Prayer request Meeting the Pastors

[The Revolting Man]

Like @Mojo , I hear what you are saying, but let me throw a real live human being that I personally know out here as a case study.

She is divorced. He former husband physically, mentally and sexually abused her. For ten years. The last time he pistol whipped her, tried to kill her and left her for dead. During those ten years he had multiple sexual encounters and extended relationships with both married and unmarried women. Now, this woman has been divorced for ten+ years and desperately just wants love, healing, and protection. What should she do?

I know I don’t have to sugarcoat things for you and I also know that you know the answer to that. IF there are no mitigating circumstances, i.e. is he an unbeliever who refuses to live with her in peace (a very slippery slope)? Will he write her a certificate of divorce? Eligibility issues are slightly malleable BUT iron is slightly malleable too.

 

[cnystrom]

@Gary Slaughenhaupt, should we take this conversation to another thread, or leave it be?

I did not mean to start a debate on this topic in this thread. We have debated it before. Clearly it should be in a different thread for those who wish to debate the subject. This thread is for Gary and his situation.

I only brought it up to support Gary and to encourage him that not only is his wife not to divorce him, she is not even to leave him and he should resist this with all of his power and he should call out his wife and church for suggesting it.

 

[Daniel DeLuca]

I did not mean to start a debate on this topic in this thread. We have debated it before. Clearly it should be in a different thread for those who wish to debate the subject. This thread is for Gary and his situation.

I only brought it up to support Gary and to encourage him that not only is his wife not to divorce him, she is not even to leave him and he should resist this with all of his power and he should call out his wife and church for suggesting it.

Agreed...and in this scenario, even if she could somehow justify divorce, which clearly, she cannot, but if she could, she most certainly CANNOT justify remarriage, and I think this is where the modern church has the most glaring blind spot, to such a degree, that their stance is hypocritical, because regardless of what anybody's stance in the extreme cases, happens to be, I know we can all agree that if Gary's wife were to remarry, with or without her church's blessing, she will most certainly be committing adultery.

 

[rockfox]

That would seem unrealistically harsh.

His disciples said to Him, "If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry."

extreme cases, happens to be, I know we can all agree that if Gary's wife were to remarry, with or without her church's blessing, she will most certainly be committing adultery.

The way this goes down is EVERY case gets painted as an extreme case.

 

[steve]

The way this goes down is EVERY case gets painted as an extreme case.

How many broken bones does it take before it qualifies as an extreme case?

The fact that every female wants her case to qualify as extreme does not nullify the real ones.

 

[Mojo]

The way this goes down is EVERY case gets painted as an extreme case.

Wait, are you saying that making a wife stay with her husband even if he either beats her just short of death, or to death is not even remotely harsh?

If so, we need to talk.

 

[Mojo]

I did not mean to start a debate on this topic in this thread. We have debated it before. Clearly it should be in a different thread for those who wish to debate the subject. This thread is for Gary and his situation.

I only brought it up to support Gary and to encourage him that not only is his wife not to divorce him, she is not even to leave him and he should resist this with all of his power and he should call out his wife and church for suggesting it.

He said he didn't mind.

 

[FollowingHim]

The way this goes down is EVERY case gets painted as an extreme case.

The fact that every female wants her case to qualify as extreme does not nullify the real ones.

Both statements are true. Our job is to navigate the tightrope of applying both to real, complex lives, with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit guiding us, and these two sides of the truth as weights steadying us in all circumstances. Arguing which truth to drop is foolish. We need a weight on both sides of the rope to stay balanced, drop either one and you fall off the other side.

 

[rockfox]

Wait, are you saying that making a wife stay with her husband even if he either beats her just short of death, or to death is not even remotely harsh?

If so, we need to talk.

Should a wife (generic) stay in her marriage no matter how she feels? Yes. But if she finds staying untenable (for whatever reason) and leaves, she should remain single (or go back) as Paul teaches. But when you justify a women divorcing and remarrying because 'scary story here' you not only go beyond what is written, you provide justification for every woman who wants to jump ship.

But more importantly I'm saying that Gary will be painted to that church as an abusive adulterer, even though he's [apparently] not. Most men aren't horribly abusive husbands. But women are well able to convince themselves they are even when they're not. And pastor's will line up all day long to help them with that.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Should a wife (generic) stay in her marriage no matter how she feels? Yes. But if she finds staying untenable (for whatever reason) and leaves, she should remain single (or go back) as Paul teaches. But when you justify a women divorcing and remarrying because 'scary story here' you not only go beyond what is written, you provide justification for every woman who wants to jump ship.

But more importantly I'm saying that Gary will be painted to that church as an abusive adulterer, even though he's [apparently] not. Most men aren't horribly abusive husbands. But women are well able to convince themselves they are even when they're not. And pastor's will line up all day long to help them with that.

Amen, amen and amen.

 

[steve]

How many broken bones does it take before it qualifies as an extreme case?

Evidently there is no upper limit.
She has to stay married no matter what.

Bullsnot.
Back in the day that Paul’s statements were made, if a woman could prove to the local leaders that the situation was untenable, they met with the husband and pressured him into giving her the get.
Assuming that she was stuck like Chuck no matter what, is legalism in my book.

 

[steve]

Both statements are true. Our job is to navigate the tightrope of applying both to real, complex lives, with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit guiding us, and these two sides of the truth as weights steadying us in all circumstances. Arguing which truth to drop is foolish. We need a weight on both sides of the rope to stay balanced, drop either one and you fall off the other side.

My statement is not one side of the truth, it clearly accepts that both ends of the spectrum exist.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Bullsnot.
Back in the day that Paul’s statements were made, if a woman could prove to the local leaders that the situation was untenable, they met with the husband and pressured him into giving her the get.
Assuming that she was stuck like Chuck no matter what, is legalism in my book.

MegaDittos.

 

[Daniel DeLuca]

Evidently there is no upper limit.
She has to stay married no matter what.

Bullsnot.
Back in the day that Paul’s statements were made, if a woman could prove to the local leaders that the situation was untenable, they met with the husband and pressured him into giving her the get.
Assuming that she was stuck like Chuck no matter what, is legalism in my book.

Legalism, is when you add regulations that are not found in Scripture (e.g. women shouldn't wear pants because it is men's clothing).

An interesting side note: a few years back the FBI busted up some rabbis in a sting, where they were paid $10,000 in order to force a husband to provide the "Get". The thing is, this goes against the entire spirit of Deut 24! It was the husband granting the "Get" of his own volition, that gave the woman her freedom to remarry.

 

[cnystrom]

Back in the day that Paul’s statements were made, if a woman could prove to the local leaders that the situation was untenable, they met with the husband and pressured him into giving her the get.

How do you know that Paul was not trying to change this situation? I mean why would Paul say anything about it, if everyone was already doing what they were supposed to be doing? When Paul wrote that a woman should not leave her husband, what was he trying to teach? Maybe he was teaching that, for a Christian, a woman should not leave her husband.

If the Bible says not to deny Christ, and they are torturing you beyond your endurance and you decide to deny him, I am not going to judge you for it. At what point is it ok? If they are going to kill you for it, is it ok then? Everyone can make up their own minds, and I will not judge for it. God is the judge. But if you are asking me what the Bible says, the Bible says that we should not deny Christ. End of story. You can call it legalism but the Biblical language seems clear and straightforward. I am not sure why people think we have a right to have happy lives or happy marriages.

Sometimes being a Christian is a call to suffer.

 

[cnystrom]

He said he didn't mind.

Ok. I have been sucked in. I will jump into the debate again.

 

[steve]

Ladies, all I can do is apologize to you for the position that some of my brothers take.
In my opinion, death is not the only way out of a completely unrighteous situation.
But accept ANY council about leaving with fear, trembling, and the utmost humility.
For MOST of the situations where there is a question my brothers are 100% correct.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Evidently there is no upper limit.
She has to stay married no matter what.

Bullsnot.
Back in the day that Paul’s statements were made, if a woman could prove to the local leaders that the situation was untenable, they met with the husband and pressured him into giving her the get.
Assuming that she was stuck like Chuck no matter what, is legalism in my book.

Legalism is the natural result of following the Law.

 

[steve]

How many broken bones constitutes excessive?

 

[PeteR]

Guys, not sure we are going to solve every possible nuance or agree on the exact balance between letter and spirit of the Law... Bottom-line, each case needs to be measured on it's own merits and the safety of the woman should be a very strong central consideration.

That said, can we let this discussion return to the OP?