You did clarify. I totally disagree... but to be brutally honest, I think we will both be corrected once we get Home. :)
Surgery is on Tuesday, if you pray please pray for steady hands while he gets the nerves pulled out of the scar tissue and pray now, if you will, for steady nerves on my end!
What's next on the discussion list?
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Losing salvation
Yes, I absolutely believe that a real Christian can sin and lose their salvation. By that I do not mean that sins of ignorance lead you there, or even that by simply failing to be perfect (since we can't be perfect, that's where grace comes in) causes one to lose one's salvation.
I am not saying that there is a specific sin that can cause an individual to lose his salvation since I think that the sinning that causes a person to lose his or her salvation is dependant on the individual himself. How that person thinks about himself and his sin. As when Paul says that to eat unclean foods is not a sin unless you eat without being fully convinced in your own mind. Therefore to consciously keep doing something that you fully believe is sinful, or someone who deliberately hurts other people all the time, knowing the hurt he or she is causing - those are things that can cause a person to lose their salvation.
I think there is a deliberate and conscious choice involved in losing one's salvation just as there is a deliberate and conscious choice involved in choosing one's salvation. I don't believe there is a formula involved in either so I can't say precisely what could cause another to lose that salvation. I could say, if I knew a person well, if I thought they were in danger of losing their salvation based on how they live, as when Christians are told to warn each other in brotherly love.
Where maybe I could, theoretically, given what I believe about divorce, divorce my husband without feeling any condemnation, that doesn't mean that it would not be sinful for another person.
In Galatians, Paul says "Be not deceived for God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that he shall also reap. For he that soweth to the flesh shall reap corruption" but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting."
There are a lot of Christians whose lives show nothing of what they claim to believe. Who use the liberty of Christ for license to sin. The above verse shows it isn't a matter of losing some sort of reward in Heaven but of reaping corruption, or spiritual death.
In the parable of the talents, one of those who is given a talent buries it instead of using it to create more wealth. He is like the Christian who, having professed Christ, believes he is always saved, but he is not. He is not living his faith.
As to fear of Hell - some people start at that point and then learn to love God. Others love God first, and what "fear" of God there is comes as they consider the I AM that I AM. There's nothing wrong with a prod of fear as every parent knows although if the fear aspect overrides the mercy aspect, there is a problem.
And you know, it took me a while to realize we were thinking different things when you talk about "rewards" in Heaven, since I have never understood that as anything more than a metaphor. I've never thought about losing or gaining some sort of special, tangible reward in Heaven and I'm still not sure that isn't just a metaphor like the vineyard.
It isn't fear that drives me at all, except in the way that I am sometimes overwhelmed as in "Oh Lord my God, when I in awesome wonder, consider all the worlds thy hands have made...."
As a child, I think I was born with a sense of the divine that never really left me in the sense that I did not have to learn it. I first loved God. Then later, I learned fear because the church that I grew up in, while not given to fire and brimstone sermons, told me that no one could ever know they were saved until they died. I had loved God wholly and unselfconsciously. Now there was fear. For myself, for my family. I couldn't imagine wanting to be in Heaven if anyone I loved was in Hell.
But I never entirely swallowed that no one can ever know line either, because I had the gift of loving God from the time I was born. Without that gift though, I can easily see how people might have been overwhelmed by despair. Me, more or less around the age of six, decided "bullshit." Around fourteen or fifteen I stopped going to church. I am a pretty self-contained person. It wasn't a big "I am turning my back on the church" thing. It just didn't strike me as relevant. God was always in my life.
I think now, that not going to church, probably saved my life. I think it would have worn me down eventually. They would surely have excommunicated me somewhere down the line because I don't think I could have kept my mouth shut forever and I would almost surely have offended the powers-that-be, and the powers-that-be in the church where I grew up are close relatives. *G* Excommunication would have been a big deal in terms of relating to my neighbours and if I had built my house on that sand, I would have no ground under me. Now I am just a fairly run-of-the-mill heathen, I think, in people's eyes. This area isn't so completely suffocatingly Mennonite anymore either, and I can't think of a Mennonite family in which a divorce hasn't happened. But back then...
Don't know if I'm clarifying anything or further confusing the issue? When is your surgery? I'll be praying for you. Next week, probably Wednesday, I'll be leaving on a trip.
Layla
I am not saying that there is a specific sin that can cause an individual to lose his salvation since I think that the sinning that causes a person to lose his or her salvation is dependant on the individual himself. How that person thinks about himself and his sin. As when Paul says that to eat unclean foods is not a sin unless you eat without being fully convinced in your own mind. Therefore to consciously keep doing something that you fully believe is sinful, or someone who deliberately hurts other people all the time, knowing the hurt he or she is causing - those are things that can cause a person to lose their salvation.
I think there is a deliberate and conscious choice involved in losing one's salvation just as there is a deliberate and conscious choice involved in choosing one's salvation. I don't believe there is a formula involved in either so I can't say precisely what could cause another to lose that salvation. I could say, if I knew a person well, if I thought they were in danger of losing their salvation based on how they live, as when Christians are told to warn each other in brotherly love.
Where maybe I could, theoretically, given what I believe about divorce, divorce my husband without feeling any condemnation, that doesn't mean that it would not be sinful for another person.
In Galatians, Paul says "Be not deceived for God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that he shall also reap. For he that soweth to the flesh shall reap corruption" but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting."
There are a lot of Christians whose lives show nothing of what they claim to believe. Who use the liberty of Christ for license to sin. The above verse shows it isn't a matter of losing some sort of reward in Heaven but of reaping corruption, or spiritual death.
In the parable of the talents, one of those who is given a talent buries it instead of using it to create more wealth. He is like the Christian who, having professed Christ, believes he is always saved, but he is not. He is not living his faith.
As to fear of Hell - some people start at that point and then learn to love God. Others love God first, and what "fear" of God there is comes as they consider the I AM that I AM. There's nothing wrong with a prod of fear as every parent knows although if the fear aspect overrides the mercy aspect, there is a problem.
And you know, it took me a while to realize we were thinking different things when you talk about "rewards" in Heaven, since I have never understood that as anything more than a metaphor. I've never thought about losing or gaining some sort of special, tangible reward in Heaven and I'm still not sure that isn't just a metaphor like the vineyard.
It isn't fear that drives me at all, except in the way that I am sometimes overwhelmed as in "Oh Lord my God, when I in awesome wonder, consider all the worlds thy hands have made...."
As a child, I think I was born with a sense of the divine that never really left me in the sense that I did not have to learn it. I first loved God. Then later, I learned fear because the church that I grew up in, while not given to fire and brimstone sermons, told me that no one could ever know they were saved until they died. I had loved God wholly and unselfconsciously. Now there was fear. For myself, for my family. I couldn't imagine wanting to be in Heaven if anyone I loved was in Hell.
But I never entirely swallowed that no one can ever know line either, because I had the gift of loving God from the time I was born. Without that gift though, I can easily see how people might have been overwhelmed by despair. Me, more or less around the age of six, decided "bullshit." Around fourteen or fifteen I stopped going to church. I am a pretty self-contained person. It wasn't a big "I am turning my back on the church" thing. It just didn't strike me as relevant. God was always in my life.
I think now, that not going to church, probably saved my life. I think it would have worn me down eventually. They would surely have excommunicated me somewhere down the line because I don't think I could have kept my mouth shut forever and I would almost surely have offended the powers-that-be, and the powers-that-be in the church where I grew up are close relatives. *G* Excommunication would have been a big deal in terms of relating to my neighbours and if I had built my house on that sand, I would have no ground under me. Now I am just a fairly run-of-the-mill heathen, I think, in people's eyes. This area isn't so completely suffocatingly Mennonite anymore either, and I can't think of a Mennonite family in which a divorce hasn't happened. But back then...
Don't know if I'm clarifying anything or further confusing the issue? When is your surgery? I'll be praying for you. Next week, probably Wednesday, I'll be leaving on a trip.
Layla
sin and damnation
Faith vs. works is indeed a place where all good Christians probably agree in their deepest hearts about what *they* should do, but have difficulty explaining to other people. I serve Christ because I love Him and wish to please Him - thus my statement "I love you Lord" is expressed in my walk. Likewise, you'll find many a human saying, "I love you babe" and then walking off... people say what they don't mean all the time. Saying, "Yeah I'm a Christian" and placing no faith on Christ is hardly being a Christian. So... well enough, better minds than mine have tried to resolve this issue. :)
But what brought me to discuss it initially was not the urge to attack the impossible quandry, but what you had said (and mentioned again in your last post) about being condemned (damned?) for the sin of divorce. A divorce may (or may not) be a sin - but even when we slip into sin, I don't believe we slide away from grace. If I'm driving my car and get angry and blaspheme then run into a telephone pole and die, am I going to Hell? Um, don't think so. *All* my sins are forgiven. Past, present, and future. Do I then sin cheerfully? NO!!! Because it separates me from the presence of God and it grieves the Holy Spirit.
Our actions may be exactly the same... but what motivates me to avoid sin is that I don't like upsetting God, not a fear of damnation. I want to do His will, I want to be an ambassador for Him, I want to share His love. I can't do any of that with sin in my life. But I trip.
So with divorce - even if I left my husband for no good reason at all, I don't believe that would damn me. It would likely result in a rather unpleasant conversation with Jesus at some point... "I wanted you to do XYZ and you walked away from it to do your own thing" but damnation? No.
Did you truly mean to say that you felt that some sins after salvation could result in damnation?
But what brought me to discuss it initially was not the urge to attack the impossible quandry, but what you had said (and mentioned again in your last post) about being condemned (damned?) for the sin of divorce. A divorce may (or may not) be a sin - but even when we slip into sin, I don't believe we slide away from grace. If I'm driving my car and get angry and blaspheme then run into a telephone pole and die, am I going to Hell? Um, don't think so. *All* my sins are forgiven. Past, present, and future. Do I then sin cheerfully? NO!!! Because it separates me from the presence of God and it grieves the Holy Spirit.
Our actions may be exactly the same... but what motivates me to avoid sin is that I don't like upsetting God, not a fear of damnation. I want to do His will, I want to be an ambassador for Him, I want to share His love. I can't do any of that with sin in my life. But I trip.
So with divorce - even if I left my husband for no good reason at all, I don't believe that would damn me. It would likely result in a rather unpleasant conversation with Jesus at some point... "I wanted you to do XYZ and you walked away from it to do your own thing" but damnation? No.
Did you truly mean to say that you felt that some sins after salvation could result in damnation?
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Faith as a noun
Well, first of all, with regards to divorce, I myself do not believe that because, as you say, "you broke the lamp," therefore you ought to live in darkness. That was the position of the Mennonite church I grew up in but not all Mennonite churches hold that position either. There isn't a central authority in the way that there is for the Catholic church, so you have disagreements about everything within different Mennonite churches except for two things: they all agree on pacifism, and they all agree that Jesus is Lord.
I wish I could remember the name of the theologian who, in his later years, when asked what he had learned from all his years of studying the Bible, responded, "Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so."
That is all I know.
And I understand the difficulty people have with self-described Christian fundamentalists because you would probably describe yourself as a fundamentalist in that you are living the Bible as best as you understand it, and I too - yet I don't know that we would agree on anything beyond "Jesus loves me, this I know."
The Bible isn't nearly as straightforward as many people like to think it is. For every verse on how we are saved by grace and not by works, there is another verse that tells us faith without works is dead.
To be "dead" in the Bible meant to be spiritually dead, as when one of the disciples wanted to bury his father and Jesus responded, "Let the dead bury the dead."
Or in James, when he writes that "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."
It isn't that Mennonites don't believe in grace. They do - they do not believe that works will get them into Heaven. Grace gets them into Heaven. But they also have to uphold their part of the contract by following that grace with action. You have said something along those lines when you say that those who claimed to be Christians but who somehow fall away were never "really" Christians and therefore that doesn't contradict the once saved, always saved thing.
To me, that's sort of playing with semantics, like my friend who felt that if her first marriage hadn't worked out it was because God had not truly joined them.
To me, ultimately, you are still recognizing that a formula said, and not lived through, has no meaning.
What I think is that you can't take anything out of the Bible out of context as different passages illuminate and expand on each other. Such as Paul saying that our works will not save us, to emphasize out utter dependency on Christ and James expanding on that by saying that pure religion reaches out to others and is lived by example, not through empty words. As James writes a few verses later:
What does it profit, my brethern, though a man say he hath faith and have not works? can faith save him?
He goes on to say that faith without works is dead and further that "yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works and I will shew thee my faith by my works."
Belief - faith - is meaningless as James says, "Thou believest there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble."
He goes on to make the point that Abraham followed through on his faith, and it was the following through part which made his faith real. He didn't just say he had faith. It didn't become faith until he had followed through.
Which is the problem with just saying some formulaic A,B,C thing. That's like Abraham saying to God, when God wanted him to sacrifice Isaac, "Sure thing, dude." And then rolling over and going back to sleep because he thought God couldn't mean what he said, to do something so horrible.
Abraham moved - he acted - he did a work - when he took his son Isaac to the mountain prepared to do the work of sacrificing him. That was when it became faith. That is why in one part of the NT we read that Abraham was justified by faith and in another (like James) we read Abraham was justified by works.
They are not contradicting each other; the term "faith"as used by Paul is being misunderstood as a passive word, not an action word. James defines faith.
I came across an interesting website, again regarding divorce. I don't agree with everything. My view on divorce is much broader than what he describes, broader than yours too. I don't believe that the only out for a marriage is physical infidelity. Infidelity comes in many forms as Jesus said when he said that whoever looked at a woman with lust in his heart was an adulterer. For myself, I am totally persuaded in my own mind, as everyone must be, that it is the spirit of the thing that is addressed, and not a specific act.
I believe that yes, we should forgive until it hurts, and God knows, I have done it my entire marriage. I think that is the best thing. But I also believe that God totally would get it if I left my marriage and that I would not be condemned. I don't think that God would think less of me somehow or that I would lose some reward in Heaven. I think that the Jesus whose feet the woman washed with her tears totally gets me. "Much shall be forgiven her for she loved much." Knowing that, I think, may ultimately be the reason I stay.
I haven't finished reading the entire web page but here's the link. I think you would find it interesting, even if you don't agree with it.
Layla
I wish I could remember the name of the theologian who, in his later years, when asked what he had learned from all his years of studying the Bible, responded, "Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so."
That is all I know.
And I understand the difficulty people have with self-described Christian fundamentalists because you would probably describe yourself as a fundamentalist in that you are living the Bible as best as you understand it, and I too - yet I don't know that we would agree on anything beyond "Jesus loves me, this I know."
The Bible isn't nearly as straightforward as many people like to think it is. For every verse on how we are saved by grace and not by works, there is another verse that tells us faith without works is dead.
To be "dead" in the Bible meant to be spiritually dead, as when one of the disciples wanted to bury his father and Jesus responded, "Let the dead bury the dead."
Or in James, when he writes that "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."
It isn't that Mennonites don't believe in grace. They do - they do not believe that works will get them into Heaven. Grace gets them into Heaven. But they also have to uphold their part of the contract by following that grace with action. You have said something along those lines when you say that those who claimed to be Christians but who somehow fall away were never "really" Christians and therefore that doesn't contradict the once saved, always saved thing.
To me, that's sort of playing with semantics, like my friend who felt that if her first marriage hadn't worked out it was because God had not truly joined them.
To me, ultimately, you are still recognizing that a formula said, and not lived through, has no meaning.
What I think is that you can't take anything out of the Bible out of context as different passages illuminate and expand on each other. Such as Paul saying that our works will not save us, to emphasize out utter dependency on Christ and James expanding on that by saying that pure religion reaches out to others and is lived by example, not through empty words. As James writes a few verses later:
What does it profit, my brethern, though a man say he hath faith and have not works? can faith save him?
He goes on to say that faith without works is dead and further that "yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works and I will shew thee my faith by my works."
Belief - faith - is meaningless as James says, "Thou believest there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble."
He goes on to make the point that Abraham followed through on his faith, and it was the following through part which made his faith real. He didn't just say he had faith. It didn't become faith until he had followed through.
Which is the problem with just saying some formulaic A,B,C thing. That's like Abraham saying to God, when God wanted him to sacrifice Isaac, "Sure thing, dude." And then rolling over and going back to sleep because he thought God couldn't mean what he said, to do something so horrible.
Abraham moved - he acted - he did a work - when he took his son Isaac to the mountain prepared to do the work of sacrificing him. That was when it became faith. That is why in one part of the NT we read that Abraham was justified by faith and in another (like James) we read Abraham was justified by works.
They are not contradicting each other; the term "faith"as used by Paul is being misunderstood as a passive word, not an action word. James defines faith.
I came across an interesting website, again regarding divorce. I don't agree with everything. My view on divorce is much broader than what he describes, broader than yours too. I don't believe that the only out for a marriage is physical infidelity. Infidelity comes in many forms as Jesus said when he said that whoever looked at a woman with lust in his heart was an adulterer. For myself, I am totally persuaded in my own mind, as everyone must be, that it is the spirit of the thing that is addressed, and not a specific act.
I believe that yes, we should forgive until it hurts, and God knows, I have done it my entire marriage. I think that is the best thing. But I also believe that God totally would get it if I left my marriage and that I would not be condemned. I don't think that God would think less of me somehow or that I would lose some reward in Heaven. I think that the Jesus whose feet the woman washed with her tears totally gets me. "Much shall be forgiven her for she loved much." Knowing that, I think, may ultimately be the reason I stay.
I haven't finished reading the entire web page but here's the link. I think you would find it interesting, even if you don't agree with it.
Layla
Monday, June 30, 2008
Marriage and grace and life in general
Please let me start out by saying that I am sure that I don't hold the absolute truth on any of this - the Lord will no doubt correct us on everything when we get to Heaven, but grace and divorce both have to be at the top of His list of human errors. We try to make little rules and tiny boxes for things that span the heavens!
"By grace are ye saved... not of works", "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved". I truly believe that *salvation* is a matter of belief and of faith. Having given one's heart to God, it's given. I rest my hope of Heaven on the blood that was spilt for me. I don't rest it on anything I've ever done - eesh, I'd never sleep at night if I thought that salvation had anything to do with ME. My works, the works that I see in other Christians, they are *signs* of conversion... but only God knows the heart of man.
I am sure that there will be folks that I think hopeless sinners in Heaven, and other folks that I thought were God-fearing who end up in Hell. It's all about that moment when you put your hope of heaven in Christ - your faith in Him. The more you contemplate His sacrifice, the more you fall in love with Him, the more you earnestly desire to obey His commandments.
But obedience to His commandments is not, and is not meant to be, something that humans can do outside the power of the Holy Spirit. I know that every day I fail at "be not anxious for tomorrow..." does that lose me my salvation? Again with the eeesh... I should hope not! (And talk about a mindset that would make me permanently concerned with tomorrow - thinking that I had to follow a zillion rules on my own strength would do that for certain!)
I love my Lord, and I know it displeases Him when I fail... and so each day I give over more of myself to Him. It's not like I don't fail at it - giving over self, surrendering to Him, letting the Spirit work through me... those are not things that come quickly to anyone. I strive, for He has told me to strive, but my strength is not where I put my faith. In fact, the moments when I have knelt, broken, at my Lord's feet in prayer are the moments when I feel that my faith was the truest. The moments when I *knew* that I was only saved by His grace, that I was utterly unworthy to whisper His holy Name.
So. That brings us to marriage, and in it I see grace as well.
First let's look at the purposes of marriage. Procreation, social support, intimacy, friendship, stability, and a vision of the relation of Christ and the church (among others). Ideally, a man and woman marry and support one another through life - the family was the original social support system. You *need* someone to be with you when you're sick, when you're grieving, who knows your weaknesses and still loves you, is still committed to you. Even when marriage was much less about love and much more about the business end - your spouse was the one who was *expected* to have your back, no matter what.
God doesn't want us to throw all of that down the drain for just anything - and as we can see from today's world, people will cheerfully do just that given the opportunity to do so. More in former times, but still today - women get the short end of the stick financially after a divorce. Divorce is *fundamentally* unfair. You are breaching a life-long contract that is meant to be the center of your mundane existence, the thing you take for granted, the thing you depend upon. People who *expect* to be married til death can behave differently than those who expect to be discarded if things "don't work out".
None of that, of course, speaks to the abusive or ugly marriage... and I don't know what to say on that except that for His own reasons, God didn't give an out for that in His Word. Perhaps it's part of how you deal with an abusive master if you're a servant? To serve as you would serve God, and give your service to God in serving the one who hurts you?
For the folks that have been victims of adultery - they are given an out because in the act of adultery you form another primary bond, and you break the first one. "...members of an harlot" says Paul in relation to fornication - so one can assume that it *is* the act of intercourse that makes that bond. When you take an adulterer back, you forgive the sin and then you re-form the intimate bond between you. But you are free not to do so...
Remarriage? Since I think it's the act of intimacy that forms the metaphysical side of the marriage, how could I think that any marriages were "adulterous" or not?? I don't think that's part of grace *at all*. I mean... it's over, you know? If the other person is already remarried or won't take you back when you repent of the divorce - it's over. Ideally, again, you're neither one remarried and can marry each other again, but how often does that happen? Further, saying that the second marriage is adulterous, should be repented of and essentially dissolved is missing the point of marriage in the first place. Once you are *married*... you're married. You should just stay where you are. The one person a OT divorcee was forbidden to marry was her first husband...
I guess the metaphor is that if I throw a baseball and break a lamp, I should first try to fix it, and if it's not fixable, then I should get a new one. The theory that you cited seems to say that if you break the lamp and can't fix it, you should live in the dark.
Some may, indeed, be so called... but it's a hard walk, and such things scare many a convert away. I would take such a sensitive issue on my knees to the Lord in prayer, not for one day but for many, and with fasting as well. After all, that's Who our primary *eternal* relationship is with... God. Should we not consult Him in all things?
One final thought... in Heaven we aren't married, nor will we be given in marriage. Sentimentalist that I am, I pondered, and came up with this: God wants that primary relationship to be with HIM, to free us finally of everything so that we can be individuals, chained not by infirmity of body nor circumstance, free to worship Him for all eternity and rejoice in His love.
I wandered, hope this made my end a bit clearer. :)
- Hearth
"By grace are ye saved... not of works", "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved". I truly believe that *salvation* is a matter of belief and of faith. Having given one's heart to God, it's given. I rest my hope of Heaven on the blood that was spilt for me. I don't rest it on anything I've ever done - eesh, I'd never sleep at night if I thought that salvation had anything to do with ME. My works, the works that I see in other Christians, they are *signs* of conversion... but only God knows the heart of man.
I am sure that there will be folks that I think hopeless sinners in Heaven, and other folks that I thought were God-fearing who end up in Hell. It's all about that moment when you put your hope of heaven in Christ - your faith in Him. The more you contemplate His sacrifice, the more you fall in love with Him, the more you earnestly desire to obey His commandments.
But obedience to His commandments is not, and is not meant to be, something that humans can do outside the power of the Holy Spirit. I know that every day I fail at "be not anxious for tomorrow..." does that lose me my salvation? Again with the eeesh... I should hope not! (And talk about a mindset that would make me permanently concerned with tomorrow - thinking that I had to follow a zillion rules on my own strength would do that for certain!)
I love my Lord, and I know it displeases Him when I fail... and so each day I give over more of myself to Him. It's not like I don't fail at it - giving over self, surrendering to Him, letting the Spirit work through me... those are not things that come quickly to anyone. I strive, for He has told me to strive, but my strength is not where I put my faith. In fact, the moments when I have knelt, broken, at my Lord's feet in prayer are the moments when I feel that my faith was the truest. The moments when I *knew* that I was only saved by His grace, that I was utterly unworthy to whisper His holy Name.
So. That brings us to marriage, and in it I see grace as well.
First let's look at the purposes of marriage. Procreation, social support, intimacy, friendship, stability, and a vision of the relation of Christ and the church (among others). Ideally, a man and woman marry and support one another through life - the family was the original social support system. You *need* someone to be with you when you're sick, when you're grieving, who knows your weaknesses and still loves you, is still committed to you. Even when marriage was much less about love and much more about the business end - your spouse was the one who was *expected* to have your back, no matter what.
God doesn't want us to throw all of that down the drain for just anything - and as we can see from today's world, people will cheerfully do just that given the opportunity to do so. More in former times, but still today - women get the short end of the stick financially after a divorce. Divorce is *fundamentally* unfair. You are breaching a life-long contract that is meant to be the center of your mundane existence, the thing you take for granted, the thing you depend upon. People who *expect* to be married til death can behave differently than those who expect to be discarded if things "don't work out".
None of that, of course, speaks to the abusive or ugly marriage... and I don't know what to say on that except that for His own reasons, God didn't give an out for that in His Word. Perhaps it's part of how you deal with an abusive master if you're a servant? To serve as you would serve God, and give your service to God in serving the one who hurts you?
For the folks that have been victims of adultery - they are given an out because in the act of adultery you form another primary bond, and you break the first one. "...members of an harlot" says Paul in relation to fornication - so one can assume that it *is* the act of intercourse that makes that bond. When you take an adulterer back, you forgive the sin and then you re-form the intimate bond between you. But you are free not to do so...
Remarriage? Since I think it's the act of intimacy that forms the metaphysical side of the marriage, how could I think that any marriages were "adulterous" or not?? I don't think that's part of grace *at all*. I mean... it's over, you know? If the other person is already remarried or won't take you back when you repent of the divorce - it's over. Ideally, again, you're neither one remarried and can marry each other again, but how often does that happen? Further, saying that the second marriage is adulterous, should be repented of and essentially dissolved is missing the point of marriage in the first place. Once you are *married*... you're married. You should just stay where you are. The one person a OT divorcee was forbidden to marry was her first husband...
I guess the metaphor is that if I throw a baseball and break a lamp, I should first try to fix it, and if it's not fixable, then I should get a new one. The theory that you cited seems to say that if you break the lamp and can't fix it, you should live in the dark.
Some may, indeed, be so called... but it's a hard walk, and such things scare many a convert away. I would take such a sensitive issue on my knees to the Lord in prayer, not for one day but for many, and with fasting as well. After all, that's Who our primary *eternal* relationship is with... God. Should we not consult Him in all things?
One final thought... in Heaven we aren't married, nor will we be given in marriage. Sentimentalist that I am, I pondered, and came up with this: God wants that primary relationship to be with HIM, to free us finally of everything so that we can be individuals, chained not by infirmity of body nor circumstance, free to worship Him for all eternity and rejoice in His love.
I wandered, hope this made my end a bit clearer. :)
- Hearth
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Mennonites and Divorce
Who knew? Someone actually put out an official statement on it. I started to think that maybe I had misinterpreted the Mennonite position on divorce but apparently not. Here's the link: http://www.anabaptists.org/tracts/divorce2.html
Turns out that I am in an "adulteress marriage" since my husband was married before. Turns out that he can divorce me, return to his first wife, and all is okay. I am stuck, according to this statement, in spite of this being my first marriage to live a life of celibacy, with no remarriage possible.
I do not believe for one instance that this is God's plan or way of thinking about people in bad marriages. The above linked statement is legalism at it's worst, straining at gnats and swallowing camels, making clean the outside of the cup while the inside is dirty and the church putting burdens on people that they themselves could not bear. I might not be sure what the Bible says exactly about divorce but this pitiless position is not it.
Layla
Turns out that I am in an "adulteress marriage" since my husband was married before. Turns out that he can divorce me, return to his first wife, and all is okay. I am stuck, according to this statement, in spite of this being my first marriage to live a life of celibacy, with no remarriage possible.
I do not believe for one instance that this is God's plan or way of thinking about people in bad marriages. The above linked statement is legalism at it's worst, straining at gnats and swallowing camels, making clean the outside of the cup while the inside is dirty and the church putting burdens on people that they themselves could not bear. I might not be sure what the Bible says exactly about divorce but this pitiless position is not it.
Layla
Friday, June 27, 2008
Divorce and Grace
No, Mennonites do not believe in salvation through grace in the way that you believe in salvation through grace. Mennonites are not actually Protestants: they fall into a no-man's-land between Catholicism and Protestantism.
Mennonites believe that we are all sinners and "come short of the glory of God" and that no matter how hard we try to be good, we could never be good enough for Heaven without the sacrifice that Jesus made, and the grace that allows us to be saved. Nonetheless, they also believe that "out of the heart, the mouth speaks" and that your actions follow your heart. Therefore your faith should be evident in works, otherwise something is clearly not right there. Salvation is a gift but not a gift to be taken for granted or abused. It is also a gift that can be lost. I also don't believe when you're in, you're in.
Salvation can be lost. I don't believe that a divorce necessarily makes it so but I do believe that there are people who turn their backs utterly on God and "deliberately" lose their salvation.
But more generally, Mennonites believe that to sin knowingly, is not covered under that grace. Sinning through ignorance would be covered. You would have to sincerely repent in order for that grace to cover you. Paul addresses this actually. Somewhere he says that there is no "covering" for knowingly sinning, as that means that Christ would be twice crucified.
Since divorce is a sin and remarriage is a sin, and it may be a sin that a person doesn't truly repent in his or her heart, Communion is denied, just as it would be for instance, in the Catholic church which takes a similar view of divorce and remarriage. Although they do provide a way out, as in if only one party was Catholic then the other party isn't, Catholics conveniently "don't count" that marriage as valid in the eyes of God, even if the other party is a Christian only not a Catholic Christian.
Mennonites don't count anyone out. So you're pretty well stuck. The idea that a marriage cannot be dissolved at all and a divorced person can't remarry without sinning is from Jesus' words in Mark: Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.
And in Romans, Paul says: ...by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man.
Both Jesus and Paul seem to be saying that to remarry while your spouse is alive is adultery, regardless of the circumstances of the separation.
Layla
Mennonites believe that we are all sinners and "come short of the glory of God" and that no matter how hard we try to be good, we could never be good enough for Heaven without the sacrifice that Jesus made, and the grace that allows us to be saved. Nonetheless, they also believe that "out of the heart, the mouth speaks" and that your actions follow your heart. Therefore your faith should be evident in works, otherwise something is clearly not right there. Salvation is a gift but not a gift to be taken for granted or abused. It is also a gift that can be lost. I also don't believe when you're in, you're in.
Salvation can be lost. I don't believe that a divorce necessarily makes it so but I do believe that there are people who turn their backs utterly on God and "deliberately" lose their salvation.
But more generally, Mennonites believe that to sin knowingly, is not covered under that grace. Sinning through ignorance would be covered. You would have to sincerely repent in order for that grace to cover you. Paul addresses this actually. Somewhere he says that there is no "covering" for knowingly sinning, as that means that Christ would be twice crucified.
Since divorce is a sin and remarriage is a sin, and it may be a sin that a person doesn't truly repent in his or her heart, Communion is denied, just as it would be for instance, in the Catholic church which takes a similar view of divorce and remarriage. Although they do provide a way out, as in if only one party was Catholic then the other party isn't, Catholics conveniently "don't count" that marriage as valid in the eyes of God, even if the other party is a Christian only not a Catholic Christian.
Mennonites don't count anyone out. So you're pretty well stuck. The idea that a marriage cannot be dissolved at all and a divorced person can't remarry without sinning is from Jesus' words in Mark: Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.
And in Romans, Paul says: ...by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man.
Both Jesus and Paul seem to be saying that to remarry while your spouse is alive is adultery, regardless of the circumstances of the separation.
Layla
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)