Divorced in Church Roles

I believe we as Christians have done a great disservice to the ones who are divorced. We have been treating them like second class citizens. I talked with a gentleman today about joing the church. He is divorced. He asked me what he could do in the church, and I told him the "sky's the limit."

A divorced person is just as precious in God's eyes as the gossipper.

 

I just have one thing to say to pocadots1990: AMEN!

 

Not at all, I just choose to let God define sin and not Salamander. Again, I am reading the verse as the Lord gave it to us. If you can show me I am reading it wrong I will be glad to reconsider my view.

Mt 19:7 (KJV) They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

It clearly says, "and shall marry another".

I am also saying Jesus told us there will be a time for divorce and that is marriage infedelity.

Lastly, if you want to speak about sin, the sin in this passage is adultry and not divorce. Am I reading this wrong?

 

There shouldn't be an issue with any of the above. The "husband of one wife" thing is taken wrong by 99% of outspoken baptists. But they are still wrong.

No issues here or in the Bible. Period.

 

Tell that to mission boards. They'd probably welcome an ex-murderer with open arms. He'd have a powerful testimony. But God forbid they should allow a divorced person in.

 

The reason why I personally have no problem with someone who is divorced/remarried being a preacher and/or pastor/moderator is because ALL of their sins were covered by the Blood of Jesus!! We were all sinners, so if they had divorced and remarried while they were sinners, when God saves them from their sins, He remembers them no more. If He was to save someone and then said, "I would use you as a preacher, but you are divorced/remarried now", that would make Him a liar...and we know He isn't a liar. It's hard to express myself properly through a keyboard, but I am doing the best I can. We live in a society where "tradition" is our biggest stumbling block. God used traditions as a means to having Jesus nailed to the cross for our sins. Grandpa and grandma's religion isn't always true. People want to live by what they were raised by, and that's not always true, either. I was raised that if a woman wore pants or shorts, cut her hair, wore makeup, etc. she would split the bad place wide open....if someone was divorced/remarried, they couldn't be a preacher, etc. But, I believe that WHATEVER a sinner does before he was saved, is cast as far from him as the east is the west. Now, after they have been saved, that's a whole nother story......

 

Why would that last line be?

 

Re: Divorced roles in church

Bro Jerry,

The reason why I stated after they come to church, that is a whole other story is because while we were sinners, we were outside of God's commandments. His Word does not take effect on us, until we are saved. After we are saved, then the Words written in the Good Book are what we walk by, talk by, live by, etc.

Willis

 

The Bible is emphatically clear: "From the begininng it was not so, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts....." Now who "let" the divorce happen? Moses or He who is from the begininng?

Explain how it is that God allows the hardness of men's hearts have authority where forgiveness is the command of God?

Mt 19:7 (KJV) They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

...committeth adultery/ doth commit adultery." Need I say more?

It's not me who interpreted the Bible here, it is what the Bible clearly states from the very mouth who inspired it's words.

You say, but Jesus didn't say.

Both adultery and divorce are sin, though they are different sins: adultery is sin against the vow of marriage, divorce is sin against the command of God to let no man put asunder that which God hath joined together and is become one flesh.

It's known in the insurance vernacular as double indemnity.

Next we'll hear all the conditions that are introduced as if they are relevent to the law of God but are based solely upon emotions.raying:

I treat divorced the same as never divorced, it's just in the positions laid out in scripture for preachers and deaons there are God's qualifications, then there are men who allow something as if to make the word of God appear to have grey areas in.

Men seem to demand they be allowed to hold positions in the church, but they are granted by callings and that is from God:godisgood:

 

awfully presumptuous there.

 

This is evidence of the degradation of society in general. It is based solely upon personal feelings wrapped up in emotions.

It is evident men in general think less of the institution of marraige than God does based upon their emotions.

Marraige requires much work, many allowances and much forgivenesses if it is to work out for our betterment and God's glory. Otherwise we remain in the mess sin has us in.

 

These permissive attitudes in the church seem to have sprung up in response to the divorce boom of the late twentieth century. It is troubling that the advent of no-fault divorce would inspire a reinterpretation of the Bible, finding license now for divorce among ministers.

 

I'm glad that you, as I, don't allow polygamists to be deacons & pastors (different from preachers?), then.

 

I am not pro-divorce. I believe two people should do all they can to work it out. However scripture clearly states there will be a time when there is no other alternative. Infidelity, unequally yoked etc... You seem to have a higher standard than scripture which is ok for you as long as you're not dissappointed when others can't live up to your standard. Remember, the standard we live by is in the Word and not out interpretation of the word.

Here is the verse Jesus is refrencing; If I am reading your post right, you are saying this is Moses law and not Gods? If it is Moses' law how did it make God's Word? How do we tell God's Word from Man's word?

Dt 24:1 (KJV) When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

This is my point to you, you want me to explain why sctipture says you can put away your wife for hardness of your heart. This is not my word, this is in scripture whether you like it there or not. It is not for me to explain why it is there, I just need to point out to you that it is there.

Don't forget the previous few words, "and shall marry another". It is the "and shall marry another" that makes it adultery. Not the divorce.

First of all, don't overlook where it says, "what God has joined together". All marriages are not sanctioned, ordained or blessed by God. Some marry because of lust, fornication and other worldly reasons. You can usually spot these unions because the two never become one flesh.

You also have to consider the sequence of these scriptures, after Jesus says in verse 7 "Mt 19:6 (KJV) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." he then says in verse 9, "Mt 19:9 (KJV) And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery."

How are we to interpret these two seeming conflicting versus. In one verse he says let no man put asunder then he says execept for fornication. My answer is the key to this not conflicting lies in, "What therefore God hath joined together". Secondly, is this a commandment? If not, how is it a "sin"?

You ever heard of a match made in heaven?

 

Do you consider infedility and unequally yoked "no-fault"?

 

Hi Salamander,

You say that both adultery and divorce are sins. Actually, divorce is NOT a sin. No where in the Bible does God call it a sin or talk against it. The Bible does say that putting away a spouse (what we would call seperation) is a sin. But NEVER, in all of Scripture, does God call divorce a sin. Divorce is what God put in place to fix the sin (if there is a sin from the seperation).

Therefore, a person that is divorced (before, during or after their salvation) should not have that as a barrier to service.

And, marrying someone that is divorced is not a sin. Marriying someone that is "put away" without a divorce is the sin - adultery. Check your Greek. The passage in Matthew 5:32 mistranslated the word for "put away" and rendered it "divorced." As a matter of fact, the word was translated correctly in Matt 19:9, Mark 10:11-12 and Luke 16:18 where Jesus said virtually the same thing

 

Mal 2:16For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for [one] covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.

I disagree. the Blood of Jesus is the only thing God put in place to
"fix" sin.

In a degradated society your arguement would hold water, but according to that which is the command of the Lord to turn back to the old paths, God would still hold a higher degree to marriage than what your arguement allows.

Wrong. The Old Testament is proof text for what Jesus talked about.

To be "put away" is divorce and vice-versa.
from http://www.ntwords.com

apoluo:
Dismiss, Release

0630 APOLUO (66): apo = from + luo = to loose; to loose from, put away, release, dismiss. To dismiss or release a spouse, people in general, a prisoner, a slave, a person from an ailment or from life, or a personal offense. In God's First Century Message (FCM, NT) apoluo always refers to the action of one person with respect to others.
DISMISSAL OF A SPOUSE: Apoluo refers to the deliberate act of one spouse putting away, releasing or dismissing the other from their marriage. Further, God's Message specifies in Deu.24.1,3, Mt.5.31, 19.7 and Mk.10.4 that when a person dismisses his (or her) spouse, a "certificate of divorce" (0647 apostasion) is to be given to the other spouse. For example, Deu.24.1: "When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts [it] in her hand and sends her out from his house..." Also Mt.5.31: "And it was said, ‘Whoever dismisses (apoluo) his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce (apostasion).'" Most civil governments require that a certificate of divorce be issued.
But in Mt.5.32, 19.9, Mk.10.11,12, and Lk.16.18 Jesus is teaching about dismissing a spouse, without reference to a certificate of divorce, as in Mt.5.32: "But I say to you+, ‘Everyone who is dismissing (apoluo) his wife, except for a matter of sexual immorality, makes her marriage broken (3429 moichaomai); and whoever marries a dismissed (apoluo)woman ends her [previous] marriage.'" Accordingly, "apoluo" should be translated "dismiss," not "divorce." In two of these contexts Jesus condemns the separation of husband and wife in a broader sense, stating in Mt.19.6 and Mk.10.9: "...whom God has yoked together, let no human separate (5563 chorizo)."
Translation:

DISMISS (14) Mt.1.19; 5.31,32,32; 19.3,7,8,9. Mk.10.2,4,11,12. Lk.16.18,18.
​

TO SEND AWAY, OR DISMISS PEOPLE IN GENERAL. For example Mk.8.8-9: "And they ate and were satisfied, and took up seven baskets of left over pieces. Now they were about four thousand. And he dismissed (apoluo) them."
Translation:

DISMISS (19) Mt.14.15,22,23; 15.23,32,39. Mk.6.36,45; 8.3,9. Lk.8.38; 9.12; 14.4. Act.13.3; 15.30,33; 19.41; 23.22; 28.25.
​

TO RELEASE A PRISONER.
To release a prisoner in Mt.27.15: "Now at a feast the governor's custom was to release (apoluo) a prisoner, whomever the crowd wanted."
Translation:

RELEASE (28) Mt.27.15,17,21,26. Mk.15.6,9,11,15. Lk.23.16,18,20,22,25. Jn.18.39,39; 19.10,12,12. Act.3.13; 4.21,23; 5.40;16.35,36; 17.9; 26.32; 28.18; Heb.13.23.
​

TO RELEASE A SLAVE.
To release a slave in Mt.18.27: "And the master of that slave, filled with compassion, released (apoluo) him and forgave him the loan."
Translation:

RELEASE (1) Mt.18.27.
​

TO RELEASE SOMEONE FROM A PHYSICAL AILMENT OR FROM LIFE.
To release from a physical ailment in Lk.13.12. "And seeing her, Jesus called and said to her, ‘Woman, you have been released (apoluo) from your ailment." To release from life in Lk.2.29: "Now, Master, release (apoluo) your slave in peace, according to your word."
Translation:

RELEASE (2) Lk.2.29; 13.12.
​

TO RELEASE A PERSONAL OFFENSE OR OBLIGATION: To release from an offense in Lk.6.37: "Do not evaluate and you+ will surely not be evaluated. And do not condemn, and you+ will surely not be condemned. Release (apoluo), and you+ will be released (apoluo)."
Translation:

RELEASE (2) Lk.6.37,37.
​

 

Sorry Salamander. I'm not sure who is feeding you this poison. But "put away" and "divorce" are obviously two different things. First, "put away" is a verb and "divorce" (actually "article of divorcement") is a noun.

Yes, I agree, Jesus' blood covers all sins. What I was saying was that God (through the law He gave to Moses) gave the article of divorcement as the legal document to "fix" the problem of two people seperating. This allowed them to get on with their lives without the constant sin of adultery.

ἀπολύω (your apoluo) is the verb "put away"

ἀποστάσιον is the noun for "article of divorcement"

I honestly think you are trying to hold to some standard that God just doesn't have in His Word.

To go back to the Hebrew. Look in Lev 21:7 (the priest could not marry a woman that was "put away"). But look in Lev 21:10-15 (the high priest couldn't even marry a divorced or widowed woman). "Put away" and "divorced" are different.

Finally, in the text you quoted you actually agree that they are different:

"And it was said, ‘Whoever dismisses (apoluo) his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce (apostasion).'"

 

That is pure allegory. It is not poison either to encourage the will of God in marriage before one commits.

God hateth the "putting away". "Putting" is the verb of the noun clause.

Your mistake.

You simply do not have the same view of importance on marriage as the Bible places upon it. That is evidence opf the degradation of society.

Prove it. God has never provided any legal document. men provide legal documents to relate the letter of the Law as ascribed by the Lord.

Moses acted upon his own in this case due to the hardness of men's hearts.

God hardens rebellious hearts and breaks them as well. God has never honoured a hardheart over forgiveness and reconciliation.

I agree with what you offered as in reference to the Greek words, but ajpostavsion, the right word, does not carry the conotation you apply to it in this context as being a divorce, but does carry the implication of the writing, or bill of divorcement.

Either way, divorce is still a sin.

A divorce is the putting away.

 

Sorry you feel that way, brother. I'll pray for you.