H2O2:

Okay Jesoul, since you want to get technical, are you insinuating that joining, bonding, uniting etc only occur in marriage situations

 Of course not, it can be in business ventures, collaborations etc . . . But marriage is the tightest yoke 2 people can ever share. If you don't consider marriage a yoke then I don't know what else qualfies.

lol . . . okay if you prefer:

Stay away from people who are not followers of the Lord! Can someone who is good get along with someone who is evil? Are light and darkness the same? Is Christ a friend of Satan? Can people who follow the Lord have anything in common with those who don't? Do idols belong in the temple of God? We are the temple of the living God, as God himself says, "I will live with these people

  I think that bible version is even 'harsher'. The KJV is the oldest and 'purest' of the bible versions, and it uses "yoke".

JeSoul:

Busy,
   you did not answer the simple questions I asked you:

- In verse 39 it says explicity a woman must marry a christian: "A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord."

>>>>  Do tell me why marriage with a non-christian will be allowed in verse 12 but not in verse 39? <<<<.

.

i dont know,maybe we should ask paul dat gave both scriptures

Sweetie, marriage was not under discussion in that specific context that spoke of "yoke" .  That is your own groundnut you dey throway inside, abeg; I was just hoping you can rationalize it.

JeSoul:

lol . . . okay if you prefer:

Stay away from people who are not followers of the Lord! Can someone who is good get along with someone who is evil? Are light and darkness the same? Is Christ a friend of Satan? [color=#990000]Can people who follow the Lord have anything in common with those who don't? Do idols belong in the temple of God? We are the temple of the living God, as God himself says, "I will live with these people[/color]

  I think that bible version is even 'harsher'. The KJV is the oldest and 'purest' of the bible versions, and it uses "yoke".

so wat r u still doing wt unbelievers jesoul?

JeSoul:

 Of course not, it can be in business ventures, collaborations etc . . . But marriage is the tightest yoke 2 people can ever share. If you don't consider marriage a yoke then I don't know what else qualfies.

Of course, because in your opinion marriage is the tightest yoke 2 people can have, it[yoke] should not be applied just as uniformly, and strictly, in our other dealings  

H2O2:

Sweetie, marriage was not under discussion in that specific context that spoke of "yoke" .  That is your own groundnut you dey throway inside, abeg; I was just hoping you can rationalize it.

it wasnt,the members of d church in corinth,were getting associated wt idolaters,and dat was why paul gave that scripture,marriage is not found in dat context

busybein:


i don't know,maybe we should ask paul that gave both scriptures

 Exactly Busy. Paul would not contradict himself like that. The problem therefore is with our interpretation of the two verses.
Hang with me for a sec here:

If you say marriage with a non-christian is permitted using verses 12-16 then you get a contradiction with verse 39.
but if you say that the situation in 12-16 is where one converts during marriage then you get no problem reconciling that with vs 39. Hope this makes sense.

H2O2:

Of course, because in your opinion marriage is the tightest yoke 2 people can have, it[yoke] should not be applied just as uniformly, and strictly, in our other dealings

Okay Peroxide , what in your opinion would qualify as a "yoke" between 2 people?

@david

ok,let say i accept it,but my prob is why r we trying to make it happen only in marriage?why not in our general life?

It is evident that members of the church were participating with pagans in some of their rituals,hence dat scripture,correct me if im wrong?

it wasnt talking about marriage alone,was it?

busybein:

it wasnt,the members of d church in corinth,were getting associated wt idolaters,and that was why paul gave that scripture,marriage is not found in that context

Thanks.
Moreover, if we look more closely at 2 Corinthians 6 verses 14:17 it states

14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial[a]? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."
17 [b]"Therefore come out from them
     and be separate, says the Lord.

Look very well at verse 17 where you are commanded to "come out from them and be separate".  Is this not in contradiction with 1 Corinthians where you are commanded not to divorce him (if you are willing to live with him)? And also in contradiction with Matthew 19:9 where fornication is the allowable grounds for divorce?

busybein:

it wasnt,the members of d church in corinth,were getting associated wt idolaters,and that was why paul gave that scripture,marriage is not found in that context

  Honey, "associating with" is VERY different from "yoking with". By your standard Jesus was in the wrong becos he frequently 'associated' with sinners.

busybein:

@david

ok,let say i accept it,but my prob is why r we trying to make it happen only in marriage?why not in our general life?

It is evident that members of the church were participating with pagans in some of their rituals,hence that scripture,correct me if I'm wrong?

it wasnt talking about marriage alone,was it?

 You're right, it wasn't just marriage alone. But any situation where you 'join' or 'unite' yourself with an unbeliever.

jesoul no it doesnt?tell me why u r picking on marriage alone,wat about our daily life?dat is my point,paul cannot contradict himself,but its d same paul dat said its better to remain single and then said get married

listen it takes 6th sense to understand d bible

all i wanna know is,where was it writted conversion DURING MARRIAGE?

na u come dey add ur own word put for bible

JeSoul:


  Honey, "associating with" is VERY different from "yoking with". By your standard Jesus was in the wrong because he frequently 'associated' with sinners.
 You're right, it wasn't just marriage alone. But any situation where you 'join' or 'unite' yourself with an unbeliever.

My dear, "associating with" is still a notable form of "bond or unity", which is what you described earlier as "yoking".

H2O2:

Thanks.
Moreover, if we look more closely at 2 Corinthians 6 verses 14:17 it states

14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial[a]? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."
17 [b]"Therefore come out from them
     and be separate, says the Lord.

Look very well at verse 17 where you are commanded to "come out from them and be separate".  Is this not in contradiction with 1 Corinthians where you are [b]commanded not to divorce him (if you are willing to live with him)?[/b] And also in contradiction with Matthew 19:9 where fornication is the allowable grounds for divorce?

 Bingo. and this is why David took the time to highlight that that specific portion in 1 Cor7 Paul painstakingly highlighted that that bit was "his personal opinion" not a direct command. Because often situations are not always black and white, every marriage circumstance is unique and Paul was giving his advice there.

busybein:

@david

ok,let say i accept it,but my prob is why r we trying to make it happen only in marriage?why not in our general life?

It is evident that members of the church were participating with pagans in some of their rituals,hence that scripture,correct me if I'm wrong?

it wasnt talking about marriage alone,was it?

Of course it wasnt applicable to strictly marriage alone but then you wonder why Paul was particular in verse 39 that if the woman remarry she must only marry a man already in the Lord. I mean if Paul really didnt care or didnt think it was important to God he wouldnt be so specific now would he?

I think we need to take important note of the terminology used - "yoke". What does it really connote? Mere friendship or associations?

One important thint to also take into consideration, God constantly refers to the relationship between Himself and the church (believers) as that between a man and his wife. The church is regularly refered to as his "bride" in the epistles making herself ready for the marriage supper of the Lamb.
This must mean that marriage is very important to a believer, its not something God would want to triffle with.

why are we even arguing?

He that will be "unequally yoked" (whatever you think it means) let him be yoked still.

JeSoul:


  Honey, "associating with" is VERY different from "yoking with". By your standard Jesus was in the wrong because he frequently 'associated' with sinners,

jesoul,read dat bible well ehn,and tell me d reason why dat passage was written in d bible to everything there is a root,go down to the root and tell me if it was talking about marriage, it was used cos of xtians dat were getting them self associated wt pagans

jesoul association can also mean connection,same way as yoke,so im yet to see d difference

if pauls opinion was just an opinion or was not so important i don't think it should be in d bible

Jesoul, it is paul's advise? Even though he clearly says "SAYS THE LORD"  

I tire for you o.

busybein:

if pauls opinion was not so important i don't think it should be in d bible

Lol that too. And I don't think God would be very happy with Paul's use of his name in vain.

H2O2:

Jesoul, it is paul's advise? Even though he clearly says "SAYS THE LORD"  

I tire for you o.

H2O2:

My dear, "associating with" is still a notable form of "bond or unity", which is what you described earlier as "yoking".

 
 . . . hehe according only to Peroxide    

I spend time with my unsaved friends, I associate with them, we hang out occasionally, I might go to their birthday party or their graduation, they might come to my house for dinner. I love them and as long as I'm not falling away, I associate with them.
Look at what it says in just the previous chapter:
"I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world."

There is nuthin wrong with "associating" with unbelievers. But will I marry them? no. That will be to yoke myself. Dost thou not see this difference?  

busybein:

if pauls opinion was just an opinion or was not so important i don't think it should be in d bible

  ah ah David has already gone over this now 


Peroxide & Busy if you're not careful I'll YOKE the two of you together   

JeSoul:

 

Peroxide & Busy if you're not careful I'll YOKE the two of you together   

hahahahhahah u no well,im already yoked ojare

i need more proof,david has not really convinced me alot

busybein:

hahahahhahah u no well,I'm already yoked ojare

i need more proof,david has not really convinced me alot

you mean you are already "associated"?

I cant convince u any better . . .

the same verse says - can two work together except they be agreed?

God's perfect will for marriage is - and they shall be one flesh

Can you be one flesh with someone you are not spiritually in agreement with? I think not.

busybein:

hahahahhahah u no well, I'm already yoked ojare

i need more proof,david has not really convinced me alot

lol . . . then I'm sure you know better than us 'unyoked' that marriage na real lockdown . Anyways if you have loose time, read and do some research on the matter, lots of online resources. I'm sure you'll understand all drama we've been trying to say the past 3 pages    

@david

an unbeliever can still be in agreement wt his/her partner

it's not only on xtianity

what makes people unique is their individuality. Your wife doesn't have to share exactly the same ideas as you otherwise, there will be no such thing as marriage, or even friendship, in the world. So, all the talk of spiritual, emotional, blah blah "agreement" is all trash. Agreement does count but Tolerance counts the most. I'm sure most of you bigots sometimes will disagree with members of your family but you have to deal with it and tolerate because you can't "divorce" them. lol

@ OP, my advice to you is to find out her stance on the matter. If she wants to marry you despite her father, then go for it!! but move far away from her dad. He won't live in the marriage with you so his opinion shouldn't affect your decision unless you plan to depend on him or one reason or another (financially etc). lol

to give you presonal examples,
My former neighbors are a family that practice both christianity and islam. The father is muslim and the wife is christian and they live together in peace with their kids. Their alfa comes to their flat (or apartment?) to teach the kids the koran on wednesdays and the kids come with us to church on sundays. Eventually the children will grow up and decide for themselves which religion they will eventually profess after seeing both sides of the coin.
In fact, my other neighbor is a muslim family and their daughter is christian and we go to the same church as well.
In fact,the house I lived in back in Nigeria is a mix of christian and muslim and we all got along, shared food on each others' holidays watched soccer together etc
so I don't see what the big deal is with all these religious animosity!!!! religion is a personal matter and people shouldn't let it interfere too much with their public interactions.

@busybein,
you say unbelievers and believers can be in agreement in certain issues.But in marriage,they are never in agreement;hence the differing faiths.And God has said that in marriage,the two shall be one flesh,and that is based on agreement which clearly is not possible in the scenario u are hailing.
Now,a question I'd like to ask u and hope for an honest answer:
The person u are married/yoked to,is he a believer or not?

@JeSoul: « #117 on: Today at 12:03:34 AM »  

Quote from: H2O2 on Yesterday at 11:56:39 PM
My dear, "associating with" is still a notable form of "bond or unity", which is what you described earlier as "yoking".


 . . . hehe according only to Peroxide    

I spend time with my unsaved friends,

My Poet laureate inside an Israeli F15 or 16 Jet, know that the these "unbelievers" you associate with, also considered you an "unbeliever." If they are Muslims, they call you a "Kafiri." Kafiri is a very direct and intensed in meaning. It means the person denies and hides the truth.

I associate with them, we hang out occasionally, I might go to their birthday party or their graduation, they might come to my house for dinner. I love them and as long as I'm not falling away, I associate with them.
Look at what it says in just the previous chapter:
"I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world."

I wonder if this does not described an average Christian or most of those who will chalk Christianity as their religion?

There is nuthin wrong with "associating" with unbelievers. But will I marry them? no. That will be to yoke myself. Dost thou not see this difference?  

Interesting. The Jews says the Christians are idol worshippers. The Jews do not say Muslims are Idolators. The Muslim says that the Jews and the Christians are disbelievers, along with the rest of them. Since the Jews could not even accuse the Muslims, does it matter what the Christians say about Muslims? Afterall the Christians books of religion were written by Jews. The lord of the Christians was a human Jew. LOL.

ttalks:

@busybein,
you say unbelievers and believers can be in agreement in certain issues.[b]But in marriage,they are neve[/b]r in agreement;hence the differing faiths.And God has said that in marriage,the two shall be one flesh,and that is based on agreement which clearly is not possible in the scenario u are hailing.
Now,a question I'd like to ask u and hope for an honest answer:
The person u are married/yoked to,is he a believer or not?

said who?pls tell me,who told u they cant be in agreement?

and what makes u think believers can be in agreement?

listen marrying a believer does not gurantee a successful marriage,and marrying an unbeliever does not guarantee failure in marriage,even so called pastors and bishops are not in togedaness wt their wives

what is this agreement we r talking about?it can simply mean :both hearts uniting,coming togeda and trying to make or achieve a peaceful and loving home and all there is to it

busybein:

said who?please tell me,who told u they can't be in agreement?

and what makes u think believers can be in agreement?


listen marrying a believer does not gurantee a successful marriage,and marrying an unbeliever does not guarantee failure in marriage,even so called pastors and bishops are not in togedaness wt their wives

what is this agreement we r talking about?it can simply mean :both hearts uniting,coming togeda and trying to make or achieve a peaceful and loving home and all there is to it

thank you!

agreement ko agreement ni