Forever,
This is a great discussion. And I hope you bundle up while you are up there. I hate the cold!! I still use the Mason-Dixon line. But not for what it was originally created for. I call it the TDC line now...Too Darn Cold. I just dont like to go above that line in the winter.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The "writ" in the OT was not by a church, it was the prerogative of the husband. That's why Jesus made it clear that the only "justified" divorce in God's eye is for "marital unfaithfulness." </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes, this is true. What I meant by what I was saying was that it wasnt from the secular world or the government. I guess I wrote it in a confusing way. Sorry.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">There was NO need for divorce due to adultery in the OT. The penalty was physical death of the adulterers, thus ending the marriage and "freeing" the betrayed spouse to remarry.
In the NT, the death penalty for adultery was removed as we moved into the Age of Grace and left the Age of the Law behind. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Exactly. But, all divorce (except that which the spouse does not remarry and does not have sex within anyone else) involves adultery. Moses allowing divorce was a concession from God because the way man was headed, there would have been a lot of dead people around if there hadnt been allowed a way out of marriage. On the "freeing the spouse," you are exactly correct. Death has always been the way that a spouse is freed from the covenant and allowed to remarry. Yes, the NT has freed us from many of the penalties of the OT due to grace...because someone already paid the penalty. But, while the penalty of death was removed for adultery, the consequences thereof may not have been removed. Example? If my wife cheats on me, gets an STD...but then is repentant and comes back to Jesus, He will forgive her and provide her with grace. But, she is stuck with the STD. The consequences of her sin. She is forgiven in heaven and her eternity is assured. But her life on this Earth may still have problems due to her sin...consequences.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I believe that you are "stretching" the Matthew passage to say more that it actually does. But that discussion is one that may well have to wait until I have more time.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">It is possible...but again, Matthew 18 is very clear on how believers are to deal with other believers that have done them wrong.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The "unevenly yoked" marriage you referred to is NOT a "backslidden" Christian marriage. It is a marriage that BEGAN between a Christian and a nonbeliever(in direct opposition to God's command) with the unbelieving spouse continuing in their rejection of Christ. It does not apply to a Christian marriage. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If I left the impression that it was a backslidden Christian, I am sorry. That was not my intent. I meant to say that the unevenly yoked person is free if their heathen spouse leaves because that spouse is spiritually dead. Now the believer could have been someone that married an unbeliever (which, as you say, is against what God has commanded us) or it could be that believer became a believer after they married. In either case, they are free from the marriage covenant if the unbeliever decides to leave. They are free due to the fact that only death ends a covenant. Scripture is very clear on this. My point on the unevenly yoked issue was to show that for a Christian, whether their spouse is a believer or not...the standard is still death for the covenant to be broken. And as I said, the word "death" used in that passage is the same word used to describe Adam's and Eve's death in Genesis. It didnt describe their physical death, although that was now assured due to their sin. But it also described their immediate spiritual death due to their disobedience. More on this below.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">With respect to the(church or individual) treating of someone "as if" they were a tax collector or heathen, the key thought is "as if." They are NOT in actuality an unbeliever, or if you are so judging them to be, the caution that should be taken is that only God truly knows the heart of an individual. And before you jump all over that one, yes, I know what James had to say about how we will "recognize" a believer by their "works." </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Please dont get me wrong. I do not believe that you lose your salvation. What you wrote here and below is true...no matter what, once you are saved, you are always saved. It does say "as if." That was my point. We are to treat that believer "as if" they are spiritually dead. That is why a believer's adultery is NOT grounds for divorce. Unrepentant, continued adultery by a believer is grounds for divorce. Sin is not grounds for divorce...rebellion is. If a wayward spouse walks into the church, at the last minute...right before the divorce is declared...and says "I repent. I am sorry, I was wrong. I will come back to the Lord, and I will fulfill my part of this covenant," then the divorce would be ended. As is outlined there in Matthew. The Matthew passage shows how, not just a divorce, the church conducts church discipline. And if the believer repents, then the deiscipline ends and the believer is restored.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Now, here is where we could potentially diverge. I've had this discussion with another member in the past and it's a huge topic. It is the topic of "eternal security." It is based in the concept of "election." It is founded upon the rock of Jesus who stated clearly that "no one can snatch them out of my hand, I will lose none of them, no not one." </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I actually dnt think that we are too far apart. I believe in eternal security.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think you can see why I hesistate to say too much right now, but there are those who believe that a true Christian can never lose their salvation and there are those who believe a Christian can lose their salvation. I refer to Paul's writing about IF(as in "if we make the hypothetical argument that someone could lose their salvation) a believer should fall away it would be impossible for them to regain salvation a second time." </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">As I said, I believe that once you are saved...you cannot lose your salvation, no matter what you do.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If your wife "had" fallen away, i.e., lost her salvation, it would be impossible for her to "saved" a second time and you would have a permanent unbeliever as a spouse and in the congegration as a member of the church. Marrying an unbeliever would require you to violate God's command to NOT marry an unbeliever. If you chose to marry her anyway, you would be sinning against God. But that would also NOT make you an unbeliever anymore than the sin of adultery makes someone an unbeliever.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Again, either my wife was never a believer...or she fell away. But if she fell away, she was still saved. There are only three kinds of people. Heathens, Christians, and Carnal Christians.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Since I am obviously of the "camp" that believes in eternal security, your wife could never have "lost" her salvation. Sure, she may have been behaving "as an infidel," the same as any Christian who gives into sin, but she never ceased being a born-again bride of Christ. Christ did NOT divorce her, though He as the "bridegroom" of an adulteress certainly had the "right." No, He sought to bring her back into the "sheep pen," as He does with all of us when we stray into sin.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am of that camp to. So, I totally agree with what you wrote here.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Why DOES God allow divorce in the case of adultery? Because the death penalty no longer applies and because forgiveness is very hard due to our own "sin nature." It is for the believer's protection, not as a punishment for the offender. Remember, God hates divorce, but He allows it for much the same reason as He allowed divorce in the Old Testament, because of the "hardness of our hearts." As hard as forgiving adultery is for us...it gives us a tiny glimpse of how hard sin against God is for God to "deal with." Yet He forgives us and gave us Christ "while we were yet sinners." Instead of divorcing us, Christ died for His bride. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I totally agree!!
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That is what brings me to a greater understanding of the phrase; "from whom much has been forgiven, much is expected." </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This whole thing has so taught me that!!
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The idea of "consequences" is one that we have to be very careful with. If you are arguing that that the "consequence" in question is that her actions made a "spiritual divorce" mandatory, then it is illogical to assume that there can simultaneously be a "legal marriage." God did NOT say that there is "spiritual death" for a born-again believer. In fact, there WILL be believers in heaven who receive no rewards to speak of, but they WILL gain entrance into heaven because of Christ, and not because of what they did or did not do on earth. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am "arguing" that continued rebellion by an unbeliever, no matter its form (adultery, stealing, lying, etc) mandates church discipline. It mandates the carnal Chritian being treated as if an unbeliever. It mandates that they be thrown into the world of Satan so God can win them back. It mandates that the Carnal Christian be treated is if they are spiritually dead. We are not to even eat with such a one. Again, their salvation is not in question. But how they are treated by the church, how they live on this Earth, definitely depends on whether they are in rebellion or repent.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Lest anyone get too far afield with that statement, it is why we are warned to examine ourselves to make sure that our faith is true. Christ spoke to this in the Parable of the Soils (Sower). There are those who may "think" that they are Christians, but they really are not. An example would be those who go to church and claim to be a Christian, but who have never really accepted Christ as their personal Lord and Savior and refuse to surrender "their" lives, choices, selfish desires, etc., to God. Those folks think the mere "appelation" of the title "Christian" gives them some sort of "get out of Hell free Monopoly type card." "Fire insurance," if you will. Christ performs the dual role of Savior and Lord. We, especially we Americans, often struggle with the idea that "anyone" has the "right" to tell us what to do and we have no recourse but to obey. But that is precisely what Christ is. He IS our sovereign Lord, and we are His to command as He sees fit, bought and paid for with His own blood. That's a hard concept for a lot of us Americans to accept (since we like "majority rule" and the preeminance of the individual.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I totally agree with this.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I happen to also believe that if someone claims to be a Christian, but leads an unrepentant, adulterous life, it is unlikely that they ever were a true Christian because God is quite clear that unrepentant adulterers will NOT be in heaven. That's not judging, that simply taking God at His word. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Again, I agree!!
I did want to add another Scripture that talks of this idea that we treat the rebellious Christian as an unbeliever and with them being treated as if they are spiritually dead. It is Hebrews 10:
26 Dear friends, if we deliberately continue sinning after we have received a full knowledge of the truth, there is no other sacrifice that will cover these sins. 27 There will be nothing to look forward to but the terrible expectation of God's judgment and the raging fire that will consume his enemies. 28 Anyone who refused to obey the law of Moses was put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Think how much more terrible the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God and have treated the blood of the covenant as if it were common and unholy. Such people have insulted and enraged the Holy Spirit who brings God's mercy to his people. 30 For we know the one who said,
"I will take vengeance.
I will repay those who deserve it."
He also said,
"The Lord will judge his own people."*
31 It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.He is NOT talking about unbelievers here. He is talking about believers and rebellion here. And He is very clear in verse 26 that if we rebel, there will be no sacrifice for sins. He is not saying you have lost your salvation. It is saying that the consequences of your rebellion will fall squarely on you, not on Jesus and what He did at the Cross. He will take vengeance on the wayward, rebellious believer. And He can only do so because that believer is being treated as if spiritually dead. Because, as long as Christ's blood covers our sins, then there is no condemnation of God. But, we rebel...after receiving the knowledge of the truth...and He says Christ's blood will not cover that rebellion. That you will accept the consequences of that rebellion fully on yourself. Again, you are still saved. But on this Earth, you are treated as an unbeliever, as if dead.
That is why when the Scripture says that you are married to your spouse until they are dead, if it didnt mean spiritual death...then we would be stuck with an adulterous spouse forever...or until the ydied physically. God's word is never in conflict with itself. So, if He says "You are married until death..." but then says "You can divorce for marital unfaithfulness..." then you might say that these two contradict each other. And they do if we are just talking about physical death. But God NEVER contradicts Himself. He cant. So, if we take the word death to mean what it originally meant...which was spiritual, as well as physical death, then these two passages agree with each other. As well as the unevenly yoked passages. Because if it says that we are married to our spouse as long as they live, and Scripure says that a believer can let their unbelieving spouse go...then we have conflict. Because they are not physically dead. But...with spiritual death included in that definition, then God's word is in perfect harmony.
Again in verse 28, it talks about how in Moses' time, followers were put to death by two or three witnesses. Church discipline has always been the same. And while the death penalty for most crimes has gone away, the NT admonished the church to treat that wayward believer as if they are dead...spiritually dead.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Many topics, MM. Not enough time now, but hopefully enough there to give you some things to comment on while I'm away. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Well stay warm and we can continue this discussion when you are able. Of course, hopefully others will join in as well.
In His arms.
