***
Is there such a thing as “rape” in a Christian marriage?
***
JA note: Thanks to Kathi for putting this post together this week as I’m finding my groove with a new term back at college.
***
***
Robert posts on his blog, A Man, His Wife, and the Bible and is married to Amanda. That is all that we know about Robert, although I do think that his Doctrines and Beliefs tab tells us quite a bit.
With regard to physical abuse, Robert believes that it is not grounds for divorce. Robert also believes that emotional abuse is overused and overblown by women today. He does think that both sexes are capable of emotional abuse, but it is more “culturally acceptable” for women to be emotionally abusive.
Adultery is the only Biblical grounds for divorce, and adultery is defined as “physical intercourse with someone not your spouse.” Forget that emotional stuff because everyone does it.
When children enter the picture, a wife is to teach them to honor the Lord and her husband. And, let’s not forget that a wife is to submit to her husband in all things – including his sexual desires – which does not surprise me in the least about Robert’s view of sexual abuse considering the following (added spaces for easier reading):
Sexual Abuse:
Biblically, we do not believe marital rape is possible. Scripture clearly teaches in 1 Corinthians 7 that a wife’s body is her husbands and a husband’s body is his wife’s.
We believe consent is given at marriage.
We believe the teaching on marital rape is a poison in the well of women’s hearts and minds towards their husbands and marriage & does much damage. However, we also do not condone a husband taking his wife against her will and strongly state that a man should not do so. In situations of repeated and enduring refusal, professional help and Matthew 18 need to be worked through & not force to be used.
We also believe that denying a spouse sex is just as much abuse as forcing sex upon a spouse.
Lastly, we do not believe sex where a man and woman engage in sex while intoxicated is rape.
In closing, we put equal responsibility on each party in such a situation. Any marriage where sexual abuse is taking place needs to get help from a pastor, or in some situations law enforcement. (Source)
Let’s pause there for a moment and look at the definition of marital rape:
Marital rape can be defined as any unwanted intercourse or penetration (vaginal, anal, or oral) obtained by force, threat of force, or when the wife is unable to consent. (Source)
Back to Robert…
How in the world can he honestly say that he does not believe that marital rape is possible when he states that he does not condone a husband taking his wife against her will? Taking a wife against her will is the definition of marital rape, therefore you must believe that marital rape is possible.
Robert doesn’t go so far as to say that sexual assault is a woman’s fault, but when I read this, I think he comes pretty close. He almost makes it sound that sexual assault is a result of a woman denying sex to her husband. And then to say each party has equal responsibility, but if raped while intoxicated is null and void? In the end, I think Robert’s belief that marital rape is not possible is because there are enough loopholes to get a man out of being accused of raping his wife.
Oh, by the way, when Robert says, “We do believe,” he is referring to himself and his wife, Amanda. He makes it very clear in the Doctrines and Beliefs that they both believe these things. This makes me sad for Amanda and I want to know if that is what she really believes. I certainly hope that this man is not a pastor. I can’t imagine that any woman who comes to them with problems in an abusive marriage will receive any help.
photo credit: Klardrommar via photopin cc
Spiritual Sounding Board 
Tim,
Thank you, I think??
LikeLiked by 1 person
Truly. You got it right on the nose: God is more concerned with the people than the divorce.
LikeLiked by 2 people
My goodness, Earl, you are so consumed with your own desire to be in control as a husband and your own view of women as inferior that you are calling loving Christian people with happy marriages ‘pigs.’ When two people love each other and work together as partners to create lives that bring about good for their children, families, communities, and themselves, don’t you think God is pleased?
LikeLike
@ elovesc34
You never did respond to my questions or comments to you.
You mentioned hogs, pigs, and idiots in this other post. To whom are you referring?
LikeLike
Tim,
I don’t want to take too much credit for my comment. I had help coming to my stand on divorce for abuse, abandonment (even if he’s still sitting on your couch) and adultery. Leslie Vernick and Barbara Roberts are outstanding in this capacity and do not take divorce lightly, as I do not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bike Bubba, I am all for repentence and rehabilitation (I spent years working professionally with prison rehabilitation programs), but I do not think that this should mean avoiding consequences. Physical and sexual abuse are crimes and perpetrators don’t deserve to get a second shot at their victims while the church figures out if they are genuinely sorry. People can repent anywhere including from a jail cell.
LikeLiked by 2 people
eslovesc34: It was irony. You made a blanket assertion about men who comment here without knowing them. You cannot prove your assertion, thus you resort to calling names like a child. Come out from behind that screen name if you are such a man.
LikeLiked by 1 person
eslovesc34: Come on. Real name. You don’t even know my wife, you coward.
LikeLike
eslovec34: If you are calling me an idiot, pig or dog, please do so directly, not by implication. Perhaps you are too weak a man to say it directly. Real name, please.
LikeLiked by 1 person
eslovec34: You have insulted my wife. You should apologise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brenda, the point here is that one does not merely wait on repentance. It is rather more or less demanded by the church elders/deacons when they initiate church discipline upon a member, or begin to assist a spouse whose spouse is not a member.
And to be honest, from the looks of your most recent link, I’ve got some issues. Malachi 2:16 notes that God hates divorce; your source says the opposite. 1 Peter 3:7 notes that the penalty for a man in the church who is harsh to his wife is that his prayers will be hindered; your source says to simply treat him as an unbeliever.
More or less, they’re skipping Matthew 18:15-16 and just jumping to verse 17 in such cases. I concede that a lot of those cases will get to verse 17, but count me out on skipping the first steps of Biblical discipline. It all but guarantees a lack of repentance and the destruction of relationships.
LikeLike
Brenda, and Bike Bubba,
Please see my comment at 11:21 AM. That is biblical. We gotta dissect scripture.
I know, I know, it goes against “orthodox”. What do I care? I don’t.
As far as I can see, scripture, including Jesus and Paul, does not forbid divorce, nor do either one call it a sin.
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, boy…there goes Bike Bubba’s NO WITNESS PLAN for a Matthew 18 again.
LikeLike
I just tried to leave a comment over on Deo Volente for eslovec34 and got moderated.
LikeLike
Bike Bubba and Brenda,
My impression is when Spouses are repetitively practicing Mental and Physical Abuse they are abandoning their vows.
Abandoning can be interpreted differently whereas the spouse simply walks out and never comes back.
Unfortunately, I had a friend (because of his upbringing) who has difficulty controlling his emotions to a point that his refined and loyal wife of 40 years couldn’t handle his repetitive abusive and out of control temper.
He felt that she had no basis for divorcing him and blamed her “rebelliousness” on her shoulders as well as the church counseling they were receiving.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Keith,
It’s a common game among abusers on blogs and social media to delete comments, block people on Twitter, etc. Julie Anne and others can tell you. People like this are not after dialogue. Maybe your comment on eslovec34’s blog will be moderated until he approves it, which is common for first comments. Or maybe he will delete it. Either way, I suspect he’s not the least bit apologetic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Has anyone heard of David Platt and something called “Secret Church”?
LikeLike
Bike Bubba,
Putting away a spouse is NOT the same as divorce. That is why I say that orthodox is wrong in this regard.
Putting away is a separation, divorce is a severation.
Putting away a spouse for fornication is as if the marriage never took place, and that was the ONLY reason for “putting away”. Divorce was allowed in the Law of Moses, and due to that alone, divorce is not a sin.
The sin is in the act of not divorcing, because putting away causes the sin of adultery.
But if you divorce, divorce does not cause anyone to sin.
Ed
LikeLike
The one situation about David Platt that stands out to me was when he presented his trip to the UAE as a life-and-death risky endeavor. That simply wasn’t true.
http://thouarttheman.org/2013/08/17/630/
LikeLike
Keith,
David Platt is known as a New Calvinist.
Isn’t the “Secret Church” being referred to YRR who are Stealth or Covert New Calvinist Pastors going into unsuspecting Non-Calvinist churches for the sole purpose of indoctrinating the congregation into Calvinism while of staying within the boundaries of TULIP, while keeping their Doctrine a mystery?
LikeLike
BB.
“The man who hates and divorces his wife,” says the Lord, the God of Israel, “does violence to the one he should protect,”[a] says the Lord Almighty.
So be on your guard, and do not be unfaithful. Malachi 2:16 NIV
Or you might prefer .Malachi 2:16 “I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel, “because the man who divorces his wife covers his garment with violence,”
There is more to this verse than many quote. They stop at “God hates divorce”. God divorced Israel more than once.
Do you believe that a spouse that is harsh with or abuses his wife is showing much fruit of repentance? The person who does not listen and does not repent IS to be treated as an unbeliever. How do you think pagans and tax collectors were treated? Beyond that, Matthew 18 is not recommended by anyone reputable in the knowledge of abuse as a means of coming to the truth. Abusers are crafty and hide their bad deeds when people outside the household are around. My daughters would tell you that the X liked everyone who came to our house EXCEPT for those who lived there.
Often the abused wind up looking like they are crazy which plays into the abusers hands. They are so confused from manipulation, control, lies, assaults etc. they don’t know what is real and what is not. They are peace fakers. Making all think that everything is just fine. They have done all they can for so long to do more, be better and all of the other nonsense that the church will tell them to do, that I was told to do. If only you would make better pancakes, he wouldn’t scream at you, throw things at you or slam you up against the wall. Abuse is talked about throughout the Bible. It may not be called by that word in every instance, but it is there.
I will from now on believe: God did not intend for marriage to end this way, but he cares more about the people in the marriage, their overall well being and the sin that caused the divorce.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ed, regarding Matthew 5, given that “put away” and “divorce” are used in the same context, I’m going with the historic position. Again, Malachi 2 makes very clear that God hates divorce because He put that marriage together–presumably even if it becomes a living Hell. It’s worth noting as well that Moses allowed divorce in the case of an uncleanness being found–some interpret that as “undisclosed sexual sin.”
So count me as profoundly disagreeing with you there.
And “no witness” on Matthew 18? Well, being the son of a woman who was abused, suffice it to say that had things come to the church elders where we were, there would have been witnesses, starting with my brother and I. Bruises are pretty darned hard to hide from your own kids, especially if they watched them being inflicted, as we did.
Plus, my dad more or less admitted that he felt it was his right to “discipline” my mom. Sorry, but his spiritual error demanded the processes of church discipline, and knowing what I know, the evidence would have come out. The question is whether my dad would have repented.
Again, in this case, I simply disagree with at least two contentions made by the source referenced; that God is OK with divorce (again, Malachi 2 refutes this), and that an abuser ought to automatically be treated as an unbeliever. Lots of problems with that one, starting with the implications of 1 Peter 3:7.
LikeLike
Regarding (I think Bike Bubba wrote this?)
You know how I said on Page 1 Jesus Christ himself is one of the only small threads that keeps me holding on to the faith?
No offense to whomever wrote the above, but that is one thing of many that drives me away from the faith. The endless jumping thru hoops to judge and calibrate every single life choice by “what the Bible says,” and most Christians cannot even agree on “what the Bible says” on many an issue.
Since I no longer over analyze the biblical text or am hyper concerned with following rules or pleasing God, life becomes ten times easier, simpler, and more enjoyable.
In other words, if I get married, and my spouse is abusive, I don’t have a problem divorcing him. I won’t bother trying to justify my choice by appealing to the Bible, I will just be out of there.
(continued in next post)
LikeLiked by 2 people
(continued)
It’s rather like all the years I was a total Christian and had depression and anxiety attacks, I had or read other Christians say that seeing a doctor or taking anti depressants was wrong, an affront to God, or was sinful.
IAfter trying to deal with depression without medicaitons and doctors, and just tough it alone with Jesus, prayer, and my Bible (as many Christians advised me to do because that was the “biblical” way of handling it, they said), I said phooey on that and wanted results – real actual results. .
Which I got when I read books by psychologists that helped release me from the depression. The prayer, reading the Bible, having faith for healing, did not work.
I also realize my life is my life to live. I am not beholden to other people’s values or beliefs. So, if I get married to a guy who is a chump, I have no problem divorcing the guy.
Other than being shunned by overly judgmental Christians / churches should I divorce a guy, I see no penalty to it. I see lots of believers divorce, and God does not strike them with lightning or anything.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ed,
I am not disputing what you said, although I believe there is more to it.
Under Jewish law in the OT there were too types of divorce. The names of them fail me now but are in Barbara Roberts book. One was for any cause (the hardness of their hearts, she burnt the toast, she gained a few pounds etc…) and the second was for cause. As in the case of the slave wife (abused wife in today’s world) the woman was given a divorce if the man refused to care for her needs including food, shelter, clothing and sex or generally mistreating her.
When the Pharisees asked about divorce for any cause that is what they were referring to. Jesus didn’t get into a huge dialogue about the causes that were allowed for divorce. The Pharisees asked one question to tempt Jesus. He didn’t fall for it. He told them what he thought of them for divorce without real cause.
I’m sure that there will be some who call me a legalist for bringing up the OT, but God gave us the entire Bible for a reason. To get to know Him better throughout all covenants and for all time. I do not see anywhere where God aligns marriage with being a martyr.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Marsha, agreed that someone can repent anywhere; my point is simply that Matthew 5 and 1 Cor. 7 appear to lay out Biblical and un-Biblical reasons for divorce, and I would contend that the likelihood of repentance (and coming to or continuing in Biblical faith) is lower if the process of church discipline is engaged in un-Biblically.
Protect the victims? You bet. But let’s not create a new set of them as we protect the first victims if we can avoid it.
LikeLike
Bike Bubba,
I Totally disagree with you Bike Bubba. Part of that “historical context” is out of whack, because Orthodox is wrong.
IF divorce is a sin, then God would not have allowed it in the Law of Moses.
The Law of Moses defines sin (Romans 3, Romans 7, 1 John 3:4).
And, I re-iterate that Putting Away is NOT the same as divorce.
Both were mentioned in ONE verse in Matthew. A put away wife married a divorced man.
Orthodox is wrong.
And, if a spouse is beat up, she needs to dial 911 first and foremost. I don’t know why you are so afraid of three numbers.
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE Bike Bubba JANUARY 12, 2015 @ 2:48 PM
Why does a divorce have to be “biblical.” Why can’t one or both partners in a marriage realize the marriage is not working, for whatever reason, and divorce?
LikeLike
RE chapmaned24 JANUARY 12, 2015 @ 2:49 PM
As I mentioned above, didn’t God divorce the nation of Israel for a time, in the OT?
If it’s okay for God to divorce his covenant people, why can’t married couples today divorce, especially if there is abuse?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mark,
Agree. I wish it had not taken her 40 years. A person can only use their upbringing as an excuse for so long. There is help available if you want to look at yourself in the mirror. I had a very abusive childhood. I did not grow up to abuse my children or anyone else.
LikeLike
Missdaisyflower,
Yes, God did divorce the children of Israel for a time. If divorce is a sin, then God sinned.
But, Bike Bubba, as well as those who are against divorce is all about the rules; forget about emotions, that’s not important, huh? What’s love got to do with it?
The Catholics invented this no divorce policy, and very successfully pawned it off onto the reformed folks.
Ed
LikeLike
Keith Blankenship
JANUARY 12, 2015 @ 2:16 PM
Has anyone heard of David Platt and something called “Secret Church”?
Mark
JANUARY 12, 2015 @ 2:30 PM
Keith,
David Platt is known as a New Calvinist.
Isn’t the “Secret Church” being referred to YRR who are Stealth or Covert New Calvinist Pastors going into unsuspecting Non-Calvinist churches for the sole purpose of indoctrinating the congregation into Calvinism while of staying within the boundaries of TULIP, while keeping their Doctrine a mystery?
Nobody forgot about you Keith
LikeLike
Keith,
David Platt, “Radical”. “Secret Church”—No.
LikeLike
BB,
I have already come to realize that you have a certain way of looking at things and no amount of showing you a different perspective will turn you from your way of thinking. It took me a long time to change my own views. It did not happen over night or without a great deal of study and prayer. You have tunnel vision when it comes to Malachi 2:16.
As for you being a witness to your mother’s abuse, what about those who do not have a child old enough to give their account. What about those without children or small children who will tell authorities that they fell down the stairs rather than risk the wrath they will find at home? Many have been sent back into abusive situations by church leadership and the next time it cost them their lives. Abusers switch up their tactics when one thing doesn’t work. I do not for one moment believe that is what God requires from either spouse and feel that a church leader that would put a person in harm’s way by making that requirement is just as guilty of murder as the abusive spouse.
LikeLiked by 3 people
According to the Creation order theology, mankind is greater than the animals and meant to rule over them because mankind was the crowning glory of God’s creation. Mankind being the final exclamation point on all his creative workings.
Following this logic, since Eve was the absolute last creature to be formed, she and all women after her) is by the very nature of the Creation order, the rightful authority over Adam and all men. The reason the serpent chose to deceive Eve (and not Adam) is because Eve had authority over Adam. She told him to eat of the apple and he obeyed.
The curse reversed the creation order, but Jesus has restored it and now women should not only be equal to men, but in authority over them in every way….marriage, church, and even in secular society. In order to be faithful to God’s original creation, restored in Christ, Men are to obey and be submissive to their wives and to men in general.
LikeLike
Daisy, you said. I also realize my life is my life to live. I am not beholden to other people’s values or beliefs.
The only one that I wanted to please was God, not man. I didn’t ask the church if I could separate or divorce the X. I feel better now than I have in my entire life. The Bible is still my primary reference point, but do not take a fragment of it and make it law. There is a lot of good stuff in those pages and no lightning struck me dead when I walked out of the court house that day. I did walk out and took at a life ahead free from abuse.
If people would stop and think about it, divorce is not the end all of end alls. If there was real repentance after divorce, people could remarry. There is nothing stopping that other from happening except in my case the X continued with the abuse after separation. I’m done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ed,
You wrote: “The Catholics invented this no divorce policy, and very successfully pawned it off onto the reformed folks.”
Just a note: Divorce, no, but Catholics have 11 valid reasons for annulment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anon2,
I am interested in what the 11 are. How does that go with state law where annulments are not always allowed?
LikeLike
“I can’t edit my comments, but with that post I see you are in the no divorce ever camp Dustin. So, in my opinion, that reeks of control issues. What it really means is “I can treat my spouse as badly as I want and you are stuck with me.” So, your views really are no different.”
Well, I personally don’t feel that divorce is necessary in light of the transformative power of the gospel. From how I read scripture, I think this is what is borne out. That being said many good people disagree with me, and so I have grace and understanding and compassion for anyone who feels that things like sexual infidelity and abandonment are legitimate reasons. That means if someone divorces because their spouse cheats on them, I may not agree with that they have done, but I would not lay sin at their doorstep and judge them as having sinned in this respect.
Also, I’m sorry you feel this means that my viewpoint is in some way enslaving and licence to treat one’s spouse as dirt. In other places on this blog I have advocated and in fact championed the necessity to get out from an abusive relationship and get separated and have spoken of the failure of the Church to provide teaching and emotional and financial support for those who may be in abusive relationships. I’m not advocating stay in the same house and take it- not at all. I’m saying get the hell out of there, and run to friends and family and run to the Church who ought to be providing shelter and comfort and support against those who claim to love you and yet are acting evily towards you.
LikeLike
I forgot to put a bookmark at the last comment I read. I’m in trouble now.
LikeLike
And Ed- I did write that article and stand by it. I look at verses like the first 4 of Ephesians 2, and the man who was forgiven much debt and then refused to forgive the debt owed him, and I think that “I am to love my spouse like Christ loved the Church- like he loves me.
He found me when I was sinful and prideful and rebellious and at war with him, and he saved me and he calmed my raging soul and gave me a heart of flesh.
I didn’t deserve that. I deserved his wrath and anger at having repeatedly, over and over and over and over again repudiating him and spitting in his face. I can’t fathom why he saved me. Who am I? I’m just a guy that hated him and lived far from him. Yet for some reason, despite my insolence he loved me.
And so I wrote that as one who has been on the receiving end of those pains and heartaches- of those betrayals and gut-wrenching hurt, and I think “This is what I did to Christ, and yet he still loves me and calls me. I hurt him a million times more than I feel hurt right now, and he still loves me and drew me to him and adopted me as his son. ”
In light of my own foolish and awful actions towards my Lord, both pre-salvation and post salvation, how can I not forgive? How can I not continue to pray and wish for the best, and hope that Jesus redeems and transforms my spouse? I may have to get out of there for a time- months or years. I have to be safe away from him/her for my own sanity and my own self-perseverance…but that doesn’t mean that I don’t stop praying for them as a lost soul who needs to be found, like I was. Or that I don’t forgive them, like I was forgiven. Or try to lay aside bitterness and betrayal, like Christ separated my sins from the east to the west.
I get that not everyone will agree, but that’s how I look at things. Hoping for the best, from a safe vantage point if necessary
LikeLike
dustin,
Isn’t that way of thinking enabling the abuser. If they know that divorce will not be permitted, what gives them incentive for change. I know you said that you wouldn’t consider it sin. Most abusers do not ever change. It is a very small amount that do. It is only through the healing power of Christ that it happens and most don’t feel the need for salvation or to change their ways with their families. Why would a believing spouse be doomed to a life attached to such a person? You advocate separation from such a person, but would not want to see a divorce. I don’t understand that.
I know a lot of folks who don’t have a problem with divorce, but remarriage is criminal. I don’t agree with that either. The abusive spouse has broken every part of the covenant they agreed to. One person cannot make a marriage work all on their own. Living apart is not a marriage, it is two people who have a piece of paper.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Isn’t that way of thinking enabling the abuser. If they know that divorce will not be permitted, what gives them incentive for change. I know you said that you wouldn’t consider it sin. Most abusers do not ever change. It is a very small amount that do. It is only through the healing power of Christ that it happens and most don’t feel the need for salvation or to change their ways with their families. Why would a believing spouse be doomed to a life attached to such a person? You advocate separation from such a person, but would not want to see a divorce. I don’t understand that.
I know a lot of folks who don’t have a problem with divorce, but remarriage is criminal. I don’t agree with that either. The abusive spouse has broken every part of the covenant they agreed to. One person cannot make a marriage work all on their own. Living apart is not a marriage, it is two people who have a piece of paper.”
This is some good pushback with some challenging things here. I’ll respond a bit later [still at work, snuck off for a minute!”] If I can ask a question real quick though- in your view, if two people divorced for “irreconcilable differences”- that is not abusive, but fought over money raising kids, stuff, etc, would remarriage for either of them to other people be permissible?
LikeLike
dustin,
I think it is much easier for a person to feel the way you do that has no experience with abuse. I pray for X and for all who have not found Christ to soften their hearts and allow Him in, but I am not and will not ever be married to him again. He has shown that he will not repent. He doesn’t want to. I can and have forgiven him, but that is for my heart not for him as he feels he has nothing to be forgiven for. I will not retaliate against him. I also will not allow him near me.
LikeLike
I wrote a little bit on no fault divorce, Dustin, although it’s in the context of asking people to consider how they view same sex marriage. Still, it might help a bit. Or not. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, and I realize these things are all hi-jacky of this thread, but as it pertains to Robert- I think it’s pretty clear to everyone here what is happening. Plus If Robert stuck around and kept on talking, I don’t think it would take long for more sketchiness and manipulative behavior to come to the surface. If pressed, I think even the most jaded of us would be alarmed at the extent of his abusive behavior
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t believe in divorce for irreconcilable differences. There are no such things. There is help to handle these types of situations and can be worked out. These are normal, marriage is hard relationship issues. I would still not judge someone if they did divorce and remarry for these reasons. It is between them and God. Abuse is a totally different issue. I don’t believe divorce is necessary in everyday marriage issues.
LikeLike
Tim,
I can’t seem to get into your piece on no fault divorce.
LikeLike
“….It goes further back than that, with Rushdoony. I’ve written quite a lot about it (see Patriarchy in sidebar category) and Rushdoony, Reconstructionism, Doug Phillips, Bill Gothard. Interesting that you linked to a post by HSLDA. HSLDA has been long-time proponents of patriarchy although they are trying really hard to say they aren’t. I was a member of HSLDA, heard them speak in conferences for years and you better believe they pushed Patriarchy. Now with the downfall of Phillips and Gothard, Michael Farris has tried to clarify his stance. But the reality is he has written words recorded from years ago that prove otherwise.” – J.A.
@Julie Anne,
Thanks for explaining the history behind American patriarchy in the Christian evangelical church. It’s a repugnant, un-Christian mindset that has no place in the Christian church. No wonder the church is such a big turnoff for unbelievers; and that so many children raised in these families leave the faith and are turned off by it. Patriarchy is an anti-Gospel.
I never knew such a thing existed when I came to Christ ten year thirteen years ago.
And I will never step foot in one of these bizarre churches again that espouses it.
Because it’s a “red flag” that they are going to have a ton of other problems too (immaturity, control issues, rage, anger, boundary problems, domestic violence, child abuse, secrecy, inability to have adult, open, honest conversations).
I love Jesus. And Him I will not abandon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t think so, Biblically, if it’s just a couple who have fallen apart in their marriage. The important distinction is abuse.
LikeLike
Dustin,
How does God deal with abusers?
LikeLike
Never mind Tim. I found it. What a dilemma! In my line of work, we have gay clients and heterosexuals that divorce. It is all business as usual. We help them all with respect and dignity. I believe that is what Jesus would want us to do. We work like we are working for Him. If anyone ever asked me how I felt about it, I would have to be honest with my faith and beliefs. I’ve been there for 17 years. No one has ever asked. We do have Christian radio playing in our office and have had people ask us questions from that. We answer when asked.
LikeLiked by 2 people
elovesc34 – “Feel free to ban me.”
I love how you assume that you’ll be banned. Nah. We’ll let you hang around and enjoy our feminist wiley ways.
LikeLike
@ Bubba:
What I think is making folks tick about the Matthew 18 thing, is that most pastors do not understand the dynamics of abuse and how abusers behave. The key thing is that most abusers put on huge fake shows of repentance in an attempt to hoodwink everyone around them. (Though if you lived with an abusive parent you may already know this.) So I guess I can see what you’re saying about the technicalities of Matthew 18, but it will backfire BIG TIME if the pastors believe the abuser’s initial show of fake repentance and then stop the proceedings. Which, from what I have read, is what happens in many (most?) cases in conservative evangelical churches. It seems that pastors in those churches refuse to educate themselves about domestic abuse/violence, because 1) they perceive it as something that would allow the divorce rate to rise and thus (supposedly) threaten the institution of marriage – I would think it would be more threatening to the institution of marriage to allow travesties of marriage (i.e. abusive marriages) to continue with church support but hey, what do I know; and 2) they see the purveyors of correct information about abuse/abusers as “evil secular psychologists” and thus preemptively write off everything they say.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brenda R
JANUARY 12, 2015 @ 2:53 PM
Mark,
Agree.I wish it had not taken her 40 years. A person can only use their upbringing as an excuse for so long. There is help available if you want to look at yourself in the mirror. I had a very abusive childhood. I did not grow up to abuse my children or anyone else.
Hi Brenda,
I don’t think he really took the time to consider his background to be harsh and abusive, to him I think he thought his aggressive and combative upbringing was a normal thing being a middle child of mostly boys, among a family of 14, in a rural environment.
He has taken depression drugs but again he embraces an aggressiveness that ignites an uncontrollable temper, that camouflages his Christianity. He knows he has a problem and that he is not well in the mind. His former wife on the other hand had a much gentler spirit.
He is trapped, going back and forth blaming others for intervening and then other times he accepts responsibility for driving the love of his life away, then other times he refers her to being rebellious for divorcing him.
Pretty Sad.
LikeLike
@ Bubba:
This sounds like minimizing verbal abuse – i.e. hands off, we don’t have to do anything, God’s hindering his prayers so we don’t have to worry about it.
Also “revilers” are included in a pretty big list of no-nos in 1 Cor. 5. The Greek word for “reviler” there is loidoros and it’s translated in lexicons as “railing, abusive.” So I strongly object to the idea that prayer hindrance is the only penalty for verbal abuse, because it’s clear from 1 Cor. 5 that it reaches a level that warrants church discipline. There’s no magic exemption there for spouse revilers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bike Bubba said:
BB, please have a listen to this. Barbara Roberts deals specifically with the “God hates divorce” passage in this video. She has done extensive research on it.
LikeLike
Julie Anne responded to a question:
” This is some good pushback with some challenging things here. I’ll respond a bit later [still at work, snuck off for a minute!”] If I can ask a question real quick though- in your view, if two people divorced for “irreconcilable differences”- that is not abusive, but fought over money raising kids, stuff, etc, would remarriage for either of them to other people be permissible?”
For which she responded:
“I don’t think so, Biblically, if it’s just a couple who have fallen apart in their marriage. The important distinction is abuse.”
Julie Anne,
I disagree. Anyone that is divorced can be remarried. This is where the Catholics are in HUGE error by telling people that if they are divorced and remarry, they cannot be in the church, because they are willingly committing adultery, as per Bike Bubba’s interpretation that “putting away” is equated to “divorce”.
It isn’t equated. They are different. Adultery is as a result of “putting away”. Adultery is not a result of divorce. So, divorced people can indeed remarry. But, the Catholics forbid it, thinking that it is the sin of adultery. I say a huge HOGWASH to that concept.
That, to me, is “biblically”.
Ed
LikeLike
Bike Bubba said:
“It’s worth noting as well that Moses allowed divorce in the case of an uncleanness being found–some interpret that as “undisclosed sexual sin.””
My response:
Is that all? First, it might be noted that I didn’t just use Matthew 5. I also included chapter 19 as well. There is also Luke 16:18 which states:
“18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
And Mark 10:11
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
The above is “PUT AWAY” causing adultery.
The following pertains to DIVORCE, WITHOUT THE TERM “PUT AWAY”, which does NOT cause adultery. It plainly states, divorce. No wording of put away is even noted. No wording of adultery is used as a result of divorce.
Deuteronomy 24:1-4
24 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.
3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;
4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
***********Notice that a divorced woman can indeed remarry. Then if the NEW husband HATES HER, she can get ANOTHER divorce. Again, even in that, she can REMARRY. There is NO RESTRICTIONS on getting remarried. In the above scenario, the wife is twice divorced, and one divorce is JUST BECAUSE THE HUSBAND HATED HER. And guess what, Bubba…..NO ADULTERY GOING ON!
Besides, what is the penalty for adultery? DEATH.
So where “IN GOD’S NAME (PUN INTENDED) do Christians come up with all these crazy rules about divorce is not allowed stuff? It’s not a sin to get one. My goodness.
__________________________________________
NOW, lets look at the term PUT AWAY!
Leviticus 21:7
They shall not take a wife that is a whore, or profane; neither shall they take a woman put away from her husband: for he is holy unto his God.
____________________________________________
This clearly shows that a woman that is PUT AWAY cannot be taken as a wife, because she belongs to her husband.
___________________________________________
Put away and divorce is not the same. A divorced woman can remarry, a put away woman cannot, because she is not divorced.
Here is another example:
Put away, not divorce
Jeremiah 3:1
They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man’s, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the Lord.
1 Corinthians 7:11
But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
Isaiah 50:1
Thus saith the Lord, Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.
_____________________________________
Put away AND divorce
Jeremiah 3:8
And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
See the difference between “put away” and “divorce”, and note that there is no adultery going on in a divorce, and no death sentence stemming from adultery.
Putting away causes adultery, because she is still married, until divorced, and divorce does not cause adultery.
And, the word divorce is not even mentioned in 1 Corinthians 7, but the term, “PUT AWAY IS.
I stand by that.
Ed
LikeLiked by 2 people
Christianagnostic
You had said:
“According to the Creation order theology”
I do not buy into the Creation order theology. I believe that both Adam and Eve was created at the same time that you and I were in Genesis chapter 1.
Formation of the body is different than the creation of the spirit. Chapter 2 deals with formation, whereas chapter 1 is about creation.
1. (CREATION) Order of events in Chapter 1=animals BEFORE Adam
2. (FORMATION) Order of events in Chapter 2=animals AFTER Adam
Huge difference. So, I do not buy into any theology which states that women are inferior to men.
Ed
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dustin,
Wow. What a response to me. I do need to say that your response was complete apples to oranges to the topic that I was discussing. You had the typical Reform wording of the “woe is me, I’m unworthy” blah blah. That isn’t the topic that I was discussing.
Ed
LikeLike
Hester,
they perceive it as something that would allow the divorce rate to rise and thus (supposedly) threaten the institution of marriage
Exactly!! The pastor at the church I attend went so far as to say in sermon that he wasn’t going to speak on abuse and divorce because he didn’t want to get anything started. Happily married people, even those with differences that can be managed are not going to make up being abused to get out of the marriage. When I went to him for counsel, he did say that he would counsel us jointly which is not recommended by anyone who knows anything about abuse whatsoever. It was the last time I spoke with him about the matter until I said I had left. The X came in during a service and threw papers on my lap. The elder that saw it started to see the real him at that point.
I was already a member at that church and X had asked for membership. The night the elders were to meet with him at a local restaurant to talk about it, both of them forgot and X sat there and waited with no one else showing up. Devine intervention?? I believe so. This was just a few weeks before I left. By that time, I didn’t care who thought what. My only audience was God and I did not feel that he minded at all. Everything fell into place very fast. I had an apartment, people to move me, I already had a job. I was rescued, as I pray Amanda will be.
The counselor that I saw was a Christian and a member of a Baptist church in my county whose pastor believes in divorce for abuse and sees no problem with the target being married again with wise counsel. I felt God’s leading through every step out of the pit I was in.
LikeLike
Mark,
to him I think he thought his aggressive and combative upbringing was a normal thing
It is sad. I can’t imagine how his mind works. All we can do is pray for him and those like him. The X goes back and forth between he was wrong and then blame shifts and says that I am the devil and if you shaved my daughters head there would be a 666 marking. Those are new references since I left added to the old.
What people don’t realize is that sometimes the most loving thing that you can do is not allow your spouse to abuse you any longer and commit further sin. In many cases if the abusing spouse would seek help, repent and make amends there are targets that would go back. Some go back too quickly and it doesn’t work, but many still love there spouses even with all they have been through, but it is not safe for them to stay.
LikeLike
to him I think he thought his aggressive and combative upbringing was a normal thing
Hester, Yes, to all that you just said. Thank you for so eloquently explaining that reviling is verbal abuse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Julie Anne, I had forgotten about this video with Barbara Roberts. I hope Robert and Amanda watch it as well.
LikeLike
@BTDT:
I figure a lot of MRAs are guys who got burned BAD in a divorce or breakup and have gone on a Revenge Binge against anything female. Either that or they can’t refuse Captain Bonerhelment’s orders. Or (like the Santa Barbara Shooter, who left behind a Manifesto and thousands of Selfies), they’re singing this theme song into the mirror and fly into a rage when nobody else sings along:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YUXIKrOFk
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ok, Ed, your put away vs divorce is challenging my understanding of divorce/remarriage. I’m going to have to do more research on this (after I get my degree). 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daisy; the reason a Christian ought to adhere, as much as is possible, to what the Bible says is that God’s Word is God’s instruction manual. As I’ve noted above, bad things happen, spiritually speaking, when you ignore it, and as a rule, ignoring God’s Word because you think it’s more “loving” is actually the least loving thing you can do.
Brenda, the simple fact with regards to your source is that they’re in direct contradiction to at least a few things that Scripture actually says. God hates divorce, period, because marriage is a picture of Christ’s love for the church. There is one sin in the Bible that clearly indicates a person is outside of Christ–and that is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, not spousal abuse. God gave us ordinary processes for rebuke and correction that we ignore at our peril–if we ignore them, the issue becomes the process and not the sin being dealt with.
Which is really one of the big reasons a lot of us are here, no; there was a dispute at a former church where leaders ignored Biblical processes, and many of us have been hurt by that. Let’s make sure as we recover that we don’t repeat the mistake.
LikeLike
BB,
Your quote:
“the simple fact with regards to your source is that they’re in direct contradiction to at least a few things that Scripture actually says. God hates divorce, period”
My source, as you call her, is not the only person in the world who feels this way. If you watched the video that Julie Anne added she explains why the “God hates divorce” premise is not completely accurate and is only part of the scripture in Malachi 2:16. There are many other people, preachers and theologians included that would firmly disagree with your opinion. I have no problem with agreeing to disagree, but disagree, I do. I don’t pretend to have all of the answers, but I am not going to put an adamant “period” on the end of anything that God feels or has decided. I am not God, nor do I pretend to know everything about Him. It would take an entire lifetime and I would not have the capacity to know all. Some things are simply a mystery, known only to Him, the Creator, Lord of Lords etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BB, you can’t be serious! I would hope that Brenda’s marriage was not a picture of God’s love for the church!!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Julie Anne, maybe I’m too simplistic here, but when God uses the example of infidelilty to characterize Israel’s idolatry throughout the Torah, history, and Prophets, and closes the Prophets with the clear statement about hating divorce, I take Him at His Word. When Christ says that divorce was allowed in the Torah because hearts were hard, I take that as another sign that God hates divorce. Marriage is a picture of God’s love for us–a love that (see the Prophets again, think of the Cross) suffered more than we can ever imagine.
Sometimes divorce is an ugly necessity, but it’s still repulsive in God’s eyes. And if the source gets this wrong, and it does, I need go no further.
And regarding Hester’s comment about 1 Peter 3:7, I think this person is missing the point. God is saying through Peter that He does not listen to the prayers of a man who does not treat his wife well. Should that not terrify any real believer?
LikeLike
BB,
I do not believe that abusers are true believers. They are mostly calculating, selfish, controlling individuals. (As Mark pointed out some are emotionally disturbed in some way.) They have not accepted Christ. If they had, they could not do these things to another human being. Have you researched this at all? Have you dug down into the original language? I personally have tried to keep up with the writers with these views and can see the validation. Those who are abusers is spoken of in the Bible and we are told to stay away from them. I don’t believe this leaves out the ones we are unfortunately married to.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BB- you said
Brenda, the simple fact with regards to your source is that they’re in direct contradiction to at least a few things that Scripture actually says. God hates divorce, period, because marriage is a picture of Christ’s love for the church.
And what if it’s not? MAybe if we turned that phrase around, it would make more of an impact. What if we said Christ’s love for the church is the picture of marriage? Most people I know who aren’t christian have heard this saying, and they tell me ‘if marriage represents Christ and the Church, they want nothing to do with either.” Why? Because they see abuse, addiction, people getting away with terrible things, affairs, and all sorts of other horrors in marriages. Please tell me again how a spouse beating on another spouse, or one spouse putting the family in a precarious financial situation due to continued addiction, or a spouse molesting their child represents Christ and the church?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bike Bubba –
“the reason a Christian ought to adhere, as much as is possible, to what the Bible says is that God’s Word is God’s instruction manual.”
Jesus is God’s Word.
Looking at scripture as an instruction manual is problematic. Isn’t that what the Jews and Pharisees did with scripture?
“Brenda, the simple fact with regards to your source is that they’re in direct contradiction to at least a few things that Scripture actually says. God hates divorce, period, because marriage is a picture of Christ’s love for the church.”
Scripture, at times, seems to be in contradiction with itself when we read it closely. It isn’t simple. Just like above where you take scripture out of context from two entirely different writings in scripture and meld them together as to why you believe God hates divorce. Christ’s love for the church is the picture for how marriage should look. Our marriages aren’t the picture.
“There is one sin in the Bible that clearly indicates a person is outside of Christ–and that is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, not spousal abuse. God gave us ordinary processes for rebuke and correction that we ignore at our peril–if we ignore them, the issue becomes the process and not the sin being dealt with.”
If the person refuses to repent (change thejr behavior) and continues to sin we are to put them out of the church and treat them as an unbeliever – divorce them?
“Which is really one of the big reasons a lot of us are here, no; there was a dispute at a former church where leaders ignored Biblical processes, and many of us have been hurt by that. Let’s make sure as we recover that we don’t repeat the mistake.”
Our church fell apart as the leaders refused to let people speak or answer member’s questions. They felt that the congregants should just follow along without discussion about the “repeated” issues that had arisen in several different go rounds of elder groups.
Some food for thought.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Bubba:
Yes. But you seem to be saying that that’s where it stops. Do you not accept that repeated verbal abuse is grounds for church discipline? Because Paul clearly puts it in that category. It’s put side by side with drunkenness and financial swindling. I’m sure you would advocate church discipline for those. If you don’t support church discipline for verbal abuse, why not?
As for Malachi, have you actually examined the translation issue in that verse? There are at least three Bible translations that disagree with your reading of God hating divorce there. You can’t just say “the English says” and leave it there because that verse was originally written in Hebrew, and there are legitimate Hebrew scholars who disagree with your reading. It’s not 100% conclusive but it is a valid point of view that has a basis in Hebrew. It’s not “out there” or made up by evil ______ [insert scary group name here].
In any case Rabbinic experts have demonstrated that abuse and neglect were universally grounds for divorce and remarriage in ancient Judaism (this was derived from the Torah, and those rabbis were certainly familiar with Malachi too) and that Jesus never disagreed with that position in the Gospels. Clearly divorce was not the outcome anyone wanted, but there were certain circumstances where it was necessitated.
Do you support divorce and remarriage for someone who has been physically abused by their spouse? And do you think the police should be called before church officials or after?
And yes, seconding the question of how an abusive marriage pictures Christ and the church.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I could care less if a wife wants to submit to her husband, I really don’t, the teachings of Alexanders along with CM in my opinion are nothing but ways to be control another person’s way of thinking and living, they all advocate if there is some (abuse) going on, seek out a elder, now in my world, if a woman even gets one hand laid on her for being rebellious, I would tell her to get thyself to a cop, and have his behind tossed in jail. I am sure God would say that was the right thing to do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think God hates the hardened heart more than the divorce. Think about it – if a divorce protects a woman and her children against further harm, do you think God would hate divorce? No, he hates the sin of the abuser. That is the common theme throughout scripture. We also see God caring for the oppressed in Scripture, so it makes absolutely no sense why God would force an abused woman to remain in oppression.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Brenda; I would agree that manyabusers are not believers, and that many of them will end up excluded from the church after a Matthew 18 process. That said, God gave us this process, which assumes that a person is a believer and is concerned about his spiritual welfare until he proves otherwise. Your resource does the opposite.
Really, basic, unforced error that any Lutheran (which appears to be the faith of the people involved) ought to avoid. If it appears that an author of the Psalms killed a man to take his wife, and that the author of Proverbs grossly violated the Torah’s prohibitions of idolatry, multiple wives, and accumulating gold of horses, I have to assume that Christians can commit some pretty nasty sins. That is the reason, after all, that Paul writes to churches urging them to take action regarding those nasty sins.
Or, put in some stark Lutheran terms, would not Luther’s castigation of the Jews qualify in many peoples’ minds as abuse? It certainly would in my mind. Do we then treat Luther as an unbeliever?
Bridget; actually, the error of the Pharisees was primarily in substituting traditions for the Law itself, not in excessive adherence to the written Torah. If they’d adhered excessively to the Torah, you wouldn’t hear about divorce for burning the toast, as the old saw goes, but rather about how unspiritual it was that some used the Torah to justify divorce on weak grounds.
Hester; you are confusing the brevity necessitated by this forum with not caring. Does not the very Matthew 18 process in light of a man’s prayers not being heard demand that church leaders require evidence of repentance on a man’s part before he is allowed to take full part in church life?
As I’ve noted many times before, I concede fully that most people haven’t seen church discipline working well. That is a nasty blot on our records. However, that doesn’t mean we should not try, and I personally know people who have been injured more by a lack of proper church discipline than they were actually hurt by the sins involved.
Or, to draw a picture, if we decide that God’s Word does not matter in how we resolve our differences and decide to go our own way, don’t be surprised when those involved in those differences decide to go their own way, too.
LikeLike
Julie, sin is sin, period. There are cases where it is regrettably necessary, but it’s still repulsive. And as I’ve noted elsewhere, marriage is a picture of God’s love for idolatrous Israel and a sinful church. Hence we ought to both restrain the hurting from a hasty divorce, and also take action to bring the perpetrators to repentance.
And from a purely practical viewpoint, if we bring about a hasty divorce, have we not just ensured that the offender has one less reason to repent?
Really, a lot of times, we assume that our own difficulties are somehow unique and therefore we have the right to handle things our own way. The one who died on the Cross would beg to differ with us on that.
LikeLike
As you say, abusers aren’t christian. So, why on earth would biblical discipline matter to them? They just stop going to the church. Then what?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sorry I have not had the time to read through any of the posts since I last posted, which I may do later and respond.
But after having skimmed down the last several posts here, including Bike Bubba’s, you guys are still making life more difficult than it has to be.
If I get married, and my spouse is an abuser, I am leaving him. I’m not going to sit around twisting my pearls in worry wondering if my leaving is “biblical” or not.
I’m not going to jump through hoops looking for “biblical” reasons or justifications to leave the guy.
Or, even if I marry a guy and just fall out of love, or he refuses to be supportive of me or meet my emotional needs and/or expects me to meet all those needs for him (like with my ex fiancee, Rick, I spoke of earlier), I’d divorce over that and not be concerned if God approves or not, or if the Bible supports it.
When you go through life hyper obsessing on what God thinks, or if the Bible is “okay” with something, you make life far more complicated and burdensome than necessary.
At the end of the day, plenty of Christians divorce, and God does not reprimand those couples. They carry on with their lives and either stay single or get married again. It happens all the time. God is not hurling thunderbolts down at people who divorce regardless of their reasons.
Being “biblical” and trying to be “biblical” did not help me during my years of suffering clinical depression and anxiety. I have no reason to believe that concern over “being biblical” about many other aspects of life are worth my time and effort.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Bike Bubba said,
And what is so horrible about that?
If both people in a relationship decide it’s not working anymore, they’re both adults and have a right to determine how to live their lives.
People who are Non Christian makes these decisions at times. They decide their marriage is not working, for whatever reason, or maybe the Non Christian husband is abusing his Non Christian wife, so she divorces him.
Is this more a concern of keeping up appearances among Christians?
Are you more concerned with your Christian Reputation, in wanting to use the wished for stability of Christian marriage to show that the pagans have marriage all wrong, and if they just believed in Jesus too, they would have great, long lasting marriages?
Christians cannot (as even this thread has shown) agree on when or if a Christian couple may divorce, or under what circumstances. Which means, it seems to me, that each Christian person in a marriage has to determine what is right for him (or her) self.
I don’t want to go through life allowing preacher John Piper (or Mark Driscoll, or whatever other Christian) tell me when or if or how I may marry, divorce, or live my life. Why not allow other people make choices for themselves (rhetorical question)?
Why does everything have to be shoe-horned into “what does the Bible say about topic X.”
– which creates all sorts of problems and doesn’t necessarily solve any problems (like again, with the depression I used to have, the Bible did not help me with that, why would I expect it to help me if I were stuck an in abusive marriage, for example)
But to mention my first point again, people who are not Christian don’t rely on the Bible to make all their life choices, and they are not necessarily worse off for that. Their lives are tooling along just fine, or no worse than most Christians I’ve seen.
I see Christians who profess to believe in the Bible who, in news stories I read, have affairs, lie, cheat, molest kids, steal, and they still divorce.
LikeLiked by 2 people
BB –
“Or, to draw a picture, if we decide that God’s Word does not matter in how we resolve our differences and decide to go our own way . . . ”
Who here is saying that God’s Word doesn’t matter? Almost everyone here is discussing the issue through the lens of scripture.
A question – what would you think a person should do if they suspected child abuse by a church member? Does the person need to walk through the Matt. process with the alleged perp/church member first or report to the appropriate authorities for the safety of the child. It is against the law to abuse a child just as it is against the law to physically harm your spouse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BB,
hasty divorce?????????????????????????????????????? People live in abusive marriages for 20,30,40,50 years. There is nothing hasty about it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bridget quoted Bike Bubba:
Oh brother, as a never-married, middle aged lady, I really get tired of this cliche’.
Marriage alone does not reflect Christ’s love for the church.
The fact is, unMarried adults who accept Jesus as savior ALSO “reflect Christ’s love for the church.”
All believers, regardless of marital status, whether they are never married, divorced, single (as in yet to be married), or widowed are the Bride of Christ too, not just married couples. You don’t have to be married to reflect God’s love for Jesus, or God’s love for the church, or Jesus’ relationship to the church, or whatever spin some Christians put on it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This comment is very revealing. It shows that you really do not understand the abused and how long it takes for them to even realize what they are dealing with because the abuser brainwashes them for so many years. By the time an abuse victim finally gets the courage to leave/divorce, it has likely been many, many years.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Screw going through Matthew in the case of abuse,, you call the cops,, NOW, I have read to many stories of the woman being told,, well just submit more and win him withut a word, that probably will work if your jaw is busted and you cant utter a word anyway
LikeLiked by 3 people
Bridget asked,
I’m the one bringing that point up, back on page 2, and in a post or two above today.
I respect the Bible and am sola scriptura in so far as I remain a Christian at all (I am somewhat of an agnostic now as well).
However, I can no longer understand the obsessive, almost anal retentive nature by some other Christians any more to seek to validate every last life choice on “what the Bible says” or “would God approve of X” or “what is God’s will for my life or in this matter.”
I used to be that way – for years.
I used to be hung up on the “biblical way” of doing things, or thinking in terms of, “would God approve if I did X, Y, or Z,” but I’ve had some paradigm shifts the last couple of years.
It’s fine to a degree, I suppose, to care about what the Bible says, or what does God think about thus and so, but some Christians just go far out there with it to the extreme and make life unnecessarily more difficult than it has to be.
Being biblical doesn’t help at all times in all circumstance anyway, from what I have observed over my life.
Christians cannot agree on the “biblical” way of handling child sex abuse in churches, how to deal with clinical depression, and many other issues, both in doctrinal and practical, daily life matters.
People who are atheists, don’t get bogged down in any of this, they just act and carry on with life.
Biblical, Godly Toast
When I make toast, I do not get sidetracked in to issues like, “is making toast honoring to the Lord,” or “what is the Biblical way of putting the bread in the toaster.”
I just cram the bread in the machine and press the lever, and voila, I have toast. No muss, no fuss, no agonizing, tortured decision-making about it. I like toast, I want to eat toast, so I make some toast.
But preachers John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and 85% of other Christians, would want to pray about what kind of bread to use, debate if making toast is “Christian” to start with, etc. etc. ad nauseum.
Then they would write books about Toast, hold conferences discussing how or if Christians should make toast.
Homeschooling, patriarchal Christians would then demand that all toast be made of bread from home-grown wheat that the wives grow and bake themselves at home.
Kevin Swanson would do a radio show proclaiming all store-bought bread is Satanic and evil.
Tony Miano would scream that Christian women should not be seen in public buying Wonder Bread at the grocery store but should buy it under cover at night while wearing a mask.
Then Julie Anne would have to blog about Toast Abuse in Christian, homeschooling communities.
I’ve lately been leaving that type of insanity behind me and life has been much simpler and pleasurable to live ever since.
——–
To all: yesterday I accidentally hit the “Like” link for some of my own posts.
I was trying to hit other links on the page NOT the “like” link for my posts, but hit that link by mistake. I think I un-hit those links and fixed things, but I may have missed a few.
I just don’t want anyone to run their cursor over my “likes” on each of my posts, see my screen name, and think, “That Daisy lady must think highly of herself, she keeps liking her own posts.” (I’m not doing it on purpose.)
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Bubba:
1. I think it is a big assumption on your part that anyone in this conversation is advocating for hasty divorces. And you still didn’t say whether a physically abused spouse should go to the church or the police first. I would think the police response to a domestic dispute could provide the witnesses needed to get the Matthew 18 process moving. But maybe that’s just me.
2. You really should look into the Malachi translation issues and Rabbinic material I referenced. Even if you don’t agree it will give you a more complete picture of where others are coming from.
3. Is it adultery for someone who has been abused to remarry? I don’t think it is.
4. Jeff Crippen and Barbara Roberts at ACFJ are, I believe, Reformed Baptists and not Lutherans. I’m not sure who wrote the post Brenda referenced above, though, because the site has many contributors. They do frequently recommend LCMS resources though.
5. I’m not completely convinced this is correct:
Obviously BAHS does indicate someone is unsaved, but technically what the Bible says about it, is that it is the only sin that cannot be forgiven, not that it is the only sin that can clearly indicate someone is unsaved. Those aren’t actually the same thing.
(Side tangent: the other problem with BAHS is that no one can clearly define what it even is. Some say it’s repeated and presumptuous lack of repentance and/or repeated rejection of the Gospel. If you go with repeated and presumptuous lack of repentance, then that could mean many (probably most) abusers would definitely qualify for having committed it. That’s just speculation, though; I wouldn’t use that as an actual argument to support any position because BAHS is such a murky thing anyway.)
Paul lists lots of sins that he treats as clear indications someone is unsaved. In fact he decides that the person sleeping with his stepmother in 1 Cor. 5 is worthy of church discipline without ever having met him, let alone cross-examined him. Does that qualify as part of the Matthew 18 process? I’d be interested to hear your take on that.
6. I suppose I can see your technical point about the formalities of the Matthew 18 process, but I suspect that in reality, this really would be nothing more than a formality with the kind of hardened abuser ACFJ and others are talking about. And to make that formality safe(r) for abuse victims, there would have to be A LOT more knowledge base in the American pastorate about abusers’ psychology, because otherwise you will just get more of what you already have: pastors believing the abuser’s showy false repentance, stopping the process, and telling the victim to continue putting up with it and not report it to the police. Another practical problem to be dealt with is exactly how long you wait for the repentance, and whether you tell the victim and any children to stay in the house with this person while waiting for it. I would not support any system that recommended they continue living with the abuser at that point.
Most churches also ignore Romans 13 that says to hand lawbreakers over to the authorities. Battery, sexual assault, child molestation, etc. as you know, are crimes. So are things like coercion and fraud, which I’m sure enter into many cases of financial/medical abuse. Though you seem to have been clear earlier that you think there should be legal consequences for criminal abusers, which is good.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Addendum @ Bubba:
…and what JA and Brenda said about victims often remaining in relationships for decades before they even try to get out and/or realize what is happening. By the time you reach the point where someone is trying to tell the church what is happening, “hasty” is almost always the exact opposite of reality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Julie Anne said,
Very true. Especially with verbal and emotional abuse.
Many women (and men) have been conditioned to think of abuse as only being physical, severely physical, like the husband beating the wife so hard he puts her in the hospital, gives the wife a black eye, etc.
This is one reason it’s so important for women to read books like Boundaries or the other books I recommended. Nobody has a right to mistreat you at all, in anyway. That means if you’re married to a guy who puts you down daily, that is not tolerable. Abuse doesn’t always take the form of broken ribs or black eyes.
From what I’ve read (and experienced myself in my own life) the verbal /emotional abuse starts out slowly, and it may be months or years before you realize it is abuse.
It’s like the story of the frog in the boiling pan of water. If you put the frog in the pan when the water is cold and slowly heat the water, the frog doesn’t notice he’s being boiled.
Women are strongly conditioned in our culture, and ten times more so, in churches (and at that, via things like gender complementarianism), to tolerate a lot of mistreatment from people, especially from men.
So it becomes hard for some women to spot early on when they are on the road to being abused more severely.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Brenda R on January 13, 2015 at 9:56 AM
It seems many people don’t understand the complexities regarding physical abuse. It doesn’t seem to register with most folks that by the time a victim shares their pain with someone else, the abuse has often been going on for years. In the case of children it my have happened years earlier and been repressed for years. In both cases the victim does not share it in an organized, structured, proper (to the Christian community) way. It is messy, painful, often dramatic, unbelieved by others. It needs to be addressed fromt the context of the Beatitudes, not Matthew or worrying about repentance on the part of the perpetrator! In the case of a Christian perp., they have had plenty of time to repent and they should know what God says about their behavior. The Christian and non Christian will have plenty of time to repent while the law of the land is in progress.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Daisy:”I just don’t want anyone to run their cursor over my “likes” on each of my posts, see my screen name, and think, “That Daisy lady must think highly of herself, she keeps liking her own posts.” (I’m not doing it on purpose.)
LOL I did the same thing yesterday!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Daisy; if we believe indeed that God has revealed Himself in His Word, then walking away from the Bible is a serious thing indeed, no?
Julie Anne, I am fully aware that these things can take years to blow up. What I am referring to by “hasty divorce” is a divorce encouraged by counselors before the Matthew 18 process can take place.
Notice that the Scriptures don’t say “follow this procedure only if you’re responding quickly to a sin”. It says to use it.
Now yes, I can be incredulous at some of the excuses I’ve seen for this behavior. Someone has to be told that it’s wrong to give your wife two black eyes? That it’s wrong to be in the strip club, even if you’re handing out tracts? I know men who needed to be told this. In the same way, I remember someone in the Bible who had to be told that it was wrong to kill a woman’s husband in order to take her. That someone, King David, was described as a man after God’s own heart.
Another practical reality is that if one does, as Brenda’s link does, push people to divorce, it becomes harder to deal with abuse, not easier, because you’re asking the victim to walk away from home, friends, relatives and the like.
Bring out God’s method for reproof, and things will get easier as people get the hang of it.
LikeLike
Again, an abuser is probably not a christian, so THEY DON”T CARE ABOUT BIBLICAL DISCIPLINE!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Why does Matthew 18 seem to trump everything else that Jesus says and does? Head bang . . .
LikeLiked by 4 people
No kidding Bridget…what is the victim is married to a true unbeliever? He isn’t going to care what the bible or the church has to say, in fact, it may put the victim in MORE danger.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hester said to Bike Bubba,
For the record, I am not necessarily advocating for “hasty” divorces.
I think Bike Bubba may be assuming that this is the view I hold because I am not as obsessive on finding, or insisting upon, “biblical” reasons for a couple to divorce as he appears to be.
I do think people in a marriage should try to work thing out if they can, by seeing a qualified marriage counselor, for example (for more mundane marriage issues).
For abuse, I’d say there most likely needs to be divorce, regardless of time in the marriage, though, because based on material I’ve read by domestic abuse experts, most of the time, abusive husbands don’t stop abusing (though I did read one article that disputes that).
But the vast majority of stuff I’ve seen says that abusive husbands, even if they go through counseling, don’t stop the abuse. Which means a woman’s only choice, if she wants to be safe and happy, is to divorce the guy.
And I do think personal happiness matters. I don’t agree with Christians who teach that “God wants your holiness more than your happiness” or that “marriage is about making you holy, not happy.” I could go on about that much longer, but on one point, that cliche (and others like it) is used to keep women trapped in abusive marriages.
I also do not recall the Bible stating anywhere that God does not care about our happiness but only in making us holy. I think a lot of Christians read that into the text.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BB –
You never answer the questions about reporting to the police/bringing charges.
PS – Should we let every repentant Christian murderer out of prison because God let David continue as king after he murdered and repented? Is that what you think? That is what you are proposing with your Davidic pleas.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bike Bubba is missing a HUGE point.
The point is:
WHY (Yes, the why word) does God hate divorce?
God is not saying that he forbids divorce, as the way that YOU put it, based on that statement.
I mean, really, dude. I hate divorce. BUT divorce is necessary. Just because God hates divorce does not mean that he forbids divorce.
So, the question is WHY does God hate divorce.
I would “submit” (ooooh, there’s that submit word) that the reason that God hates divorce is DUE TO the reasons that CAUSES one to divorce.
You, however, think that God forbids divorce equates to God hates divorce. I beg to differ with you.
Ed
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bike Bubba talks all about how we are to be adherent to God’s Word, and yet he dismisses WITNESSES in the Matthew 18 process, and adds the word “discipline”.
That is not being adherent to God’s Word.
Ed
LikeLiked by 2 people