Chrom was written and translated by men, who inserted their own agendas whether consciously or subconsciously. That's my belief Me 2. And how does one describe something that one never saw or wasn't invented. Describe the Internet to someone born 2K years ago. Can you?
Dom Annulment is just weaslewords to cover up that a divorce is what is wanted, but there aren’t biblical grounds for it. I don’t know about biblical grounds but see instances where a D happened but annulment rules were used to sugar coat the term D. Anyone m for 5/15 years and has some kids, a good but maybe troubled M, wasn’t hiding another side of themselves or another previous R, and then split is a D, no ifs ands or buts.
NOTE: I just want you to know that you seem like an intelligent and nice fellow trying to help people on the board. Know that this is not personal in any way. Unfortunately it is easy to take religious differences personally, but that is not my intent.
Quote:
Which means, you can take any part of the bible that you don't like, and declare, "well, I believe that someone just made THAT bit up, so I'm going to ignore it".
Yes you can, and EVERYONE EVERYWHERE ALL THE TIME has been interpreting the Bible to suit their purposes since it was first "written" (although when where and how and all that is open for debate). Every Sunday in every church in america pastors/preachers/priests interpret the Bible. I will say though that just saying "I'm going to ignore it" is irresponsible and I DO NOT explicitly advocate doing that. However, blindly following words on the notion that everything there must be absolute truth seems a bit foolish to me as well. There are many errors in the Bible.
Have you researched the history of how the Bible was originally put together and then translated? Just looking at the translations it is easy to see that some personal bias was introduced. And that does not include the discussions on which book to include and which to not include, etc. NO version of the Bible is a literal translation from the original text, because different languages come from different peoples with different modes of speaking and thinking.
Quote:
And also, how tragic. Because you are following a religion that basically you have invented and refined for yourself, rather than following the bible, which is the clearest indication on earth that we have, of God's will for us.
I don't think it is tragic at all, I am quite comfortable following a religion that makes sense to me. I do have some blind faith, in that I believe in God and in salvation through mercy and the sacrifice of his son. But I am not willing to accept scriptures that to me CONFLICT with the message I read from the Bible. You have no problem (I presume) rejecting the writings in the Book of Mormon. On what basis? Do you KNOW that they are not the inspired word of God. What about the Qu'ran?
And the Bible is not particularly clear on many issues, although I will grant you that it is perhaps the clearest of any religious text. If the Bible is so clear, why is it that there are so many denominations? Are all but one wrong? What does that mean for a person in the wrong denomination? Does it mean they are going to hell? If not, if two people with different specific beliefs can both be saved, why is it such a stretch to think that one can make one's own interpretation, so long as it is logical in one's own mind.
Quote:
Not, "Well, I dont like that bit. It makes me uncomfortable/it's inconvenient/makes me unhappy. So I'm going to ignore it and pretend that 'someone just inserted it into the bible', rather than it really being God's will for my behavour".
You are assuming that I haven't researched and thought about this issue, that I am just doing this out of convenience, that I am just "pretending." I assure you I am not. The funny thing is, most devout Christians know LESS about what the Bible truly says that most atheists. That is because we have a culture of just go to church and agree with the pastor or the Sunday School teacher. We may debate really minor points in Sunday School, but the meaty stuff nobody wants to touch.
Quote:
Err.. i dont recall where my marriage vows, or any other service I've been to, had vows of "explicitly promising to have sex on a regular basis.
That is true, and I'm not advocating that people should do that. I'm just raising a hypothetical situation.
Quote:
Please show me where it says otherwise in the bible. I would be honestly interested to read anything you may research
To me, in my interpretation, if a W (or H) is neglecting their spouse, then that person is not obeying the Bible on how marriage should be. Thus I feel it should be grounds for a divorce. Note that neglect does not mean literally "refuse sex" because their could be a myraid reasons for that independent of neglect, and could include actions by the spouse wanting sex. However, refusing sex for no good reason over an extended period of time is neglect, or to use a stronger word, abuse.
Quote:
And if there isnt an explicit allowance for "you may divorce if..." then, by definition, you have no grounds for divorce.
In the Bible it says if a child does not respect its parents, it should be stoned. Please point out to me the exemptions to that rule. If that is an Old Testament rule that has been superceded by the New Testament, explain to me why a God that is perfect changed his mind. IMHO, the reason is that the stoning law was a misinterpretation (at best) of God's will for us. Why then cannot some of the other rules be misinterpretations as well.
Chrome
"Recollect me darlin, raise me to your lips, two undernourished egos, four rotating hips"
I see that you are "personally invested" in the concept of, "if I dont get sex, i can divorce my wife", since that appears to be the exact position you are in, and I guess you "want out".
Not true, although you may be getting that perspective from some of my rants and vents. I want an intimate R with my W, that includes sex, affection, quality time, respect, etc. ALL OF IT.
I do not "want out", I have committed to trying to make it work. But if it becomes clear to me that after a period of time my W is refusing to move in a positive direction, and that I have truly done what I can, I will have no religious problem with divorcing. The fact of the matter is that my W has made positive steps, and I have not done all that I can, so D is not even on the table for the forseable future.
Quote:
from your very first post in that thread, looks like you are continually pressuring your wife to have sex with you. or at least, that may be how she feels
That very well may be how she feels, but I can assure you that it not my intent. I do pressure her for closeness, spending time together, etc. I have not actually asked my W for sex in over a year. We have had sex in that time period yes, but either she has initiated or I have using body language. The rejection has come in a more indirect way. She has ways of making it clear to me that she is not interested without me saying a word.
Quote:
I think you dont have a sex problem with your wife. I think you have an intimacy problem with your wife.
Agreed
Quote:
She's "decided against it", and you pressuring her for it, is making her more determined to not be close to you.
That could be true. I prefer to think that my approach to her is still flawed, I haven't still managed to discover what I truly want, and she has a lot of work to get out of mommy/daughter mode and into W mode, which she has never done in any sustained way. In short, we have a lot of work to do. And we will do it at our pace. There will still be many times in which my low self-esteem will crop up and cause me to rant/vent on here.
Chrome
p.s. While I do appreciate you taking the time to get advice, this discussion is really moot to the point of D and religion.
"Recollect me darlin, raise me to your lips, two undernourished egos, four rotating hips"
Wow. That was a very interesting read. Thanks for posting that.
Quite honestly, I think that this makes quite a bit of sense... and is probably at the heart of SSM and any other pro-marriage books we've read.
But this is an understanding of Paul, which he is passing along to the Corinthians. Based on his own interpretation. I personally believe it is a pretty good opinion... I don't think any married couple would even disagree with this, in theory.
Unfortunately, he doesn't say what to do to get back on track. When things fall apart to the extent that a man is not providing his woman with emotional connection, and she in turn does not provide him with fulfilling sex... the Bible, I am sorry, is of no help whatsoever. Except here to say both are at fault.
We mortals are left to figure it out on our own, and if we can't, I think it is mutually abusive to continue. And the Bible, I believe, has lots to say about that. I don't know if it says anything about Divorce... I don't even know that that was even a fathomable concept at the time.
And given that the Bible didn't really say anything concrete about divorce, our societies feel free to make their own conclusions and decisions on this matter.
As I recall, Jesus said that Jewish law provided for divorce because humans were flawed and won't perfectly follow God's will, not because God approves of divorce under any circumstances.
a fine and enviable madness, this delusion that all questions have answers, and nothing is beyond the reach of a strong left arm.
My mother married when she was just a teenager. It was very, very bad. She saw immediately that she had made the worst mistake of her life. He did bad things to her. She D him and finished school and years later met my dad and they M and then had me and my sister. When the subject of D came up in church and how "wrong" it is, etc., and oh yes, they brought up the subject of the D W living in adultry. Well, this bothered me to say the least. My dad told me as best he could that...yes, those vows are serious just as all vows before God are serious. But, we humans do make mistakes and we fail so badly. Thankfully, God is a God of mercy, forgiveness and second chances. He forgave my young mother, rescued her from an abusive M and gave her another chance in another M.....for which I personally will always be grateful, since I was born from that M. I will not debate the "divorce is a sin" issue. But, as my father told me, it is not a sin that God cannot forgive. I am thankful that my God is bigger than that. Marriage vows are serious and I am not implying they aren't, but I have found it some what amazing that other vows are completely ignored and it gets shrugged off with hardly a second thought. To God, sin is sin.....and a vow is a vow. However, I for one, am thankful His policy is "grace".
When I was seven years old, my dad became an ordained minister. I first hand witnessed his and my mother's M of 43 years before his death. I also saw how God used him and my mother in the Church throughout my entire life.
I was not going to tell that, for personal reasons, but I have now and I hope that it will help somebody.....somewhere. Like I said, I'm not here to debate the D is a sin issure, but neither do I feel that we should hold this (I don't even know what to call it) over a young man and more or less say, "You've made your bed and now you have to lie in it!" If there is no hope (and I'm not the one to say if there is or isn't) why distroy two lives and possible the lives of children that may be born from this R? Why can't they each have a second chance?
Sadly, I have known several couples that married....only to wake up to a stranger from hell. They were deceived. So, my way of looking at that goes back to the scripture where if the man marries a W (thinking she is a virgin) and then discovers she isn't.....he is entitled to a D. It all boils down to "deception". It may have been written from the male gender's stitch in the scripture, but I think it goes both ways.
It is not about what you feel should work in your M. It is about doing the work that gets the right results. Do what works!
