We've talked about marring someone outside of your religion or lack of it. But we have never touched on the idea of one's child dating & possibly marrying outside of thier faith.

IMO marrying outside a particular faith is more common than not.

As an illustration: Two synagogues in my area have support and counseling for interfaith marriages amongst members of their congregations. I'm told their numbers are growing, mainly in Reform/Liberal and Conservative congregations. Since Judaism doesn't actively seek converts, Jews generally don't try to force their beliefs on others.

It wouldn't bother me, speaking as a mother, as long as the couple were happy, to me that would be the most important thing. Any problems are more likely to come from the different faiths involved as some faiths may not be too keen to acccept mixed marriages which could have the potential to make things a bit difficult for the 'happy' couple.

To me I dont care what religion or color or nationality you are, as long as your a nice one!

If they, or me were to be happy with regard to the union, then so be it.... We all bleed red.

My son and I were discussing this. He is looking for someone with the same religious background as his. He feels that having that makes her more of a match for him and therefore making them more compatible.
I am glad he feels this way as having someone who shares your views on religion brings one closer to their religion. If you have someone who does not share your beliefs it is too easy to not be as active in your beliefs.

Always a pleasure

My son married a Christian girl and became a Christian. As long as he is happy I don't care. Even if he is not happy it is his problem and it is up to him to work it out. People pick partners for many different reasons sometimes the person you end up with is nothing like who you thought your ideal would be. That is why when I do love spells for people I don't do them for a specific person or your ideal person, but the person who is best for you.

Exactly, couldn't agree more

Having the same faith makes for greater compatibility especially when moving on from the dating stage to something more long term but it is not a deal breaker. Darkwind also speaks truth when he says love is best served by the person who is best for you instead of the one someone thinks is most ideal.

When discussing the Bible 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 makes it clear that there is nothing wrong to be married to an unbeliever so the same should apply to dating. Dating after all should be about finding who is compatible but I can see how someone might have a certain list that others have to fall in before they are even considered for dating. Nothing wrong with that either since it is all preference.

Doesn't the bible say something about being equally yolked?

It does in 2 Corinthians 6 but I am not sure how anyone can consider that to have anything to do with marriage. I can see how someone would assume such but those Christians who think it says that, including editors of the Bible, are clearly reading into it what they want since the passage has nothing to do with marriage before that or after.

The word in this passage for 'unequally yoked' is heterozygeō and is just used once in the Bible. It is a compound of two words, hetero, which means different, and zygos, which means yoke or balance. The latter word is used only six times.

^So what do you think 2 Corinthians 6:14 is referring to then, Clovis? I'd consider paying particular attention to the following verses straight after this (2 Corinthians 6:14-17):

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? - v. 14-16.

Verse 16 then continues to say that we are the Temple of the Living God, and therefore verse 17 concludes: Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord.

I'm curious to know what you think this is referring to if it is not referring to relationships with Christians and non-Christians.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That said, I think mixed relationships can work, but they are plagued by more difficulties than same-Faith beliefs. From a Christian point of view, how could I marry someone and then leave them at home when i go to church? What if we have children - if I want my child to go to Sunday School and my wife does not, this causes friction. What if during my dating, my non-Christian girlfriend wants sex - how do they accept that they will have to wait til marriage? As a husband it is my duty to care for the spiritual well-being of my wife - that involves reading the Bible together and praying together. At the very very least, this part of my life would be missing. I would read the Bible alone, and pray alone - unless she is understanding and open to reading the Bible and praying also, which might mean she becomes a Christian.

I think in the end, if a Christian dates a non-Christian, one of three things will happen. Either 1- the Christian's relationship with their partner will suffer, 2- the Christian's relationship with God will suffer (either partly, eg. no longer devoting as much time to God, or fully - turning away from God and becoming non-Christian), or 3- the partner will become a Christian. Mostly it's number 2, I'd wager.

When I'm looking for a partner, the first thing I try and find out is "are they Christian"! I do not think Christian/non-Christian unions can work successfully without someone radically changing their views or outlook on life/God.

However, most people who call themselves Christians are not fully devoted Christians. As someone on another thread mentioned, they grew up in a "moderately religious" household where they'd go to church for an hour on Sundays and never mention God for the rest of the week. If a person is "Christian" in this sense, then there relationship with God is already lacking a lot, and so would not greatly suffer from a partner who is non-Christian.

Sorry Clovis I agree with PA here thats what I get to after looking the verse up.



Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?

I do agree that two people with different faith can make it though life. However if two very different religions got married I think they would be asking for trouble.

That'd certainly make for interesting arguments at the dinner table.

What a prejudicious thread.

Don't think so?

As recently as a couple decades ago people were still questioning if a black man and caucasian woman or a Hispanic man and Asian woman would have a difficult time making their relationship work.

In this case, nationality has been replaced by religious belief.

Can a person of the Jewish faith make it work with an atheist? Can a pagan make it work with a Muslim? Etc., etc.

Wow.

To everyone who replied positively I applaud you.

But the fact that religion still remains as a deciding factor in the compatibility of two people (especially in one's children) leaves me with a very bad feeling.

I don't think anyone is saying its not possible but that there will be some hurdles to the relationship.

The colour of your skin does not affect who you are as a person (though depending on where you grew up and what type of family you grew up in there might be certain cultural influences that might affect behaviour). But religion is totally different. What religion we identify with will often change the way we behave - particularly if we hold our religions as very important to us (not everyone does - some just pay lip-service to whatever deity they believe in but generally act in whatever way they like anyway). Like cadet said, I'm not saying it won't work, I'm saying there are inherent difficulties with people of different mindsets, and I think in most cases, if someone holds particularly strong religious beliefs, that person will likely have to compromise either their relationship with their God or their relationship with their partner. Sex before marriage is one of the biggest issues I can think of - though many Christians do not abide by this. What if both partners are very religious, but different religions (eg, Muslim and Christian). How would a relationship with a Muslim affect the Christian's relationship with their parents (and vice versa).

I think I would try to avoid a relationship with someone not Christian. Though having said that, Love can do strange things to people, and if one day I met that one person...... and they weren't Christian..... who knows, I might find myself going against everything I've just said..... So really, I'm simply saying there are difficulties to consider when starting a relationship. I would not compromise my relationship with God, and that means my potential partner would not get to "know me" (in the biblical sense) until after marriage - could they handle that????

Just a few things to consider,

It is referring to mixed church services. Believing the same thing as non-believers that contradict biblical teachings.

The ancients made great use of contrasts, writing about A then about B, for example, whereas they did not simply write A is better than B or B is better than A but showed how A and B pertain to the author and the reader. So sometimes it appears a paradox as when Tacitus wrote that a Britain warlord when rallying his troops said this of the Romans: Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches (link).

In 2 Corinthians 6 we can also see a contrast in the whole of the chapter. The first part is speaking about enduring and non-believers persecuting Christians. It speaks about hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, riots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger...so what then is the opposite of this? What is the contrast?

The contrast is instead of being attacked by non-believers to instead swing the other direction and be equally yoked with them, start to believe as they do, go to worship their gods along with yours, so unless the first part of the chapter is speaking about a spouse who will put you through hardship, calamity, beatings, imprisonment, riot, labor, sleepless nights, and hunger then the second part is not speaking about marriage either. And well some people do accuse their wives or husbands of all of this but is that what the chapter is about?

So what else is in the second half of the chapter? It speaks about the temple being the body and are reminded through that that it is not just a building. So another warning not to go to the same temple as non-believers. How can it possibly be speaking about marriage?

Should a Christian consider themselves righteous and non-believers as being lawless? 1 Corinthians 10:12 says, "Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall." 1 Timothy 1:15 states, "...that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost."

So I do not believe that this is talking about believers and non-believers marrying and it is dangerous to label believers as being of Christ and all non-believers as not, this creates prejudice and discrimination, but instead I see the chapter of being about doctrines and temple, one cannot go to service or accept the doctrines of Belial if they are wanting to be with Christ, when it comes to discussing what portion or part does a believer have with an unbeliever a word search can identify further what this is discussing by looking at the other times the word 'part' is used (link), and verse 16 of the chapter particularly tells us what this context of the chapter is about when it claims, "What agreement has the temple of God with idols?".

We can also see how this theme is played out in other parts of the Word when discussing aligning your beliefs with those of non-believers:







Since neither of these verses are speaking about marriage I do not see anything in 2 Corinthians 6 having anything to do with marriage either. The only reason people think it does is because they are linking that one verse with Old Testament belief that people should not intermarry but the Old Testament belief had a strong purpose, that was to keep the Israeli people separate, if not they would have mixed with their neighbors, inter-married, accepted their gods with their God, then the message would have been lost for all time.

I can understand how one will view themselves as a mini-Israeli nation, that if they themselves marry a non-believer, that they will then have to compromise their beliefs, change the mind of their spouse, or the partnership between the believer and non-believer will suffer. These are definitely things to consider but someone who is faithful to Christ and prays regarding this issue can, even though the odds are against them, come through in the end, after all are not the odds stacked against a believer by just being in this world? So it is not an ideal marriage to be partnered with a non-believer but this is not an ideal world and I just do not see anywhere in 2 Corinthians 6 as discussing marriage in any verse, and to have one verse out of the whole chapter change tone and suddenly mention marriage, then go back to discussing other concepts does not make much sense either.

I believe this is what Maimonides was discussing when he was mentioning true beliefs vs necessary beliefs. True beliefs are beliefs that lead to an understanding of God. Necessary beliefs are only necessary to provide social cohesion but might not be actually true. So to believe that this is a New Testament mandate was a belief set forth from those fearing a loss of their church community and congregation. Love those does not work out of fear and to think strategically in terms of keeping a church together, whether someone is truly faithful or not, is not the way God should operate in the modern church.

Boaz married a non-believer, Ruth, and for it the line of David came to be. I think God can bless these mixed-marriages even at the same time He warns us against mixed-services through Paul. This is just my opinion of course and I know my opinion is at odds with centuries of church tradition.

Of course before entering any relationship a believer should pray about it to ask God if they are on the right course, if this is the right person, and if not to either give them wisdom in discerning or on the other hand if the other person is wrong to have them leave on their own accord. No matter how much it would hurt to break away from someone we desire it would hurt more to enter in an unfruitful relationship that after time will dissolve. There is also a clear line between dating for fun (not clean fun) and choosing non-believers for this purpose knowing it will not lead to a serious relationship and courting seriously to find a possible match and in this regard non-believers should not simply be overlooked if there is a real connection and friendship formed with such a person.

I agree with you on that .When the old love bug bites ,everything else goes out of the window ,you might regret it later but at the moment you won't consider it


fullywired

Cheers, Clovis. After reading over your post (I'm only editing it out to save space), and reading the context of 2 Corinthians 6 (and 7), I totally agree with you. It is completely referring to following the gods of the other nations (Christ and Belial, God and idols). I guess it goes to show how important that dratted "C" word is, after all

That said, do you think that marrying a person who worships one of those idols is something that God would like. Granted, I don't any longer think 2 Corinthians 6 refers directly to marriage, but it does mention that we are the Temple of God (verse 16). One could perhaps draw inference to relationships with other people. What are your thoughts on this?????

As I said, I'm not saying Christian/non-Chrsitian relationships can't work, I'm just saying there are difficulties. All the best, and thanks for sharing. I've just learned something new, yay

hehe, I guess we can't always disagree I'm sure that love bug will toss most of our senses out the window.

Anyhow, moving on to the other book of Corinthians - 1 Corinthians 7, to be exact, there's an interesting passage worth noting:

If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? ~ 1 Corinthians 7:12-16.

There are a few arguments I can make against it already. The biggest of these being the contrast of verse 10 and the start of verse 12. Verse 10 speaks to the married folks and says, "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord)", while the start of verse 12 (which I didn't quote at the start of the above paragraph) - "To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)". Paul is clearly making the distinction that this is not a command from God, but his own personal opinion - a curious passage in its own right, since this is the only passage I can think of off the top of my head that directly states that it is solely the opinion of the writer. Thus we need only consider this to be one possible opinion, though a good one to consider.

Another clear argument to me is the cultural climate in which this was written. This was written to people who were only newly converted to Christianity. Thus there would have been many people already in marriage relationships and one converts while the other remains a non-Christian. As such, we might view this only in the context of those who are already married and one becomes a believer. Thus no direct commandment is given regarding marrying non-Christians - only the comment on what should happen if they are happy to live together under the circumstances that they are already married.

Thirdly, the textual context is regarding our abilities to serve the Lord. Paul argues that a man or woman who is single has more time they can devote to God, while a married couple must by necessity devote time to each other as well as to God. But Paul is clear that this is not a sin, and whether married or single, both are right. So keeping this overall theme in mind, the believing or non-believing state of the spouse is irrelevant to the overriding theme.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So considering all this, can we argue that 1 Corinthians 7 forbids the marriage union between a Christian and non-Christian? You could, but you could also argue that it does not (in my opinion, at least)

And finally, I could be wrong on this, but I can't specifically remember any other passages beyond these two that refer to marriage to non-believers - they could be there, but I can't recall any. Any takers on this one?

Sounds like that there is another way to be saved without having to auctally BEING saved sounds like a loophole.

On this particular issue as well as others I try not to think in terms of what God would like but on what He has in store for us. Since there is no New Testament mandate specifically prohibiting a sinner who has come to believe in God from marrying another sinner who has yet to do the same and since the only discussion regarding this specific issue is in 1 Corinthians 7 I have to see this as not being a clear sin but a personal issue of standards. What is a sin for one, as in the issue of eating meat, or celebrating Sabbaths, might not be for another.

Mention and reprinting 1 Corinthians 7 again so it does not get lost.



Of course immediately after this passage this is written:



Then this and keep in mind the word betrothed in the Greek simply means virgin which to them meant simply unmarried if my understanding is correct of the Greek culture:



But before all that this is written:



Well I wish to not paste so much scripture but Paul says it better than I could. Clearly he is concerned that those who marry will have worldly troubles (v 28). But he also says this is not a command and only a concession (vs 6 and 25). Clearly though one who is not married who does marry is not sinning (v 28).

To answer your questions specifically though in my opinion marrying or dating someone who is not just a non-believer but is dedicated to worshiping other idols then we should definitely pray about it and most likely my common sense tells me the answer will be no...but my common sense cannot compare to the mind of God and it should not be taken as the word of God for every situation.

Also idolatry can take many forms to someone who worships money, sex, or beauty. Even watching TV too much or sports can turn into an idol.

Clearly though there will be difficulties in a match of a believer and a non-believer even more so in a match between two believers but by the same token difficulties will be present in both marriage to some degree or another. I do not consider 1 Corinthians 7 as a license either to go wild and try and date non-believers but more of a if you come to believe while already married to a non-believer there is no need to instantly separate because your partner also refuses to believe. Overall the decision as any decision especially when it is not clearly stated in the Bible as a sin or as permissible should be approached with an open heart that trusts in God and His answers regardless of how those answers arrive and should not be approached with a hardened heart. IMHO those who insist that the verse applied to 'being yolked' means marriage and nothing else are simply of a hardened heart. This is not meant to be offensive to those who do believe that but is just my personal opinion.

Clearly though some will pray to God and believe, regardless of that scripture, that they should not mingle with non-believers when it comes to dating. For them maybe the Lord knows their temperance and their weaknesses and knows that they will easily be pulled way if they do marry a non-believer. But what the Lord answers for them is not necessarily the same as what He would answer to another.

Here is something I thought I would share as well:



This is just a humorous e-mail and not to be taken too seriously but the best wisdom in such matters is always light-hearted.



Loopholes are for legalists and it is something that is frowned upon because it takes away from spirituality. Romans 3 clearly makes a distinction between all those who try and simply go by the law will fail since no human can do right by the laws (v 20) then mentions the law of works and the law of faith (v 27). Clearly the loophole is that no one has to be bound by Mosaic law anymore. The sacrifice of Christ is the ultimate loop hole in this view. Again this is something non-believers should not even worry about for they neither follow the law or Christ.

Jesus did not come to destroy the law but fulfill it. This tells us the law was imperfect before and it is made perfect in the personage of Christ. This is just one view. Being made holy though does not instantly translate to being saved IMHO. It is far from a loophole but to me it speaks about God protecting the unbeliever, not from being unsaved, but from being damaged or doing damage to the point where it affects the believer.

I was praying deep with my wife around a month or less ago and realized through God, it came out in prayer without even thinking about it, it was a prophecy, that the reason our marriage has lasted so long, during the times we were so far away from God, was because her mother, a Catholic, prays everyday for us and others, if not for that, for my mother-in-laws prayers we would have self-destructed, so it does not mean her prayers saved us but it does mean her prayers helped protect us, for she really believes in God, and prays to It.

It's not an issue in my family because we're all on the modernized, liberal extreme of our religions. I'm Pagan and my husband's Jewish. My stepsons have all married Christians and their wives are wonderful people. Two of the grandkids are being raised in the Christian tradition and two in the Jewish tradition.

I think I'd be concerned if one of their wives was extremely conservative in a way that resulted in the granddaughters getting different educations from their brothers. I don't think I'd do anything because I'm really adamant with myself about letting the grandkids' parents call the shots. But I'd be concerned if I thought their future choices were being reduced by a religious education.

Fortunately, we're all very compatible spiritually, as well as in other ways.

Bigotry against skin color or national origin was also the result of a mind set. And not all bigots felt superior over other nationalities. Some people were prejudice out of fear and ignorance of cultures they'd had little or no exposure to.

My point is, they were not born prejudice. They became that way because of what they were taught. Isn't this the same as religion (though not as extreme)?



It's very honest of you to admit that. Why risk the trouble and turmoil of loving another human being who's not of the same faith as you?



So basically what you're saying is love me, love my god?

Excuse me if I sounded flippant, I'm not trying to single you or your religion out (or any religion for that matter). I know full well that there are many non religious matters that can bring difficulty to any relationship. It's just that all religions are so alien to me sometimes. I can understand if believing brings comfort and peace of mind to a person. But when it begins sounding like a members only club I begin to wonder if indeed it's all that good to begin with.

a close cousin , like my own sister really , raised christian and converted to marry into a Jewish family. no big whoop. that was 19 years ago.

Very good point!

Salaam (Peace)

My wife, Queen Sandy, embraced Islam in less than a year after we were married. She was studying the religion prior to that, and had the intention of becoming Muslim. I know a few Muslim men who are happily married to non-Muslim women, and I have the utmost respect for them. I love my wife with all my heart and soul, she is the number one person in my life. If there is such a thing as "Soul Mates", then she is definitely mine! However, the simple truth, for me, is that our marriage could not work if she were non-Muslim.

Does it really take a complete switch over or conversion to the other parnters religion...one way or the other..

Or isnt respect enough of the others beleifs??? As long as there is no disrespect, it should work....

Respect, tolerance and patience usually will bring understanding. Both ways.

It is a matter of preference through and through. Anyone claiming such to appear politically correct are dismissing their own particular preferences which we all have for the most. I know I have many, maybe not based on race, creed, national origin, political affiliation, or beliefs. But if someone is the wrong color, sorry I prefer light skin, or of the wrong sex, sorry I prefer females, and if someone is not the right size, I would not consider them at all for dating material or marriage. They have to attract me first. My wife feels the same way and luckily we were and are a match. Anyone might say I am wrong for such but I am honest and I know what works and does not work for me when I have to finally decide something. Attitude counts for much too and if they are of the wrong attitude forget it.

In the same vain if someone has preferences other than mine such as race, creed, national origin, political affiliation, or beliefs, then that is their preference and I would nary look down on them or offer any criticism. And honestly I have not dwelt on those five or many other possible differences. For example it is most likely if someone was too radically different in political affiliation than me it might very well pose problems and I would prefer them to be either apolitical or have the same stance on several issues as me before the relationship went from the courting to the engagement phase.

I'm saying that if someone wants to love me they must also understand that I also love God, and as much as I will Love them, I won't turn my back on God. If they are non-Christian and can accept that, and can accept that my morals that I take from my God include not having sex until after marriage, then that is good. If they cannot accept that, then that means they cannot accept who I am as a person. There are certain things I will not compromise in life - God is one of those.

It's not a matter of being a "members only" club. I'm just saying that marrying another Christian would avoid many of the problems I just addressed (such as sex before marriage, prayer-time together, reading the Bible together, raising our kids).

Let me ask you - ....edit: don't worry, I'll start a new thread on the topic

Bit of a contradiction there .if you love her with all your heart ,nothing else should matter


fullywired

Salaam (Peace)

My love for my Creator overrides any other attachments I may have in this world, and, in my opinion, it takes much more than love to make a relationship (of any kind) work. I am not one of those who believe that "as long as two people love each other nothing else matters". My home and lifestyle is based first and foremost upon Islam. If I were just a nominal Muslim perhaps it wouldn't matter, but I'm not. It takes two to build a marriage, home and life together; very difficult to do with a non-Muslim wife or wives, been there done that - doesn't work for me. My wife read my post and feels as I do about it. If, for some unimaginable reason, we were to divorce, she would never marry a non-Muslim man.

Well I'm all for marrying outside your religion as long as both parties are willing to accept each other as they are, being Pagan, I've found it very hard to date people with my same views, or within my same religion, my longest relationship was 4 years, he was an Atheist, the Religion discussion had come up a few times, and I was willing to admit to him that I wasn't for sure about what happens when we die, as personal experience doesn't count for much as evidence. To be honest it wasn't something we really thought of as an issue, I think it would be an issue if you want to make it that way but if you truly love someone then it shouldn't matter, you should be willing to meet in the middle when it comes to religion.

I'm sorry I haven't been keeping up with this thread, I'm already married. I would like to point out though that you should never marry anyone if you expect them to change. You shouldn't love someone for who they WILL be (that person doesn't exist) you should love someone for who they ARE. This, I think applies to all areas of a relationship, even religion. JMO

Hi Clovis,
You gave me a point to think about...regarding the"right size"attraction....

Your right that there would have to be an attraction to the partner for the marriage too...I also need an attraction to be intriqued or ----- with my partner...So the physical atraction would be there...
I dont think Id fall out of love with that person, should my husband had put on weight in the past years...but the sex life sure would flounder.....Hes still the same person inside. But im sure the prom king and queen society of looks would still measure out as they do in this worldly society too.

But your right, I wouldnt have been attracted in the first place to get to know him to start off. Interest wouldnt have been there to begin with.

Since religion isntt usually something of a hot topic for discussin when first meeting someone, hopefully that would be a topic brought up after learning what a persons ground morals are first. Even if slightly varied from ones own...It would give a bond a chance to begin and then work thru the differences I would think, or hope....afterwards. To not allow that I would think was like trying to live with a wet blanket thrown over you if one partnet wasnt openly loving and acceptant of ones differences....

That just wouldnt be worth being there at any cost to me.....to be smothered with no room for discussion or acceptance or patience, by someone elses beleifs. Nor me to do to them.

There has to be give and take.

Blessings

I agree 100% with you here! We have a good friend of ours who believe that he needs a women who will make him look good. He believes that women should be submissive towards men because of what the bible says. If you try to change a person that your married too then you were never in love with them in the first place. You were in love in what you believed you could change them into.

To me its all about respect and giving people room to carry out their beliefs, if the one you are married to or will marry is able and willing to do so then there is no problem.

Me and my boyfriend are different in many ways, I'm religious, black and from latin america. he is an atheist, white and from western europe. We are happy together and respect our differences: it works (and yes we are definitly getting married)

Quite true and we do have go into a long-term relationship with a sense of balance. While we might first be attracted to another instantly outwardly we have to be sure we can stay attracted to them inwardly. Looks will fade and it is about the inner-person, how we connect, their attitude, and how they make us feel with our eyes closed, that will matter in the latter years.

And how pray do you know that ?How do you know what the latter years will bring?


fullywired

This October my wife & I will be married for 5 years total we've been toghether for 7. We never talked about religion untill after the first year we had been living toghether but I knew that she didn't believe in the Christian God. MY wife is nothing like what I would date & same goes for me.

There is a saying which goes. You had really better love the person your with because sooner or later he isn't going to be able to have sex & her breast are going to sag. So looks are not everything.

Thats for sure....everything changes. Usually all goes South!

Working on marreid 9, together 12....

Blessings guys!

I know when I was single looks were everything & looking back I guess we all we're. To some point that's the first thing we still look at.

Id like to think I still have it soome days!!!

I have friends who have come from differing religious backgrounds find a happy medium in their relationships and they have worked out great. But I also have some friends who could not resolve their religious differences and as a result, have divorced. I guess it depends on how important your personal faith is to each of you and what compromises you're both willing to make.

I think family could hender two people getting married because of 2 different faiths. I have to admit the fact that Sandee's husband lets her deal with that alone & without his say so. I could not do that myself.