Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Scripture Question

So, I came across this verse in my scripture reading a while ago, and I can't come up with a meaning for it that I'm comfortable with. I don't usually get a lot of comments on here, but I would appreciate them now.
How should I interpret this?( http://scriptures.lds.org/en/3_ne/12/31-32#31 )

7 comments:

  1. http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=ec21b5658af22110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
    Part 1 I think explains that scripture a bit.

    The idea is that you shouldn't take divorce lightly, and men shouldn't use it as a way to be with many women in their life instead of spending eternity with just one woman. Think of a couple that want to sleep together without breaking the law of chastity, so they go to Vegas and get married, do the deed, then get divorced. That's not technically fornication, but in spirit it is.
    As for the last clause, I think it just means that the divorce needs to be complete before you move into a new relationship. Divorce law varies by country and by state, and in some places the process can be long, difficult, and in some Catholic countries almost impossible. You still have to go through it and finish it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I should probably point out that in this context 'put away' probably means separation without legal divorce, which is what a lot of people in Catholic countries do rather than bother with that the process (which in some places is even impossible). Think of when you were a kid and your mom told you to put away your Barbies. You put them away in the toy chest, and they're out of sight. They're still yours, though. Your sister can't go into the box and claim them as her own just because you put them away.
    I guess that's an unfortunate metaphor because I'm comparing Barbies to wives, but it works for the 'put away' concept. I also know that in the metaphor women are treated as property. Unfortunately, in the Middle East where Christ lived, both then and now women are treated as property, and I think that's part of what Christ was preaching against.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I looked it up in the lesson manual. The first verse is about the law of Moses and the second one you shared is the higher law.

    Below is taken from the manual. Hope this gives you some clarity.

    1. Jesus’ teaching about divorce

    As you discuss the Savior’s teaching recorded in 3 Nephi 12:32, you may want to share the following information:

    In ancient Israel a man could put away, or divorce, his wife for insignificant reasons. However, in a perfect world, such as the celestial kingdom, divorce does not exist. Because the earth is not yet perfect, divorce is allowed but should not happen except for the most serious reasons. In Matthew 19:9 Jesus indicates that a man who divorced his wife for a frivolous reason was still married to her in the eyes of God, and the man thus committed adultery if he married another woman. (See James E. Talmage, Jesus the Christ, 3rd ed. [1916], 473–75, 484; see also Bruce R. McConkie, The Mortal Messiah, 4 vols. [1979–81], 2:138–39.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like Jessica's explanation better...

    ReplyDelete
  6. I followed Jessica's quote a bit further down the rabbit hole, and found a couple really cool quotes from Jesus the Christ:

    The Mosaic provision had been but
    permissive,and was justified only because of
    existing unrighteousness... In our Lord’s day
    the prevailing laxity in the matter of
    marital obligation had produced a state of
    appalling corruption in Israel; and woman,
    who by the law of God had been made a
    companion and partner with man, had become
    his slave. The world’s greatest champion of
    woman and womanhood is Jesus the Christ....

    Geikie thus paraphrases part of Christ’s
    reply to the Pharisee’s question concerning
    divorce, and comments thereon. "’I say,
    therefore, that whoever puts away his wife,
    except for fornication, which destroys the
    very essence of marriage by dissolving the
    oneness it had formed, and shall marry
    another, commits adultery; and whoever
    marries her who is put away for any other
    cause commits adultery, because the woman is
    still, in God’s sight, wife of him who had
    divorced her.’ This statement was of far
    deeper moment than the mere silencing of
    malignant spies. It was designed to set forth
    for all ages the law of His New Kingdom in
    the supreme matter of family life. It swept
    away for ever from His Society the conception
    of woman as a mere toy or slave of man, and
    based true relations of the sexes on the
    eternal foundation of truth, right, honor,
    and love. To ennoble the House and the Family
    by raising woman to her true position was
    essential to the future stability of His
    Kingdom, as one of purity and spiritual
    worth."

    I think in a perfect world there would be no such thing as divorce. However, in a perfect world there would be no such thing as abuse or adultery, either. I think we (members of the church) need to acknowledge that we live in a world where sometimes divorce is necessary. Divorce should only be considered taboo in a world without abuse and adultery, and people should not be looked down on just for being divorced. I've known too many divorced women who do not deserve to be thought of as anything less than as "one of purity and spiritual worth." I haven't met any divorced men that I could say the same about (although they PROBABLY do exist).

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry for being so loquacious, but I've thought a lot about this in the past because of some close friends who've been through it, and I have some pretty strong feelings on the subject. This scripture talks about adultery, but I really don't think that is the only legitimate reason for divorce. In Christ's time people were using divorce basically to commit adultery, so he laid down the law about divorce. However, I think any time one person in the marriage isn't treated like an equal partner, that's a problem that if it can't be corrected could be a legitimate grounds for divorce. Once when subbing an English class the students were assigned two short stories that changed my whole view of marriage and equal partnerships. The women in these stories were married to men who loved them and thought they were doing what was right, but their wives were in some serious need of divorce (and a second medical opinion).

    Both are from the victorian era. They're not true stories, but they're based on the feelings and experiences of the authors, one of whom had to find happiness after first going through divorce. They don't have happy endings (The Yellow Wallpaper is actually a bit of a horror story), but I think they're worth reading.
    The Yellow Wallpaper: http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/dept/history/lavender/wallpaper.html
    The Story of an Hour:
    http://www.vcu.edu/engweb/webtexts/hour/

    ReplyDelete