Marriage and divorce in christianity

[nobspeople]

It was once said to be a sin to get divorced (some sect may still see it this way as some don't).
It was once said that marriage is a 'special' contract, blessed by god (some may not see it that way any longer).


For discussion:
How does your faith deal with marriage and divorce?

Does it hold marriage in high standard yet allow divorce? If marriage is 'special', can it only be preformed by a priest? If it allows divorce, under what circumstances? And why?
Does it hold marriage in a high standard and frown on (or prohibit) divorce?
Does it not care much about either, marriage or divorce?

What's your opinion about the secular marriage and divorce today?

A lot of questions that could be dealt with in individual threads, so feel free to initialize which discussion point(s) you wish, but keep in mind others may ask your POV on a point on which you didn't initially address - which is totally fair and even expected.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #40]

The God of the bible has promised to see his modern day church survives and prospers spiritual but God has not promised divine intervention at this present time.

If god made that promise, that should suffice. Seems faithless humans (or humans with weak faith) needed to created their own fail safe plan with excommunication. Which isn't surprising - humans are like that.

The bible* says He will one day judge everyone on earth but in the meantime scripture indicates he has put human "judges" in place to protect in the church from within and allowed secular judges to do their work outside.

Yes yes I've heard of these judges but thus far, no one has been able to show who they are, nor I have I seen words from god about them. Open for interpretation I suspect is the MO here.

But it seems we're getting off topic of the thread.

[JehovahsWitness]

... how is 'kicking one out of the church' due to a divorce preventing sinful practices?

Nobody is disfellowshipped for divorce; they may be disfellowshiped ("kicked out") for ADULTERY. I have done my very best to explain the difference; apparently with little success.

[JehovahsWitness]

... Do JWs think that because one is not a part of their church it's enough to prevent them from sinning?

It is not our business to "prevent" people from sinning, our elders are charged with preventing certain unrepentent sinful behaviours from being opening practiced in the church by putting such ones out of the church.

As for outsiders (whether non Witnesses or ex witnesses) they can practice'all the sin they want. We attempt to educate people as to bible standards but leave them free to make their own choices and face the consequences thereof. What ex-witnesses do once they are no longer Jehovah's Witnesses is not our business. No more than it is our business to prevent non-witnesses, atheists or members of other religions from what we see as sinful behaviours.




JW

[nobspeople]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #43]

It is not our business to "prevent" people from sinning, our elders are charged with preventing certain unrepentent sinful behaviours from being opening practiced in the church by putting such ones out of the church.

The concept is the same. You're preventing certain unrepentant sinful behaviors that come from sin.

As for outsiders (whether non Witnesses or ex witnesses) they can practice'all the sin they want.

Surely they're glad for that permission?

[nobspeople]

... how is 'kicking one out of the church' due to a divorce preventing sinful practices?

Nobody is disfellowshipped for divorce; they may be disfellowshiped ("kicked out") for ADULTERY. I have done my very best to explain the difference; apparently with little success.

This is a word game you're playing here. They're kicked out for sin, but that doesn't answer the question of how that how is that preventing sinful practices.

In a couple words: it doesn't. It simply makes other 'feel better' and distances them from those that may need them. As such, more of a social club than a true church.
Which makes no difference to me as I don't attend them. Simply stating it as an opinion.

But thanks for the information. It has cemented my POV on certain religious practices!

[JehovahsWitness]

But thanks for the information...

You are most welcome. If there is anything else you would like to ask, feel free. I will certainly consider answering.


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[brunumb]

https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-set ... l-assault-

In fact, the organization has reportedly engaged in an active cover-up for decades. According to a report in The Atlantic, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (the organization that oversees Jehovah’s Witnesses) told its congregations back in 1997 to write detailed reports about known predators, keep a copy for their congregation’s records, and send a copy to Watchtower’s headquarters, sharing the information with no one else.

As a result, over the course of more than two decades, through the more than 10,000 congregations in the U.S. and more across the globe, the Jehovah’s Witnesses essentially created a database of child molesters who had not been officially documented. Most of these cases have not been shared with law enforcement.

So the Catholic hierarchy is not alone in protecting sexual abusers. When you read the report it all comes across as an effective way to create a pedophile ring embedded within a trusting community.

[JehovahsWitness]

I think Jesus is correct, it would be better not to divorce. ..

I have to agree, but is Jesus not recorded in the bible* as allowing for divorce on the grounds of adultery?





JW

* NOTE :

Of course it is permissible to mention the bible in this sub-forum. [...] See LINK for FULL quote: viewtopic.php?p=1050358#p1050358

I am ONLY mentioning the bible to show what Christianity says in line with subforum guidelines, not to prove that a statement or story therein is true. ​I am not presenting the bible as authorative or proof of truth and have no intention to add an argument to that end in this subforum See LINK for details: viewtopic.php?p=1058158#p1058158

[Tcg]

* NOTE :

Of course it is permissible to mention the bible in this sub-forum. [...] See LINK for FULL quote:

No need. I'll provide it here given that when one sentence is stripped from its context the full meaning of the quote is lost:

Of course it is permissible to mention the bible in this sub-forum. The Bible however is not considered authoritative here. If you intend to add an argument that is considered authoritative here, you'll need to provide something more than and other than the Bible.


Tcg

[JehovahsWitness]

No need. I'll provide it here given that when one sentence is stripped from its context the full meaning of the quote is lost:

Fair enough my point was that Jehovahs Witness beliefs are based on the bible* . Jesus is recorded as clmmenting on adultery and divorce and we base our mandates on that.





JW

* NOTE :

Of course it is permissible to mention the bible in this sub-forum. [...] See LINK for details: viewtopic.php?p=1050358#p1050358

I am ONLY mentioning the bible to show what Christianity says in line with subforum guidelines, not to prove that a statement or story therein is true. ​I am not presenting the bible as authorative or proof of truth and have no intention to add an argument to that end in this subforum See LINK for details: viewtopic.php?p=1058158#p1058158