========================================================================
INSTRUCTED by the Scriptures, LED by the Spirit
Bold Christian Living E-Mail Newsletter, Issue #72
© 2000 Jonathan Lindvall
Permission to re-post in full is granted.

This newsletter is sent out free to those who request it. To UNSUBSCRIBE
from or to SUBSCRIBE to the newsletter, please write from the address
you want to use, to the following addresses (NOT directly to me please).
To unsubscribe write to <BoldChristianLiving-UNsubscribe@onelist.com>.
To subscribe write to <BoldChristianLiving-subscribe@onelist.com>.

========================================================================

Thank you to those who support our ministry financially. Out of
principle Bold Christian Living is not a government-registered
non-profit organization, but if the Lord leads you to support our
ministry through contributions or ordering resources, we are grateful.

========================================================================

A few months ago, we were given a four-year-old dog (Border
Collie/Australian Shepherd) by some Christian Homeschoolers moving out
of the area. We were so pleased to have this relatively obedient and
energetic dog. Recently we have been excitedly arranging to train the
dog to herd our growing flock of sheep.

However, the dog had recently shown a nasty side, growling quite
ferociously at visitors, and seeming especially unfriendly to children,
even our own. To my regret, we dismissed these warning signs. This last
Monday the dog apparently felt the need to exert dominance over our
two-year-old son, Joel. As he "helped" Judah, our six-year-old, feed the
dog, he first charged at Joel and butted him over with his head.

I dismissed this, insisting it must have been an accident. But Connie
wasn't so sure, so after calming the boys down, she watched as they
proceeded to feed the dog. To our horror, the dog decided to attack. In
one swift moment, he had ripped Joel's face open about an inch from his
eye.

We were all crying out to the Lord audibly, and Connie was beside
herself as she picked Joel up. We ran to the car and sped off for the
hospital. On the way, the bleeding subsided with the help of ice. Joel
was eventually stitched up, but our family routine was significantly
disrupted for several days as we all focused on Joel and his needs.

The doctors have told us Joel will likely have a major scar. We've been
instructed to keep his face out of direct sunlight for at least six
months to minimize scarring. You can imagine we'll be applying vitamin
E, Calendula, Aloe Vera, and anything else that seems wise, but we would
appreciate your prayers for Joel, that the Lord will glorify Himself in
this situation.

========================================================================

Jim Erskine, one of this newsletter's subscribers publishes a delightful
Christian family magazine I thought I'd let you all know about, in case
you're unfamiliar with it. It is entitled _Coming Home_, and often
carries articles I've written. Jim didn't ask me to promote this, but I
asked him to send me something that would describe the magazine
accurately. This is what he sent:

COMING HOME is a bi-monthly, "homemade" 56-page magazine (now
in its 7th year) published by our family of five here at our 12 acre
homestead in central Kentucky. Our purpose in publishing is twofold: to
bring honor our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ; and to build up and
encourage men and women whose hearts are at home. In the magazine our
emphasis is both on Practical Christianity and Practical, Simple Living.
We desire to build up the family and home, by offering a God-centered,
simple alternative to the hectic, materialistic & entertainment-
oriented world we live in today.

COMING HOME is written in part by our readers, and also contains
words of wisdom from Godly men from days gone by, which have practical
application for us today. Some recently published articles include: A
Godly Daughter * Dangers to Young Men * Making and Canning Butter * Old
Books in Homeschooling * Betrothal * Grandma's Money-Saving Recipes *
Silent Influences on Our Lives * Spiritual Preparation for Hard Times *
Homemade Bread recipes * Struggling with Fertility * Public Schools: A
Combat Zone * Cheesemaking * "Making Do" with What You Have * Clothing
and Modesty * Candlemaking * Help for the "Domestically Challenged"
Homemaker * and more...

A one-year subscription to Coming Home (6 issues) is available
to new subscribers for just $12 (regularly $20) until April 30, 2000.
Please mention the Bold Christian Living Newsletter when you order. Our
mailing address is: Coming Home Magazine, PO Box 187, Canmer, KY 42722.

========================================================================

We conduct monthly meetings for those enrolled in our local homeschool
ministry (Pilgrims School). Each month I give a presentation that is
generally recorded and later made available through our tape ministry.
The tapes often take quite a while to be released, and I don't want to
be premature in raising expectations, but I'm really excited about a
presentation we taped earlier this week entitled "Fathers' Houses: the
Patriarchal Birthright."

This message deals with God's design, in scripture, for families to
maintain unity intergenerationally, as household clans. Most Christians
today have embraced the scattering of their families as a norm. God
calls this scattering a curse. But how can it be avoided? One key is
found in scriptural teaching regarding the passing on the birthright and
patriarchal blessing.

Although this tape won't be available for some time, I thought I'd whet
your appetites with some encouraging feedback from one of the brothers
who was there. He wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Feedback on last nights topic... I'm really excited !! God has
> specifically been dealing with me in this exact area this past year
> and more intensely this month. Now that [son] has graduated, [wife]
> and I (and [son] too!) are beginning to hear: "what are your plans
> now?"; "What college will you be attending?"; "About time to be moving
> out on his own now". I've been battling my 'old self ' who grew up
> and moved 2000 miles away from home immediately after Hi school and
> the new person in Christ who now says 'follow Him'. Lord, help !!
> [Son] shows NO desire to 'get away' as I did at his age, and is in fact
> very content and eager to stay on and further our home business the
> Lord has blessed us with. Just this past week, the Lord gave me a
> vision (not a foretelling vision ?? but a 'What if...') to obtain
> properties within my immediate locale to keep our family united, a
> viable possibility with circumstances here. But the 'old self ' says,
> "how, when, where and why"? But Christ keeps urging me in this
> 'other' direction which brings peace to my spirit, but what is this
> other direction ? After last night, I felt better able to articulate
> the 'other' direction. I see things much clearer now and have more
> resolve to pursue this course.
> PRAISE THE LORD !!
>
> Jonathan, I thank the Lord for the ministry He has entrusted to
> you, and for how much He has directed me through your faithfulness in
> delivering His Word.

In follow-up correspondence this dad continued:

> I talked in depth with [son] and shared with him about Tuesday's topic
> and how I felt God was calling me to lead our family down this path.
> I asked him what his ambitions were, his expectations, what he thought
> God's plan was for him. Keep in mind, [son] has observed many Christian
> children (that we went to church with way back when) grow up; date,
> leave home, go to college (far away), date some more and finally get
> married. Now he's observing Christian children his own age that he
> knows follow the same path. I often wonder how much 'pressure' he
> feels to conform, to 'fit in' (to typical Christian standards let
> alone the world's (hard to tell the difference!!)).
>
> Praise the Lord for His protection, His mercy in my family that in all
> the areas [wife] and I lack in spiritual wisdom, God's grace fills in
> and blesses all the more !! [Son's] response was enthusiasm for buying
> surrounding property and keeping the family together now and down the
> road as we all get older. We came home and by his initiative
> (generated by excitement) got on the computer and began creating a
> marketing flyer he and I discussed earlier. An excitement and
> interest I have not seen in him without 'prodding;' it seems as though
> there has been some resolve in his heart as well.

What a blessing to see our young people give their parents their hearts
(Prov. 23:26) and catch a vision for being part of spiritual dynasties
(corporate households) that go beyond the individualism so pervasive in
the modern church.

========================================================================

My application of the scriptural principles of "shunning" from 1 Cor. 5
in the last issue raised some interesting feedback. I'll want to respond
to a couple of letters in a moment, but let me get myself in even more
hot water by dealing with same principle from another angle. Jesus told
us to resolve our conflicts with those who sin against us in a very
specific process.

In the following case, let's apply this to the issue of sisters who wear
IMMODEST APPAREL. A subscriber wrote:

> We really enjoy your articles & were wondering if you have a
> specific writing on appropriate dress for young people in church?
> Many of the female youth are wearing skirts so short that you can
> hardly call them skirts and tops so low that there is no need for
> imagination. My request is for info that we could present to our
> pastor that may help him in addressing this issue. I don't know if he
> is just unsure of how to approach the subject so he usually says
> something like "we as believers should not look like the world" How
> can one be more specific & is it possible to set limits?

This is a growing concern for many families. I've heard from many about
the grievous immodesty they and their children face in their own
churches.

I personally don't believe gathering as a church is a time people should
dress differently from the way they normally do. I'm sympathetic with
the need to project specialness--the meaning of the word "holy"--to the
gathering of the saints, but in my estimation Christians have
historically overdone this by having a church "uniform," essentially. I
seriously doubt Jesus dressed up special for meetings of the synagogue.

Rather than dressing up in uncomfortable Sunday costumes to show off our
wealth, taste, or beauty at church, perhaps a good rule of thumb might
be to wear what we would to go to dinner at the home of friends (this
is, after all, what the early church gatherings were). We should dress
nicely, in clean clothes, out of honor toward those God has called us to
edify when we gather, but not "dress up" in the sense of trying to make
a good impression. This issue is honor and deference, but not
ostentatiousness.

Further, though, the gatherings of the saints should be the one place
families can feel safe in bringing their children without being
confronted by immodest, defrauding apparel. If some of those who go by
the name of Christ have not seen the need for modesty in their normal
lives, I believe it is up to the rest of the saints they meet with to
gently exhort them, and provide a model of propriety. (Note: I don't
believe the scripture teaches that "pastors" have more responsibility
here than anyone else--we're all sheep under the Chief Shepherd.)

1 Timothy 2:9 is extremely clear. Paul writes, "...in like manner also,
that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and
moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly
clothing..." In other words, don't dress up in high fashion, showing off
new or expensive clothes, but also, make sure your apparel projects
"propriety and moderation."

I love the way the King James Version puts it: "...that women adorn
themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety..."
SHAMEFACEDNESS????? What's that? Other translations use words like
"propriety," "decency," and "modesty." The Greek word "aidos" literally
means "downcast eyes" with the sense of reverence or even bashfulness.

In Proverbs 7:10, Solomon describes the opposite--a woman "with the
attire of a harlot." What type of attire would a harlot wear? I suppose
in every culture it might be different, but in every one it would be
"attractive" in the sense of overtly "attracting" men's attention.

Certainly men have the responsibility to keep their hearts pure, even
when confronted by temptation. But if a woman wears clothes that make
this difficult, she will be held accountable before God. Jesus said
(Luke 17:1-2), "It is impossible that no offenses should come, but woe
to him through whom they do come! It would be better for him if a
millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea,
than that he should offend one of these little ones."

Temptations will come, and we are all responsible for how we respond to
them. But woe to me if I knowingly facilitate the temptation resulting
in some weak Christian's failure. According to Jesus, I would be better
off being drowned with a millstone!

So should churches have dress codes? I honestly don't believe so. When
we start making rules for one another we are rejecting the very freedom
in Christ Paul guarded so diligently. He was adamant when he wrote (Col.
2:20-23), "Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles
of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject
yourselves to regulations; 'Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,'
which all concern things which perish with the using; according to the
commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an
appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and
neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the
flesh."

The solution is not to be found in imposing rules on ourselves and one
another. Instead, the key is found in letting the Holy Spirit teach us
to truly love Jesus and one another (revealing our lack of love). In
another context, Paul said (1 Cor. 6:12), "All things are lawful for me,
but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will
not be brought under the power of any."

The apostle insisted on no "legalism" (imposed laws), but rather walking
in love and freedom. If something would bring him under bondage, it was
not legalism to avoid that trap. And if something fulfills selfish
pursuits rather than love for one another, it is not legalism to ask the
Lord to help us see this.

Paul apparently had this principle in mind when, a couple of chapters
later (1 Cor. 8:9), he said, "But beware lest somehow this liberty of
yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak." We're back to the
question of stumbling blocks. Yes, the sisters are free to wear whatever
they wish. But let them beware lest their freedom results in causing a
brother to stumble. And if they refuse to see such a cause and effect
sequence, they are not walking in love.

A second time in the same letter Paul wrote (1 Cor. 10:23-24), "All
things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are
lawful for me, but not all things edify." But notice this time he zeroed
in on the issue of loving edification of others. He continued, "Let no
one seek his own, but each one the other's well-being."

A few verses later (1 Cor. 10:32-33) he summed up his exhortation,
saying, "Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the
church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking
my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved."

The sisters need to take this exhortation to heart regarding what they
wear.

But now let me turn the tables. If there is a new or immature believer
who dresses in a worldly, immodest fashion, it is quite possible they
are the "bruised reed He will not break, And smoking flax He will not
quench" (Matt. 12:20; Is. 42:3). Jesus didn't always jump all over
people's sins immediately. He fanned the flame of their humble thirst
for the living water.

We who are mature may need to put up with some immaturity for a time, in
order to avoid quenching the work of the Spirit in some struggling
sister's life. Paul wrote (Rom. 15:1) "We then who are strong ought to
bear with the scruples of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let
each of us please his neighbor for his good, leading to edification."

Although the context in which he said this is reversed in some senses
(the weak had the stricter conscience, in the case he was dealing with),
the principle remains. If the immodesty of a weak sister is bearable
(gross immodesty clearly must be dealt with immediately, but we must
rely on the Spirit to help us correctly draw the line), the more mature
ones must clearly be patient, and let the Lord teach her shamefacedness
in His time.

Still, if sisters who should know better insist on their "right" to wear
what they want, I believe they should be lovingly exhorted privately,
probably by another sister. If they won't respond to that, witnesses
(sisters AND brothers) should be included in a second warning. If she
refuses to respond to this, the brothers should humbly take it before
the whole church (humbly providing thorough explanation of the
principles and process involved).

Jesus said (Matt. 18:15-17), "Moreover if your brother sins against you,
go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you,
you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one
or two more, that 'by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may
be established.' And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church.
But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a
heathen and a tax collector."

Several of our tapes touch on the topic of modesty, including #115
"Training Sons vs. Training Daughters." Ordering information is
available at the end of this newsletter.

For further discussion of the issue of modesty, you can search our
newsletter archives for previous issues dealing with the topic. In
particular, Issue #63 dealt with the topic of Clothing. It can be
accessed at <http://onelist.com/message/BoldChristianLiving/63>.

========================================================================

The previous example is one in which the responsibility of
fellow-believers to be pro-active is debatable. The situation I dealt
with in the last issue (#71 available at
<http://onelist.com/message/BoldChristianLiving/71>) was much more
clear. Yet it is natural to wish for some other, more merciful, way. One
subscriber's appeal seemed particularly reasonable, and gives an
opportunity to address the question from the angle of "taking the LORD'S
NAME IN VAIN."

> I keep wondering why you would only encourage the man to allow his wife &
> children to attend the wedding of a couple who are living in sin IF she
> were NOT a professing Christian - shouldn't we encourage adherence to
> God's ways even before having complete understanding of them? Someday of
> course, she (& hopefully he) will repent of the time they spent OUT of
> God's will, and in showing forth such an ungodly example - but we teach
> our children (rightfully I believe) Scriptures & encourage memorization
> of them when they have only a very small understanding of the real
> meaning or power in God's words. If we waited until they had a mature
> understanding to begin reading them over & over and committing then to
> memory - well, would it ever happen? Reading, praying over, memorizing,
> meditating, and hearing them is what will bring about the very maturity
> needed. I can understand not being in fellowship with them while they
> remain unmarried - but why not applaud their decision to make their
> relationship right? To praise God with them that the relationship can be
> one He can now bless?
>
> Wouldn't it be a glorious occasion to share wonderful appropriate
> Scriptures to encourage them to further embrace God's ways into their new
> life together? Opportunities to exhort them and further their
> understanding of the blessings of obedience to our loving, forgiving
> Father? We should continue to Scripturally encourage new/young/immature
> believers shouldn't we? - even the s l o w ones?
>
> Didn't Jesus go to all the places where sin was abounding to teach and
> love and bless - do we think or believe that everyone who hears the truth
> understands the whole truth all at once and after the first exposure to
> it? I know that the Lord tells us that we have received all we need for
> righteousness - in CHRIST JESUS, when we are saved, but we don't
> automatically have perfect access to all of it right off.
>
> Are we responsible for those that we share the truth with that they
> repent and accept? or are we responsible to give and live the truth &
> pray for God's desired results to follow? I would greatly appreciate
> your expounding on this issue.
>
> My thought is that if she is not at all repentant, she may very well have
> NOT received salvation yet and is in constant need of prayer to come to
> know and deal with that. Being unsuccessful to do the right thing earlier
> is not the same as not being repentant is it?

You make a good point that we are not to isolate ourselves from sinners.
It is the nature of sinners to sin. If we could persuade them to stop
committing certain sins, they would still be sinners. They would simply
come up with more sophisticated ways to exhibit their selfishness and
pride. (Do we do the same thing?)

And as you noted, Jesus was accused of being friends with sinners. And
as I quoted in my response, Paul clearly said (1 Cor. 5:10) we are NOT
to stop interacting with "the sexually immoral people of this world."

However, he did say (verse 11) "not to keep company with anyone NAMED A
BROTHER, who is sexually immoral." You make a good point that it is
quite likely this fornicating sister is not truly born again. But
interestingly, Paul doesn't address just those who are actually
brothers, but "anyone NAMED a brother." When someone claims to be a
follower of Jesus, they are taking the name of the Lord.

What does it mean (Ex. 20:7) to "take the name of the Lord your God in
vain?" Although I heartily agree with purging blasphemous flippancies
involving the Lord's names or titles from our speech, I don't honestly
think that's what this is referring to.

In the third of the ten commandments God said, "You shall not take the
name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him
guiltless who takes His name in vain." Notice the last few words of that
sentence. Why this emphasis? God won't hold us guiltless for any sin.
Why is He so explicit about this one?

I believe the Lord is saying, "Don't misrepresent me intentionally." If
we take his name, but then claim His blessing upon things He has called
abominations, we have taken His name in vain. If I claim to represent
Jesus, but give His enemies "occasion to blaspheme" (2 Sam. 12:14)
through my lack of integrity, love, joy, humility, etc., I have taken
His name in vain.

This woman claims to follow Jesus, and has been exhorted to leave her
sin of fornication. She somehow rationalizes that this sin is not
necessary to repent of. This is taking the name of the Lord in vain.

If she were not claiming to be servant of Jesus, she would not be taking
His name at all, and certainly not taking it in vain. Or if she were
agreeing with God, even if she repeatedly stumbled back into the trap of
her sin, if she truly repented each time and purposed to pursue God's
holiness, it would be an entirely different story. Then she would be
vindicating God's righteousness by her confession of her sin.

But in this case there is no repentance whatsoever. There is no grief
over the sin that is an affront to God. Planning a wedding is a mockery
of the intended vows of purity. This is precisely the type of situation
Paul's admonition "not to keep company" was meant to apply to. By
keeping company with such a blasphemer, Christians would be implying
fellowship with (& acceptance of) her sin.

But let me be really practical here. Let's talk about the impact on our
children & young people. If my children know someone is living in sin,
and they don't know the Lord, it is a relatively easy matter to explain
the sin in those terms. On the other hand, if someone claims to be a
disciple of Jesus, but is involved in gross immorality that my children
are aware of, I cannot overlook it without some explanation, or else my
children will infer this sin is acceptable.

What kind of explanation could be given to young people in such a
situation? With some sins, it is reasonable to say something like
"they're immature Christians and really don't know better." But every
maturing young person knows this is a transgression that no one is
ignorant of. Especially if they know the issue has been confronted.

Now probably it would be better to keep knowledge of immorality a
secret. So the issue of what to tell our children can probably be
avoided in many instances. I only use this to help clarify the real
issue. Our children can be brutally honest, and we find that
uncomfortable.

Ultimately, I wonder if you're not falling in the trap of pitting mercy
and righteousness against one another. In God's economy both are
expressed without compromise of the other. There is full, and repeated,
forgiveness (mercy) to every one of us who humbles ourselves before God,
accepting the cleansing purchased with Christ's blood.

But this mercy presupposes recognition of guilt. Pardon requires
acknowledgment of need. Even after they are married, if there is no
repentance of the past sin, they are continuing to defend it. In my
estimation, fellowship cannot be restored until there is some expression
of regret for dragging the name of Jesus through the mud. But if there
is evidence of true repentance, we are clearly to restore the sister to
full fellowship.

If we would not uphold the admonition to "not to keep company with
anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral" in this case, when
would it be appropriate? Every Bible believer must see that there is
some line at which we are directed to cease fellowship. It appears to me
that this is clearly such a case.

========================================================================

Finally, another follow-up question raises the issue of what to do after
the sin is no longer being practiced, and assuming there is true
repentance. In this case, the question raises the controversial issue of
DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE.

> We so much appreciate your newsletters, and one thing that strikes me is
> that often the subjects you write about are things that we are dealing
> with also!
>
> I have a question that would be sort of a follow-up to the issue of
> weddings that you addressed in today's newsletter, where a woman calling
> herself a Christian wants their Christian family members to be a part of
> the wedding and attend.
>
> I have a sister who is sort of in the same situation; she adamantly
> insists that she is a Christian yet over one year ago she left her
> husband and moved in with a man that also claims to be a Christian. He
> is not divorced from his wife, and has two teen sons with whom he has no
> contact, apparently. My sister and he, from what I've heard, are each
> pursuing divorces and are planning on marrying.
>
> Based on 1 Corinthians 5 we have stopped fellowshipping with my sister,
> after meeting with her and tearfully urging her to repent. We explained
> that we would have to stop seeing her. She was very sad at that meeting
> but afterwards became extremely angry with us, and that is where the
> situation stands.
>
> My question is, what do we do after they are married? We would not
> attend the wedding, but afterwards how do we *respond* to them? Since
> they are married will they be back in God's will and all is fine? We are
> at a loss as to what we should do, and what to explain to our small
> children. The rest of my family, with the exception of another sister,
> does not see "our" view of things at all, although they are Christians,
> and are trying to "be supportive" of her and "help her through this".
> We want to treat her the way Christ would treat her, not at all out of
> anger or spite, but we just don't know what that way is :) Could you
> please give us some help? Thank you.

You are right to apply 1 Cor. 5 to your sister's situation. I encourage
you to make sure she and the adulterer she is sinning with both
recognize that you are not rejecting them, personally, but rather their
sin. If they repent, you would be delighted to walk in full fellowship
with them. Paul wrote, regarding the man who repented after the
Corinthians followed the 1 Cor. 5 directions (2 Cor. 2:8), "Therefore I
urge you to reaffirm your love to him."

Yet as long as they continue unrepentant, you must follow the Lord and
His ways rather than the world's perversion of tolerance for sin.

You obviously know all that I have just said, but your question is what
to do if/when they get married. The answer to this hinges on several
things. First, you are clearly facing the question of whether or not
re-marriage after a divorce is legitimate. Second, especially if you
conclude remarriage at least in this case is not permissible, you must
resolve the question of what they should do if they come to realize
their sin. Then finally, you must address the question of your role in
all that.

As you're probably aware, there are many varying opinions regarding
whether remarriage after a divorce is ever permissible. Although I have
dealt with this question in previous issues of the newsletter, I always
wish I could avoid this question. Thankfully, in this situation the
issue is quite clear. Even if there are legitimate grounds for divorce
in some cases, there are none in this case. Therefore there certainly is
no scriptural grounds for remarriage after divorce in this case. It is
clearly adultery!

Again, you already clearly recognize this, so I won't go into the
scriptural basis for this assertion. But you are wrestling with what to
do after they actually marry one another. This question gets to the
heart of the nature of the sin. Is a marriage after this obviously
illegitimate divorce an ongoing adulterous relationship? Or is it no
longer adulterous after they are married?

Jesus said (Mark 10:11-12, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries
another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her
husband and marries another, she commits adultery." Clearly what your
sister and this man are contemplating is adultery against their current
spouses. What exactly does this mean? They are already in an adulterous
relationship, but somehow marrying another is a specific act of
adultery.

The question I'm posing is whether the second marriage is a continuous
adulterous relationship that must be annulled if repentance comes, or
whether the taking of a second marriage covenant is itself the act of
adultery (even if consummation never took place). I am leaning toward
the latter understanding.

It seems to me that it is sin to divorce and sin to re-marry (I'm not
convinced of exceptions, but cannot argue dogmatically against them
either). But if the adulterous sin of re-marriage has been committed, it
seems to me the participants must now remain faithful to the new
marriage covenant.

Some very godly brethren hold a contrary view, that the second marriage
is an ongoing, continuous adulterous relationship that must be severed.
Many (but not all) who hold this view go so far as to insist that if at
all possible the repentant one is to return to the first spouse. However
God specifically forbids this in Deut. 24:1-4. Here God says:

"When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds
no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and
he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends
her out of his house, when she has departed from his house, and goes and
becomes another man's wife, if the latter husband detests her and writes
her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of
his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her as his wife, then
her former husband who divorced her MUST NOT TAKE HER BACK to be his
wife after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the
LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God is
giving you as an inheritance."

From this it is clear that although God "hates divorce" (Mal. 2:16), HE
APPARENTLY RECOGNIZES IT. Secondly, he recognizes the second marriage.
This is why returning to the first spouse is forbidden.

Thus, in my estimation, after your sister and this man are married, they
are no longer living in continuous adultery. However, I also would hold
that they must truly repent from their hearts of their past adultery
(obviously confession is part of this) before you can return to normal
relationships with them. But if you discern that God has truly brought
them to sincere repentance, it seems to me that they should then be
fully embraced as forgiven sinners just like the rest of us.

========================================================================

You can order our materials by mail or through our web-site order form,
e-mail, or by phone. The videos cost $25, and audios cost $6 for
individual tapes and $34 for seminar albums (plus 15% shipping--$1
minimum). If you don't mail order with a check we can send the materials
immediately with an invoice to be paid when you receive the tapes.

Although we don't accept credit cards (and certainly don't want to
encourage debt), you can now pay for orders (or send a contribution)
with a credit card through PayPal.com (a free service) by going to the
following link:
<https://secure.paypal.com/refer/pal=Lindvall%40BoldChristianLiving.com>.

(If you do register a credit card with PayPal via our link above,
they'll give you a $5 bonus your first time using them, and give us a $5
bonus for referring you, even if you never actually use the service.)

========================================================================

ARCHIVES: I can't respond to requests for previous issues of the
newsletter. However, for past issues of the Bold Christian Living E-Mail
Newsletter, you (or a friend) can quickly & easily find them in our
public archives at <http://www.onelist.com/archive/BoldChristianLiving>.
You can select past issues by date or issue number, or you can search
the archives using any key words you choose.

========================================================================

Unless you specify otherwise, I will assume subscribers who write me
letters are giving their permission to publish their letters and my
responses in this newsletter.
--
God bless you.

Jonathan Lindvall Lindvall@...
Bold Christian Living http://www.BoldChristianLiving.com

PO Box 820 Voice 559-539-0500
Springville CA 93265 Fax 559-539-0804

...He who has begun a good work in you will complete it... Phil. 1:6