• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Are there any Baptists that believe a Divorced Pastor Can Still Pastor a Church??

Discussion in 'Baptists' started by Chickenman1, Jun 6, 2017.

  1. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    With all due respect, pastors, bishops, deacons, are held to a higher standard.

    One rule: sola scriptura. I don't recall any "divorced" priests from the OT.

    Also, one rule: sola scriptura. The qualifications set forth for Bishops (pastors) elders, and deacons make it clear that if you can't rule your own household well, how can you be expected to take care of God's house? ("(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)"-1 Tim. 3:5 (KJV))

    And again, how does "divorce" get around "the husband of one wife" if he gets remarried?

    If a man is divorced, and stays divorced (not re-married), I have no problem with it.

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  2. OzSpen

    OzSpen Regular Member

    +661
    Australia
    Baptist
    Private
    This article from bible.org takes a different view to yours in its interpretation of a one-woman man: Will you explain “husband of one wife” in relation to elders/deacons?
     
  3. GeorgeJ

    GeorgeJ <Insert Custom Title Here>

    +1,519
    United States
    Deist
    Married
    The preceding argument has been brought to you by Paul.........almost 20 centuries old and still going strong.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2017
  4. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +28,808
    Anglican
    Married
    OK, but I didn't get the idea that if this action were taken, there wouldn't be some pushback, just that it would be possible.
     
  5. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    The "husband of one wife" argument is nothing new. That has been a hotly contested subject for quite some time.

    For "bishops" (sola scriptura) scripture says:

    "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;" -1 Tim. 3:2

    For "deacons" (sola scriptura) it says:

    "Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife" -1 Tim 3:12

    For "elders" (sola scriptura) it says:

    "ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife," Titus 1:5-6

    But lets look at the requirements in the OT for "High Priest".


    NUMBERS 18:7: "Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest’s office for everything of the altar, and within the vail; and ye shall serve. I have given your priest’s office unto you as a service of gift; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death".


    LEVITICUS 21:10: "And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes;"

    LEVITICUS 21:13: "And he shall take a wife in her virginity."


    LEVITICUS 21:14: "A widow, or a divorced woman, or profane, or an harlot, these shall he not take: but he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife."

    LEVITICUS 21:15: "Neither shall he profane his seed among his people: for I the Lord do sanctify him."


    EZEKIEL 44:22, "Neither shall they take for their wives a widow, nor her that is put away: but they shall take maidens of the seed of the house of Israel, or a widow that had a priest before."

    EZEKIEL 44:23, "And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean."

    No matter how called you were; you had to meet the requirements for the office.

    Should this not apply today? Below are some of the called and the main requirements:

    The Called: God called the tribe of Levi only.


    Requirements:

    l Must be male (Levi and his sons).

    l Must have one wife.

    l Must only marry a virgin.

    l Must be able to teach.

    l Must not have extramarital affairs.

    l Must not have children outside wedlock.

    l Must be clean, faithful, blameless and undefiled.


    Source

    God Bless

    Till all are one.

     
  6. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    The article you reference says:

    "Now for my thoughts on this passage. Literally, the passage says, “a one-woman man” just as 5:9 says, “a one-man woman.” If you recall, later in chapter 5 verse 14, Paul actually told the younger widows to marry rather than to remain single. If Paul meant married only once in 5:9 rather than referring to a woman who had been faithful to her husband, then he would have been excluding these younger widows from ever being able to be included in the list of widows should they be widowed again."

    The most obvious point here is that in the event of the death of a spouse, either the man or woman is free to remarry. There are no restrictions on that. And two, we're not talking about women in the "bishoprick".

    It also said:

    "
    On the other hand, if we take “a one-woman man” to mean one who has shown and demonstrated constant faithfulness and who has eyes only for his wife, then this qualification falls in line with the others from this standpoint. Whereas, if it is taken in the absolute sense of “married only once,” then it stands alone as the only absolute qualification. Maybe that’s okay, but this is something that I think should be considered.

    Obviously, this can be abused as can any aspect of grace. Church leaders (and all believers) should maintain high standards in their marriage relationships so they promote purity and commitment. But the ultimate issue ought to be, at least in my perspective, a track record that has demonstrated faithfulness in all the qualifications mentioned. If divorce occurred in the past, but the man has demonstrated growth, maturity, faithfulness to his wife and family for a sufficient time to give solid evidence of the reality of this, then I question whether we are truly acting biblically to hinder such a man from leadership. Does it not illustrate the restorative nature of God’s grace and forgiveness?

    In keeping with this, we know historically that in Paul’s day in the Roman world that divorce and sexual impurity was even more rampant than it is in our day. Finding men or women, for that matter, who were married only one time, could have been as difficult as it is becoming in our day. This is an argument from silence, but maybe it is one we should consider.

    Concerning divorce and remarriage, Ephesians 5 and 1 Corinthians 7 are key Pauline texts. In short, I would say that Paul’s view is that a believer whose unbelieving spouse has deserted him is not disqualified from being an elder or deacon; a believer who was divorced when he was an unbeliever is not disqualified; and a believer who is the innocent party in a divorce involving adultery is not disqualified. Having said all this, one still ought to look into any pattern of behavior that might reveal a character flaw (e.g., a man who has had multiple marriages as an unbeliever). In other words, the fact that there is not necessarily a disqualification does not of itself endorse a particular candidate."

    My answer is as I posted above in my previous post.

    Scripture is my guideline. As shown from the OT, there were qualifications that the Old Testament Priests had to meet first. Most notably is to be of the tribe of Levi.

    And scripture is clear that "divorce" is the exception, not the rule. That always the first course of action should be reconciliation. God "divorced" Israel, but as we learn in Hosea, even in adultery, He reconciles us to Him.

    I may be wrong, but "the husband of one wife" means just that. Even in "divorce".

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  7. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Here is a teaching by Charles Ryrie on "Biblical Teaching on Divorce and Remarriage"

    Link

    Grace Theological Journal, 3.2, (1982), pp. 177-92

    I wonder how people can stand before a magistrate or a Pastor, say "till death do us part" in the eyes of God, and then think its "ok" to remarry and then also believe that its "ok" to become a Pastor?

    Like I've said many times, I'm an "olde tyme Baptist".

    My wife and I (come July 3rd) will have been together 32 years, and will celebrate 30 years of being married.

    Thank God for my wife.

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  8. 2win

    2win Newbie

    134
    +23
    Baptist
    I love it George, I love it!
     
  9. alex2165

    alex2165 Newbie

    382
    +77
    Christian
    Single
    These verses below should make my point clear.



    Ezekiel 33.12-13.18.20


    12."And you, mortal say to your people. 'The righteousness of the righteous shall not save them when they transgress, and as for the wickedness of the wicked, it shall not make them stumble when they turn from their wickedness, and the righteous shall not be able to live by their righteousness when they sin.


    13.Though I say to the righteous that they shall surely live, yet, if they trust in their righteousness and commit iniquity, none of their righteous deeds shall be remembered, but in the iniquity that they have committed they shall die.


    18.When the righteous turn from their righteousness and commit iniquity, they shall die for it.


    20.Yet you say, 'The way of the Lord is not just.' O house of Israel, I will judge all of you according to your ways!"


    Of course some you may say, “Jesus Christ saved us!” “He washed away our sins” “He promises those who believe in Him to be saved” and so on.


    If you trust only in general terminology of Jesus but ignoring all the condition that He presented in order to be forgiven and be saved, I am sure that all the slogans that Christian covering themselves today in order to justify they ungodly deeds, would not save them in the Day of the Judgment of the Lord.


    And the verse above and many other similar statements of the Bible support this notion.
     
  10. OzSpen

    OzSpen Regular Member

    +661
    Australia
    Baptist
    Private
    Dean,

    Let's use 1 Tim 3:2 as an example of the meaning of 'husband of one wife'. The NIV helpfully translates as, 'Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach'.

    In Gordon Fee's commentary on 1 Tim 3:2, he states that there are at least 4 options for the meaning of this truly difficult phrase, 'the husband of but one wife':
    1. Requirement that the overseer (bishop) must be married;
    2. A prohibition against polygamy;
    3. A prohibition against second marriages;
    4. Marital fidelity as in the NEB and NIV translations, 'faithful to his wife'.
    Fee favours the latter option because 'the concern that the church's leaders live exemplary married lives seems to fit the context best - given the apparently low view of marriage and family held by the false teachers (4;3; cf. 3:4-5) (Fee 1988:80-81).

    I don't find your adding the 'requirements in the OT for High Priest' to be helpful in determining the marital relationship for NT leadership.

    Oz

    Works consulted
    Fee, G D 1988. 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (New International Biblical Commentary. W W Gasque (N T ed.). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers.
     
  11. OzSpen

    OzSpen Regular Member

    +661
    Australia
    Baptist
    Private
    Dean,

    That's because the Bible gives legitimate reasons for divorce and remarriage:

    (1) Adultery by one spouse (Matt 19:9);
    (2) If the unbeliever leaves (1 Cor 7:15).

    Oz
     
  12. Dave-W

    Dave-W Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner! Supporter

    +16,557
    United States
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Others
    One guy. For life. Only unique duties were to once a year offer the Day of Atonement sacrifices.

    Those requirements did not all apply to the hundreds of other levitical priests that worked in the temple.

    I see no correlation to modern day pastors/elders/deacons.
     
  13. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    I hate to disagree, but if you look at the qualifications, strickly speaking, even if you were from the tride of Levi, you had to marry a virgin.

    "And he shall take a wife in her virginity. A widow, or a divorced woman, or profane, or an harlot, these shall he not take: but he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife."

    John Gill comments:

    "And he shall take a wife in her virginity.
    One, and not two, or more, as Ben Gersom observes; and so Maimonides says, an high priest might never take two women together; for it is said, "a wife", or "woman", one, and not two; and so it is explained in the Talmud; for though polygamy was practised by the Israelites, and even by the common priests, yet these writers suppose it was by no means allowed to an high priest: among the Egyptians, though they took as many wives as they pleased, their priests, married but one; and so a minister of the New Testament is to be the husband of one wife, ( 1 Timothy 3:2 ) ; and this wife the high priest was to take was to be a "virgin", one that not only had never known a man, but that was never betrothed to any; yea, according to the Talmudists, who was not quite ripe for marriage, or the time of her puberty not fully completed, which was the age of twelve years; within, or somewhat before that time, the high priest was to marry her, that it might be out of all doubt that she was a pure virgin; since it is said, "in her virginity", within the time of her puberty, before it was quite up; this, by many, is thought to be an emblem of Christ and his church; as he was typified by the high priest, so the church by the virgin he married, which is espoused to Christ as a chaste virgin, ( 2 Corinthians 11:2 ) .

    Link

    A widow
    The high priest might not marry, whether the widow of a priest or of an Israelite, as Aben Ezra, that is, of any Israelite that was not of the priesthood; and this, whether a widow after espousals, or after marriage, as runs the Jewish canon; the meaning is, that if she was betrothed to a man, and that man died before he married her, and so was a virgin; yet being betrothed to him was reckoned as his widow; and such an one the high priest might not marry, any more than one that had been left a widow, having being married: though, according to the same constitutions, if he had betrothed a widow, and after that was appointed an high priest, he might marry her, and an instance of it is given in Joshua the son of Gamla: and in the same it is observed, that an high priest, when his brother dies, must suffer his shoe to be plucked off, and not marry his brother's widow; which, in other cases, when there was no issue, was required:

    or a divorced woman;
    whether by a priest, or a common Israelite; and indeed, if a common priest might not marry such a person, much less an high priest: or profane anyone born of those that were not fit for priests to marry, as the Targum of Jonathan and Jarchi; (See Gill on Leviticus 21:7);

    [or] an harlot;
    a common prostitute:

    those shall he not take
    any or either of them, to be his wife; which are forbid in order to maintain the dignity of his office, and a reverence of it: there seems to be a gradation in these instances, he might not marry a widow, which was forbidden no other man; and if not such an one, much less a divorced woman, still less a profane person, and least of all an harlot;

    but he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife;
    which phrase, "of his own people", did not limit him to his own tribe, and to the fraternity of priests in it, as if he was to marry only in it, or the daughter of a priest; for the priests and Levites being scattered in the several tribes, and having no inheritances in them, were not restrained from marrying into other tribes, as the rest of the tribes were; and so an high priest sometimes married into another tribe, though he took care not to debase himself, by marrying into a mean family: so Jehoiada, the high priest, married Jehoshabeath, the daughter of King Jehoram, ( 2 Chronicles 22:11 ) ; but by this law he was forbid to marry a virgin of another nation, even though a proselytess and one that was made free, as Gersom observes; a captive virgin, and one that was become a Jewess, as Aben Ezra says, he was not allowed to marry."

    Link

    And from the commentary on Lev. 21:13, we draw a direct link to 1 Tim. 3:2:

    "and so a minister of the New Testament is to be the husband of one wife, ( 1 Timothy 3:2 ) ;"

    Ibid

    Like I said before, I have no problem with a divorced man becoming a Pastor as long as he isn't re-married. I take, as most Baptists did, the "husband of one wife" meant that even in divorce, as long as she is alive, he could not re-marry.

    While some of the priests only served once per year in the Temple, that did not negate the "husband of one wife".

    Sorry to disagree.

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  14. now faith

    now faith Veteran Supporter

    +1,444
    Word of Faith
    Married
    As others have replied it is a old question, but never fails to be brought up when a pastor is divorced.
    I will use Kent Hovine as a example.

    Moses was the giver of the law,and the delivered Israel.
    Or I should say God created the law and Moses brought it.
    His office was higher than a Preist ,because He had spoken to God personally.
    We still have Moses taking a Ethopian wife after Zipporah.

    Exodus: 18. 1. When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses' father in law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt; 2. Then Jethro, Moses' father in law, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after he had sent her back, 27. And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land.

    Jethro,advised Moses to delegate responsibility for judging people then left.

    Numbers: 12. 1. And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for he had married an Ethiopian woman.

    Jesus said out of the hardness of their hearts Moses granted a writ of divorcement , I believe as man will the Children of Israel starting divorcing due to flesh,not obedience.
    I personally believe Zipporah was disobedient due to her calling Moses a bloody man when he obeyed God on circumcision,she threw the for skin at him.

    Exodus: 4. 25. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.

    It has to be opinion due to the Bible not telling us the rest.

    If you are divorced you are no longer a husband to the woman you divorced.
    Being re married you do not have two wives in your house.
    The verse says nothing about divorce,it simply says let them be the husband of one Wife.
    I cannot find where polygamy is forbidden any where in the old or New Testament.
    I do not support the notion of polygamy, but I try my best to look at Schripture in its literal context.
    As far as Pastors and Deacons being held to higher standards ,God is no respecter of persons.
    So any additional qualifications to Pastors and Deacons are placed by man,due to a divorced Pastor being in sin all men would be sinning over divorce,and remain in a state of sin until the second marriage was divorced,and he remained celibate.
    Please don't construe my reply as debate as I have a sincere need to learn.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
  15. now faith

    now faith Veteran Supporter

    +1,444
    Word of Faith
    Married
    Dean your qualifications for marriage of a Priest,are contained in the law.
    Aside from a Priest having found his wife is a unbeliever,Paul dealt with this in 1st Corinthians

    1 Corinthians: 7. 15. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
     
  16. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    You had me at one point.

    Moses and his first wife Zipporah. After Exodus 4, we see no mention of her. She did not go with him back to Egypt, and she didn't go with him to Canaan.

    Right, but how do you get around "the husband of one wife"?

    Even if you divorce, if she re-marries, you have forced her to commit adultery. Likewise, we are told that if you divorce and remarry you commit adultery:

    "Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery." -Lk. 16:18 (KJV)

    Brother, before I say this, please know I do respect you. You know that don't you?

    Lets not go down this road for that is the exact argument Mormons use (Moses/Zipporah/The Ethiopian woman) to justify polygamy.

    There is only one man mentioned in the entire bible who had more than one wife, but he was never a priest. Solomon. 700 wives and 300 concubines.

    With all due respect, the qualifications for bishops, elders, deacons, in the New Testament, were "additional qualifications". They were given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16)

    And yes, I do believe that scripture indicates that bishops, elders, and deacons are held to a higher standard. Scriptures teach us to look to these people as people we should "emulate" (cf. Hebrews 13:7, 2 Thess 3:7, 9; 1 Tim 4:12, 1 Peter 5:3)

    "The key is found in Paul’s letters to Timothy ( 1 Tim 3: 1-7 ) and Titus (Titus 1: 5-9). Paul is saying that for someone to be an elder, they need to exhibit certain qualities. So Paul is not telling Timothy to recognize and appoint as elders men who have the potential, with the proper training and ordination, to become men of character that we should emulate but rather to appoint as elders those men among the local body who already were exhibiting those traits.

    Is lying acceptable for an elder? What about murder or adultery or stealing or blasphemy? Well of course the answer is no. Is lying, murdering, adultery, stealing or blasphemy acceptable for any Christian? I should think the answer is also a firm no. What about false teaching? Of course elders should not hold to or expound false teaching. Should a “regular” Christian not be held to that same standard?

    We need to be very careful about the religious stuff we declare. When we see a two-tiered set of standards for elders/pastors and everybody else we have crossed a dangerous line."

    Source

    While it does not come right out and say they are held to a higher standard, it can be inferred from Romans 2.

    "Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written." -Rom. 2:17-24 (KJV)

    Is every "Christian" called to be a teacher, or bishop, elder, or deacon? Isn't teaching listed as a spiritual gift? And isn't "apt to teach" another qualification for bishops?

    What if lets say, I get up a preach or teach that a certain passage of scripture means this. When in fact, it means the opposite. Now lets suppose somebody picks up what I said and teaches it to another. In turn they teach it to others. And so-on, and so-on.

    On that great judgment day, not only will I have to answer for my wrong teaching, but I will also have to answer for what I taught wrong that was taught to others.

    Looking at the scriptures as a "whole", from the qualifications for the Priests to the qualifications for bishops, elders, and deacons, (OT and NT) they should be "the husband of one wife" (as long as the wife is alive) and they will be held to a higher standard.

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  17. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    How do you get around Jesus' own words?

    "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." -Mt. 19:6 (KJV)

    Besides, looking at the context of Paul's first letter to the church at Corinth, I don't see that passage referring specifically to bishops, elders, or deacons.

    I also offer this Link. It is commentary by Charles Hodge on 1 Cor. 7. I have read it, and don't see it applying specifically to bishops, elders, or deacons, rather just a general letter addressing several problems that were present in the church at Corinth.

    One of them was sons taking taking their mothers for wives.

    "It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife." -1 Cor. 5:1 (KJV)

    Sexual immorality was a big issue in the church at Corinth.

    Hodge comments:

    "The second evil in the church of Corinth, to which Paul directs his attention, is allowing a man guilty of incest to remain in its communion. He says it was generally reported that fornication was tolerated among them, and even such fornication as was not heard of among the heathen, v. 1. He reproves them for being inflated, instead of being humbled and penitent, and excommunicating the offender, v. 2. As they had neglected their duty, he determined, in the name of Christ, and as spiritually present in their assembly, to deliver the man guilty of incest to Satan, vs. 3-5. He exhorts to purity, in language borrowed from the Mosaic law respecting the Passover. As during the feast of the Passover all leaven was to be removed from the habitations of the Hebrews, so the Christian’s life should be a perpetual paschal feast, all malice and hypocrisy being banished from the hearts and from the assemblies of believers, vs. 6-8. He corrects or guards against a misapprehension of his command not to associate with the immoral. He shows that the command had reference to church communion, and not to social intercourse, and therefore was limited in its application to members of the church. Those out of the church, it was neither his nor their prerogative to judge. They must be left to the judgment of God, vs. 9-13. 1. It is reported commonly (that there is) fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.

    Having dismissed the subject of the divisions in the church of Corinth, he takes up the case of the incestuous member of that church. It is reported commonly (o[lwv ajkou>etai ). This may mean what our translation expresses, viz., it was a matter of notoriety that fornication existed among them. %Olwv may have the force of omnino , ‘nothing is heard of among you except, etc.’ Or it may mean, ‘In general, fornication is heard of among you.’ That is, it was a common thing that fornication was heard of; implying that the offense, in different forms, more or less prevailed. This is the less surprising, considering how little sins of that class were condemned among the heathen and how notorious Corinth was for its licentiousness. To change the moral sentiments of a community is a difficult and gradual work. The New Testament furnishes sad evidence, that Jewish and Gentile converts brought into the church many of the errors of their former belief and practice. The word fornication (pornei>a ) is used in a comprehensive sense, including all violations of the seventh commandment. Here a particular case is distinguished as peculiarly atrocious. The offense was that a man had married his step-mother. His father’s wife is a Scriptural periphrase for step-mother, Leviticus 18:8."

    Source

    So look at the scriptures as a whole, not just picking a piece out here, and say this applies to bishops, elders, and deacons too.

    There were a lot of problems Paul addressed in the church at Corinth my friend.

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  18. Dave-W

    Dave-W Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner! Supporter

    +16,557
    United States
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Others
    Those were for priests under the Mosaic covenant.

    What does that have to do with New covenant congregational leadership? The functions are quite different. (unless your pastor spends a large amount of time ritually slaughtering lambs and goats)

    But as to a pastor being divorced, IMO he should have stepped down from the pastorate as soon as there were problems in the marriage. A LOOOOONNNNGGG time before getting divorced.
     
  19. DeaconDean

    DeaconDean γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

    +2,583
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Here again, the passages speak of the qualifications (NT bishops, elders, and deacons), not the duties. Only the OT addressed the duties.

    And both the Old and the New teach, the husband of one wife.

    God Bless

    Till all are one.
     
  20. Dave-W

    Dave-W Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner! Supporter

    +16,557
    United States
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Others
    No argument. (with the exception of levirite marriage in the OT)

    So a single man - never married - should NOT be in congregational leadership - right?
     
Loading...