"H" asks:
Had this question posed by a member of one of my other groups. Anyone have any suggestions?"My girl-friend is not a christian and recently I have been struggeling a bit with it. Nothing serious, but I would like to know if any of you know of any books or articles that deal with having a partner of a different religion? Preferable focussed on lesbian couples, of course, but anything is fine. I can't seem to find anything..."
- Thanks!
John Of AllFaith wrote:
Hi "H",
If a person is a Christian who wishes to observe the biblical requirements, the answer is an easy one:
II Cor.6:
14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?The Bible does not reject same gendered marriages (see my Grace Inclusive Website for more on this) but it does reject Christian marriages with unbelievers or even dating. The biblical directive even goes further, saying that Christians should minimize contact with unbelievers in all areas of life.
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
The Bible ALSO teaches us that I Cor 10:23
"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."
As Believers, we are free. That freedom brings responsibility however and Christians must be very cautious with interfaith dating if they wish to maintain their Christian practice, because "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (Gal. 5:9)
"A" wrote:
When I was in prison, my pastor never once brought his Bible to any of our visits, nor did he ever quote Scripture at any of our visits. One of my "by-the-book" cell-mates once "observed," "You're not taking your Bible to your Minister Visit?" I relayed this "observation" to my pastor, who responded, "Well you can tell him that your pastor didn't bring his Bible, either."
That is, I knew what "the biblical requirements" were. I'd had them drilled into my head from I-don't-know- when. I'd heard them quoted ad infinitum. Quotes, quotes, quotes...with no discussion or role-modelling about how people incorporated "the biblical requirements" into their everyday human lives. I suspect many people have been quoted many things many times. That's what the religious (not the spiritual) leadership did in Jesus' day: they quoted "the biblical requirements. "That approach wasn't bringing people into God's grace. Instead, it was demanding penance when people offended, i.e., when they didn't abide by "the biblical requirements."
I think that when we quote this, that, or the other thing, it's not quite the same as offering practical, everyday-life guidance. It's the classic "legalism versus grace" situation.
Consider the Davidic stories: much grace, no legalism. We can quote things till we're blue in the face. At the heart of that legalistic approach is the implication that if someone isn't within the letter of whatever we're quoting, all is lost, for we're only saying what shouldn't be done (legalism), versus helping someone understand a deeper meaning for what could be done (grace).
In Jesus' day, the religious leadership (that was not spiritual), legalistically focused on what shouldn't be done on the Sabbath. They focused on what shouldn't be done in everyday life.
There was no grace-full focus on what should be done.
In my experience, I've had police, detectives, parole/probation officers, and court-sanctioned therapists drill into my head what I shouldn't do, where I shouldn't go, what I shouldn't think. In Jesus' day, we knew these people as the priests-of-the-culture. If you committed an offence, they demanded penance. Those priests-of-the- culture are still with us today, except now we know them as politicians, law-enforcement entities, officers-of- the-court, and people like court-sanctioned therapists whose livelihoods depend on treating hurting, healing, recovering people with the heavy hand of legalism.
That's why I go to church, and to 12-Step meetings, and meet with my Stephen Minister, and go to a Christian-fellowship programme for recovering offenders: for the grace. If we're not speaking God's grace, we are less like Christ and more like the legalists.
I used to abide by legalism, by the don'ts. It didn't work. Ultimately, eventually, anyone who lives by legalism will fail by such standards, and there will be harsh internal and external punishment, and penance will be demanded. That's why I choose to live by the do's, by grace. Knowing the don'ts is one thing. Living by the do's is healthier.
Peace, "A"
John Of AllFaith wrote:
Hi "A,"
While I agree with several of your points, I think you are throwing the 'baby out with the bathwater' so to speak.
I did address the freedom that is in Christ by my reference to I Cor 10:23 ("All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not).
And in my statement that, "As Believers, we are free. That freedom brings responsibility however and Christians must be very cautious with interfaith dating if they wish to maintain their Christian practice, because "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (Gal. 5:9)")"
I'm not suggesting that anyone should be a legalist here, however the Bible IS the primary guide Christians are to follow. We are to follow it in love and in the freedom of God's grace to be sure, but we are not to ignore or reject the plain teachings of the scriptures either.
Practically speaking, people in mixed-religious marriages (regardless of what religions those are) tend to have difficulties following their own religious system. This is why virtually every religion opposes it.
If therefore the Christian wishes to obey the central text of the Christian faith, i.e. the New Testament, and if the person wishes to avoid hindrances to her Christian walk, then it is my opinion that inter-religious relationships are best avoided.
We are all free to do as we wish. "H" asked for opinions and this is mine.
"A" replies:
Hi Pastor John,
I agree. Different approaches can be effective, provided we combine scriptural guidance with practical, basic moral guidance that distinguishes itself because it is characterised and informed by scriptural guidance and our modern, "now"-time experience.
I hope "H" will share with this group how things are going for her.
"M" adds to the discussion:
I just thought I'd input my 2 cents. Neither my husband nor I was a Christian when we got married, so it was a moot point. We both became Christians, but I know that even if he hadn't, I wouldn't leave him, because unless your partner cheats on you or beats on you, divorce is wrong. I also empathize with Rev. "L's" position, as I am bisexual, but I have been married and monogamous for 12 years. I don't tell my conservative mom my sexual orientation, because it would just cause trouble. Besides, we fall in love w/a person, not a gender.
John Of AllFaith replies:
Hi Marilyn and all,
Just to clarify my opinion a tad, the couple in question are not married nor even engaged, as the situation was presented. They seem to be casual girlfriends and the Christian partner is debating whether to kick the relationship up to the next level.
If they were married, I'd agree with you completely ["M"], as would Paul who says in I Cor.: Such isn't the case here however. Clearly, as Andy pointed out and you seem to imply, these women must follow the lights they are given. I was responding from the perspective of the Word. The Bible says we should not be "unevenly yoked with unbelievers. " It says that if a Believer has (present tense) a non-Christian spouse, and
if that spouse wishes to maintain the marriage, the Christian should not divorce him/her on that ground.
It also says by the way, that the only legitimate cause for divorce is adultery. It does not include physical abuse as a reason to divorce. Personally, if my spouse was beating me, I'd leave whether the Bible specifically says I should or not.
Andy's point is well taken. We are to follow the spirit of the law, not the letter, at the same time, we are to obey the Scriptures. Each of us must decide how to do this in our own lives.
"M" replies:
Absolutely, I totally agree, but I wasn't sure how serious their relationship was.
"H" clarifies:
Thank you all for your input. My friend is indeed in a relationship with this other woman, and has been for about two years. You input has been helpful.
As a bit of background on myself, I was partnered for 7 1/2 years with a non-believer. She left almost 6 years ago to be with another woman. I have since had two brief relationships, both with believers. One ended with the death of my partner. The other ended on unpleasant terms, instigated by her. I believe I got into that relationship too soon after the death of my partner, and blame is not all on her. I take responsibility for my end of the breakup. At
this point in time, it is just a fact.
Again, thank you all for you input. I knew I could count on this board to give a good, balanced response to my friend.
Hi "H"!
Thanks for letting us know how things have transpired. I hear much discussion about how the "only" way we can be faithful to God through our sexual _expression is within the paradigm of a monogamous relationship, or within the nuclear-family model. I believe it is very much possible to be faithful to God through our sexual _expression. I read an excellent book, about Christian ethics in this regard, called "Sex & the Church: Gender, Homosexuality, & the Transformation of Christian Ethics," by Kathy Rudy (Beacon Press). I encourage you to locate a copy - perhaps at your public library or by interlibrary loan - and read it, and see what you get from it.
Take care,
God Bless.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
"H"
"A"
Click to join glbtchristians
Visit The Not-so Sacred Book of John Not The Apostle