Quote:
Originally Posted by MissBrattified
This thread is beginning to feel as if it needs to be merged with the Chauvinism thread. Apostolic women who stick with unbelieving men are praised for their tenacity and their faithful prayers for their non-Christian spouse. I've heard the stories all my life about determined little women who go to church and get beat for it and finally one day the man converts and everyone lives happily ever after.
Apparently Apostolic men are free to (or maybe encouraged to?) divorce their wives if they backslide or become something less than a "real Pentecostal."
Double standard, anyone?
I can't imagine my Dad threatening to leave my Mom for not going to church or wearing a bathing suit. Sorry. As ultra con as he was, he loved her more than anything, and she couldn't do wrong in his eyes. He probably would have chalked it up to a *hot flash*, stomped around the house yelling about it or maybe as a last resort, tried to rebuke the devil out of her, but divorce her? Perish the thought. 
I think the problem we're having on this thread is that we don't know that she was ALONE with the friend's husband. There are two different ways to take the statement, but either way you take it, without further evidence, she's guilty of impropriety at worst.
I wonder if the definition of fornication was modified to include "exhibitionism" in order to make the accusation stand. I wonder if Pastor Fogarty had ever included that in the definition before?  |
Great post. It is as if the male , for the most part, is to pounce on any thread or bikini so as to exchange it for a get out jail free card.
I surely hope this was not one of the reasons for the divorce if initiated by Mr. Driver.
If so and if the ultra-con maxim is true that one's pastor is accountable for one's soul and this not being fornication even among those who see adultery as the only reason for divorce and remarriage than ... There are souls in eternal peril at the approval of their pastor
Threaded Mode
