This is the tenth article in a series of posts regarding questions I have recently answered for churches searching for a new pastor. Like some of the previous posts, this question deals with the hairy beast of divorce prior to conversion.
I certainly acknowledge that there are more godly and learned men than myself who take a different stance on this issue. But I also know that there are more godly and learned men who hold to the exact same interpretation as well. Each person must weigh the issues and compare it to what the Bible teaches, for God’s Word alone is the final authority in both life and the church.
There has been a loosening of the reins over the past few decades in American Christianity regarding what is and is not acceptable for marriage, divorce, remarriage…and how these issues affect church leadership. Add these issues to a person’s lifestyle before they were saved and it gets even more convoluted. Maybe it is because of issues like these that God says, “For I hate divorce…and him who covers his garment with wrong” (Malachi 2:16).
Here is the scenario posed by the church and below that is the response I gave.
[stextbox id=”custom”]An unsaved man was divorced when he was 22 years old. He married his current wife when he was 25. He received Christ at the age of 28. He is now 62 and has four children. What church offices do you believe he is permitted by scripture to hold? Cite the Scripture upon which you base your opinion.[/stextbox]
MY RESPONSE: The Bible does not teach that a pre-conversion divorce is to be viewed any differently to that of a post-conversion divorce. Therefore, I do not believe the Bible teaches that a man who has ever been divorced may hold the office of pastor or deacon. The office of deacon, for example, requires that a man be “beyond reproach” (1 Timothy 3:10), as well as “good managers of their children and their own households” (1 Timothy 3:12). To have ever been divorced is to have brought upon oneself a certain reproach that can never be taken away and, therefore, excludes the divorced man from ever serving as a pastor or deacon (“The one who commits adultery with a woman is lacking sense; he who would destroy himself does it. Wounds and disgrace he will find, and his reproach will not be blotted out.” Proverbs 6:32-33).
However, a pre-conversion divorce does not mean that person can’t minister in the church at all. Such a man, as in this scenario, would be eligible to minister in other non-pastoral/non-deacon positions or ministries in the church, such as a Sunday school teacher or usher, for example. Moreover, some churches create official (yet subordinate) positions in the local church under the leadership, guidance, and discretion of the pastor and/or deacons. Although these are not prescribed offices in the Bible (and therefore have no God-breathed/ordained qualifications required for eligibility), such positions can and have been created in order to strategically serve the local congregation. A few examples of such positions could be labeled as: Treasurer, Church Clerk, or Sunday School Superintendent.
(Scriptures I would cite: Genesis 2:24; Malachi 2:14-16; Matthew 5:32; 18:15-17; 19:3-9; Mark 10:11-12; Romans 7:2-3; 1 Corinthians 7:10-16, 20-24, 27, 39; 2 Corinthians 6:14; 1 Timothy 3;1:12; Proverbs 6:32-33)
Charles,
The word for reproach in Proverbs 6 32-33 you quote is the Hebrew word cherpah (kher-paw’); commonly used as disgrace. In the KJV english it means: rebuke, reproach, or shame.
The word for reproach in 1 Timothy 3:2 is the Greek word
anepileptos (an-ep-eel’-ape-tos)in KJV english it means blameless, unrebukeable.
Even if it was the same word used in the text and seems to be a stretch to try to give them continuity between the two verses because Proverbs in talking specifically about the sin of adultery and what happens to those who commit it and 1 Timothy 3 is talking specifically about qualifications of elder character qualifications that no pre conversion sinner would have. That is why the verse really seems out of context by your stance when you latch onto the “husband of one wife” as unforgivable but the rest of the flaws not one has a problem with. I understand your view, but I do think it’s inconsistent and I think you’re wrong. Here is why.
Jesus told us in Matthew chapter 5:27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Jesus tells us in Matthew 5:31-32 Divorce is not permitted “except” for sexual immorality (fornication) and whoever does get divorced without that exception causes their spouse to commit adultery.
I would say that if your going to be consistent and hold to a view that divorce is the unforgivable sin because it leads to adultery even in pre-conversion; you shouldn’t be a liberal when it comes to the sins of adultery, and fornication which lusting after someone in our hearts pre-conversion. That way there isn’t a double standard where the grace is sufficient for one but not the other.
Also let’s remember that most of the Patriarchs had many wives up to including Moses who had two and Rahab was a harlot that Jesus descended from yet through grace they were above reproach.
Sure would of been a lot clearer if Paul would of said avoid elders who have been divorced, like he said avoid sexual immorality like in the Jerusalem council in Acts 15. That way nobody would be reading into the text bringing wisdom of men into it.
Blessings,
Scot
Scot, thanks for the comment. I truly enjoy the dialogue.
I certainly agree that there are interpretive problems on both sides of these issues. Yet I also question as to whether or not God would leave subjective “gray” area with regards to the issue of leadership in the local church.
With regards to the Proverbs 6 passage about reproach, yep, it refers to adultery. And adultery deals with the relationship between a husband and wife, and a 3rd party. Certainly at that time the Jews didn’t interpret that verse as lust of the mind, which is why Jesus widened the interpretation of lust and adultery in the Sermon on the Mount. So it obviously referred to the physical act of adultery and not, necessarily, only to the thought life.
After all, if the qualifications for N.T. church leadership were all inclusive of “thoughts,” then certainly no one would ever be qualified, for we’d disqualify ourselves on a daily basis. Moreover, it could be argued that most (if not all) of the leadership qualifications are “subjective” rather than “objective.” For I could interpret what it means “to be hospitable” or “able to teach” one way and you could another. Therefore, each person must come to their own interpretation/decision on what all of these qualifications mean by studying the whole of Scripture…with a good conscience.
Moreover, I never said that a past divorce is an “unforgivable sin,”, like you stated above. I am simply making an argument that it does exclude a person from “official” church leadership, but that it doesn’t preclude them from by any God-honoring ministry inside or outside the church in general.
To compare the O.T. patriarchs to local church leaders in the early church and today, however, is a bit of a stretch. I would personally prefer to steer clear of that comparison, because the differences are legion. If you assume the temple priest or Levitical priests are the foundation for early church leaders, then we might want to also consider sacrificng bulls, lambs, goats and pigeons in between singing Amazing Grace and passing the offering plate. 🙂
Finally, let’s assume for a minute that I’m completely wrong on my interpretation(s) and you are correct. How then would you answer the following questions/issues?
1) If a pre-conversion divorce doesn’t matter, is that based upon a certain time period? Such as a week, a few years, or 40 years? In other words, how long is the time period supposed to be between a pre-conversion divorce, salvation, and church leadership? What the magic number…and who decides that number?
2) I think you also previously stated that you believe a pastor can still remain the pastor and lead the church even after getting divorced while he was the pastor (we discussed Charles Stanley, for example). Is that still true? Do you still think that? Wouldn’t such a man be immediately disqualified from not only the “above reproach” qualification, but others such as “husband of one wife” and “manages his own household well,” for example?
3) If a pastor got divorced and still remained the pastor of the church, how in the world could he preach/teach (not to mention counsel one-on-one) on the many passages regarding marital relations, divorce, remarriage, male leadership, fatherhood, etc., without being a hypocrite and the people in the church thinking he’s a hypocrite? (I have personally noticed that most…(maybe all?)…divorced pastors turned into “topical” preachers rather than “verse-by-verse” expositors, primarily because of this issue.)
I still love you, brother Scot…but I do think your interpretations on these issues are much more liberal than mine are! But iron does sharpen iron, and I love the fact that we are both trying to sharpen one another in the spirit of gentleness and love. Blessings to you my friend…and I’m looking forward to your replies on my 3 questions above.
Charles
Scot,I’m still waiting for your answers on the following questions. 🙂
1) If a pre-conversion divorce doesn’t matter, is that based upon a certain time period? Such as a week, a few years, or 40 years? In other words, how long is the time period supposed to be between a pre-conversion divorce, salvation, and church leadership? What the magic number…and who decides that number?
2) I think you also previously stated that you believe a pastor can still remain the pastor and lead the church even after getting divorced while he was the pastor (we discussed Charles Stanley, for example). Is that still true? Do you still think that? Wouldn’t such a man be immediately disqualified from not only the “above reproach” qualification, but others such as “husband of one wife” and “manages his own household well,” for example?
3) If a pastor got divorced and still remained the pastor of the church, how in the world could he preach/teach (not to mention counsel one-on-one) on the many passages regarding marital relations, divorce, remarriage, male leadership, fatherhood, etc., without being a hypocrite and the people in the church thinking he’s a hypocrite? (I have personally noticed that most…(maybe all?)…divorced pastors turned into “topical” preachers rather than “verse-by-verse” expositors, primarily because of this issue.)
I would differ with you on this conclusion as well, Charles. When a person is saved, he is a new creation and all things in his life become new (suddenly or gradually). The sins committed prior to salvation are void if he departs from them. A repentant divorcee, murderer, fornicator, adulterer, homosexual, drug user, swindler etc. is a new creation. To suggest that any sin committed prior to salvation could be grounds to disqualify a man from one day serving as an elder or pastor is to deny the legal power of the cross. His entire life prior to salvation is described by Ephesians 2:1 as “dead.” How can a dead thing bring honor or reproach to anyone, much less God? It cannot. The dead can only stink. However, when Jesus saves, he resurrects that dead spirit that it may walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:4) If such a man is deemed unqualified for eldership, it cannot be on the basis you propose.
Thanks for your comments Carol. I’m glad you did!
Yes, I fully understand that people disagree with me, and that’s okay. If I took the other side of the interpretation, such as you do, I’d still have people disagree with me, and that’s fine.
I agree…and praise God that all things become new at salvation! But is that referring to eternal destination, forgiveness, “everything” in this life, spiritual recreation, etc.? That’s where we need to be clear, because there still remains the reaping-and-sowing principal even for newly saved people.
What I mean by this is that, yes, we are forgiven in Christ, but we still must deal with the consequences (or outcomes) of our decisions/actions. For example, a person who murdered before salvation is still responsible for their actions after being saved. So is a thief…and so is a liar…and so is an adulterer. A person who committed sexual immorality while a non-Christian might still get AIDS three years after getting saved. Someone who smoked before getting saved still reaps the consequences later or. They same goes with countless other things as well.
Using your argument above, at what point then would a person be considered “qualified” or “above reproach” or “one who manages his own household well” after getting divorced and later on saved? You need to come up with a number (# of years or months, or instantly, etc.) based upon your interpretation of this issue. What is that number?
If all things become new, can a murder become a pastor immediately after salvation…if he’s sorry for his actions? If yes, how long after the murder would he be eligible for church leadership? You see, you can’t isolate the issue and say, “Well, for divorce we won’t take that into consideration, but things like murder, and theft, and…we will.” Whatever your answer is for divorce must also be true for everything else, including murder.
Lastly, if my interpretation is correct, that doesn’t mean such a person is a substandard Christian…or even would be used less by God compared to a pastor or deacon. It certainly doesn’t mean that person can’t minister their spiritual gifts either inside or outside of the church entity. All it would mean is that being a pastor or deacon isn’t an available position (or ministry) to them.
Does that make sense? I look forward to your answer on the “time period” issue above.
Charles
Charles, such a legalist approach. As I mentioned in the past, sin is sin but grace and forgiveness are not ours to withhold. There is no magic number of days or years only a manifestation of a man’s character after salvation. Churches and committees should examine a man with the Biblical standard as it applies to his current life and character. With much prayer and supplication. No man is above reproach. A pastor is only a man after all. Do you confess your sins before your congregation that they may judge you and dole out consequences or before the almighty god creator of heaven and earth that he may draw you nearer to himself? Pray that God be evident in all our lives so that our own perspectives not destroy our witness to those who are yet to believe.