What constitues "evidence" for scriptural divorce?

by monitorman 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Glander

  I was in a JC case between a married couple (not to each other) that involved the famouse 'heavy petting". At one time the grounds for divorce was adultery, intercourse with the opposite sex. Then the Watchtower entered into it's notorious "pornea" period which opened up all kinds of sticky situations. This now meant that homosexual sex could be grounds for 'scriptural' divorce. It also included masturbation with another person. In this case the heavy petting had gone to the point of hand to genital fondling and the female told us that the brother was 'exuding fluid'.

  He was in another cong. and we had to find out if he had ejaculated. He was questioned and said that he had not climaxed but that it was normal for him to dribble when when aroused. Thus, NO grounds for divorce.

  This involved six elders in two congregations in several hours of this tedious Talmudic investigation.

  What a load of stupid crap.
• 

  Black Sheep

  Hi monitorman. Welcome to the forum.

  This site doesn't work very well with IE9. Look for a compatability button, or try Firefox or Chrome.

  If you are being pestered to admit divorce evidence, tell them to take a hike. They will get their 'freedom' then use your evidence to bash your character to all and sundry.

  If they choose to abide by the WT's silly rules, that is their choice and they have to accept the consequences.

  Cheers

  Chris
• 

  Fernando

  Hey monitorman!

  Welcome and thank you for your first post.

  You may want to try a different browser if your post was not intentionally blank.

  To answer your question, it depends on whose perspective you are after.

  As a SBNR (Spiritual But Not Religious) simple Jesus follower, I reject the perspective and rules/laws/codes of spiritually blind, confused, insane and inebriated religionists (Pharisees, the ruling religious clergy class and hierarchy, and their Sanhedrin).

  A simple Jesus follower knows in his heart and spirit when sufficient evidence exists and does not need another human's inane and illegitimate authority to be imposed on such a delicate and personal matter.

  Certainly there is wisdom in a multitude of counsellors and their suggestions. However anyone who wants to prescribe should share the blame and responsibility (costs) for a bad outcome. Ever seen a Pharisee do that?

  It is not God but the devil that delights in the anguish of a person he has managed to trap in the "morass of inconsistencies" that arise from "legalism" (rule making and keeping) which is a "denial of Christian faith" as per g79 6/8 pp. 27-28 "Why the Emphasis on Christian Freedom?"

  If you are in this situation you likely also appreciate that there are many more dimensions to the problem than just "evidence".

  We are all here for you if you want to share more and evaluate the breadth and depth of advice you may receive from persons here many of whom have been through similar or worse.
• 

  DT

  Suppose a woman catches her husband in the act, but he later denies anything happened and recieves no congregational discipline. I wonder what would happen if the wife decides to remarry. She knows she is scripturally free, but can't prove it. I wonder if the elders would then take action against her.
• 

  clearpoison

  Oh yes, I forgot the overnight stay thing. But what about if this sister in elder book arranges party every night, and this boy is simply so absent-minded that he forgets each evening when the last train went. But do note it must be train, sisters house by the busline would not count and the poor nerd must go and wait on the train station for a while each evening.

  Oh and when they are ready with whatever they are doing they then must go and sleep, the boy on the couch and the girl in her bedroom, otherway around would be absolutelly forbidden. What happens when they are awake do not count here.

  Based on the facts in the description I would say that this party involves also substantial amount of alcohol as obviously this poor brother is no more able to drive his car. That's why he must go and check the train timetables in the middle of the night. Yes and the girl obviously do not use the train at all as she had not knowledge about it's timetables, she is a car driver but she too is too drunk to drive. Or maybe she won't drive because they would be alone in the car and it was not exempted here.

  For the last example in elder book it is obvious that it is ok that this brother sleeps in the same bedroom when the husband is also present, but when he's gone he must find another sleeping arrangement.

  CP
• 

  WTWizard

  This is what happens when you try to impose stupid rules. First, divorce only on the grounds of adultery is ridiculous. If fornication wasn't such a "serious sin", couples would be able to "try before you buy". Would you buy a car without even trying it? And a car is only expected to last some 12 years, if that. Why would you marry someone without a "test drive"? That is inviting trouble.

  On top of that, the religion restricts sex variety even among married couples. How many rags have insinuated that oral or anal sex is "filthy dirty", even to the point of disfellowshipping? Even after 1978, they still kept it as proof that a couple are not "exemplary". They recently had a few "oral sex" studies (where children are present, further polluting their attitudes toward sex). This intrusion into sex life means the marriage will soon stagnate, and result in problems that usually lead to divorce. At some point, someone is going to commit adultery, just so they can divorce and remarry.

  And, with the two-witness rule in place, they need to go to such great lengths to obtain proof that it happened. This further pries into private matters, and creates more work where none should have existed. When there is disagreement as to whether "proof" is met, usually the one that doesn't think of it as "proof" will make trouble if the person later attempts to marry. All of which is a crock of rubbish.
• 

  blondie

  The overnight thing implies that sex does not take place during the day.........
• 

  undercover

  I guaran-damn-tee you that if a single brother missed the train and spent the night on a single sister's living room sofa, there would be repurcussions.

  Oh, it might not ever get to the point of an official tribunal, but elders will be involved. They will "investigate" and "interview" the brother and sister. Even without an official JC meeting, there will be harrassment and accusations of wrongdoing. The elders will still impugn bad motives on the innocent and bully them and lord it over them. The two innocent people will likely come out of the ordeal feeling guilty and ashamed.
• 

  QueenWitch

  My mother had my oldest brother and someone else catch my father with his girlfriend. Prior to this my mother said he was emotionally abusive. She told me she fell out of love after year 2 but had to stay in a loveless marriage since she was JW. It took her 20 yrs to get a so-called scriptural divorce.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Many male friends and male friends of friends stayed in my apt overnight in Manhattan. I worked very hard to afford my apartment. It was the fulfillment of a long lived desire. These friends could not never afford a hotel in NY or the affordable ones would not be safe. There was never any sexual component. Quite the opposite. I loved playing hostess and giving directions.

  It takes a sick mind to feel that any encounter at night between a man and woman is a sexual one.

  Sex can happen during the day.

  If you have a sex obssessed mind, you will find sex all over the place, even where it does not exist. I wasn't the only one offering hospitrality. Many people I knew did it. Sex would have destroyed these relationships.