I was once an RGN (Registered General Nurse) student. I went into nursing to be a missionary, not kill people, so when I found out there were secret plans not to resuscitate patients, and other ways they finished up without the planned resuscitation, I went on Channel 4 TV News in England to try to expose the practices. However I would describe the TV broadcast as a clever cover-up. They actively refused to allow me to quote evidence of a planned resuscitation that did not occur, even though the patient and relatives thought a resuscitation would be performed in the event of a cardiac arrest.
If you want to see just how bad the secret practices were just see the paper that was published by one of the hospitals I worked in, where I made complaints about subjects like "The Hollywood Code" "Light Blue" or "The slow code".
Aarons / Beeching Paper, Fazakerley Hospital Liverpool England, BMJ Dec 1991.
I was once an RGN (Registered General Nurse) student. I went into nursing to be a missionary, not kill people, so when I found out there were secret plans not to resuscitate patients, and other ways they finished up without the planned resuscitation, I went on Channel 4 TV News in England to try to expose the practices. However I would describe the TV broadcast as a clever cover-up. They actively refused to allow me to quote evidence of a planned resuscitation that did not occur, even though the patient and relatives thought a resuscitation would be performed in the event of a cardiac arrest.
If you want to see just how bad the secret practices were just see the paper that was published by one of the hospitals I worked in, where I made complaints about subjects like "The Hollywood Code" "Light Blue" or "The slow code".
Aarons / Beeching Paper, Fazakerley Hospital Liverpool England, BMJ Dec 1991.
Jesus and Bible .com
Where Jesus is Lord!
Living in Sin.
Living in Sin.
This pages contains some of the most difficult issues of theology or doctrine I know of, and once again I remind you I am giving opinions on the issues, in the form of percentage possibility as I see it, not definite answers. However many pastors and elders out there are blasé about the seriousness of their decision, when one wrong answer could lose them their salvation.
COHABITATION
The fact that simply massive numbers of people "live in sin" or "cohabit" or"shack-up" with each other, do not officially marry, have children, live together, then break-up, is a very tough issue of doctrine for teachers of Christian law. It seems almost every teacher out there believes such people are getting what amounts to a free marriage, and can turn up in church and marry a virgin. More than 60% of children born in France are born to unmarried parents. This is a significant increase from the early 20th century, when less than 10% of births were out of wedlock. It is a frightening situation for teachers and pastors to teach people can "get away" with doing this, and actually marry to virgins people who have cohabited.
One big problem with issues of cohabitation is that not only 1 Cor 7:15 "But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace." rather cryptic and imprecise (not mentioning the words divorce or remarriage) but also the passage containing "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 6: 14-18) is too. That is if you as a pastor "decide" to make a commitment in doctrine and tell a new convert to marry the person he is cohabiting with and has had children with, what about the paradox (contradiction?) between "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers" and "Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called."??
It is worth mentioning here that in Eastern Orthodoxy they believe their clergy are "empowered" to make binding decisions about marriage, and that their decisions stand, and this heresy has now entered the church of England, and is part of the reason we now have a king, that is Charles III, that in the past would have been prevented by law to become king, an adulterer king.
INNOCENT AND GUILTY PARTY IDEAS.
I believe this subject is related to church of England doctrinal issues, some discussed by Archbishop Gore. In his doctrines he discusses how the Anglican Church deals with divorcees. He says the innocent party is allowed to remarry, and the Anglican clergy will perform the ceremony, but the guilt party cannot remarry in the Anglican church, and the clergy at that time would not perform a marriage ceremony for them. Only trouble is..... he did not name the sin the guilty party commits if he remarries in that bogus doctrine, whereas Jesus did. Jesus said the sin is "adultery" because in God's eyes they are still married to the first spouse. The point I am getting at is - if vicars are "empowered" to refuse remarriage to guilty parties in divorce for adultery, are they "empowered" to refuse marriage to people who have cohabited for years, had children, and lived in all but name as man and wife? I do not think you will ever see Anglicans saying this. Thus.... is it really true? Is cohabiting a way to circumvent Christian morality laws and get a "free marriage" in all but name before actually marrying? Of course one definite glitch is that the partners who cohabit in this way, and bring up illegitimate children are unsaved throughout the entire time period, and should they die they will not be saved.
Another issue related to this is the second marriage of Mick Jagger. Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall had a Hindu wedding ceremony in Bali on November 21, 1990. However, a high court judge ruled that the marriage was invalid under both Indonesian and English law. The couple chose to annul their marriage instead of divorcing. Some say Mick Jagger knew this from the start, and was trying to stop his second wife from divorcing him for his cash. So if a marriage is ruled invalid, could a certain person somewhere get a "free marriage" then waltz into church and marry a Christian virgin legitimately??
But it does not stop there! What about the marriages of (so called) king Charles III and also Prince Harry? The wife of Prince Harry is a divorcee? So what is the advice we are supposed to give him if he repents and becomes a real Christian, and is born again? Should he divorce his wife Meghan, and as he was never "really" married he was just committing adultery, so..... do we now say he can remarry to a Christian virgin, as he has never been legitimately married? These are very troubling questions. It is similar with king Charles III whose wife first husband is still alive, and was not divorced on the grounds of adultery (to those who think that relevant). So were or are Mick Jagger, Charles III and former Prince Harry to be doctrinally seen as cohabiting??
The OT Law of Obligation to marry.
Another situation described in the bible is
"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." Deut 22:28-29 .
Some people malign God and say this describes a rape, where a woman is forced to marry her rapist. What you must understand is that other scriptures apply, in that a woman if she was being raped must resist. In my opinion this scripture is not the identical situation to the two verses that precede this about the rape of a betrothed woman, but this time not betrothed. A woman was under command of God to resist rape, and scream. We hear no description of injuries to prove rape, or stories of unheard screams. It seems that by disobedience this woman has put herself in a "my word against his" situation, and God's solution is they should marry. "and they be found" does not sound like rape.
I do not intend to resolve all scenarios linked to this here. Deut 22:28-29 is quoted as another proof of "a law of obligation" along with Ex 22:16-17. I am discussing on this page various situations where people are "trying to get away with" sexual activity, then going to church to marry a virgin. Apparently in the NT there is no fixed law demanding fornicators should marry, a complicating factor is the sexual history (called "body count" by some) that is it is very far from being the situation two fornicators "that are found/discovered" were both virgins.
"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins." Exodus 22: 16-17
TWO TYPES OF DIVORCE.
A marriage that is "joined together by God" is true marriage, but Jesus in the same verse of Matthew 5:32 mentions another type, a marriage (still called marriage) that is not joined together by God. What a hugely controversial question this is..... When Jesus says "Whosoever divorces and marries again commiteth adultery" does he mean from both a real marriage and one God does not recognize as joined together by his law? That is would Charles the III and former Prince Harry be sinning by remarrying, even though their present marriages are not "joined together" by God? This is a tricky issue as somehow it seems against natural justice that Charles III and Prince Harry could claim a conversion experience, divorce and remarry, yet the criteria Jesus gives to forbid divorce and remarriage is that it is "adultery" meaning he is dealing with only a true marriage.
under construction.....