Johnny Robertson Admits He Was Wrong ...

Johnny Robertson Admits He Was Wrong about Divorce

Posted in the Martinsville Forum

First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Ezra 10

Axton, VA

#1 Jan 20, 2012
Mr. Robertson FINALLY admits that adultery is not the ONLY allowable reason for divorce in the Bible. He admitted that it could be for false god worship. So now, we have at least TWO reasons God allowed divorce in the Bible. So, having said that and giving up his "adultery-only" position, is he now willing to affirm publicly that there POSSIBLY could be other reasons for divorce in the Bible? Mr. Robertson already said there are two; why not admit that there are more than two? Spouse abuse, murder by a spouse of another individual, et cetera? Come on Mr. Robertson, let us all study together and come to a great truth together.

Here is a direct quote from Mr. Robertson wherein he admits that divorce is allowed over other reasons:“My point of Ezra 10 is this. They had to put away their wives. This is proof that God would be a God that would expect homes to be interrupted even if kids were involved. This is why we bring up Ezra. We all know the people didnt commit adultery. We are saying to all critics who say god would not expect a home to be interrupted, that you dont know god very well.”

Found here on post 19:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/martinsville-...

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#2 Jan 20, 2012
When Johnny admitted that there are more reasons than just "adultery" for divorce in the Bible, I almost fell out of my LazyBoy recliner. Johnny "seemed" to be on the cusp of a big breakthrough, like an alcoholic has what is called a "moment of clarity", but then a few posts later he's back to the whole "adultery-only" routine that the COCINOs preach.

Come ye out from among them, Johnny, and be ye separate!
Johnny Robertson

Fredericksburg, VA

#3 Jan 20, 2012
this was not something new for me. i have always said that God demanded that people in Ezra separate because they were not REALLY married in the first place.
Our position about divorce has always been the same. YOU ARE NOT REALLY MARRIED!
When people form what the Bible called illegal unions then you are not really married.
So we then say if you are not really married then you have undo that situation in order to call it repentance
MrT

Wytheville, VA

#4 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny Robertson wrote:
this was not something new for me. i have always said that God demanded that people in Ezra separate because they were not REALLY married in the first place.
Our position about divorce has always been the same. YOU ARE NOT REALLY MARRIED!
When people form what the Bible called illegal unions then you are not really married.
So we then say if you are not really married then you have undo that situation in order to call it repentance
If you murdered how do you undo it? If you just had sex with someone other than your spouse how to you reverse that? If you told a lie 10 years ago that resulted in severe consequences how do you undo that? If Christ died and we were baptized for remission of sins if we can undo them what do we need Christ for? Wasn't the sin washed away to be remembered no more and you arise as a new creature? The old man was buried with him to destroy the body of sin, correct?
Whitman

United States

#5 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny Robertson wrote:
i have always said that God demanded that people in Ezra separate because they were not REALLY married in the first place.
Our position about divorce has always been the same. YOU ARE NOT REALLY MARRIED!
Nobody sane and reasonable cares what your position is Johnny. You are an insane cult leader and everyone knows it. You can't think straight. You can't spell right without someone helping you. Probably your secretary you know your daughter Chay who you pay church money to like the rest of your family.
Mike Conner

United States

#6 Jan 20, 2012
You sound like a wonderful Christian Whitman. Dont you think that all the people attacking Johnny personally and NOT ANSWERING him is really bad. I am not a member of the church of Christ but this is REALLY making me question my whole position. I attend a Baptist church.
what

Charlottesville, VA

#7 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny Robertson wrote:
this was not something new for me. i have always said that God demanded that people in Ezra separate because they were not REALLY married in the first place.
Our position about divorce has always been the same. YOU ARE NOT REALLY MARRIED!
When people form what the Bible called illegal unions then you are not really married.
So we then say if you are not really married then you have undo that situation in order to call it repentance
So a 'wife' isnt a wife and a divorce isnt a 'divorce' when its convenient for your position. hhmm
Johnny

Annapolis, MD

#8 Jan 20, 2012
it is not really a marriage! Finally it gets into the open.
Unions that are formed in opposition are deemed as adultery by Jesus.
Mat 19:9
yes Jesus speaks of persons getting married in that verse, but the result is not God approved. It is called adultery.
The only way we will stop the terrible social curse that has taken over our country is to go back to when we all taught this as it was in the 60s.
It is so sad that we have so many who are now in adultery and will not admit that the union is unlawful before God and must be repented of. As sad as it is, it is no sadder than the places where we have had to teach that more than one wife is sinful. We have worked & lived in other countries where we have had to tell a man he cannot be married to but one wife, and that is the first one. He had children by both but he could no longer be united to both. My family is cursed with this sad situation too. My dad lives with the woman he ran off with when we were children. Some preacher baptized her and told them it was sanctioned by God now. Still adultery.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#9 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny Robertson wrote:
this was not something new for me. i have always said that God demanded that people in Ezra separate because they were not REALLY married in the first place.
Our position about divorce has always been the same. YOU ARE NOT REALLY MARRIED!
When people form what the Bible called illegal unions then you are not really married.
So we then say if you are not really married then you have undo that situation in order to call it repentance
Johnny, much like several people on here, you just called the Bible a lie. Shame Johnny. There are three witnesses against you. Here they are:

1. The Bible calls the unions in Ezra 10 "marriages". If they were not marriages, don't you think the writers of the Bible would have not called them marriages, so as not to confuse the reader. That's evidence number one.

2. The Bible calls the women in Ezra 10 "wives". If they were not "married", why would the writer of the Bible call the women "wives"? Again, confusing if you try to hold your untenable position. Evidence number two.

3. The Bible says the "wives" were "put away". We know that the phrase "put away" is the same as "divorce", as is testified by Isaiah 50:1 in the OT. So, if reason stands, why would they be required by God to "put away" "wives" if they were not truly married? That's evidence number three.

So, given all that text against you, how can you say that the Bible is wrong? Would you please quote for us where the Bible refers to an "illegal union"? Thanks!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#10 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny wrote:
it is not really a marriage! Finally it gets into the open.
Unions that are formed in opposition are deemed as adultery by Jesus.
Mat 19:9
yes Jesus speaks of persons getting married in that verse, but the result is not God approved. It is called adultery.
The only way we will stop the terrible social curse that has taken over our country is to go back to when we all taught this as it was in the 60s.
It is so sad that we have so many who are now in adultery and will not admit that the union is unlawful before God and must be repented of. As sad as it is, it is no sadder than the places where we have had to teach that more than one wife is sinful. We have worked & lived in other countries where we have had to tell a man he cannot be married to but one wife, and that is the first one. He had children by both but he could no longer be united to both. My family is cursed with this sad situation too. My dad lives with the woman he ran off with when we were children. Some preacher baptized her and told them it was sanctioned by God now. Still adultery.
So now it finally comes out, the root of your hatred for people who are divorced. Your father scorns your mother by leaving her, and you are so angry about it that you have made it your life's mission to condemn everyone who is divorced.

Shameful. You condemn everyone unrighteously, twist the Scriptures to fit your belief about divorce, and then try to shame people into ANOTHER divorce to justify your position. Completely in error and shameful.

Your position is untenable. You cannot prove by Scripture what you teach, except to twist it to fit your own church of Christ traditions. This is not the '60s, and we are smart enough not to just believe the traditions handed down by your forefathers, or any of the forefathers of any denomination, for that matter.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#11 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny wrote:
it is not really a marriage! Finally it gets into the open.
Unions that are formed in opposition are deemed as adultery by Jesus.
Mat 19:9
yes Jesus speaks of persons getting married in that verse, but the result is not God approved. It is called adultery.
The only way we will stop the terrible social curse that has taken over our country is to go back to when we all taught this as it was in the 60s.
It is so sad that we have so many who are now in adultery and will not admit that the union is unlawful before God and must be repented of. As sad as it is, it is no sadder than the places where we have had to teach that more than one wife is sinful. We have worked & lived in other countries where we have had to tell a man he cannot be married to but one wife, and that is the first one. He had children by both but he could no longer be united to both. My family is cursed with this sad situation too. My dad lives with the woman he ran off with when we were children. Some preacher baptized her and told them it was sanctioned by God now. Still adultery.
I agree with much of the teaching of the church of Christ but you are W A Y off on MDR. Your own words "defeat and destroy" your position. This post by you reveals so much. You have yet to answer SW on his points. The bible calls them wives and refers to putting them away. How clear can this be yet you hold to "tradition"

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#12 Jan 20, 2012
Johnny said: "My point of Ezra 10 is this. They had to put away their wives."

Put away?

Wives?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#13 Jan 21, 2012
regiarc ydnar wrote:
Johnny said: "My point of Ezra 10 is this. They had to put away their wives."
Put away?
Wives?
Johnny seems to be hanging on to his traditional doctrine by a thread. In the past, he has said that people who pit one verse against another are doing damage to the word of God. If he holds to his position of "adultery-only" by using Matthew over and over, when he's already admitted to more than one reason for divorce in Ezra, then he himself is guilty of committing the same error. After what he has said publicly on here, there is no way he can back-track and change his doctrine, without either saying he misspoke or trying to pit one verse against another.
J R fan

Cleveland, GA

#14 Jan 21, 2012
SeekingWanderer wrote:
<quoted text>
After what he has said publicly on here, there is no way he can back-track and change his doctrine, without either saying he misspoke or trying to pit one verse against another.
That is why they are afraid to come on here and discuss in an open forum, where you cannot cut someone off or hang up on them. They also can't twist it or hide their lies as they have tried to do with Poegate. Johnny must have gotten bored and came on here, like Mark has a couple of times. Like Mark, Johnny will probably run for the hills also. They get in over their head pretty quick.
MrT

Fredericksburg, VA

#15 Jan 21, 2012
Johnny wrote:
it is not really a marriage! Finally it gets into the open.
Unions that are formed in opposition are deemed as adultery by Jesus.
Mat 19:9
yes Jesus speaks of persons getting married in that verse, but the result is not God approved. It is called adultery.
The only way we will stop the terrible social curse that has taken over our country is to go back to when we all taught this as it was in the 60s.
It is so sad that we have so many who are now in adultery and will not admit that the union is unlawful before God and must be repented of. As sad as it is, it is no sadder than the places where we have had to teach that more than one wife is sinful. We have worked & lived in other countries where we have had to tell a man he cannot be married to but one wife, and that is the first one. He had children by both but he could no longer be united to both. My family is cursed with this sad situation too. My dad lives with the woman he ran off with when we were children. Some preacher baptized her and told them it was sanctioned by God now. Still adultery.
Johnny you use the word repent when I think you should use the word atone. You want people to atone for their sin by undoing it, something we can not do. Christ alone is our atonement for sin. The Hebrew word is translated as in part propitiation. Who is our propitiation?
Is this why you do not answer my questions above? If I have sinned against a person who has died I can repent but I can not undo the sin. I repent to God and Christ as our propitiation atones for it by taking it upon himself. If we repent and are baptized by your own teaching this makes us a new creature and the body of sin (the old man) is destroyed.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#16 Jan 21, 2012
MrT wrote:
<quoted text>
Johnny you use the word repent when I think you should use the word atone. You want people to atone for their sin by undoing it, something we can not do. Christ alone is our atonement for sin. The Hebrew word is translated as in part propitiation. Who is our propitiation?
Is this why you do not answer my questions above? If I have sinned against a person who has died I can repent but I can not undo the sin. I repent to God and Christ as our propitiation atones for it by taking it upon himself. If we repent and are baptized by your own teaching this makes us a new creature and the body of sin (the old man) is destroyed.
Completely, completely agree.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#17 Jan 21, 2012
MrT wrote:
<quoted text>
Johnny you use the word repent when I think you should use the word atone. You want people to atone for their sin by undoing it, something we can not do. Christ alone is our atonement for sin. The Hebrew word is translated as in part propitiation. Who is our propitiation?
Is this why you do not answer my questions above? If I have sinned against a person who has died I can repent but I can not undo the sin. I repent to God and Christ as our propitiation atones for it by taking it upon himself. If we repent and are baptized by your own teaching this makes us a new creature and the body of sin (the old man) is destroyed.
Good Point!
Johnny has run away

United States

#18 Jan 21, 2012
These are all very strong points. God said that they were wives. Johnny can't get over his father leaving him. Johnny doesn't understand difference between repent and atone.

Johnny seems to have run away instead of responding.
Johnny Robertson

Fredericksburg, VA

#19 Jan 22, 2012
I was waiting on all of you to post.
Now I can demonstrate that the Bible speaks in language to accommodate.
2Sa 12:9 Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.
Ro 7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
is she uriah's wife? still?
Big John Robertson

Hillsboro, KY

#20 Jan 22, 2012
in other words Withman it is like i said before. two ways. give her the axe or remarry the old bag.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Martinsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dr.joel smithers (Sep '16) Sep 7 Lurliec 5
Jessica Griffith Star News Personality Arrested... (Jul '11) Jul '17 Jay Kendricks 9
Why They Left: Listening to Those Who Have Left... (May '12) Jul '17 Barmsweb 48
How many of the 10 commandments have you broken? (Feb '12) Jul '17 Barmsweb 151
Johnny Robertson, when were you baptized? (Apr '15) Jun '17 Sig Fife 20
Looking Jun '17 Captain Hotdog 1
i want to be Christian.can i ? (May '15) Jun '17 Captain Hotdog 10

Martinsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Martinsville Mortgages