Interfaith Marraige

Post Reply New Topic

Again:
1) Provide a way of differentiating between a "bad person" and a "good person who does bad things because of their religion", or your statement is drivel typical of the pseudo-intellectual New Atheist movement.
2) Appeal to authority, and a terrible one at that- surely a philosopher or psychologist should be consulted ahead of a physicist? Would you trust John Hick's opinion on the Higgs Boson?

I would wager that the acts of goodness done in the name of religion far outweigh the acts of evil done in the name of religion. Amongst the most obvious are penal reform, the work of many religious charities, conscientious objection, universities, and Gandhi's non-violent protests.

“What’s innate in our species isn’t the fault of religion. But the bad things that are innate in our species are strengthened by religion and sanctified by it… So religion is a very powerful re-enforcer of our backward, clannish, tribal element. But you can’t say it’s the cause of it. To the contrary, it’s the product of it.”- Christopher Hitchens

I don't entirely agree with Hitchens, but I think he's closer to the truth there than Weinburg. One example would be Osama bin Laden, who used Islam to justify his extreme nationalist attacks against the USA.

One problem is finances. If you're not religious, but your wife belongs to a church that insists upon helping itself to 10% or more of your income, then you're set up for a conflict.

To be faithful to a religion you must give up your free will and allow yourself to be a thrall to a book full of fairytales that dictates how you must act, whether you like it or not. Once your dedicated to your religion and put religion over your love life and family you are no longer free.

Well for a start, if we have free will (let's not get into that), then a religious person would still be freely choosing to go along with the teachings of their religion. They don't sign up to have a chip put in their brain that makes them obey the priest even if they don't want to.

I don't personally see a problem with interfaith marriage. I've had relationships with women of different Christian denominations, non-religious, Unitarian-Universalist...

The only trouble I'd see happening in my life being involved long-term with someone of another faith is I have particularly strong convictions. I'm ok with someone challenging my beliefs and discussing our differences. I'm not so sure how well a woman could handle me if and when I get on one of my tares. As long as the relationship sparks conversations, one of us is genuinely persuaded one direction or the other, and we can celebrate our differences rather than let religion divide us, I could work with that. I'm afraid that we'd do more celebrating our differences as I have yet to be easily swayed on many issues. SOME issues, but not many,,,

Divorces happen most often over arguments involving money, in-laws, infidelity, raising kids, and religion (yes, I know there are other causes, and the top-ranking causes vary depending on the study). The more factors for divorce a couple can eliminate, the greater chances the marriage will last. I think something that can be as emotionally charged as religion should be agreed upon in pre-marriage counseling. I don't care how much you think you "love" someone. You MIGHT make it if you're divided on religion, but you do yourself and your spouse no favors if that's not something you can share.

My wife was raised United Methodist and for a long time said she missed some of the more ritualistic aspects of church (I'm Southern Baptist, and ritual plays significantly less of a role than with many other denominations). She "converted" to Baptist and was baptized the right way not because of me but because she saw a lot more things in how we worship that she felt the UMC churches she new lacked. Before we'd discussed what we'd do about church when we got married. I said that the Lord would show us what to do, but in the meantime there's no reason why we can't alternate services at both churches. I sincerely meant that. But as it turned out she made the decision for me and we've never had a conflict.

So while I believe that it's POSSIBLE interfaith marriage can work, I have serious doubts as to how easily it might work for most people.

Most people seem to overlook the well-established fact that the most common cause for divorce is marriage.

Which makes all of the efforts to make same-sex marriage legal so ironic - what those who want same-sex marriages are also asking for is the right to divorce their partners when they get tired of them.

That's... not any more of a problem than most hobbies or whatever. All married couples will be annoyed by something about each other's spending, I figure, I think it is not very much related to religion in particular.



No, why would I? I mean, it seems only obvious that a sensible person would care more about God or the universe or whatever than their significant other, so of course I see nothing wrong with religion being a higher priority.

Its pretty normal here, and I dont understand the problem. If you have two partners of the same religion, they get children, raise them and teach them their religious believes.

If you have two partners with different religions, they get children, raise them and teach theim their religious believes. You simply have to be grown old enough to simply show and talk about your own religion, without blaming another one. Like "He kid. This year we are going for christmas to the catholic gathering and next year we will all go to the evangelic church to celebrate christmas." As kids they normally get the christening of both religions (you can do that with two separate celebration or you simply make one ecumenically celebration with both priests) and when they are grown up, they choose themselves in which church they want to stay and that fits more to their personal believes into god. Generally there are no great struggles around here, simply because there also arent big differences in the religious believes. So our neigbors are serbian orthodox as example, the biggest difference is that they are celebrating easter sometimes some days behind the catholic easter. On the stuff with Jesus as frontman, they normally all agree. ^^



Thanks for you telling me. So I am with my partner now for 14 years and we already married, but I didnt see that conflict until now. Could you tell me where to search for it, because I like to prepare myself for conflicts but didnt know until now, that there was a conflict luring for us. ^^

Oh damn it. And I thought I needed to read the books and inform myself upon the different viewings of the different religions. Beware myself that the stories written in these books depends upon different versions that was inherited for centuries by mouth-to-mouth telling until they finally were written down and translated differently many times, appreciate them as great witnesses of the human social evolution, teaching us upon how folks lived in earlier days and which social struggles and social systems and laws they had. Accept the existence and various proofs that 2000 years ago a couragous guy with a revolutionary new worldsight, in opposition to many brutal cruel religions around that time, existed that wanted to give us ideas of a better living with each other, just as a Mahatma Ghandi or a mother Theresa did so in this century.

There is no need to believe in a god or magic stuff to appreciate Jesus teachings. And if he still lived I think he would simply tell us to stop arguing about such nonsense like if the "real" eastern should be correctly celebrated one week before or behind and simply focus on teaching the kids to become nice, helpful people that are caring for others.

Sure. And death is the number one killer worldwide. It's an epidemic. We need to do something to stop it. Set up a charitable fund for research, etc.


I've often wondered about that myself.

You're probably aware that I think that gay sex is morally wrong. Since it's also common for married couples to virtually stop having sex, gay marriage might have at least one redeeming quality: They get to stop having sex just like straight people.

In all seriousness, I'm not going to get back into the gay marriage debate. There's more to marriage than the right to get a divorce because people get bored. People who shack up for a long period of time have no legal recourse when it comes to shared property. The good thing, IF there's a good thing, about divorce is that a judge can get involved in deciding who gets what, settling child custody matters, and so forth. People who live together don't have a binding contract or any legal protection when a breakup occurs. People who live together for long periods before marriage also seem to fail at making lasting commitments. I'm not sure shacking up is a CAUSE of divorce, but it likely is symptomatic of underlying problems in the relationship that do ultimately lead to divorce.

Oh, and hopefully you're also aware that "marriage causes divorce" is an example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Well no, but in a way it kind of is, its an obligation the person makes, strong religious followers allow the book to dictate their thoughts even natural urges like wanting to have sex etc they are to supress those thoughts for they are evil and sinful *according to religions like Christianity and Islam*. Some will go far to being radical fanatical religious followers and brainwash themselves to doing really crazy stuff because their book dictates themselves to. Some may fast themselves to malnutrition.

in my opinin it is no diferent than an artists placin there art or a scientst placing their work befoer their social life - soemone is so dedicatd to what they craft or in th case of religon, an abstracct thuoght or concepts as well as posible craft or ritual that gos along with it, taht they place it befoer most of everythng else. I see no reson to be disturbd of it then - if theyy want to love soemthing other than other peoplle, more power to them.

anyways, on my partt, Im not alowed to marry anyone outsid my religon - I would hope that if i did fall in loev with seomone outside of it taht they would convert so it would be permisable.

If the two people are not fanatical in their religions, then there should not be too much difficulty in managing such a marriage.

ruveyn

Depends on the follower.

Actually, the Bible doesn't "dictate" my thoughts or natural urges. I look at the Bible as more of a guidebook when it comes to how I should behave or think. The point of the Bible is to point the way to God, to help the reader understand better what behaviors best reflect inner faith. If you seek out righteousness, there are certain thoughts you shouldn't even want to have. And that goes for anyone, religious or not. You could be an atheist or agnostic and think about nothing but murder all day long, recognize that murder isn't cool, and figure out some way of occupying your time and energy to direct your thoughts away from murder. The Bible doesn't have all the answers when you look at it in terms of historical context, of course, but it does provide enough to extrapolate what is most likely expected in our present context. I believe most Christians will tell you that how a person responds to the Spirit is largely a matter of conscience.

Accepting Christ as Savior is the focal point of the Bible. All else is secondary. It isn't submitting to every letter of the Bible that's the point--it's rather learning to submit to the Spirit and surrender your will to God's will. The Bible doesn't make us perfect, nor does being a Christian make us perfect. It simply helps us find the path. Ultimately it is God who directs us as long as we let him.

Fasting themselves to malnutrition? Sorry, had to laugh at that one. I don't personally know any Christians who have done that.

All I can say is this: If God tells you to do something, it will be possible to do it no matter what anyone says. All you need is faith for that to work. I was called to fast for 40 days and nights. It wasn't some funny idea I got from reading the Bible. I just knew it was the right thing to do. People knew I experienced some dramatic weight loss and often would stop me and ask what it was I was doing. I explained that I felt God calling me to do this and that I was following in obedience. And honestly, it wasn't that bad. You're miserable for about 3 days until ketosis sets in. Hunger pangs stop after about a week. There are some weird experiences you'll have, like weird dreams, irregular sleeping patterns, your breath will smell like nail polish remover, and plain bottled water will taste like pure sugar syrup. You have to be aware that as your sodium levels are depleted, you'll experience hypovolemia, low blood pressure, and elevated heart rate to compensate--you'll want to be careful not to black out when standing for long periods, which I ALMOST learned the hard way at the end of church one Sunday. At one point I was drinking up to two gallons or more of water every day, and despite that I was waking up in the middle of the night with dry mouth so bad it hurt. The thing is, though, that I was able to do all this and still keep my work schedule. It didn't interfere at all and I was able to stay mentally sharp. I'd have these HUGE bursts of energy from the ketones and felt unusually active in the evenings. I knew pretty much when I could expect to crash and made sure to get plenty of rest around those times. MOST of the unpleasantness was fairly minor, though I could have done without acetone breath.

The most important thing I gained from fasting was the experience of living on nothing but faith. The experience teaches you that whether or not you eat anything, it is always and only God who sustains your life, both physically and spiritually. In my experience, being able to fast the way I did was a gift, not some crazy endurance test. If you read about Jesus' fasting, you'll notice that He wasn't tempted until AFTER the fast. My thing is I don't want to go back to the way I lived my life before, so I closely monitor my weight and eat almost entirely a vegetarian diet. I still drink up to a gallon and a half of water every day. I hate the way sugary junk food makes me feel. I avoid alcohol and caffeine except for special occasions. I continue to do a total fast once a week and will occasionally do an additional water fast day in the middle of the week. I've also tried to increase my exercise. The thing is, it has nothing to do with being on a diet or eating because I enjoy food. It's about maintaining spiritual balance in all aspects of my life, including my eating habits. The physical benefits, like having lost 70 lb., is just the proverbial icing on the cake. My weight now pretty much stays under 160 lb., which is almost my ideal weight.

Fasting isn't for everyone. What I did was extremely dangerous. I went into it fully aware of the dangers. But I also went into it knowing that if God wanted me to have this experience, I'd come through it unharmed. I even prepared a few months' worth of light meals, each measuring out to between 8 and 16 oz. so I could gradually rebuild my electrolyte levels. It's not easy coming off a fast knowing that eating a huge steak could quickly stop your heart. But I feel (and look) like a completely different person after having the experience and can say that for me the whole thing was mostly positive, and I'd encourage anyone who feels strongly led to do it to pray about it and ask God to strengthen their faith to get them through it. If it is what God wants you to do, it's an amazing ride.

Seems to me you lost weight just by changing your eating habits from relatively unhealthy to healthy. I don't understand where god comes in.

What also strikes me is the fact that some people are convinced that god actually talks to them. How does he do that. Does he have an enormous megaphone or something when he talks to a selected few from the heavens above?

God is usually not held to be a physical, material entity, so the idea of him using a megaphone is nonsense.

In the Christian faith, it is held that humans have a relationship with God and can communicate with him simply by using thought. Studies of religious experiences by the likes of James and Otto have found that people generally acquire knowledge without memory of learning- they just experience something with a "noetic quality" which confers knowledge, and their experience is ineffable.