Husband of one Wife

Why would I be a member of a Baptist church if I was not a Baptist?

 

Answer the question:

Are you a member of a local Baptist church?

 

Diane

Whew! I guess we may have to take Baptist off of the Church signs! I would not want to get confused with this new stuff!

I am amazed, next they will be dancing, drinking, baptising (sprinkling) babies for salvation, and ordaining methodists women to preach in our pulpits ...

NOW I understand why I keep hearing Deacons ask about my beliefs on these kinds of subjects.

WHEW! Now we hear, "Baptists really practice immersion? And THEY don't dance? WHAT!? They don't drink? THOSE BAPTISTS NEVER HAVE FUN. They are JUST like the Pharisees!"

And this is coming FROM WITHIN Baptist circles.

 

Manchester

I wonder what you expect the response will be?

 

Perhaps no one has responded because you are asking pro-divorcers for a response, and there are none of them here. I have yet to see anyone here who is pro divorce. I am not pro divorce but this question is so easy to answer it is hard to pass up. It is really a very simple answer.

You are ignoring part of what Christ said. Your verses are not all he said. He said in Matthew 19 that remarriage after divorce was permissable if it was for adultery. In 1 Cor 7, he said remarriage was possible if the divorce was due to desertion by an unbelieving spouse. Since Christ did not contradict himself, then it is clear you need to interpret your passages are the general principle about marriage and divorce, and the passages you ignored as hte clarification of certain circumstances.

When you don't deal with teh whole counsel of God you run into problems. That is what you have done.

 

Amen!

 

Manchester

MMM ...

Really?

or

 

Manchester

Do you think that I missed something in the Greek?

 

Seems to me you've missed (more like ignored) something in plain English, nevermind the Greek.

 

Gershom,

In a non-Baptist reading: the spiritual eyes can read into the scripture what is not there.

But, a Baptist tenet has traditionally been: The Bible says it, and I believe it.

Here Paul said:

In plain English ... that was the passage referenced above ...

Could you tell me where & what your "spiritual eyes" are reading into this passage?

 

The scriptures do not start and end with this verse in regards to divorce. As much as you and some others would like it to, it does not. My "spiritual eyes" cover (as Pastor Larry pointed out) the whole council of God. I do not take a single verse and build my own belief system around it, holding others accountable to a flawed interpretation, ignoring what is said elsewhere in the Bible.

 

But remember, Gershom, some here would like to take ONE VERSE from either the OT or NT and make a whole doctrine of it even if other verses clearly teach the whole truth concerning the issues being discussed. Thus comes the great divide in denominations, Christianity itself, etc.

 

Really?</font>[/QUOTE]Yes really.

1 Corinthians 7:27-28 27 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. 28 But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you.

The one in view is one who has been "released" from a wife, and it is plainly said that if he remarries, he has not sinned. How much more clear does it get?

 

Pastor Larry, I read this verse THIS way which gives me a completely different take.

1 Corinthians 7:27-28

27 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released.

Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife.

28 But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.

Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you.

I do not see verse 28 referring to a divorced person but a first marriage.

Diane

 

Diane,

It is ONLY referring to a first marriage. WHEW! Talk about reading into a passage what one wants to see.

They just missed a few Training Union Classes ...

 

Diane,

The "but" performs a stopping point for the thought - this is the same in English as in Greek.

Paul had already commanded in the Lord that divorced are not to remarry ...

cited above ...

 

Ah! Training Union! Our teachers were always deacons. We call it Discipleship Classes now.

 

ah ... the days when we really did agree on theology ...

 

For those still opened to more comments on this thread. . .

There is much evidence to show the no divorce and no marriage after divorce has much agreement with the teaching of the Fathers. In fact, early in this thread the Fathers were referred to extensively to support the no divorce no marriage after divorce teaching. It should be noted, not all Baptists agree the Church Fathers should be looked at as if they had anything to do with Baptist churches. Also, it should be noted the Reformers for the most part did not agree with the no divorce and no marriage after divorce of the Roman Catholic Church.

There are what I consider serious problems with following the Fathers, especially in the no divorce no marriage after divorce teaching. The Fathers tended toward Gnosticism, considered the marriage bed as sinful, show celibacy to be favorable to marriage, and generally lean toward the asceticism that motivates the thought and teaching of the no divorce and no marriage after divorce. There is much evidence to show why there are those that agree the Church Fathers and the Roman Catholic Church have imbedded the no divorce and no marriage after divorce teaching. There is clear Scriptural reasons to reject the no divorce no marriage after divorce teaching.
Here is a passage of Scripture for the reader to consider. See what this passage clearly has to say:
Deuteronomy 24:1 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.
The Bible shows God approved the marriage, for she was no longer bound to her former husband, being divorced, complete dissolution from her former spouse and not merely separation. This is the plain sense of the passage as I understand it. The teaching that there is one flesh till death parts them is one of the things that I believe causes many to stumble over this matter. Till death parts them was original intent, but adultery was not part of the original intent, and neither was desertion part of the original intent or other manner of wickedness. The divorce and remarriage is protection for the victim. As some would have it, a twenty year old that was married one month when their spouse ran off divorced and remarried or other manner of evil would be demanded to remain single. That is not at all what the word of God demands. The divorce and remarriage law is a protection because of the hardness of heart of a spouse that would commit adultery, desertion and all manner of evil.

... she may go and be another man's wife.

More shown at this site:

http://www.bright.net/~bkrajcik/marriage.htm