Friends ... with "benefits"?

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Since the Society does NOT recognize Civil Divorces if there is no adultery, and considers a couple to STILL BE MARRIED ... if a man and wife get divorced civilly ONLY ( perhaps for some economic reason, like bankruptcy, or estate management .... or they cannot stand each other more than a few hours a week .. (health reasons (?)) ... and they still shack up (friends, with benefits..) does the Society sanction these ones in any way?

( For those in Rio Linda ... "friends with benefits" means friends that have sex ...) ....

 

[Guest Nicole]

[The Librarian]

They would be disfellowshipped if they did not marry properly (legally) in a reasonable amount of time.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

..and HOW do you know this?

It seems to me if they are ALREADY married, per WTB&TS policy ... and the State has granted them a divorce .... (remember ... in the eyes of the "Congregation" they are always married unless one commits adultery, and the other does NOT forgive the adultery ...) they have satisfied the requirements of the Society... AND .. the state, and any interference is just busybody meddling.

Ok... lets say that in the middle of the Amazon Jungle, I meat ... er .. meet a tribe of cannibals, and in order not to be the guest of honor at dinner, I agree to marry the pigmy chief's daughter, he chants, dances, and makes a marriage certificate on the side of a coconut, and according to that tribe, I AM MARRIED.  Guards stand outside the grass hut to make sure the marriage is consummated,

The only way to get divorced is to feed the coconut to an alligator, which I do.

I guess then that according to current WTB&TS policy ... I have to wrestle the alligator and have IT ... after a reasonable time, of course ... barf up the coconut, and hang it around my neck on a chain.

On 6/27/2017 at 2:08 AM, The Librarian said:

They would be disfellowshipped if they did not marry properly (legally) in a reasonable amount of time.

I have no doubt that is true, THAT IS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN  ... BUT HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS?

AND MORE TO THE POINT ... WHAT IS THE SCRIPTURAL BASIS FOR THIS?

It is ABSURD that people married in the sight of God ( disregarding the Amazonian specifics ..) need approval and registration from the State... WHEN THE STATE DOES NOT CARE AT ALL ... AND HAS GIVEN THEM PERMISSION FOR A CIVIL DIVORCE.

1. God considers the couple still married.

2. The "State" could care less or not at all, and even GRANTS legal divorce.

If I was a cynical person ... I might think the ONLY thing the WTB&TS cares about is controlling EVERY aspect of human behavior, and that EVERYTHING not specifically allowed ..... is forbidden.

[The Librarian]

There is a principle... a phrase I remember in the elder's book regarding "a reasonable period of time" when it comes to marital rules...

one that comes to mind is regarding if a spouse abandons the other.

Not sure what page it was on though ... sorry.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Has the Society ever ruled on what happens if a man or woman abandons their spouse forever ... is the one abandoned stuck forever ?

 

[TrueTomHarley]

On 6/30/2017 at 10:53 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Ok... lets say that in the middle of the Amazon Jungle, I meat ... er .. meet a tribe of cannibals, and in order not to be the guest of honor at dinner, I agree to marry the pigmy chief's daughter, he chants, dances, and makes a marriage certificate on the side of a coconut, and according to that tribe, I AM MARRIED.  Guards stand outside the grass hut to make sure the marriage is consummated,

Michener writes somewhere about a delegation of Western bigwigs hosted by natives. Chiefs were insistent upon providing hospitality, and beautiful women was the first line of offence. Our hero of the book, whoever he was, did indeed succumb, married though he was. 

However,  the drummer for the Rolling Stones,  Charlie someone-or-other, lives a life as conventional as the other Stones' lives are promiscuous. When Hugh Hefner had them all over for an orgy,  Mick went hogwild, but Charlie stayed downstairs playing pool.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

THE QUESTION REMAINS ....

Has the Society ever ruled on what happens if a man or woman abandons their spouse forever ... is the one abandoned stuck forever ?

[Melinda Mills]

Who has the authority to make a rule on that that would supersede what Matt 19:9 and 1 Cor 7:10,11 say.  Never heard of anything.  Have to face the fact that the couple did not commit adultery nor do one of the partners wish to make up again with the mate.

Know of a couple who needs a solution also for over  25 years. If this remedy was available to them they would know.

And who said that self-enforced celibacy kills.

The ones what are "friends with benefits" should remarry legally as this can't be pleasing to God or the congregation.

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

THE QUESTION REMAINS ....

Has the Society ever ruled on what happens if a man or woman abandons their spouse FOREVER! ... is the one abandoned stuck forever ?

(This is a LOT of work ....sigh...)

... AND IF SO ... WHY?

[TrueTomHarley]

14 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

what happens if a man or woman abandons their spouse FOREVER!

It's a little too soon to tell.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

TTH

You are correct, technically.

THE QUESTION REMAINS .... (rephrased .... )

Has the Society ever ruled on what happens if a man or woman abandons their spouse FOR THE REST OF THEIR "NATURAL LIVES" ... is the one DELIBERATELY abandoned stuck for the rest of his "natural life"? ?

Example: Lets say my wife got on a Starship to the  Centauri Star System, at sub-light speeds.  She is in hibernation, and will be asleep for 126 years in transit, 63 years accelerating, and 63 years decelerating, meanwhile, back on Earth I have to live the rest of my life, say 42 years, with no help, companionship, or love, THROUGH NO FAULT OF MY OWN.

Does it serve the interests of 1.) God, 2.) Christ, 3.) or any PERSON .... for me to endure this cruelty for 42 years, and die alone? 

To the best I have been able to determine ... THE ANSWER IS NO!

That to me is the KEY question to understanding Jesus' advice about marriage.

I cannot think of ANYONE who benefits from this cruel, current application of Scripture.

Can YOU?

The only working theory I can see for kindness, compassion, and Justice to prevail ... is if Jesus was ONLY talking to the Pharisees of his day about the SPECIFIC custom among Jewish men of his time of "juking the system" with a pad of divorce certificates, and closing the manufactured  "loophole" of this SPECIFIC activity, then, and now.

If you have a better explanation ... I would like to hear it.

The alternate explanation would have to be reasonable, show common sense, and the end result be merciful, and just ... and NOT HURT ANYONE ... which is the whole point of ALL Theocratic Law.

.