Hitting with the heavy gloves

[Fieldsofgold]

You know, the scripture says that she was taken in the act of adultery.

 

I'd like to know where the man she was committing adultery with was.

 

I also don't know how more clear,"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," can be.

 

But maybe that's just me.

 

GEL

 

the Bible also says a tree shall be known by the fruit that it produces. If it does not produce good fruit, the Master Gardener will work with it, will prune it, will fertilize it. Will try to restore it. Will give it time to grow. But if it continues to not produce good fruit, at some point it will be chopped down and thrown into the fire.

 

This is a message to us. We are sinful creatures by nature. G-d shows us, corrects us, sends lessons and people our way to help get us on the right path. When we sin, and realize it, we are to be quick to repent (turn away from) our sin.

 

G-d is quick to forgive us, when we repent. G-d loves us, and wants us to love Him. Sin is something that will be harmful to us, or to someone else. Because G-d doesn't want us to hurt ourselves (or others), he wants us to not sin. Because we love G-d, we want to be pleasing to Him, and we try not to sin. But when we do sin, and repent, He is quick to forgive us and restore us. (This does not mean that we will not suffer any natural consequences as a result of our sin. This means that we will not always and forever be under condemnation for sin we have repented of.) *

 

As for the judging part, it is referring to us bringing condemnation on others. The Bible clearly tells us that when we see someone sin, we should try to help restore that person to right-standing with G-d. In order to do that, we would yes, have to judge their actions as being sinful. But we are not to judge in a harmful, hateful way. (remember the dudes were going to stone that woman to death. They weren't saying, "oh sister, that's not a good thing for you to be doing. Let us help you.") So, obviously, Jesus doesn't want us to go around damaging people with condemnation. That is what is meant in that scripture - not that we are to turn a blind eye to sin.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Fieldsofgold

[Fieldsofgold]

that was not G-d's original plan. When He gave the Ten Commandments, it was applied to everyone. The plan that men could have as many women as they wanted, was a law created by man, or as the Bible says, "every man doing what seems right in his own eyes."

 

When Jesus came, He made it very clear that all the Commandments, including the one about adultery, applied to males.

[Spark1111]

You know, the scripture says that she was taken in the act of adultery.

 

I'd like to know where the man she was committing adultery with was.

 

I also don't know how more clear,"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," can be.

 

But maybe that's just me.

 

GEL

 

Gel, I agree with you. I just bristle that the last part is often ommitted by many who quote it.

 

Yes, it is an admonishment at judgemental hypocrites and a teaching in forgiveness.

 

But, THERE was a lesson to be learned by the sinner as well.....that's all.

 

Mombot, listen to your heart and continue on your path.

 

An unexamined life is not worth living.....(Great quote, but I forget who said it.!)

[Spark1111]

When Jesus came, He made it very clear that all the Commandments, including the one about adultery, applied to males.

 

Even today in many orthodox and fundamental sects, adultery is viewed as the only grounds for immediate divorce, and in this instance, it CAN be initiated and granted to women.

[Fieldsofgold]

You know, just for the record, that story about the prostitute was a later addition by Christian monks into the Bible. It is not found anywhere in ancient texts, so scholars believe that it was a widely popular story told by mouth that (because of its popularity) was later added in.

 

But that is neither here nor there, just interesting tidbit for you guys during this heated debate.

 

Whether it is an original or an add-on, the concept is a good one, and is supported throughout scripture.

 

To me, this story tells us that

 

1. Adultery is a sin

2. Adultery is not an unforgiveable sin

3. We should examine our own lives for our own sins

4. We should not judge others' sins in a way that would cause them harm, but rather that would restore them

5. We should strive for a righteous lifestyle - one that is in right-standing with G-d and with our fellow human beings.

Edited July 15, 2010 by Fieldsofgold

[Owl]

 

I also don't know how more clear,"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," can be.

 

But maybe that's just me.

 

GEL

 

You know GEL...I can agree that this parable contains more than one gem of wisdom (as they all do).

 

You're completely right...the first part "Let he without sin..." is absolutely on track with Jesus telling others not to judge in this case.

 

But the parable didn't end there.

 

It went on to the rest of it.

 

What I find fascinating is how people FOCUS on the specific parts that they WANT TO focus on...and often (again deliberately) avoid the parts that "hit too close to home".

 

And that applies to both halves of the parable here.

 

Some focus on the "Go, and sin no more"...and avoid the considerations of the first half of the parable.

 

Others focus on the first half "Let he without sin..." and avoid thinking through the rest of the parable because that's the painful part for them.

 

Of course....the real trick is to take God's word in it's entirety...don't pick and choose the parts you like, and don't pull parts out and take it out of context because it suits your meaning at the time.

 

I want to say that I'm not "judging" Mombot in all of this, and I apologize if I'm coming across that way. Gven the course of this thread, and her expressed desire to address this issue...I provided my advice based off of what I believe is the best course of action for her.

[In_Repair]

*Note* Just want to put it out there that there are no licenses to sin, although there is great forgiveness and therefore no condemnation.

 

IR, the church was meant to be a place for "sinners". Jesus was condemned for hanging out with the sinners (people like me).

 

I think it's great that you don't sin and are not in need of Jesus...be grateful and try not to cut others down because they do:)

 

You know nothing of my relationship with God, or my religious views. You though, obviously wanting to project yourself as having some sort of deep understanding of all things holy, MUST see the wrong I was speaking of. It's akin to downing a pint of vodka before you walk into your AA meeting.

 

Tony, the moderator, took down my original post. Good job on quoting it. I'm sure it's appreciated. I apologized to him, and now I am apologizing to the OP. My opening comment was way out of line. I do however stand by the second part of my post, and I think more OW/OM need to hear things like that, in that manner.

[Dexter Morgan]

Thanks for the thought provoking posts. Am deciding what it is I really want. I have a good life with or without him.

 

if you have a good life, then I suggest living it and finding someone unattached. makes alot of sense, no?

[Mombot]

He is legally separated and that's the issue with me. That is not free and single to me.

[Fieldsofgold]

He is legally separated and that's the issue with me. That is not free and single to me.

 

You are absolutely right. He is still someone's husband. And who know what, if anything, he intends to do about it. But until he does whatever it is that he is going to do --- he is still someone's husband.

[Mombot]

I do wonder if it's all about the assets-

[BB07]

He is legally separated and that's the issue with me. That is not free and single to me.

 

Did you independent verify this Mombot?

 

Call me cynical.........but well everyone who has read the recent happening in my life knows why.

[Mombot]

The cabins/land are in a trust for their 3 adult children, the farm (another state yet) is in his name only and the house is still in both their names.

[Fieldsofgold]

The cabins/land are in a trust for their 3 adult children, the farm (another state yet) is in his name only and the house is still in both their names.

 

Not the assets. Have you verified that he is legally separated? And assets or no assets - he is still legally married. He's married til he's not.

[Fieldsofgold]

The wife could answer a lot of your questions. If he IS legally separated, then it should be no problem for you to talk to her.

[BB07]

Not the assets. Have you verified that he is legally separated? And assets or no assets - he is still legally married. He's married til he's not.

 

Thanks.........that was what I meant in my question, it wasn't about the assets.

[Mombot]

This is all sort of headed the same direction about my other post, contacting the S.

[pureinheart]

You know nothing of my relationship with God, or my religious views. You though, obviously wanting to project yourself as having some sort of deep understanding of all things holy, MUST see the wrong I was speaking of. It's akin to downing a pint of vodka before you walk into your AA meeting.

 

Tony, the moderator, took down my original post. Good job on quoting it. I'm sure it's appreciated. I apologized to him, and now I am apologizing to the OP. My opening comment was way out of line. I do however stand by the second part of my post, and I think more OW/OM need to hear things like that, in that manner.

 

I tried to make sense out of the majority your reply to me and was unable to....I am glad you saw the wrong in your reply to the OP as it was extremely judgemental:eek:.

 

I don't portray myself as anything and resent this comment as it is demeaning as usual.

[pureinheart]

I think most of us on this forum either are or were in self-conflict- and we know it.

 

Most definitely MB, I certainly was, although like you stuck close to God (the best I could)

[In_Repair]

I tried to make sense out of the majority your reply to me and was unable to....I am glad you saw the wrong in your reply to the OP as it was extremely judgemental:eek:.

 

I don't portray myself as anything and resent this comment as it is demeaning as usual.

 

If you couldn't understand my post, I will clarify a bit. I'm not going back and quoting, but you made comments regarding my lack of "need" for Jesus in my life... or whatever. So, I informed you that you know nothing of which you speak, and therefore your comments were out of line.

 

Are my posts usually demeaning? While I'm not proud of that, it just means I fit in pretty well around these parts, don't you think?

[Mombot]

And it just keeps comimg- he just called me at work to tell me he's desparately in love with me.

[BB07]

Mombot.......sometimes you sound so mature and that you have a good head on your shoulders and are trying to do the right thing for yourself and others, but then you post something like your last post, that he called you at work to tell you he loved you. It confuses me.....

 

Mombot......I'm sure that was a rush and it made you feel like you are flying to hear those words, but don't let his words fool you. As others say here, base it on his actions and I'd take it farther and say base it on what you can absolutely know is the truth about what he is telling you.

 

Don't stick your head in the sand mombot and blindly trust this man based on your feelings and what you think he is feeling.........verify the FACTS.

[Mombot]

I'm lots of OW/OM hear the love talk and that is what causes love affair FOG.

[jj33]

Mombot, I still think calling someone's wife to find out the status of the marriage is WRONG. It is beyond pushy

 

How exactly do you make that call? Hi Im in love with your H, sorry it didnt work out for you but Im wondering how long you expect to drag this out because I want him to be single so we have a shot at our own marriage?

 

This is not a parking space that you are waiting for her to vacate. Its a marriage.

 

He is separated they may be going through divorce proceedings they may be discussing the terms of a financial settlement.

 

Many divorce lawyers admonish their clients NOT to date while this is going on because the other spouse could go ballistic (jealousy whether rational or not) and it can make negotiations more difficult.

 

And you are going to call her anyway?

 

Does he KNOW you are thinking of contacting her?

 

I think it is intrusive and selfish and controlling. The winding up of marriage takes as long as it takes. It may not be your time frame.

 

Or he may never plan on actually divorcing (which seems to be your fear) and may simply remain separated for the rest of his life. But that is a question you need to ask him. Why would she know differently?

 

Is she the one ultimately in control? Or is his grasp of the truth unreliable?

That is what you are suggesting.

 

If someone called my x or soon to be x that would be the LAST they would EVER see of me. And if he approves of you making that call then he lacks balls. That may be OK with you, you may like being in control but its his marriage to wind up, not yours.

 

And if a new gf of a stbx called me to find out where we were with our divorce? I wouldnt speak to them. None of your business as far as I am concerned and I would thank my STBX H not to have his gfs contacting me ever again. The subtext is patronizing. Look honey, your time is over, hes mine now. Lets wrap this thing up.

 

 

I know people whose financial settlements have taken years to work out. Yes years. 3 years ago they were divorcing and they are still going back to court time and again to settle various points about who gets what and how it is implemented.

 

It seems to me that either you dont trust this guy which is reason enough to end it. Or maybe the timing of the relatoinshp is just wrong for you and you arent cut out to date a separated man

 

Either way I would strongly advise you NOT to contact her.

Edited July 17, 2010 by jj33

[Mombot]

I think I'm going to back off on all the seriousness and see him if I feel like it, and the rest be whatever it is. He has been demoted to second in my life, I am first!