Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The scandal of evangelical silence on divorce
Life Site ^ | Eric Metaxas

Posted on 08/06/2013 12:01:51 PM PDT by Morgana

August 6, 2013 (Breakpoint) - If I asked you to name the “hot button” social issues of concern to Christians, you’d probably cite abortion and gay marriage right away. Of course, the coarse and hyper-sexualized nature of popular culture might also come to mind.

But what probably wouldn’t come to mind is the high incidence of divorce. Given the clear biblical teaching on the subject and its impact on families and children, that is, to put it mildly, more than a little odd.

Actually, as one Christian leader rightly puts it, our lack of attention to the subject is a “scandal.”

That leader is Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville. I recently came across a three-year-old podcast—better late than never, especially in this case—in which he labeled our indifference to divorce “the scandal of the Evangelical conscience.”

The podcast began with an interview of Mark A. Smith, a political scientist at the University of Washington. Smith had recently written a paper entitled “Religion, Divorce, and the Missing Culture War in America.”

As Smith studied the culture wars across the U.S., he was struck by the issue that was conspicuous by its absence: namely divorce.

For instance, during its existence, the Moral Majority “mobilized and lobbied on many political issues, including abortion, pornography, gay rights, school prayer . . . and sex education in schools.” In contrast, divorce ranked “so low on the group’s agenda that books on the Moral Majority do not even give the issue an entry in the index.”

This makes no sense. As Smith noted, “from the standpoint of simple logic, divorce fits cleanly within the category of ‘family values.’” In fact, “divorce seems to carry a more direct connection to the daily realities of families than do the bellwether culture war issues of abortion and homosexuality.”

Click "like" if you support TRADITIONAL marriage.

So Mohler asked Smith, why the silence on divorce?

Smith’s answer is that “the inclusion of divorce on the agenda of the Christian right would have risked a massive alienation of members,” so the issue went virtually unmentioned.

Or, as Mohler put it, “evangelicals allowed culture to trump Scripture.” According to him, “the church largely followed the lead of its members and accepted what might be called the ‘privatization’ of divorce. Churches simply allowed a secular culture to determine that divorce is no big deal, and that it is a purely private matter.”

This happened despite the clear scriptural teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman for life.

As divorce has been privatized—fenced off from Scripture, Christian teaching, and from the community—so has marriage. If marriage is merely a means to happiness or sexual fulfillment (instead of a sacrament, a life-long commitment of sacrificial love open to the creation of life), no wonder same-sex couples argue that they deserve the same happiness and fulfillment available to heterosexuals.

In addition, what Mohler calls the “real scandal”—the fact that “evangelical Protestants divorce at rates at least as high as the rest of the public”—creates a “significant credibility crisis when evangelicals then rise to speak in defense of marriage.”

No, divorce is not an unpardonable sin but, as Mohler insists, it is a sin, and our acceptance of this particular sin while inveighing against other violations of God’s plan for marriage is hypocritical.

My point here is not to pour salt on the wounds of divorced Christians—they deserve and need our compassion; but it’s to get the Church to acknowledge the beam in its own eye and, thus, end a silence that is not only conspicuous but scandalous.


TOPICS: Evangelical Christian; Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: divorce; evangelical; evangelicals; family; moralabsolutes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-108 next last
To: presently no screen name

Allow me to consign the Most Convoluted Logic Award to “Mr/Mrs/Ms presently no screen name” for having confounded others trying to make a point in the face of his bullfighter-adroit responses. It just goes to show you how far you go arguing with someone who can’t even figure out a screen name for himself.


51 posted on 08/06/2013 6:46:13 PM PDT by Insigne123 (It is the soldier, not the community organizer, who gives us freedom of the press)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

The reason its not a crisis is evangelicals, baptists in particular, divorce at a rate higher than anyone in the nation. Much easier focusing on the other guys sins.


52 posted on 08/06/2013 8:22:08 PM PDT by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wonkowasright
You're right, "everyone's doing it" but at least the Catholic Church still teaches that divorce is wrong while the vast majority of non-Catholics gradually accept and excuse whatever becomes widely accepted in society.

At least the people who stay in the Catholic Church know what sin is even if they're as guilty as anyone else of divorce, remarriage, and even contraception.

The people who leave do so because they want to go along to get along without hearing the Truth about sin and how Jesus Christ expects us to follow Him rather than society. The people who stay and defy Church Doctrine are just your run of the mill hypocrite you can find anywhere in any group but at least they still hear the Truth from time to time rather than hearing, "I was sinking deep in sin, Wheeeeeeeeee, what fun and I'm forgiven in advance".

The vast majority of those who leave the Catholic Church leave because they can't stand the heat of the Truth.

They can make up all sorts if excuses, blame individuals in he Church who fail to do as they should, or even repeat the lies about Catholicism and claim the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church Jesus Christ Himself founded is wrong but the fact remains; they won't be bothered with the whole Truth in any other Church. They join the non-Catholics who claim to be Christian because with rare exceptions those non-Catholic folks and their tens of thousands of churches all gradually adapt to whatever is socially acceptable.

53 posted on 08/06/2013 11:15:51 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

As governor of CA he signed into being the no fault divorce abomination that swept across the country and caused so much emotional torture to people and children


54 posted on 08/07/2013 4:44:43 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

divorce is a sin, what are you saying


55 posted on 08/07/2013 4:45:17 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Careful...I’ve had posts pulled that pointed that out. Some people are very uncomfortable when confronted with the fact that both parties have tag-teamed the institution of marriage for a very long time.


56 posted on 08/07/2013 4:50:35 AM PDT by Orangedog (An optimist is someone who tells you to 'cheer up' when things are going his way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
Who needs a sermon on divorce? Both or at least one is more than likely devastated by it. A preacher should not waste the time of a whole congregation to preach/teach on divorce when no one wants divorce

I don't agree with you here. If all the pastors thundered from their pulpits "God hates divorce" (Malachi) as much as they preach against other things they are against, abortion, same sex marriage, etc., there would not be nearly as much likely hood of their church people running off to get a divorce for the slightest reason, bored with their spouse, etc., or as Matt. 19:3 puts it, "for every cause." A lot is going to laid at the feet of preachers for not preaching against divorce.

Preachers don't have a problem bucking the trend when it comes to abortion and same sex marriage, but they, for the most part, don't want to buck the "divorce for every cause" (no fault) trend.

There is a reason society in general in Christian America in the 19th and for the first half of the 20th centuries, had very little divorce. Preachers everywhere, and their congregations since most went to church back then, preached against it, society in general knew God was against it.

57 posted on 08/07/2013 4:00:12 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

I can’t believe this, on a rare thread which happens not to be Roman Catholic, here comes the Catholics pushing their advantage (advantage being they know they’ve got their backside covered, FR a Roman Catholic website), they are “the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church,” and such like. We’ve heard it a thousand times here.

For heaven’s sake, can any subject be discussed around here without Catholics using it to push their anti-Protestant agenda?


58 posted on 08/07/2013 4:22:08 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
people running off to get a divorce for the slightest reason, bored with their spouse, etc.,

You really think those are the types INSIDE a church? If that is your experience, I suggest leave it.

A lot is going to laid at the feet of preachers for not preaching against divorce.

You know who a lot will be laid on? Those who don't teach the GOSPEL properly and those who don't teach God's Word is the FINAL authority. They are leading 'their flock' astray. But that doesn't let the flock off the hook for each one is responsible for themselves. There is no 'he made me believe that' in heaven. It's over.

There is a reason society in general in Christian America in the 19th and for the first half of the 20th centuries, had very little divorce.

Saying Christian means zilch to me. There are far too many who claim to be Christian and are not. They are people going to a church on Sunday and think they are a Christian; yet, doing the things of the world and divorce is one of them. And for a price they can get a divorce but it's called annulment. If they can't, they will get it anyway because 'What is good for the rich goose, is good for the poor unknown goose'.

Christianity is about having fellowship with The Lord where one gets to KNOW Him and learn more about Him daily and they know what pleases Him, His Way and what He hates. It's like any relationship we value - the more you spend time the more you learn and the more you know them.

59 posted on 08/07/2013 6:45:49 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

We agree.


60 posted on 08/07/2013 7:48:53 PM PDT by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
I notice you didn't get hot and bothered over fellowship at #39 as a response #37 :

To: Morgana

It took me years to realize that all professing “Christians” are not followers of Christ. Particularly in the South, my family for instance would say they are Christians because it the South everyone is, they all go to church but do they follow Christ? It is a social network. This is the problem with Evangelicals and SBC.

37 posted on Tuesday, August 06, 2013 17:53:58 by ThisLittleLightofMine

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

And who are Mormons and Catholics following?

39 posted on Tuesday, August 06, 2013 18:10:07 by presently no screen name

But when you get to my statement of fact in #53 which mischaracterize as "anti-Prototestant" you get all upset about "fellowship" in spite of ignoring snark regarding Catholics much earlier in the thread. Why are you so selective if you actually believe what you're saying?

Based on exactly where in the series of comments the subject comes up, apparently your definition of "fellowship" is a one way street with Catholics ignoring snark, wisecracks, and offensive comments in order for your "go along to get along" crowd to feel good about themselves.

When I see a non-Catholic jumping on one of their non-Catholic pals about Christian fellowship for posting lies, snark, and offensive comments regarding Catholics I'll believe comments about fellowship from that poster. Until then talk of fellowship from when posted along with a false accusation is just another tactic in the silly games some people play.

Now, please apologize for mischaracterizing my comment as being "anti-protestant" and for pretending I altered the tenor of the discussion when offensive remarks directed toward Catholics began much earlier in the thread.

61 posted on 08/07/2013 8:10:31 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: sasportas

(advantage being they know they’ve got their backside covered, FR a Roman Catholic website)

I wonder if the Vatican has actually sent Albino Monk Assassins to ‘persuade’ the owner and mods to make FR a Roman Catholic website or if the mere threat of the Jesuit supercomputer with all the Protestant names and locations is enough to ensure compliance.

Freegards


62 posted on 08/07/2013 8:53:58 PM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
I can’t believe this, on a rare thread which happens not to be Roman Catholic, here comes the Catholics pushing their advantage (advantage being they know they’ve got their backside covered, FR a Roman Catholic website)

Oh trust me, it isn't.

63 posted on 08/08/2013 5:21:01 AM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Thus, my opponent's argument falls.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
You really think those are the types INSIDE a church? If that is your experience, I suggest leave it.

I was speaking in general of the churches plural here in America, not a particular local church.

You know who a lot will be laid on? Those who don't teach the GOSPEL properly and those who don't teach God's Word is the FINAL authority. They are leading 'their flock' astray. But that doesn't let the flock off the hook for each one is responsible for themselves. There is no 'he made me believe that' in heaven. It's over.

I certainly agree with you on the gospel, and God's word is indeed the final authority, but the subject of this thread is divorce. And on that subject, Mal. 2:11-17 and Matt. 19:3-9, among other texts, are that final authority you speak of.

Christianity is about having fellowship with The Lord where one gets to KNOW Him and learn more about Him daily and they know what pleases Him, His Way and what He hates.

Yes, but if our subject is divorce, and preachers preached more on passages like the Malachi and Matthew passages above, one would know "what pleases Him, His way and what He hates." He hates divorce.

64 posted on 08/08/2013 10:52:54 AM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
I know HE hates divorce, I said it in my first post and anyone INSIDE the church knows the same!

I was speaking in general of the churches plural here in America, not a particular local church.

So was I! But that doesn't stop one from saying they are against it; yet, authorizes it under a different name.

but the subject of this thread is divorce.

We can speak about it for hours and it all goes back to the person. How strong and committed their beliefs are. And sitting in a church on a Sunday doesn't produce strong belief - one has to KNOW THE WORD and then OBEY it. And a pastor can't make that happen. That responsibility lies with each individual.

65 posted on 08/08/2013 11:06:16 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; Ransomed; Rashputin

I was referring to the usual flood of threads on the RF about the Pope, etc. and etc. In that respect, I am correct in saying non-Catholic threads are rare.

Then here comes Rashputin pushing his agenda, on a thread about the scourge of divorce in ALL our churches, the churches here in America in general, pushing his institution (the RCC) in specific. One would have to be blind not to see that is what he was doing.

Rashputin wants me to apologize, he is the one that should apologize for his dishonest denial of the highjacking of this thread in order to push his agenda.


66 posted on 08/08/2013 11:13:33 AM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: sasportas; Rashputin; Ransomed
I was referring to the usual flood of threads on the RF about the Pope, etc. and etc. In that respect, I am correct in saying non-Catholic threads are rare.

You are correct, but IMO just using the concepts of "Catholic threads" and "non-Catholic threads" itself prejudices the argument. There are no such things as "Protestant" and "Catholic" threads in the Religion Forum. Rather, there are "open" threads, "ecumenical" threads, and "caucus / devotional / prayer" threads. They can be about virtually any topic. You can read more about these categories here.

Catholics and Protestants and others are free to post any materials of interest to them to the Forum, so long as the contents don't fall afoul of FR general guidelines. Catholics have demonstrated a greater willingness to take advantage of this freedom, and thus the tone of the Forum takes on a Catholic bent. As a result, because Protestants and others have failed to post sufficient threads of their own liking, the Religion Forum has a distinctively Catholic flavor. The Religion Forum is what we make (or don't make) of it. If Protestants don't participate, they only have themselves to blame IMO.

Then here comes Rashputin pushing his agenda, on a thread about the scourge of divorce in ALL our churches, the churches here in America in general, pushing his institution (the RCC) in specific. One would have to be blind not to see that is what he was doing. Rashputin wants me to apologize, he is the one that should apologize for his dishonest denial of the highjacking of this thread in order to push his agenda.

Generally speaking, avoid making your posts personal. Discuss the topic, not the poster and not his/her "agendas" for posting something. Either disprove the post content or learn to ignore it. If a poster gets his/her feelings hurt because others ridicule or disapprove or hate what that poster holds dear, then that poster is probably too thin-skinned to be involved in "open" Religion Forum threads. Old-timers in the Religion Forum know that "open" threads often lead to heated and often contentious debate. Antagonism should be expected in "open" threads, and a thick skin is always required (and expected) to participate effectively. Failure to operate with a thick(er) skin usually drags the debate into a flame war.

As an alternative, posters may choose to ignore/avoid "open" threads altogether and instead post within threads labeled "prayer", "devotional", "caucus" or "ecumenical." And if they can't find such a thread, they can always post one for themselves and enjoy Moderator protection, so long as the thread stays within the posting guidelines of the Religion Forum.

67 posted on 08/08/2013 1:07:59 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Thus, my opponent's argument falls.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
because Protestants and others have failed to post sufficient threads of their own liking, the Religion Forum has a distinctively Catholic flavor

Thanks, good info, I'll take it to heart. Maybe I'll even take your advise and get around to posting a thread of my own (when I have more free time, when one posts a thread he has to stay pretty close by it appears) I'm sure it will be interesting if and when I do.

68 posted on 08/08/2013 1:59:47 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: sasportas; Alex Murphy; Ransomed
I see you've ignored my question regarding your not being upset by the sequence of comments I so thoughtfully reproduced for you in order to save you the trouble of scrolling back through the thread.

Does ignoring honestly asked questions aid the growth of an attitude conducive to Christian fellowship?

Well, no matter. And since I know that your genuine Christian desire for sincere fellowship will get the better of you sooner or later, apology accepted.

Here's a little something that would help you really blossom as a an advocate of Christian fellowship:

God bless you, I'll add you to my prayer list.

69 posted on 08/08/2013 2:08:50 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
Thanks, good info, I'll take it to heart. Maybe I'll even take your advise and get around to posting a thread of my own (when I have more free time, when one posts a thread he has to stay pretty close by it appears) I'm sure it will be interesting if and when I do.

Been there, done that :)

My name's Alex Murphy. And this is how I prepare for a typical day in the Religion Forum.

70 posted on 08/08/2013 2:12:07 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Thus, my opponent's argument falls.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

LOL, I got a real belly laugh out of that one. Poor guy in the middle, good thing he has on his armor, a Protestant getting double teamed on the RF?


71 posted on 08/08/2013 2:34:49 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: sasportas; Alex Murphy
" . . . a Protestant getting double teamed on the RF?

ROTFLOL.

As the passage of so much time since comment #66 was posted without that comment being deleted and with no comment by the RM proves, there is absolutely no doubt about who is permitted to ignore the rules in order to "double team" who on the Religion Forum.

72 posted on 08/10/2013 5:28:39 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Oops, I forgot to ping Morgana who posted the article. I won’t bother with the long, long, list of people who would get a really good laugh out of that “double teaming” joke. The list is just too long to type in when I”m having trouble typing.


73 posted on 08/10/2013 5:32:38 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin; All

I’m not sure what post 66 is about but the topic of this thread was divorce in evangelical churches and why there is so much of it. Yes there are high divorce rates in all protestant churches. Yes they all should address the problem, not just the evangelical ones.

As my priest said we should stop using the word “Marriage” because it is over ratted and call it what it is and that is “Holy Matrimony”. Don’t know what “Holy Matrimony” means? Look it up, it just might surprise you.


74 posted on 08/10/2013 6:15:01 PM PDT by Morgana (Always a bit of truth in dark humor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin; sasportas
As the passage of so much time since comment #66 was posted without that comment being deleted and with no comment by the RM proves, there is absolutely no doubt about who is permitted to ignore the rules in order to "double team" who on the Religion Forum.

butthurt

75 posted on 08/11/2013 10:38:00 AM PDT by Alex Murphy ("Thus, my opponent's argument falls.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Oh my, “potty” language, too.

Nice try but all you did was prove my point.


76 posted on 08/11/2013 12:57:05 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: sasportas; Religion Moderator
Given the length of time this particular, "making it personal" post lingers on, is it reasonable to believe that unless someone whines it's Ok to "make it personal" as long as it's an approved target?

I only ask due to not understanding why a post of mine elsewhere was pulled.

77 posted on 08/16/2013 4:11:29 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin; sasportas; All
It may come as a shock, but being human and all that, I cannot give curb service.

That said, both of you and all on this thread: do not make this thread "about" individual Freepers. That is also a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

78 posted on 08/16/2013 8:05:33 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator
It may come as a shock, but being human and all that, I cannot give curb service.

I cannot believe that this comes from the RM. We all know that as Catholics, that we are continually discriminated against since the RM is a well known antiCatholic bigot. The Protestants believe that Catholics are coddled and given great licence to practice their unChristian prattlings.

I presume that you ice skate.

79 posted on 08/17/2013 12:13:28 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Morgana; HoosierDammit; TYVets; red irish; fastrock; NorthernCrunchyCon; UMCRevMom@aol.com; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

80 posted on 08/17/2013 12:17:23 AM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; Rashputin

So much Truth posted on this particular thread, amongst so much hate and blindness. Thanks for your efforts.


81 posted on 08/17/2013 10:34:18 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM; Rashputin

There are many Catholics on FR that do a lot more heavy lifting than I do. I thank you for your post, but would state that there are many more worthy that I of such notice.


82 posted on 08/17/2013 1:18:19 PM PDT by MarkBsnr (I would not believe in the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name; aimhigh

I think most Christians miss what Jesus did when he addressed the religious world. The Law is deceptive: it appears to be almost attainable if a man will just try a little bit harder. Or at least a man can put on a front of keeping the Law.

It’s like a hurdle that I can clear if I just train a little harder and I just focus constantly.

The Pharisees seemed to have it together. Jesus came along and told them they’re not aiming at God’s bar. His bar is at least a mile high. He said God’s commandment about not committing adultery isn’t about having physical sex with a woman. It’s about looking at her with lust in your heart. His message was that you’re not going to successfully obey the Law. Obeying the Law isn’t the path to righteousness.

In fact Romans tells us the Law causes us to sin.

The Law is the path to the Son. The Son is the doorway to righteousness.

My problem for 40 years was I embraced Jesus for salvation, but then tried to follow God’s commandments in my own power. I was angry and frustrated because I was failing to follow His commandments. I loathed myself.

I’m probably denser and more stubborn than most. It wasn’t until I came to the absolute end of myself that I experienced God’s grace in overcoming the power of sin in my life. My life was radically changed in a single day. It’s a rare day I don’t look back on that encounter with Him and marvel at the miracle He wrought in me. I don’t recognize the man I am today.

This is the work of the kingdom of God, to believe on him who the Father has sent.


83 posted on 08/17/2013 1:19:10 PM PDT by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
Praise GOD!

I believe we all had similar struggles - especially if that is what you were taught from day one and taught they are the 'only true' - where do you go? Then JESUS sees our heart and we never look back for we have been changed!

And, yes, Romans is Paul's masterpiece, IMO.

While all God's own in His Word have been encouraging - Joseph and Paul are two I'm anxious to meet. I already put 'my reservation' in for them to be apart of greeting me when I enter in. They are my family so I have no doubt those two will be there!

84 posted on 08/17/2013 2:58:25 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
This is the work of the kingdom of God, to believe on him who the Father has sent.

I agree.

"And THIS is His commandment, that we beleive in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one anoher as He gave us commandment."
1 John 3:23

85 posted on 08/17/2013 4:08:12 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Where are your getting this misinformation? Anullments depend on the circumstances within the marriage.


86 posted on 08/17/2013 4:22:22 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

I wanna meet Amos, Paul, David and Rich Mullins.


87 posted on 08/17/2013 5:15:54 PM PDT by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
I never gave Romans a lot of attention until a few years ago. I've spent a year in chapters 7 and 8. Not because I'm some great scholar (I don't read the original Greek but I like their salads), but God is doing something in my soul. I don't know what, but it's both painful and glorious.
88 posted on 08/17/2013 5:18:47 PM PDT by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I remember going to some pro-life thing years ago, and meeting a man who had no use for Regan, because he was divorced.

Of course, no protestant church forbids divorce, so what are you gonna do?


89 posted on 08/17/2013 6:48:13 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
Of course, no protestant church forbids divorce, so what are you gonna do?

Believe it or not, a few do. A church pastored by Henry Blackaby will not recognize unbiblical divorce among its members and will not marry anyone who has divorced for any other than the few strict biblical reasons. They are thriving.

90 posted on 08/17/2013 6:56:52 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: gitmo

AMEN! and that includes the salad.


91 posted on 08/17/2013 9:04:10 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Anullments depend on the circumstances within the marriage.

Yes, divorces do that. But Rome goes to the extreme to say the marriage never existed - a LIE!

92 posted on 08/17/2013 9:06:27 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

An anullment says that the marriage was not valid. Your phrasing of “never existed” is in error.

An anullment speaks to the validity of the marriage. One example — very simple — lack of form. They didn’t get married in a Catholic Church but by a Justice of the Peace.


93 posted on 08/17/2013 9:25:52 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

:-)


94 posted on 08/18/2013 6:56:35 AM PDT by gitmo ( If your theology doesn't become your biography it's useless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Brian Kopp DPM
Thank you for all you do around here. I learn a lot from your posts.

It's interesting how some posts get deleted followed by a warning and others that are far more blatant violations of the rules linger on even if they do generate a warning. I look at a post that seems to violate the rules but doesn't even generate a warning, post something that's well short of the one that didn't generate a warning, and my post is still deleted. Go figure.

God Bless you and thanks for the insightful comments you post .

95 posted on 08/19/2013 5:49:50 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Not sure about the integrity of the author. This is discussed in gobs of Evangelical churches.

Granted you probably won’t hear about it in Joel Osteen’s church. But you won’t hear much about Jesus either.


96 posted on 08/19/2013 5:57:22 PM PDT by Gamecock (Many Atheists take the stand: "There is no God AND I hate Him.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

I haven’t heard divorce encouraged, trivialized, or permitted in any Evangelical church I’ve ever attended.

I keep hearing from the pulpit that divorce is sin and God hates divorce.


97 posted on 08/20/2013 7:05:05 AM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
Or could it be that many Evangelical churches are populated with ex-Catholics who left because they did not want the annulment hassle?

Could it? I don't know.

Got any proof for that?

Or is it more idle speculation because Catholics can't come to grips with the idea that someone could find something wrong theologically with Catholic teaching?

I know LOTS of Evangelicals who left the Catholic church. Evangelical churches are jam packed with ex-Catholics and I don't know any of them who left for reasons connected with morals. It's always been theology.

98 posted on 08/20/2013 7:10:54 AM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
As if the problem doesn't exist in Catholic churches.

The Roman Catholic church just hands out church sanctioned divorces and repackages them as annulments.

99 posted on 08/20/2013 7:13:08 AM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
We're in a hell of a mess. I confess sometimes I think we'll just have to be utterly destroyed before we realize what we've done. The Muslims may be God's instruments of judgment upon us like the Assyrians in the OT, a "razor that He hired to shave us," a scourge on our backs. I see nothing in the future but the natural and logical consequences of our sex-gender-marriage-family nihilism.

There certainly is precedent for that in Scripture.

Habakkuk 1

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Habakkuk+1&version=ESV

100 posted on 08/20/2013 7:17:58 AM PDT by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-108 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson