good point George, Moses took someone outside the camp as a mate
5/15 WT - WT Society Displays Condescending Attitude towards Marriage
by flipper 56 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
baltar447
indeed non-Witnesses DO have " some " appreciation of marriage = Weasel Words.
-
Listener
If you date an outsider you will be marked but if you go on to marry an outsider at some point in time you are no longer marked, it makes no sense.
-
Muddy Waters
Wasn't it Jeremiah who was supposed to take a wife from among the nations (to represent Israel's unfaithfulness or something)...? He was commanded directly by Jehovah to take a wife who wasn't a worshipper of Jehovah. Just have to figure out where that scripture is.... Jeremiah somewhere....
-
flipper
MR DARK KNIGHT- Exactly. There are so many cases of non-JW's marrying JW's and it working, it's ridiculous the WT society makes a big deal about it.
WHA HAPPENED? - Good point, Moses took a foreign wife.
BALTAR 447- Those really were weasel words describing non-Witnesses as having SOME appreciation of marriage.
LISTENER- The WT society is really good at not making any sense on a lot of things, so their confusing take on marriage is no surprise to me.
MUDDY WATERS- Interesting. Jeremiah was told to take a foreign wife ? So WT society doesn't have a leg to stand on then
-
Disillusioned Lost-Lamb
They constantly assault R&F intelligence.
They assume we are too stupid to judge a good mate for ourselves and say only witlesses are acceptable. WOW, thanks for telling me 'cause I would've just dated someone, all the while getting to know them, but never have known they were evil unless you told me.
Soooo insulting!
Not only is this offensive, but also there is no guarantee that marrying a witless will ensure wedded bliss; I know plenty of mean and abusive witlesses and I certainly wouldn't want to be married to ay of them.
-
Muddy Waters
OOPS -- I'm sorry... totally wrong about Jeremiah. I don't know what I'm thinking of or trying to remember.... it wasn't Jeremiah. I thought maybe Ezekiel, but he was just told by Jehovah not to mourn the death of his wife....
So please ignore my earlier comment everybody.... somewhere I've got a screw loose or thinking of something that may (or may not) exist..... -
mP
@newChapter
Esther is Isis the goddess or Easter the same fertility goddess. Mordecai is named after Marduk.
How is it the Bible uses the name of the pagan goddess associated with the Sun rather than uses her neutral Jewish name ? How exactly do JWs address the fact a book in the Bible is named after the same root as the pagan holiday Easter ?
The simple answer is of course xians lie and selectively ignore these troublesome facts.
Its particularly strange that the Bible would have a book named after a pagan goddess, shouldnt they have useed her non pagan jewish name. Perhaps theres a message there that the ancient jews themselves worshipped goddesses and many gods, and xians have erased and pretend not to acknowleddge this when they selectively read the Bible.
I might be wrong but i believe Esther is one of the few books in the Bible where God or Jeahovah is never mentioned directly or indirectly. This book has absolute no place in the Bible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther
According to Esther 2:7 , Esther was originally named Hadassah. Hadassah means "myrtle" in Hebrew. It has been conjectured that the name Esther is derived from a reconstructed Median word astra meaning myrtle. [7]
An alternative view is that Esther is derived from the theonym Ishtar. The Book of Daniel provides accounts of Jews in exile being assigned names relating to Babylonian gods and "Mordecai" is understood to mean servant of Marduk, a Babylonian god. "Esther" may have been a different Hebrew interpretation from the Proto-Semitic root "*?aθtar- 'morning/evening star'", [8] which descended with the /th/ into the Ugaritic Athtiratu [9] and Arabian Athtar. [10] The derivation must then have been secondary for the initial ayin to be confused with an aleph (both represented by vowels in Akkadian), and the second consonant descended as a /s/ (like in the Aramaic asthr "bright star"), rather than a /sh/ as in Hebrew and most commonly in Akkadian.
...
Esther is compared to the "morning star", and is considered the subject of Psalm 22, because its introduction is a "song for the morning star".
In other words God and all other heavenly creatures are stars and other heavenly bodies.
-
blondie
My last "meeting" was a circuit assembly where it was said from the platform: marrying an unbeliever is like kissing a corpse. Several jws had their non-jw spouses with them. The husband of one that I knew made that assembly the last "meeting" he attended.
Also I remember that Mahlon and Chilion, Naomi's sons, married Moabite women. (besides living in Moab instead of Israel) Weren't the Moabites the ones that tricked the Israelites into immorality just before crossing into the Promised Land, where 24,000 Israelites died?
I have known jws that were told that even if the unbelieving spouse became a jw, that the original jw would eternally be held as flawed having deliberately disobeyed god.
*** w86 11/15 p. 27 Are You Looking for a Partner in Life? ***‘But how can you say that?’ someone may ask. ‘I know a brother who did not marry a fellow worshiper, and now they are both serving Jehovah.’ True, in a few cases matters have worked out that way, and we are glad that both mates are now “walking in the truth.” (3 John 4) Nevertheless, the brother who married an unbaptized person was disobedient. Will that independent spirit surface once again? Might he be tempted to think he knows better than God and thus disregard Bible counsel and trust in his own wisdom in yet another situation?
-
Retrovirus
Hi Mr Flipper,
This topic reminded me of the horrible example in the Feb 15th, 2012(?) study edition of the Watchtower called "Happiness can be found in a divided household" , depicting domestic violence. As I remember it, a wife in an abusive marriage was counselled by her Bible study giver to submit and avoid provocation, and after 14 years her husband finally came to the "truth" .
I wonder now if that article was also intended to reinforce believers' view that marriages "outside" are violent and unhappy, and so discourage any interest that they might have in a non-jw as a spouse?
Retro