|
Post by buzzybee on Apr 14, 2009 20:50:28 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing this with us Steph. I'm sorry for the pain you went through.
|
|
|
Post by hippyatheart on Apr 15, 2009 1:57:04 GMT -5
I am sick to the top of my stomach that certain ones aren't deemed worthy to partake of the bread & wine because some worker is trying to judge someone in the room. So mean and unkind. My bible speaks of SELF EXAMINATION. Not worker examination. Divorced professing folks are asked to shut up and not take the bread and wine during the meeting. Even if the divorce isn't their fault...someone stepped in and took their spouse yet they have to be treated like a criminal. Where is the mercy? The kindness. This is making a mockery of the one they claim to be remembering during the time of the emblems. And yet these "silent" members have brethern in other states who are permitted to partake of the emblems! So inconsistent and unfair. First of all-some background about me which may help others understand where I am coming from and my perspective. I have been divorced. Even though it was a very sorrowful and difficult experience, I have no regrets. My ex was mentally and emotionally abusive. Regular put-downs were just a normal part of our relationship that I grew accustomed to. But I received a wake up call after being married for several years. I found out he had cheated on me. And when I confronted him on the infidelity he was mortified. Mortified that the truth had been exposed, yes. Mortified that I would leave him also. Mortified that all our family and friends would find out. Mortified what I would do. But most of all, mortified by the Strength I had and how capable I could be without him. He was scared. I don't blame him. Everything in his "stable" married life was at stake: A good wife & mother to our healthy children. Financial success and stability. A nice home. An almost paid off mortgage and plans for retirement in view. A light at the end of the tunnel was suddenly farther away than he perceived as he thought of reasons and excuses that would bring forgiveness and reconciliation. We entered into earnest counseling by one of the best marriage counselors around. It helped for a bit. But, I still felt mentally and emotionally abused; put-down; never quite good enough. That wears on a person and I had to get out of the relationship to save my health and sanity. It was a hard thing to do; one of the hardest things I've ever done. But I couldn't go on pretending any longer. Even though a person's self worth and self esteem can be erroded over time, I still had some left and the urge to survive and thrive and be free helped me leave a relationship that took too much toll. I had been paying tolls for years upon years. That's not so bad if you feel you are getting what you've paid for. One of the biggest excuses he gave for cheating is that he was feeling low, lonely, depressed and not worthy- so some other woman made him feel better. He stated that he did not feel good enough for me. He tried to reassure me that he loved me so very much, but that he had weakness(es). He stopped seeing other women to prove to me I was the only one he loved. But the mental and emotional abuse did not stop. Because he was not a happy person, he could not be a loving, supportive and encouraging husband to me. He could not rejoice in my success(es). He could not support endeavors that brought me joy. He felt threatened by other people that were good friends to me and by other healthy relationships. His family begged me not to leave him. Our children just wanted peace. I finally decided to go ahead and get my own place to rent and move a bunch of my stuff there to try a trial seperation. I cannot begin to tell you the peace I felt the first night away from this man I thought I had to stay married to til death do us part. I cannot explain the way I was able to sleep well again after letting go of someone who was such a pain to my soul. It is something that I had to experience myself in order to understand. This is why I feel it is vital to not cast judgement on others who have been divorced or divorced and remarried. The workers, bless them for trying, can give some spiritual advice and hopefully a neutral, non-biased opinion on the matter. But if they have never been married to an abusive spouse for years and years they have no idea what it feels like to be emancipated from that abuse. And they have no right to cast condemnation. Only God is able to judge the rightness or wrongness of divorce. For it was God who divorced the Children of Israel. Since our divorce, we have been able to rekindle a friendship that I thought had long ago died. I have realized that it is much better to be friends than to be intimate with my ex. Intimacy brought a sense of entitlement and ownership into our relationship and then abuse. Sad, but true. For now I choose to remain single and unmarried. I have had some dates and plenty of offers for dates and even been pursued and proposed to, but intimacy and marriage no longer appeal to me. I enjoy my freedom and don't want to risk being married to a controlling person anymore. I credit the Lord with revealing the truth to me. I feel that I honor the Lord's choice when I use extreme caution and discretion regarding relationships. I feel that intimate relationships need to be treaded lightly upon. It was never meant for intimacy to thrown around like a basketball. In my opinion, divorce is not a sin and being divorced is not living in sin. If I find the mate that God intends for me to be with-I would wish to have the Lord's seal of approval on that; for it is the Lord that should be the one to join a couple together for life. -steph- Stephanie, I'm glad you were able to get out of an abusive relationship before it was too late. God Bless you. hah
|
|
|
Post by toffeecrumble on Apr 15, 2009 12:59:14 GMT -5
The westcoast workers teach the friends who husbands or wives that left them are allow to take parts. but NOT the ones who divorced/left and remarry another man/woman while his/her mates are alive. Murdering one's former spouse would solve this. just being practical... fs You are hilarious, Freespirit!! ROTFL!!
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Apr 15, 2009 13:05:41 GMT -5
Murdering one's former spouse would solve this. just being practical... fs Interestingly enough, I said this exact statement to an uncle who used to be a worker when he was explaining "the professing stance" on those divorced peoples. He looked at me, and said, wow, that is sort of what we are saying. The discussion ended there.
|
|
|
Post by jphillips on Apr 15, 2009 13:22:45 GMT -5
Murdering one's former spouse would solve this. just being practical... fs Interestingly enough, I said this exact statement to an uncle who used to be a worker when he was explaining "the professing stance" on those divorced peoples. He looked at me, and said, wow, that is sort of what we are saying. The discussion ended there. Yep, sg, that's the eloquent 'EASY-OUT' argument. Maybe the next question should be, "What is the best and accepted method?" Now that would stand them on their heads!
|
|
|
Post by scarletto on Apr 15, 2009 13:28:07 GMT -5
I will share some of my background on this as well as I think that helps people understand what I write better. I have been more of an observer of divorce and remarriage than anything.
Having been raised in a very STRICT religious atmosphere; and "good Christian home" I, too thought I had to be the perfect Christian. Dad was a deacon of the church and as such us kids were expected to behave well and above everyone else because he didn't want to lose his deacon status. But, it wasn't Dad who was the most attached to being a deacon and having that status; it was my mom. She was the one that seemed so uptight about everything...as if we made one misstep we would bring the whole entire family DOWN. We had a reputation to uphold not just in the church but in the community. Such PRESSURE for a kid is not pleasant, but hey, I tell myself that it could have been worse.
So, mom and dad had pretty high standards. We had to be good little Christians, we had to be good students; we were expected to excel at what we did; if one of us was even slightly overweight Dad made comments. I don't know if his comments about being overweight is what led one of us into obesity. Obesity does not run in our family but enjoying food does run in our family, especially in the older ones. Most of us kids didn't have a weight problem at all for the longest time. We kept BUSY leading the perfect little life of excellence....we were too busy to get fat. But I felt for my one sister, because she seemed to inherit the obese genes. She had a really nice figure as an early adolescent, and she just seemed to gradually put on more and more weight until she was outright obese. If someone said the least little thing about her weight she was EXTREMELY OFFENDED. So, I LEARNED early on that that was a VERY sensitive subject and that her feelings were easily hurt. She wasn't happy being overweight and it didn't seem to help if someone made a comment. It seemed to only make matters WORSE.
I remember praying for my sister. Because I KNEW how UNHAPPY she WAS. And I KNEW that she would be a happier person if she was happier about her weight. But, she had issues-- and she used food as her "pacifier"; she also turned to food to cope with stress. Food was a pleasurable thing to her and eating food was a pleasurable past time for her. I guess she could have turned to drugs or something else destructive. But, like many Americans, food became her drug of choice.
You may wonder what this has to do with Divorce and Remarriage. Well, it all ties in with her marriage and divorce and remarriage. Her first husband loved her, but didn't really love her fluffiness all that much, but thought that it was always something they could work on and change after they got married.He assumed that love could conquer all and that she would lose weight and be happier and he in turn would be happier as well. It didn't work that way. She continued to turn to food to cope with life and whenever he made a comment about it she became very upset and hostile and verbally abusive back at him. So he learned too hold his feelings in for a long time and then explode. This created a vicious cycle of silence, erupted fights, followed by cold silence again. Resentment just grew and grew. He accused her of not wanting to please him by not losing weight. She accused him of not loving her and accepting her the way she was when he married her. She felt that he was trying to change the essence of who she was instead of loving her just the way she was. A painful reality is when you find out someone you love doesn't love you just for who you are.
But neither of them had a very strong relationship with the Lord and did not really know about that unconditional love the the Father has for His children. She was brought up under the teaching that you had to perform well to be loved and stay with the good graces of mom and dad. He came from a very dysfunctional family and religious background as well. Performance-based. Neither set of their parents probably felt that they raised their kids with CONDITIONAL love, but that is the MESSAGE that the kids got from their parents: I love you and approve of you if:........She felt she could do little right and also that she was under constant scrutiny.
Because we were raised in such a strict Christian environment, most of us kids wanted out of it by the time we moved away from home. She was no exception. And....she may have rushed into marriage because of the way she had been raised. (possible) , thinking that getting married was the answer to her need to feel loved and accepted.
Her, marriage eventually dissolved. And she still had her issues and he still had his. She began to feel as though 'love' was always conditional. She thought that people would only love her if she was skinny & had perfect manners. Many men wouldn't even look at her because she was overweight or obese; as her weight fluctuated all the time. She noticed that skinny women got more attention and were asked on date more and more pursued. And she wanted to be loved. She wanted attention. She needed love and acceptance and attention. So she started a series and cycles of weight loss followed by weight gain. The underlying issues had never been truly dealt with, so the addiction to food would resurface again and again.
After being single for awhile following her divorce, she met someone who loves her just the way she was. He didn't ridicule her or try to change her and mold her into something she wasn't. She was overweight when he first took and liking to her and that is the person he fell in love with. He didn't expect her to change to please him. At last,, she felt accepted and loved for being herself. Who am I to tell this woman she doesn't deserve to be loved and cared for by a someone who really loves her and cares for her as she is? The interesting thing is, that now that she feels a freedom to be herself and still be loved, she is dealing with her childhood issues and developing a more healthy relationship with food. It is within the accepting & unconditional love of the second marriage that she is blossoming into a truly happy, contented and healthy person.
|
|
|
Post by hippyatheart on Apr 15, 2009 15:35:13 GMT -5
I will share some of my background on this as well as I think that helps people understand what I write better. I have been more of an observer of divorce and remarriage than anything. Having been raised in a very STRICT religious atmosphere; and "good Christian home" I, too thought I had to be the perfect Christian. Dad was a deacon of the church and as such us kids were expected to behave well and above everyone else because he didn't want to lose his deacon status. But, it wasn't Dad who was the most attached to being a deacon and having that status; it was my mom. She was the one that seemed so uptight about everything...as if we made one misstep we would bring the whole entire family DOWN. We had a reputation to uphold not just in the church but in the community. Such PRESSURE for a kid is not pleasant, but hey, I tell myself that it could have been worse. So, mom and dad had pretty high standards. We had to be good little Christians, we had to be good students; we were expected to excel at what we did; if one of us was even slightly overweight Dad made comments. I don't know if his comments about being overweight is what led one of us into obesity. Obesity does not run in our family but enjoying food does run in our family, especially in the older ones. Most of us kids didn't have a weight problem at all for the longest time. We kept BUSY leading the perfect little life of excellence....we were too busy to get fat. But I felt for my one sister, because she seemed to inherit the obese genes. She had a really nice figure as an early adolescent, and she just seemed to gradually put on more and more weight until she was outright obese. If someone said the least little thing about her weight she was EXTREMELY OFFENDED. So, I LEARNED early on that that was a VERY sensitive subject and that her feelings were easily hurt. She wasn't happy being overweight and it didn't seem to help if someone made a comment. It seemed to only make matters WORSE. I remember praying for my sister. Because I KNEW how UNHAPPY she WAS. And I KNEW that she would be a happier person if she was happier about her weight. But, she had issues-- and she used food as her "pacifier"; she also turned to food to cope with stress. Food was a pleasurable thing to her and eating food was a pleasurable past time for her. I guess she could have turned to drugs or something else destructive. But, like many Americans, food became her drug of choice. You may wonder what this has to do with Divorce and Remarriage. Well, it all ties in with her marriage and divorce and remarriage. Her first husband loved her, but didn't really love her fluffiness all that much, but thought that it was always something they could work on and change after they got married.He assumed that love could conquer all and that she would lose weight and be happier and he in turn would be happier as well. It didn't work that way. She continued to turn to food to cope with life and whenever he made a comment about it she became very upset and hostile and verbally abusive back at him. So he learned too hold his feelings in for a long time and then explode. This created a vicious cycle of silence, erupted fights, followed by cold silence again. Resentment just grew and grew. He accused her of not wanting to please him by not losing weight. She accused him of not loving her and accepting her the way she was when he married her. She felt that he was trying to change the essence of who she was instead of loving her just the way she was. A painful reality is when you find out someone you love doesn't love you just for who you are. But neither of them had a very strong relationship with the Lord and did not really know about that unconditional love the the Father has for His children. She was brought up under the teaching that you had to perform well to be loved and stay with the good graces of mom and dad. He came from a very dysfunctional family and religious background as well. Performance-based. Neither set of their parents probably felt that they raised their kids with CONDITIONAL love, but that is the MESSAGE that the kids got from their parents: I love you and approve of you if:........She felt she could do little right and also that she was under constant scrutiny. Because we were raised in such a strict Christian environment, most of us kids wanted out of it by the time we moved away from home. She was no exception. And....she may have rushed into marriage because of the way she had been raised. (possible) , thinking that getting married was the answer to her need to feel loved and accepted. Her, marriage eventually dissolved. And she still had her issues and he still had his. She began to feel as though 'love' was always conditional. She thought that people would only love her if she was skinny & had perfect manners. Many men wouldn't even look at her because she was overweight or obese; as her weight fluctuated all the time. She noticed that skinny women got more attention and were asked on date more and more pursued. And she wanted to be loved. She wanted attention. She needed love and acceptance and attention. So she started a series and cycles of weight loss followed by weight gain. The underlying issues had never been truly dealt with, so the addiction to food would resurface again and again. After being single for awhile following her divorce, she met someone who loves her just the way she was. He didn't ridicule her or try to change her and mold her into something she wasn't. She was overweight when he first took and liking to her and that is the person he fell in love with. He didn't expect her to change to please him. At last,, she felt accepted and loved for being herself. Who am I to tell this woman she doesn't deserve to be loved and cared for by a someone who really loves her and cares for her as she is? The interesting thing is, that now that she feels a freedom to be herself and still be loved, she is dealing with her childhood issues and developing a more healthy relationship with food. It is within the accepting & unconditional love of the second marriage that she is blossoming into a truly happy, contented and healthy person. hah Wow, Scarlett, thank U muchly for sharing this inspiring piece. There is nothing quite like unconditional love...to nurture a person to be all they can be. And no matter what earthly human relationships we have, we can know the assurance of The Lord's unconditional love. It fosters so many wonderful things; it fosters love and good growth and spiritual prosperity. hah
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Apr 15, 2009 16:25:58 GMT -5
~~~ My opinion... the overseers should continue to have some married workers in the work. They can be a great help in this department.
Peter was married when Jesus called him in the work/ministry.
Peter and some of the apostles were married. (I Cor. 9:5,6) The Vaudois apostles had some married apostles among them for 1800 yrs. There has been some 2x2s married workers for 90 yrs.
Wow Nate, totally agree with you. We really should have married workers. It is definitely scriptural and certainly would be more healthy, both for the workers and for the fellowship. As buzzybee pointed out, it would give them a fresh perspective. Hopefully, when there are married workers again, they will live according to the way the married disciples lived.....with homes and children!!! Edy
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Apr 15, 2009 19:51:26 GMT -5
The work seems to not have "grown" the same direction the "church" has. It has wanted to stay as "evangelistic works", but once the congregation is won, then it is time for the "pastoring" to begin, isn't it? It is sad that changes do come sometimes, but sometimes in order to "keep up" with growth, then changes are vitally necessary! JMO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2009 22:03:02 GMT -5
The work seems to not have "grown" the same direction the "church" has. It has wanted to stay as "evangelistic works", but once the congregation is won, then it is time for the "pastoring" to begin, isn't it? It is sad that changes do come sometimes, but sometimes in order to "keep up" with growth, then changes are vitally necessary! JMO You're right, the ministry group has completely changed from an almost totally evangelical mission to a pastoring mission. Nothing wrong with that really. Unfortunately, it is still denied that this change has occurred so the ministry group is stuck in the uncertain middle, trying to live like a spirit led evangelist but trying to do the job of a pastor. The meeting church needs real pastors. Pastors who live real lives, married and have to balance a checkbook so they can relate to regular people. Pastors who are readily available, pastors who have taken the time to learn how to be good pastors, how to help the distressed and fallen who pick people up not kick them out, and have a sound understanding of the bible. We need pastors whose sole job is to care about people, not be running conventions, arranging special meetings and doing building projects.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 15, 2009 22:08:27 GMT -5
Sounds like those who have been appointed to be elders have fallen short in their places.
|
|
|
Post by déjà vu on Apr 16, 2009 0:11:08 GMT -5
Sounds like those who have been appointed to be elders have fallen short in their places. As an Elder for years .I often felt nothing more than a host , with very little responsibility except preparing the room and entertaining etc. IMHO the workers have to learn to delegate .
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Apr 16, 2009 7:15:27 GMT -5
Sounds like those who have been appointed to be elders have fallen short in their places. Their fall is because the workers do NOT generally grant the elders the "power" to take care of their churches and the problems that that church has....elders are elders in name only! And that's a sad fact in most places.
|
|
terry
Senior Member
Posts: 328
|
Post by terry on Apr 16, 2009 8:52:38 GMT -5
Now I understand why RT said he often took himself too seriously! ~~~ I met Ron T. my first year in the work 1986. He was a visiting worker. He was very kind to me, I got to know him better when we traveled to different conventions together. I saw the kind, soft side of Ron which I really appreciated and admired.
Ron had some very strong points, but like most workers didn't have a clue as to what the real world was like. While I was a single parent, commuting 90 miles a day (my babysitter lived past work) and trying to maintain a house, raise a little livestock (to restore my finances after the divorce) Ron and his companion had gospel mtgs about 30 miles away on Sat afternoon. He told me he was really disppointed that I didn't come as they were meant to encourage me. I asked him when I was to do the wash, cut the grass, weed the garden, clean house etc? Such work was banned on Sunday of course. He didn't seem to understand what I was saying.
~~ Terry, sorry to hear that worker said such a thing to you because it wasn't nice thing to say jokingly or not. The Workers must be more sensitive to the feelings of others more carefully in what they say sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by melissa on Apr 16, 2009 8:57:41 GMT -5
The remarried person can be a very good person and yet unable to take part and/or the emblems because some HUMAN being has judged them. Dale Shultz and Harold Bennet are men. The way that workers handle the divorce-remarriage thing reminds me of the old uncivilized ways when public shaming took place...making someone stand in a pillory while people spit on them. All who do not agree should vote with their feet and WALK OUT> Why support what you feel is WRONG?
|
|
terry
Senior Member
Posts: 328
|
Post by terry on Apr 16, 2009 17:00:32 GMT -5
The remarried person can be a very good person and yet unable to take part and/or the emblems because some HUMAN being has judged them. Dale Shultz and Harold Bennet are men. The way that workers handle the divorce-remarriage thing reminds me of the old uncivilized ways when public shaming took place...making someone stand in a pillory while people spit on them. All who do not agree should vote with their feet and WALK OUT> Why support what you feel is WRONG? I don't think you understand the hold the mtgs have on those B&R. We were taught from day one that to deviate from that doctrine meant certain hell. It was several years--even before I'd made the mistake of marriage, I heard Garritt Hughes explain why no one was allowed to tape a convention mtg. Because if you don't see the messanger the message is meaningless. Putting himself above the message of Jesus and salvation. I knew it was wrong, but felt guilty for thinking such thoughts. When Duane told me to pray for my ex's death, I knew I was going to leave, but it took another couple of years and finding something else. After I remarried it took 8 years before I could be a part of a "worldly" church. Yes the best thing is to leave, but it's like a battered wife--it's easier said than done.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 16, 2009 19:53:57 GMT -5
A murderer can have a fresh start, a divorced and remarried person cannot (unless their former spose dies first).
King David arranged for one of the best men living to die because he coveted the man's wife.
However God allowed David to marry the woman and continue in his role as king.
Convicted murderers can have full part in meetings, yet someone who is abandoned by their spouse and later remarried has no hope unless their former spouse dies first.
Man's wisdom leads into a maze, and workers continue to teach as doctrine the commandments of men.
|
|
|
Post by buzzybee on Apr 16, 2009 21:47:40 GMT -5
What stands out to me in all this is that the workers seem to be judging this. Workers have never married and do not know how hard and what extenuating circumstnaces exist. How appropriate (sarcasm dripping here) to have some who have never had the experiences as being the judges. Kind of twisted if you ask me. ~~~ My opinion... the overseers should continue to have some married workers in the work. They can be a great help in this department.
Peter was married when Jesus called him in the work/ministry.
Peter and some of the apostles were married. (I Cor. 9:5,6) The Vaudois apostles had some married apostles among them for 1800 yrs. There has been some 2x2s married workers for 90 yrs.
Hmmmmmm.....if this was the case and some married worker got divorced...i wonder how that would go over....
|
|
|
Post by buzzybee on Apr 16, 2009 21:48:22 GMT -5
I can see it now headlines. Worker shunned out of the work.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Apr 16, 2009 23:27:05 GMT -5
Look, I hear where you're coming from, JO and others, but let's give credit where credit is due, ok? The workers read the Bible literally, and take from it that D&R is living in sin, thus making no attempt to reconcile with God. It's not hard to read the scripture that way; All you have to do is believe God put his stamp of approval on the KJV. So, while most workers surely hate the hardline stance against D&R (any idiot in their right mind can see how cruel it is, even if they make excuse and pretend to agree with the Bible) we must give credit to them for trying so hard to do the will of God. It surely must be hard.
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Apr 17, 2009 2:23:30 GMT -5
~~~ David knew as long as Bathsheba's husband was alive he couldn't marry her with a baby in her womb so he killed him. God didn't approve what David had done and getting away with murder. God allowed king David to marry Bathsheba AFTER her husband was dead.
Their first baby didn't survive to show how God displeased with them. In His mercy God granted them a second child named Solomon.
John the baptist told king Herod that he couldn't marry his brother's wife while her husband was living.... She silence him by having John the baptist's head on the plate for telling her they were living in adultery. Actually I think that God didn't approve of King Davids actions. On this Nate we agree. However, blood had to be spilled. The law required King David and Bethsheba to die, however, in mercy God took the life of the child instead of them. For our sins, God still requires blood to be spilled. Are you in some way trying to explain around workers decisions and say that the blood of Jesus isn't enough. Nathan, Jesus died so that we may live by grace, so that when we sin, which we will because all fall short of the glory of God, there is hope. We don't have to die for our sins. He took our place. So to try to say that someone divorced can't remarry is like saying the sacrifice of Jesus doesn't cover the sin. Weird. As to John, I don't think that is what John said at all. Didn't he say he couldn't marry her while her husband was still living. You are twisting the scripture. Mat 14:3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife. Mat 14:4 For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. It was only not lawful because his brother was still married to her. It was lawful according to the law if she was divorced but obviously she wasn't. Sigh....
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 17, 2009 5:05:14 GMT -5
Look, I hear where you're coming from, JO and others, but let's give credit where credit is due, ok? The workers read the Bible literally, and take from it that D&R is living in sin, thus making no attempt to reconcile with God. It's not hard to read the scripture that way; All you have to do is believe God put his stamp of approval on the KJV. So, while most workers surely hate the hardline stance against D&R (any idiot in their right mind can see how cruel it is, even if they make excuse and pretend to agree with the Bible) we must give credit to them for trying so hard to do the will of God. It surely must be hard. I hear what you're saying DC. In their legalistic zeal workers overlook the fact that God would have mercy not sacrifice, and that Jesus said to not judge. When the woman was caught in adultery Jesus could have stoned her as the law required, but he chose mercy. I know of no scripture that would suggest D&R folks should be shunned or excommunicated or forbidden to pray and speak in meetings.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Apr 17, 2009 5:23:59 GMT -5
Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Seems to me here that they would be committing a sin and would continue in that sin as long as they stayed married. I wonder if Jesus would have fellowship with those who continue in sin? There are many places that would suggest that He wouldn't.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Apr 17, 2009 6:13:07 GMT -5
Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Seems to me here that they would be committing a sin and would continue in that sin as long as they stayed married. I wonder if Jesus would have fellowship with those who continue in sin? There are many places that would suggest that He wouldn't. Hey Kiwi, I guess God won't be having fellowship with you either! You are a sinner like everyone else! From your statement no one will have fellowship with God anymore. I wonder why there is provision made through repentance
|
|
|
Post by jphillips on Apr 17, 2009 6:56:23 GMT -5
Kiwi wrote, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
If one takes this literally it clearly applies to the husband, gender-specific, so ladies you can freely divorce your husbands with no adverse effects.
Am I reading this correctly?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2009 7:45:21 GMT -5
Kiwi wrote, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. If one takes this literally it clearly applies to the husband, gender-specific, so ladies you can freely divorce your husbands with no adverse effects. Am I reading this correctly? From a literalist point of view ManFred, you are reading it exactly right. The words apply only to men and the hard liners today have to change it to apply it to women today. The literalist/legalists have huge problems with the divorce issue. They, like kiwi, ignore what the bible actually says so that they can lay down a law for the people to follow and be judged by. Here's an example: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. and And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. You will never hear the literal legalists either quoting Jesus on the above or attempting to explain it because it contradicts their agenda. I disagree with DC about how hard it is for workers to enforce their current rules about D&R. Well, I agree that it is hard for some who still have some degree of compassion and sense of mercy for people. However, for those who form the core support for the current system, they do it with a kind of perverse pleasure because they know exactly what the scripture says about divorce and pursue a different law anyway. Take a look around and see who are the greatest supporters for the current D&R policy of kicking them out of "God's Way", then we will begin to understand what's behind it all.
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on Apr 17, 2009 7:57:27 GMT -5
Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Seems to me here that they would be committing a sin and would continue in that sin as long as they stayed married. I wonder if Jesus would have fellowship with those who continue in sin? There are many places that would suggest that He wouldn't. The problem to me, Kiwi, is that life is very messy. Suppose through a series of life-choices a person finds themselves divorced and remarried with their former spouse still living. After a while they realize that they want/need to "get right with God." Reading the bible they come to the conviction/conclusion that the remarriage was a bad idea. Now... they want to make it right but how? (1) Divorce present spouse problem: divorce is a "sin". God hates divorce. (2) Kill off ex-spouse problem: murder is also a "sin". I personally do not believe that someone can "sin" their way into being right with God. That doesn't make ANY sense to me. None. Zero. Zip. So... option (3) is to depend on the sacrifice and blood of Christ/do as David did and throw themselves onto the mercy of God. I'm NOT saying that divorce is okay. And I'm NOT advocating remarriage. food for thought, freespirit
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Apr 17, 2009 11:23:21 GMT -5
Look, I hear where you're coming from, JO and others, but let's give credit where credit is due, ok? The workers read the Bible literally, and take from it that D&R is living in sin, thus making no attempt to reconcile with God. It's not hard to read the scripture that way; All you have to do is believe God put his stamp of approval on the KJV. So, while most workers surely hate the hardline stance against D&R (any idiot in their right mind can see how cruel it is, even if they make excuse and pretend to agree with the Bible) we must give credit to them for trying so hard to do the will of God. It surely must be hard. I hear what you're saying DC. In their legalistic zeal workers overlook the fact that God would have mercy not sacrifice, and that Jesus said to not judge. When the woman was caught in adultery Jesus could have stoned her as the law required, but he chose mercy. I know of no scripture that would suggest D&R folks should be shunned or excommunicated or forbidden to pray and speak in meetings. If the workers want to be "true paulines" they need to remember that Paul wrote that if we're guilty of "one sin" that we're "guilty of them all"! So that makes any of us, including workers who sin and what mankind doesn't? Just as guilty of adultery, murder, and all other kinds of sin....now isn't that what Paul said? Just take for example, the MI debacle, the workers that continue to "spread rumors and gossip" about "anyone" are just as guilty as any D&R, adultery, murdering, hatred, variance, lying...etc.....so if we can not deal with one another in love and mercy, THEN what in the world do we think we're going to receive for our guiltiness? Why do not people remember that/ Why?
|
|