by sosoconfused 81 Replies latest jw experiences
That's not a valid ground for "scriptural divorce" by any stretch of the most insane imagination. There is no way this is valid by JW standards, absolutely NO WAY. Those elders have gone native, and way, WAY off the reservation. I can only think they must've really hated her for some other reason.
--sd-7
Let's hear more from other elders:
Did you elder school instructor say that getting a lap dance is adultery?
Don't you have to be married to each other for adulltery to take place by either party?
Sex before marriage = fornication, at worst she could be df'd but with marriage intact.
So did Rahab have to reveal all her "encounters" to Salmon before she married him?
His wife began pioneering april 1, and after about three weeks she came to him and told him that about 4 years she had engaged in loose conduct (fondling the penis and the guy kissing her breasts) during a time that she was inactive. She never went to the elders about it and after the event occured is when she decided to go back to meetings and get her life together. 2 years later she met him and they got married etc...
BTTT
As it sits as of this morning, there is no change in the decision by his elders and they are still holding to him having the right to divorce...
sosoconfused - "As it sits as of this morning, there is no change in the decision by his elders and they are still holding to him having the right to divorce..."
Girl's better off; hope she ends up here and meets Mr. Right.
Dude! If I had known this...maybe my wife would've had scriptural grounds for divorce if I just hadn't told her about that first woman and then brought it up at the judicial committee! Me and my big mouth! Son of a beast!
--sd-7
Maybe the edlers should have read this? Not easy to find but there none the less on wtlib cd. Seek & you shall find!
*** w99 8/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
Two Christians ought to know each other quite well before they begin thinking of engagement. Each can ask, ‘Am I really sure of the other’s spirituality and devotion to God? Can I envision serving God with that one for a lifetime? Have we been adequately exposed to each other’s personality traits? Am I confident that we will be lastingly compatible? Do we know enough about the past actions and present circumstances of each other?’
Once two Christians are betrothed, it is right for them and for others to expect that marriage will follow. Jesus admonished: “Let your word Yes mean Yes, your No, No.” (Matthew 5:37) Christians who get engaged should mean it. In a rare case, however, an engaged Christian may learn that something serious was not mentioned or was concealed before the betrothal. It might be a significant fact about the other’s past, even criminal or immoral acts. The Christian coming to know of this must decide what to do. Perhaps the two will discuss the matter thoroughly and agree to continue their engagement. Or they may mutually decide to end the engagement. Though doing so may be a private matter—not something that others should intrude into, try to second-guess, or judge—it is a very weighty decision. On the other hand, the one learning of the serious issue may personally feel compelled to end the engagement, even if the other person wants it to continue.—See “Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of June 15, 1975.
There is good reason for resolving such issues before entering a marriage. Jesus said that the only Scriptural basis for divorce that frees one to remarry is por·nei′a, gross sexual immorality on the part of the other marriage mate. (Matthew 5:32; 19:9) He did not say that a legal marriage can be ended by divorce if one learns of a grave problem or wrongdoing that preceded the wedding.
For example, in Jesus’ day contracting leprosy was distinctly possible. If a Jewish husband learned that his mate was (knowingly or unknowingly) leprous when she married him, would he have a basis for divorce? A Jew under the Law might thus divorce, but Jesus did not say that this was fitting for his followers. Consider some modern-day situations. A man infected with syphilis, genital herpes, HIV, or another serious communicable disease might marry without revealing that fact. Maybe his infection was contracted through sexual immorality before or during the engagement. The wife’s later learning of his disease or past immorality (even of sterility or impotence) does not change the fact that they are now married. An unsavory past before the wedding is not a Scriptural basis for ending the marriage any more than if she had contracted some disease or even was concealing a pregnancy by another man when marrying. They are married now and have committed themselves to each other.
Granted, such sad situations are rare, but these examples should add emphasis to the basic point: Engagement is not to be taken lightly. Before and during an engagement, Christians should strive to get to know each other well. They ought to be honest about what the other party wants to know or has a right to know. (In some lands couples are legally required to have a medical examination before marriage. Others may want such a checkup for their own information.) Thus the joyousness and seriousness of an engagement will serve an honorable purpose as the two move toward the even more joyous and serious state of marriage.—Proverbs 5:18, 19; Ephesians 5:33.
Wow. Those elders are going to have to reverse their decision, I would think--they're dead wrong, based on that article.
--sd-7
What difference does it make if WT legal tells them to reverse their decisions? They've already humiliated the woman, and ruined the couple's marriage.
