MatthewG Posted January 1, 2009 Author Posted January 1, 2009 Only if she refused to continue taking out the garbage..(I apologise, I was feeling the need for a chuckle.. carry on.. )
ryanelwood Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 So I read a comment in another thread that someone was threatened with divorce because the person had lost their belief in the LDS Church. My original thought was, their spouse doesn't love them, why stay with them?Well it's complicated I suppose, family, kids, friends it can get messy, but why would you want to stay with someone who would divorce you because you stopped believing in the truthfulness of the LDS Church? To me, IMO, says the person doesn't truly love them. I presented the scenario to my wife who agreed, and asked if the person really did love them, why wouldn't they stick it out and try to help said person who has lost their belief to regain it?I would only divorce someone I truly loved over a religion, if it became more problem and began to snowball into other areas of our lives. A good friend of ours just resigned from the Church after he lost his belief in it, but his wife, loving him very much, respected his decision and they are still happily married, he even goes to church with her some times because he truly loves her and wants to spend time with her. Your thoughts, would you divorce someone over religion?This is a good question that is difficult to answer since there could be many different variables in different cases. But as a general rule, I think it insulting for a spouses love to be so shallow that he/she would hold the importance of an institution or a god that they have never seen nor heard over their spouse. This is the way I have thought about in the past, I am a male so my thoughts are from that perspective, lets say someone breaks into the house to harm my wife for whatever reason. She can call on god or me to stop the intruder, well we all know calling on god would be totally worthless in that situation, but I could do something about it and would. Lets say the family is having finacial trouble, the spouse, whether wife or husband, may get a second job or something, calling on god will profit nothing. In a medical emergency, a persons spouse will call 911 and administer medical attention, calling on god will accomplish nothing. The point is that a spouse should be much more loyal to their partner than to god because when the poop hits the fan, the spouse is actually there to support their partner whenever needed, the invisible god doesn't show up. I could never stay married to someone that holds their do nothing invisible god higher than me.
Cadizita Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 I think the above scriptures make that clear, don't you? But now here we go with, "well, what if he's beating his wife and kids, etc., etc., etc.," which then is quickly translates into "well, if one leaves the lds church, then that's like abuse - it's spiritual abuse" or whatever.No, the Bible is clear. Leaving the lds church, or sbc church, or lutheran church is not grounds for divorce.I did have my spouse leave the LDS church, and I left him. And I can tell you that through personal revelation, priesthood blessings, and even council, it was the decision that God was happy with me making. Staying with him would have meant multiplying by the dozens the chances that my children would also go apostate. It would have been selfish and wrong to stay with him. However, I know a girl who's husband also left the church but did it quietly, peacefully, and has no ill-will or anger against the church, he just doesn't believe and isn't belligerent about it and so they've stayed together and are quite happy.When Paul said that women should remain silent in the churches he did that because women were so strong in the faith that they were taking over the meetings, to the point of infringing on the priesthood responsibilities and so Paul was harsh but got his point across. I believe it is the same with statements regarding divorce. Maybe it was happening too much, but it wasn't necessarily wrong to do so under the right circumstances.I believe God wants us to be happy and sometimes the best way to find happiness is to leave an unhappy situation, which I can say is true.
Ms. Jack Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 When Paul said that women should remain silent in the churches he did that because women were so strong in the faith that they were taking over the meetings, to the point of infringing on the priesthood responsibilities and so Paul was harsh but got his point across. I believe it is the same with statements regarding divorce. Maybe it was happening too much, but it wasn't necessarily wrong to do so under the right circumstances.I'm curious, how did you arrive at this interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-14? I've heard a lot of different things said and argued about that passage, but this one is new to me. Did an LDS leader teach it, or is it your own pet theory? I believe God wants us to be happy and sometimes the best way to find happiness is to leave an unhappy situation, which I can say is true.I think you have to be careful using happiness as a justification for actions. I'm not saying you in particular were wrong since I wasn't there and I can't know everything that went on with your marriage, but I've had too many friends go against what the Bible taught just because they wanted some temporal happiness. I think God cares more about doing what's right than doing what makes you happy. Doing right usually brings its own kind of joy.
busybee Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 Maybe this point has been made. But the Bible at least tells us that divorce is not allowed accept for sexual infidelity. Paul tells the believing spouse to stay with the unbeliever and that the believer might be the means to saving the unbeliever. I think it a rare case where the believing spouse is justified in divorcing the spouse who has lost their belief. I do not think many Church leaders would encourage such council.While I don't know that loss of belief would be grounds for divorce in the eyes of the Lord, I'm pretty confident that sexual infidelity wouldn't be the only acceptable reason for divorce. I cannot imagine a loving Heavenly Father would expect a woman/man to stay married to a spouse that beats the crap out of them or the children. There is nothing that would persuade me to remain married to a man who abused me or my children!!
Teancum Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 While I don't know that loss of belief would be grounds for divorce in the eyes of the Lord, I'm pretty confident that sexual infidelity wouldn't be the only acceptable reason for divorce. I cannot imagine a loving Heavenly Father would expect a woman/man to stay married to a spouse that beats the crap out of them or the children. There is nothing that would persuade me to remain married to a man who abused me or my children!!Yes I could agree with that.
katherine the great Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 While I don't know that loss of belief would be grounds for divorce in the eyes of the Lord, I'm pretty confident that sexual infidelity wouldn't be the only acceptable reason for divorce. I cannot imagine a loving Heavenly Father would expect a woman/man to stay married to a spouse that beats the crap out of them or the children. There is nothing that would persuade me to remain married to a man who abused me or my children!!Ditto. Although I do think that separation would also be an option that many faithful Catholic women would choose since divorce is not usually an option for them. I use this as an example because I think they have the strictest beliefs on divorce among Christians.
John Williams Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 My two cents: Loss of belief is usually a catalyst for exposing problems in the marriage. In other words, it isn't necessarily the primary cause of the dissolution of the marriage, though it is often the most visible cause, but rather it has exposed underlying problems that just needed the right issue to destroy the marriage.Even in cases where it appears to be the primary factor in a divorce, it's usually that one or both spouses places the church issues ahead of everything else in the marriage, which in any case is a recipe for disaster.
CherishedVirtue Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 Seems as though hubby and I went through this, only backwards. I was not a member and he was. As time has gone on it created a lot of stress points in our marriage, as I never joined any religion feeling that I would fail at it... I had to be perfect or it was a lie. Hubby was far from perfect at religion, and it used to anger me. However as time went I, I better understood forgiveness, repentance, and faith. I am still struggling hard with my own ability to have faith, but I joined the church rather then either of us leaving it. Things aren't easier because of this. It created a whole new set of difficulties, but at least we're now on the same page.However, I do feel that if I DID remove my name from the church, (as if one of us were to leave it, it would most likely be me) that our marriage would not survive it. Though hubby has stated time and again that he would love me either way, it would create a lot of resentment, misunderstandings and just overall ill feelings. I was surprised to discover what kind of effect religion can have on a marriage, that I was blind to when at 18 a non religious girl married a very devout LDS boy. Obviously, we weren't married in the temple, and I think this bothers him still... It puts a lot of strain on him as he is the ONLY child in his large family that wasn't married in the temple. In general, I think that yes, being a member of the church or leaving the church can effect a marriage heavily. This has been true for me, but it also depends on how the couple views it. My marriage is very important to me, and I will work hard at it, going so far as to try to be part of a religion I never dreamed I'd be in, and in general, its been a positive experience for the most part thus far.
CherishedVirtue Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 My two cents: Loss of belief is usually a catalyst for exposing problems in the marriage. In other words, it isn't necessarily the primary cause of the dissolution of the marriage, though it is often the most visible cause, but rather it has exposed underlying problems that just needed the right issue to destroy the marriage.Even in cases where it appears to be the primary factor in a divorce, it's usually that one or both spouses places the church issues ahead of everything else in the marriage, which in any case is a recipe for disaster.I agree here... and it was a serious cause for concern before. I was regularly angry at my husband for seemingly valuing the church moreso than he did our family and marriage. He's said things here and there that feel as though when it comes to church vs marriage that church will always win. I think, though, that I may have not understood him. His belief is that they go hand in hand, not one above the other.
Hoops22 Posted January 1, 2009 Posted January 1, 2009 And I can tell you that through personal revelation, priesthood blessings, and even council, it was the decision that God was happy with me making.Hence the problem with relying on something other than God's word.Typical anti-mormon garbage taking what i said completely apart and twisting it to say what you want. Do you enjoy being a liar? Because what you have quoted, while they are my words, it is not what I said. I don't appreciate it either.Please, where did I get it wrong? I simply commented on what you wrote. Those are your words.
MatthewG Posted January 2, 2009 Author Posted January 2, 2009 Hence the problem with relying on something other than God's word.Please, where did I get it wrong? I simply commented on what you wrote. Those are your words.They are my words, but it isn't what I said, the way you have quoted me it appears that I could care less what the bible says AT ALL, when that is not the case. If you did that on purpose then we have issues, because I clearly care what the bible says, just not concerning divorce. If you did it on accident I would appreciate you edit your post because as it stands I find it offensive.
Hoops22 Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 I clearly care what the bible says, just not concerning divorce.I have nothing to apologize for. I took your words and commented thereupon.What other subjects do you not care what the Bible says?
emeliza Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 What other subjects do you not care what the Bible says?The Bible clearly says that divorce is okay in the case of adultery. However you have interpreted this to mean it was only okay for the Jews and not the Gentiles if I read your correctly. What other subjects do you not care what the Bible says?
Hoops22 Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 The Bible clearly says that divorce is okay in the case of adultery. However you have interpreted this to mean it was only okay for the Jews and not the Gentiles if I read your correctly. What other subjects do you not care what the Bible says?None. The Bible makes a very, very clear distinction between pre-new covenant jews and new covenant gentiles.
emeliza Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 None. The Bible makes a very, very clear distinction between pre-new covenant jews and new covenant gentiles.I don't agree with you in this particular case. Again I am in line with Bluebell. I think divorce is warrant in cases of abuse or continuing adultery. I am a bit more conservative than most people though and think it is only okay for extreme situations of these and not just because you marry a jerk. Generally speaking if you marry a jerk and it doesn't work out, I think you should legally separate, but I am not sure I agree with divorce.
saemo Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 re: the comments on Catholics and divorce. Divorce is not allowed. Marriage is a serious commitment, through thick and thin, hard times, and includes people changing. As, yes, people do change over time.An exception can be given, by the Church, for adultery, abuse and the Pauline privilege.The Pauline privilege is the most relevant point to this thread:1 Cor. 710 To the married, however, I give this instruction (not I, but the Lord): a wife should not separate from her husband 11 --and if she does separate she must either remain single or become reconciled to her husband--and a husband should not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say (not the Lord): if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she is willing to go on living with him, he should not divorce her; 13 and if any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he is willing to go on living with her, she should not divorce her husband. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through the brother. Otherwise your children would be unclean, whereas in fact they are holy. 15 If the unbeliever separates, however, let him separate. The brother or sister is not bound in such cases; God has called you to peace.This is of course to us, the privilege given to the Catholic partner. That is, a divorce over religious differences would allow the marriage to be annulled. (Annulment being a Catholic process, not a secular process.)For LDS, I believe you should follow your beliefs. But I am all for working to keep a marriage together.
Hoops22 Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 I don't agree with you in this particular case. Again I am in line with Bluebell. I think divorce is warrant in cases of abuse or continuing adultery. I am a bit more conservative than most people though and think it is only okay for extreme situations of these and not just because you marry a jerk. Generally speaking if you marry a jerk and it doesn't work out, I think you should legally separate, but I am not sure I agree with divorce.That's fine. Just don't claim Biblical justification for you view. It is a view that is contrary to, and an addition to, the Bible.
emeliza Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 That's fine. Just don't claim Biblical justification for you view. It is a view that is contrary to, and an addition to, the Bible.I disagree with you. I am pretty certain that God okayed divorce in the NT for adultery and if your spouse who lost the faith decides to leave you (however you aren't allowed to leave them only let them leave you).
Hoops22 Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 I disagree with you. I am pretty certain that God okayed divorce in the NT for adultery and if your spouse who lost the faith decides to leave you (however you aren't allowed to leave them only let them leave you).Please cite that for me. I'd be interested.
Hoops22 Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 I'm sure you'll be citing mt 5 to me - as that could be your only support.But Jesus goes on later to say in mt.19One could argue, and I might, that Jesus' point here is noting that Joseph did not divorce Mary, though he could have.In addition, to extrapolate this clear exception into "spiritual unfaithfulness" or "abuse" or whatever is clearly not warranted. Particularly in light of Paul's writings mentioned above.3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?" 4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." 7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?" 8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." 10The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry." 11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[c]because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
emeliza Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." This is not a commandment that one should not divorce, but appears to be more about one should not remarry.
Hoops22 Posted January 2, 2009 Posted January 2, 2009 This is not a commandment that one should not divorce, but appears to be more about one should not remarry.So, then, where is the Biblical justification for divorce?
MatthewG Posted January 3, 2009 Author Posted January 3, 2009 I have nothing to apologize for. I took your words and commented thereupon.What other subjects do you not care what the Bible says?No what you did was manipulate my statement and added to it. You sir are a liar. All anyone has to do is look at my post and yours, and you will clearly see what you are trying to do. By breaking my sentence up AND ADDING "....." like a typical anti-mormon jerks do, you are taking what I said completely out of context. Your post the way it is quote it would appear I don't care what the bible says AT ALL which is false.
Hoops22 Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 All anyone has to do is look at my post and yours, and you will clearly see what you are trying to do. By breaking my sentence up AND ADDING "....." like a typical anti-mormon jerks do, you are taking what I said completely out of context. Your post the way it is quote it would appear I don't care what the bible says AT ALL which is false.Anyone is free to do so and come to their own conclusion.I stand by my commentary. I can not anticipate what you MEANT to write, I can only comment upon what you ACTUALLY write.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.