Appears to be another case of "shifting the burden."

by garyneal 54 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  garyneal

  EOM,

  I agree in that I know it bothers her conscious and I am just trying to make the best of the situation. I doubt I will be 'celebrating my own birthday' but I sincerely think that I could do something special for my daughter on that day and consider it 'my birthday gift.' At least in secret.

  Also, I still take issue with how she imposed her will on me when my sister wanted to do something for me on my birthday.

  Otherwise, I don't totally disagree with the WT teaching that each spouse should put the other first for even the Bible teaches similar in that we are to count others as more important than ourselves. However, I do think this has limits, especially if you look at StAnn's example.

  Just trying to make the best of the situation, that's all.
• 

  ziddina

  "I swear, Jehovah's Witnesses can be some real nuts sometimes. ..."

  What, only SOMEtimes????

  Imho, I think your wife feels a bit insecure in the marriage because, as a 'worldly' guy, you supposedly could go out and have 'any woman you want', because you're influenced by that "evil Satan", don't you know, wink, wink...

  Tying into that, she feels insecure because you're not "in the organization" - and that, if you were a "good, little Jehovah-boy", she could be sure that your marriage would last forever and ever and ever and ever... (mmmmmf!! snicker, snicker, giggle, giggle... )

  I've seen SO many "pure" JW marriages break up; I suspect that the vast majority of broken marriages within the WTBTS are those between two JWs, in spite of the stresses present in a marriage to a 'worldly' person...

  I remember one JW boy that I foolishly had a crush on when I was a teenager; by the time I was in my mid-20's he was on his THIRD marriage!!!

  I also suspect that her unyielding insistence that "YOU" do the research on birthdays, indicates that SHE isn't very familiar with the Watchtower information on the subject, and she's unwilling to look into it herself...

  Perhaps afraid of what she might find...

  Don't forget about Job and his children - and that each one had his/her "special" day - I don't think the WTBTS can prove that they WEREN'T celebrating their birthdays!!!

  Zid
• 

  PSacramento

  I am curious as to how your wife putting the needs and wants of the WT ABOVE your needs as a husband, is putting YOUR mariageirst ?
• 

  EndofMysteries

  Gary - I read your further comments and you seem to be trying your best to keep the peace, ( The example of your sister ). Hopefully it doesn't become where she will not wanting you to do anything, at the same time, not wanting to go out with you.

  (I know a married couple, both JW's, the wife ONLY likes to read, at home is spending most her time reading and he likes to do more active things, she doesn't want him going out and at the same time not wanting or offering to go out with him. Don't know how long he'll last in that type of marriage)
• 

  superpunk

  Otherwise, I don't totally disagree with the WT teaching that each spouse should put the other first for even the Bible teaches similar in that we are to count others as more important than ourselves. However, I do think this has limits, especially if you look at StAnn's example.

  It is just a simple human principle.

  However, if it is only being one-sided, the spouse will begin to feel like they are being taken advantage of. You can only be soooo generous if someone is not being generous in turn.

  It's not unreasonable for spouses who have differences to indulge those differences for the good of their mate every once in a while. For instance a wife who hates football may indulge her husband because she knows it's important to him and maybe one day she may even come to like it. For myself, I hated alot of the music my wife liked when we got married. But I *tolerated* it for a while, understanding that she enjoyed it and it really wasn't important whether I did or not. Now I enjoy it, too - and vice versa.

  The same principle should apply in religious matters. But by inserting GOD into the equation, making HIS happiness more important than yours, all the things HE wants supercede your happiness or the happiness of your marriage. Therefore the simple human principle may be disregarded, and her selfishness is deemed excusable in her mind because she is simply doing what GOD wants, which is most important. Sub-human behavior is now acceptable in GOD's name.
• 

  PSacramento

  Well, we have the wrods of Paul in 1Corinthians:

  10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.

  12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 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. 14 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.

  15 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. 16 How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
• 

  garyneal

  Well, we have the wrods of Paul in 1Corinthians:

  Funny how in the case of a marriage between a witness and a christian that scripture seems to have them pointing to one another.
• 

  superpunk

  And Jesus also said he came to bring a sword, etc...so the believer who experiences contention in their family life feels validated. "OMG this is exactly what Jeebus said would happen! I must be doing the right thing!"

  This is why revelation should be solely personal, and the supernatural should stay the hell out of normal human interactions. We do much better on our own. Or at least as well, just without all the magic.
• 

  ziddina

  Thanks, JWFacts, for posting this:

  "The first Watchtower mention against birthdays was 1951.

  "Is it proper to have or attend celebrations of birthday anniversaries?-F. K., Nevada. Such celebrations have their roots in pagan religions..."

  Every time I read something like that, I want to SCREAM...!

  The bible ITSELF is innately "PAGAN"... Sheesh.

  All one has to do is look at the various elements in the bible. Moses' setting up that bronze serpent on a staff for the Israelites to "worship" - yeah, I know it says "gaze upon", but that's a thinly disguised and conveniently re-phrased version of WORSHIP...!

  That symbol of the snake upon a staff is called the "Rod of Asclepius"... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius "The rod of Asclepius (?; sometimes also spelled Asklepios or Aesculapius), also known as the asklepian,[1] is an ancient symbol associated with astrology, the Greek god Asclepius, and with medicine and healing. It consists of a serpent entwined around a staff. ..."

  Then there's the "12 Tribes of Israel"... I've said this before, but haven't had the time to lay it all out - Look at the TWELVE SIGNS OF THE ZODIAC, especially those of the Chinese zodiac, THEN look at the symbols for the "twelve tribes"... They are almost an EXACT MATCH!!!

  And the reason that 10 of the "12 tribes" disappear, later on, imo, is that THEY NEVER EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE. They were simply a convenient way of grouping the Israelites into the astrologically symbolic number of 12 - which was viewed with great significance by the astrology-practicing Egyptians, whose land they'd supposedly just left... In more likelihood, they picked up the "12 tribes" idea after coming into contact with the much greater and more refined Egyptian civilization, and thought that using that "magical" number would give THEM greater military power, too...

  Don't even get me started on "Moses" and the tribes worshipping a VOLCANO - Exodus 19: 16-19 - as a manifestation of their "god"...

  Then there's this business of "Jesus" being in the "grave" for "three days and three nights"... Long, LONG before "Jesus" was a gleam in a Jewish-man-who-wanted-to-plagiarize-the-Elysian-mysteries eye, the Sumerian GODDESS Inanna was "in the grave for THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS" - around THREE THOUSAND years BEFORE "Christ"... And well over 1,500 years before the 'bible' ITSELF came into existence!!!

  Sorry. But the WTBTS - in fact, all of Christianity's rabid fear of that which they call "PAGAN" - is INSANE, and laughable to those of us who have researched the so-called "PAGAN" beliefs THAT MAKE UP THE BIBLE ITSELF...

  Sheesh... Repetition for emphasis... The bible itself is plagiarized from OLDER, so-called "PAGAN" religions... The bible itself is plagiarized from OLDER, so-called "PAGAN" religions... The bible itself is plagiarized from OLDER, so-called "PAGAN" religions... THE BIBLE ITSELF IS PLAGIARIZED FROM OLDER, SO-CALLED "PAGAN" RELIGIONS...

  The bible itself is thoroughly "PAGAN', therefore for any bible adherents to condemn other practices as "PAGAN" - well, they might as well take their own bibles out and burn them, too...

  BUT! They're too damn ignorant - or stubborn - to allow themselves to SEE the "PAGAN' - more accurately, ancient PolyTheist religious - origins of the bible...

  Rant over...

  Zid
• 

  garyneal

  superpunk,

  I agree that human interpersonal relationships is more complicated than the simplistic interpretations of scripture offered by witnesses and some fundamentalists. I remember when I first started attending an Indy Fundy Baptist church some of the members there were telling me that my aunt needed to return to her husband because God hated divorce. Never mind the fact that her husband abused her mentally, emotionally, and even allegedelly sexually abused their oldest daughter. Nevermind the fact that she stuck with him for years and years before she finally had had enough. No, she left him and he became a 'born again Christian' after that to show that he changed and began telling his pity pot story to the other Indy Fundies, garnering their sympathy.

  I personally went to bat for my aunt against those fundies and told them that unless they lived the situation they had no right to judge, so to speak.

  When it all did not work out, he eventually began attending church less and less until finally he stopped altogether.