Marriage In The New World (page 6)

caroline77

I have discussed this point of 3 groups with JW's at the door. To me, unrighteous is the same as wicked. I did not understand their point of view.

Bobcat

Did anyone mention John 5:28, 29?

Jesus said the resurrection would include "those who practiced good things and those who practiced vile things."

The Society gets around that by saying the things "practiced" (good or bad) are practiced after being resurrected. But the verb tenses used by Jesus do not support that idea. The most natural reading of those verses is that those practicing said things are those who would be resurrected, either to life or judgment.

The Society's understanding of that verse(s) derives from their insertion of "[his]" into Romans 6:7.

Cold Steel

I guess there's no room for debate on this as far as the JW leadership is concerned. This would be a good topic for debate in a Sunday School gospel class, but it's becoming increasingly apparent (to me) that the leadership pretty much has given the Society its take on just about all debatable issues. What must it be like to convert to this religion and then discover the only views valued in meetings are those held by the Governing Body. And it seems the GB has an opinion on every gospel issue.

Does it ever happen that someone says in a meeting, "I know the GB has said X about Y, but I've always felt Z? I mean, the GB has had some reversals on some issues, right? And as Apognophos noted:

You mean I have to pick someone NOW, as an imperfect person, who I want to live with FOREVER? I could see examples all around me of Witnesses who seemed to have chosen wrong even for the short term, and who could predict what the marriage would be like 500 or 10,000 years in the future? I decided that there was no way to make an informed, wise choice while imperfect, therefore I could not get married until the new system came around.

It's funny how these sort of absolutist concepts like infinite life and perfection can lead one to bizarre conclusions.

Adam didn't have a lot to choose from in the Garden, and the Lord arranged the marriage before death entered the world. That means he was to be married for eternity to Eve. It all goes back to the question of whether eternal life in a garden was God's original purpose for man. If the atonement only returns us to Square One, then what was ever achieved? And once the price was paid and the atonement complete, why didn't death cease immediately? "For in Adam, all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." Not just the righteous, not just the righteous and the unrighteous, but the wicked as well.

I cannot envision spending trillions of years in a garden, no matter how beautiful. I can only conclude that the fall of Adam was a good thing, because without the fall, there could be no redemption; and without the redemption, there could be no eternal life with God in Heaven for the righteous. Or lower levels for those who merit less, but Paul makes it clear that we have no idea what things will be like in the world to come. Through a glass darkly and all that. I, too, can't see spending eternity with the same person. (Just 27 years has been a real challenge and I've got a very good marriage.)

truthseeker

Adam did not get depressed over not having a mate because he had never seen a woman before and had no concept of who is other half might be, if he even had a concept of a female.

It is unnatural to have a two tiered world in the New System, of Armaggedon survivors who can marry and produce offspring and billions of resurrected people who can't.

God said he would satisfy the desire of every person, you cannot do that if you take away something as fundamental as love, marriage and kids.

This in itself raises all kinds of problems, with the potential of discrimination of the basis of who can and can't marry.

BluesBrother

Talking about the idea of living for eternity with someone you are unsuited to, The WTS's wedding vows might give a slight hope for a reprieve:

Wt 2006 10/15 p20

"Unless local law requires something else, these vows that honor God are used. For the groom: “I [name of groom] take you [name of bride] to be my wedded wife, to love and to cherish in accordance with the divine law as set forth in the Holy Scriptures for Christian husbands, for as long as we both shall live together on earth according to God’s marital arrangement.” For the bride: “I [name of bride] take you [name of groom] to be my wedded husband, to love and to cherish and deeply respect, in accordance with the divine law as set forth in the Holy Scriptures for Christian wives, for as long as we both shall live together on earth according to God’s marital arrangement.”

Not "till death do us part" but as long as the arrangement exists...may be different?

Also the WT 2005 May 1st said no ressurections for Judas, Adam and Eve or Cain.....

Separation of Powers

The story of Adam and Eve has nothing to do with marriage per se. It is a story about the beginning of a nation...Israel. So, God chooses a guy, Adam. Gives him a wife that he must regard as part of him, aka "the nation." They must work together to establish their landrights, aka "garden of Eden." Then, they must fill that land with their offspring, aka "little Israelites." It is part of the narrative in establishing a 'divine right" of "manifest destiny" similar to what every nation has done before and since the Jewish nation.

SOP

Marriage In The New World