razor said:

wildgoldenhoney said:

Well, then, I hope you appreciate her now.
Always remember this thread whenever you feel an argument coming on.

Not sure she would be happy if I said " well, at least you're not a religious extremist" as my core expression of happiness with my marriage!
[Edited 7/21/08 17:19pm]

4EVER
~~

Just treat her nice.

4EVER
~~

wildgoldenhoney said:

Just treat her nice.

razor said:

Uhope said:

Yeah, what she said.

Notice I said "and it's not working". I think I explained my reasons (for those who are active participants in their faith) in previous posts.
[Edited 7/21/08 17:03pm]

Yep, just re-read them. Sorry, I didn't realise you were an extremist. Shame you would rule out the vast majority of the world as your potential partner. And I thought my wife was demanding...

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

Janfriend said:

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

Uhope said:

razor said:

Yep, just re-read them. Sorry, I didn't realise you were an extremist. Shame you would rule out the vast majority of the world as your potential partner. And I thought my wife was demanding...

Not a shame at all. I know what I value and what's important enough in my life not to compromise. A person should be demanding (and have their standards) regarding the person they're considering becoming "one flesh" with. To be frank, MOST people rule out the majority of the world as potential partners -- don't they? Are people really that easy?

I want to share my life with someone who shares my core values. As those values are founded in my religious life (not everyone's is), the best chance for success exists within my religious group. If that's extreme, well . . .

There are just about seven million Jehovah's Witnesses out there. If I really wanted to marry, I could probably find someone.

razor said:

Uhope said:

Not a shame at all. I know what I value and what's important enough in my life not to compromise. A person should be demanding (and have their standards) regarding the person they're considering becoming "one flesh" with. To be frank, MOST people rule out the majority of the world as potential partners -- don't they? Are people really that easy?

I want to share my life with someone who shares my core values. As those values are founded in my religious life (not everyone's is), the best chance for success exists within my religious group. If that's extreme, well . . .

There are just about seven million Jehovah's Witnesses out there. If I really wanted to marry, I could probably find someone.

To be Bob (if you're Frank), no they don't. Most people know love when they find it, not based on some pre-conceived notions of acceptable partners. Most people also enjoy, and are not afraid of, intellectual and emotional challenge and do not wish to spend their lives with someone they already know share all their views. Dull is the word that comes to mind.

Variety is the spice of life. By the sounds of it, the only herb or spice you'll ever know is Rue...

Stymie said:

Stymie said:

razor said:

Uhope said:

Not a shame at all. I know what I value and what's important enough in my life not to compromise. A person should be demanding (and have their standards) regarding the person they're considering becoming "one flesh" with. To be frank, MOST people rule out the majority of the world as potential partners -- don't they? Are people really that easy?

I want to share my life with someone who shares my core values. As those values are founded in my religious life (not everyone's is), the best chance for success exists within my religious group. If that's extreme, well . . .

There are just about seven million Jehovah's Witnesses out there. If I really wanted to marry, I could probably find someone.

To be Bob (if you're Frank), no they don't. Most people know love when they find it, not based on some pre-conceived notions of acceptable partners. Most people also enjoy, and are not afraid of, intellectual and emotional challenge and do not wish to spend their lives with someone they already know share all their views. Dull is the word that comes to mind.

Variety is the spice of life. By the sounds of it, the only herb or spice you'll ever know is Rue...

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

razor said:

razor said:

Are views and values the same thing?

I believe that viewpoints can and possibly should be changed. However, values are usually intrinsic to a person's character; changing them to please another may not be a very good thing.

And being "evenly yoked" doesn't always have to be a religious thing. For instance, if someone dearly wants children it would make no sense to marry someone who has clearly stated they do not. They are not of the same mind about something that means a lot.

I'm sure any single or married person has personal values that they'd need to be supported by their mate. If they don't see eye-to-eye on certain, core issues (religious or otherwise) that matters much to them, the union will not work well.

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

Similar thoughts in great minds, eh, Ivy?

How you doin'?

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

Uhope said:

razor said:

To be Bob (if you're Frank), no they don't. Most people know love when they find it, not based on some pre-conceived notions of acceptable partners. Most people also enjoy, and are not afraid of, intellectual and emotional challenge and do not wish to spend their lives with someone they already know share all their views. Dull is the word that comes to mind.

Variety is the spice of life. By the sounds of it, the only herb or spice you'll ever know is Rue...

Oh, believe me -- there is PLENTY of spicy intellectual and emotional challenge within marriages between Jehovah's Witnesses!

1)What there isn't is sadness or frustration because one mate isn't inclined to attend meetings/assemblies/conventions or participate in the ministry with the other; tension because one wants holidays/birthdays observed and the other feels it will violate his/her conscience. 2)transfusion becomes an issue for them or their children, Unspeakable drama if one cannot support the other regarding medical treatment 3)One who doesn't agree with the other regarding the future of government/mankind -- political involvement or waiting on Jehovah's Kingdom.

As I mentioned earlier, the list could go on. These things are important to Jehovah's Witnesses and there aren't any other religious groups (or non-religious persons) who could really "vibe" with an active, faithful JW.

To a different or lesser degree, there could be similar issues between any two people who don't share similar perspectives and value systems. How would a marriage work between the devout Muslim woman in the thread here and a devout Christian? One or the other would have to compromise something and that's not generally a good thing regarding one's core values.

There are plenty of people out there who won't cause a person to compromise something valuable to them -- those are the ones who will be good mates for each other. Marriage can be challenging enough without knowing from the get-go that specific problems will come up.

Stymie said:

Stymie said:

Uhope said:

Uhope said:

Similar thoughts in great minds, eh, Ivy?

How you doin'?

Janfriend said:

razor said:

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

noimageatall said:

Stymie said:

If someone believes in God and following the bible, which is what this thread is about, then there is no debating the equally yoked question.

But, Ivy...I asked this before...most Christian religions believe in Jesus/God and follow the Bible, right? Then why do Methodists say they can't marry Catholics, and Jehovah's Witnesses say they can't marry outside their faith, and Baptists won't marry Protestants? Very confusing.

Believing in God and following the Bible doesn't seem to matter at all.

razor said:

Stymie said:

noimageatall said:

But, Ivy...I asked this before...most Christian religions believe in Jesus/God and follow the Bible, right? Then why do Methodists say they can't marry Catholics, and Jehovah's Witnesses say they can't marry outside their faith, and Baptists won't marry Protestants? Very confusing.

Believing in God and following the Bible doesn't seem to matter at all.

But the tenets of their faiths are very different.

razor said:

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

Stymie said:

razor said:

you will end up alone. No-one, but no-one will meet all your criteria..
[Edited 7/21/08 18:28pm]

First up,the man I love now meets all of my criteria. second, even if I were to end up alone, I'd be alone and drama-free. And being alone is not the worst thing there is to be.

Oh, c'mon -- living without a husband or wife is hardly the same as living without human companionship!

I have many wonderful friends. I have family. I'm rarely lonely.

But I cannot imagine how lonely it would feel to have a mate who wasn't going the same direction I was in life. A life with constant conflict and distress would hardly be worth living.

Go to the source: www.watchtower.org

Thanks!

This is a topic that I've stayed out of because I found myself pondering this very question for the past few weeks. In fact, I found it very ironic that this topic came up at a time when I was/am so focused upon it. What I've discovered is that I have no answers for it. Yet. I am very spiritual. My idea of a good time on a Saturday night is a good book by Alan Watts, or spiritual music, and meditating. My husband is not so spiritual, and dabbles with the idea of spirituality. I find that as I go deeper within the Spiritual, there is so much that I would love to share with my husband, but know that he doesn't "get it". For instance, I may read a passage in a book that really just jumps out at me and I get excited and want to share it! He will give me that look. You know, the humor her look and pretend you know what the heck she is talking about. And there are other elements within the Divine Spirit that I would love to share with him, but know that I can't. And it makes it hard sometimes because this spiritual undertaking is extremely important to me, in fact the most important aspect of my life. And sometimes I feel sad because I want to share that part of my life, that part of me, with someone but my spiritual journey isn't dependent upon sharing that part of me/of my life with anyone. It is what it is.

But having said all of that, there are things that he brings to the table that I appreciate and value. He's a stickler for time. I'm a "fly by the seat of my pants" type of person who doesn't even wear a watch unless I have to. If I'm reading a spiritual text, or focused upon something so Divinely inspired, I can lose all sense of time, and he's there reminding me of it. I would never get anywhere if he wasn't pressuring me about the time. And he has to plan everything, I rarely plan and tend to go more on impulse. I may eat one meal a day, and sometimes I won't even do that, unless he reminds me "Honey have you eaten anything at all today?" Hmmm, "nope". (I've never been a big eater.)

And maybe we aren't "evenly yoked", but he's in my life for a reason and I do love him. Someone above said that they would "not fall in love" with someone outside of their religion, would not even give love a chance. And to that I say, you can't help who you love or who you fall in love with. Love happens, it's not something that can be controlled, and if it can be, then it's not love. When I fell in love with someone, it wasn't planned, contrived in any way, and it wasn't wanted! () but rather it was something that spontaneously arose, that responded I guess to the energy between him and I. And it's just there, and is not dependent upon their spiritual status, or education, or however else one views another or judges someone to be worthy or not of their love. Love is spontaneous.

Uhope said:

razor said:

Compromise is the essence of peaceful human co-habitation. Many people would marry the one they love even if they differed on their desire for children. People who are dogmatic and convinced of their righteousness (in whatever form, religious or otherewise) cause bloodshed...
[Edited 7/21/08 18:32pm]

1) Obviously you don't know any couples where one deeply desired children and simply hoped the other would change his/her mind. I do. It is NOT pretty.

It's not all about righteousness or dogmatism. Everyone has the right to want or not want certain qualities or values in a mate. None of us HAS to be a perfect mate for any/everyone we meet. That's why there are SO many to choose from. Compromise on certain things are necessary in a marriage, of course. But I hold to my statement that core values should not be if they are important to the individual. The resentment that can come from that is an ugly, draining thing.

2)Bloodshed can easily be avoided if one is clear on one's own values and doesn't try to bend or bend somebody else to fit an image that is unrealistic.

3) How would it work for a person who had high standards regarding honesty and hard work to get involved with another who believed getting money by any means necessary was okay? Even through criminal activity? The honest one could not compromise and be happy.

razor said:

Stymie said:

First up,the man I love now meets all of my criteria. second, even if I were to end up alone, I'd be alone and drama-free. And being alone is not the worst thing there is to be.

All of them. I doubt it.

For what its worth, I can't imagine many things worse than livng my life without any human companionship. That is the point of life imo, to enjoy each other's company, learn from each other and enjoy life whilst we have it...