04-2022 Q from Readers on Divorce

by Rattigan350 11 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Rattigan350

  Any comments on the 04/2022 Question from Readers on Divorce and remarriage.

  "If a Christian divorces his wife without Scriptural grounds and then marries another person, how does the congregation view the previous marriage and the new marriage?"

  Why does that even matter how the congregation views anything? They should be minding their own business.

  If people move to a different area, the congregation wouldn't even know about.

  (If a guy remarries a woman with the same first name, she would end up with the same name and no one would know)

  "In the past, the congregation viewed the new marriage as adulterous as long as the innocent mate was alive, remained unmarried, and was not guilty of sexual immorality"

  That's stupid. The whole concept of adulterous marriage made no sense. The first time they had sex would be considered adultery, but then after that they would be fully married and not adultery after that since the prior marriage would be undone and uninstalled.

  They are more pharisaic than the phrarisees. Jesus was not even making rules. He was talking to people under the law, and showing what the law was really about. The law does not apply anymore so what he said does not apply anymore.

  Do people even know what adultery is? m-w says "adultery is from adulterāre (“to pollute, defile, commit adultery”), a word formed ultimately from the Latin elements ad- “to, near” and alter “other.”" It is more about polluting and defiling the marriage than sex. If the two have been separated, then getting a divorce and then remarried does not pollute or defile that marriage.
• 

  TonusOH

  I think they're using "the congregation" to mean "the governing body," but they don't want to be too overt (for outsiders, perhaps?). The GB doesn't hide their belief that they are the only reliable conduit to God's guidance and to Biblical understanding. From very early on, the WTS has put the human leadership between God and the membership, so that only the person/people at the very top can interpret Scripture.

  So whenever there is a question about policy, they will often refer to "the congregation" or "the organization" instead of referring to the Bible directly. It's a bit surprising that they don't just admit that the "view" that matters is the one from the human leadership-- it's not as if they aren't perfectly clear about the importance of the hierarchy of the organization on policies and beliefs.
• 

  Foolednomore

  I was Divorced from abusive partner. The congregation, the elders told me that I could not remarry. If I would remarry it would not be scriptural. This reason #15 why I'm no longer a Jw.
• 

  Rattigan350

  Fooldnomore. Right. It would not be adultery because what is being adulterated? A marriage that no longer exists?

  I hear of people, like myself, who have been separated from their spouses because we've been taught that divorce is bad. But is that really what marriage is? People living apart and not agreeing. That's not a marriage. So how could getting a divorce and marrying another be an adulterous marriage if the marriage that one was just in was not a "marriage"
• 

  RULES & REGULATIONS

  Foolednomore

  I was Divorced from abusive partner. The congregation, the elders told me that I could not remarry. If I would remarry it would not be scriptural. This reason #15 why I'm no longer a Jw.

  I don't blame you Foolednomore for leaving your abusive partner and the organization. Here is a Watchtower Study article where a physically abusive husband becomes a danger to his wife's health and her life. So, what is the Watchtower solution? You can separate or you can still remain with the unbelieving mate ( getting physically abused) and wait ( with more abuse) until he becomes a true worshipper. What a sick and disturbing article!

  December 2018 STUDY ARTICLE :

  Honor “What God Has Yoked Together”

  17 Admittedly, there have been instances where an “unbelieving husband” seems to prove that he is not “agreeable to staying with her.” He might be extremely physically abusive, even to the point that she feels that her health or life is in danger. He might refuse to support her and the family or severely endanger her spirituality. In such cases, some Christians have personally decided that, despite what he might say, the mate is not “agreeable to staying” together and that a separation is necessary. But other Christians in comparably difficult situations have not; they have endured and tried to work at improving matters. Why?

  18 In such a separation, the two are still marriage mates. If they lived apart, each one would face challenges, as mentioned earlier. The apostle Paul gave another reason for staying united. He wrote: “The unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.” (1 Cor. 7:14) Many loyal Christians have remained with an unbelieving mate under very trying circumstances. They can testify that doing so was worthwhile in a special sense when their mate became a true worshipper. —Read 1 Corinthians 7:16; 1 Pet. 3:1, 2.
• 

  wozza

  Yes "Many loyal christians....", so they present it as if the ones that get abused and wait in hope that the abuser becomes a JW are somehow on a superior path ,so many women especially I remember doing this but to no avail.

  And what about the title "Honor what God has yoked together", if you were married in a Kingdom Hall one could say that perhaps, but what if ,like me you were married before you became a JW by a civil celebrant?

  How does this apply ? God was not on our minds so how can the WTS treat us the same when the wife committed adultery and leaves the family? I was still in for some time raising my children on my own when an elder warned me of not being able to marry again unless adultery can be proved! I thought about it and said to him I could go to a prostitute theoretically ,admit my sin and wait quietly to be re-instated and then be free to have a partner again ,he did'nt know what to say. The fact is I was treated by the congo as a sinner and avoided even though I was the innocent party so waiting out the restriction time seemed no different to me.

  In the end I talked to another elder when my daughter told me my estranged wife was screwing around ,now this elder took it upon himself to go see my wife ON HIS OWN and talk to my wife where she then admitted to adultery. What happened to the 2 witness rule? She was quite willing to hide her adultery (and therefore I could not get a "sciptural divorce") ,until she got caught by my daughter and then confessed to the elder. In all of the time she had left she was playing the hard done by sister in another congregation where the sisters flocked to her, and in time it became known to me thru a brother that a rumour had come from this congregation that I was the adulterer!

  Back tracking a bit before all this my wife was a full time Pioneer ,she had committed adultery before and did'nt tell me for 2 years ,I "forgave " her thinking it was best for the peace of the congregation as we had many bible studies. She spoke to the same elder she spoke to years later when my daughter let me know of her adultery again!.The elders, on this her first occasion ,stopped her pioneering for a few months and took away the book study from our home during this period ,and when everyone had forgotten a few months later they re-instated her!

  At the root of her behaviour over the years was the desperate love of attention as a Pioneer and her growing hatred of me trying to adopt the role of "headship" the WTS said I had to adopt or I can't be considered for "priveleges" ,so she grew to despise me for trying. Before we became witnesses we had a good marraige but trying to follow the rules rocked that boat.

  Sorry if this seems off topic but I am trying to show how their rules on marraige and other things like divorce cause more trouble and they can't possibly have any authority over peoples marraiges that were not made in a Kingdom Hall and I know they wrote an article in the 1980's saying that marraige was NOT a religious institution.

  I know this because when I was getting married a second time to a sister ,we chose not get married in a Kingdom Hall but use a celebrant publically, and the elder who studied with me years before took exception to this and refused to go to the wedding . This blew up when I attended his kingdom hall to show him the watchtower article and we argued in front of the brothers there.
  

  So from my personal experience the WTS pushes an agenda which just wants the drones to shut up, heads down ,to their ever vascillating pretentious rules based on keeping them relevant at the cost of the drones in their actual lives and don't offer any real practical help ,waiting on Jehovah does not cut it ,it's a blunt and broken knife they use to guide people and it is always to the detriment of the people.
  
• 

  skin

  WT give us the idea that divorce is almost unheard of in the JWs, and that it is a worldly problem. Personally, I know a lot of failed JW marriages, for various reasons their marriages fail. But the ones I don't understand, are the marriages where they get divorced, then a number of years later, both remarry again to another WT member without any known discipline having taken place. "The world is so bad", we are told....but I don't see this level of divorce happening in the world. This is an unspoken issue that is happening within JWs that they turn a blind eye too, but they are more than happy to blame the world for failed marriages.
• 

  road to nowhere

  WT divorce mirrors or exceeds the world. The statistic they use is false. A lot of people make a good long marriage, a few cannot make anything work so add in a whole bunch of divorces to the average
• 

  peacefulpete

  Just curious, the 4/22question from readers, did it change the position on divorced remarriages?

  Back in the late 90's they had an article that said that men who had divorced without "grounds" could never be used as an elder. Even after the 'innocent' wife remarried. As HE was still "scripturally" married. I discussed/debated this with the branch overseer at the time. His reply was the usual, "be patient" and it will be worked out if need be.

  It was of particular interest as a circuit "heavy" had just left his wife and remarried another. He was Dfd then little over a year later was not only reinstated but back giving parts at the assembly. It raised eyebrows but he was a charismatic and wealthy guy.

  Can someone pick up this topic to answer those questions? Was this 4/22 QFR a reversal of this? Blondie?
• 

  EdenOne

  Peacefulpete,

  From the said article:

  "The new marriage constitutes a legally binding relationship. As stated in the November 15, 1979, issue of The Watchtower, page 32, “now he has entered a new marriage and so cannot simply end it and return to the way things were before; the former marriage ended with the divorce, adultery and remarriage.”

  and

  "Although the new marriage would not be viewed as adulterous, the man would not qualify for special privileges of service in the congregation for many years and not before living down any notoriety or reproach associated with his wrongdoing."

  and

  "This adjusts our previous understanding that such a marriage would be viewed as adulterous until the innocent mate died, remarried, or was guilty of sexual immorality."

  So, it doesn't change the fact that entering into a new marriage while not being "free to remarry" constitutes adultery, it only changes that the new marriage is considered legally binding and sacred, regardless of the status of the "innocent" mate.