Danny Shelton Marries....again, 3abn Options

[Zephyr]

Zephyr,

I am going to ask that you refrain from name calling. Even though we are not talking about [active] members, BSDA is still a SDA christian site. You can state you disagreement, distaste, and even disgust, but try to keep it respectful.

Snake oil is actually a very respectful term. I wouldn't call Kay or anyone else a smooth talking, filthy lucre-loving liar.

[vcpa]

Hindsight today suggests very, very strongly that Danny was looking for another Mrs. Shelton well before this medical issue came up.

Regards,
Norm

If Dannny was already looking for another Mrs. Shelton before the divorce was final, would this be considered adultery?

vcpa

[Guest_statrei_*]

If Dannny was already looking for another Mrs. Shelton before the divorce was final, would this be considered adultery?

vcpa

It does not matter. Any marriage that takes place while any of the spouses is alive is adultery. This is clear in the NT though the church has successfully blinded the eyes of all to this.

[summertime]

It does not matter. Any marriage that takes place while any of the spouses is alive is adultery. This is clear in the NT though the church has successfully blinded the eyes of all to this.

Can you imagine, if this were the case, how many innocent people, who did not want the divorce in the first place, would be sitting around the rest of their lives waiting for their unfaithful spouse to die before they could go on with their lives? How in the world could a person be an honest Christian, just waiting for their ex-spouse to die? That certainly would be unacceptable in the eyes of God.

[Guest_statrei_*]

Can you imagine, if this were the case, how many innocent people, who did not want the divorce in the first place, would be sitting around the rest of their lives waiting for their unfaithful spouse to die before they could go on with their lives? How in the world could a person be an honest Christian, just waiting for their ex-spouse to die? That certainly would be unacceptable in the eyes of God.

The NT covers that. The adultery of the one who has been put away is now the responsibility of the one who engineered the divorce.

[summertime]

The NT covers that. The adultery of the one who has been put away is now the responsibility of the one who engineered the divorce.

So it is still adultry, but the sin lies at the door of the partner who obtained the divorce in the first place? In other words, I can sin, but the sin will not be laid at my door? If my husband has gotten a divorce against my will, and then remarries-and I later remarry also, I would be commiting adultry, but the sin would not be mine, it would be his/hers? That sounds good.

[PrincessDrRe]

If Dannny was already looking for another Mrs. Shelton before the divorce was final, would this be considered adultery?

Yep.

It does not matter. Any marriage that takes place while any of the spouses is alive is adultery. This is clear in the NT though the church has successfully blinded the eyes of all to this.

...we tend to see what we want to see how we like to see it....

[Denny]

It does not matter. Any marriage that takes place while any of the spouses is alive is adultery. This is clear in the NT though the church has successfully blinded the eyes of all to this.

True we have the practise that adultery is biblical grounds for divorce and to add to that we stretch the meaning of the world adultery to keep members happy who want a church wedding. The Anglican church used to recognise Jesus real meaning to what He said they would not marry divorcees as long as the original spouse was still alive whether they had remarried or not but this has not been the case for a looong time.
Sticking to what Jesus really said will make things hard for people but perhaps that will help us to see how serious God really views marriage..... who knows eh?

[4reneyonly]

True we have the practise that adultery is biblical grounds for divorce and to add to that we stretch the meaning of the world adultery to keep members happy who want a church wedding. The Anglican church used to recognise Jesus real meaning to what He said they would not marry divorcees as long as the original spouse was still alive whether they had remarried or not but this has not been the case for a looong time.
Sticking to what Jesus really said will make things hard for people but perhaps that will help us to see how serious God really views marriage..... who knows eh?

Because its hard some are always looking for a way out or the popular "work-around"

[Guest_statrei_*]

So it is still adultry, but the sin lies at the door of the partner who obtained the divorce in the first place? In other words, I can sin, but the sin will not be laid at my door? If my husband has gotten a divorce against my will, and then remarries-and I later remarry also, I would be commiting adultry, but the sin would not be mine, it would be his/hers? That sounds good.

It is not so much a matter of sounding good as it is being fair. The God's rules are never arbitrary. If you read Jesus carefully you will find that it does not matter whether your husband remarries. The fact is that even though he obtains a divorce the only effect is that he does not have to deal with you in his house. The God still considers you to be his wife until you die. If you remarry, since the God does not expect you to lose your sexual drive because he put you away, your adultery becomes his responsibility because he actively caused it. In Jesus' eyes you do him a favor by not getting remarried.

While we are on this subject, one thing our preachers have not taught us is the fact that the God NEVER forgives sin. The God ONLY forgives people. You an only forgive sin by repealing the law behind it.

This post has been edited by statrei: May 10 2006, 05:44 AM

[watchbird]

True we have the practise that adultery is biblical grounds for divorce and to add to that we stretch the meaning of the world adultery to keep members happy who want a church wedding. The Anglican church used to recognise Jesus real meaning to what He said they would not marry divorcees as long as the original spouse was still alive whether they had remarried or not but this has not been the case for a looong time.
Sticking to what Jesus really said will make things hard for people but perhaps that will help us to see how serious God really views marriage..... who knows eh?

I am hearing some really strange theology in several recent posts. I had known all along that there were some Fundmentalist family oriented groups who refused remarriage to any who had a "living ex-spouse", and of course the Roman Catholic Church historically has refused to recognize divorce as legitimate for any reason, causing some to go through some rather interesting contortions in order to get their marriages "annulled". But I had not until just recently run into Adventists who held that postition. I guess, even though I was raised in what I would consider a very conservative Adventist environment, it must have been pretty "liberal" in comparison with some strands of conservatism.

In my world of Adventism, I was taught that God accepted people where ever they are, and that even though through their own sins people found themselves with a marriage broken beyond repair so that they found divorce as the only recourse left to them, that once it was done, God recognized divorce as legally binding, and thus he accepts the two individuals as free from the legal bindings of marriage and each are free to receive his full forgiveness for whatever they have done wrong and move on with their lives, including marriage to another partner.

If we really expand the definition of adultery beyond that of having sexual intercourse with someone other than one's spouse to including having "roving eyes" and inappropriate friendships with another, or even to lustful thought (as Jesus noted) without following up with inappropriate friendships -- Who among us who have been married more than 10 years, would be able to raise their hands and say, "I am sinless in this area." ?

Is the New Testament, where Jesus translates the law into love, to be considered as even more legally restrictive than the Old? Is it in accordance with God's love for us -- as exemplified in Christ's life and in the way he dealt with sinners, to consider that the institution of marriage is more important than are the people who are married, or single, or divorced, or whatever?

I cannot but think of David Newman's motto, "Remember, God loves people more than anything!"

Are the old restrictions of the RCC or the Anglican Church or the restrictions held by Fundamentalist Christian groups today truly more representative of the way God treats people than are those which have traditionally been held by our Adventist church -- that once the deed was done, that we should meet people where they are, represent God in the way that we extend forgiveness and fellowship, and allow people to get on with their lives? If they have not repented from real sin, that will show up in their future actions soon enough. If they either have repented or were not guilty in the first place, then who are we to hold that divorce is the unforgivable sin and they must pay penance for it for the rest of their lives--or until their former spouse dies?

On the bottom line, do we believe in God's grace and forgiveness, or do we hold that for some sins that is not enough and we must live forever working out our assigned penance?

[Guest_statrei_*]

Watchbird, it is difficult to reply to your post because you did not clearly state just what it was you found to be objectionable. Maybe it would be helpful if you first stated what it was that you gathered from the post you have read.

Sticking to what Jesus really said will make things hard for people but perhaps that will help us to see how serious God really views marriage..... who knows eh?

And the effect of what Jesus said is this, in any divorce the only person who has a right to remarry without committing adultery is the spouse who was put away (or left behind). This is a very simplistic summary but it suffices for now.

[NormF]

Sideways nods in the church's direction have been made regarding what it's position is on the subject of marriage and divorce, with the clear implication that this supposed position is a non-biblical stance, or at the very least, that the Bible trumps whatever it may be.

Well, the church does have a voice: by definition the General Conference in session. A product of the GC in Session is the Church Manual. So for the record, here is what the current edition of the Church Manual, as posted on the General Conference website, says on the topic.

I find it difficult to see how Budda or Mohammad or things that go bump in the night are the source of these position statements. As I read it, the authority they are citing (repeatedly) is the Bible.

Regards,
Norm
-------

The Church’s Position on Divorce and Remarriage

Acknowledging the teachings of the Bible on marriage, the church is aware that marriage relationships are less than ideal in many cases. The problem of divorce and remarriage can be seen in its true light only as it is viewed from Heaven’s viewpoint and against the background of the Garden of Eden. Central to God’s holy plan for our world was the creation of beings made in His image who would multiply and replenish the earth and live together in purity, harmony, and happiness. He brought forth Eve from the side of Adam and gave her to Adam as his wife. Thus was marriage instituted -- God the author of the institution, God the officiator at the first marriage. After the Lord had revealed to Adam that Eve was verily bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, there could never arise a doubt in his mind that they twain were one flesh. Nor could ever a doubt arise in the mind of either of the holy pair that God intended that their home should endure forever.

The church adheres to this view of marriage and home without reservation, believing that any lowering of this high view is to that extent a lowering of the heavenly ideal. The belief that marriage is a divine institution rests upon the Holy Scriptures. Accordingly, all thinking and reasoning in the perplexing field of divorce and remarriage must constantly be harmonized with that holy ideal revealed in Eden.

The church believes in the law of God; it also believes in the forgiving mercy of God. It believes that victory and salvation can as surely be found by those who have transgressed in the matter of divorce and remarriage as by those who have failed in any other of God’s holy standards. Nothing presented here is intended to minimize the

[page 195]

mercy of God or the forgiveness of God. In the fear of the Lord, the church here sets forth the principles and practices that should apply in this matter of marriage, divorce, and remarriage.

Though marriage was first performed by God alone, it is recognized that people now live under civil governments on this earth; therefore, marriage has both a divine and a civil aspect. The divine aspect is governed by the laws of God, the civil by the laws of the state.

In harmony with these teachings, the following statements set forth the position of the Seventh-day Adventist Church:

1. When Jesus said, "Let not man put asunder," He established a rule of conduct for the church under the dispensation of grace which must transcend all civil enactments which would go beyond His interpretation of the divine law governing the marriage relation. Here He gives a rule to His followers who should adhere to it whether or not the state or prevailing custom allows larger liberty. "In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus declared plainly that there could be no dissolution of the marriage tie, except for unfaithfulness to the marriage vow." Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, p. 63. (Matt. 5:32; 19:9.)

2. Unfaithfulness to the marriage vow has generally been seen to mean adultery and/or fornication. However, the New Testament word for fornication includes certain other sexual irregularities. (1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:9, 10; Rom. 1:24-27.) Therefore, sexual perversions, including incest, child sexual abuse, and homosexual practices, are also recognized as a misuse of sexual powers and a violation of the divine intention in marriage. As such they are just cause for separation or divorce.

Even though the Scriptures allow divorce for the reasons mentioned above, as well as for abandonment by an unbelieving spouse (1 Cor. 7:10-15), earnest endeavors should be made by the church and those concerned to effect a reconciliation, urging the spouses to manifest toward each other a Christ-like spirit of forgiveness and restoration. The church is urged to relate lovingly and redemptively toward the couple in order to assist in the reconciliation process.

3. In the event that reconciliation is not effected, the spouse who has remained faithful to the spouse who violated the marriage vow has the biblical right to secure a divorce and also to remarry.

4. A spouse who has violated the marriage vow (See sections 1. and 2. above) shall be subject to discipline by the local church. (See Chapter 14, Church Discipline, pp. 182-190.) If genuinely repentant, the spouse may be

[page 196]

placed under censure for a stated period of time rather than removed from church membership. A spouse who gives no evidence of full and sincere repentance shall be removed from church membership. In case the violation has brought public reproach on the cause of God, the church, in order to maintain its high standards and good name, may remove the individual from church membership even though there is evidence of repentance.

Any of these forms of discipline shall be applied by the local church in a manner that would seek to attain the two objectives of church discipline -- to correct and redeem. In the gospel of Christ, the redemptive side of discipline is always tied to an authentic transformation of the sinner into a new creature in Jesus Christ.

5. A spouse who has violated the marriage vow and who is divorced does not have the moral right to marry another while the spouse who has been faithful to the marriage vow still lives and remains unmarried and chaste. The person who does so shall be removed from church membership. The person whom he/she marries, if a member, shall also be removed from church membership.

6. It is recognized that sometimes marriage relations deteriorate to the point where it is better for a husband and wife to separate. "To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband)--and that the husband should not divorce his wife" (1 Cor. 7:10, 11, RSV). In many such cases the custody of the children, the adjustment of property rights, or even personal protection may make necessary a change in marital status. In such cases it may be permissible to secure what is known in some countries as a legal separation. However, in some civil jurisdictions such a separation can be secured only by divorce.

A separation or divorce which results from factors such as physical violence or in which "unfaithfulness to the marriage vow" (See sections 1. and 2. above) is not involved, does not give either one the scriptural right to remarry, unless in the meantime the other party has remarried, committed adultery or fornication, or died. Should a member who has been thus divorced remarry without these biblical grounds, he/she shall be removed from church membership; and the one whom he/she marries, if a member, shall also be removed from church membership. (See pp. 184, 185.)

7. A spouse who has violated the marriage vow and has been divorced and removed from church membership and who has remarried, or a person who has been divorced on other than the grounds set forth in sections 1. and 2. above and has remarried, and who has been removed from church membership, shall be considered ineligible for membership except as hereinafter provided.

8. The marriage contract is not only sacred but also infinitely more

[page 197]

complex than ordinary contracts in its possible involvements; for example, with children. Hence, in a request for readmittance to church membership, the options available to the repentant may be severely limited. Before final action is taken by the local church, the request for readmittance shall be brought by the church through the pastor or district leader to the conference/mission/field committee for counsel and recommendation as to any possible steps that the repentant one, or ones, may take to secure such readmittance.

9. Readmittance to membership of those who have been removed from church membership for reasons given in the foregoing sections shall normally be on the basis of rebaptism. (See p. 189.)

10. When a person who has been removed from membership is readmitted to church membership, as provided in section 8., every care should be exercised to safeguard the unity and harmony of the church by not giving such a person responsibility as a leader; especially in an office which requires the rite of ordination, unless by very careful counsel with the conference/mission/field administration.

11. No Seventh-day Adventist minister has the right to officiate at the remarriage of any person who, under the stipulation of the preceding paragraphs, has no scriptural right to remarry.

Local Church Ministry for Families

The church as a redemptive agency of Christ is to minister to its members in all of their needs and to nurture every one so that all may grow into a mature Christian experience. This is particularly true when members face lifelong decisions such as marriage and distressful experiences such as divorce. When a couple’s marriage is in danger of breaking down, every effort should be made by the partners and those in the church or family who minister to them to bring about their reconciliation in harmony with divine principles for restoring wounded relationships (Hosea 3:1-3; 1 Cor. 7:10, 11; 13:4-7; Gal. 6:1).

Resources are available through the local church or other church organizations which can be of assistance to members in the development of a strong Christian home. These resources include: (1) programs of orientation for couples engaged to be married, (2) programs of instruction for married couples with their families, and (3) programs of support for broken families and divorced individuals.

Pastoral support is vital in the area of instruction and orientation in the case of marriage, and healing and restoration in the case of divorce. The pastoral function in the latter case is both disciplinary and supportive. That function includes the sharing of information relevant to the case; however, the disclosure of sensitive information should be done with great discretion.

[page 198]

This ethical concern alone should not be the grounds for avoiding disciplinary actions established in sections 1. to 11. above.

Church members are called to forgive and accept those who have failed as God has forgiven them (Isa. 54:5-8; Matt. 6:14, 15; Eph. 4:32). The Bible urges patience, compassion, and forgiveness in the Christian care of those who have erred (Matt. 18:10-20; Gal. 6:1, 2). During the time when individuals are under discipline, either by censure or by being removed from membership, the church, as an instrument of God’s mission, shall make every effort to maintain caring and spiritually nurturing contact with them.

[Denny]

"A separation or divorce which results from factors such as physical violence or in which "unfaithfulness to the marriage vow" (See sections 1. and 2. above) is not involved, does not give either one the scriptural right to remarry, unless in the meantime the other party has remarried, committed adultery or fornication, or died. Should a member who has been thus divorced remarry without these biblical grounds, he/she shall be removed from church membership; and the one whom he/she marries, if a member, shall also be removed from church membership. (See pp. 184, 185.)"



Mmm Interesting......

[Guest_statrei_*]

I have only two things to say. 1. The Creator had never performed a marriage on this earth. 2. This statement of the church's position does not recognize the biblical teachings on marriage.