Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
I was watching a video from someone I’ve met and spent some time with one day on Facebook. He was saying that the Old Testament guarantees a right to divorce, that Jesus would not overturn that, and that Matthew 19 was about people who divorce for adulterous motives– but adultery doesn’t mean sex. He got really fuzzy and unclear about the verse that did not fit with his position on the matter. His message had a lot of posts of agreement.
There is also a website, which I won’t advertise in this message, which argues that Matthew 19 is really about the problem of not giving the proper certificate when you divorce, and that divorce is okay, and it is something believers are allowed to do. Of course, it doesn’t line up at all with just sitting down and reading the passage. I saw people on a forum defending this site tooth and nail. I pointed out why it was wrong, and they defended it. One divorced and remarried man called them on it, and pointed out that the passage obviously said what it said.
This is a way liberal position, not historically Pentecostal, historical evangelically, or historically Christian.
Is this ultra-liberal approach to Matthew 19 and other passages (based on not really reading it carefully) growing in popularity? Have you seen it?
Varnel Watson
Link Hudson love me a claim that starts with I was watching a video from someone I’ve met and spent some time with some day somewhere on Facebook that no one can really trace and even I dont remember cause for all purpose its more of a parable
THEN There is also a website, which I won’t tell you continues the same post that said something I dont really remember well and then I even saw people on some forum somewhere
and based on ALL that I feel this is not a historically Pentecostal view though I only visited Pentecostal churches somewhere sometime but no more than a few times and got no clue what a historically Pentecostal view really is but based mine on a video I was watching from someone I’ve met and spent some time with some day somewhere on Facebook… Therefore Joe is bapticostal
Link Hudson
I dont see anyone else complaining. Do your comments edidy or minister grace?
Varnel Watson
how can we comment on the unknown to us?
Link Hudson
I think you are missing the point of the paragraph. I was presenting the fact the I see experiential evidence of a more liberal view of divorce gaining ground. I did not want the discussion to focus on aspecific individual bit on the topic of a shift toward more liberal stances on divorce and remarriage.
I do not get why you would dig up an old thread like this to pedantically pester me by tagging me about such a tangental issue about a post so many weeks. If you want to talk about the actual issue, fine. If not, I have better things to do with my time.
Varnel Watson
I think the paragraph makes NO clear point apart from the ability to use unknown entities in order to proof much disregarded or inflicted conclusion Its a pure form of mind manipulation – too much talk that presents no facts to add up
Joe Absher
…baptist win souls it wouldn’t hurt for a few “historical pentecostals” to take a class