Your advice please on "Scriptual Divorce" (page 4)

ScenicViewer

@Djeggnogg who said,

"While the elders are not judges, they are adults..."

Whaaat? If elders are part of a judicial committee, they certainly are judges!

ProdigalSon

Ananias and Sapphira held back a little of their own money from the church stealing it. Jehovah made them drop dead on the spot.

Paul can't make up his mind whether women should wear a head covering while teaching, if they should be praised for being congregational leaders, or if they should just keep their traps shut altogether.

In fact, the Bible is filled with inconsistencies, contradictions, atrocities, ridiculous stories, failed prophecies and blatant lies.

Why should it matter what's "Scriptural"?

Scully

I'd tell her and her cult to piss up a tree.

Why would you write a letter to the Body Of Elders™ that has the potential to be used against you, to instigate shunning against you, and to instigate defamation of your character?

If she wants to admit to adultery / fornication so she can be Free To Remarry™, and suffer the consequences, then suggest that she do so. She's the one who belongs to the cult, not you, let her play by their rules. You are not obligated to do so.

djeggnog

@NewChapter wrote:

The first husband was not a JW. He never told me what went on in his personal life after he left, and I really didn't want to stalk him. Even though I needed a scriptural divorce to move on with my life, it was not lost on me how inappropriate it would be to ask him about his sex life. I was pretty much stuck, unless I wanted to become the kind of person I despised. I could have followed him and sat outside his house and taken someone along to witness with me.

The first thing to notice here is that @NewChapter had indicated her desire not to become the persons that she despised by stalking her husband, and that she was definitely not how to be asking him about his sex life with others after he left the marriage. I agree with her that taking someone along to be a witness to the demise of a marriage -- I cannot think of anything more intrusive than someone probing the specifics as to someone's personal life or someone seeking intimate and personal details of a married couple's marriage -- is very inappropriate. The truth is I find it especially repugnant that an elder would be pressuring someone that may be in despair emotionally, apprehensive about the future and extremely vulnerable by seeking to learn the salacious details of a marriage on the brink of failure.

It doesn't matter how it is that the wife has come to know that her husband had moved on; she may have needed a couple of witnesses to marry the man, but she didn't need a second witness to decide to marry the man and she doesn't need a second witness to divorce the man so that she can move on with her life. The elders are not judges over other people's marriages. They should be giving comfort to those that need it and a marriage on the brink is when such comfort would be greatly appreciated, especially if there are one or more children. If the wife is not bearing up well and feels so depressed that she hasn't given any real thought to finding a job, if she is not working, or ensuring that her husband that has moved on will handle his financial responsibilities to his wife (spousal support), if she is not working, and to his children (child support), the elders can be of help here, but their making inquiries into the details of someone's marriage are, as @NewChapter said, "inappropriate."

Now were I @NewChapter's ex-husband, and I had learned from her that one of the elders had approached her and had sought to learn about my sexual prowess -- maybe making inquiries of her as to what things my wife felt she could have done differently that might have made me stay in the marriage or in what areas my ex-wife thought me to have been wanting, things like this -- I'd say the elder was driven by his own lustful thoughts and had abused his role in God's household to satisfy his own personal desires, and I'd seek him out and -- let me use the vernacular here -- "kick his ass" -- and then explain to him why he now must explain to his wife the bruises she sees on his torso.

I'm in excellent shape and I'm sure my delivering a good shot to one of his kidneys and the pain that goes along with taking such a shot would also get his wife's attention when he got home. (Some of us used to box before we became Witnesses and you never forget how to momentarily incapacitate another person.) Then I'd report what the elder had said to my ex-wife in writing to the local body of elders and to the Branch without implicating myself in anything that might be considered criminal by signing the letter, and leave what happens next in Jehovah's hands since I know he saw everything that went on from the beginning to the end. But now let me continue on with this so that I might respond to @ScenicViewer's question.

@djeggnog wrote:

Even if a married couple aren't Jehovah's Witnesses, a marriage is a marriage. It doesn't matter how someone, who is divorced from his or her former spouse, or who is separated from his or her spouse, comes to know that the other has moved on and become "one flesh" with someone else.

While the elders are not judges, they are adults and, as adults, they are expected to know the kinds of things that typically occur behind closed doors and they do not need anyone to have to spell out any of such things for them. If, in a courtroom, a wife has had occasion to observe the car of her spouse parked outside someone's home at, say, 6:00 a.m., and she testifies to this effect, the judge knows the husband has moved on, or if, in a courtroom, a husband has had occasion to observe the car of his spouse parked outside someone's home at, say, 10:00 p.m., and he testifies to this effect, the judge knows the wife has moved on. If one of them should be dealing treacherously with the other, that is not the business of the judge, and such would not be the business of the elders either.

@ScenicViewer wrote:

Whaaat? If elders are part of a judicial committee, they certainly are judges!

Right, but the elders are not judges over other people's marriages. Let me ask you something: Is this the kind of thing that you tend to do here on JWN? Someone says something, and you don't quite understand the reason it was said that way, and so you go after the person for what he said and criticize the person because they were ambiguous? If I were writing an article for the Watchtower, I might be a bit more careful about such ambiguity since while the context of what I wrote would be clear to most adults, not all adults have a high enough IQ in education and in life experience to know how an examination of the context of a certain statement can help flesh out the meaning of a particular statement, and I'd be especially concerned that nothing ambiguous or vague would be conveyed once the statements in my article were translated into other languages.

But I hadn't written a Watchtower article; I had posted a message on a website that include a statement that admittedly was ambiguous, so instead of the drama, instead of the criticism, what you could have done is asked me, "What did you mean, @djeggnog? Aren't the elders judges? I didn't understand what you meant." You coming back with something to this effect would also have worked, but your approach did work, I comprehended your question and you now have my answer to it.

I think many of the people here on JWN have been stumbled. I don't think the majority of the folks here are apostates, but when issues arose, you didn't know what to do, who to approach, and too many of you here tremble at men, have a morbid fear of the elders taking adverse actions that will separate you from other family members, from your own children, so that you don't speak up, you never voice complaints, except to one another in the congregation or here in cyberspace on websites like JWN, and if you haven't already physically left your congregation, your heart has left so that you're in fade and looking for a reason to leave God's organization, but worry about your life with your family once they begin to shun you.

Just as I understand that this inordinate fear of man exists, there are many elders that are more aware than you might think of how many of you are reeling and feeling "knotted up" over the way in which you are being treated in the congregation by the local elders, and know (now) how many of you have left and went on to disassociate yourselves from God's organization because you had had enough. I don't intend to be ambiguous, @ScenicViewer, but I'm human, and I'm probably going to ambiguous sometimes. You asked me, "Whaaat?" and I answered your question, did I not? If you want to know what I meant by something I've written on here, you can just ask me, "What did you mean?" and I might answer that one, too.

For those here with the lower IQs I mentioned in either education or in life experience, or both, I'm now going to digress here a bit, and explain what I had pointed out in another thread, that I've found many here on JWN to be "fleshly" in their viewpoints, and I regret that I didn't explain what I meant in that thread that was started by @megatron entitled "12% of JWs Think Gay Is OK? Really?" in which the discussion centered on the percentage of "Jehovah's Witnesses who think that gay is OK," and these were the exact words that @megatron used, but because @sizemik turned the discussion into one about how "the true gay [population] among JW's is likely close to 12%" and about how he felt that the "thread title infers incredulity at the thought of a significant portion of JW's 'being OK' with being gay," I had to quickly take my leave of that thread because @sizemik is clever, and I didn't want to engage in a battle of wits, because I also know how to be clever, but then I would then be like @sizemik in appealing to the flesh and seeking the plaudits of others for myself, which is not my calling, and I would not be advancing true worship, which is what I have been called to do.

I mention this only to point out how disingenuous some of the posters are on JWN, and so when I say some here have "fleshly" viewpoints, what I am saying is that spiritual viewpoints are lagging here. Many of you were formerly Jehovah's Witnesses and some of you are at present pretending to be Jehovah's Witnesses and really do not want to be Jehovah's Witnesses, and were it not for your fear of man, you'd be gone already, but I don't want you to go, and if you're "gone" at this time, I want you to come back to Jehovah's organization, but not cowering in fear of the elders over what you think they might do to you and your ties with your family.

Stop reacting to what things you have seen (that sense of sight) and have heard others say (that sense of hearing), and keeping to yourself the things that you feel that are bothering you (that sense of touch) and then telling everyone (the sense of speech) but the elders in your own congregation or if what you are telling involves the elders in your congregation, the elders outside of your congregation your complaints and your concerns.

These are the kinds of things that fleshly Christians do, but spiritual-minded Christians examine all things spiritually. I'm not going to quote the scriptures; you know them well and some here don't care what they say. Some people are what they are, and, frankly, @sizemik has a way of expressing things in a way that could very easily lead a fleshly Christian down the road to apostasy since he knows how Jehovah's Witnesses tick, and he is able to exploit that fear that many of you on JWN have of the elders quite well.

The elders do not all want to split up anyone's family. Please read my posts and at least try to see what I am saying to you all here. Hopefully, none of you find yourself in a hospital with the doctors poised to give you a few blood transfusions in an attempt to save your life, and you begin to think of self, and not wanting to die -- the doctors are telling you that you will die if you don't let them give you the emergency medical treatment you need -- you cave, or one of your children is hospitalized with the doctors are standing by waiting to give your child the emergency medical treatment he or she needs, and not wanting your child to die, you cave. Why you have just been through a trial like you've never experienced before, and the elders know this, and are not out to disfellowship you for caving, for many of us have never been there ourselves or with our own children, and so we can only imagine the ordeal and what it was you felt.

I've never experienced hunger like many children that have had to be content with eating bread sandwiches or cracker sandwiches as a meal, and it is only when the elders or others in the congregation visit the home and discover the squalor in which some have been forced to live that they are made to remember how important it is for us to invite those we don't know very well to our homes for a meal, for our family lives can be almost as private as our marriages. When someone says they're "fine," or claims "we're doing fine," you find discover later that what they meant was "I'm getting by," or "We're managing to stay alive." I can only imagine what someone that must go to bed hungry goes through. Do you respect God's view on blood? Yes or no? If you do, then you won't seek to hide your sins; you'll confess them, and you will be forgiven, not disfellowshipped. And btw, being hungry is not a sin; it's a condition that a meal can cure.

The elders are placed in the congregation to provide spiritual guidance and comfort to all of us, and disfellowshipping someone who in their despair and weakness gave in. The elders just want to know if you regret what you did and are still mindful of the need for all of us to live up to our dedication as best we can. If an elder is determined to disfellowship someone, especially someone that for whatever reason he doesn't like -- he's poor, he's black and rich, she's white and fat, they are so uncouth, they think that they are "all that" -- what can you do?

You can talk to another elder in the congregation about the problem, or you can keep it all inside and try not to let it bother you. You can speak to an elder outside of the congregation about the issue, or you can take it on the chin, as it were. You can write a letter to the branch and ask for assistance from the circuit overseer before the nonsense becomes too much for you to handle or you can wait until you combust. I read somewhere in the Bible that we must fear Jehovah, and so did many of you. I've read absolutely nothing in the Bible though that says we must cower in fear of men, so why do it?

@ProdigalSon:

Ananias and Sapphira held back a little of their own money from the church stealing it. Jehovah made them drop dead on the spot.

Is this how you understood what you read in the Bible in Acts chapter 5?

Read the passage at Acts 5:1-6 and I would ask you to pay particular notice to the words at verse three, where Peter tells Ananias that "Satan [had] emboldened [him] to play false to the holy spirit." Grieving the holy spirit is quite serious; it is not a little sin, but a grave one.

Ananias and Sapphira, his wife, had hatched a scheme to deceive Peter and the rest of the congregation into believing that they had sold one of the properties they owned, and had donated the entire proceeds of the sale to the church, when they had really withheld some of the proceeds of the sale for themselves. Ananias and Sapphira were seeking prestige for themselves in the congregation, so they decided to conjure up a story as to how they felt that they had to donate all of the proceeds from the sale due to the importance of the ministry, and Peter confronted them as to their desire to gain prominence for themselves by inflating the true value of their donation so as to exploit the love and naivete in the congregation.

Imagine some couple joining a congregation in search of someone with the financial wherewithal to invest in a business venture where these unscrupulous individuals -- Ananias and Sapphira -- make it known to the "mark" that a mere $20,000 investment could net them $12,000 (60%) is six months or as much as $25,000 (125%) in a year!

Now there are only ten slots or "points" left in the multimillion dollar project -- he has convincing new articles that he handed you from the web that provide impressive information about the project in which he and his wife had invested $40,000 in two points to which the impressive certificate with a goal seal attests -- so the mark doesn't consult a lawyer and upon signing an official-looking document goes on to fleece the mark out of $100,000 in exchange for five points of a pipedream, who was hoping to net a $125,000 return on the investment, as well as five other marks who came to learn about the opportunity from the mark, and who bought the other five points, so that in exchange for six worthless piece of paper -- one of them bearing the number "6" on it and each of the other five bearing the number "1" on them -- Ananias and Sapphira have fleeced these marks out of $200,000. A good month.

Well, Ananias and Sapphira had picked up the cost of all that schmoozing the mark and his wife had done with them, including those tickets for those great seats you had at Staples Center, and those dinners to which the mark and Ananias thought what a great gesture of Christian love it would be to invite some of the poorer Witnesses to join you, and Ananias and Sapphira wouldn't let the mark pick up the tab ever. Everyone in the congregation thought they liked Ananias and Sapphira and admired their generous spirit. The mark had come to know Ananias and Sapphira for only two months, and had even vouched for them to the other five marks, and they were all fleeced in less than three months of their association with the congregation. Using what things they knew about Jehovah's people, was this sin committed by Ananias and Sapphira a little sin? No one wants to be anyone's victim. Why not give all of this some thought, @ProdigalSon, and get back to me when thinking is done.

Paul can't make up his mind whether women should wear a head covering while teaching, if they should be praised for being congregational leaders, or if they should just keep their traps shut altogether.

Please explain this one to me, for when teaching a man, Paul taught that a woman's head should be covered as a sign of submission to God's arrangement, the principle of headship. A woman may have to take the lead sometimes; some are married to husbands that are not baptized, and they must cover their heads when praying or teaching when their head is present out of respect for him and in recognition of the divine principle. Or maybe a baptized male is present -- her son -- when she's conducting a Bible study with someone, and he is reluctant about praying (he has laryngitis).

Actually, I would say that most Christian women are bold Kingdom proclaimers and you cannot shut them up. Why should they? They very often know more than do the elders in the congregation, but God's arrangement does not permit them to serve as elders themselves. I have been known to be so full of myself that I'm only too happy to be checked by my wife and by other women, too, that aren't too timid or reticent about putting me in check on things I should know, but I've forgotten. There may be one or two things I know that my wife doesn't, and I rather like feeling artificially smarter than she. It happens. I tell them that they when they get to be my age, I'll be the one reminding them.

In fact, the Bible is filled with inconsistencies, contradictions, atrocities, ridiculous stories, failed prophecies and blatant lies.

I've heard this said before about all of the inconsistencies, the contradictions, the atrocities in the Bible. I would be interested in hearing what ridiculous stories you've read, what failed prophecies you've read, what blatant lies you've read in the Bible though. Whenever you have time to do it, I'd really like to hear those.

Why should it matter what's "Scriptural"?

That's a good question. Maybe, in a different thread, we can take up your question, but this is @karter's thread and I've already gone too far as it is.

@djeggnog

Anony Mous

Disregard DJEggnog

DO NOT PUT IT IN WRITING. Why not? It could be used against you in court. No, not the Kangoroo Court they call Judicial Committees but in REAL court with REAL consequences.

I don't know if you have any custody over any children? Could be used against you to say that you're a sexual deviant. Trust me, with the help of the elders it is happening to me - their "ideas" of what constitutes sexual deviance are appearing in my court case although they don't have a written letter from me. My lawyer says most likely the claims were not written by a lawyer but by the elders because of the language and even a law student knows these claims won't hold up in court but they're still trying to convince the judge that their way of thinking is better than the rest of the world and that I should be punished for offending the churches' ideals.

Most states still have a clause that adultery is a reason for divorce and even though you are already divorce, she could be out for something she thinks she might have missed when the divorce went through. The adultery laws are still valid (or could have been valid when you divorced) and usually state that the person that was wronged (eg. your wife) gets more/all of the assets and alimony. If your wife and her lawyer can convince the judge today to apply the old laws and viewpoints to your case you could end up paying back alimony for the years or the value + interest on the assets.

This may indeed be far fetched but maybe you forgot you had a business, stocks, bonds or a 401k back then that has appreciated by now and she just found out. Maybe there is something else coming down that you don't know of yet or she intends to go back to court to get full custody. I don't know your situation but DON'T DO IT.

Quarterback

You have broken free for 12 years. You are free to move on. This is your god given right.

Don't play into the politics of the ORG by giving them anything that they can play with. If you want to get married again, and you are aware that your X is living against the bible principles, that is enough. Let the X move on too.

The congregation filing cabinet is overcrowded with such useless/unlawful/slanderous papers.

Your advice please on "Scriptual Divorce"