It's like having a car that only runs down hill. If you move to Kansas where there are no hills, you'll be forced to deal with the fact that the car just doesn't run.
Dang 3Cents I was wondering why my car quit working thanks for the auto help. :D-->
All cars driving on major roads must have a chain attached to the front of the auto.( so the horse or mule can pull them out of the way if they breakdown.)
Mules may not be used to hunt ducks
You may not shoot a rabbit from a motor boat
It is required to wear a tail light when crossing the highway at night
It is illegal to catch a fish with your bare hands
Topeka: you are not allowed to have more than five cats at one time
If two trains meet on the same track, neither shall proceed until the other has passed.
Although I basically agree (out of my common sense) with what you wrote, tell me where you got this quote: "In fact, what God said even though He hates divorce, He said If you find your spouse to be morrally unclean in any way, write up the divorce papers, put them right in their hand, and put them out of the house." -Pat
I came up with the quote, based on Deuteronomy 24:1;
"When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house."
The word "uncleanness" above is the Hebrew "ervath dabar" which, according to Wilson's Old Testament Word Studies is:
Chiefly spoken of Levitical uncleanness, both of persons and animals.... Unclean and impure in a Levitical and moral sense. It speaks the greatest pollution, the sordid and filthiness of habit, the gore of blood, the muddiness or water, whatsoever is loathsome or unlovely, noisome or unsightly, all these meet in and make up the meaning of this word. It implies unsuitableness or contriety to communion with him that is holy."
Props to Galen for first bringing this scripture to the conversation here. :)-->
This scripture is very direct and plain spoken concerning Gods POV for allowing divorce. Levitical uncleanness can easliy be defined Biblically as things God would consider as immoral.
I did some cross referencing on the subject because this is the only verse the particular Hebrew words I found listed as being in. The subject, however was also covered "prior" to Dueteronomy, in Numbers 5 where the law is talking about "the spirit of jealousy" in terms of " V:13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled ,"
In "V:19 ...And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband...."
The Deuteronomy verse "uncleanness" includes sexual but is not limited to it. The Numbers verses speak of sexual inpropriety as "going aside into "uncleanness." Further study of the Levitical law would show how God considers things other than adultry as unclean. I just didn't take the time to delineate them.
One of the worst errors in PFAL'ian logic is how TWI handles the Old Testament. Christ's being the "end of the law" et. al. means that he, as our passover lamb, is the once and for all sacrifice that ends God's requirements that we perform all of the rituals of the law. He was the completion of the law & its requirements, the payment in full for all of the things man once had to do which were "partial payments."
PFAL'ian logic taught it as Christ was the NEGATION of the law, as in erasing it as if he burned it and it doesn't exist anymore. EXCEPT when it came down to giving money... "If you don't give beyond the tithe, God won't even SPIT in your direction...."
They taught that since the law was OVER, as in GONE, the very clear penalties for adultry, didn't exist anymore. They created a loophole that since the stuff in the new testament REFERS back to Old Testament law (and therefore does not detail it) they could say, "See it doesn't say "that" in the New Testament.
The PFAL'ian logic of administrations: "this is written TO the Church of the Body in OUR Administration" and the Old Testament was written "only" FOR OUR LEARNING, "that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures, might have hope." That stuff perverted the fact that Jesus CONSTANTLY referred to OT stuff, prophecies, etc. as "present day truth."
They said that even Jesus' time was only for us to learn from but not "official DOCTRINE" for us in the administration of God's grace. All the while ZOOMING past Paul's YELLING at US, the church of the Body in Corinthians, "Is GRACE therefore a license to SIN?!!! GOD forBID!!"
They just focused a sharp beam on the "fornication & unbelieving spouse leaving" as the ONLY "Godly reasons" for divorce.
Actually, there IS no GODLY reason for divorce.
God's central reasoning for divorce is (Matt 19:8) "...because of the hardness of YOUR hearts..." hardly Godly. There is nothing Godly about "uncleanness" AND the "fornication" of Verse 19 is not limited to sexual unfaithfulness.
AND. Don't forget Matthew 5:27, 28
In short; Biblically although fornication/adultry is uncleanness all uncleanness in not fornication.
"Chiefly spoken of Levitical uncleanness, both of persons and animals.... Unclean and impure in a Levitical and moral sense."
Very nice.
"Numbers 5:12 which says:
"Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him,
V:13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, "
If a wife goes astray,
and commits trespass,
and lies carnally with a man,
and hides it from her husband,
and they keep it secret,
THEN she is defiled?
Wohh, back up a couple steps there. It wold seem to me that the defiling happened sometime before that last and final step there.
But see, that is thinking with my carnal mind again. God seems to have entirely different difinitions.
"I'm sure it also included spiritual uncleanness. which would include possession (TRUE possession, not the TWI version; "I don't like you or what you've said or done, so YOU are possessed!")."
From the context I should think that this was the primary focus of the text, in the Levitical and moral sense.
"In other words... NO. God would NOT have a spouse to stay in a morally abusive realtionship, even if it is a marriage. Um... ah, is ANY abuse moral? I think NOT."
Today's society is ever changing. Today we are very sensitive to physical 'abuse', yesterday they were not.
Today we consider slavery to be a moral wrong, yesterday they did not. In the case of slavery, the Bible does mention it and in fact lays down guidelines for handling the slave issue.
There exists a single verse mentioning the existance of 'spanking', and that one verse is jumped onto by many denominations to justify it. Does that one verse also justify all household corporal punishement? I dont know.
So you think when looking at the Bible's never-changing statutes, through today's ever-changing moral ideal's as a filter we can see that it's guide for today is to conclude that "uncleaness" really means 'abusiveness'? Hmm, could be.
"In fact, what God said, even though He HATES divorce he said, "If you find your spouse to be morally unclean, in ANY way, write up the divorce papers, put them right in their hand and put THEM out of the house."
Wow really, what verse did you find that: "in any way" from?
I do need to read it again.
I do see the example of Moses [who had the Egyptian wife and then also the Hebrew wife], and Paul whose Hebrew wife is never mentioned except to say that he no longer was with her.
Wow really, what verse did you find that: "in any way" from?
I think it was socks who mentioned something to the effect of PFAL becoming a religion unto itself.... We we had it drilled into our head about this precise wording of the Word stuff, remember?
I had a little trouble, myself with writing "in any way," myself. I asked myself the SAME question, while I was studying it. I went looking for other verses that would say precisely that. THen that pesky logic thing, I'm prone to (Raf :D-->) hit me again...
IF there is ONLY one usage of this Hebrew wrod for uncleanness listed in the Bible, HOW am I gonna find it somewhere else? Then it hit me again - - "Unclean and impure in a Levitical and moral sense."... would that not include EVERYTHING that would be unclean and impure to the Levitical law?
How would it be "this unclean and impure thing is 'ok' but THAT one it a NO no?" I'm not sure. It had to do with broken covenant type stuff (contriety to comunion withhim that is holy).
Maybe the sense of it might be better communicated by any immoral thing in violation of the marriage covenant. (???)
I think any wife could make a strong case before God for writing a bill of divorcement that stated a husband did any abusive thing to her. I think ANY and EVERY abusive thing would fall far short of Ephesians, "Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and GAVE HIMSELF for it."
Wouldn't you agree?
I do think that abusiveness could certainly be classified as "morally dirty" by any standard.
One of my fondest TWI memories is one beautiful Saturday evening at the Snack Shop in the courtyard near the Wierwille home @ HQ. A group of us were hanging out eatin' ice cream & bug juice.
There was a girl from Norway, Great Britain, a guy from Germany, someone from Iran, South America, Mexico, India, New York, Texas and me, from Pittsburgh. Lots of foriegn countries.... :)--> I thougt it was SO cool, & started asking around, "How do you say (things like Ice cream, tree, table, chair, barn, car, etc.) in YOUR language. It was amazing how many different sounds we made, even speaking English with different accents, all oth these different "words" meant the SAME thing. We had about eight different languages goin' on.
That taught me something about God communicating to us in terms of how much a specific sound meant to HIM when it came to communicating His thoughs to us.
AND. It wasn't published very widely but we ran into MAJOR problems when it came to translating PFAL, et al. into other languages. International Outreach Dept. got into some extreme situations as there were too few people in the ministry fluent ENOUGH in these languages to communicate subtle nuances. People were reporting that some of the translations work had TWI teachings saying some MAJOR politically incorrect, and sometimes even expletively vulgar statements to people.
They finally backed of and abandoned some major translations work because of this.
Dealing with specific words can be interesting stuff. I don't have all the answers....
HCW - You make it sound like an abused spouse is expected, by God, to divorce the abuser. Do you think it is going against God, then, to stay with an abusive spouse? Explain where forgiveness ends and codependence begins. Aren't we supposed to forgive? When the definition of "abuse" is so all-inclusive, how can the abused spouse know when enough is enough? ie If there are no black and blue marks, but there is lots of mental anguish, at what point does a Christian spouse call the lawyer? I think spiritual discernment is next-to-impossible between husbands and wives. It's so subjective.
TWI would argue over semantics trying to enforce their black & white version of life. I just don’t see it that way. God directs our paths and if God works in someone’s heart to have them leave a dangerous or bad situation, then who are we to judge them and throw Bible verses at them? Only God knows what is truly going on in the situation. Each situation is different and unique to the impact it has on an individual. How easy is it to be your best for God if you’re in a terribly oppressive situation and your spouse, though claiming to be following God’s will, obviously isn’t? How easy is it to believe God and be a good witness for him if you have bruises all over (mentally, emotionally and/or physically)? Think God wants his kids living like that? I don’t.
How do these verses fit in with that black & white legalistic view of life?
Mat 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
v.30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
****************
Tts 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain
****************
Jesus appears to be teaching that life is not all black & white and that legalism is wrong – but I could be wrong
Mat 12:1-8 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
But when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
But I say unto you, That in this place is [one] greater than the temple.
But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
****************
1Cr 10:23,24, 29 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Let no man seek his own, but every man another's [wealth].
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another [man's] conscience?
Let me also add that I think this arguing over semantics and the Biblical meanings of these words is way overrated. I'm not sure I believe that the ancient Greek language was as specific as vee pee led us to believe. There are too many examples of Greek words that are synonyms for each other and interchangeable in the text.
HCW - You make it sound like an abused spouse is expected, by God, to divorce the abuser. Do you think it is going against God, then, to stay with an abusive spouse? Explain where forgiveness ends and codependence begins. Aren't we supposed to forgive? When the definition of "abuse" is so all-inclusive, how can the abused spouse know when enough is enough? ie If there are no black and blue marks, but there is lots of mental anguish, at what point does a Christian spouse call the lawyer? I think spiritual discernment is next-to-impossible between husbands and wives. It's so subjective.
Going against God? Do you think God wants his children to stay in such bad situations? Life is just too damned short. And you know deep down in your heart if it's right or not to get out of a situation.
Forgive? There were a couple of discussion threads about forgiveness. One of the criteria for forgiveness is: does the person needing forgiveness want forgiveness? Did he/she ask for it?
Also, you can forgive, but if the other person goes right back into those same activities as before, what good did that forgiveness do? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
Marriage shouldn't be like a bad movie, where you just keep hoping it will get better, because you don't want to feel like you wasted the price of admission.
Life is just too damned short!
Someone once told me: if you are at a bar with friends, and your beer is half finished, and someone buys you a new beer, forget the half finished one - it's warm by now, and the new one is cold, and if you finish the warm one first, the other will be warm by the time you get to it. Forget the old one!
That person also said: if 15 minutes into a movie it's proving to be not very good, leave! unless you've heard from someone trustworthy that it really does get better. Generally a movie that starts out bad, stays bad! The price of your admission is a sunk cost - it's gone! Salvage the evening and go do something enjoyable!
And life is too damned! short to stay in an unhappy marriage. I don't mean a marriage that is unhappy now but could be saved with counseling, you've got to try if you can. I mean a marriage where there is no real prospect of happiness in the future. I've been there, done that, got the wardrobe, sold it at a garage sale. Nothankyouveddymuch!
HCW - You make it sound like an abused spouse is expected, by God, to divorce the abuser. Do you think it is going against God, then, to stay with an abusive spouse? Explain where forgiveness ends and codependence begins. Aren't we supposed to forgive? When the definition of "abuse" is so all-inclusive, how can the abused spouse know when enough is enough? ie If there are no black and blue marks, but there is lots of mental anguish, at what point does a Christian spouse call the lawyer? I think spiritual discernment is next-to-impossible between husbands and wives. It's so subjective.
Welcome to GS Xena!
I can see your points. It was not my specific intention to make it sound as you said. Maybe I could be more clear by saying I meant it to sound like God is OK with divorcing an abuser.
When should one leave? At the FIRST sign of abuse. YES I do mean SHOULD. I feel that if we as individuals valued ourselves one %-age point as much as God does we would NOT put up with one OUNCE of abuse. PERIOD.
I have children. How much abuse would I as a Father allow MY children to experience???
"If I, being evil would not put up with ANYONE abusing my children at ALL, how much MORE, my Father in heaven?"
Codependence begins the MOMENT an abused spouse formulates the thought, "Its OK honey...."
A wife should use her command from God to "submit" to hold her husband to "... as Christ loved the church, and GAVE himself for it."
There is a HUGE difference between forgive and EXCUSE. God is faithful and just to forgive us, but He does not always EXCUSE us from the consequences of our sin.
There must be swift, immediate, and strong consequences for any and every act of abuse in a marriage. I DO believe that if your hubby said an abusive thing to you on his way out the door to work and he came home to any empty house, it may be quite easy for wifee-poo to make her point that she will NOT put up with such stuff.
Of course that is extreme. I'm not adovcating that we divorce over every "broken fingernail" of "abuse." I'm just saying, DON'T take it at ALL.
It IS subjective, between THAT couple. Its not even about GOD at that point, it is what I expect from YOU, MY husband! (and vice-versa).
Obviously there are honesty issues, control issues, etc. These are things couples must work out on their own.
When do you call the lawyer? "When you reach the point that honestly, "he who is an heretic after the first and second admonition, reject!" I think that's a good and Godly standard.
My Mommy taught me as a little boy that people, including ME, do what they WANT to do. IF I don't heed what my WIFE says AFTER she's told me (and I understand) TWICE, it cause I just DON'T want to heed.
I would be THRILLED that my wife would LOVE me enough to tell me, "Honey, I can't take it when you.... to me."
THEN, I'm empowered, I know what she wants, or at least what she doesn't want. It takem me a little bit out of us men's completely CLUELESS state when it comes to pleasing in this relationship that David said was way "too high for me!"
Been separated for about a year. Trying to figure out the next step. This involves clearing out a lot of Way Ministry junk from my head. They knew zero about relationships.
But I can tell you what did it for me. In marriage #1, it was the children. It was one thing for my husband to be drunk and abusive around me, I could get out of his way for a time if need be, but it was a totally different thing to be around defenseless children, ruining their lives by being such a bad example of a grown-up, and risking their being traumatized if he were to turn on them. I got out before that point.
In marriage #2, I spent a lot of time thinking that he just didn't understand what I wanted. If only I could get him to understand my point of view. He loved me, right? Then it must be a mistake that he is hurting me. I even toyed with the idea that he might be autistic. When it became clear that he understood me just fine, but didn't care, that I ended it.
And yeah, when it came to relationships, TWI was clueless.
I was in an abusive marriage for thirteen years, left in 2000, gave him 6 months to become involved in individual/marriage counseling...ANYTHING that would help. He made no moves to get help or fix the marriage and help our children...so I filed for divorce.
Each situation is different.
If you want to talk, email or Private Message me, I'd be glad to talk, listen, offer any advice I can. It is so very healthy to talk about it, helps you see it from another perspective.
The best thing to do is go to an abuse shelter or call an abuse hotline and get some info and some counseling. My kids and I went to counseling for two years after getting the divorce...it was worth every penny and every minute so that they would not grow up thinking that kind of behavior is 'ok' and I would break the cycle of choosing abusive partners.
Yoday on Oprah she said that there are over 21 million, over 1/3, of all women in relationships are emotionally abused on a daily basis in this country.
One of the biggest pieces of "Way Ministry junk" is that they SEVERELY overestimate their importance in this world. At its zenith TWI had about 300,000 "active followers" worldwide. More people than that were wiped out in less than an hour in the recent, highly publicised, Tsunami.
The $22 mil/yr they once brought in is a drop in the bucket compared to the $9 BILLION a company I once worked for makes per year.
No woman in this country is too beautiful, too smart, too wealthy, or too professional to be immune to this horrible phenomena.
TWI is too small to give it the power they crave. The woman on the Oprah show is saying the same type of stuff about why she hasn't left her husband as has been posted earlier on this thread.
I'm not advocating divorce, nor am I telling anyone what they should do. I'm sharingthings from my experience, and I agree with both Steve & Shaz.
I think that most people who haven't divorced after about a year of separation and are contemplating the next steps have been involved in some sort of reconciliation activity. At least I was, it was more complicated than just figuring out what I wanted though.
What I thought I wanted then was my spouse without the negatives, the problems. Christian thinking about marriage, "til death do us part" had been distorted so that we accept and justify receiving abuse.... we STAY... we take it.
Over 55% of marriages in general, 50% of "christian" marriages end in divorce. 33% of SECOND marriages end in divorce. Add that to the above statistic considering that we haven't mentioned about how many MEN are emotionally abused and we must conclude that it is not JUST TWI who hasn't a clue about relationships.
Although the specifics may vary each situation may not be as different as we think. Abuse is abuse is abuse. The situations vary, types of abuse differs, the "reasons" vary but the results of abuse are the same, it damages people.
Everything I've said concerning this is, as Cindy said, towards breaking the cycle of abuse.
Yep. Marriage counselling that involved reading the blue book.....throw in some Genesis .... That's all you need in twit world to "fix" things Oh and G-d forbid you talk to leadership about husband--puts the wife in immediate trouble
Been separated for about a year. Trying to figure out the next step. This involves clearing out a lot of Way Ministry junk from my head. They knew zero about relationships.
Welcome Xena. Damn right about knowing zero. I've been out and married for the same amount of time, about 20 years. If I had taken their advise, I'd surely be divorced by now. A man and woman can live together happily while treating each other as equals. At least most of the time (:
Yoday on Oprah she said that there are over 21 million, over 1/3, of all women in relationships are emotionally abused on a daily basis in this country.
1/3 of ALLLLLLL women are abused daily? Does anyone else find this statistic suspect? Wild overreaching claims like this only cast doubt on those who truly are in abusive relationship, IMO.
On this subject, I had read this section in Romans so many times and yet it did not register in my brain for the longest time that what it actually says is this (my paraphrase): the law says this about divorce, but remember we are now not under the law .
Here it is (follow to the end):
Ro 6:15 -What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Ro 7:1 -Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? Ro 7:2 -For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. Ro 7:3 -So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Ro 7:4 -Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. Ro 7:5 - For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. Ro 7:6 -But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter [steve!'s old beer].
If we're delivered from the law, we're delivered from the law. We have to decide what is going to enable us to be able to serve in newness of spirit. It is up to us to decide. No organization can or should make that decision for us.
And, certainly it is going to be one of the hardest decisions one will ever make, but it is the individual's to make. Period.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
26
14
19
17
Popular Days
Apr 5
35
Mar 4
24
Mar 9
13
Mar 17
11
Top Posters In This Topic
Galen 26 posts
Steve! 14 posts
Belle 19 posts
HCW 17 posts
Popular Days
Apr 5 2005
35 posts
Mar 4 2005
24 posts
Mar 9 2005
13 posts
Mar 17 2005
11 posts
WhiteDove
Dang 3Cents I was wondering why my car quit working thanks for the auto help.
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Actually the state fixed that problem years ago.
Kansas (here is a few more)
All cars driving on major roads must have a chain attached to the front of the auto.( so the horse or mule can pull them out of the way if they breakdown.)
Mules may not be used to hunt ducks
You may not shoot a rabbit from a motor boat
It is required to wear a tail light when crossing the highway at night
It is illegal to catch a fish with your bare hands
Topeka: you are not allowed to have more than five cats at one time
If two trains meet on the same track, neither shall proceed until the other has passed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
This is the question lovers and poets have wrestled with for years.
I Don't Believe You( She just acts like we never have met)Bob Dylan
I can't understand,
She let go of my hand
An' left me here facing the wall.
I'd sure like t' know
Why she did go,
But I can't get close t' her at all.
Though we kissed through the wild blazing nighttime,
She said she would never forget.
But now mornin's clear,
It's like I ain't here,
She just acts like we never have met.
It's all new t' me,
Like some mystery,
It could even be like a myth.
Yet it's hard t' think on,
That she's the same one
That last night I was with.
From darkness, dreams're deserted,
Am I still dreamin' yet?
I wish she'd unlock
Her voice once an' talk,
'Stead of acting like we never have met.
If she ain't feelin' well,
Then why don't she tell
'Stead of turnin' her back t' my face?
Without any doubt,
She seems too far out
For me t' return t' her chase.
Though the night ran swirling an' whirling,
I remember her whispering yet.
But evidently she don't
An' evidently she won't,
She just acts like we never have met.
If I didn't have t' guess,
I'd gladly confess
T' anything I might've tried.
If I was with 'er too long
Or have done something wrong,
I wish she'd tell me what it is, I'll run an' hide.
Though her skirt it swayed as a guitar played,
Her mouth was watery and wet.
But now something has changed
For she ain't the same,
She just acts like we never have met.
I'm leavin' today,
I'll be on my way
Of this I can't say very much.
But if you want me to,
I can be just like you
An' pretend that we never have touched.
An' if anybody asks me, "Is it easy to forget?"
I'll say, "It's easily done,
You just pick anyone,
An' pretend that you never have met!"
WindowsMedia http://bobdylan.com/audio/albumtracks/Wind...eve_another.asx
"And though our separation, it pierced me to the heart
She still lives inside of me, we've never been apart."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Schwaigers
BTW
Although I basically agree (out of my common sense) with what you wrote, tell me where you got this quote: "In fact, what God said even though He hates divorce, He said If you find your spouse to be morrally unclean in any way, write up the divorce papers, put them right in their hand, and put them out of the house." -Pat
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Sure Pat:
I came up with the quote, based on Deuteronomy 24:1;
"When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house."
The word "uncleanness" above is the Hebrew "ervath dabar" which, according to Wilson's Old Testament Word Studies is:
Chiefly spoken of Levitical uncleanness, both of persons and animals.... Unclean and impure in a Levitical and moral sense. It speaks the greatest pollution, the sordid and filthiness of habit, the gore of blood, the muddiness or water, whatsoever is loathsome or unlovely, noisome or unsightly, all these meet in and make up the meaning of this word. It implies unsuitableness or contriety to communion with him that is holy."
Props to Galen for first bringing this scripture to the conversation here.
:)-->
This scripture is very direct and plain spoken concerning Gods POV for allowing divorce. Levitical uncleanness can easliy be defined Biblically as things God would consider as immoral.
I did some cross referencing on the subject because this is the only verse the particular Hebrew words I found listed as being in. The subject, however was also covered "prior" to Dueteronomy, in Numbers 5 where the law is talking about "the spirit of jealousy" in terms of " V:13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled ,"
In "V:19 ...And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband...."
The Deuteronomy verse "uncleanness" includes sexual but is not limited to it. The Numbers verses speak of sexual inpropriety as "going aside into "uncleanness." Further study of the Levitical law would show how God considers things other than adultry as unclean. I just didn't take the time to delineate them.
One of the worst errors in PFAL'ian logic is how TWI handles the Old Testament. Christ's being the "end of the law" et. al. means that he, as our passover lamb, is the once and for all sacrifice that ends God's requirements that we perform all of the rituals of the law. He was the completion of the law & its requirements, the payment in full for all of the things man once had to do which were "partial payments."
PFAL'ian logic taught it as Christ was the NEGATION of the law, as in erasing it as if he burned it and it doesn't exist anymore. EXCEPT when it came down to giving money... "If you don't give beyond the tithe, God won't even SPIT in your direction...."
They taught that since the law was OVER, as in GONE, the very clear penalties for adultry, didn't exist anymore. They created a loophole that since the stuff in the new testament REFERS back to Old Testament law (and therefore does not detail it) they could say, "See it doesn't say "that" in the New Testament.
The PFAL'ian logic of administrations: "this is written TO the Church of the Body in OUR Administration" and the Old Testament was written "only" FOR OUR LEARNING, "that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures, might have hope." That stuff perverted the fact that Jesus CONSTANTLY referred to OT stuff, prophecies, etc. as "present day truth."
They said that even Jesus' time was only for us to learn from but not "official DOCTRINE" for us in the administration of God's grace. All the while ZOOMING past Paul's YELLING at US, the church of the Body in Corinthians, "Is GRACE therefore a license to SIN?!!! GOD forBID!!"
They just focused a sharp beam on the "fornication & unbelieving spouse leaving" as the ONLY "Godly reasons" for divorce.
Actually, there IS no GODLY reason for divorce.
God's central reasoning for divorce is (Matt 19:8) "...because of the hardness of YOUR hearts..." hardly Godly. There is nothing Godly about "uncleanness" AND the "fornication" of Verse 19 is not limited to sexual unfaithfulness.
AND. Don't forget Matthew 5:27, 28
In short; Biblically although fornication/adultry is uncleanness all uncleanness in not fornication.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
HCW:
"Chiefly spoken of Levitical uncleanness, both of persons and animals.... Unclean and impure in a Levitical and moral sense."
Very nice.
"Numbers 5:12 which says:
"Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him,
V:13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, "
If a wife goes astray,
and commits trespass,
and lies carnally with a man,
and hides it from her husband,
and they keep it secret,
THEN she is defiled?
Wohh, back up a couple steps there. It wold seem to me that the defiling happened sometime before that last and final step there.
But see, that is thinking with my carnal mind again. God seems to have entirely different difinitions.
"I'm sure it also included spiritual uncleanness. which would include possession (TRUE possession, not the TWI version; "I don't like you or what you've said or done, so YOU are possessed!")."
From the context I should think that this was the primary focus of the text, in the Levitical and moral sense.
"In other words... NO. God would NOT have a spouse to stay in a morally abusive realtionship, even if it is a marriage. Um... ah, is ANY abuse moral? I think NOT."
Today's society is ever changing. Today we are very sensitive to physical 'abuse', yesterday they were not.
Today we consider slavery to be a moral wrong, yesterday they did not. In the case of slavery, the Bible does mention it and in fact lays down guidelines for handling the slave issue.
There exists a single verse mentioning the existance of 'spanking', and that one verse is jumped onto by many denominations to justify it. Does that one verse also justify all household corporal punishement? I dont know.
So you think when looking at the Bible's never-changing statutes, through today's ever-changing moral ideal's as a filter we can see that it's guide for today is to conclude that "uncleaness" really means 'abusiveness'? Hmm, could be.
"In fact, what God said, even though He HATES divorce he said, "If you find your spouse to be morally unclean, in ANY way, write up the divorce papers, put them right in their hand and put THEM out of the house."
Wow really, what verse did you find that: "in any way" from?
I do need to read it again.
I do see the example of Moses [who had the Egyptian wife and then also the Hebrew wife], and Paul whose Hebrew wife is never mentioned except to say that he no longer was with her.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
I think it was socks who mentioned something to the effect of PFAL becoming a religion unto itself.... We we had it drilled into our head about this precise wording of the Word stuff, remember?
I had a little trouble, myself with writing "in any way," myself. I asked myself the SAME question, while I was studying it. I went looking for other verses that would say precisely that. THen that pesky logic thing, I'm prone to (Raf
:D-->) hit me again...
IF there is ONLY one usage of this Hebrew wrod for uncleanness listed in the Bible, HOW am I gonna find it somewhere else? Then it hit me again - - "Unclean and impure in a Levitical and moral sense."... would that not include EVERYTHING that would be unclean and impure to the Levitical law?
How would it be "this unclean and impure thing is 'ok' but THAT one it a NO no?" I'm not sure. It had to do with broken covenant type stuff (contriety to comunion withhim that is holy).
Maybe the sense of it might be better communicated by any immoral thing in violation of the marriage covenant. (???)
I think any wife could make a strong case before God for writing a bill of divorcement that stated a husband did any abusive thing to her. I think ANY and EVERY abusive thing would fall far short of Ephesians, "Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and GAVE HIMSELF for it."
Wouldn't you agree?
I do think that abusiveness could certainly be classified as "morally dirty" by any standard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
This may be an interesting sidelight....
One of my fondest TWI memories is one beautiful Saturday evening at the Snack Shop in the courtyard near the Wierwille home @ HQ. A group of us were hanging out eatin' ice cream & bug juice.
There was a girl from Norway, Great Britain, a guy from Germany, someone from Iran, South America, Mexico, India, New York, Texas and me, from Pittsburgh. Lots of foriegn countries....
:)--> I thougt it was SO cool, & started asking around, "How do you say (things like Ice cream, tree, table, chair, barn, car, etc.) in YOUR language. It was amazing how many different sounds we made, even speaking English with different accents, all oth these different "words" meant the SAME thing. We had about eight different languages goin' on.
That taught me something about God communicating to us in terms of how much a specific sound meant to HIM when it came to communicating His thoughs to us.
AND. It wasn't published very widely but we ran into MAJOR problems when it came to translating PFAL, et al. into other languages. International Outreach Dept. got into some extreme situations as there were too few people in the ministry fluent ENOUGH in these languages to communicate subtle nuances. People were reporting that some of the translations work had TWI teachings saying some MAJOR politically incorrect, and sometimes even expletively vulgar statements to people.
They finally backed of and abandoned some major translations work because of this.
Dealing with specific words can be interesting stuff. I don't have all the answers....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xena
HCW - You make it sound like an abused spouse is expected, by God, to divorce the abuser. Do you think it is going against God, then, to stay with an abusive spouse? Explain where forgiveness ends and codependence begins. Aren't we supposed to forgive? When the definition of "abuse" is so all-inclusive, how can the abused spouse know when enough is enough? ie If there are no black and blue marks, but there is lots of mental anguish, at what point does a Christian spouse call the lawyer? I think spiritual discernment is next-to-impossible between husbands and wives. It's so subjective.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
TWI would argue over semantics trying to enforce their black & white version of life. I just don’t see it that way. God directs our paths and if God works in someone’s heart to have them leave a dangerous or bad situation, then who are we to judge them and throw Bible verses at them? Only God knows what is truly going on in the situation. Each situation is different and unique to the impact it has on an individual. How easy is it to be your best for God if you’re in a terribly oppressive situation and your spouse, though claiming to be following God’s will, obviously isn’t? How easy is it to believe God and be a good witness for him if you have bruises all over (mentally, emotionally and/or physically)? Think God wants his kids living like that? I don’t.
How do these verses fit in with that black & white legalistic view of life?
Mat 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
v.30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
****************
Tts 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain
****************
Jesus appears to be teaching that life is not all black & white and that legalism is wrong – but I could be wrong
Mat 12:1-8 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
But when the Pharisees saw [it], they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
But I say unto you, That in this place is [one] greater than the temple.
But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
****************
1Cr 10:23,24, 29 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
Let no man seek his own, but every man another's [wealth].
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another [man's] conscience?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Let me also add that I think this arguing over semantics and the Biblical meanings of these words is way overrated. I'm not sure I believe that the ancient Greek language was as specific as vee pee led us to believe. There are too many examples of Greek words that are synonyms for each other and interchangeable in the text.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Going against God? Do you think God wants his children to stay in such bad situations? Life is just too damned short. And you know deep down in your heart if it's right or not to get out of a situation.
Forgive? There were a couple of discussion threads about forgiveness. One of the criteria for forgiveness is: does the person needing forgiveness want forgiveness? Did he/she ask for it?
Also, you can forgive, but if the other person goes right back into those same activities as before, what good did that forgiveness do? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
Marriage shouldn't be like a bad movie, where you just keep hoping it will get better, because you don't want to feel like you wasted the price of admission.
Life is just too damned short!
Someone once told me: if you are at a bar with friends, and your beer is half finished, and someone buys you a new beer, forget the half finished one - it's warm by now, and the new one is cold, and if you finish the warm one first, the other will be warm by the time you get to it. Forget the old one!
That person also said: if 15 minutes into a movie it's proving to be not very good, leave! unless you've heard from someone trustworthy that it really does get better. Generally a movie that starts out bad, stays bad! The price of your admission is a sunk cost - it's gone! Salvage the evening and go do something enjoyable!
And life is too damned! short to stay in an unhappy marriage. I don't mean a marriage that is unhappy now but could be saved with counseling, you've got to try if you can. I mean a marriage where there is no real prospect of happiness in the future. I've been there, done that, got the wardrobe, sold it at a garage sale. Nothankyouveddymuch!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
By the way -
Welcome to da spot, Xena! First cuppa coffee is usually on Raf, he'll probably be along presently.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Welcome to GS Xena!
I can see your points. It was not my specific intention to make it sound as you said. Maybe I could be more clear by saying I meant it to sound like God is OK with divorcing an abuser.
When should one leave? At the FIRST sign of abuse. YES I do mean SHOULD. I feel that if we as individuals valued ourselves one %-age point as much as God does we would NOT put up with one OUNCE of abuse. PERIOD.
I have children. How much abuse would I as a Father allow MY children to experience???
"If I, being evil would not put up with ANYONE abusing my children at ALL, how much MORE, my Father in heaven?"
Codependence begins the MOMENT an abused spouse formulates the thought, "Its OK honey...."
A wife should use her command from God to "submit" to hold her husband to "... as Christ loved the church, and GAVE himself for it."
There is a HUGE difference between forgive and EXCUSE. God is faithful and just to forgive us, but He does not always EXCUSE us from the consequences of our sin.
There must be swift, immediate, and strong consequences for any and every act of abuse in a marriage. I DO believe that if your hubby said an abusive thing to you on his way out the door to work and he came home to any empty house, it may be quite easy for wifee-poo to make her point that she will NOT put up with such stuff.
Of course that is extreme. I'm not adovcating that we divorce over every "broken fingernail" of "abuse." I'm just saying, DON'T take it at ALL.
It IS subjective, between THAT couple. Its not even about GOD at that point, it is what I expect from YOU, MY husband! (and vice-versa).
Obviously there are honesty issues, control issues, etc. These are things couples must work out on their own.
When do you call the lawyer? "When you reach the point that honestly, "he who is an heretic after the first and second admonition, reject!" I think that's a good and Godly standard.
My Mommy taught me as a little boy that people, including ME, do what they WANT to do. IF I don't heed what my WIFE says AFTER she's told me (and I understand) TWICE, it cause I just DON'T want to heed.
I would be THRILLED that my wife would LOVE me enough to tell me, "Honey, I can't take it when you.... to me."
THEN, I'm empowered, I know what she wants, or at least what she doesn't want. It takem me a little bit out of us men's completely CLUELESS state when it comes to pleasing in this relationship that David said was way "too high for me!"
Hope that clarifies things I said?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xena
Been separated for about a year. Trying to figure out the next step. This involves clearing out a lot of Way Ministry junk from my head. They knew zero about relationships.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
That's for darn sure!
Do you know what you want? I would think that that would help to determine next steps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shazdancer
HI, Xena, and welcome!
I would not presume to answer that for you.
But I can tell you what did it for me. In marriage #1, it was the children. It was one thing for my husband to be drunk and abusive around me, I could get out of his way for a time if need be, but it was a totally different thing to be around defenseless children, ruining their lives by being such a bad example of a grown-up, and risking their being traumatized if he were to turn on them. I got out before that point.
In marriage #2, I spent a lot of time thinking that he just didn't understand what I wanted. If only I could get him to understand my point of view. He loved me, right? Then it must be a mistake that he is hurting me. I even toyed with the idea that he might be autistic. When it became clear that he understood me just fine, but didn't care, that I ended it.
And yeah, when it came to relationships, TWI was clueless.
Hope that helps you,
Shaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cindy!
Hi Xena...welcome to the 'spot!
I was in an abusive marriage for thirteen years, left in 2000, gave him 6 months to become involved in individual/marriage counseling...ANYTHING that would help. He made no moves to get help or fix the marriage and help our children...so I filed for divorce.
Each situation is different.
If you want to talk, email or Private Message me, I'd be glad to talk, listen, offer any advice I can. It is so very healthy to talk about it, helps you see it from another perspective.
The best thing to do is go to an abuse shelter or call an abuse hotline and get some info and some counseling. My kids and I went to counseling for two years after getting the divorce...it was worth every penny and every minute so that they would not grow up thinking that kind of behavior is 'ok' and I would break the cycle of choosing abusive partners.
chindy004@yahoo.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
This is a pretty darn big subject....
Yoday on Oprah she said that there are over 21 million, over 1/3, of all women in relationships are emotionally abused on a daily basis in this country.
One of the biggest pieces of "Way Ministry junk" is that they SEVERELY overestimate their importance in this world. At its zenith TWI had about 300,000 "active followers" worldwide. More people than that were wiped out in less than an hour in the recent, highly publicised, Tsunami.
The $22 mil/yr they once brought in is a drop in the bucket compared to the $9 BILLION a company I once worked for makes per year.
No woman in this country is too beautiful, too smart, too wealthy, or too professional to be immune to this horrible phenomena.
TWI is too small to give it the power they crave. The woman on the Oprah show is saying the same type of stuff about why she hasn't left her husband as has been posted earlier on this thread.
I'm not advocating divorce, nor am I telling anyone what they should do. I'm sharingthings from my experience, and I agree with both Steve & Shaz.
I think that most people who haven't divorced after about a year of separation and are contemplating the next steps have been involved in some sort of reconciliation activity. At least I was, it was more complicated than just figuring out what I wanted though.
What I thought I wanted then was my spouse without the negatives, the problems. Christian thinking about marriage, "til death do us part" had been distorted so that we accept and justify receiving abuse.... we STAY... we take it.
Over 55% of marriages in general, 50% of "christian" marriages end in divorce. 33% of SECOND marriages end in divorce. Add that to the above statistic considering that we haven't mentioned about how many MEN are emotionally abused and we must conclude that it is not JUST TWI who hasn't a clue about relationships.
Although the specifics may vary each situation may not be as different as we think. Abuse is abuse is abuse. The situations vary, types of abuse differs, the "reasons" vary but the results of abuse are the same, it damages people.
Everything I've said concerning this is, as Cindy said, towards breaking the cycle of abuse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smurfette
Yep. Marriage counselling that involved reading the blue book.....throw in some Genesis .... That's all you need in twit world to "fix" things Oh and G-d forbid you talk to leadership about husband--puts the wife in immediate trouble
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
Welcome Xena. Damn right about knowing zero. I've been out and married for the same amount of time, about 20 years. If I had taken their advise, I'd surely be divorced by now. A man and woman can live together happily while treating each other as equals. At least most of the time (:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
1/3 of ALLLLLLL women are abused daily? Does anyone else find this statistic suspect? Wild overreaching claims like this only cast doubt on those who truly are in abusive relationship, IMO.
JT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
On this subject, I had read this section in Romans so many times and yet it did not register in my brain for the longest time that what it actually says is this (my paraphrase): the law says this about divorce, but remember we are now not under the law .
Here it is (follow to the end):
Ro 6:15 -What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Ro 7:1 -Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? Ro 7:2 -For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. Ro 7:3 -So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Ro 7:4 -Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. Ro 7:5 - For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. Ro 7:6 -But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter [steve!'s old beer].
If we're delivered from the law, we're delivered from the law. We have to decide what is going to enable us to be able to serve in newness of spirit. It is up to us to decide. No organization can or should make that decision for us.
And, certainly it is going to be one of the hardest decisions one will ever make, but it is the individual's to make. Period.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cindy!
JT...that statistic is actually quite conservative.
Domestic Abuse Statistics
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.