...they neither marry, nor are given in marriage...

by Tashawaa 19 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Tashawaa

  One of the hardest doctrines of the witnesses that I couldn't wrap my little brain around, was the teaching that the resurrected would NOT marry.

  I remember one assembly, a whole talk was spent on the resurrection, and EMPHASIS was placed on the fact that they would not marry. The couple sitting in front of me (obviously a happy couple, 'cause this distressed them) whispered how they just couldn't believe it.

  Here's the scripture they use to back their doctrine:

  Matt 22:22-33 specifically vs 30 "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven..."

  This bothered me for many reasons. First, its unnatural and unloving. Why won't perfect women and men be allowed to marry? Will BibleGod change them? Will he take away their desire for companionship, sex, children, etc? If so, they why didn't/doesn't he take away our desire for "badness" (instead of killing us)? If free will is left in place, then are they expect to do this of their own free will? Will they have sex organs or will they literally "be as the angels", sexless? If so, then are they really human?

  Talk about opening a can of worms after armageddon - you'd have to start a whole new judicial case and start the killing again to prove BibleGod is right... these humans are lucky to be alive albeit now they aren't doing normal, human things - having normal human desires.

  And those pictures of the resurrected ones! You'd have an old woman running to hug some old guy resurrected (obviously I had the feeling they had been married for upteen years in the old system) or the happy couple holding arms out to the 6 year old girl, newly resurrected, and running to her parents. Little does she know that she'll grow up and spend eternity a virgin, enying everyone who "survived armageddon" who are allowed to have spouses and babies.

  I use to think of the scripture that identified teaching of demons as "forbidding marriage" (1 Tim 4:1-3). I always, even as a witness, thought this was a wrong understanding.

  Geee, even using Society logic, couldn't THAT scripture refering to the resurrection have been only for the annointed? Even if you stretched it and applied it to the "earthly resurrection", couldn't it mean they are resurrected in an "unmarried state". The marriage vows they may have had are now disolved and they are now single? It doesn't say that they will NEVER marry.

  Did/does this doctrine bug you as much as it did me???????
• 

  Terry

  There is a way around that doctrine of "they will not marry".

  That is by realizing those words may have been written by warped people with an agenda instead of inspired by a super supreme being.

  The premise that everything we read in scripture simply must be the word of God needs a bit of investigation; at least it has meant that for me.

  A great many religious people in the first, second and third centuries told fanciful tales and made up stories about Jesus. There were hundreds and hundreds of these stories floating around. The earliest ones were lacking in miracles and the supernatural. As time passed they became tall tales indeed. They would have remained fanciful stories too, except some other people doubted them to be true and argued about points of detail. That is when religious word of mouth stories get written down. When somebody wants to prove that their way is the right way they always need some kind of document to prove it. So, those tales had names attached to them that were very authoritative like the Apostles! If Jesus very own apostle wrote it; it must be true.

  But, this little trick can get a bit suspicious when so many of these writings seem wacky or contradictory or just plain unbearably doctrinaire. Who would decide which one are really true and which ones are fake? Who do you think decided? Politically connected religious power brokers, that's who. Take a guided tour of the third century writers and historians some time. See who they are and read what they wrote. You will be astonished. I know I was.

  These people are just plain awful. They are bloody bullies. They connive and murder and backstab and wield power with an iron fist. And who do we thank for our modern day Bible canon of orthodoxy? Those same people. The people who gave us all sorts of strange and ridiculous Church laws that the world tries to present as truth today.

  No, I would not worry myself about questions about marriage after death. Nobody I know has ever had the opportunity to marry after they died. In fact, being resurrected is something that has never been caught on film or proven in any way. The fact that so many of us casually talk about resurrection as though it happens every day of the week says alot about how much we've swallowed without chewing first.

  Most of us are lucky if we marry and stay married and have a life worth bragging about as a married couple. Now that is something to worry about. But, later on? One problem at a time for me.

  Terry
• 

  peacefulpete

  Tashawaa...The story itself is strange when examined. It claims to be a masterful refutation of the Sadducees (who correctly saw belief in angels and afterlife as Persian ideas) who denied the angels (Acts 23:8) and resurrection teaching of the Pharisee sect. The scenario painted is typical sexist concern about ownership of property, the passing on of ownership of the woman to the next brother till all were dead raised the question of ownership if they were all resurrected. Jesus then supposedly impresses the Sadducee skeptics by simply telling them they are wrong and that they don't know the scriptures. Just exactly which scriptures does he mean, we don't know. Interestingly the author of these words of Mark 12 have Jesus faulting the teaching of a future eschatological mass resurrection by insisting that Abraham Isaac and Jacob are already raised to a life (immortal as well acc to Luke's version, chapt 20) like that of angels. They ARE raised up and worshipping God not WILL BE raised up in some future event. The statement that "they are like angels" meant they are no longer humans with property concerns and petty debates about legal issues and therefore the scenario presented to him was meaningless and ignorant. Luke ends by having his fictional Sadducees speechless and deeply impressed by Jesus' logic. Yeh right. He refutes their postion of denying angels and afterlife by asserting that the dead are raised in an afterlife to become like the angels and spins a verse that everyone knew meant nothing like how he was using it. The author of Mark appears to simply be taking a stab at the conservative Sadducees that no longer existed as a vital sect by the time the book was written Matt and Luke simply repeated the story. It is clear that there are multiple opinions about death and afterlife in the NT so proof texting any doctrine with a passage or two is not hard. The WT of course needed a spin for these passages in Mark 12, Luke 20 and Matt 22 but found it very difficult to make them fit their expalnation of other sections. Hence all the awkwardness about the WT interpretation.
• 

  mamochan13

  Tashawaa - thanks for bringing this up. I had forgotten about that teaching, but your post brought it all back. It used to really bug me too, and I questioned everyone about it. How is it possible that a god of love would torment people by resurrecting them to meet up with their loved spouses, yet not be able to be with them in the bonds of matrimony anymore?

  I tried to puzzle out why they even concocted the notion. I think it had to do with trying to answer someone who asked a "questions from the readers" about what would happen if someone was married twice and then got resurrected and had to choose.
• 

  XQsThaiPoes

  Well obviously you cant get married so you'll just live together and have sex. It won't be premarital sex because Jesus said you can get married. Since you wont be paying taxes, be making in medical dicisions, or inheirting anything who needs to get married.
• 

  Oxnard Hamster

  There is a way around that doctrine of "they will not marry".

  That is by realizing those words may have been written by warped people with an agenda instead of inspired by a super supreme being.

  I agree, Terry. I used to believe that The Bible is the inspired word of God. However, I always had nagging questions regarding scriptures such as the one discussed in this topic.

  It doesn't make any sense that God would create Eve for the sole purpose of allowing she and Adam to start a family in the perfect Garden of Eden only to disallow marriage in the perfect afterlife. Why is marriage okay in one perfect setting but not the other?
• 

  bebu

  I wonder...

  Marriage is the union of man and wife (the two become 'one'). The Song of Solomon celebrates passionate love.

  Jesus prayed that all his followers would be 'one', just as he is one with the Father.

  Revelation speaks of the church as the Bride of Christ...

  So I think... what Christ meant is that our experiences point to a bigger, deeper unity and completeness, of which sex is perhaps the closest earthly metaphor. Not that there will be a humongous 'orgy' in heaven--a' la Mohammed's assertion--but that the deep unity that binds 2 lovers today will be even deeper, and the contentment of love and passion will bind all together, in Christ. Marriage as we know it will, at that point, be understood as a prototype for a greater passion.

  2 cents...

  bebu
• 

  A Paduan

  Christ - 'bridegroom'

  Those counted worthy are not pledged to another - eg. the Samaritan woman - " I have no husband " ie. "a word who is head of my house"

  And as I believe Christ effectively said to His questioners at the end of His answer - 'you really don't know what you're talking about'.

  I'm putting to you, and any jw, something similar. It must be very hard for jws to not think in terms of the flesh. In all the biblical discussion carried on here, deep and researched as it may be, it is almost always on that level.
• 

  robhic

  There was a discussion similar to this a while ago. The whole not getting married is one thing, but "being as the angels in heaven" is a completly different conundrum.

  Matthew 22:29-30 (new world translation):
  "In reply Jesus said to them: "You are mistaken, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God; for in the resurrection neither do men marry nor are women given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven."

  But didn't some angels mate with earthly women and spawn giants -- the Nephilim and Rephaim like Goliath? (1Sa 17:4, Gen 6:4 see also Num 13:33) does being like angels allow you to swoop down and mate and/or spawn with any woman you want?

  Sounds like a sort of "drive-by rape" to me ... with nothing wrong about it. It's all just a load of B.S. as far as I am concerned.

  Robert
• 

  Tashawaa

  I agree its all BS.

  BUT, I remember as a young, faithful, believing dub, NOT wanting to ever die and be resurrected. I wanted to be able to marry and have kids.

  I would fantasize about what it would be like to be resurrected and not be able to do things I had always dreamed of (sex, marriage, family)... would I be happy in the New System?????

  It was these thoughts, as a faithful witness, that bothered me SOOOOO much, and when I'd talk about it, I'd be told:

  "Maybe we'll get "new light" on this subject ONCE we're in the New System" or the good'ole

  "Wait on Jehovah" "He'll satisfy ALL our desires".