Prime example of when irreconcilable differences does not equal - just tired of fighting and are quite complex like you stated later.
When I said that irreconcilable differences is usually "tired of fighting", I wasn't trying to minimize it or make it seem trivial. Constant fighting can wear away at people and make them miserable and depressed. Constant fighting and arguing is also a terrible atmosphere for children. So even if a couple divorced just from being "tired of fighting", that in and of itself often has [some] merit, IMO.
It really doesn't need to be qualified with more "serious" offenses, although I'm quite sure that as you pointed out, "irreconcilable differences" is often used on paper in place of the actual problems.
But when a person says they divorced because of "irreconcilable differences", unless they're just wanting to remain vague, then "tired of fighting" seems to be pretty accurate. In some cases it is trivial, and it means "tired of trying" or "found someone I like better" or "I want to party", but my statements were meant to give the benefit of the doubt...not trivialize "irreconcilable differences."
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
When I said that irreconcilable differences is usually "tired of fighting", I wasn't trying to minimize it or make it seem trivial. Constant fighting can wear away at people and make them miserable and depressed. Constant fighting and arguing is also a terrible atmosphere for children. So even if a couple divorced just from being "tired of fighting", that in and of itself often has [some] merit, IMO.
It really doesn't need to be qualified with more "serious" offenses, although I'm quite sure that as you pointed out, "irreconcilable differences" is often used on paper in place of the actual problems.
But when a person says they divorced because of "irreconcilable differences", unless they're just wanting to remain vague, then "tired of fighting" seems to be pretty accurate. In some cases it is trivial, and it means "tired of trying" or "found someone I like better" or "I want to party", but my statements were meant to give the benefit of the doubt...not trivialize "irreconcilable differences."
Thanks for explaining even further.
Until you explained yourself further even in this thread, it did seem to trivialize it.
__________________
Master of Science in Applied Disgruntled Religious Theorist Wrangling
PhD in Petulant Tantrum Quelling
Dean of the School of Hard Knocks
Until you explained yourself further even in this thread, it did seem to trivialize it.
Yes, sorry, I realize I wasn't clear. That wasn't my intention.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
No. But its an understandable reason for separation, especially if there are children in the home.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
Irreconcilable differences is an interesting “state of affairs” that each of us have probably had experience with during our life since receiving the Holy Ghost. These circumstances do (and should) stir a lot of worthwhile introspection.
Is it a spiritual witness of “not agreeing” and therefore unable to walk together?
Or
Is it a witness of an area where our old man is still alive? More specifically, an area where we are still dealing with carnal-mindedness that prompts us we to desire to possess things that we are not able to have.
The James Chap. 4 setting may apply in the worst of these…. From whence [come] wars and fightings among you? [come they] not hence, [even] of your lusts that war in your members?
Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume [it] upon your lusts
I appreciate the post that made the comparison with the covenant relationships and non-covenant relationships. I guess it is fairly common knowledge around here that I do not view local church assemblies as a covenant relationship. We are not married to our local church or the founding/senior pastor. Brethren, yes. Betrothed, no.
I keep thinking that these stress-producing relationships are allowed to be at work in our lives to search our own hearts. If we can allow the Spirit to guide our personal understanding concerning our own role in these, the hidden motive of our hearts can be made apparent and our soul can prosper.
If we can gain clarity in the Holy Ghost, we are always blessed by the individuals and circumstances that seem so utterly detestable.
__________________
Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath [James 1:19]
Linear Mode
