7 Simple Tips for a Successful Marriage

[GMDino]

(07-02-2015, 01:39 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I was in a relationship where I attempted to give in and let her do things her way after a number of pointless battles involving stating my actual thoughts on things, but she was unhappy because she didn't want me to give in.  Basically, she wanted to do things her way but she wanted me to WANT to do things her way without having to give in and just let her win.  It was pretty frustrating.

She would get upset when I argued or attempted to even debate my point/my way but when I gave in and decided that just doing things her way was good enough for me she took that as me not wanting or being capable of being involved in a working relationship.  She was a pain in the arse.  So in summation, just giving in doesn't always work either.

Its a fine art.

With my wife she will ask why or how to do something and immediately tell me I can't be right when I answer.

I often just let her do it her way until she asks for help.  When I fix whatever problem it is she inevitably ask how I did it.  To which I just shrug and tell her my way must have worked.

I've also learned how to bring up a subject (say a new television) and allow her to argue until she has decided it is not only a good idea, but also that it was HER idea since she "won" the argument.

We've been together for 21 years and married of almost 19...the "discussion" are fewer and fewer these days.  But I've always told her that of all the women I dated she was the only one I really ever argued with.  I didn't want to make waves before that.  So I guess that's why we've worked out so well for so long.

[fredtoast]

Interesting that none of the experts here are talking about how to handled the situation when the woman ended up being right and they were wrong.

Or did that just never happen?

[*Nately120*]

(07-02-2015, 02:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Interesting that none of the experts here are talking about how to handled the situation when the woman ended up being right and they were wrong.

Or did that just never happen?

I think the response is to be relieved that she's insisting on traveling a reasonable path for a change.

[GMDino]

(07-02-2015, 02:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Interesting that none of the experts here are talking about how to handled the situation when the woman ended up being right and they were wrong.

Or did that just never happen?

I admitted I was wrong.

I just don't argue for the sake of arguing though.  If I ask her why its because she knows the answer and I don't have one.  When she asks me my answer is wrong until I can prove it even though she doesn't have one.

She thinks I "make stuff up" like why the sun appears red at sunset or some other simple fact and then refuses to believe me until I can show her someone else said it too.

One of my favorites is she'll have a problem with her laptop.  The WiFi is working say.  So she keeps complaining that she doesn't know why it isn't working rather than going over and checking the router or modem.  I go over and reset everything and when it all comes back on she wants to know why it stopped in the first place.  Since I don't have that answer except to say that they are electronic and sometimes they don't work and need reset she keeps asking about all kinds of OTHER reasons like the neighbors on our signal, problems with the cable provider or my my favorite:  something *I* did!  

I told my dad about a year ago that I finally figured out why he says so little when my mother (a lovely Italian woman) argues over every little detail of something.  Its not worth it most of the time.  Let them do it their way and if they're right you didn't argue, and if they're wrong you just go fix it and don't make it look like they were wrong.

But, again, I admit when I'm wrong.  And then I move on.  Something my wife doesn't do as easily.

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-02-2015, 02:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Interesting that none of the experts here are talking about how to handled the situation when the woman ended up being right and they were wrong.

Or did that just never happen?

As far as I know...I'm never right, and when I am I keep my big mouth shut.  

[*Nately120*]

(07-02-2015, 02:40 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: As far as I know...I'm never right, and when I am I keep my big mouth shut.  

In my case even admitting I was never right and/or keeping my mouth shut didn't work.  Oh lordy!

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-02-2015, 02:52 PM)Nately120 Wrote: In my case even admitting I was never right and/or keeping my mouth shut didn't work.  Oh lordy!

I'm kidding though...My wife and I have worked together for 15 of our 17 years together...we have to have good communication skills in order to have lasted this long spending that amount of time per day together.

[StLucieBengal]

(07-02-2015, 01:35 PM)Beaker Wrote: I have one tip for a successful marriage:

1. Pick your battles.

90% of the crap she wants to "discuss" (i.e. argue about or get her way), I really don't care about anyway. It doesn't matter to me what color throw pillows we get, or whether or not we need sconces in the hallway. If I let her have her way on most of the stuff she wants (which don't matter to me), then when I really do want something, she thinks to herself "he usually lets me have my way, this must really be important to him, ok, I'll let him have it". She thinks she is controlling most of the decisions and letting me have a few things to keep me happy, when in reality I get the things I want plus I don't have to listen to the bitching because I didn't let her have the things I don't care about anyway. Simple.

I so live by this same thing.... Thankfully I have someone who isn't selfish. My ex wife was a different story.

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-02-2015, 02:37 PM)GMDino Wrote: I admitted I was wrong.

(07-02-2015, 02:40 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: As far as I know...I'm never right, and when I am I keep my big mouth shut.  

These.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-02-2015, 01:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The archaeological evidence suggests a significant shift in the theology of the Semitic people during the Second Temple Period. Early Semitic theology held a pantheon of deities with each nation having a corresponding deity. Elohim was the deity of the Semitic people, the Israelites, and was the most powerful. While Elohim was the deity worshiped almost exclusively by them, there was the existence of multiple deities. When they returned from their exile and the Second Temple period happened, the archaeological evidence shows a loss of any mention of other deities. They disappear. So during their time away the religion transformed into Judaism from the ancient Semitic religion.

What evidence? I ask this with completely sincerity. From my research (admittedly, it's been awhile and even then it wasn't the most comprehensive research), I've not come across any evidence to suggest that Judaistic worship incorporated the worship of other gods. I am aware that the Israelites often worshiped other gods, but that these deities were not part of Judaism and ran counter to the Judaistic commandment of "Thou shall have no other gods".

I would be most interested to discover the evidence that suggests that Judaism originally incorporated the acceptable worship of multiple gods.

Belsnickel Wrote:The archaeological evidence suggests a significant shift in the theology of the Semitic people during the Second Temple Period. Early 
Now, I don't know what the majority of scholars say in regards to Zoroaster's time frame because I've seen many conflicting opinions on it ranging from 1700 to 500 BCE. I don't know what the majority opinion is on that.

From what I've read, most people seem to think Zoraster was born sometime during the 600s BC. I forget exactly why but IIRC, I think a big chunk of it is with the language and syntax of his writings and how they fit in with that particular time period.

[Belsnickel]

(07-07-2015, 01:06 PM)PhilHos Wrote: What evidence? I ask this with completely sincerity. From my research (admittedly, it's been awhile and even then it wasn't the most comprehensive research), I've not come across any evidence to suggest that Judaistic worship incorporated the worship of other gods. I am aware that the Israelites often worshiped other gods, but that these deities were not part of Judaism and ran counter to the Judaistic commandment of "Thou shall have no other gods".

I would be most interested to discover the evidence that suggests that Judaism originally incorporated the acceptable worship of multiple gods.


From what I've read, most people seem to think Zoraster was born sometime during the 600s BC. I forget exactly why but IIRC, I think a big chunk of it is with the language and syntax of his writings and how they fit in with that particular time period.

You're thinking of the history of Judaism in the wrong way, here. The ancient Semitic religion eventually transitioned into Judaism, but Judaism was never polytheistic. I'm not sure if I'm explaining this well or not.

We know the pantheon of the ancient Semitic people, Semitic being the culture of the area surrounding the Holy Land, consisted of several deities. The people believed that each nation had a deity that oversaw them and the most powerful of these deities was the one for them. This god's name was El or Elohim. This is why as the language of the culture changed and as Judaism rose the word El became the Hebrew word for God. When I say there is evidence of all of this we aren't talking hard and fast evidence that definitively proves anything. What we have is the existence of a pantheon prior to the exile, and a marked decrease in any mention of the other gods upon the return of Semitic people to the region.

It's interesting that you keep bringing up the worship of multiple gods, because even with a pantheon worship was almost exclusively of El/Elohim among the Semitic people as that was the most powerful of the gods and their protector of their nation (thus the "chosen people" aspect). So what you're asking for there isn't evidence of because that wasn't the case. In fact,t he quote you provide is missing something, is it not? "You shall worship no other gods before me." This is seen by some biblical scholars as fingerprints of the ancient Semitic religion recognizing the existence of other gods, but that Yahweh (which merged with El within Israel) is the god of these people and so comes first.

None of this is of course finite because discoveries are made all of the time. This is just what the archaeological evidence leads us to right now. I took a course last summer on the history of the Abrahamic religions at Eastern Mennonite University where I learned most of this in more detail. I knew that there was a transition, but as far as some of the more nitty gritty stuff I didn't know until then. But the long and short here is that Judaism was never polytheistic, but the God of Abraham is the primary deity of the pantheon of the ancient Semitic peoples and the prevalence of monotheism among them, and thus the earliest form of Judaism, did not occur until their return from exile in Babylon and the Second Temple.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-07-2015, 02:39 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You're thinking of the history of Judaism in the wrong way, here. The ancient Semitic religion eventually transitioned into Judaism, but Judaism was never polytheistic. I'm not sure if I'm explaining this well or not.

We know the pantheon of the ancient Semitic people, Semitic being the culture of the area surrounding the Holy Land, consisted of several deities. The people believed that each nation had a deity that oversaw them and the most powerful of these deities was the one for them. This god's name was El or Elohim. This is why as the language of the culture changed and as Judaism rose the word El became the Hebrew word for God. When I say there is evidence of all of this we aren't talking hard and fast evidence that definitively proves anything. What we have is the existence of a pantheon prior to the exile, and a marked decrease in any mention of the other gods upon the return of Semitic people to the region.

It's interesting that you keep bringing up the worship of multiple gods, because even with a pantheon worship was almost exclusively of El/Elohim among the Semitic people as that was the most powerful of the gods and their protector of their nation (thus the "chosen people" aspect). So what you're asking for there isn't evidence of because that wasn't the case. In fact,t he quote you provide is missing something, is it not? "You shall worship no other gods before me." This is seen by some biblical scholars as fingerprints of the ancient Semitic religion recognizing the existence of other gods, but that Yahweh (which merged with El within Israel) is the god of these people and so comes first.

None of this is of course finite because discoveries are made all of the time. This is just what the archaeological evidence leads us to right now. I took a course last summer on the history of the Abrahamic religions at Eastern Mennonite University where I learned most of this in more detail. I knew that there was a transition, but as far as some of the more nitty gritty stuff I didn't know until then. But the long and short here is that Judaism was never polytheistic, but the God of Abraham is the primary deity of the pantheon of the ancient Semitic peoples and the prevalence of monotheism among them, and thus the earliest form of Judaism, did not occur until their return from exile in Babylon and the Second Temple.

When you speak of "Semitic people", are you specifically talking about pre-Abraham?

[Belsnickel]

(07-08-2015, 12:42 PM)PhilHos Wrote: When you speak of "Semitic people", are you specifically talking about pre-Abraham?

No. Semitic people are those that linguistically and culturally came from the region referred to often as The Holy Land. Specifically, I was referring to the Western Semitic people. This exists even in modern day.