|
Post by marrage on Jun 4, 2006 8:42:45 GMT -5
Do 2x2s wreck marrages?
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jun 4, 2006 8:44:48 GMT -5
I would say most of the time the people who wreck marriage(s) is/are the one(s) involved. Any third party only has as much power to wreck a marriage as the spouse(s) give(s) them.
|
|
|
Post by the point to make on Jun 4, 2006 9:00:41 GMT -5
Many denominations want to make out there behind the family but evidence doth show many denominations are wrecking marrages
|
|
|
Post by junia on Jun 4, 2006 9:28:34 GMT -5
I don't think I've ever seen a marrage (sic). Maybe it's because them nasty 2x2s wreck them before I ever get a chance to see one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 10:43:44 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2006 10:43:44 GMT -5
The 2x2 doctrine is carefully designed to wreck the marriage of proffessing people with 'outsiders' -- They don't always succeed --- but often.
However, as long as both partners are willing to submit to complete immersion in 2x2 activity -- I don't think that the doctrine threatens their marriage. I
|
|
eurp
Senior Member
Posts: 290
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 10:48:43 GMT -5
Post by eurp on Jun 4, 2006 10:48:43 GMT -5
"The 2x2 doctrine is carefully designed to wreck the marriage of proffessing people with 'outsiders' "
The word "designed" implies a deliberate intention to wreck marriages - that doctrine has as its purpose the wrecking of marriages.
Is this seriously what you mean?
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 10:53:18 GMT -5
Post by Greg Lee unplugged on Jun 4, 2006 10:53:18 GMT -5
"The 2x2 doctrine is carefully designed to wreck the marriage of proffessing people with 'outsiders' " The word "designed" implies a deliberate intention to wreck marriages - that doctrine has as its purpose the wrecking of marriages. Is this seriously what you mean? The design is "We are right and everyone else is wrong." This division - not of Christ, but man - would apply to any relationship, any situation.
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 11:00:16 GMT -5
Post by mrleo unplugged on Jun 4, 2006 11:00:16 GMT -5
You're ALL wrong...it's gay people that wreck marriage(s), at least in the U.S. That's why the U.S. needs a Constitutional Amendment to protect marriage. I know you might be thinking that it's divorce that's threatening marriage, but put that silly thought out of your heads...it's a very small percentage of the population who can't get married and might want to that is the real threat, and if that threat can be nipped in the bud, marriage will be saved--SAVED, I tell you!
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 11:27:42 GMT -5
Post by sjg on Jun 4, 2006 11:27:42 GMT -5
The workers do not really support marriage because they seem to think IF each one of us were truly "willing" to do God's will, "willing" to die to self", "willing" to sacrifice all.....THEN we would all be workers. That is the ultimate! They are setting the "example"......we should all follow. I simply can not agree on that.
They do not offer pre-maritial counseling for engaged couples. In most cases they do not even perform the marriage ceremony. And they do not offer any sort of counseling IF problems arrive after marriage. So it doesn't appear that marriage is high on their priority list. Do they personally "wreck" marriages. I won't go that far. I will say that by reducing women to second class citizens will not help the unity that SHOULD be part of any marriage.
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 11:34:28 GMT -5
Post by justamom on Jun 4, 2006 11:34:28 GMT -5
In my humble opinion.. the only people who can wreck a marriage/relationship are the ones who are in the marriage/relationship. LOL Leo......
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 12:49:48 GMT -5
Post by mrleo on Jun 4, 2006 12:49:48 GMT -5
Do you really think they believe this? If it weren't for the "unwilling", the workers would have no place to stay, no one to feed them, no one to provide them with cars, and no one to give them money.
|
|
eurp
Senior Member
Posts: 290
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 13:10:28 GMT -5
Post by eurp on Jun 4, 2006 13:10:28 GMT -5
"They do not offer pre-maritial counseling for engaged couples. In most cases they do not even perform the marriage ceremony. And they do not offer any sort of counseling IF problems arrive after marriage. So it doesn't appear that marriage is high on their priority list."
I don't agree with this. The fact that they do not do thing for which they are not qualified does not mean that marriage is seen as undesirable, low priority.
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 13:24:58 GMT -5
Post by Brick on Jun 4, 2006 13:24:58 GMT -5
They do not offer pre-maritial counseling for engaged couples. In most cases they do not even perform the marriage ceremony. And they do not offer any sort of counseling IF problems arrive after marriage. So it doesn't appear that marriage is high on their priority list. That is not the whole truth. Some will attend weddings and even provide a benediction there. On the other hand, some refuse to even attend a wedding. Some who are qualified want to help struggling marriages as do some who are not, and may just make things worse. Some,whether capable or not, refuse to become embroiled in marriage disputes.
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 19:03:15 GMT -5
Post by Salle on Jun 4, 2006 19:03:15 GMT -5
Is there an available list of those workers that are qualified? What qualifications are needed to counsel? Is there suggested coursework that these workers are taking in order to fulfill their duties? Did you have a worker say a benediction at your wedding Brick?
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 19:11:56 GMT -5
Post by Brick on Jun 4, 2006 19:11:56 GMT -5
No. No list. If you need help, only ask it from someone you trust enough that accept and act on their advice. Qualifications? I'd prefer someone with an psychology background or certification, but that is not an absolute requirement. As far as their duties, I wouldn't say that marriage counseling is a requirement, but if you are professing or a devout Christian, I think that a Christian counselor would be preferred. Workers wouldn't even attend my wedding.
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 19:13:11 GMT -5
Post by jxr on Jun 4, 2006 19:13:11 GMT -5
"They do not offer pre-maritial counseling for engaged couples. In most cases they do not even perform the marriage ceremony. And they do not offer any sort of counseling IF problems arrive after marriage. So it doesn't appear that marriage is high on their priority list." I don't agree with this. The fact that they do not do thing for which they are not qualified does not mean that marriage is seen as undesirable, low priority. This does not mean that they shouldn't get qualified. I fail to understand the distinction between the workers playing celebrant to a F&W funeral (which they do with regularity) and them playing celebrant to a F&W marriage (the event of which they avoid with monotonous regularity). It could be read as if there is somewhat of a jealousy on this issue. Since the workers "can't" be married, they won't have any part in anything that promotes or celebrates such an institution. Or is it that they spurn any education or organisation, thus can't get off their backsides to become registered civil celebrants?
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 19:17:06 GMT -5
Post by jxr on Jun 4, 2006 19:17:06 GMT -5
... Some,whether capable or not, refuse to become embroiled in marriage disputes. And with such a closed, inbred society, with so much gossip that goes around (perpetrated by workers as much as friends), is it surprising that they have no aptitude to offer professional counselling services? (as a sweeping generalisation, admittedly).
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 4, 2006 19:35:04 GMT -5
Post by Simple on Jun 4, 2006 19:35:04 GMT -5
... Some,whether capable or not, refuse to become embroiled in marriage disputes. And with such a closed, inbred society, with so much gossip that goes around (perpetrated by workers as much as friends), is it surprising that they have no aptitude to offer professional counselling services? (as a sweeping generalisation, admittedly). They would have to become effectual, capable human beings, instead they have choosen to play the self-titled role of "Superior" beings. Looks more like hiding than serving the God of creation. Believing in themselves alone. Forever hiding behind pretense for the gullible and naive. They have made a good demonstration of how easily misguided we can "all" be.
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 6, 2006 21:56:54 GMT -5
Post by what it is on Jun 6, 2006 21:56:54 GMT -5
And with such a closed, inbred society, with so much gossip that goes around (perpetrated by workers as much as friends), is it surprising that they have no aptitude to offer professional counselling services? (as a sweeping generalisation, admittedly). They would have to become effectual, capable human beings, instead they have choosen to play the self-titled role of "Superior" beings. Looks more like hiding than serving the God of creation. Believing in themselves alone. Forever hiding behind pretense for the gullible and naive. They have made a good demonstration of how easily misguided we can "all" be. There are a lot of things that can wreck a marriage:: *Selfishness *Boredom *Lack of love *Lack of committment *Financial stress *Unresolved issues *Mental illness *Chemical dependency *Sexual incompatibility *Pride *Abuse *Lack of listening / communication And the list goes on ......... But a big part of the problem is that people rush into the wrong relationships and then into marriages that are not meant to be; not of God. What God has joined together, let NO MAN (or woman) put assunder. A marriage that is truly of God; will withstand so much more than and marriage that is not of God; A marriage that is meant to be has much more RESERVE for those hard times and stressors that all marriages will and do encounter. So the marriage that is healthy to begin with ; with lots of reserve; will often RECOVER after difficult tests and trials. A marriage that is unhealthy to begin with does not have much reserve for times of insult. just my take, fwiw
|
|
|
wrecked
Jun 6, 2006 23:59:39 GMT -5
Post by Most are guessing on Jun 6, 2006 23:59:39 GMT -5
Did someone actually say in some cases workers don't perform marriages? This is a very telling sign that many on here who "profess" to know about "2x2s" are clueless. Workers NEVER perform marriages. Not as ministers anyway.
Edgar..You make wide general statements but give no specific examples. You like to impale with a blunt object. It needs to be sharpened if its going to acheive any penetration.
|
|
|
Post by net worth on Jun 7, 2006 1:06:32 GMT -5
... Some,whether capable or not, refuse to become embroiled in marriage disputes. And with such a closed, inbred society, with so much gossip that goes around (perpetrated by workers as much as friends), is it surprising that they have no aptitude to offer professional counselling services? (as a sweeping generalisation, admittedly). And as any sweeping generalization it isn't worth crap.
|
|
|
Post by tiddles on Jun 7, 2006 1:52:17 GMT -5
The 2x2 doctrine is carefully designed to wreck the marriage of proffessing people with 'outsiders' -- They don't always succeed --- but often. However, as long as both partners are willing to submit to complete immersion in 2x2 activity -- I don't think that the doctrine threatens their marriage. I What a load of self righteous baloney. We meet with 3 ladies whose partners are not professing and NOTHING is ever said or done to discredit or discourage. NO pressure is bought to bare on either party. Another lady in our meeting is divorced and she has full participation with NO restrictions or negative responce from anyone
|
|
|
Post by Reasons on Jun 7, 2006 2:02:16 GMT -5
A marriage that is unhealthy to begin with does not have much reserve for times of insult. just my take, fwiw All the more reason for people to live together before them make the legal move and get married. You cannot know what living with a person will be like until you have actually lived with them.
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jun 7, 2006 4:58:40 GMT -5
And as any sweeping generalization it isn't worth crap. Which is a sweeping generalisation in itself. Why do you post such crap?
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jun 7, 2006 5:04:21 GMT -5
Did someone actually say in some cases workers don't perform marriages? No. This is a very telling sign that many on here who "profess" to know about "2x2s" are clueless. Workers NEVER perform marriages. Not as ministers anyway. Edgar..You make wide general statements but give no specific examples. You like to impale with a blunt object. It needs to be sharpened if its going to acheive any penetration. Which makes the rest of your rant irrelevant
|
|
|
Post by Generalisations on Jun 7, 2006 7:28:28 GMT -5
Generalisations? You cannot use generalisations, as in most cases, you will be incorrect. Workers (Ministers) do perform marriages as ministers, in some states, that will allow a legal marriage by a minister or elder of a church that does have a license to preach. I have attended such a wedding. This may be rare, but never say never.
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jun 7, 2006 8:39:36 GMT -5
Of course you can use generalisations. They generally cover the majority of cases. Anything else is an exception to the generalisation. Of course, the critical factor is that the generalisation must cover a significant sub-set of the sample space. How significant is significant? Well in general terms, it is open to debate, unless you are a statistician, in which case you are an exception.
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Jun 7, 2006 8:51:37 GMT -5
This goes back to a point I made elsewhere about why I'm opposed to Workers, in general - there is no formal education in anything, much less on how to help members of your fellowship in need of marriage, personal or family counseling.
To any Workers reading this, pay very close attention to what I say. You have got to know how to serve your people in every way, not just enforcing rules on TVs in the home and the clothing choices of women. The Holy Spirit is not just some magic Genie whose bottle you rub in a time of crisis, hoping for the right instruction.
Hope is not a strategy.
|
|