ADVERTISEMENT:   
Tim Haile Speaking On: “Biblical ‘Putting Away’” 

On Feb. 12th we will have a (almost) all day Bible study at the meeting house of the Warfield Blvd. church in Clarksville, Tennessee. Anyone within driving distance, please come.

It will begin at 9:30 a.m. Three speakers will present 45 minutes of study and 15 minutes of Q&A.  David Dodd will speak on "Seven Ds of a Successful Church." Steve Reeves will speak on "Grace Unity Movement."  Tim Haile will speak on "Biblical 'Putting Away'".

Our meeting house is located at 290 Warfield Blvd. From Interstate 24, take exit 4 and go south. That is Hwy 79 and becomes Wilma Rudolph Blvd.  Follow it until you pass the Trane (Air Conditioner) Factory. You will turn left (get in the left lane of traffic) on Hwy 374 (that is Warfield Blvd to the left and 101st Air Borne to the right.) Turn left and go about 1/2 mile. You will see our meeting house on the right just after you go over the overpass. Questions: call me at 931-503-1598 or 931-647-1324 or email me.

Hope all in this area can come for a profitable study.

Brotherly,
Dudley Ross Spears

Dear brother Spears,

I hope that you and your family are well.  Since I am unable to drive to TN to attend your meeting, I was wondering if you could have Tim answer some of these questions, either in his lesson or the Q & A period afterwards. 

In regards to the post-civil-divorce divorce doctrine, where does the gospel of Christ mention anything about:

1. A divorce that is not really a divorce?

2. God recognizing some unlawful divorces, but failing to acknowledge other unlawful divorces?

3. Accommodative use of the words “marriage” and/or “divorce?”

4. The impossibility of obtaining an unscriptural divorce against an “innocent” mate?

5. “Marriage” and the “bond” being inextricably linked together so that whenever there is marriage, there is a bond and vice versa?

6. A remaining “marriage” (as opposed to solely a bond), after an unlawful divorce?

7. The requirement for the innocent party to protest the divorce, in order to ensure their subsequent option of putting away their ex-spouse if and when he commits fornication?

8. The ability of the innocent put away party (described in Mt.5:32b; 19:9b and Lk. 16:18b) to change themselves into the party who can “put away” for fornication (described in Mt. 5:32a; 19:9a and Lk. 16:18a)?

9. The extension of the exception clause past a finalized divorce (repudiation)?

10. Jesus emphasizing the exception rather than the rule in Matthew 19:6-9?

11. The innocent put away person’s ability to scripturally remarry another while the one who put them away is still alive?

12. Fidelity “to the marriage bond” ensuring the possibility for a put away innocent party to “put away” and “remarry,” when their estranged spouse commits fornication?

13. Different consequences for those involved in some unlawful divorces, as opposed to those imposed on participants in other unlawful divorces (II Tim. 2:15)?

14. A divorce being nothing more than a “farce” when perpetrated against an “innocent” mate?

The above insinuations (which Tim, Harry and Ron have made) seem to me to be absolutely arbitrary, yet necessary for the doctrine of the second putting away (“mental divorce”) to stand.  In addition, if he answers none of the above, could you at least ask him to answer the question that is in many of our minds:  Although he seems to disagree with Ron's "application" (that allows an "innocent" one who is put away before any fornication takes place, to later put away and remarry if and when the ungodly mate fornicates), does he believe it can be fellowshipped? 

I would also like to request a copy of the lesson and Q/A session if possible.  I will be glad to reimburse you for all costs.

My Address is:

Jeff Belknap
100 Carriage Drive
Beckley, WV  25801

Thank you very much.

Brotherly,
Jeff

Home | Search This Site