Do homosexual acts on the part of a married person constitute a Scriptural ground for divorce, freeing the innocent mate to remarry?

[Srecko Sostar]

18 minutes ago, Anna said:

Actually, just a little reminder, problems with any sexual abuse, including child sexual abuse, in the whole wide world started with Satan.

(satan,  little s) satan is not  personal name and it is not  deserve big S. He is the biggest enemy of God and human. Big S honoring him, no matter of grammar rules :)))))))) (You know, Jesus is not God but god :))))))))))))))) 

But main treason for my comm on this your quote is something else.  "Started with satan"?. WT not started in those time when satan started. Why you need to made this comparison?     

20 minutes ago, Anna said:

Perhaps it would be a good idea for those who criticize the WT for the way they handled Child abuse in the past, to educate  themselves on how the rest of the world handled child abuse in the past.

Again, God's lessons and principles are older than 19/20 and 21 century of WT history. And by "choosing" WT to be His earthly agent, it is quite confusing and weird that God with such high moral standards and tools for helping people, did not make better progress in his own organization regarding this issue, but He waited for secular authority to teach His people/nation here on Earth. And He left to "social and scientific evolution/revolution of satans world to be progressive force that helping WT aga Gods organization to make "positive changes" in congregational structure regard policy and spiritual awareness of this problem  :)))    

[Srecko Sostar]

19 hours ago, Anna said:

but I have a feeling this may have been written or approved by Raymond Franz.

:))) Raymond is guilty as JW and as ex-JW. hahaha 

If it is approved it was done by whole GB body, no matter of number of votes that was pro et contra :))))

[Srecko Sostar]

18 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

This hasn't been the attitude in the org for a LONG time.

Long time for Whom? Short time for Whom?

For human soul of sister or brother which marital partner are "animal"?

[JW Insider]

20 hours ago, Anna said:

I am not sure, but I have a feeling this may have been written or approved by Raymond Franz. @JW Insider may know better.

I think you are right. Fred Franz wrote a 1969 article that got much of these concerns started over the definition of "porneia," and this article started a number of judicial issues which were typically handled by the Service Department (Harley Miller, Merton Campbell, etc.) Believe it or not, Knorr and Fred Franz had very little input into congregational discipline issues from about 1968 to nearly 1980. Harley Miller was trusted to manage this through his team. He was the chief "executioner" in those days. Fred Franz was a prophecy specialist and the primary doctrines he took an interest in were related to fulfillment of prophecy. Nathan Knorr was a bureaucrat, whose work running a fast-growing organization left him with almost no time for anything else. With the only other active organizational officers like G.Suiter, L.Swingle, and M.Henschel, the g.b. only existed for corporate, bureaucratic functions like signing checks, buying presses, paper, property and ink, etc.

The governing body did not exist as a "body" or even a "committee" of any kind until 1971 when R.Franz, G.Gangas, L.Greenlees, and W.Jackson were added to the corporate-defined officers. But none of these men, not even Knorr, even in 1971 would have thought it possible to suggest a change in doctrine, which could have only fallen to F.Franz.

There became one exception to that rule, because one member of this new Governing Body was put there specifically because he had successfully completed the Aid Book, and a couple items from the Aid Book resulted in policy/doctrinal changes. One of those policy changes was the creation (in 1971) of the "elder arrangement" with committees, which by extension, resulted in the creation of the "Governing Body." But Franz, in his book, says that even then 1971-1974, he still would never had thought of suggesting a change in doctrine, and the initial meetings of the GB were not about spiritual matters, but just bureaucratic matters like rubber-stamping the sign-off on lists of names selected for full-time branch assignments and traveling overseers. But Knorr began bringing in some of the questionable disfellowshipping decisions (from Harley Miller and Merton Campbell, etc) and other Service Department issues. Most people didn't notice, but the Writing Department was still on a 20-year cycle (updating articles that had been printed approximately 20 years earlier, starting in the mid-1930's) with a lot more, new prophecy-related updates by F.Franz interspersed.

So the 1972 article was to be written as a defense of the current disfellowshippings by the Service Department, and R.Franz was given the assignment during a time when he still did not question the general doctrines. Remember that the Aid Book didn't even question our chronology even though R.Franz already should have known better based on all the contrary research they found while preparing that book. According to Franz it was not until between 1974 and 1976 when he realized that he disagreed with the rest of the Governing Body who voted that a sister was not free to get a divorce because her husband only had anal sex with another woman. The Governing Body's opinion was that oral or anal sex or bestiality on the part of the husband with other women (or animals) would not have freed her to remarry. At this point he was sure the other members had it wrong and when the policy finally changed, he says he was happy that he was also assigned to write the updated correction to the old ruling in 1976.  

 

[Noble Berean]

5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

this is interesting. revised Bible text ? it can be, and it is very tricky when someone change text to adapt it to understanding in particular moment of time. 

WT made few revising on Bible text from first printing. How many problems will come in a future if some problem of past error on translation we can see now, today. And how many more problematic changes and interpretations that has been done according to bad translation are already here but we are not see it yet, maybe some other people saw before us :))  

But isn't revision a good thing when it leads to clear understanding? We're constantly learning more about the Bible as we dig into it and research it.

[Srecko Sostar]

4 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

But isn't revision a good thing when it leads to clear understanding? We're constantly learning more about the Bible as we dig into it and research it.

Inside WT revision often means new period of dogmatism :)))

[Anna]

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

And who told to Stephen Lett about "apostate" informations on paedophile cases that had become "driven lies" . Does he watching apostate YT channels, or somebody else doing that dirty job for him/them? hehe

Apostates send letters to Bethel, regularly.

[Noble Berean]

1 minute ago, Anna said:

Apostates send letters to Bethel, regularly.

And they almost certainly read websites like JWSurvey, JWFacts, etc. I believe they even sued one. They have an awareness of what critics are saying.

[Srecko Sostar]

9 minutes ago, Anna said:

Apostates send letters to Bethel, regularly

I send my letter of dissociation to Zagreb Branch and they never published it. :))))

Elders said to bro and sis not to read if they receive something from me. And to destroy it :))))))))))

[Srecko Sostar]

9 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

They have an awareness of what critics are saying.

And then integrate such material in WT study :))))) as proper food in proper time :)))))))

[Anna]

5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

:))))) just/only gaffe???

 

I meant gaffe from a logical point of view, obviously, not how it affected people's lives. I made it clear how I felt about that in my reply to Gone Fishing. 

Gaffe also means "an unintentional act or remark causing embarrassment to its originator; a blunder"

So the reasoning in the 1972 WT was a blunder, a mistake, and obviously, later on,  a cause for embarrassment to those who made it, and those who read it.

[Anna]

7 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I send my letter of dissociation to Zagreb Branch and they never published it. :))))

We are not talking about letters of dissociation. You were wondering how GB members get to know about what apostates say, regarding child abuse for example.They get to know because apostates send letters to them.