Christianity ruins a relationship ....Alpha courses?

[Dave Davenport]

I'd say give her a copy of Dawkin's The God Delusion and scarper!

 

[Tetedelacourse]

I don't get it. Is it the idea of marriage or a bit of rumpy-pumpy which has forced her to air her views / demands?

So he's good enough to get on well with and be considered a close friend, but no more? How does she decide where the line is drawn?

I'm only confused by this particular situation by the way, not by the whole faith vs no faith debate.

 

[Riding in Circles]

I don't get it. Is it the idea of marriage or a bit of rumpy-pumpy which has forced her to air her views / demands?

So he's good enough to get on well with and be considered a close friend, but no more? How does she decide where the line is drawn?

I'm only confused by this particular situation by the way, not by the whole faith vs no faith debate.

An accurate scripture quote would be 2 Corinthians 6:14 "Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?"

Friends is one thing but a relationship steps into the boundaries of a committed partnership or a "yoking" of people together. That is what she is concerned about.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

The bible does not forbid relationships with non Christians but it strongly advises against it, which given the subject of the thread you can see is resonable advice.

It doesn't even say that though - what Corinthians says, and this is the only book of the New Testament to mention it AFAIK, is that good people should not chose 'bad company' or be 'yoked together with unbelievers.' That's Paul anyway, and Paul's message always seemed to be very different from what Jesus is reported to have said. The Pauline version of Christianity always seemed much more divisive to me...

The only other thing that sometimes get quoted is from Proverbs, but Proverbs is hardly mainstream Christian doctrine.

 

[Fnaar]

My aunty used to be a nun (true) but she got out of the habit (taking opportunity to lighten the thread with a little inane humour )

 

[Tetedelacourse]

An accurate scripture quote would be 2 Corinthians 6:14 "Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?"

Friends is one thing but a relationship steps into the boundaries of a committed partnership or a "yoking" of people together. That is what she is concerned about.

So she should be yoked before she's yolked.

I'm none the wiser. Does the bible outline what constitutes a fellowship? You've inferred it as a committed partnership, but that is open to interpretation too. When are you officially "yoked"? It's hard (for me) not to see her behaviour as anything other than self-righteous in spite of her feelings for the guy. It's definitely not lawless.

Quite interesting though, good post Bobg

 

[Tetedelacourse]

My aunty used to be a nun (true) but she got out of the habit (taking opportunity to lighten the thread with a little inane humour )

Swiftly followed with crude punnery - in itself almost a pun.

 

[ChrisKH]

I have had the same "lessons" as bobg. I can neither confirm or deny whether catholics are hotter in bed than non-catholics.

Interestingly, now I'm some years down the line with this experiment I can honestly say my wife has never asked me to convert. In fact she said 'don't' because I would be an insufferable arse if I did and would make her go to mass on a daily basis. I know a lot of people who are married and one partner is a practising catholic and the other isn't. Some go to mass together. Some don't. These relationships seem very strong to me. Even the catholic church doesn't force you to marry another catholic.

 

[Riding in Circles]

So she should be yoked before she's yolked.

I'm none the wiser. Does the bible outline what constitutes a fellowship? You've inferred it as a committed partnership, but that is open to interpretation too. When are you officially "yoked"? It's hard (for me) not to see her behaviour as anything other than self-righteous in spite of her feelings for the guy. It's definitely not lawless.

Quite interesting though, good post Bobg

When it says lawless it is talking about someone who does not follow the law of God, i.e. a non believer, fellowship again is talking about believers being in close communion so how can a non believer be part of that communion. In a relationship the parties should be relatively equal on a spiritual basis, however if that progresses to marriage then the man assumes the role of spiritual head of the household, it could be problematic if the woman is spiritually more astute, Christianity isn't an extra part of most peoples lives, it is the central aspect, so I would say I am a Christian who is also a cyclist, not a cyclist that is also a Christian.

I hope that makes some sense.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

When it says lawless it is talking about someone who does not follow the law of God, i.e. a non believer, fellowship again is talking about believers being in close communion so how can a non believer be part of that communion. In a relationship the parties should be relatively equal on a spiritual basis, however if that progresses to marriage then the man assumes the role of spiritual head of the household, it could be problematic if the woman is spiritually more astute, Christianity isn't an extra part of most peoples lives, it is the central aspect, so I would say I am a Christian who is also a cyclist, not a cyclist that is also a Christian.

I hope that makes some sense.

Ta. So... was she wrong to lead the man on knowing that he'd never be yokable? Or was it a vain hope that he would be? Either way, doesn't seem very nice. Or was she naive in that she didn't realise he was harbouring / would harbour these feelings for her until it was too late?

Why would the man be the spiritual head of the household then? Seems a bit draconian to me. Is that what you believe Catrike, as a cycling Christian?

Maybe I should go on an Alpha course!

 

[Riding in Circles]

Ta. So... was she wrong to lead the man on knowing that he'd never be yokable? Or was it a vain hope that he would be? Either way, doesn't seem very nice. Or was she naive in that she didn't realise he was harbouring / would harbour these feelings for her until it was too late?

Why would the man be the spiritual head of the household then? Seems a bit draconian to me. Is that what you believe Catrike, as a cycling Christian?

Maybe I should go on an Alpha course!

Maybe she fell before she thought about it, it happens, maybe she thought they were just going to be friends, who knows? Only her.

I'm not going to get into the whole sexism thing as I think the bible is pretty clear that everyone is equal regardless of sex, in as much as men and women are equal but different, which I think is true in a lot of non spiritual ways as well, in a marriage there has to be a way of resolving a stalemate at times so the man gets the casting vote while remembering he must love his wife as he loves his own body because by not caring for his wife he does not care for himself, the union of marriage making the people as one, so even in having the casting vote he can only use it in love and consideration, not as a way of making his wife submit to his will.

And yes I do believe all that and more.

 

[Bug]

I think it may be a little unfair, without access to all of the information, to assume that the lady in question is basing this decision on a purely doctrinal basis. Yes, there is an argument for this standpoint if you read Paul's letters as a universal teaching for all Christians, rather than personal letters to individual churches, but even this is not clear-cut - as others have explained.

However, over-and-above this are the practical aspects that one has to think about when thoughts turn from a relationship to marriage. For example, if the woman gives up work to become a full-time mum, how is the husband going to react to charitable giving to the church from his pay-packet? Prayer is an important part of Christian life - not being able to pray with the person closest to you might be very hard for some people. How would the husband feel about their children being exposed to Christian teaching, which he may think is just a bunch of fairy stories. These are just some issues that may cause problems in a marriage which, for a Christian (although I'm not implying it wouldn't be the same for an atheist) is a union which cannot be broken except in very limited circumstances.

Not that I'm saying that marriages between people of different/no religions don't work - of course they can - but I guess it depends on individual circumstances.

In my case, both my wife and I are Christians and even the fact that she is more literal in her interpretation of scripture than me can cause the odd disagreement. So, I can see how someone who might think it's all fairies Vs another who really, deeply believes could be problematic

 

[rich p]

Nothing to do with this directly but Jonathan Edwards, the triple jumper, wore his deeply held beliefs on his sleeve even to the point at one stage of not competing on Sundays but managed to lose his faith. He had to give up doing Songs of Praise and eventually said it had been his wife who was the reason he had adopted such strong views.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

so the man gets the casting vote

That is all from Paul and not what Jesus taught at all... but then this is one of the reasons why stopped being a Pauline Christian. I had a go at being a Thomasian Gnostic, but that was just silly, so eventually I had to admit that Christianity was just a load of old politics and some way past its sell by date.

I certainly can't accept any religion that is based on the fundamental inequality of men and women.

 

[domtyler]

Nothing to do with this directly but Jonathan Edwards, the triple jumper, wore his deeply held beliefs on his sleeve even to the point at one stage of not competing on Sundays but managed to lose his faith. He had to give up doing Songs of Praise and eventually said it had been his wife who was the reason he had adopted such strong views.

Yeah, I think this is prevalent in our society. I.e. the women are the actual religious members of the family with the man just going along with it so long as he gets his dinner on the table and his leg over on Saturday nights.