One of the practical, and usually fun, outworkings of pastoral ministry is performing marriages. Yet as pastors, we are faced with a bit of a dilemma—we live in a culture of diverse peoples, backgrounds, and beliefs, yet the Bible doesn’t explicitly tell us which marriages we can oversee and which we cannot. In fact, the Bible doesn’t even tell us that as pastors we have to oversee wedding ceremonies, but it does tell us to obey the law of the land, and the law basically states that you either have to be a justice of the peace or some kind of recognized clergy-ish official to perform weddings. So, in the church it is up to us to perform them…
Now as Christian ministers, there aren’t many people out there who would expect us to unite a Muslim couple or Buddhists or Mormons, but usually due to some family connection or history with the church there are a lot of people who tend to expect us to unite couples who are merely culturally Christian, or secular with some vague religious memories.
And here different pastors have different standards and opinions. Some are prone to perform a wedding for just about anyone (so long as it’s legal) with the attitude, “It’s an opportunity to share the Gospel.” Then there exists a spectrum all the way to the opposite end of only performing marriages for faithful followers of Jesus.
I tend to live on that end.
To my brothers who see it as an opportunity to share the Gospel, I understand your desire. You view the Gospel as the pinnacle of life and see counseling and the ceremony as the ability to share and attempt to persuade not just one but two people (or perhaps more with the involvement of family and friends) to truly follow Jesus. You are willing to perform such service in order to have that opportunity.
As for me, the limitations I place on marriages I will perform also come from viewing the Gospel as the pinnacle of life, but from a different angle.
While God has not given us instructions about wedding ceremonies, he has told us plenty about the nature of marriage. In Genesis 1&2 when there existed just two people who lived in a garden, and the rest of the earth remained uncultivated and uncivilized, God gave us (humanity) marriage. He declared it is not good for the man to be alone (especially in light of the commands of the image God—be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it—kind of hard to do when you’re alone). Therefore, God created a helper who corresponded to him, yet who was also different. Adam was male; and his wife, his helper Eve, was female. In marriage a man will leave father and mother and hold fast to his wife and the two will become one—an illustration that in a way points us to the Trinity where three persons are one.
Marriage is good. It is good for us, it is good for society, it is simply good.
But when we skip ahead a bit to Malachi 2:13-16, we find that marriage is not merely about a husband and wife becoming one. In more of the fullness of a picture of the Trinity, we find that God gives a portion of his Spirit to their union. Man, woman, and Spirit—three as one. And Malachi asks, “What was the one God seeking? Godly offspring.” Not only is marriage for the mutual benefit of husband and wife together, but it is truly to populate the earth in such a way that God’s glory and image fills the earth. A family is born, a family in which we not only should expect to see a godly couple but godly children.
Does it always work like that? No, for various reasons. But that is the goal—godly couples producing a new generation that also lives for God.
Skip ahead even further, and we find still a greater image to marriage—Ephesians 5:22-33. Everything that Jesus came to this earth to do for the sake of his people, his church—including dying to make us holy—everything that is described by the word “Gospel,” this is supposed to be pictured in marriage. Before the world, a husband is to picture Christ sacrificing himself for the good of his church, and a wife is to picture the Church following Christ.
As a pastor, though I can confess the goodness of marriage for society as a whole, I also feel based on the full picture of marriage the Bible presents to us, I must be limited and discerning in whose weddings I perform. I am not a justice of the peace, I am a shepherd of Jesus’ sheep.
In light of the Gospel story, the marriage ceremony should be an act of worship for the church, in which we have discipled towards and place our blessing upon a union we are confident will continue to grow even more to reflect the images of Ephesians 5. Therefore, personally I feel I would be professing a lie to speak of such images, to tell the Gospel story, and to symbolically place both God’s and the church’s blessing upon a couple when I know they are not truly followers of Jesus striving to produce a godly home.
Thus my reason for a more exclusive wedding policy, which, by the way, I have provided below:
* * *
Wedding Policy
of Michael Bergman
Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Adrian
The Bible teaches that marriage is a wonderful relationship to be held in great honor by everyone (Hebrews 13:4). God created male and female together to reflect his image to the creation around them (Genesis 1:26-29), and gave them the relationship of marriage because “it is not good that the man should be alone” (Genesis 2:18).
As Christians, we celebrate and honor the goodness of marriage among people of diverse backgrounds and beliefs. As a pastor, I hold the oversight and conduction of weddings as a great privilege among the church and a great duty before God. The Bible teaches about marriage that:
1) It is to be a living picture of the Gospel story of salvation as husband and wife relate together in a way that displays for the world an image of the relationship between Jesus and his church (Ephesians 5:22-33);
2) It is a covenant relationship (meaning it exists as a lasting commitment where a husband and wife are devoted to each other for mutual benefit) that God unites with a portion of his Spirit for the sake of creating a family that follows him in all things. As such, it is a covenant marked with a selfless and unceasing love first devoted towards God and then towards spouse and children (Malachi 2:13-16, Matthew 22:34-40, & 1 Corinthians 13:4-8);
3) And it is the union of two persons as one flesh, and as a new and unique family unit; a relationship which is to be honored by the couple throughout life including times of joy and sorrow, happiness and hardship, wealth and poverty, and sickness and health (Genesis 2:21-25, & 1 Peter 2:17).
With these teachings in mind, I view my role as a church pastor to joyfully conduct and provide oversight for wedding ceremonies between a man and a woman who are faithful followers of Jesus; dedicated to God, each other, and their local church; and who view their wedding ceremony in light of Christian worship.
Even if I do not personally perform the wedding, the facilities of the church may still be available for your use (please, contact the church office at (phone # ) or (email address) for policy and fee information). Also, I am happy to discuss biblical marriage, what it means to be followers of Jesus, and church involvement before decisions about marriage or the wedding ceremony are made. You can contact me, also through the church office, to schedule an appointment.
Based on the above, I generally require the following if I am to perform the wedding:
1) Both the bride and groom must be believers in Jesus as Savior and Lord, who actively seek to follow him, and desire to produce a loving, Christian home. The bride and groom must be members in good standing of a church and faithfully active there. Preferably, at least one among the bride and groom should be a faithful and active member of the church I pastor (if both are members of other churches, I suggest you first speak to your home pastors concerning their availability to perform your wedding).
2) Both the bride and groom understand marriage is a lasting covenant of love in the sight of God, and therefore commit to honor God and each other in their marriage for the entirety of life.
3) Both the bride and groom are seeking to live according to the standards of Scripture, with a desire to grow as followers of Jesus. This includes an expectation of genuine love between the two, of the absence of any type of abuse (physical, emotional, spiritual, etc.), of the couple striving for sexual purity and presently are not living together, and of the groom desiring to care for and lead his family as Jesus cares for and leads his church. (see: Matthew 19:1-12, Luke 9:23-26, 1 Corinthians 6:12-7:5, 13:1-13, Ephesians 5:22-33, and 1 Peter 3:1-7)
4) Both the bride and groom are of legal age and of acceptable blood relationship within the context of the law of the United States.
5) Both the bride and groom commit to at least three weeks of marriage counseling with the pastor that includes the following:
a) Week 1: a discussion of the bride and groom’s faith in Jesus, involvement in church, and commitment to each other, as well as specifics of the ceremony.
b) Week 2: a discussion of various marriage texts in the Bible (including those listed above).
c) Week 3: a discussion of the book Sacred Marriage by Gary Thomas. The bride and groom are expected to procure their own copy and read the book by the time of this counseling session.
d) If the couple would prefer counseling with another pastor, arrangements can be discussed and made.
6) Both the bride and groom commit to at least one year of continued counseling, being mentored by an older couple within the church. Details of this counseling can be worked out among the couples and the pastor, with the expectation of at least one meeting per month.
If any of the above does not apply to you, I will be happy to discuss any valid exceptions you may have, and help you determine the next steps in order to have a God-honoring marriage.
Mike Bergman – What if you are personally aware of either or both of the individuals having a significant mental disorder and they have not confided this in each other – do you feel obligated to expose this circumstance ?
Any pastor can feel free to offer their opinion of course – I didn’t mean to limit the responses.
I would not feel obligated to inform the other party; however, I would encourage the person with the mental disorder to come clean with their soon to be spouse. If they did not want to be up front with their soon to be significant other, I would have to not be able to go through with the wedding.
Mike, this is an issue I’ve been working through lately and have come to very similar conclusions as you, though haven’t written out a policy like you’ve posted here. That’s a great idea.
Russell Moore had a great article on the issue of whether or not we should marry non-believers a while back. Here’s a link for anyone interested. http://www.russellmoore.com/2008/09/11/should-a-minister-officiate-at-the-weddings-of-unbelievers/
A couple of questions: (I mean this in a nice way. 🙂 )
1. Do you put any emphasis on the marriage blessings from both parents?
2. Should counseling be extended to the parents separately and then together as well?
3. Do you think the parents should read a book on how not to destroy their kids marriage?
4. Do you explain to the couple how to turn cheap advice into godly counsel?
5. When is the best time to encourage the couple to learn how to raise children?
I think you have a great idea by having a “Wedding Policy” and I think it is laid out perfectly. I see, too often, couples just wanting to use the church building for their wedding and you never see them again. This way, you don’t have to turn anyone away or marry someone unequally yoked. Wish more pastors would take that stand and allow it to purge the dross.
As an Associate Pastor, I am even stricter. In this day and age, if you want to get married, a family member can spend $5 on an ordination to the Church of the Web or something like that. If I am going to put my signature on it, better be legit.
I don’t do weddings for people I don’t know. They have to be believers, they should (at least one) be members of my church, and I better know them, or else I’ll recommend a JP. Go get a common law, Marriage is by God for God’s people, get a civil union if you just want the tax status and to share benefits. If God’s not in it, you can call it marriage, but it’s not marriage. I only do weddings, not civil unification.
Dan, would you flesh out a little more your statement that “Marriage is by God for God’s people.” It seems you might mean lost people shouldn’t bother to get married, but in context maybe you mean don’t bother to be married by preachers??
Thanks.
Mike Bergman,
I thought that the article was great. I especially liked your explanation of the Malachi 2 passage. I personally lean to the other end of this question than you do. But, nonetheless, I certainly thought that your reasons for what you do were absolutely well reasoned and biblical.
Mike Bergman and others – Was my scenario not plausible or too far fetched; or did you need to research the answer or maybe you would just rather not comment with me. The ” what if ” game is played by professionals to better prepare themselves . Do you ever make judgements on the Airline Crew that is flying you family ? Suppose it was the Captains first flight as Captain and with a snow storm in progress at night in icing conditions he had to shut down an engine while making an approach in West Virginia somewhere – and the flight attendant opened the cockpit door allowing the white cabin light to come in effecting your night vision as she inquired what was going on. This is a ” what if ” but fair question that every professional air line pilot has been asked in one form or another. The question I submitted is plausible as well and much more likely to happen to to all than my flight scenario . I couldn’t avoid my scenario by not answering or getting out a book to look up the answer. Is this maybe some of what I call “test tube theology” that micro analyses and the finer parts but overlooks the harder more obvious challenges. If I didn’t have some kind of an answer I would be deemed ” not qualified ” to be in charge of that airplane and people’s lives . ” No answer ” suggests from you all , suggests what ?
To answer your question Jack, I suppose I would encourage the parties to be honest with each other about their problems. It’s doubtful that I would perform such a wedding, but also I would not disclose information that was given to me in confidence (except, of course, for information that I’m required by law to disclose).
John Wylie – Your answer hits the mark in my estimation from many angles . My question could be complicated by suggesting different levels Behavioral Problems in one or both along with possibly their doctors / councilors getting involved if indeed they had any . I appreciate your response and hope my question leads others to think objectively about ” what if “. I’ve witnessed these occurrences with varied outcomes .
John,
This may be off the general topic a little but may apply when counseling prior to marriage. This is in regard to your statement about being required by law to disclose things. If the law required you to turn in someone based upon their confession (excluding murder) and you knew them very well and you found that there was real and true repentance, reconciliation and a life that proved what they did had been resolved, would you still turn them in “by law”? If turning them in by law destroyed their testimony, family relationships, their upcoming marriage and the loss of their present employment and it effected their future employment would you still turn them in? If so, you need to post a disclaimer in your church bulletin, your office and verbally inform all people prior to counseling: “Due to the laws of the land, I must reveal certain information confessed in counsel or regular conversation. Please do not disclose “XXXX” or “XXXX” or “XXXX” to me because I must turn you over to the authorities because it is the law.”
We need to think through this “required by law” since those obligations can be challenged when it comes to our practice faith (Prayer, Preaching, Carrying a Bible, etc). Repentance is part of our faith and that needs to be brought into full consideration before we turn anyone over to the government for destruction. I’ve seen it happen and disapprove of it totally in some isolated cases. Each case has to be taken individually, however, the disclaimer would be very appropriate. If that is what we do as Christians to other Christians we have become no different than the world. The government does not reform, support or help reconcile. All they do is beat people down and keep them down. I would only turn someone in as an absolute last resort no matter what the law says. If we train ourselves and our congregations to turn people in because the law requires it we will be digging our own hole because when the law changes against Christianity we have to try to change people’s minds and it will be too late.
Bruce,
My point is this, we are required to report child abuse, credible threats of suicide and murder under penalty of law and I have and do comply with those laws. The scripture commands us to comply with the law. And I do warn people that certain things do not fall under clergy confidentiality. And our church has reported people to the authorities who have revealed things that would fall under one of these categories. I truly respect what you’re saying but even you make an exception for murder, but would you not report a case of child abuse to the authorities?
I agree with the other exceptions you mentioned. To protect the individual is the important thing here. Child abuse is the area that has many views to be considered. The law destroys more in some cases than it would protect. That is what I am saying, we need to be extremely careful and do our homework before ever turning someone over to the authorities. New laws are coming out that make everyone responsible, not just pastors or other professionals. The untrained can get anyone in trouble even if it was hearsay. I lean more toward caution and protecting the repentant. Hopefully, we can tell if someone is producing the fruit of repentance.
John Wylie – Doctors as well as Teachers have the same requirement in Law which hopefully , helps put a stop to this mess . Children are ones that can’t contain these issues within themselves – can’t talk to their parents – and guess who gets the ball . It could happen by telephone call that some suggestion of wrong doing is broached . A good honest , working relationship with authorities can be of great benefit as they may have some suggestions for you in this predicament . Helping the hurting is primary in everyone’s mind.
Bruce,
I see where you’re coming from now. Yes I agree with what you said about hearsay evidence. And to do thinks it’s sad that people’s lives have been ruined by unfounded accusations.
John,
About turning in people into the authorities, did you know that a person in our church turned in someone to the pastor because they didn’t want to turn them into the authorities. They knew the pastor was obligated to do so because he had been informed and had to find out. I feel for you guys when this begins to become a normal occurrence.
Bruce,
I’ve had the same thing happen to me one time. I basically insisted that the person call DHS themselves because his wife was the witness to what a young lady was claiming her own step father was doing. But I do appreciate your concern because it is a legitimate one for pastors.
John,
One more thought. Should we have open forums in our churches to discuss this matter? I’m talking about when and how to address these kind of issues. My thought would be for the church to know how to approach similar things by way of Matthew 18:15 first. Many people run straight to the pastor first without even trying to deal with certain issues one on one. It would sure protect pastors and cause the people to focus on their own maturity as believers. The government is getting too involved in the churches business and forcing exposure where it may not be necessary.
Bruce,
I agree with you 100% here. This doesn’t have anything to do with illegal activity but I used to have a man who wanted to circumvent all the steps in Matthew 18 and go directly to the church any time he disagreed with anyone in the church. The reason was that he was a part of a family that weilded a great amount of power in the church. The last time he pulled that I let him know “Just because your name is ___________ that doesn’t mean you’re always going to get your way.” My point is that if the process is going to followed it must be followed correctly and the church can never play favorites.
I have more restrictive policies than most, but less so than you.
Let me start out by stating the unwanted truth. I generally do not like doing weddings. Most pastors I’ve talked to would much rather do a funeral than a wedding.
It’s not because we are morbid. But at a funeral, you have a genuine opportunity to do real ministry to people who are both hurting and thinking about death and eternity.
At most weddings, no one wants real ministry from the preacher – you are just a ceremonial decoration. They’d get a talking monkey to read the vows if they could. Sorry, cynicism alert.
The only weddings I really enjoy are those of two committed Christians who want to serve Christ. I’m just not sure I can limit myself to only those people. In counseling and leading up to the wedding, the preacher has some opportunities to do ministry.
Good article, Mike.
Main reason I like funerals better is that every funeral I’ve ever done has lasted!
I agree with you totally. Also you don’t have to endure a rehearsal with someone’s mother or grandmother breathing down your neck because they know more about how a wedding is supposed to go than you do even though you’ve done more than a hundred of them.
None of the funerals Jesus attended, lasted. Not even to the end of the “service”.
🙂
The divorce rate for Christians and non-Christians is essentially the same, thus, it is not clear that counseling prior to the wedding ceremony is making much, if any, difference. But if marriage counseling is going to be required, I surely hope the one doing such is licensed to do such, otherwise let’s just call it a discussion about marriage and not drag it out ad nauseam.
BH,
With respect I couldn’t disagree with you more. Do you really believe that the only competent counselors are those who are licensed by the state? What do you do with the eternal counsels of God’s word? I’m sorry but I’ve met several of those licensed counselor types and from what I’ve seen they are only exercising rhetoric and human logic. For counseling to be effective insofar as preserving marriage is concerned an eternal value must be inculcated in the life of a person.
John: [1] Do you really believe that the only competent counselors are those who are licensed by the state? [2] What do you do with the eternal counsels of God’s word? I’m sorry but I’ve met several of those licensed counselor types and from what I’ve seen they are only exercising rhetoric and [3] human logic. [4] For counseling to be effective insofar as preserving marriage is concerned an eternal value must be inculcated in the life of a person.
bapticus hereticus
Concerning [1]: Competency is a legal concept, and it is possible that licensed counselors may offer incompetent counsel, just as it is possible that an unlicensed counselor may offer competent counsel, but that is really not the point. It is about being professional and giving the advice that one is trained and recognized to suggest. It is also a trust issue and people are more apt to take seriously the advice of trained professionals (not to mention the liability issues that a church must consider). An M.Div. is not sufficient training for claiming that one is competent as a marriage counselor.
Concerning [2]: There are a good many marriage counselors that are Christian and are trained in matters related to faith.
Concerning [3]: Absent such, how does one interpret scripture? That paradox and limits of language and understanding exist are not the issues here, they are acknowledged (and are known via an understanding of the logic contained in differing epistemological systems), but to dismiss our ability to reason and it to critique said reason is foolishness of the first order.
Concerning [4]: Again, if what ministers are doing is effective concerning divorce, then extant data offers little support.
“””An M.Div. is not sufficient training for claiming that one is competent as a marriage counselor”””
BH, I think it comes down to what constitutes good counsel. If marriage is in any way a “sacred” act, as most Christians believe, then God’s counsel is the only counsel that counts.
I understand this sounds simplistic, backward, parochial, and unprofessional to some, but either marriage was instituted by God and the principles for successful marriage are given in His word, or they are not.
Psychology, including marriage counseling, is a “made-up” discipline that simply did not exist until the modern period. Psychology which begins with man cannot hope to end with God.
Therefore, the only counsel “licensed, sanctioned, or blessed” is that which comes from the Word of God. Therefore, an M.Div. with sufficient Biblical training absolutely qualifies for marriage counseling.
I know you are an academic and “credentials” are what matter most to you, but what matters most to me is the Word of God.
I believe counselling must begin with theology and work toward anthropology, not the other way around. The worst counsel of all would be someone licensed by the State who does not value the Word of God.
BH
With respectful disagreement:
Concerning 1: You and I are on the opposite sides of the spectrum here. Not only do I think it’s unnecessary to possess a state license to offer competent pre marital counseling, I think an MDIV is not necessary also. Marriage is God’s institution and His word is sufficient to meet those needs if one will simply put them into practice.
Concerning 2: We agree here.
Concerning 3: Human logic absent the Spirit is nothing more than an exercise in the flesh and is fundamentally flawed. Let’s just say that I’m not as impressed with the human intellect as much as you appear to be. God has hidden His eternal counsels from the wise and prudent and has revealed them to babes.
Concerning 4 : I would say that extant data hasn’t had time to take into account pastoral premarital counseling as it has only really been pushed for a decade or so. I know pastors did it before but not on the scale it’s done today. Further couldn’t the same indictment be made of licensed counsellors? Also the old “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink” adage applies here. Ultimately it’s up to the couple to put the biblical principles to practice.
John, good points.
Also, who gives the support to marriages? Is it the psychology industry? That’s rhetorical of course.
Premarital counselling from a pastor who has little or no connection to the couple after they are married will probably not fare much better than other counselling.
However, when the couple has and maintains a solid relationship with their pastor in the early years of marriage, my experience has been that the success rate is much higher.
Marriage was God’s idea and I don’t recall Him asking for help in charting its course.
To all above.
The Proverbs provides a principle in counseling. It says, “Where [there is] no counsel, the people fall; But in the multitude of counselors [there is] safety.” Proverbs 11:14
No matter how qualified a person is I would think that multiple people we can trust would be more appropriate in receiving accurate counsel. The person(s) being counseled must seek information on their own to be able to verify that the counsel they are hearing is valid. They must equip themselves to execute the counsel they accept and make sure they perform it with wisdom. So many factors exist that a single counselor cannot cover all aspects. At least, by knowing that scripture tells me that there is safety in a multitude of counselors, I would have a tendency to do so.
Frank: … [1] and the principles for successful marriage are given in His word, or they are not … [2] Psychology, including marriage counseling, is a “made-up” discipline … [3] M.Div. with sufficient Biblical training absolutely qualifies for marriage counseling … [4] “credentials” are what matter most to you, but what matters most to me is the Word of God … [5] counseling must begin with theology and work toward anthropology … [6] The worst counsel of all would be someone licensed by the State who does not value the Word of God.
bapticus hereticus:
[1] Scripture speaks on many subjects, but such is not sufficient curriculum for most subjects.
[2] In the same way that biology, chemistry, medicine, etc. are also “made-up.”
[3] Except that M.Div. is about divinity, not marriage counseling.
[4] Truth is more important, and such is more likely to be ascertained by those trained in the thing they are pursuing.
[5] Whereas most evangelicals begin with theology and work toward anthropology, MacQuarrie, however, for example, offers an excellent systematic that begins with anthropology and moves toward theology.
[6] The worst counsel is counsel that is not competent. If Christians have special insight into having a successful marriage, the evidence does not suggest such if divorce rate is the measure.
John: … [1] to offer competent pre marital counseling, I think an MDIV is not necessary also. Marriage is God’s institution and His word is sufficient to meet those needs if one will simply put them into practice … [2] … Let’s just say that I’m not as impressed with the human intellect as much as you appear to be. God has hidden His eternal counsels from the wise and prudent and has revealed them to babes … [3] I would say that extant data hasn’t had time to take into account pastoral premarital counseling … [4] Further couldn’t the same indictment be made of licensed counselors? [5] Also the old “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink” adage applies here. Ultimately it’s up to the couple to put the biblical principles to practice.
bapticus hereticus:
[1] See [1] above to Frank. If one is going to offer counseling, it behooves one to have counselor training. I am really surprised that I need to say this on a forum in which the average degree is a master’s degree.
[2] This old canard does not work to shore up a weak argument and will not work when one faces legal action for representing self as something that self is not.
[3] Logically, you are correct – the absence of evidence is not evidence of absent. But, sufficient data over several decades representing millions of marriages highly suggest that a type II error is not the problem here, that is, we are missing something due to lack of sampling power.
[4] No, that is, all things being equal marriage counselors are marriages counselors, not ministers performing wedding ceremonies. Where there is overlap, it would be interesting to look inside the numbers.
[5] You are not responsible for their divorce, but it also appears that your marriage counseling is having no impact, either. If the goal is to reduce divorce, the strategy does not appear to be working (or the intervention might be more successful if it represented the best insights from the literature [see 4 above], if such are presently lacking); thus it behooves ministers to spend their energy in more fruitful ways toward said end.
BH,
Oh I’m not against someone being educated and having a license or a MDIV, I just don’t think either is absolutely necessary. Even if the majority on here possess a masters level degree I would be surprised if a single preacher on here would say that it is a requirement.
As far as your canard statement I’ll just say this “For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” 1 Corinthians 1:25 God doesn’t think very highly of our little pea brains either.
John: “… I just don’t think either is absolutely necessary … As far as your canard statement I’ll just say this … 1 Corinthians 1:25 ….”
bapticus hereticus: If one is going to assert oneself as a marriage counselor, that is, one qualified to do marriage counseling, one best have the credentials for doing such, if for no other reason than the potential liability to self and/or the church. I am not opposed to conversations concerning marriage that an engaged couple enters into with the pastor, but let’s be honest as to what it is or how it should be considered, and let us not dismiss the research on its efficacy. Given such, what appears to be happening is this: ‘oh, this is not working, well, then, let’s do it even more.’ Not that more may not work, for some change in the intervention is certainly needed (assuming one thing has anything to do with the other), but adding more non-professional counseling, on top of non-professional counseling, does not seem to me a plausible strategy. Again, 1 Cor 1.25 is not a trump card that offsets a weak argument.
I will be kind. This is not a 1 Cor 1.25 issue. I don’t wish for baptist ministers, good people with and for people’s good at heart, to be perceived of as ‘cute.’
BH,
I’m sorry I just have no confidence in human intellect that is not informed by the word. I believe a person can be extremely intelligent but not very wise. I also think that a person can lack formal education and still be wise. I wasn’t just using that scripture as a trump the fact is that there are hundreds of passages in the Bible that basically teach not put confiidence in the human intellect because it has a way of deceiving us and sending us down the path of unbelief.
“””[2] In the same way that biology, chemistry, medicine, etc. are also “made-up.””””
No, that is not the case, and I did not suggest that it was.
BH: [2] In the same way that biology, chemistry, medicine, etc. are also “made-up.
Frank: No, that is not the case, and I did not suggest that it was.
bapticus hereticus: Well, Frank, you are painting yourself in a corner and not leaving yourself an out. If one insists that one is competent to provide professional counseling but dismisses the areas of psychology devoted to the study of such, it seems to me that talk of counseling is a bit nonsensical. It is not that various psychological fields have settled all issues related to counseling and the human experience, but neither are said fields absent of useful knowledge. If it makes no sense to engage in biblical theology absent knowledge of scripture, it makes equally no sense to engage in counseling absent knowledge or use of psychological insights.
“””it seems to me that talk of counseling is a bit nonsensical.”””
BH, it seems nonsensical to you because you are using “counsel” in a sense I am not. It is further “nonsensical” to you because you do NOT accept the Biblical teaching on counsel that has nothing to do with and puts little to no credence in human wisdom.
As I said, we might as well be from different planets because we do not hold even the most basic Christian foundations in common.
You have a very low view of Scripture and I have a very high view of Scripture. This is the traditional problem of a conservative Christian and liberal Christian (and I give you the benefit of the doubt on your salvation) have. There can be no meeting of the minds.
You hold in contempt what I hold dear. All we could ever do is aggravate one another. I don’t wish to do that.
So, if I tried to explain to you the difference between comparing the natural sciences and psychology, it would be fruitless. To convince you that Theology is the Queen of the Sciences would also be fruitless.
My advanced degree is in apologetics. The only way apologetics ever works if to find some common ground. When there is no common ground, there can be no discussion–only argument.
I don’t wish to get drawn into painting a mental picture of you as some have painted.
You and I differ. No doubt about it. I want to give you the respect to hold a different opinion.
Frank: BH, it seems nonsensical to you because you are [1] using “counsel” in a sense I am not. It is further “nonsensical” to you because you [2] do NOT accept the Biblical teaching on counsel that has nothing to do with and puts little to no credence in human wisdom. As I said, we might as well be from different planets because [3] we do not hold even the most basic Christian foundations in common.
bapticus hereticus:
[1] Week upon week of meetings prior to a wedding ceremony? What is one doing? We are told one is providing marriage counseling. OK. Is one a marriage counselor? This is the context that I am speaking.
[2] I would recommend one pause before placing such a bet unless one is prepared to lessen one’s assets.
[3] I claim Jesus as Lord. Do you have a different Lord?
Frank: You have a very low view of Scripture and I have a very high view of Scripture. This is the traditional problem of a conservative Christian and liberal Christian (and I give you the benefit of the doubt on your salvation) have. [1] There can be no meeting of the minds.
bapticus hereticus:
[1] Sure there can be such. Happens all the time among those in the Christian faith.
Frank: You hold in contempt what I hold dear. All we could ever do is aggravate one another. I don’t wish to do that.
bapticus hereticus: What do I hold in contempt that you hold dear?
Frank: [1] So, if I tried to explain to you the difference between comparing the natural sciences and psychology, it would be fruitless. [2] To convince you that Theology is the Queen of the Sciences would also be fruitless.
bapticus hereticus:
[1] Do the social sciences have no place in the academy? Do we dismiss sociology, economics, political science, history, etc?. Are the humanities and natural sciences the only areas of knowledge that one needs to have to be considered an educated individual? Is Santorum correct in that education is for snobs? Is your life only about the physical (i.e., natural science) with some art (i.e., humanities) thrown in for good measure, or is there also a social (i.e., social sciences) aspect to your life?
[2] Try me. I often serve as a consultant to faculty that are charged with the development of gen-ed curricula, but I am still learning.
Frank: My advanced degree is in apologetics. The only way apologetics ever works if to find some common ground. When there is no common ground, there can be no discussion–only argument. I don’t wish to get drawn into painting a mental picture of you as some have painted. [1] You and I differ. No doubt about it. I want to give you the respect to hold a different opinion.
bapticus hereticus: And so do you and CB, and he with Bruce, and me with my wife, but in Christ there is no male or female, Jew or gentile ….
“The divorce rate for Christians and non-Christians is essentially the same…”
Nonsense. That is true only if you include as “Christians” everyone who self-identifies as Christians. But those who accept the Bible’s teaching as authoritative know that many who identify as Christians are not. Among those who have been born-again by the grace of God, have repented of their sins and have their faith in Christ there is much less divorce than among nominal Christians or the lost.
Your statistic is misplaced in situations such as Mike and the rest of us here who believe the Bible and believe in God’s power address.
I’ve been doing weddings for 30 years. Not all of them have survived. But I can tell you that a WAY higher percentage have made it than the stats I’ve heard from our culture in general.
Two young people who enter into a marriage with a desire to honor God, obey his Word and are committed to his glory have a significantly higher marriage success rate than the world at large.
Dave: Nonsense … I’ve been doing weddings for 30 years … [and] can tell you that a WAY higher percentage have made it than the stats I’ve heard from our culture in general.
bapticus hereticus: Anecdotal v Research. Your decision, of course.
BH,
Dave is correct. It is nonsense to decree “The divorce rate for Christians and non-Christians is essentially the same…” That is simply not true.
Besides BH, it is basically impossible for you to speak to the merits of Christian marriage. For recently, on another post and comment thread, you removed all doubt that you are an apostate.
Recently removed all doubt? Oh, you are being much to charitable. His comments over the past two years prove that he doesn’t believe the gospel.
CB, Dr. Dave put that patient out his misery. The Barna Group missed it by a mile by using two different definitions of “Christian.”
Maybe we should stop leading according to statistics and start leading according to Scripture.
David’s anecdotal evidence parallels mine of 30 plus years. I actually have a pretty good “success” record for marriages I’ve performed.
I don’t perform very many because my standards are not usually acceptable to many people shopping for a preacher.
I don’t perform “civil unions” in the church. I don’t perform Christian weddings unless the couple desires a Christian marriage.
I don’t do beach weddings–I’m not a surfer. I don’t do garden weddings–I’m not a gardener. I don’t do sky-diving weddings because I’m scared of heights. I do Christian weddings in the Church.
As I said, that has allowed me to see many of my marriages stand the test of time–far better than the Barna Report stats.
Frank: [1] The Barna Group missed it by a mile by using two different definitions of “Christian.” [2] Maybe we should stop leading according to statistics and start leading according to Scripture.
bapticus hereticus:
[1] They may have looked at ‘Christian’ in more than two ways given they typically do sub-group analyses (e.g., mainlines, evangelicals, etc.)
[2] Statistics is value-free, whereas scripture is not. Makes sense to look to scripture for advice on leadership. Statistics can be useful for interpreting the effectiveness of some forms of leadership.
The research to which you refer is only as accurate as the definition of Christian employed.
Did the research limit itself to those who have truly repented of their sins, trusted Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord and are committed to walking in obedience to him and giving glory to him?
Or did anyone who said, “Yeah, I’m a Christian” get counted as a Christian.
The research is flawed if it uses a flawed definition of Christian.
That’s exactly right Dave.
The problem is that researchers being largely uninformed about Christianity basically count cultural Christians in with genuine ones. And Bruce really makes a good point as well about the fact that by the time people come to us they’ve have already made up their minds about marriage. Where we do our best work against divorce is in our week to week preaching and teaching ministries.
CB: It is nonsense to decree “The divorce rate for Christians and non-Christians is essentially the same…” That is simply not true.
bapticus hereticus: Then simply provide research suggesting such.
Dave: … [if] research … uses a flawed definition of Christian.
CB: … you [i.e., bapticus hereticus] are an apostate.
Joe: … he [i.e., bapticus hereticus] doesn’t believe the gospel.
bapticus hereticus: I guess if we narrow it down to what is acceptable to some at SBC Voices, evidence will remain anecdotal, thus one’s n of 1 experience is all that is needed to understand any particular phenomena related to Christians; nonetheless, see Barna Group research (see also Barna Group below).
John: … researchers being largely uninformed about Christianity basically count cultural Christians in with genuine ones.
bapticus hereticus: For research on divorce and Christians, see the Barna Group. The “Barna Group is a visionary research and resource company [that is] is widely considered to be a leading research organization focused on the intersection of faith and culture. “
John: … we do our best work against divorce … in our week to week preaching and teaching ministries.
bapticus hereticus: Then put your energies here rather than weeks upon weeks of ‘counseling’ that does not appear to be working.
John: … I’m sorry I just have no confidence in human intellect that is not informed by the word.
bapticus hereticus: And Christian marriage counselors will inform you that doing marriage counseling without proper education and training is irresponsible and disrespecting of those that one is seeking to counsel.
BH,
You stated, “… Christian marriage counselors will inform you that doing marriage counseling without proper education and training is irresponsible and disrespecting of those that one is seeking to counsel.”
You have a point there. So since you have confirmed the fact that you are an apostate, you should not be doing any marriage counseling involving Christians.
BTW, in view of the name change debate, I think I should begin to better identify you as:
“The Apostate formerly known as Baptist Heretic.” I think I shall shorten it to “Afkabh.” Will that be OK with you?
BH:
Honestly if it’s God’s institution and God gives us ver detailed instructions as to the roles of the husband and the wife and details as to the treatment of our spouses why is the Bible insufficient to counsel with? And why can’t someone who is skilled with the word be considered competent to counsel? Further isn’t preaching and teaching a form of counseling?
CB: … since you have confirmed the fact that you are an apostate, you should not be doing any marriage counseling involving Christians.
bapticus hereticus: Goodness, CB, not even among apostates, either.
CB: “The Apostate formerly known as Baptist Heretic.” I think I shall shorten it to “Afkabh.” Will that be OK with you?
bapticus hereticus: Sort of like Great Commission Baptists formerly and presently known as Southern Baptists?
John: And why can’t someone who is skilled with the word be considered competent to counsel?
bapticus hereticus: I see no reason that one could not be so skilled at both; it’s not an either/or proposition.
John: Further isn’t preaching and teaching a form of counseling?
bapticus hereticus: When you explain your upcoming intimate session with the to-be-wed couple, are you going to share that you will be preaching to them about and teaching them about marriage and issues related thereof? Have a conversation, but know your boundaries are conditioned by your professional education and training, which in most churches, given the training of their pastors, does not justify week after week of intimate and personalized meetings.
I’ll back you up further. People who consider themselves Christians tend to marry because it is the Christian thing to do. The percentage of people in uncommitted cohabitational relationships has increased dramatically. Those obviously haven’t been counted and should be considered in addition to the 50% or so who have married and divorced. If you take the divorced nominal Christians and add them to the non-Christians, because they are functionally so, and also add the cohabitations, the number becomes very much different.
While it is true that the divorce rate is the same with both Christians and non-christians, I would argue that most people that call themselves Christian are just those that say, “Sure, I believe there was a guy named Jesus.”
Also, there is a great deal of difference in pre-marriage counseling and counseling a troubled marriage, and I believe that most ministers have enough sense to know when they are getting in over their head. The difference in pre-marital counseling is the hopes of giving them some tools to work with to make their marriage successful, and also to make them aware that they can come to their pastor to talk about anything.
In regard to licensing . . .
Consider forced government schooling. They license (credential) their teachers and without a doubt “unlicensed” parents homeschooling their children do a much better job. The data is clear in that regard.
We seem to have this need for government to coddle and care for us from the cradle to the grave. Like John Dewey, socialist philosopher and Founding Father of government schooling, many feel that the government is a better parent than the child’s biological parents.
We should be very wary of any such notion. I’d much rather trust a counselor or teacher whose credentials are faith in God and His Word than whose credentials come from the government.
BTW to everybody, I see that I’m second behind Dave Miller on number of comments so I’m going to start spamming so I can get the little gold medal next to my name.
John, I thought you were spamming?
LOL that was good.
Oh goodness gracious . . . 🙂
this comment stream could use a woman’s touch . . . a marriage is a celebration also of great JOY . . . you can’t forget to bring your hearts to the ceremony . . .
a reading of 1 Cor. 13, YES!
and the candles, the flowers, the music, celebrating the Lord’s Supper,
the family, the friends, the faith . . .
YES, by all means prepare with pre-Cana counseling, soberly and thoroughly teaching the importance and permanence of the Christian marital bond . . .
but don’t forget that in the lives of these young people, this is a moment of great joy , to be celebrated with love, and surrounded with love.
For those wed in the love of Christ, their joy on that day is a blessing that is shared with everyone present.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdsX01wVa00&feature=related
About marriage counseling. If it is simply done before people get married it is too late. It is like giving someone a diet plan and then seeing what happens. Their paradigm is set from their parentage and the counsel becomes simply a formality that they endure. If they came to a pastor to request him to marry them without seeking counsel for marriage first, counsel would seem fruitless to me. Why? They have already made the decision to marry.
Bruce H.,
For you to comment on marriage counseling is like a hog writing a book on housekeeping.
I’m sure your unforgiving view toward other Christians would put you in a position of “expert” here. Then you should be able to give everyone insight that exceeds the divine. Since my comment above has no value to you and you are the self-appointed one to verify it, why don’t you offer your comment, unless you don’t do anything without a fee attached to it.
Bruce H.,
I do not claim to be an expert in marriage counseling. I do not claim to be an expert on hogs either.
Nonetheless, I do know a hog when I see one or read his comments on a blog thread. Some things need no great expertise at all. Hog recognition is one of those things.
That is a cop-out, Magoo, if I have ever heard one. You profess to be like Christ because you claim to be a Christian. Where did Christ attack one of His own and keep publicly condemning them until they left Him? I’m sure you read that into the rich young ruler. Your actions and statements show just the opposite of Christ. You are destructive and not restorative or forgiving. I really feel for those who were under your ministry. Pastors are to be examples to the flock. I can just imagine that there are many CB examples out there now condemning other Christians because they don’t have all the facts.
I do not think people like you are totally useless because you can always be used as a “bad example”.
Bruce H.,
You proclaimed yourself to be a racial bigot. You later proclaimed you divorced your wife because she was chronically ill.
Those were your proclamations, not mine.
Also you continue to claim that I am not forgiving. This has nothing to do with my being forgiving. I gladly forgive you as will God.
What this has always been is about you trying to justify your ungodly attitudes and actions. Also, it is about you trying to condemn those who had a justifiable right to divorce and place upon them the same guilt as that you shoulder.
So don’t to flip this. Just repent and admit you had/have no justification to have the attitude you have nor were you justified in the actions you have taken.
Men please forgive me. CB and Joe I want you both to know I really appreciate stands that y’all have taken on and things and I respect you. I vaugely remember a conversation on here about Bruce’s marital situation, but I guess my question would be when does he receive forgiveness?
I really do respect you men and consider you brothers in the Lord and I’m glad we’re on the same team. This is not a rebuke, I just don’t understand what Bruce can do about a past marriage.
John Wylie,
Any of us receive forgiveness when we repent. That is a biblical fact. It is also a fact that one who trues to justify sin with humanistic arguments has not yet come to godly sorrow. That is also a biblical fact.
I understand brother. I’m not trying to rebuke you I just didn’t know why it got so heated all of a sudden. I do think Bruce made some very good points in this discussion today. And CB I have deep respect for you. There is obviously some history here of which I am unaware.
John Wylie,
History? Yep. There is a history. That history is that I believe that men should be men. I believe that Christianity is not to be confused with “meism.”
There are biblical reasons for divorce as Dave Miller has done an excellent job of presenting here on Voices, but a spouse being sick is not one of them.
Also, to try to justify an unbiblical reason for divorce is not a sign of repentance. In addition, to condemn those who had a biblical reason for divorce just to salve one’s guilt is selfish and self serving.
Yep, there’s a history.
CB,
Here is an excerpt from your comment #54:
“What this has always been is about you trying to justify your ungodly attitudes and actions. Also, it is about you trying to condemn those who had a justifiable right to divorce and place upon them the same guilt as that you shoulder.”
There has been no “justifying”. I condemn divorce as scripture says with the exception of a lost mate leaving or unfaithfulness. I still believe God hates divorce even though I am divorced. We have to agree with God’s word and that is what I have been doing. When you read my condemnation of divorce it isn’t me who condemns, I am only repeating God’s word. Scripture says, “It wasn’t that way from the beginning.”, and that has to be said apart from the two allowances. You are saying that I should not agree with God’s word publicly and that is what we need to do more. I condemn no one, I just speak the word and in the same breath I confess that sin to be sin even though I did it, and I say that. If I steal something and repent I do not lower the bar by not saying stealing is a sin. I do not know why you of all people cannot see that.
In Romans 3:31 it says, “Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we ESTABLISH the law.” By my confession of sins to God through faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ, my action is basically establishing the Law. By establishing the law it enforces a heavier burden upon and against ALL sinners. Their fate is more sure when someone comes to Christ. My confession of the truth against divorce, my experience through divorce and my life after divorce is a testimony of the truth of God that should establish how those who are not divorced or are considering divorce should remain married. I am not a pastor or deacon, divorce disqualifies me. But I have that testimony that has purpose for those who have never experienced divorce. You seem to think you are called to attack and accuse and condemn those you judge with total disregard to God’s truth. More divorced people need to confess that as a sin whether it was acceptable or not, it wasn’t that way from the beginning. I wasn’t able to begin to forgive myself until I confessed it before God. We want to confess only the sins we believe are sins and justify the rest, like you. Sin is sin no matter what we want to believe. We need to tell ourselves the truth more often. It is good for the soul, mind and spirit.
Yeah, anyone just has to look at how he treated his marriage vows to verify that one.
True Joe. Very true. Then he has the audacity to come here and comment on marriage counseling. Amazing.
cb,
Just to be nit-picky. You’re comment didn’t address what Bruce actually said. If you disagree with what he said, then you gave a glaring ad hominem which was entirely graceless and unhelpful. I happen to agree with what Bruce said here and think we should be parenting our children to one day marry wisely if that is their eventual place and be good spouses according to God’s revealed will.
If you actually have a beef with Bruce, then it belongs in that other discussion and not in this one – unless he brings it up. From what I read further on in the discussion, if you are correct in what you hold against him, his sin is better dealt with by his local church. If he has repented as he claims here, they will know it far better than those of us who don’t know him outside of the cyber-world.
Use some discretion, please.
Thank you Jim Pemberton,
Bruce H., brought this to a public forum. I simply addressed it in the same forum. As far as your agreeing with him, that’s fine.
Yet, I do wonder if you agree with this statement he made:
“This may be off the general topic a little but may apply when counseling prior to marriage. This is in regard to your statement about being required by law to disclose things. If the law required you to turn in someone based upon their confession (excluding murder) and you knew them very well and you found that there was real and true repentance, reconciliation and a life that proved what they did had been resolved, would you still turn them in “by law”? If turning them in by law destroyed their testimony, family relationships, their upcoming marriage and the loss of their present employment and it effected their future employment would you still turn them in? If so, you need to post a disclaimer in your church bulletin, your office and verbally inform all people prior to counseling: “Due to the laws of the land, I must reveal certain information confessed in counsel or regular conversation. Please do not disclose “XXXX” or “XXXX” or “XXXX” to me because I must turn you over to the authorities because it is the law.”
If you do agree with that statement, maybe you should retink your agreement. Nonetheless, you have every right to think what you want. As far as repentance goes, well read the comments below.
Also, you are right about using discretion, yet there are times when discretion does noty get the job done. There are times when we need to be blunt. I believe that this situation demands such action. I believe anything else only enables a guy like Bruce H. to continue in his self-pity and self-justification. Yet, again, you have every right to believe as you desire. Feel free to rebuke me. I will feel free to do the same with you.
Frankly, I believe you have not been keeping up with this little set-to, otherwise, I don’t think you would be taking up a defense for Bruce H. Yet again, maybe I am wrong.
Jim Pemberton – Your assessment of Bruce H is right on in my humble opinion. I have some personal insights to similar situations that at least allows me to say that there is a lot more to know that Bruce H has seen fit not to discuss . With the tongue lashing that ensued it’s a wonder anyone would let on the least little bit about a personal problem they were having . A pastor is a pastor wherever he shows up and certain decorum is expected . I also let out a problem during a weak moment and got ” rolled over” by cb scott which wasn’t called for. Now I’m going to read down in the follow ups , but , it is good someone – you – can/ did look down from the Cross .
“…but, ti is good someone – you – can/did look down from the Cross.”
Well…I must say there Jack Wolford, that would be a major leap for any sinner such as we, don’t you think?
I don’t think you meant that like you wrote it there, do you?
cb scott – You misquoted me and I meant every word . Your “control ” is showing up and you have researched something I’ve said in the past somewhere that you want to throw in my face . I’m not going to play your game which is hurtful and doesn’t well represent those that share your title. We all get old – join the crowd . Everybody has compassion – it’s just clergy are expected to show more of it . That’s what I call looking down from the Cross – that explanation belongs to me .
For CB and Joe,
Thank you very much. This is my final post here on sbcvoices. This was just an informative blog to me. Didn’t realize how damaging transparency could be here among the spiritual elite. I guess if a person reveals their sin here they are blackballed and the Peter’s among you warm yourselves by the fire in silence, watching. It has been Christians that have brought me the worst of life after sin. It now seems to come straight from those who are suppose to be our examples here on earth. I just don’t plan on being like any who think like these.
I’ll give myself a period of time to cool down from this. You should be in my shoes to understand how this affects people. Nothing has shaken my perseverance like it does when men of God trample and condemn a person without knowing all the facts. I have lived through three (3) pastors that lied to me, one (1) pastor that fell to adultery, one (1) pastor that politically tried to destroy my name and two (2) professed Christians that lied about me and caused me to lose my job (all before I was forced to proceed with my divorce). Now, it follows me to the internet. Of course, it must be me. I thought I was use to people stabbing me in the back. This tells me that the SBC is in real trouble when we shoot our own in front of eyewitnesses. Gentlemen, you may think you are justified, but you are not. I am forgiven of my past, present and future sins and I am planning on continuing to live like it. I just don’t need your public condemnation hypocrisy any longer. Keep patting yourselves on the back and showing how much you know, or think you know. Living without the condemnation works best for me. I have enough to deal with than a whole group of pastors that either condemn or stand by and do nothing.
Dave, I understand that you have had to distance yourself from me. Sorry I became such a bad example.
John Wylie, Thanks for your question about forgiveness. That was a good ending. Best to you.
“Of course, it must be me.”
I tend to agree with you.
Hey BRUCE H.
people are reading this blog from other faith traditions, and they, too, have been ‘judged’ and called names,
but remember this:
Our Lord was mocked, but He did not turn away, He forgave.
And, in doing so, He taught us something about HOW TO LIVE in a world where there is so much pain and darkness.
Don’t turn away. Not everyone here sits in judgment on everyone else . . . we all mess up and do it sometimes, but not all of the time. No need to apologize to us sinners, Bruce.
And turning away will only ‘reinforce’ the finger-pointing . . . so follow the Way of Our Lord in this trouble.
Some help:
“O Jesus! meek and humble of heart, Hear me.
From the desire of being esteemed, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being loved, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being extolled, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being honored, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being praised, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being preferred to others, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being consulted, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being approved, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being humiliated, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being despised, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of suffering rebukes, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being calumniated, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being forgotten, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being ridiculed, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being wronged, Deliver me, Jesus.
From the fear of being suspected, Deliver me, Jesus.”
from the ages to the ages, Amen.
L’s,
Jesus will deliver you if you repent of sin and believe the biblical gospel, just as I have told you for the last four + years. Remember?
Christiane,
Thanks for you encouraging words and the prayer. Since there are others from other traditions here I think it best for me to sit in silence for a while. There is no need for Christians to have these type of discussions publicly for all the world to see. No wonder Baptist have a bad name. If we are called “hypocrites” or “racist” or “southerners” or whatever, we don’t need to fuel the fires for the unbelievers with our hatred of each other then declare we are Great Commission Baptist.
“””Of course, it must be me.”””
This seems abundantly apparent, but I don’t think you really believe it. Therefore, forgiveness is not likely to be forthcoming. Luke says, “If someone repents, forgive.”
Seeking forgiveness in the same breath as blaming others is like trying to quench one’s thirst by drinking salt-water.
You can run off and have a pity party but the only pity you are likely to receive is “self-pity” which is like trying to warm yourself with a picture of a fireplace.
Why not simply admit you have failed and move on? It’s worth a try.
Frank,
This discussion happened quite a while back. CB is the Chihuahua that has been biting my heels for over a month now because he has judged my divorce based upon what I revealed about it in a comment stream on Dave’s subject on Divorce. In a nutshell, over a 5 year period my wife continued to digress slowly into mental illness and refused to go to a psychiatrist. She was about to leave me. I didn’t know she was truly mentally ill but wanted to verify if she was. I could commit her for only 3 days for “observation” but she knew how to keep silent for that period of time and until properly diagnosed she had her rights. I finally decided to use the divorce court to force both her and I to be psychologically evaluated through detailed professional testing. She also received medication to calm her tension during the test. Once she was diagnosed with Major Depressive disorder and properly medicated she wanted to proceed with the divorce even though I worked for weeks to try to change her mind. There was no recourse and the kids needed to be with me due to this type of mental illness. This mental illness has the highest suicide rate. She has told me since then that she believed that I had gone to the other side with the people who were working against her. That is not all of it but enough to get the jest of what is going on here. CB has judged me to have left her in her “illness” based upon that information and I have tried to explain to him that divorce was not my intention. I have apologized to my entire family and hers. I apologize to her each time we talk and she is the only one I will continue to apologize to. I have been forgiven by everyone. That took place in 2003 and I do not see in scripture where we tell our story and apologize to everyone who judges us for our bad or sinful decisions. My Judge died for that sin and I acknowledge it as a sin and asked Him to forgive me. I live now as though He has forgiven me and plan to continue that way of life.
I tried to ignore CB and he is relentless to get me off of the comment stream. He has judged me openly and there is just silence here. My final statement stands even though you seem to think I am having a pity party. If being hurt by men of God responding the way CB has with no correction from other men of God and it is called pity, then you are right. Even gossip! I quote CB in comment #57, “History? Yep. There is a history. That history is that I believe that men should be men. I believe that Christianity is not to be confused with “meism.” Read on and you will see the gossip. If no one sees that in your own (pastors), how do you discern and judge things in your congregation?
Christ has a testimony here at sbcvoices and this argument is not worth being exposed to the world any longer for more ridicule. That is why I will not continue to comment here. I wish it was different because I love to learn and be corrected when my view needs to be corrected. That is what I thought it was all about, not condemnation.
Bruce H.,
Again, if you have truly repented then quit coming here trying to justify your humanistic and sinful actions and condemning other people who had a biblical reason for their divorce. Also quit lying and saying we will not forgive you. That is a strawman you use to cover and the weak among us here fall for it constantly. Your history is nothing compared to mine. The difference is that I have repented of my sin and do not try to justify myself before other people on a blog thread. You constantly say stuff like, “I have repented, but here are the reasons why I have done the things I have done.”
Bruce H., that is hogwash. Just repent of your sin. Stop trying to justify it and get on with your life and quit keeping score of all the things “other pastors and Christians” have done to you. You have not forgiven any of those people or you would not constantly bring their past up here on this blog in countless comment threads. You sit around in this continuous pity party. Get up and be a man of God and stop rolling around in the dirt like a dog.
Jack Wolford,
If you lived through the winter due to being angry at Joe and cb, then do you not think we should continue? Who knows? You may live to be a hundred and ten.
Les,
Truth is not always “nice.” Nonetheless, think what you want. That’s your privilege.
Bruce, I’ll end with this because further comment would simply make you mad.
It was everybody else. Your story as you give it here justifies nothing, but as you point out, I’m not your judge. You keep thinking all your problems are the “other guy” and you will keep carrying around this baggage.
I’ve been in the ministry 4 decades and your attempt to paint pastors in an ill light simply does not pass muster.
My opinions always come with a “take it or leave it” clause.
By the way . . . I thought you said you were leaving–or, was that just to get more pity? You see, that’s the kind of thing I was talking about.
But, please, don’t think I’m judging you. I don’t know you from Adam (or CB for that matter).
Frank,
Adam is my younger brother.
Frank,
I was not justifying I was just bringing the basic information to the surface for you in a nutshell. I don’t know where you get your conclusions from. Never mind. Sorry I responded.
Bruce H – No one living can condemn you . Sticks & stones . Both Cb Scott and Joe Blackmon , particularly Joe Blackmon tried to insult me off this blog with insults – not the vilest insults I’ve ever heard hurled by biker gangs , but some of these guys have ” hen house ways ” and feel insulated because no one knows who they are or where they live and that alone gives them false courage . They have been wrong about me , gotten their ” historical ” facts wrong , conclusions wrong but they still feel some kind of “duty” to destroy someone like a pack of lizards . I know I don’t know all of your facts and don’t need to. They seem to think they already know 100% of your history and have self appointed themselves as your crucifixion committee . I don’t know about Dave Miller distancing himself from you but he doesn’t seem the type to be bullied , but your posts seem to appear and that is all that should matter . Even if you chose to ” tell all to everyone ” on this blog the mental condition evidencing itself in ” control” would still be in evidence here . They can’t change. In other words , you can’t win here – but you also can’t lose either. So it’s your choice as to whether to have a “final” post . It was doubtful I would make it thru this winter because of my medical condition , but cb scott hurled insults at me like I should end my life just to keep the prognostication on schedule. Like I told a lie when I lived and continue to “lie” even now. We all have problems but even in my association with Harley-Davidson years ago , building trades or parachutes with people that had no formal education, have I ever have seen this many air heads in one group. If they tried anything else but religion that was safe to make a living they would ” crash” or suffocate from continuous fat lips . Your mind is quicker than mine and more knowledgeable about religious matters than mine but my sense of right and wrong is very much in tact. Don’t forget to laugh in any event. I don’t know whether your a Calvinist or not , but if not that would seal your fate here . I thought you were doing rather well here . You can always change your mind without charge .
“If they tried anything else but religion that was safe to make a living they would ” crash” or suffocate from continuous fat lips.”
Jack – For this moment in time you have elevated my spirit. Thank you. lol 🙂
“””like a pack of lizards”””
Now, that’s an interesting metaphor.
CB and Frank,
I don’t know you men and I don’t know Bruce H. And, I don’t know really facts of the matter about Bruce.
But even with my lack of knowledge, your comments to Bruce seem to me to be quite harsh toward a brother, even if it’s true (and I don’t know one way or another about his experience and repentance or non repentance) that he sinned in his situation.
Can brothers not converse in a graceful and edifying manner? I’ve really never seen a pastor speak such a way to another brother, even one in ongoing sin.
Grace,
Les
Les,
I have to disagree with you. Obviously, he’s at the point of giving up because he’s carrying a ton of baggage. I don’t see anything harsh about tossing out the baggage.
If you followed the issue you would perhaps have the same sense as I do that he’s always blaming someone else for the decisions he makes, like “being forced to initiate a divorce.”
My words were intended to be encouraging. Stop the whinning and pony-up to mistakes. Seek and receive forgiveness and start fresh.
I fail to see how that is harsh, but you are entitled to your opinion.
A-Men.
Frank, are you the same Frank who is on the West Coast that I used to dialogue with about two years ago before I took a long time away from blogs?
I am on the West Coast, but probably not the same Frank. My name isn’t actually Frank but it was changed to Frank and Larry at the behest of BDW. I shortened it to Frank L.
I’m the poster formerly known as subman. I’m still subman but have the descriptor, Frank L., and I’m a Great Commission Christian who is neither a Calvinist nor non-Calvinist.
I don’t drink alcohol.
That pretty much sums it up.
Thanks Frank,
I thought that was you.
Now, Debbie compared me to Joe Blackmon. That’s harsh!
So it is you? You are the same Frank–a church planter?
CB, I have planted two churches but not in the last 20 years.
If these posts show the ” magic ” and positive influence of Christianity – then where do the devil’s sorcerers and purveyors of things rotten hang out ? Many left over cultures gather with nasty flags flying still trying to pick up members . Is that anyone here ? The American Soccer Team with a German living in California as their coach just won the World Championship in Europe with other world sport figures in the stands . They can be proud in spite of barriers . Someone should design a ” flag” for you all to carry so you can feel proud of who you are when you march in step either on this blog or at the Convention . Normally , these groups are scheduled at the end of a gathering when normal people are picking up their chairs and lawn blankets to go home. Nobody wants to hear fighting & fuming even tho you have a “right” to show up. Right Is Might
Earlier this morning Ed Stetzler had a post about March 1st which has been taken down. ( One is still there but not the one I’m referring to ). He classified his religion with Four Words one of which was , I believe , Reformed but no mention of Baptist or Christanity and separated the entire world into sections as Europe , S. America , Canada , AND Northern U.S. . Guess where that leaves our beloved southern United States sitting as we try to bring things together in the name of Jesus Christ . If people wonder where the President of SBC and others got the dough to talk about a name change – then where does Stetzler and Al Mohler and everyone else employed to do a specific job see it in their job description or even their ” Right” to make decrees and judgements they expect us lessor mortals to adhere to. I would urge the SBC to replace employees who feel they have been given some mandate when hired particularly in a position of emportance , to spearhead changes Anywhere with Anything until asked by the appropriate SBC authority . We need to be pulling as one in favor of a winning Theology that will as it started out – embrace the World. We don’t need people creating “puke poskets” in our Country any longer . One God , One Country , One Flag and all with ONE Purpose of which we continue can be proud.
Mike,
Just want to thank you for posting online your thoughts and your policy. With a recent request, I am revisiting my thoughts and practices and your post was very timely.
Thanks!