Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

Are you a sincere seeker who has questions about Christianity, or a Christian with doubts about your faith? Post them here to receive a thoughtful response.
User avatar
Nicki
Senior Member
Posts: 614
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 8:36 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: Western Australia
Has liked: 318 times
Been liked: 64 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#31

Post by Nicki » Mon May 16, 2016 11:30 pm

At one church I went to a new lady who'd started attending was interested in being on the music team, but at the time she was living with a man - it was obviously an intimate relationship. She was told she couldn't be in ministry while she was in that situation - living that lifestyle. From what I understand it was not done judgementally but just as a statement of the church's boundaries. She left the relationship soon after and joined the music team, and ended up moving back to her home area and marrying a childhood friend. I agree about having boundaries like that for leadership or any form of church ministry, but that it should be non-judgemental - not condemning the person but needing a change in the behaviour.
These users liked this post by Nicki (total 2):
Jac3510 (Tue May 17, 2016 5:21 am) • B. W. (Tue May 17, 2016 5:54 pm)

crochet1949
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1467
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 1:04 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Has liked: 177 times
Been liked: 73 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#32

Post by crochet1949 » Tue May 17, 2016 1:47 am

There was a situation in a congregation where a man had left his wife and started bringing his girlfriend to the church with him. So, the three of them were attending the same large church Well -- the girlfriend was not a believer, but through coming to church with the guy, accepted Christ, realized that That relationship with wrong and broke off with the guy.

Being part of a church congregation is not wrong no matter Who is there. The Holy Spirit works through the Word being presented.

Agree - there is never a reason to Condemn anyone.

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 259 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#33

Post by B. W. » Tue May 17, 2016 6:24 pm

Nicki wrote:At one church I went to a new lady who'd started attending was interested in being on the music team, but at the time she was living with a man - it was obviously an intimate relationship. She was told she couldn't be in ministry while she was in that situation - living that lifestyle. From what I understand it was not done judgementally but just as a statement of the church's boundaries. She left the relationship soon after and joined the music team, and ended up moving back to her home area and marrying a childhood friend. I agree about having boundaries like that for leadership or any form of church ministry, but that it should be non-judgemental - not condemning the person but needing a change in the behaviour.
The best response so far!

In the incident I mentioned, there is not enough evidence to convict anyone, even the pastor. For some reason, the pastor decided the woman I mentioned be on the churches praise team. I would defer to the pastors judgment on this and not condemn him either. Logically, I can only guess they are considered married by common law, so in the State they reside they would be considered married anyways.

Again the point I am trying to bring out is that we should judge with Godly discernment based upon the Proverbs 3:5-8 way as every case has its points and counter points.

If the woman was unsaved, then why would she be on any biblical based church worship team?

That does not work too well. However there are churches who hire secualar musicians to do their praise and worship. That is wrong for obvious reasons but it happens. Then you have the Ted Haggard of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, a Pastor who did what he did behind the pulpit preaching...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/29/lkl.ted.haggard/

I pays to be discerning as well as know how to execute what the bible calls righteous judgment. Some things do not mix and even from the pulpit things may not be right. We need godly discernment in matters as well as the grace to handle what to do.

There is a difference in how Jesus rebuked Peter, Peters response, verses Jesus rebuke of the Pharisees and their responses. Some people hear and turn away and others will not and play games.

Back to the original post: The Pastor chose for her to remain on the team. I cannot judge the pastor or the woman wrongly as I do not know all the facts. So, I defer to the pastor's judgment to be based upon mercy. That mercy has a reason unknown to me, and with that, I trust the Lord Jesus to work it all to his good.

The man I mentioned in prior post on this thread who was the womanizer actually worked in the children's ministry in an church as well as with a mission team I was on. Very talented, however, the sex addict in him is what he chose. When he admitted to the problem due to the many women complaints, he was off ministry teams period. Folks tried to help him. He refused but stayed in church for a while then left. Not sure whatever happened to him.

There are some folks that cannot be helped.

As I look over the story of the woman at the well and Jesus. I see mercy. Jesus saw her heart. And healed her heart and freed her from seeking significance in one failed relationship after another. This freed her to be used of the Lord to help save many in a city despite her shacking up. We can only guess she either left the guy or got married and followed Jesus. I am glad the Lord looks into the heart, heals it, so we can freely follow him who sets free from all our seeking significance, importance, renown, in one failed venture after another...

So go forth and bring others to Jesus.

Amen!
-
-
-
Science is man's invention - creation is God's
(by B. W. Melvin)

Old Polish Proverb:
Not my Circus....not my monkeys

Mallz
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 799
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:34 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Has liked: 99 times
Been liked: 66 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#34

Post by Mallz » Tue May 17, 2016 9:43 pm

Side question. Aren't we considered married in His eyes once we have sex? Pretty sure we are...?

User avatar
RickD
Board Moderator
Posts: 20455
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Kitchen
Has liked: 185 times
Been liked: 1013 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#35

Post by RickD » Wed May 18, 2016 2:29 am

Mallz wrote:Side question. Aren't we considered married in His eyes once we have sex? Pretty sure we are...?
Technically no. Because technically speaking, God doesn't have eyes. :pound:
1 Corinthians 1:9
9 God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Audie wrote:
"Christianity is not a joke, but it has some very poor representatives."



St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 259 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#36

Post by B. W. » Wed May 18, 2016 7:47 am

Proverbs 15:3 NKJV, The eyes of the LORD are in every place, Keeping watch on the evil and the good.

Psalms 11:4 NKJV, The LORD is in His holy temple, The LORD's throne is in heaven; His eyes behold, His eyelids test the sons of men.

Gen 6:8 NKJV, But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.


Hmmm, Rick :fryingpan:

------ :lookingcloser:
Science is man's invention - creation is God's
(by B. W. Melvin)

Old Polish Proverb:
Not my Circus....not my monkeys

Mallz
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 799
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 8:34 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Has liked: 99 times
Been liked: 66 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#37

Post by Mallz » Wed May 18, 2016 9:26 am

Awww.. cmon. Anyone? Am I right, or wrong? ...Do I have to find out myself :(

PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 8707
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has liked: 113 times
Been liked: 321 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#38

Post by PaulSacramento » Wed May 18, 2016 9:52 am

1 Corinthians 5: 11 is an interesting verse, especially since Jesus would have been guilty of violating it since he did indeed eat and drink with sinners.
Now, some will say that Paul's letter specifies ( and it does) that this is for believers only:
9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But [f]actually, I wrote to you not to associate [g]with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13 But those who are outside, God [h]judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.
While I view the shunning of the believer to be wrong, and Paul actually goes back on this in his next letter since he realizes this has put the believer through too much sorrow, it is clear that while believers are not perfect and CAN and WILL fall, they SHOULD KNOW better.

User avatar
Storyteller
Make me a Sammich Member
Posts: 2939
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:54 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Female
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: UK
Has liked: 179 times
Been liked: 321 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#39

Post by Storyteller » Wed May 18, 2016 10:19 am

Mallz wrote:Awww.. cmon. Anyone? Am I right, or wrong? ...Do I have to find out myself :(
Right, I think.
Faith is a knowledge within the heart, beyond the reach of proof - Kahlil Gibran

User avatar
Jac3510
Ultimate Member
Posts: 5489
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:53 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Location: Fort Smith, AR
Has liked: 137 times
Been liked: 336 times
Contact:

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#40

Post by Jac3510 » Wed May 18, 2016 3:50 pm

Mallz wrote:Side question. Aren't we considered married in His eyes once we have sex? Pretty sure we are...?
Of course not. If that were the case, then there would be no such thing as fornication, since having sex would just make you married by default. Further, if that were the biblical view, it wouldn't make any sense for Moses to command a man to marry a woman he had defiled. That would be silly to command you to marry someone you were already married to. And further, this is why fornication is such a terrible thing. You are taking something that should only exist in the context of marriage and ripping it out of that context (with pretty big consequences!). No, you marry first and then you consummate the marriage.

And Paul, Paul makes it very clear that he is not saying not to associate with unbelievers who are sinners but not to associate with professing believers who are living in open sin. Moreover, the next letter in which he refers to the pain he caused them is far from an apology. He's saying the tone was necessary and ultimately successful because it produced repentance.

There's nobody more grace-oriented than me. I, then, implore those interested in God's grace not to pollute it by suggesting that it means that Christ's body need not be holy, that churches can or ought to tolerate sin in the body. The Bible everywhere, both OT and NT, speaks against such an attitude. That is an attitude that destroys churches.
These users liked this post by Jac3510:
EssentialSacrifice (Wed May 18, 2016 6:02 pm)
Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.

PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 8707
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has liked: 113 times
Been liked: 321 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#41

Post by PaulSacramento » Thu May 19, 2016 5:19 am

And Paul, Paul makes it very clear that he is not saying not to associate with unbelievers who are sinners but not to associate with professing believers who are living in open sin. Moreover, the next letter in which he refers to the pain he caused them is far from an apology. He's saying the tone was necessary and ultimately successful because it produced repentance.
I didn't say he apologized, I said he realized it may have been too much.

He says as much here:
Reaffirm Your Love
2 But I determined this [a]for my own sake, that I would not come to you in sorrow again. 2 For if I cause you sorrow, who then makes me glad but the one whom I made sorrowful? 3 This is the very thing I wrote you, so that when I came, I would not have sorrow from those who ought to make me rejoice; having confidence in you all that my joy would be the joy of you all. 4 For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears; not so that you would be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you.

5 But if any has caused sorrow, he has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree—in order not to say too much—to all of you. 6 Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the majority, 7 so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, otherwise such a one might be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8 Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. 9 For to this end also I wrote, so that I might [c]put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. 10 But one whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ, 11 so that no advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his schemes.

User avatar
RickD
Board Moderator
Posts: 20455
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:59 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Kitchen
Has liked: 185 times
Been liked: 1013 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#42

Post by RickD » Thu May 19, 2016 5:34 am

Mallz wrote:Side question. Aren't we considered married in His eyes once we have sex? Pretty sure we are...?
I think this is a really good question, Mallz. It gets to what actually constitutes marriage.

Is a commitment between man, woman and God, enough to constitute a marriage in God's eyes?
1 Corinthians 1:9
9 God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Audie wrote:
"Christianity is not a joke, but it has some very poor representatives."



St. Richard the Sarcastic--The Patron Saint of Irony

PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 8707
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has liked: 113 times
Been liked: 321 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#43

Post by PaulSacramento » Thu May 19, 2016 9:40 am

I don't think sex equals marriage BUT sex would equal being "one flesh", hence the issues with promiscuity.

User avatar
B. W.
Ultimate Member
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:17 am
Christian: Yes
Location: Colorado
Has liked: 102 times
Been liked: 259 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#44

Post by B. W. » Thu May 19, 2016 12:06 pm

PaulSacramento wrote:1 Corinthians 5: 11 is an interesting verse, especially since Jesus would have been guilty of violating it since he did indeed eat and drink with sinners.
Now, some will say that Paul's letter specifies ( and it does) that this is for believers only:
9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But [f]actually, I wrote to you not to associate [g]with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13 But those who are outside, God [h]judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.
While I view the shunning of the believer to be wrong, and Paul actually goes back on this in his next letter since he realizes this has put the believer through too much sorrow, it is clear that while believers are not perfect and CAN and WILL fall, they SHOULD KNOW better.
Wow this thread has traction!

1 Co 5:9,11 the word translated in NASB as immoral person in the Greek contains in its meaning of prostitution, with the idea of prostituting self for gain. This means multiple sexual partners, sex addicts, in fact it fits the criterion for the man I mentioned earlier who was a womanizer.

So such people who are believers, turn away from them and let the Lord deal wit them.

As for classing the woman on the praise team this thread is about as one who is prostituting self for gain with multiple relationships is a bit of a stretch for me. Again, I can't judge this woman like that. From the limited evidence I heard, she does not fit that class.

The pastor is from a main line bible thumping denomination, so he must know something we do not about this couple. Ultimately, he is responsible. The reason he retrained her on the praise and worship team is unknown to us. I trust the Lord on this one. Maybe they are considered common law in their state or some big tithers are involved. They will be getting state license married soon enough.

Does anyone know if the ancient people in the 1st century were required to attain a state marriage license or not?

I would not call all people who shack up as prostituting their selves for gain with multiple relationships. Confused, yes, hurt by past relationships, divorce,yes. Wounded people in need of Jesus, yes. Others,well, maybe perverts or sadist, etc, of some type but that is another matter.

Far worse is those in open ministry like Ted Haggard and the womanizing man who was leader in the children's ministry. That is the type of folks 1 Co 5:9-11 addresses as sexual immoral.

So let's go one hypothetical question:

A - just born again gal, new to he kingdom of God, bible, the church is in a live in relationship with her boyfriend.

So should the new convert be kicked out of the church, brow beaten, ostracized, shunned by the Church justified by 1 Co 5:9-11?

What testimony for Christ does that pose?
-
-
-
Science is man's invention - creation is God's
(by B. W. Melvin)

Old Polish Proverb:
Not my Circus....not my monkeys

PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 8707
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has liked: 113 times
Been liked: 321 times

Re: Heard this discussion about a shacked together couple

#45

Post by PaulSacramento » Thu May 19, 2016 12:22 pm

1 Corinthians actually specified the sin of that believer and it was a big one:
5 It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife.
Oivay !

Post Reply