RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
> [Original Message] > From: ShieldsFamily <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 11/8/2005 9:33:33 AM > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > I agree, Dean. But what if they made their vows before God but didn't have > a traditional civil marriage ceremony? Does God still consider them to be > married? I think so. I'm not advocating that in any way, but I DO think God > recognizes the couple as married in HIS eyes--which is what really counts, > isn't it? Iz cd: Yes-There is a point of interest that should be noted. To have a Pastor do the ceremony is to invoke God into the vows-assuming the Pastor is a praying warrior-in a stronger way and this also makes the couple hold the ceremony in a higher regard as to keep the vows. Just a thought. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Moore > Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 7:17 AM > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > > > > > > > > > So if two teenagers are having sexual relations, are they married in > > God's viewpoint? I think not if they have not made a lifetime > > commitment to each other before God. But if they have I think they are > > married in God's > eyes. > > > > What if a single man and woman are the only inhabitants on a deserted > island > > and decide to marry each other for life? Does God hold it against > > them > that > > they have no civil ceremony or witnesses? I think not. In fact, there > > is > no > > model of a marriage ceremony in the Bible, which makes me think that > > is pretty unimportant--it's the commitment to each other before God > > that matters, both before and after the marriage, and that makes it a > > real marriage IMO. And no "takiebackies". FWIW, iz > > cd: Sister Izzy I believe that these two would still have to make the vows > before God-if not it's just fornication -There was no Minister for Adam and > Eve's marriage in the Garden but they committed their lives to each other > -as they were together for life.The vows are our covenant with spouse and > God.In the Torah there were signs for a covenant such as piling up > stones-later wittiness's were used as a way of offering proof of the vows > which validate the marrage.I ,in effect, told my wife upon marriage-if you > give yourself to me then I will provide/protect and love you till > death-others wittiness this promise in case I attempt to break it-in the > torah there were stiff penalties for doing so-such penalties exist today. > > > > > > -- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know > how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) > http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a > friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. > > > > -- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Izzy wrote: According to DM's viewpoint, the adulterous woman who divorced her husband for another is free, in God's opinion, of adultery whenever her first husband rightfully remarries someone else. This makes no sense whatsoever to me. Bingo! You got my point, but you missed the fact that I was not presenting my viewpoint. Rather, I was explaining the kind of result Terry's viewpoint leads us toward. I was hoping for the conclusion to be seen by Terry, "this makes no sense..." Izzy wrote: David are you saying you actually agree with the RCC gobbledygook about annulments??? ANYONE can get an annulment in the RCC if they have the bucks to pay for it. No, I do not agree with the RCC's annulment system. That is why I keep pointing to it with Terry. His perspective leads to this annulment system that the Roman Catholics have. Izzy wrote: And regarding the civil laws of divorce, I agree with Terry. Just because the civil law says you are divorced and free to remarry, this is not necessarily correct in God's opinion. Agreed. From God's ultimate perspective, the two are one flesh and should never divorce. But, because of the hardness of men's hearts Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
I agree, Dean. But what if they made their vows before God but didn't have a traditional civil marriage ceremony? Does God still consider them to be married? I think so. I'm not advocating that in any way, but I DO think God recognizes the couple as married in HIS eyes--which is what really counts, isn't it? Iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Moore Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 7:17 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > > So if two teenagers are having sexual relations, are they married in > God's viewpoint? I think not if they have not made a lifetime > commitment to each other before God. But if they have I think they are > married in God's eyes. > > What if a single man and woman are the only inhabitants on a deserted island > and decide to marry each other for life? Does God hold it against > them that > they have no civil ceremony or witnesses? I think not. In fact, there > is no > model of a marriage ceremony in the Bible, which makes me think that > is pretty unimportant--it's the commitment to each other before God > that matters, both before and after the marriage, and that makes it a > real marriage IMO. And no "takiebackies". FWIW, iz cd: Sister Izzy I believe that these two would still have to make the vows before God-if not it's just fornication -There was no Minister for Adam and Eve's marriage in the Garden but they committed their lives to each other -as they were together for life.The vows are our covenant with spouse and God.In the Torah there were signs for a covenant such as piling up stones-later wittiness's were used as a way of offering proof of the vows which validate the marrage.I ,in effect, told my wife upon marriage-if you give yourself to me then I will provide/protect and love you till death-others wittiness this promise in case I attempt to break it-in the torah there were stiff penalties for doing so-such penalties exist today. > -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
> > > So if two teenagers are having sexual relations, are they married in God's > viewpoint? I think not if they have not made a lifetime commitment to each > other before God. But if they have I think they are married in God's eyes. > > What if a single man and woman are the only inhabitants on a deserted island > and decide to marry each other for life? Does God hold it against them that > they have no civil ceremony or witnesses? I think not. In fact, there is no > model of a marriage ceremony in the Bible, which makes me think that is > pretty unimportant--it's the commitment to each other before God that > matters, both before and after the marriage, and that makes it a real > marriage IMO. And no "takiebackies". FWIW, iz cd: Sister Izzy I believe that these two would still have to make the vows before God-if not it's just fornication -There was no Minister for Adam and Eve's marriage in the Garden but they committed their lives to each other -as they were together for life.The vows are our covenant with spouse and God.In the Torah there were signs for a covenant such as piling up stones-later wittiness's were used as a way of offering proof of the vows which validate the marrage.I ,in effect, told my wife upon marriage-if you give yourself to me then I will provide/protect and love you till death-others wittiness this promise in case I attempt to break it-in the torah there were stiff penalties for doing so-such penalties exist today. > -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
have no idea what the Church of Christ might believe. Neither does DM. -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:15:56 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? have no idea what the Church of Christ might believe. I have no problem with a Jewish Christian wedding a Gentile Christian. I have studied Paul's teaching, but do not pretend to understand what it means. I am not about to speculate what the Jews of Ezra's day intended to do once they were divorced. I simply see men who wanted to be obedient at the time. What happened afterward would be a wild guess on my part. I do not understand your last sentence. Maybe you and I do not have the same idea about what the words interpret and apply mean . I had no idea I was doing either one.David Miller wrote: Terry wrote: All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to the end of the chapter. You will see a story of men who had also married women that they should not have married, and how they corrected the situation. Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise with the Devil. Sounds like good tough love, Terry, but what else can be argued from Ezra? This is the passage that the Churches of Christ hammer about why remarried couples must divorce and then remarry their original spouses. Are you, on the basis of this passage, going to tell a Jewish Christian man who has married a Gentile Christian woman that he must divorce the Christian and go marry a Jew? Do you really think that this would be following the Spirit of Christ's teaching on this matter? What about Paul's teaching that the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife? These people in Ezra divorced these "strange women" alright, but I don't think that they were doing so with the idea of becoming eunuchs for the kingdom of God. They surely did so in anticipation of remarrying again within Judaism. So this particular example does not exactly cross over well to the teaching of Christ on this subject. The thrust of what Jesus taught on this is that he is against divorce, yet his teachings would seem to create more divorce the way you are interpreting and applying it. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
According to DM's viewpoint, the adulterous woman who divorced her husband for another is free, in God's opinion, of adultery whenever her first husband rightfully remarries someone else. This makes no sense whatsoever to me. David are you saying you actually agree with the RCC gobbledygook about annulments??? ANYONE can get an annulment in the RCC if they have the bucks to pay for it. And regarding the civil laws of divorce, I agree with Terry. Just because the civil law says you are divorced and free to remarry, this is not necessarily correct in God's opinion. And sometimes people can be truly married in God's opinion, but not be legally married according to civil law. So if two teenagers are having sexual relations, are they married in God's viewpoint? I think not if they have not made a lifetime commitment to each other before God. But if they have I think they are married in God's eyes. What if a single man and woman are the only inhabitants on a deserted island and decide to marry each other for life? Does God hold it against them that they have no civil ceremony or witnesses? I think not. In fact, there is no model of a marriage ceremony in the Bible, which makes me think that is pretty unimportant--it's the commitment to each other before God that matters, both before and after the marriage, and that makes it a real marriage IMO. And no "takiebackies". FWIW, iz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry Clifton Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 9:25 PM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? This woman has already, in her own opinion, divorced. Since she is the guilty party, she gets no consideration. Her real husband is now free to divorce her, but the legal system being what it is, it would be hard to explain why you want a divorce when the state says you are alrready divorced. It could all get very confusing. David Miller wrote: > > Aren't you overlooking an important fact here? As soon as the man had > sex with his new wife, adultery took place. Therefore, the proper > grounds for divorce that you think needs to be there now exists. This > woman may now divorce and remarry, according to your perspective, > right? (I'm not trying to convince you that divorce is now great in > God's eyes, but rather I am trying to show you a logical problem in > your thinking, hoping that you discard your present interpretation.) > > -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
This woman has already, in her own opinion, divorced. Since she is the guilty party, she gets no consideration. Her real husband is now free to divorce her, but the legal system being what it is, it would be hard to explain why you want a divorce when the state says you are alrready divorced. It could all get very confusing. David Miller wrote: Aren't you overlooking an important fact here? As soon as the man had sex with his new wife, adultery took place. Therefore, the proper grounds for divorce that you think needs to be there now exists. This woman may now divorce and remarry, according to your perspective, right? (I'm not trying to convince you that divorce is now great in God's eyes, but rather I am trying to show you a logical problem in your thinking, hoping that you discard your present interpretation.) -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Thanks for defining Torah for me. I was thinking Talmud. I see no logical problem in my thinking. She is committing adultery every time because even though her husband has grounds for divorce for adultery, he has not divorced her. She tried to divorce him on a ground that is not recognized by God. She is still married to the first man. David Miller wrote: Terry wrote: Sorry David, but I do not know squat about torah. Most of what I know, I know from studying the Bible. The Torah is the first five books of the Bible. I hope you do not think that I am talking about the Talmud. When I mention the Torah, I am talking about what Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy teach. Terry wrote: Since the divorce of my imaginary couple was not for sexual sin, God does not recognize the divorce and the woman is still bound to her first, her real, husband. She sins every time she has sex with one who is not her husband, just as surely as a thief sins every time he steals. Aren't you overlooking an important fact here? As soon as the man had sex with his new wife, adultery took place. Therefore, the proper grounds for divorce that you think needs to be there now exists. This woman may now divorce and remarry, according to your perspective, right? (I'm not trying to convince you that divorce is now great in God's eyes, but rather I am trying to show you a logical problem in your thinking, hoping that you discard your present interpretation.) Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Terry wrote: Sorry David, but I do not know squat about torah. Most of what I know, I know from studying the Bible. The Torah is the first five books of the Bible. I hope you do not think that I am talking about the Talmud. When I mention the Torah, I am talking about what Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy teach. Terry wrote: Since the divorce of my imaginary couple was not for sexual sin, God does not recognize the divorce and the woman is still bound to her first, her real, husband. She sins every time she has sex with one who is not her husband, just as surely as a thief sins every time he steals. Aren't you overlooking an important fact here? As soon as the man had sex with his new wife, adultery took place. Therefore, the proper grounds for divorce that you think needs to be there now exists. This woman may now divorce and remarry, according to your perspective, right? (I'm not trying to convince you that divorce is now great in God's eyes, but rather I am trying to show you a logical problem in your thinking, hoping that you discard your present interpretation.) Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Sorry David, but I do not know squat about torah. Most of what I know, I know from studying the Bible. A little of what I think I know comes from the studies others have done. It is my understanding that up until just a few years prior to Jesus beginning His ministry, that an adulterous spouse was stoned to death. Since the dead spouse no longer existed, the remaining marriage partner was free to remarry. This did not sit well with their Roman conquerers, who considered sexual sin to be a lightweight thing, and took away the right of the Jews to stone one to death for this minor crime. We know that God hates divorce. His intention was that all marriages last until the death of at least one partner. Now we got a situation where the death penalty cannot be carried out, freeing the innocent spouse. The innocent spouse is trapped in a marriage when according to Jewish law, that innocent spouse should be a widow or widower, free to start anew. How does Jesus solve this problem? He has no desire to punish the innocent party by trapping the innocent in a loveless marriage, and He has no desire to question Roman authority. He does the only thing that is fair. He allows divorce for one reason only. That reason is sexual sin. No other reason can break that bond. One spouse is bound to the other spouse until one divorces the other for committing sexual sin. Since the divorce of my imaginary couple was not for sexual sin, God does not recognize the divorce and the woman is still bound to her first, her real, husband. She sins every time she has sex with one who is not her husband, just as surely as a thief sins every time he steals. Terry David Miller wrote: Terry wrote: David, I don't understand what you are trying to say. To me, Matthew 5:32 requires no interpretation. What's to interpret? :-) Well then, how about if I just give you an alternative consideration. Ok? Terry wrote: The fact is clear. Remarriage after a divorce for any reason other than adultery is sin. Here is another consideration for you. Matthew 5:32 (32) But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. Let's break down these statements into two: 1) Whoever divorces his wife, except for the cause of fornication, is causing her to commit adultery. [Interpretation / Commentary: The husband does not cause her to commit adultery by the divorce if she has already fallen into fornication. Therefore, he has some justification for divorcing her in this case... BUT... he might want to reconsider even that because the one who ends up marrying her after he divorces her would be committing adultery!] 2) Whoever marries a divorced woman is committing adultery [Interpretation: whether or not she was divorced because of adultery. This reading is one whereby the clause "except for fornication" applies only to the first consideration of the problem of divorce causing the wife to commit adultery through remarriage.]. The hardness of our hearts makes hearing this second statement hard to hear, but it is a possible way to interpret what Jesus is saying here. Notice how in Mat. 19, the disciples recognize that the man should not marry, and Jesus then teaches on being a eunuch. Terry wrote: God does not see the second marriage as a marriage. He sees one who is bound to another living in continual sin with someone besides his/her spouse. This is your interpretation. Look at the text and consider another interpretation. Consider that perhaps God does not see continual sin, but that the adultery is a one time act that violated the covenant. He calls that violation adultery. Trying to argue for continual adultery is kind of like saying that after a murderer has killed someone, he commits murder again if he shoots the body again. It all depends upon how one looks upon the marriage covenant and what causes the marriage covenant to be violated. Is the marriage covenant being violated again and again and again or was it violated at that first sin? I put this forward primarily to try and help you see how you project interpretation into the text. The really important point here is to understand the end of the conversation that Jesus has in this passage. What Jesus is trying to communicate (IMO) is that divorce itself causes adultery, by the one who divorces the wife who has been found unclean according to Torah and therefore might rightfully divorce her according to Torah, and also by the one who ends up marrying the woman rightly put away. The thrust of what Jesus is after is stopping the divorce in the first place. He is encouraging purity in marriage, and forgiveness for adultery in marriage, even though the Torah might supposedly give you a right to divorce her. His point is kind of like, "yeah, Torah
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Terry wrote: have no idea what the Church of Christ might believe. Well, as I said, they use the Ezra passage to argue that all remarried people on planet earth should divorce their spouses and all original couples need to remarry. If one of the original couples will not divorce their new spouse, then the spouse trying to do the right thing should divorce and remain single, praying and waiting for the first spouse to do what God wants, which according to them is divorce and remarry their original spouse again. Terry wrote: I have no problem with a Jewish Christian wedding a Gentile Christian. I realize that, but under Torah, this poses a problem. The passage you brought up would insist in divorce in this case. Terry wrote: I have studied Paul's teaching, but do not pretend to understand what it means. I am not about to speculate what the Jews of Ezra's day intended to do once they were divorced. It is not much of a speculation. The whole idea of divorce is to undo a marriage and allow a new marriage to take place. If remarriage was not in view, then a writing of divorce is not necessary. Just leave the spouse because you can't remarry anyway. Terry wrote: I simply see men who wanted to be obedient at the time. Yes, I see that too. Terry wrote: I do not understand your last sentence. Maybe you and I do not have the same idea about what the words interpret and apply mean . I had no idea I was doing either one. :-) My last sentence was: The thrust of what Jesus taught on this is that he is against divorce, yet his teachings would seem to create more divorce the way you are interpreting and applying it. What I was trying to say is this. From my perspective, the goal of the teaching of Christ on this subject was to turn men away from divorcing their wives. His goal was to decrease the divorce rate, ideally to make divorce non-existent. The way you are interpreting his teachings is that if someone did divorce and subsequently married again, they had better divorce yet again if they want to follow Christ in purity. So the effect of your interpretation of this passage would be to cause MORE DIVORCES, the very opposite of what I perceive Jesus to be trying to accomplish. The reason your perspective leads to an opposite result is context. You take the teaching of Christ out of the context in which it was given. In the context of men divorcing wives for spoiling their supper or any other reason under the sun, and reinterpreting Torah in order to do it, Jesus was carrying a hardline, saying, "you are causing adultery even if you think you have your hands clean through all these writings of divorcement!" (I really encourage you to study a little about modern day Roman Catholic Annulments. It is history repeating itself... a real eye opener to understanding Christ's teachings here.) Ask yourself this. Where is the admonition of Jesus Christ for remarried spouses to divorce? It would be so easy for him to say, "And to the remarried spouses I say, let them divorce each other." It is not there. Perhaps it is not there because this is not the mind of Christ, that those who are remarried must immediately divorce. Maybe I'm trying too hard to explain this. If so, please forgive me. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Terry wrote: David, I don't understand what you are trying to say. To me, Matthew 5:32 requires no interpretation. What's to interpret? :-) Well then, how about if I just give you an alternative consideration. Ok? Terry wrote: The fact is clear. Remarriage after a divorce for any reason other than adultery is sin. Here is another consideration for you. Matthew 5:32 (32) But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. Let's break down these statements into two: 1) Whoever divorces his wife, except for the cause of fornication, is causing her to commit adultery. [Interpretation / Commentary: The husband does not cause her to commit adultery by the divorce if she has already fallen into fornication. Therefore, he has some justification for divorcing her in this case... BUT... he might want to reconsider even that because the one who ends up marrying her after he divorces her would be committing adultery!] 2) Whoever marries a divorced woman is committing adultery [Interpretation: whether or not she was divorced because of adultery. This reading is one whereby the clause "except for fornication" applies only to the first consideration of the problem of divorce causing the wife to commit adultery through remarriage.]. The hardness of our hearts makes hearing this second statement hard to hear, but it is a possible way to interpret what Jesus is saying here. Notice how in Mat. 19, the disciples recognize that the man should not marry, and Jesus then teaches on being a eunuch. Terry wrote: God does not see the second marriage as a marriage. He sees one who is bound to another living in continual sin with someone besides his/her spouse. This is your interpretation. Look at the text and consider another interpretation. Consider that perhaps God does not see continual sin, but that the adultery is a one time act that violated the covenant. He calls that violation adultery. Trying to argue for continual adultery is kind of like saying that after a murderer has killed someone, he commits murder again if he shoots the body again. It all depends upon how one looks upon the marriage covenant and what causes the marriage covenant to be violated. Is the marriage covenant being violated again and again and again or was it violated at that first sin? I put this forward primarily to try and help you see how you project interpretation into the text. The really important point here is to understand the end of the conversation that Jesus has in this passage. What Jesus is trying to communicate (IMO) is that divorce itself causes adultery, by the one who divorces the wife who has been found unclean according to Torah and therefore might rightfully divorce her according to Torah, and also by the one who ends up marrying the woman rightly put away. The thrust of what Jesus is after is stopping the divorce in the first place. He is encouraging purity in marriage, and forgiveness for adultery in marriage, even though the Torah might supposedly give you a right to divorce her. His point is kind of like, "yeah, Torah allows you to divorce the adulterous wife, but what God has joined together, let no man put asunder... therefore, let's live by a higher standard of Torah, which was simply accommodating your hard heartedness when it gave you the right to divorce for the cause of adultery." Terry wrote: Being born again does not change that. Being born again makes you want to do right. It does not make doing wrong right. You cannot have one who is still bound to another. You are viewing the continued relationship as divorce, but this is based upon a particular interpretation you have of the text, which is based upon assumptions you make from your particular culture and biases. Look at it from this point of view. If adultery has happened, and this was followed with divorce, then the parties are no longer bound to each other. The marriage covenant has been canceled. Torah allowed for this. Please consider carefully why Torah did not allow going back to the first spouse after the divorce. If we only considered your perspective here of Mat. 5:32, which is based upon the idea that the divorced woman is still bound by marriage to the first husband despite the divorce, then the woman should be allowed to go back to her husband. However, she is not allowed to do that. This is because Torah recognizes that her marriage covenant has been violated. She no longer has any rights to her first husband and he no longer has any rights to her, BECAUSE... THEY ARE NO LONGER BOUND TO EACH OTHER. So how do we understand Jesus's teaching? He was speaking to those men whose wives were found in adultery and were considering their right under Torah to divorce them. He is encouraging them not to di
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
have no idea what the Church of Christ might believe. I have no problem with a Jewish Christian wedding a Gentile Christian. I have studied Paul's teaching, but do not pretend to understand what it means. I am not about to speculate what the Jews of Ezra's day intended to do once they were divorced. I simply see men who wanted to be obedient at the time. What happened afterward would be a wild guess on my part. I do not understand your last sentence. Maybe you and I do not have the same idea about what the words interpret and apply mean . I had no idea I was doing either one. David Miller wrote: Terry wrote: All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to the end of the chapter. You will see a story of men who had also married women that they should not have married, and how they corrected the situation. Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise with the Devil. Sounds like good tough love, Terry, but what else can be argued from Ezra? This is the passage that the Churches of Christ hammer about why remarried couples must divorce and then remarry their original spouses. Are you, on the basis of this passage, going to tell a Jewish Christian man who has married a Gentile Christian woman that he must divorce the Christian and go marry a Jew? Do you really think that this would be following the Spirit of Christ's teaching on this matter? What about Paul's teaching that the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife? These people in Ezra divorced these "strange women" alright, but I don't think that they were doing so with the idea of becoming eunuchs for the kingdom of God. They surely did so in anticipation of remarrying again within Judaism. So this particular example does not exactly cross over well to the teaching of Christ on this subject. The thrust of what Jesus taught on this is that he is against divorce, yet his teachings would seem to create more divorce the way you are interpreting and applying it. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Iz wrote: What specific teachings of Torah are you referring to David? That it is okay to divorce??? Jesus did say it is okay to divorce an adulterer; does Torah say that as well, or does it allow divorce for any reason? Jesus was giving his interpretation of Torah, which allowed for divorce only in the case of fornication (adultery, incest, etc.). Some Jews felt that Torah allowed for divorce for any reason, even if the wife could not cook. The specific teaching under dispute is found in Deut. 24:1 and hinges on what is meant by "she find no favor in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her." Jesus said in essence, "divorce is allowed by Torah only for the cause of fornication." Read more of Christ's teaching, such as that found in Matthew 19, and you will see that the disciples rightly understood that marrying a woman who was divorced was comitting adultery. Therefore they said, "it is not good to marry!" Jesus then taught the doctrine of celibacy, also teaching that not all could hear and walk in such. In other words, Torah allowed for divorce and remarriage in the case of adultery, but the purest form of Jesus teaching is a little more strict than that. Yet, in its strictness is grace, applying it only to those who can hear. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
David, I don't understand what you are trying to say. To me, Matthew 5: 32 requires no interpretation. The fact is clear. Remarriage after a divorce for any reason other than adultery is sin. What's to interpret? God does not see the second marriage as a marriage. He sees one who is bound to another living in continual sin with someone besides his/her spouse. Being born again does not change that. Being born again makes you want to do right. It does not make doing wrong right. You cannot have one who is still bound to another. Nothing hard to understand about that. The only valid reason for divorce and remarriage is adultery. That is not to say that there is no valid reason to flee from an abusive spouse, but remarriage is not an option in those cases. Some day when you have a lot of time, if I am not feeble minded by then, you might go into detail about how you came to think this way, but as of now, what you are saying is hard for me to even consider. Terry = David Miller wrote: Terry wrote: Still, even without this example, Jesus indicates in Matthew 5:32 that the Verages are living in adultery. Not necessarily. It is a matter of interpretation, and a matter of judgment which requires more facts. Terry wrote: The solution obviously is not for her to return to her real husband, but the solution, just as obviosly, to me, cannot be to continue to live in sin. Nobody should continue to live in sin, but a major part of understanding the passage you quote, as well as other passages where we can find Christ's doctrine on this subject, is that the act of divorce is the act that causes adultery in the other partner. (There is a very long answer that I could give you on this subject, but I really don't have the time for it right now.) Please allow me to ask you to consider that further sin in this situation MIGHT BE (depending on other facts) a second divorce rather than a continued marriage relationship. Put yourself in the position of the entire past history being wiped out of any legal consideration through grace, and now look at the marriage situation of this couple. Which would be adultery from this perspective when considering this Matthew 5 passage? It would be divorce rather than a continued marriage relationship that would be causing the sin of adultery. Although we see how Jesus often is more legalistic in his approach to this subject, we must understand that he is able to be more strict in regards to his teaching on holiness because of grace. Consider why the Torah was not able to address this subject. Also consider that Torah represented God's mind and will on this matter in the situation where HEARTS WERE HARDENED. In other words, there is a perfect will of God in these situations, and there is a permissive will of God depending upon circumstances and the hardness of hearts involved. It is impossible to say that one who walks according to Torah in this matter is "continuing to live in sin." Think about that. I hope nobody takes my comments here to be excusing divorce and remarriage. I also hope my comments do not weaken the importance of Christ's teaching on this subject, that divorce for any cause is sin. I am only trying to point out that the situation is more complex than just taking a few sentences out of Matthew 5 and forbidding remarriage after divorce in every situation. Some time ago I had posted some information to how the Roman Catholics annul marriages. I remember posting a link to a Catholic website where Roman Catholics asked priests for answers about what made an annulment possible. If one examines this situation in Roman Catholicism, you will find a picture of the kind of situation Jesus was in concerning what allowed divorce and remarriage. It was sickening, how the school of Hillel in Christ's day allowed divorce for almost any situation, while the school of Shammai allowed it only for the cause of fornication. This is the context of Jesus's comment which gives us a more balanced understanding of what Jesus was teaching. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECT
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
What specific teachings of Torah are you referring to David? That it is okay to divorce??? Jesus did say it is okay to divorce an adulterer; does Torah say that as well, or does it allow divorce for any reason? iz -Original Message- In this age of grace, my focus is continually upon the teaching of Christ concerning what marriage is, which does not allow for divorce and remarriage. Those who can hear will take a celibate life and I encourage them in that. Those who cannot hear because of the hardness of their heart might better abide by the teachings of Torah on the matter. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Terry wrote: All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to the end of the chapter. You will see a story of men who had also married women that they should not have married, and how they corrected the situation. Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise with the Devil. Sounds like good tough love, Terry, but what else can be argued from Ezra? This is the passage that the Churches of Christ hammer about why remarried couples must divorce and then remarry their original spouses. Are you, on the basis of this passage, going to tell a Jewish Christian man who has married a Gentile Christian woman that he must divorce the Christian and go marry a Jew? Do you really think that this would be following the Spirit of Christ's teaching on this matter? What about Paul's teaching that the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife? These people in Ezra divorced these "strange women" alright, but I don't think that they were doing so with the idea of becoming eunuchs for the kingdom of God. They surely did so in anticipation of remarrying again within Judaism. So this particular example does not exactly cross over well to the teaching of Christ on this subject. The thrust of what Jesus taught on this is that he is against divorce, yet his teachings would seem to create more divorce the way you are interpreting and applying it. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Izzy wrote: Okay, add to Terry's original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been "Christians" prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were "in love". They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? This sounds very similar to a situation in my own family involving my sister. She actually had the other man's child while still married to her rightful husband, deceiving him and the rest of us about whose child it was until after the child was born. In the beginning, she would call her rightful marriage "adultery" and her new found love as "true love" and "God ordained marriage." It took more than 10 years before she finally has admitted to me that she should not have committed adultery. However, she still does not see the sinfulness of the divorce. In fact, she looks at it as a kind of salvation for her. This is VERY dangerous, in my opinion. The fruit of the deception has led her to the Roman Catholic Church which seems to offer haven for many in this kind of situation. In this age of grace, my focus is continually upon the teaching of Christ concerning what marriage is, which does not allow for divorce and remarriage. Those who can hear will take a celibate life and I encourage them in that. Those who cannot hear because of the hardness of their heart might better abide by the teachings of Torah on the matter. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Terry wrote: Still, even without this example, Jesus indicates in Matthew 5:32 that the Verages are living in adultery. Not necessarily. It is a matter of interpretation, and a matter of judgment which requires more facts. Terry wrote: The solution obviously is not for her to return to her real husband, but the solution, just as obviosly, to me, cannot be to continue to live in sin. Nobody should continue to live in sin, but a major part of understanding the passage you quote, as well as other passages where we can find Christ's doctrine on this subject, is that the act of divorce is the act that causes adultery in the other partner. (There is a very long answer that I could give you on this subject, but I really don't have the time for it right now.) Please allow me to ask you to consider that further sin in this situation MIGHT BE (depending on other facts) a second divorce rather than a continued marriage relationship. Put yourself in the position of the entire past history being wiped out of any legal consideration through grace, and now look at the marriage situation of this couple. Which would be adultery from this perspective when considering this Matthew 5 passage? It would be divorce rather than a continued marriage relationship that would be causing the sin of adultery. Although we see how Jesus often is more legalistic in his approach to this subject, we must understand that he is able to be more strict in regards to his teaching on holiness because of grace. Consider why the Torah was not able to address this subject. Also consider that Torah represented God's mind and will on this matter in the situation where HEARTS WERE HARDENED. In other words, there is a perfect will of God in these situations, and there is a permissive will of God depending upon circumstances and the hardness of hearts involved. It is impossible to say that one who walks according to Torah in this matter is "continuing to live in sin." Think about that. I hope nobody takes my comments here to be excusing divorce and remarriage. I also hope my comments do not weaken the importance of Christ's teaching on this subject, that divorce for any cause is sin. I am only trying to point out that the situation is more complex than just taking a few sentences out of Matthew 5 and forbidding remarriage after divorce in every situation. Some time ago I had posted some information to how the Roman Catholics annul marriages. I remember posting a link to a Catholic website where Roman Catholics asked priests for answers about what made an annulment possible. If one examines this situation in Roman Catholicism, you will find a picture of the kind of situation Jesus was in concerning what allowed divorce and remarriage. It was sickening, how the school of Hillel in Christ's day allowed divorce for almost any situation, while the school of Shammai allowed it only for the cause of fornication. This is the context of Jesus's comment which gives us a more balanced understanding of what Jesus was teaching. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/6/2005 9:28:31 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? John wrote: Why wasn't King David told to dump Bathsheba? cd:Technically her husband was dead freeing her to marry whom she willed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
I see neither in your response. JD -Original Message-From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 08:24:08 -0500Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? - Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/5/2005 6:44:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I will surrender by allotted time to Senator Taylor. If he has not the time to respond -- a very good question, by the way -- I will venture a biblical apologetic of some sort. I appreciate the New Terry. I think you have added much to the forum - even when we might disagree. And to be honest about it -- I have a predetermined bias on this subject. I will need to slow down a bit to insure that this bias does not get in the way. Dean's solution -- in the end - is the same as mine. But his is a legal solution and mine is grace based. Jd cd: I see grace and forgiveness all thru my response-is a bias getting in our way of communicating? -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always w
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Why wasn't King David told to dump Bathsheba? Do we not see that the rules of marriage were developed out of cultural considerations? And who said that the "commandments" in I Co 7:19 are the 613 of the old law? He just got through saying that circumcision is nothing one way or the other !!! Yet it is commanded under The Law. Why do we resist the obvious -- that Paul is dealing with various issues previously questioned (7:1) with his answers being drawn from either a point of wisdom or as a consideration of the revelation of Christ as he was being prepared for the [Gentile] ministry. The very fact that there are a number of difficult issues surrounding marriage is evidence of the fact that the New Testament scriptures were never to be considered as a legal document to any degree whatsoever. Not a word about a father who sexually abuses his children. Nothing about physical abuse. If fornication is intercourse and "sexual immorality" is everything else, then only intercourse outside the marriage is prohibited as an action for divorce. Is a wife stuck with her husband if he will not work, but supports the family through thievery. What if he is basically absent from the home, ala outside sales, but visits the home several times a year leaving the wife with all the home responsibilities but none of the joy of being married. Jd -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <wabbits1234@earthlink.net>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 18:23:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Circumcision may be nothing Christine.You can only do it once. Adultery on the other hand , can be, and in this case is, continual sin. Those who live in continual sin when they know that it is wrong are not following Christ; they are living in rebellion to His command. There is no forgiveness unless they turn from their sin to Christ. There are no new creatures with old natures. I know that sounds harsh, and I wish I could find a loophole. I had to break fellowship with a brother I love over this same situation. Terry > > > >>[Original Message] >>From: Christine Miller <verilysaid@yahoo.com> >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] org> >>Date: 11/6/2005 1:13:28 PM >>Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? >> >>I was reading 1 Corinthians 7, not particularly >>thinking of this topic, but I read this about >>circumcision: >> >>1 Cor. 7:18 - Is any man called being circumcised? let >>him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in >>uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. >> >>And then verse 19 says how circumsision is nothing, >>and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the >>commandments. I was wondering: does this verse apply &g t;>to this situation at all? If the two were unsaved when >>they were divorced and then remarried, and then get >>saved while in this second relationship, it doesn't >>sound right to divorce again, just as someone >>circumsised should not be uncircumsised after coming >>to Christ. Why not accept forgiveness and begin to >>walk afresh? >> >>And I have a question: does King David's example apply >>to this situation? Or was that different? >> >>What do you all think? This is a difficult issue. >> >> >>Blessings! >> >> >> >> -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how y ou ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
I think that you are probably right. Terry Charles Perry Locke wrote: Don't you think that in these verses "cirumcism" means "jew"? Why does Paul say that one who is "circumcised" should not become "uncircumsized"...certainly he is not talking about physical circumcism in this instance. He may be simply saying that jews should not become non-jews and non-jews sould not become jews when thy come to Christ. vv. 20 & 24 seem to support this interpretation. Perry From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 18:23:55 -0600 Circumcision may be nothing Christine.You can only do it once. Adultery on the other hand , can be, and in this case is, continual sin. Those who live in continual sin when they know that it is wrong are not following Christ; they are living in rebellion to His command. There is no forgiveness unless they turn from their sin to Christ. There are no new creatures with old natures. I know that sounds harsh, and I wish I could find a loophole. I had to break fellowship with a brother I love over this same situation. Terry [Original Message] From: Christine Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/6/2005 1:13:28 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I was reading 1 Corinthians 7, not particularly thinking of this topic, but I read this about circumcision: 1 Cor. 7:18 - Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. And then verse 19 says how circumsision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments. I was wondering: does this verse apply to this situation at all? If the two were unsaved when they were divorced and then remarried, and then get saved while in this second relationship, it doesn't sound right to divorce again, just as someone circumsised should not be uncircumsised after coming to Christ. Why not accept forgiveness and begin to walk afresh? And I have a question: does King David's example apply to this situation? Or was that different? What do you all think? This is a difficult issue. Blessings! -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Don't you think that in these verses "cirumcism" means "jew"? Why does Paul say that one who is "circumcised" should not become "uncircumsized"...certainly he is not talking about physical circumcism in this instance. He may be simply saying that jews should not become non-jews and non-jews sould not become jews when thy come to Christ. vv. 20 & 24 seem to support this interpretation. Perry From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 18:23:55 -0600 Circumcision may be nothing Christine.You can only do it once. Adultery on the other hand , can be, and in this case is, continual sin. Those who live in continual sin when they know that it is wrong are not following Christ; they are living in rebellion to His command. There is no forgiveness unless they turn from their sin to Christ. There are no new creatures with old natures. I know that sounds harsh, and I wish I could find a loophole. I had to break fellowship with a brother I love over this same situation. Terry [Original Message] From: Christine Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/6/2005 1:13:28 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I was reading 1 Corinthians 7, not particularly thinking of this topic, but I read this about circumcision: 1 Cor. 7:18 - Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. And then verse 19 says how circumsision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments. I was wondering: does this verse apply to this situation at all? If the two were unsaved when they were divorced and then remarried, and then get saved while in this second relationship, it doesn't sound right to divorce again, just as someone circumsised should not be uncircumsised after coming to Christ. Why not accept forgiveness and begin to walk afresh? And I have a question: does King David's example apply to this situation? Or was that different? What do you all think? This is a difficult issue. Blessings! -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Circumcision may be nothing Christine.You can only do it once. Adultery on the other hand , can be, and in this case is, continual sin. Those who live in continual sin when they know that it is wrong are not following Christ; they are living in rebellion to His command. There is no forgiveness unless they turn from their sin to Christ. There are no new creatures with old natures. I know that sounds harsh, and I wish I could find a loophole. I had to break fellowship with a brother I love over this same situation. Terry [Original Message] From: Christine Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/6/2005 1:13:28 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I was reading 1 Corinthians 7, not particularly thinking of this topic, but I read this about circumcision: 1 Cor. 7:18 - Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. And then verse 19 says how circumsision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments. I was wondering: does this verse apply to this situation at all? If the two were unsaved when they were divorced and then remarried, and then get saved while in this second relationship, it doesn't sound right to divorce again, just as someone circumsised should not be uncircumsised after coming to Christ. Why not accept forgiveness and begin to walk afresh? And I have a question: does King David's example apply to this situation? Or was that different? What do you all think? This is a difficult issue. Blessings! -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
cd: I think you are right on target and I also used David as an example-Great minds think alike:-) > [Original Message] > From: Christine Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 11/6/2005 1:13:28 PM > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > I was reading 1 Corinthians 7, not particularly > thinking of this topic, but I read this about > circumcision: > > 1 Cor. 7:18 - Is any man called being circumcised? let > him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in > uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. > > And then verse 19 says how circumsision is nothing, > and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the > commandments. I was wondering: does this verse apply > to this situation at all? If the two were unsaved when > they were divorced and then remarried, and then get > saved while in this second relationship, it doesn't > sound right to divorce again, just as someone > circumsised should not be uncircumsised after coming > to Christ. Why not accept forgiveness and begin to > walk afresh? > > And I have a question: does King David's example apply > to this situation? Or was that different? > > What do you all think? This is a difficult issue. > > > Blessings! > > --- Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As I see it, there can be no forgivness without > > turning from the sin > > that needs to be forgiven. That means that they > > cannot stay in that > > relationship and have a relationship with the Lord. > > The normal > > reaction here is to say "Consider the others that > > will be hurt," and > > there is nothing wrong with considering the feelings > > of others, but > > Jesus says you have to love Him so much, that by > > comparison, the love > > you have for spouse and children and self seems so > > inferior to your love > > for Christ that love for family seems more like > > hate. Christ is the > > Alpha and Omega, beginning to end, start to finish. > > What He wants comes > > first. Self and family come second. If He wants > > you to turn from your > > adultery, then you turn from your adultery, no > > matter what the cost. > > > > By now, someone is saying, "I know God better than > > that! He is love'. > > All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to > > the end of the > > chapter. You will see a story of men who had also > > married women that > > they should not have married, and how they corrected > > the situation. > > > > Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise > > with the Devil. > > Terry > > > = > > > > ShieldsFamily wrote: > > > > > Other than sackcloth and ashes, what form should > > their repentance > > > take? They have never apologized to their > > ex-spouses for destroying > > > their families, and still speak evil of them at > > every opportunity. It > > > seems like a hopeless situation, but surely God > > could help them > > > repent. If they did truly repent, would God call > > them to separate? > > > There are indeed so many couples in the church > > today that remain in > > > marriages that are, in fact, adulteries. But if > > they truly repent > > > must they also be single the rest of their lives? > > And what about > > > anyone who ever had sexual relations prior to > > their current marriage? > > > And, as DM said, Torah forbids reuniting with an > > "unclean" spouse. > > > It's a difficult situation. iz > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > > Behalf Of *Terry Clifton > > > *Sent:* Sunday, November 06, 2005 9:23 AM > > > *To:* TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > > *Subject:* Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you > > offer? > > > > > > > > > > > > Mornin' Iz. As I see it, these two are lying to > > themselves. To repent > > > means to turn and go in another direction. When > > Jesus, Peter, Paul, > > > John and others called sinners to repentance, they > > were calling for a > > > 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for > > self, to living for > > > Him. These people, if they still have sexual &g
RE: [Fwd: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?]
- Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/6/2005 1:01:06 PM Subject: [Fwd: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?] -As I see it, there can be no forgivness without turning from the sin that needs to be forgiven. That means that they cannot stay in that relationship and have a relationship with the Lord. The normal reaction here is to say "Consider the others that will be hurt," and there is nothing wrong with considering the feelings of others, but Jesus says you have to love Him so much, that by comparison, the love you have for spouse and children and self seems so inferior to your love for Christ that love for family seems more like hate. Christ is the Alpha and Omega, beginning to end, start to finish. What He wants comes first. Self and family come second. If He wants you to turn from your adultery, then you turn from your adultery, no matter what the cost.By now, someone is saying, "I know God better than that! He is love'. All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to the end of the chapter. You will see a story of men who had also married wome n that they should not have married, and how they corrected the situation. cd:The man of God used a rod/hickory to drive the heathen away children away.As are all childern without the parents-at least one of the parents belonging to God. Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise with the Devil.Terry=ShieldsFamily wrote: Other than sackcloth and ashes, what form should their repentance take? They have never apologized to their ex-spouses for destroying their families, and still speak evil of them at every opportunity. It seems like a hopeless situation, but surely God could help them repent. If they did truly repent, would God call them to separate? There are indeed so many couples in the church today that remain in marriages that are, in fact, adulteries. But if they truly repent must they also be single the rest of their lives? And what about anyone who ever had sexual relations prior to their current marriage? And, as DM said, Torah forbids reuniting with an unclean spouse. Its a difficult situation. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Terry CliftonSent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 9:23 AMTo: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSubject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Mornin' Iz. As I see it, these two are lying to themselves. To repent means to turn and go in another direction. When Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and others called sinners to repentance, they were calling for a 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for self, to living for Him. These people, if they still have sexual relations, are still in adultery and still in their sins, still living for self. There is no forgivness that allows continual living in rebellion to God's commands. My advice would be for them to get out the sack cloth and ashes.You will not hear this much from the pulpit these days. The pastor who preaches this will be gone and the adulterers will still be a substantial part of the congregation.Terry ShieldsFamily wrote: Okay, add to Terrys original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been Christians prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were in love. They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message]From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AMSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
I was reading 1 Corinthians 7, not particularly thinking of this topic, but I read this about circumcision: 1 Cor. 7:18 - Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. And then verse 19 says how circumsision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments. I was wondering: does this verse apply to this situation at all? If the two were unsaved when they were divorced and then remarried, and then get saved while in this second relationship, it doesn't sound right to divorce again, just as someone circumsised should not be uncircumsised after coming to Christ. Why not accept forgiveness and begin to walk afresh? And I have a question: does King David's example apply to this situation? Or was that different? What do you all think? This is a difficult issue. Blessings! --- Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I see it, there can be no forgivness without > turning from the sin > that needs to be forgiven. That means that they > cannot stay in that > relationship and have a relationship with the Lord. > The normal > reaction here is to say "Consider the others that > will be hurt," and > there is nothing wrong with considering the feelings > of others, but > Jesus says you have to love Him so much, that by > comparison, the love > you have for spouse and children and self seems so > inferior to your love > for Christ that love for family seems more like > hate. Christ is the > Alpha and Omega, beginning to end, start to finish. > What He wants comes > first. Self and family come second. If He wants > you to turn from your > adultery, then you turn from your adultery, no > matter what the cost. > > By now, someone is saying, "I know God better than > that! He is love'. > All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to > the end of the > chapter. You will see a story of men who had also > married women that > they should not have married, and how they corrected > the situation. > > Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise > with the Devil. > Terry > = > > ShieldsFamily wrote: > > > Other than sackcloth and ashes, what form should > their repentance > > take? They have never apologized to their > ex-spouses for destroying > > their families, and still speak evil of them at > every opportunity. It > > seems like a hopeless situation, but surely God > could help them > > repent. If they did truly repent, would God call > them to separate? > > There are indeed so many couples in the church > today that remain in > > marriages that are, in fact, adulteries. But if > they truly repent > > must they also be single the rest of their lives? > And what about > > anyone who ever had sexual relations prior to > their current marriage? > > And, as DM said, Torah forbids reuniting with an > "unclean" spouse. > > It's a difficult situation. iz > > > > > > > > > ------------ > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Terry Clifton > > *Sent:* Sunday, November 06, 2005 9:23 AM > > *To:* TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > *Subject:* Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you > offer? > > > > > > > > Mornin' Iz. As I see it, these two are lying to > themselves. To repent > > means to turn and go in another direction. When > Jesus, Peter, Paul, > > John and others called sinners to repentance, they > were calling for a > > 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for > self, to living for > > Him. These people, if they still have sexual > relations, are still in > > adultery and still in their sins, still living for > self. There is no > > forgivness that allows continual living in > rebellion to God's > > commands. My advice would be for them to get out > the sack cloth and > > ashes. > > > > You will not hear this much from the pulpit these > days. The pastor > > who preaches this will be gone and the adulterers > will still be a > > substantial part of the congregation. > > Terry > > > > > > > ShieldsFamily wrote: > > > > > > > > Okay, add to Terry's original scenario the fact > that the couple that > > realized that they were living in adultery had > actually been >
[Fwd: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?]
-
As I see it, there can be no forgivness without turning from the sin
that needs to be forgiven. That means that they cannot stay in that
relationship and have a relationship with the Lord. The normal
reaction here is to say "Consider the others that will be hurt," and
there is nothing wrong with considering the feelings of others, but
Jesus says you have to love Him so much, that by comparison, the love
you have for spouse and children and self seems so inferior to your
love for Christ that love for family seems more like hate. Christ is
the Alpha and Omega, beginning to end, start to finish. What He wants
comes first. Self and family come second. If He wants you to turn
from your adultery, then you turn from your adultery, no matter what
the cost.
By now, someone is saying, "I know God better than that! He is love'.
All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to the end of the
chapter. You will see a story of men who had also married women that
they should not have married, and how they corrected the situation.
Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise with the Devil.
Terry
=
ShieldsFamily wrote:
Other than
sackcloth and ashes, what form
should their repentance take? They have never apologized to their
ex-spouses
for destroying their families, and still speak evil of them at every
opportunity. It seems like a hopeless situation, but surely God could
help
them repent. If they did truly repent, would God call them to
separate? There
are indeed so many couples in the church today that remain in marriages
that
are, in fact, adulteries. But if they truly repent must they also be
single
the rest of their lives? And what about anyone who ever had sexual
relations
prior to their current marriage? And, as DM said, Torah forbids
reuniting with
an “unclean” spouse. It’s a difficult situation. iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On
Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Sunday, November
06, 2005
9:23 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] What
counsel would you offer?
Mornin' Iz. As I see it,
these two are lying to
themselves. To repent means to turn and go in another direction. When
Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and others called sinners to repentance, they
were
calling for a 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for self, to
living for Him. These people, if they still have sexual relations, are
still in adultery and still in their sins, still living for self.
There
is no forgivness that allows continual living in rebellion to God's
commands. My advice would be for them to get out the sack cloth and
ashes.
You will not hear this much from the pulpit these days. The pastor who
preaches this will be gone and the adulterers will still be a
substantial part
of the congregation.
Terry
ShieldsFamily wrote:
Okay, add to
Terry’s original
scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living
in
adultery had actually been “Christians” prior to their adultery
with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they
were
“in love”. They now have a child between them, as well as
their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that
they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy
-Original Message-
From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Both you and JD seem to
think that
these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say
the
same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason.
Fact
is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's
word.
John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation
between
Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is
wrong
for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the
message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I
can
find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to
justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill
and
David M. on this.
Terry
Dean Moore wrote:
[Original Message]
From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks.
cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the
adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a
person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not
going beyond Pau
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
As I see it, there can be no forgivness without turning from the sin
that needs to be forgiven. That means that they cannot stay in that
relationship and have a relationship with the Lord. The normal
reaction here is to say "Consider the others that will be hurt," and
there is nothing wrong with considering the feelings of others, but
Jesus says you have to love Him so much, that by comparison, the love
you have for spouse and children and self seems so inferior to your
love for Christ that love for family seems more like hate. Christ is
the Alpha and Omega, beginning to end, start to finish. What He wants
comes first. Self and family come second. If He wants you to turn
from your adultery, then you turn from your adultery, no matter what
the cost.
By now, someone is saying, "I know God better than that! He is love'.
All I can tell those folks is to read Ezra 10:10 to the end of the
chapter. You will see a story of men who had also married women that
they should not have married, and how they corrected the situation.
Even when it is painful, God does not comprmise with the Devil.
Terry
=
ShieldsFamily wrote:
Other than
sackcloth and ashes, what form
should their repentance take? They have never apologized to their
ex-spouses
for destroying their families, and still speak evil of them at every
opportunity. It seems like a hopeless situation, but surely God could
help
them repent. If they did truly repent, would God call them to
separate? There
are indeed so many couples in the church today that remain in marriages
that
are, in fact, adulteries. But if they truly repent must they also be
single
the rest of their lives? And what about anyone who ever had sexual
relations
prior to their current marriage? And, as DM said, Torah forbids
reuniting with
an “unclean” spouse. It’s a difficult situation. iz
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Terry Clifton
Sent: Sunday, November
06, 2005
9:23 AM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re:
[TruthTalk] What
counsel would you offer?
Mornin' Iz. As I see it,
these two are lying to
themselves. To repent means to turn and go in another direction. When
Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and others called sinners to repentance, they
were
calling for a 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for self, to
living for Him. These people, if they still have sexual relations, are
still in adultery and still in their sins, still living for self.
There
is no forgivness that allows continual living in rebellion to God's
commands. My advice would be for them to get out the sack cloth and
ashes.
You will not hear this much from the pulpit these days. The pastor who
preaches this will be gone and the adulterers will still be a
substantial part
of the congregation.
Terry
ShieldsFamily wrote:
Okay, add to
Terry’s original
scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living
in
adultery had actually been “Christians” prior to their adultery
with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they
were
“in love”. They now have a child between them, as well as
their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that
they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy
-Original Message-
From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Both you and JD seem to
think that
these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say
the
same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason.
Fact
is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's
word.
John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation
between
Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is
wrong
for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the
message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I
can
find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to
justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill
and
David M. on this.
Terry
Dean Moore wrote:
[Original Message]
From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks.
cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the
adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a
person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not
going beyond Paul's teac
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
- Original Message - From: Terry Clifton To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/6/2005 10:22:46 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Mornin' Iz. As I see it, these two are lying to themselves. To repent means to turn and go in another direction. When Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and others called sinners to repentance, they were calling for a 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for self, to living for Him. These people, if they still have sexual relations, are still in adultery and still in their sins, still living for self. There is no forgivness that allows continual living in rebellion to God's commands. My advice would be for them to get out the sack cloth and ashes.You will not hear this much from the pulpit these days. The pastor who preaches this will be gone and the adulterers will still be a substantial part of the congregation. cd: but alas this is so true.Terry ShieldsFamily wrote: Okay, add to Terrys original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been Christians prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were in love. They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message]From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AMSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in theadulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let aperson remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am notgoing beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned theyare free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message]From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PMSubject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school.Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inher it the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship.This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them?--"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
- Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/6/2005 8:40:34 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? They both claim to be Christians now, and to have been Christians when they committed adultery and left their spouses for each other because they were unhappy and decided to make each other their spouses instead. They claim they have repented and everything is now okay because of that because it is all under the blood. How exactly do they start fresh? Repent and stay married? I only ask because I have no idea what they should do. Just wondering what God would want them to do. izzy cd: If they were Christians (which I doubt) then not only did they sin by breaking God's covenant and sin against their first spouse and sin against their own flesh-why have they not repented by stopping the unlawful relationship? There is missing a lawful reason to abandon the first spouse (I realize that this is sounding legalistic but how can one honor an legal contract with God and receive the grace offered and just forget about the requirements of the legal binding contract?) Their claim to first love of God while in the first relationship is a breaking of the first contract with Christ and the contract with the first spouse is equal to falling away and there is not more sacrifice for that type of sin. All one can do is make it right by confession of sin and stopping the sin-as I see it-God decides the rest of the accountably as he see fit. Their claim of love for the existing spouse is a effort to get symphony from you to justifly their actions. All sodomites do this as well as a fornicating church goer I know. The fault is not in love but rather in the forbidding sexual act or dwelling upon the sexual act. Their claim to the first Christian brotherhood binds them to accountability. Hope this helps-next time try a easy question - like how many quacking quakers live on the dark side of the moon:-) cd: Can a adulterer be a Christian?So were they Christians?Can one continue in sin and be a Christian-after the Holy Spirit's instructions about sin? Time for them to leave the church and they never belonged to. Solution: Have them repent/confess the sin recieve Christ -by living by his words-and start fresh.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Other than sackcloth and ashes, what form should their repentance take? They have never apologized to their ex-spouses for destroying their families, and still speak evil of them at every opportunity. It seems like a hopeless situation, but surely God could help them repent. If they did truly repent, would God call them to separate? There are indeed so many couples in the church today that remain in marriages that are, in fact, adulteries. But if they truly repent must they also be single the rest of their lives? And what about anyone who ever had sexual relations prior to their current marriage? And, as DM said, Torah forbids reuniting with an “unclean” spouse. It’s a difficult situation. iz From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry Clifton Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 9:23 AM To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Mornin' Iz. As I see it, these two are lying to themselves. To repent means to turn and go in another direction. When Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and others called sinners to repentance, they were calling for a 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for self, to living for Him. These people, if they still have sexual relations, are still in adultery and still in their sins, still living for self. There is no forgivness that allows continual living in rebellion to God's commands. My advice would be for them to get out the sack cloth and ashes. You will not hear this much from the pulpit these days. The pastor who preaches this will be gone and the adulterers will still be a substantial part of the congregation. Terry ShieldsFamily wrote: Okay, add to Terry’s original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been “Christians” prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were “in love”. They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. Terry Dean Moore wrote: [Original Message]From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AMSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in theadulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let aperson remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am notgoing beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. Thesin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned theyare free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message]From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PMSubject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school.Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Mornin' Iz. As I see it, these two are lying to themselves. To repent means to turn and go in another direction. When Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and others called sinners to repentance, they were calling for a 180 turn, from sin, to Christ. From living for self, to living for Him. These people, if they still have sexual relations, are still in adultery and still in their sins, still living for self. There is no forgivness that allows continual living in rebellion to God's commands. My advice would be for them to get out the sack cloth and ashes. You will not hear this much from the pulpit these days. The pastor who preaches this will be gone and the adulterers will still be a substantial part of the congregation. Terry ShieldsFamily wrote: Okay, add to Terry’s original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been “Christians” prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were “in love”. They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. Terry Dean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
They both claim to be Christians now, and to have been Christians when they committed adultery and left their spouses for each other because they were unhappy and decided to make each other their spouses instead. They claim they have repented and everything is now okay because of that because it is all “under the blood”. How exactly do they “start fresh”? Repent and stay married? I only ask because I have no idea what they should do. Just wondering what God would want them to do. izzy cd: Can a adulterer be a Christian?So were they Christians?Can one continue in sin and be a Christian-after the Holy Spirit's instructions about sin? Time for them to leave the church and they never belonged to. Solution: Have them repent/confess the sin recieve Christ -by living by his words-and start fresh.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
- Original Message - From: ShieldsFamily To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/6/2005 7:29:29 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Okay, add to Terrys original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been Christians prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were in love. They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy cd: Can a adulterer be a Christian?So were they Christians?Can one continue in sin and be a Christian-after the Holy Spirit's instructions about sin? Time for them to leave the church and they never belonged to. Solution: Have them repent/confess the sin recieve Christ -by living by his words-and start fresh. -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message]From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AMSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in theadulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let aperson remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am notgoing beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned theyare free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message]From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PMSubject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school.Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inher it the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship.This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them?--"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have afriend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts f
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
- Original Message - From: To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: 11/5/2005 6:44:35 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I will surrender by allotted time to Senator Taylor. If he has not the time to respond -- a very good question, by the way -- I will venture a biblical apologetic of some sort. I appreciate the New Terry. I think you have added much to the forum - even when we might disagree. And to be honest about it -- I have a predetermined bias on this subject. I will need to slow down a bit to insure that this bias does not get in the way. Dean's solution -- in the end - is the same as mine. But his is a legal solution and mine is grace based. Jd cd: I see grace and forgiveness all thru my response-is a bias getting in our way of communicating? -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Okay, add to Terry’s original scenario the fact that the couple that realized that they were living in adultery had actually been “Christians” prior to their adultery with each other. They then each divorced their spouses because they were “in love”. They now have a child between them, as well as their children from their previous marriages. But now they claim that they have repented and are forgiven. What is your advice to them? izzy -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. Terry Dean Moore wrote: [Original Message]From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AMSubject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in theadulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let aperson remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am notgoing beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. Thesin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned theyare free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message]From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PMSubject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school.Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship.This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them?--"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have afriend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have afriend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. --"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send a
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Good points, David. Some things I had not considered. Still, even without this example, Jesus indicates in Matthew 5:32 that the Verages are living in adultery. The solution obviously is not for her to return to her real husband, but the solution, just as obviosly, to me, cannot be to continue to live in sin. Terry David Miller wrote: Terry wrote: Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. It might also be that such is not best for the children. We would have to consider more facts in the situation. Nevertheless, there are many situations that could be justified by reasoning from God's word for them to stay together. Maybe JD will address these later. Terry wrote: John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said, "You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. There are a lot more facts to the situation of Herod and Herodias. For one thing, Herod was the uncle of Herodias, so there are problems with incest laws. Also, Herodias was the wife of Herod's brother. The Torah very specifically condemns taking the wife of one's brother while the brother was still alive. Leviticus 18:16 (16) Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness. With the covenant at the time still being the covenant of Torah, John the Baptist had very clear grounds for making his case against Herod, and apparently more specifically against Herodias (because the gospels seem to make it appear that she was most offended by John). There are other facts to this case as well. Josephus informs us that Herod took up with Herodias on a trip to Rome to visit his brother, then he brought Herodias back with him. It was then, after this adultery, that he sent his first wife back to her father, the king in Arabia (Petra, in modern day Jordan). This caused a war to break out between the Jews and the Arabs, and the Jews lost, suffering much destruction. It seems to me that John was addressing the sufferings of the people caused by Herodias, which would explain her taking offense at John. He was basically saying that it was all her fault. I hope you can see that this situation between Herod and Herodias is not exactly the same situation as the sketch you gave us. In fact, it was a lot different. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Terry wrote: Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. It might also be that such is not best for the children. We would have to consider more facts in the situation. Nevertheless, there are many situations that could be justified by reasoning from God's word for them to stay together. Maybe JD will address these later. Terry wrote: John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said, "You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. There are a lot more facts to the situation of Herod and Herodias. For one thing, Herod was the uncle of Herodias, so there are problems with incest laws. Also, Herodias was the wife of Herod's brother. The Torah very specifically condemns taking the wife of one's brother while the brother was still alive. Leviticus 18:16 (16) Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness. With the covenant at the time still being the covenant of Torah, John the Baptist had very clear grounds for making his case against Herod, and apparently more specifically against Herodias (because the gospels seem to make it appear that she was most offended by John). There are other facts to this case as well. Josephus informs us that Herod took up with Herodias on a trip to Rome to visit his brother, then he brought Herodias back with him. It was then, after this adultery, that he sent his first wife back to her father, the king in Arabia (Petra, in modern day Jordan). This caused a war to break out between the Jews and the Arabs, and the Jews lost, suffering much destruction. It seems to me that John was addressing the sufferings of the people caused by Herodias, which would explain her taking offense at John. He was basically saying that it was all her fault. I hope you can see that this situation between Herod and Herodias is not exactly the same situation as the sketch you gave us. In fact, it was a lot different. Peace be with you. David Miller. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Yes, Terry, I have seen this situation more than a few times. There are many in the so-called "Church of Christ" who counsel these couples to divorce and get back with their original spouses. Sad, terrible counsel. Such instruction is contrary to the teachings of Torah. They arrive at the viewpoint because they ignore Torah and yet take a legal viewpoint of the New Testament's teachings about what marriage is. The hardness of people's hearts makes the area of marriage, divorce, remarriage, etc. very complicated. There are many issues that can be involved, and hence when Paul teaches on this, he sometimes cautions that he speaks by permission rather than commandment. The one area where he speaks by commandment is to the married, that they should not divorce. In the past when I pastored and was in the position to give counsel in these situations, I would call the couple's attention to 1 Cor. 7, coupling the teaching of Torah about marriage and divorce, and the New Testament's more stringent and higher standard of marriage that can only be realized with grace for past mistakes. For example, the concept of the past being sin and forgiven is an important one, with the idea of starting anew sometimes being appropriate. There are some situations, however, where a continued "marriage" relationship is bad and should be abandoned. There are no universal, clear answers for these situations, but there is wisdom in God for each and every situation taken on a case by case basis. Peace be with you. David Miller. Terry wrote: I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Absolutely. -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 18:59:00 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? This is one of the tough questions I struggle with, John. Makes me realise just how little I know. Hopefully bydiscussing the tough ones we can all grow.Terry[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will surrender by allotted time to Senator Taylor. If he has not the time to respond -- a very good question, by the way -- I will venture a biblical apologetic of some sort. I appreciate the New Terry. I think you have added much to the forum - even when we might disagree. And to be honest about it -- I have a predetermined bias on this subject. I will need to slow down a bit to insure that this bias does not get in the way. Dean's solution -- in the end - is the same as mine. But his is a legal solution and mine is grace based. Jd -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
This is one of the tough questions I struggle with, John. Makes me realise just how little I know. Hopefully bydiscussing the tough ones we can all grow. Terry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will surrender by allotted time to Senator Taylor. If he has not the time to respond -- a very good question, by the way -- I will venture a biblical apologetic of some sort. I appreciate the New Terry. I think you have added much to the forum - even when we might disagree. And to be honest about it -- I have a predetermined bias on this subject. I will need to slow down a bit to insure that this bias does not get in the way. Dean's solution -- in the end - is the same as mine. But his is a legal solution and mine is grace based. Jd -Original Message- From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. Terry Dean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
I will surrender by allotted time to Senator Taylor. If he has not the time to respond -- a very good question, by the way -- I will venture a biblical apologetic of some sort. I appreciate the New Terry. I think you have added much to the forum - even when we might disagree. And to be honest about it -- I have a predetermined bias on this subject. I will need to slow down a bit to insure that this bias does not get in the way. Dean's solution -- in the end - is the same as mine. But his is a legal solution and mine is grace based. Jd -Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 13:08:55 -0600Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word.John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this.TerryDean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to an
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
Both you and JD seem to think that these two should stay in their adulterous relationship. I want to say the same thing, for the benefit of the children if for no other reason. Fact is though, that I cannot reconcile that line of reasoning with God's word. John, the baptizer lost his head for condemning the same situation between Herod and Herodious. If it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Herod, it is wrong for Mr. and Mrs. Verage. When John said," You cannot have her", the message is that God will not approve of people living in adultery. I can find no exception in the new testament. Could either of you do more to justify your position? I would also like to hear the thinking of Bill and David M. on this. Terry Dean Moore wrote: [Original Message] From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. [Original Message] From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
> [Original Message] > From: Dean Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Date: 11/5/2005 8:47:47 AM > Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. cd: I understand now-I had read the letter as the young ones are in the adulterous relationship. I am going to step out on a limb and say let a person remain in the state in which they were called and hope I am not going beyond Paul's teachings.If you are called married stay married. The sin was in breaking the first covenant with the husband-once abandoned they are free to marry only in the Lord.Confess that sin and go on with life. > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > > Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM > > Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > > > > > I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you > > probably have too. Here it is. > > > > Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate > > strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the > > top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went > > for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was > > somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high > > school. > > Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went > > shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No > > scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage > > truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. > > She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. > > > > The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the > > owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the > > market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the > > old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more > > time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned > > nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started > > attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything > > went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the > > Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living > > in an adulterous relationship. > > This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what > > to do about this. > > > > You are the pastor. What do you tell them? > > -- > > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may > know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) > http://www.InnGlory.org > > > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a > friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. > > > > -- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
RE: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
cd: Tell me more about this adulterous relationship? Thanks. > [Original Message] > From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org > Date: 11/4/2005 10:41:13 PM > Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? > > > I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you > probably have too. Here it is. > > Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate > strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the > top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went > for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was > somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high > school. > Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went > shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No > scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage > truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. > She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. > > The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the > owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the > market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the > old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more > time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned > nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started > attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything > went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the > Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living > in an adulterous relationship. > This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what > to do about this. > > You are the pastor. What do you tell them? > -- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Re: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
The question, here, is whether a divorce is a divorce, of course and I rather it think it is. There is no going back in a situation such as this. It just does not happen. From a counseling perspective, such a solution would be a nightmare. Finally, the point of obedience is BECOMING. The point of obedience is not some imagined righteousness through personal and legal correctness. We are no longer under law. A course of action [ in this case ] which demands the destruction of associate lives (the children) is a clear denial of the fact that if we are led by the Spirit, we are no longer under law. Grace is the saving passion on the part of God -- He makes US right when things in our lives are oh !! so very wrong. God is not a legalist. Jd-Original Message-From: Terry Clifton <wabbits1234@earthlink.net>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 21:41:10 -0600Subject: [TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer? I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son o f the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If y ou do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
[TruthTalk] What counsel would you offer?
I have run into the following situation at least twice. Some of you probably have too. Here it is. Sally was cheer leader in high school. If you were to choose a mate strictly on physical appearance, she would be right up there among the top five. Billy was the typical small town football hero. Billy went for Sally because of her looks. Sally went for Billy because he was somebody, a big duck in a little puddle. They married right out of high school. Billy was a big guy in a small town, but when the college coaches went shopping for recruits, they did not stop in Billy's town. No scholarship, not even an offer. Billy ended up driving the town garbage truck. The marriage lasted a little over a year. Sally felt cheated. She deserved better, so she filed for a no fault divorce. The following spring she met Joe A. Verage. Joe was the son of the owner of the local super market. Joe, in fact, was manager of the market, making a good salary, and sure to inherit the business when the old man passed on. In time, Joe and Sally were married, and in more time they had a couple of kids. About the time the first kid turned nine, they went to a Billy Graham crusade and were saved. They started attending church, then started attending Sunday school and everything went well for a couple of more years, then they started reading the Bible. Eventually they discovered that they seemed to be living living in an adulterous relationship. This bothered them a lot, and so they asked the pastor to tell them what to do about this. You are the pastor. What do you tell them? -- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
