Posted on 09/26/2014 11:58:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Well, if the emotion you are talking about is lust, then that’s a sin. If it’s just love, absent carnal lust, then that isn’t a sin.
Is Divorce Equivalent to Homosexuality?
It’s up to God. I wouldn’t involve myself in either however.
I’ve often wondered if you are going to accept divorce and remarriage, why not have some sort of faith divorce process as well as marriage ceremonies? Seems like there would be less danger of relying on the state to decide when a marriage has ended and can be resumed, and messing it up like with things like no-fault divorce. I think a big reason so many accept ‘gay marriage’ is because they have been conditioned to think the state defines marriage in the first place.
Freegards
There's a difference between having sinned years ago in your life, often before coming to Christ, and claiming to be a Christian and choosing to live in blatant unrepentant sin.
Whatever someone did before they became a Christian is forgiven and that is why churches accept couples who have divorced and want to remarry.
However, if a couple in a church divorces while being a member, I don't know of any churches which will allow to marry someone else. Usually the people find another church and try to get it done there.
The reason to reject homosexual marriage is that if the person claims to be a believer and lives in sin, we are commanded to not even wish them Godspeed. We are not to associate with them in fellowship and certainly not participate in their making a mockery of marriage.
If the unbelieving spouse leaves, the person is free as Paul says.
I know some people who say that in every divorce both parties are responsible, that it's never one sided, but I've seen some situations where that is the case. The one party does NOT want to end the marriage and the other one is bound and determined to.
I've decided to refuse to do any more surveys.
They have your phone number. They can tell who they are talking to.
I don't believe the claims of confidentiality and I will not go on record any more with opinions that will be used against me by the totalitarian regime that I see on the horizon.
That's especially true of political surveys.
Voting is supposed to be by secret ballot.
I'm not telling them who I voted for or intend to vote for.
A gal I used to work with back in the 1980's also got divorced but because her mom clerked for a high official in the Catholic church here in the Detroit area, he was able to get her a pardon (or whatever it is) from the Pope himself.........
Guess it pays to have friends in high places..........
I hadn’t heard about the disfellowshipping decision on the sodomite California church. Good on the SBC. When they couldn’t get it done at this year’s convention, I was really heartsick, in another way.
They may have hope yet.
I’ve heard one very fundamentalist congregation teach that if a wife is defiantly unfaithful, the husband may divorce her and remarry. But the woman doesn’t have this same option; she may not remarry as long as he lives. He gave a scriptural reference which made sense at the time, but I can’t think of it.
The NT Church is held to a higher standard, though.
...
I don't believe the claims of confidentiality and I will not go on record any more with opinions that will be used against me by the totalitarian regime
Oh, I love surveys. And I always hope that they WILL make my answers public, so that I can have a very interesting "conversation" with any sodomite who accosts me.
It really depends on who's conducting it, but I realize that that is sometimes invisible because some groups contract with "objective" survey firms, hiding the agenda of the poll.
We need to boldly come out into the open.
When the results came in, my boss debriefed his personal team of 15 people, and went down the list of responses that HIS TEAM had provided.
Not so very anonymous.
Homosexuality, otoh, is the result of living a life so far outside the boundries of God's law that God gives us over to the lewdness of our sin. (Rom 1:21-24) There is nothing we can do to solve this except to beg God's forgiveness. It is like leprosy.
That wasn’t the question
Sorry Lears that’s under the law of Moses(Leviticus 20:21). As a Christian we are not under the law, but under the Grace of God. There are other arguments, but that’s not one of them.
Jesus condemns divorce and remarriage by taking us all the way back to “the beginning” (Matthew 19), before the Law of Moses. “Moses for your hardness of heart suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it hath not been so.” (v. 8)
The consequence of God’s edict at “the beginning” is that “Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery.” (v. 9)
The author in the OP claims that this adultery is a one-time act (presumably taking place at the marriage ceremony or on the honeymoon night). John, however, didn’t say, “It was unlawful for you to TAKE your brother’s wife,” but rather, “It is unlawful for you to HAVE your brother’s wife.” I can see no other conclusion than that it was unlawful for Herod to take her BECAUSE it was unlawful for him to have her. That was my point.
Similarly, if a man divorces his wife (except for fornication) and marries another, it is unlawful for him to HAVE her. Advising them against “doing the same sinful action again, abandoning and divorcing one another” (as he puts it) is to advise them to continue in adultery.
As to law and grace: Yes, we are under grace, freed from having to pursue a righteousness based on perfect law-keeping as our only hope, and placed under the law of faith (Romans 3:27), to be justified by our faith rather than by our works of law-keeping (which could only condemn us in our failures).
Does this mean we are free to do as we wish, having no law over us? Hardly. “What then? shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace? God forbid.” (Romans 6:15) To do so would be, as Paul explains, to continue to be servants of sin.
If all the well meaning heterosexual divorcees can’t keep from committing the sin of adultery—and by hook or by crook calling it something else—how are the homosexual offenders supposed to quit their sin? Or the drunkards? Or the gluttons?
You got that right.
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.