by liam 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Re-establishing a way for people to find a divorce judgment and have that be adjudicated is a good thing
I agree.
But some are taking it to far right and others are taking it to far left.They can't seem to meet in the middle.
What is it about humans? We're supposed to be better.
Liam,
A bit like the story of the blacksmith who charged one cent for the first nail, double that for the second, double that again for the third one - until by the time he had driven in all 32 horse shoe nails , the horse’s owner had clocked up a bill of millions.
Jesus and Paul both stated that it was BEST if you didn't get married at all.
But if you must (whatever crazy reason for it you may concoct) then everything else the NT recommends would apply.
@liam: these policy prescriptions are the middle of the road, far-left and far-right ideologies are identical, they are race-based marriage laws. But having marriage mean male to female is something Obama ca 2008 supported, keeping the government out of it is another one most would agree upon, but if the government is involved, it makes sense to have some common ground on what it all means and what is best for all involved.
I personally do not subscribe to particular theologies, but NT advice is rather common sense on the topic at least, don’t marry until you are old enough, don’t marry outside your faith, I wouldn’t put that into law, but it is good advice.
keeping the government out of it is another one most would agree upon,
This is the best idea.
These days in the USA, some stats say women initiate 70% of all divorces
So if you were going skydiving and they told you 3 of 4 parachutes were not going to open, how many would stop right there and forget the whole rhetoric about how great skydiving is?
If you get married at 20, have a couple of kids by 24, and then your wife decides she wants a divorce, you will be stuck with child support for the next 20 years, plus alimony. Plus you don’t get to see your own kids every day, but a judge whom you never met will decide how many times and when you will be able to see your kids.
Now you want to get married again and finally find the love of your life and she has two kids and after a few years you finally realize the story about the Prince finding the Princess and riding off into the sunset was just a story made up by some romantic that wanted to sell books.
Most of my friends have gotten married and had children by age 24. And most of those are already on their second marriage and come and complain to me about their lot in life. And the biggest struggle they have right now is Money.
Even the older ones I know who have been married some 50 years tell me it wasn’t easy and perhaps they should of waited till they were in their late 40s, or 50s.
The problem is this world doesn’t make it easy for two people in love to stay in love. And the marriage and divorce laws are out of wack.And the worse thing about it all is that life is short. 80 years if your lucky, and the last few will be in declining health. And at 80, sex will just be a bodily function like waking up and walking around. It won't be the hot, steamy romantic sex that you had when you first met your wife or husband, and both of you had hot 18 years old bodies.
Now it's 80-90 year old bodies. It's won't be an easy thing watching the person you love and shared your life with get old and sickly and there's nothing you can do about it but hold her hand. I know this because I see my parents frustration as they get old and more sickly than when they were younger. Both my father and mother are terrified of losing each other. They are hoping hard the paradise will come before either one of them dies.
The only reason I can see this is because I was lucky enough to inherit something that allowed me to not worry about taking care of myself and it allowed me time to study and meditate on life and what it offers. It seems like trying to enjoy the wonders of life and avoid as much Drama and people that cause Drama is the Key to a happy life.
Had I not inherit what I did, I would be doing the same thing my friends did and probably be divorce by now with kids.
Did you know most Gen Z are not getting married and don’t want children?
The scene of the world is changing.
Mark 10:11,12 has Jesus forbid divorce for anyone. When the redactor of Matt revised this passage, he added the interrupter phrase, "except for porneia" he was reflecting the times and community he lived in. Interestingly G. Luke (16:18) either saw and disagreed with the redactor of Matt or it was not yet in the copy of Matt he was using. He also has Jesus forbid divorce on any grounds.
Mark 10:11,12 has Jesus forbid divorce for anyone. When the redactor of Matt revised this passage, he added the interrupter phrase, "except for porneia"..... Luke (16:18) either saw and disagreed with the redactor of Matt or it was not yet in the copy of Matt he was using. He also has Jesus forbid divorce on any grounds.
That's interesting, I never caught that. It shows how "Time" can change someone's views.
This reminds me of the WT policy NO BLOOD. Then later on, Blood Fractions OK!
It wouldn't surprise me if in 20-30 years, the entire No Blood ideology is thrown out by New Members of the Governing Body. By that time the new GB will be of the Generation Z.
Which shows that regarding religion, and religious holy books, it has always been just a bunch men running the show. Guessing at what is a sin and what is not a sin.
This is likely how the no blood policy HAS to disappear.
Little bit,, little bit by bit at a time. So its just faded away softened a little bit at a time.
That way people who have been deeply & negatively impacted by it will have no memory of its effects. Pushed back & burried by time.
Yeah...by that time Generation Z people will be on the GB. Maybe women too,,you never know.
If I had to guess, I would think that the blood policy is on the GB's radar. It's more a question of figuring out how to deal with it. The way they interpret Acts 15:29 is shaky, to say the least. This would mean two things: one, they would have to admit that they had it very wrong, obviously wrong, for decades. Two, they now have to deal with the fallout from people who lost loved ones (including children!) or nearly died due to the policy (including my mother... twice).
They will probably try to quietly allow for a 'conscience matter' option, then wait a few decades more before finally reinterpreting it to allow for transfusions. To make a wholesale change anytime soon might open them up to a lot of lawsuits and some very heavy criticism.
They don't allow whole blood transfusions but do allow fractions in all variations, so technically they do allow blood transfusions.
