"The Husband of One Wife?

[TCassidy]

In no way, shape or manner would I contradict God's word......

The person you were quoting sure seemed to be doing so.

I do question some of the absurdities or pharisees like pretensions to superior sanctity that is spouted more regular than it should by some outside of this board.

But as they are not on this board, their opinions are not the issue.

The posting was to this board. Don't get your nose out of joint because someone gave you an honest answer you didn't like.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

Sadly, as you know Mr. Cassidy, jail time is always short of what it should be............ amazing how little time someone can serve for even murder........ the world is a sad place.......
Guess if you drag your short comings with you after salvation, there's still hope... Saul cleaned up pretty good after our Good Lord got hold of him...

 

[Reynolds]

Proverbs 6:32 He who commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding. He who does it destroys his own soul.
33 He will get wounds and dishonor. His reproach will not be wiped away.

If he returns to the office of pastor or deacon he brings that reproach to that office.

He, upon confession and repentance, can be restored to fellowship, but never to leadership. He has forever forfeited that privilege.

Then there are a lot of SBC pastors who should not be parstoring.

 

[TCassidy]

Then there are a lot of SBC pastors who should not be parstoring.

Yep. And certainly not limited to the SBC.

 

[TCassidy]

Sadly, as you know Mr. Cassidy, jail time is always short of what it should be.

That is why we have a second amendment.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

Amen!! Amen!! Amen!!

 

[Reynolds]

Proverbs 6:32 He who commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding. He who does it destroys his own soul.
33 He will get wounds and dishonor. His reproach will not be wiped away.

If he returns to the office of pastor or deacon he brings that reproach to that office.

He, upon confession and repentance, can be restored to fellowship, but never to leadership. He has forever forfeited that privilege.

9Or do you not know that the unrighteousb will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,c 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

It seemsGod forgives and then that old person is no more. Can an ex liar, ex thief, person who had sex with his girlfriend in high school ever be a pastor?

 

[TCassidy]

It seemsGod forgives and then that old person is no more.

It is not a question of forgiveness. It is a question of sin having consequences.

Can an ex liar

Do you trust his word?

ex thief

Do you trust him with your valuables.

person who had sex with his girlfriend in high school

Did he get her pregnant? Does he have a child somewhere he has not provided for?

Your questions seem to reinforce me earlier statement that "the primary problem is that most people today, including most Christians, have a very low view of marriage."

So, my question to you is, do you believe 1 Timothy 3? Or did God make a mistake?

 

[Salty]

I Tim says a man must be the husband of one wife.
It says nothing about divorce.- Now we can read into it -
But if Paul meant divorce, then why did he not say divorce?
A previous poster stated if a young man was married at 17, and divorced at age 19 - then saved at 21 -.......
Now lets suppose that same young man had relations with that same girl -but never married her (legally)
What is the difference.? In fact some would say by doing so - they are in essence married.

 

[TCassidy]

It says nothing about divorce.

Paul would not write something that contradicts the Lord's teaching in the Gospels. Matthew 5:32.

In fact some would say by doing so - they are in essence married.

The marriage relationship is a blessing from God. Fornication is a sin. God does not bless sin.

 

[rlvaughn]

Don't exactly remember B. H. Carroll's story, but seems like when he went off to the Civil War his wife had their marriage annulled (I'll look it up later and see what I find).

I promised to look this up to see what I could find. So to give the info correctly, according to James Spivey in Theologians of the Baptist Tradition (Timothy George and David S. Dockery, editors, Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman. 2001, pp. 164–165) B. H. Carroll divorced his first wife for her infidelity while he was away in the army during the Civil War.

That said, I going to bow out of the discussion. Since it was posted in the Baptist History forum, I thought the main question was about the history of this theology and practice among Baptists.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

That said, I going to bow out of the discussion. Since it was posted in the Baptist History forum, I thought the main question was about the history of this theology and practice among Baptists.

It was and it is..... I do appreciate the timeline references, it really adds some perspective to how long this elephant has been in the room.
There are a lot of subjects that people can "agree to disagree" on, but this one is more of a "I'd agree with you, but we'd both be wrong" settlement.
Appreciate you Sir! God Bless!

 

[Reynolds]

It is not a question of forgiveness. It is a question of sin having consequences.

Do you trust his word?

Do you trust him with your valuables.

Did he get her pregnant? Does he have a child somewhere he has not provided for?

Your questions seem to reinforce me earlier statement that "the primary problem is that most people today, including most Christians, have a very low view of marriage."

So, my question to you is, do you believe 1 Timothy 3? Or did God make a mistake?

I believe I Timothy 3 completely. It is all in present tense, "must be." Be and used to be are totally different things. Yes, I know some ex thieves I 100% trust with my valuables. I know a man who committed adultery 15 years ago that I completely trust around my wife. I trust scripture. we are discussing its application.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

So, my question to you is, do you believe 1 Timothy 3? Or did God make a mistake?

I think everybody here can pretty much agree on this one thing....
"GOD DOES NOT MAKE MISTAKES!"
It's not a question of believing 1 Timothy 3 (just an agreeable definition), but it now seems that the question has morphed into believing whether or not we are still accountable for our sins as non-believers even after committing yourself "To Him who loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood."
Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong (preferably in a non caustic manner!), but the Bible tells me that God forgives and forgets my former transgressions; Hebrews 8:12, Isaiah 43:25 and Psalm 103:11-12.
1 John 1:9 tells me that if I confess my sins I'll be cleansed from all unrighteousness and Jeremiah 33:8 tells me that I can be not only cleansed, but pardoned by God.

It is not a question of forgiveness. It is a question of sin having consequences.

Sin does have consequences. But apparently the Bible tells us that Forgiveness is part of the equation.
So again, why would a divorce before your salvation, still be a "scarlet letter"?
Any clarity on this is greatly appreciated.

 

[Reynolds]

I Tim says a man must be the husband of one wife.
It says nothing about divorce.- Now we can read into it -
But if Paul meant divorce, then why did he not say divorce?
A previous poster stated if a young man was married at 17, and divorced at age 19 - then saved at 21 -.......
Now lets suppose that same young man had relations with that same girl -but never married her (legally)
What is the difference.? In fact some would say by doing so - they are in essence married.

Yep, many extremely conservative theologians teach that sex with a virgin forms a blood covenant.

 

[rsr]

That said, I going to bow out of the discussion. Since it was posted in the Baptist History forum, I thought the main question was about the history of this theology and practice among Baptists.

You are correct. Other comments should be taken to a thread in another forum.

 

[TCassidy]

it now seems that the question has morphed into believing whether or not we are still accountable for our sins as non-believers even after committing yourself "To Him

No, it hasn't. Nobody has said sins are not forgiven. Nobody has said that a saved person is still accountable for his sins. The point was, and is, that the consequences of sin remains. Either that or Proverbs 6:32 is wrong.

but the Bible tells me that God forgives and forgets my former transgressions; Hebrews 8:12, Isaiah 43:25 and Psalm 103:11-12.

Nobody has said otherwise.

1 John 1:9 tells me that if I confess my sins I'll be cleansed from all unrighteousness and Jeremiah 33:8 tells me that I can be not only cleansed, but pardoned by God.

Nobody has said otherwise.

Sin does have consequences.

Yep.

But apparently the Bible tells us that Forgiveness is part of the equation.

Nobody has said otherwise.

So again, why would a divorce before your salvation, still be a "scarlet letter"?

I didn't say anything about a "scarlet letter." I am talking about the bible and the qualification of pastors and deacons.

I have a friend from high school who used to ride motorcycles with me. One day he got pretty drunk, got on his motorcycle, and ran off the road and crashed into a tree. His back was broken and his spinal cord was damaged. When he was about 30 he was saved. His sins were forgiven. But he was still in that wheel chair. Even though his sins were forgiven, the consequences are with him still. The consequences of our sins do not miraculously disappear when we are saved.

Another case. A young lady was somewhat promiscuous as a teen. She got pregnant. Rather than accepting responsibility for her sin, she compounded it by getting an abortion. She developed an infection that left her unable to bear children. She got saved as a young adult, but she is still unable to have children. The consequences of our sins do not miraculously disappear when we are saved.

We cannot minimize sin and the consequences of sin. A saved man who smokes will still die of lung cancer. The saved man who gets drunk and drives will still die when he hits that tree. The wages of sin is still death.

 

[robycop3]

I agree with Yeshua 1.

Dr. cassidy - as a former cop, I know how hard it is to have someone actually jailed for unwitnessed domestic violence unless there's unmistakable physical evidence. unwitnessed, unrecorded threats are almost impossible to successfully prosecute.

God knows every heart & situation, private or otherwise, and I don't believe He holds it against one for divorcing an abusive spouse & taking up with someone else. No question if adultery is involved.

In Paul's time/place, polygamy and concubines were not uncommon.

 

[Jerry W. Ramming]

The point was, and is, that the consequences of sin remains. Either that or Proverbs 6:32 is wrong.

Proverbs 6:32 is correct. I'm truly trying to get on the same boat with you on this, guess I'm looking for a little clarity.
We both agree that God can and will forgive and forget, that we can be washed of all our sins and that the old self dies and that we become a new creature.
There are consequences for our sins, as you described. Are you saying that one of the consequences of being divorced before you were saved is that you'll never be able to grow as a Christian to the point that you can carry out the duties as a Deacon or Pastor?
If so, wouldn't that mean that if you failed at any of the other qualifications set out in 1 Timothy 3:2 ( such as "above reproach") before you were saved, mean you would suffer the same consequence?

 

[Van]

Can anyone explain when the tradition of defining "The husband of one wife' (1 Timothy 3:2) as never having been divorced began? Seems only Church fellowship over 50 years of age still try to adhere to that definition, while even the Southern Baptist Association says it's up to the individual Church to use the definition that they prefer. Appreciate any clarification on this.

Sorry for the tardy response. While it can be informative to understand how a verse or passage has been understood historically by believers within the church, our first step probably should be to see what we think the intended message is for us.
2 The overseer then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, an able teacher, 3 not a drunkard, not violent, but gentle, not contentious, free from the love of money.


First, as one of the qualifications for being a leader, the husband of one wife appears to provide evidence the person walks the talk is an actual believer committed to Christ, and not a phony. So I have no problem with the judgment that the requirement applies to our life after we were saved, or said we were.

Is the idea we were the husband of one wife at a time? I doubt it,.
Is the idea that if we were married, we were faithful to our wife, and not an adulterer? Probably
Is the idea that if we were divorced after being saved as allowed by scripture and then remarried, that disqualifies us? Probably not.

I think the underlying idea is that men who are unfaithful in family life, cannot be trusted as being faithful to God. You would not want a teacher of the Word of God to be unfaithful to the Word of God.