"To Marry Only in the Lord" - Part 1
(By Zadig)

The text of 1 Corinthians 7: 39 says: “A wife is bound during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep [in death], she is free to be married to whom she wants, only in [the] Lord.” (New World Translation [NWT]).

Another translation shows the same verse as follows: “A wife may not leave her husband as long as he is living. But if he dies, she is free to marry any man she wants. Only this, he must be a Christian”. (Worldwide English New Testament, 1996).

It is evident that Apostle Paul supplied a summarized advice: “marry a believer” or “marry a Christian”.

Any Jehovah’s Witness knows well what is the Watch Tower’s interpretation of the above text. It is expected that a JW never becomes involved with anyone separated from the organizational sheepfold created by Jehovah’s Witnesses; he or she is not to enter any marriage alliance with “unbelievers”*, without receiving some kind of punishment, as well as congregational depreciation. Definitively there will not be any type of approval.

* For the direction of Jehovah’s Witnesses, unbeliever is any person not affiliated to its religious organization.

The punishment is defined in the “elders' handbook”, called “Pay attention to yourselves and to the whole flock”, published by the Watch Tower, 1991. On page 132 it is written: “To marry an unbeliever is contrary to biblical principles”. In the following page it goes on to say: “In case a dedicated and baptized Christian marries an unbeliever, that will result in disqualification of all the special privileges for a time”. As we can se, to break this rule “quickly called biblical rule” causes automatic loss of special privileges in the congregation (examples of some possible losses: to pass the microphone, to serve as indicator, to take care of publications in the congregation, to read “The Watchtower” magazine, to say prayers on behalf of the congregation and other possible mechanical privileges that someone may perform. But participation in the Theocratic Ministry Scholl will not be removed, nor the Field Service).

Another justification for the above practice is the historical precedent in the nation of Israel, where Israelis were not to engage in marriage ties with other nations called heathen. See Deuteronomy 7: 1-4.

We can correctly say that in both cases, in the application of 1 Corinthians 7:39 and Deuteronomy 7:1-4, there occurs a weak and purposeful analogy. Analogy that is directed to guarantee the status of the Organization of God, as it is called, which it would lose if mixed marriages were admitted. Because it tries to carry the burden of the exclusivist idea of being the only approved religion on Earth, and the only source of truth, to admit such practice would jeopardize many of its statements. But, why is it a weak analogy?

Let us consider for a moment the historical context at the time of the mentioned texts. How was the worship of the neighbouring nations of Israel? Did they accept the existence of a God called Jehovah? Certainly not! There was no similarity in worship. Some nations even offered human sacrifices to their gods. It was not a matter of simple doctrinal points around one same Creator God. No, those were worships directed to opposite gods, with total opposite teachings, with no point of agreement.

And what to say of the times of Apostle Paul? In his time the Law was being fulfilled and yielding room to Christ. The Messiah was the end of the Law, the end of the written code, he had originated a new code, but this time a code in the heart. The Messiah came to save mankind, as predicted by the Prophets. But who trusted him? Here lies the question! Certainly it was difficult for a Christian (he who accepted Jesus as the Messiah) to be cohabite with someone who had not done the same, for someone who does not accepted Jesus as the Messiah, does not have him as saviour either, nor is able to ask for any type of salvation, except what he has created in his mind. In both cases happens what the psalmist wrote:

“The senseless one has said in his heart:
“There is no Jehovah.”
They have acted ruinously, they have acted detestably in [their] dealing.”
There is no one doing good. (Psalms 14:1, NWT).

We can also cite the words of apostle Paul in 1Corinthians 15:17:
“Further, if Christ has not been raised up, YOUR faith is useless; YOU are yet in YOUR sins.”

Here, as in the rest of the scriptures, there is directioning towards a choice: “to accept Jesus as saviour”, for at the time only a few were ready for such type of life, and that classified others as non-Christians, a situation completely different from our days. The word about Christ spread through the whole inhabited land, many recognized him, even if not quite practising his commandments.

But the issue does not end here. There is a problem connected to the act of punishing JW’s who, opposing the rule, date or marry unbelievers.

The facts are like this:

“A certain Brother starts dating an unbelieving woman and, as consequence, looses all his special privileges, as per the elders’ handbook. But time passes and dating progresses into marriage. After some time, perhaps one year or two, this same Christian Brother receives back all his special privileges. But, the loss had been the result of non-authorized dating, and marriage the confirmation of the first attitude, dating. Thus being, how could a Christian, in this degree of decision, receive back all his special privileges? Did he repent? Does he abominate his own marriage? Did he turn back from wrong doing? The Bible says that Jehovah hates divorce, but then what type of marriage does He approve? If a Jehovah’s Witness is not to marry an unbeliever (non JW), would not be separation the proper way of returning to a condition approved by Jehovah, a recognition of error, as per Esdras 10:10-14?”

You must know that the Association of Jehovah’s Christian Witnesses, or their Governing Body, are not willing to discuss the subject, nor do they have any answers to the above issue. To a letter sent to the Association in Brazil, a reply came that was completely far off the real proposed question. Its initial words were: “Although it does not deal directly with the question you have put, we believe that the ponderations made in The Watchtower September 15th 1983, page 29, may help you to understand the subject you have put to us.”

Not satisfied with the reply I had a great opportunity of writing to the members of the Governing Body but, after two months wait, I received a summons from the elders of my congregation, to which I still belong, for a consideration of my doubts. I really thought that an answer would be given to me at that time, but all I received were reprimands, accusations and threats, expressions like “we do not want to lose you, brother” and questionings like “don’t you trust the faithful and discrete slave?. Regrettable.

Deuteronomy 21:10-13 mentions an exception to the rule established in Deuteronomy 7: 1-4. The text says:

“In case you go out to the battle against your enemies and Jehovah your God has given them into your hand and you have carried them away captive; and you have seen among the captives a woman beautiful in form, and you have got attached to her and taken her for your wife, you must then bring her into the midst of your house. She must now shave her head and attend to her nails, and remove the mantle of her captivity from off her and dwell in your house and weep for her father and her mother a whole lunar month; and after that you should have relations with her, and you must take possession of her as your bride, and she must become your wife.”

The leaders of Jehovah’s Witnesses do answer, although partly:

“Since the Israelite soldiers would have destroyed images of her gods, her objects of adoration would be gone. The month of mourning also served as a period of purification during which a captive woman would free herself of all features of her past religious devotion.”(The Watchtower September 15, 2004).

Would that mean that if a wife-to-be does not exert harmful influence on a Christian, and if this one has fallen in love with her, a marriage can be celebrated? As we examine more deeply this question, the position of the leaders of Jehovah’s Witnesses in punishing the supposed transgressors becomes growingly more difficult to understand.

Finals:

Many other considerations must be made for the choice of a spouse. Although this article does not pretend to be an absolute guide for decisions of this size, more reasoning will be available for interested readers, as soon as time permits.

GO TO PART 2
or
GO TO MAIN PAGE