Would Donald Trump’s marriage be accepted in a CA church?

[Josh]

In short, Holdeman's and Apostolics would accept his marriage and the rest of Plain Anabaptists would not. Is that correct?

No.

[Josh]

Is there a scriptural basis for the position that what one did before becoming a Christian and joining the church is different for remarrying after becoming a Christian and joining the church? I can understand the reasoning, that those without the Spirit of God can't be held to the same standard as those with the Spirit of God, but I am curious if there are verses/passages that are used for this position.

Does anyone have this position? I’m not aware of any that do, except maybe some Apostolics?

[Josh]

Suppose Trump decided he wanted to join an Anabaptist church. After meeting all other requirements and passing the traditional seeker “hazing”, the last thing to deal with would be his marital status.

Key facts:

His first wife is deceased.

His second wife is still living.

His third wife is also living, with him.

Discuss.

I guess I never considered such a situation.
I used to have a neighbor that was never married previously. He ended up marrying a divorced woman. After several years and two children, they also divorced.
Eventually he joined a CA church. If I remember correctly they church leaders told him they would not be comfortable officiating a wedding if he decided to remarry. He is still single to this day.
I believe most CA churches would hold this position.
Val Yoder goes into greater detail on these issues.
I believe he says that the early church would not allow remarriage if subsequent marriages had taken place.

However, not all CA agree. A while back I was speaking to a CA preacher. He does not have charge at a church. He stated that he didn't know how a person could be bound to an illegitimate marriage.

Personally, I don't feel like the Bible is crystal clear on this. While I wouldn't condemn such a person I think the church does well to take a strong stand on it. You know, "Give the devil an inch and he'll take a mile"

That’s a truly bizarre position, and in particular isn’t supported by scripture. I do not see where the Bible teaches “he who marries a divorced woman, and then separates from her, must never legitimately marry someone else”.

In my hypothetical example, let’s say Marla Maples keels over next. Would he be acceptable then?

[Ernie]

Is there a scriptural basis for the position that what one did before becoming a Christian and joining the church is different for remarrying after becoming a Christian and joining the church? I can understand the reasoning, that those without the Spirit of God can't be held to the same standard as those with the Spirit of God, but I am curious if there are verses/passages that are used for this position.

Does anyone have this position? I’m not aware of any that do, except maybe some Apostolics?

What is the Holdeman basis/position?

[Ernie]

That’s a truly bizarre position, and in particular isn’t supported by scripture. I do not see where the Bible teaches “he who marries a divorced woman, and then separates from her, must never legitimately marry someone else”.

Ultra-conservatives, Intermediate-conservatives, half of Beachy churches, some other moderate-conservatives hold to this position based on the fact that if a person makes a vow, even a wrong vow, they cannot extract themselves from it until that person dies. But to live with a divorced person is also wrong. So they must remain celibate until the divorced person dies.

[Josh]

That’s a truly bizarre position, and in particular isn’t supported by scripture. I do not see where the Bible teaches “he who marries a divorced woman, and then separates from her, must never legitimately marry someone else”.

Ultra-conservatives, Intermediate-conservatives, half of Beachy churches, some other moderate-conservatives hold to this position based on the fact that if a person makes a vow, even a wrong vow, they cannot extract themselves from it until that person dies.

This is a fascinating position, since they simultaneously expect someone to break their vow if they married a divorced person. But then somehow think they made a vow to that person not to marry someone else.

Worldly people generally don’t make such vows. Many vows don’t even say anything about marriage for life. So one wonders what “vow” they think they are upholding.

[Josh]

Is there a scriptural basis for the position that what one did before becoming a Christian and joining the church is different for remarrying after becoming a Christian and joining the church? I can understand the reasoning, that those without the Spirit of God can't be held to the same standard as those with the Spirit of God, but I am curious if there are verses/passages that are used for this position.

Does anyone have this position? I’m not aware of any that do, except maybe some Apostolics?

What is the Holdeman basis/position?

Based on this verse: “But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

We believe Jesus taught not to get divorced, except for things that break the marriage bond like unrepentant adultery. To make a clear cut case, someone has an affair; abandons and divorces their spouse; marries someone else; doesn’t want to reconcile or repent. We believe the “exception clause” above applies.

We don’t see anything about status of being a church member or not in there.

We also frankly don’t see anything about, for example, a husband whose wife divorces him, being prohibited to marry someone else, for a strict literal reading. But for a general reading, we see that abandonment combined with adultery breaks the marriage bond.

For church members who end up separated, if both are right with God, they will reconcile and get back together. If that doesn’t happen, either 1 or both have refused to repent. It is the job of the church to discern who is at fault (or both) and excommunicate appropriately.

Filing a divorce isn’t OK either, unless someone abandons their spouse and a reason for a divorce is necessary. An example is a man who decided to live a transsexual lifestyle, abandoned his wife, and refused to support her - but was more than willing to empty out her bank account (which is legal in California) and run up tax debts in her name (also a quirk of California). So it was necessary for a divorce. Interestingly, he eventually repented and was restored to church fellowship. However, because of the gross immorality he inflicted, she was not expected to try to reconcile the marriage, and he never made any attempts to do so.

She got married after her first husband died and has family ties to the extended plain world. I had someone ask me “why is your church letting her remarry when she divorced her first husband?” I reminded the other person he is DEAD. They still thought she shouldn’t be allowed to remarry. This stance of certain plain groups is beyond the pale. I don’t think a good Christian wife should be expected to stay celibate after her husband decides to become a homosexual/transsexual, acquires a fatal disease due to his sinful lifestyle, abuses her financially and other ways, and then DIES.

[Nomad]

I think a good place to start is to figure out when the marriage covenant is broken in the eyes of God as the Bible presents it. Is it broken at 1) divorce or is it broken at 2) porneia?

Once this is figured out then I would need to figure out if the exception clause for divorce in Matthew 19:9 in the case of porneia is referencing an allowance for 1) divorce or 2) divorce and remarriage.

[Josh]

I think a good place to start is to figure out when the marriage covenant is broken in the eyes of God as the Bible presents it. Is it broken at 1) divorce or is it broken at 2) porneia?

Once this is figured out then I would need to figure out if the exception clause for divorce in Matthew 19:9 in the case of porneia is referencing an allowance for 1) divorce or 2) divorce and remarriage.

The NT doesn’t say anything to think remarriage (at least for men) would be prohibited. It just says it’s wrong to divorce your wife except for a valid reason. It is a bit concerning how many CAs feel comfortable adding to the scriptures for this.

[Ernie]

Does anyone have this position? I’m not aware of any that do, except maybe some Apostolics?

What is the Holdeman basis/position?

Based on this verse: “But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

We believe Jesus taught not to get divorced, except for things that break the marriage bond like unrepentant adultery. To make a clear cut case, someone has an affair; abandons and divorces their spouse; marries someone else; doesn’t want to reconcile or repent. We believe the “exception clause” above applies.

We don’t see anything about status of being a church member or not in there.

We also frankly don’t see anything about, for example, a husband whose wife divorces him, being prohibited to marry someone else, for a strict literal reading. But for a general reading, we see that abandonment combined with adultery breaks the marriage bond.

For church members who end up separated, if both are right with God, they will reconcile and get back together. If that doesn’t happen, either 1 or both have refused to repent. It is the job of the church to discern who is at fault (or both) and excommunicate appropriately.

Filing a divorce isn’t OK either, unless someone abandons their spouse and a reason for a divorce is necessary. An example is a man who decided to live a transsexual lifestyle, abandoned his wife, and refused to support her - but was more than willing to empty out her bank account (which is legal in California) and run up tax debts in her name (also a quirk of California). So it was necessary for a divorce. Interestingly, he eventually repented and was restored to church fellowship. However, because of the gross immorality he inflicted, she was not expected to try to reconcile the marriage, and he never made any attempts to do so.

She got married after her first husband died and has family ties to the extended plain world. I had someone ask me “why is your church letting her remarry when she divorced her first husband?” I reminded the other person he is DEAD. They still thought she shouldn’t be allowed to remarry. This stance of certain plain groups is beyond the pale. I don’t think a good Christian wife should be expected to stay celibate after her husband decides to become a homosexual/transsexual, acquires a fatal disease due to his sinful lifestyle, abuses her financially and other ways, and then DIES.

so what if a man divorces his wife, leaves your church, marries another woman, then repents and comes back to the church. What is he advised to do and what is he allowed to do?