|
Recently I saw a comment from Don Martin on Bible Matters list that prompted this article. He said, "I stand ready and I trust able to defend at any time what I teach (I Pet. 3:15)." Don was not just talking about one issue - - he was talking about everything he teaches, including divorce and remarriage.
I not only stand ready to debate what I believe on MDR but I also publicly challenge Don Martin to debate this important matter. I propose that the debate be published on Don's web site and mine, as well as Focus on Truth and Bible Matters.
Don might argue that the position I hold is not worth considering and that my position is not a threat to his. That dog will not hunt because I often get e-mail from people who have found my web site who say things like, "Your position on MDR makes more sense than anything I have ever read." (Follow the link below to see what people are really saying: http://www.totalhealth.bz/marriage-and-divorce-feedback.htm )
Yes, Don Martin stands ready to debate, but is he ready to debate only those who hold a position that he thinks he can defeat? It is not difficult to prevail in debate against someone who teaches error, but it is difficult to prevail against a qualified opponent who has the truth. Could this be the real reason Don has repeatedly refused to debate me?
Don should feel at an advantage to debate me on MDR because of his qualifications - being expert in language, particularly Greek. Considering the fact that my position is that *apoluo *(put away), as used in Matt. 19:9, does not refer to formal legal divorce (which includes papers), you would think that Don would jump at the chance to prove that it does and to expose my teachings.
Propositions:
The Law of Moses, under which Jesus lived and taught, allowed divorced persons to marry and Jesus could not have taught contrary to Moses without sin.
The "put away" person of Matt. 19:9 that commits adultery by marrying another applies only to those who were ONLY put away or sent away and not also given the bill of divorcement.
The phrase "except for fornication" does not refer to sexual unfaithfulness (adultery) in a legitimate marriage, being the only reason a marriage may be dissolved, but merely refers to the putting away or sending away of a "wife" that is not scriptural or legal.
Brethren, I wish he would but I have little confidence that Don Martin will accept this challenge. On a list a few years ago I exposed his teaching as being contrary to the nature of God as well as contrary to the clear teaching of Paul; a doctrine of demons that causes needless division in churches and families; and a doctrine that makes Jesus a liar and law breaker. Nevertheless, Don continues to teach that same doctrine, which he claims to be ready to defend in debate. He boasts of millions of hits a year on his web site and that he frequently receives questions from around the world. This may be true and he may be teaching a lot of people a lot of truth, but he is not telling people the truth about who has a right to marry. On a list a few years ago Don published a question and answer on MDR.
Below is the question:
"I just want to ask regarding your stand on Matthew 5:32 because I'll be marrying a divorced woman, do you think I'm committing adultery?"
Don's Reply:
"All any one can do is refer you to Matthew 5: 32 and 19: 9. The innocent mate, not guilty of adultery and did not cause it, is allowed to divorce the guilty mate for their adultery. The innocent mate, then, is free to remarry."
Except for referring the man or woman to his web site the above was Don's answer. Don said, "All anyone can do…." Is this true? Is there nothing more to say than refer one to Matthew 5:32 and 19:9? Evidently Don did not even believe what he said because he proceeded to tell the person what he thinks the passage teaches. Brethren, we can do much more when someone wants to know if a divorced person has a right to marry. TELL THEM THE TRUTH. At the very least, don't direct them to only one or two passages on the subject and withhold others and mislead them.
Why did Don (and he is not the only one that does it) give the querist only the two closely related scriptures and fail to mention scriptures like the following: Deut. 24:1-4; Matt. 5:17-19; 1Tim 4:1-3; 1 Cor. 7:1, 2, 8, 9, 27, 28, and 36? I'll tell you why. These passages cause problems for Don's position and would virtually assure that he would not persuade the querist to his way of thinking. Suppose a Baptist preacher has a web site and a man writes and asks what he must do to be saved. The preacher replies, "All anyone can do is refer you to John 3:16" and then he proceeds to give his idea of what it means while failing to note any of the numerous passages that shed light on the subject but contradict his doctrine. This is exactly what Don Martin and others regularly do.
I encourage you to write Don and urge him to either debate this issue with me or quit teaching what he is teaching. Urge him to consider that he may be wrong in what he teaches on MDR and that putting the debate on his website would be a good thing to do.
|
