Yet ANOTHER dead horse beating

[one love]

Just so I understand is there any case in your opinion when one can not divorce/remarry? Or is it all excepted now?
I also would love some scripture that points to any sin that is repented of no longer becomes sin because it is forgiven.
No stones please I humbly ask

[scooter]

Just so I understand is there any case in your opinion when one can not divorce/remarry? Or is it all excepted now?
I also would love some scripture that points to any sin that is repented of no longer becomes sin because it is forgiven.
No stones please I humbly ask

Response: It is case by case specific in my opinion.

[Shellie]

Pastorbps wrote:

Shellie:
You named two exceptions which would make D&R acceptable – Married to an unbeliever and unfaithfulness. If you believe what you say about Fornication and “Being married to an unbeliever” then why did you accept the committee’s report which goes far beyond only those two limits?

First, I never said that I believed they were the sole reasons but that they were two examples.

Are there other legitimate escapes from a "marriage"? I think there could be. What God joins together, let not man put asunder. The question in my mind is not at the end of the "marriage", but at the beginning of it. How do we know that God joins every two people that enter an earthly covenant. Does God join every couple that join themselves together?

Two athiests do not take a covenant before God therefore, I do not see God being a third party to that covenant. Not saying that I'm sure on this, just sharing with you some of my thoughts.

If an unbeliever marries, divorces, and several years later marries a Christian man and becomes saved, are they bound to a marriage covenant that God wasn't included in in the first place.

When does God join two people....at a ceremony with a preacher, justice of the peace, notary public, or boat captain?

Or are they joined when they come together in a sexual union?

Or WAS I created in my mother's womb from Scott Creasy's rib?

Just some of my thoughts, mind you.

Shouldn’t you have opposed the report for being too liberal in its interpretations?

For the above reasons I have shared with you, I did not oppose. What was being presented was a whole lot better than what was being practiced.

The only time Jesus showed himself harshly was with religious people. With the sinner, he was gracious and loving. I don't have all the answers, but I would much rather err on the side of grace than on the side of condemnation.

[paul]

Paul:

Are you admitting the report wasn't correct? I mean no disrespect but by taking such a stand aren't you being rebellious?

I have spent most of my ministry in mission fields, Mostly in Muslim nations where dealing with the issue you brought up is a common occurance. You are comparing apples to oranges.

Why don't you just leave if you don't agree with the church? Seem harsh? Its what is being said to those who disagree with other parts of the report. Then again you may not be a member of the COGOP.

It is just because of attitudes like yours..love it or leave it, that I did leave years ago, along with hundreds of others.

Your argument at best is weak and no relevent to the question at hand.

Besides, who died and made you God and left you in charge to tell me what I should do or not.

[Pastor Gary]

Paul:
Did you vote in favor of the Assembly report? ...Then again you may not be a member of the COGOP.

That didn't stop some people from voting!

[Pastorbps]

I have spent most of my ministry in mission fields, Mostly in Muslim nations where dealing with the issue you brought up is a common occurance. You are comparing apples to oranges.

Sorry but I don't see that. Its all a discussion about what are valid marriages and what are not. Its not me you need to explain the apples and oranges to. It seems the people in Africa have the problem seeing there is a difference between their multiple marriages and America's multiple marriages.

It is just because of attitudes like yours..love it or leave it, that I did leave years ago, along with hundreds of others.

You have completely misunderstood me. The attitude I was expressing was not mine. I'm simply pointing out an inconsistency. When those who believed D&R was acceptable were in the minority people harshly told them to love it or leave it. Now, the shoe is on the other foot and those who believe marriage is for life are in the minority and they are harshly being told to love it or leave it. I said it the way I did to show the absurdity of such hypocrisy and harshness.

Your argument at best is weak and no relevant to the question at hand.

What? The question is about valid marriages. Are those who are divorced and remarried in a valid marriage? I was pointing out the hypocrisy of saying we shouldn't judge them while the report passed judges those in polygamy.

Besides, who died and made you God and left you in charge to tell me what I should do or not.

Ouch!!! I'm glad I didn't mean it the way you took it. I hope you'll come down on the side of love and grace when it comes to dealing with us who disagree or is that only for those who are Divorced and Remarried (See Shellie's post).

[Pastorbps]

For the above reasons I have shared with you, I did not oppose. What was being presented was a whole lot better than what was being practiced.

You did not oppose or you stood in favor? I assume by your wording that you don't necessarily believe it was totally correct.

Shellie you'll notice I mentioned you in the post to Paul. I wasn't condemning you personally but was pointing out another inconsistency I have witnessed. People are quick to speak of love and mercy when it comes to those in D&R but if you believe marriage is for life you don't receive the same love and mercy.

[Pastor Gary]

...if you believe marriage is for life you don't receive the same love and mercy.

That is an unfair generalization: I believe marriage is for life. I am, at least for the past 37 years, in a lifetime marriage. I counsel couples to never allow the word "divorce" to pass their lips, no matter how angry they are. That being said, here's the dilemma...

I know people -- I suspect YOU know people -- who bear the fruit of salvation, manifest the fruit of the Spirit, are in every way indistinguishable from other passionate, devoted followers of Jesus. Some of them preach and teach. Some are anointed worship musicians. Some are Christian authors, conference speakers, and/or leaders of ministries that are doing incredible things for God. That should make one wonder: did the Holy Spirit err in filling that person and anointing them, or could it be that MAYBE, just MAYBE, my interpretation of the relevant passages, and my understanding of God's heart on this subject is not precisely right. Maybe I am guilty of calling something impure that God has made clean.

"Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand."

Romans 14:4

[Pastorbps]

That is an unfair generalization: I believe marriage is for life. I am, at least for the past 37 years, in a lifetime marriage. I counsel couples to never allow the word "divorce" to pass their lips, no matter how angry they are. That being said, here's the dilemma...

Here's the problem Pastor Gary, if marriage can be dissolved by anything except death then it is not for life. Saying we believe in "Lifetime marriage" is not the same as believing marriage is for life. This is the change we made and whether we like it or not, we cannot say "Marriage is for Life" any longer.

Maybe I am guilty of calling something impure that God has made clean.

By the same token we could be guilty of calling something pure that God does not call clean.

Here's my dilemma...I am skeptical about making doctrinal decisions based upon my assessment of someone's character. The same arguments you make could be made for anyone guilty of a number of sins. Will we now determine whether something is right based upon how involved they are in church or how nice they are? Look around, involvement, zeal, good deeds, etc are not necessarily evidence of righteousness. I don't mean to sound harsh or uncaring toward those in this situation but isn't abandonment of one's sin a fruit of a child of God also?

"Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand."

"What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside." (1 Cor 5:12-13 NIV)

[Pastor Gary]

"What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside." (1 Cor 5:12-13 NIV)

Please outline for us your process for judging those inside? Do you measure them only by your current understanding of doctrine? Have you ever changed your understanding of any doctrine?

[Pastorbps]

The problem is anytime we speak about judging, someone says we shouldn't.
I am simply saying that's not Biblical.

[one love]

Was posting but it would just be overlooked....It is interesting thought that those who still hold to the original out look on d/r are slammed.

[Pastor Gary]

The problem is anytime we speak about judging, someone says we shouldn't.
I am simply saying that's not Biblical.

Nice... but it doesn't really answer the question I asked.

[Pastorbps]

Quit judging my response. I don't have a process for judging. In fact, nobody does or should have a process for judging. Therefore Paul was wrong for telling the Corinthians to judge because no one can know whether they have the correct understanding about anything. They may think they have the correct interpretation but that may change later on so don't judge because it may turn out to be wrong later. Paul told them to judge them by their sinful actions but then again...What is a drunkard? What is an extortioner? What is a fornicator? Its all so abstract and uncertain. What I think a drunkard means may not mean that tomorrow so drunkards who call themselves brothers should be left alone and on and on...

[Gerald Creasy]

Was posting but it would just be overlooked....It is interesting thought that those who still hold to the original out look on d/r are slammed.

You DON'T hold to the ORiginal COGOP outlook on D&R. In fact there were divorced D&R pastors in the church under the original outlook.