Unequally yoked in Corinthian doesn't mean marriage

[TPop]

I appreciate that you responded. Gotquestions.org has been my favorite go to site for questions and answers and I also recommend that site. I did know that Catholic means Universal but my wife said she's Catholic, I said you mean Christian. She was confused. For me I'm a born again Christian, not sure if Catholics claim that as well. For me it's not about a religion, it's about a relationship with the Lord. You've probably heard that as well. Yes, many words have been changed or have multiple meanings today, some for good reasons, others have been co-opted. Worse is actually claiming to belong to an anti-Christ group, organization, or denying Jesus as God incarnate.

I like GotQuestions too!

Religiosity is frowned upon in scripture. There are a number of groups and this is their main attempt at spiritual output.

Peace and Blessings

 

[TPop]

You asked her if she's Christian. Of course she is. But for some reason, Protestant types (Southern Baptists, Pentacostals, etc) seem to twist words to make it sound like Catholics are NOT Christian.

Yea, It's never Roman Catholics claiming to be the only Catholics. They never twist words.

Peace and Blessings

 

[Jimmy It]

It must have been really tough on Lot to be surrounded in a town where everyone was a hell bound fool.



1 Corinthians, 5:9
I wrote to 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. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

I believe it to be easier and less conflicting when we agree on the most important issue in our existence.


Our faith.

Lot was actually referred to as, 'That righteous man,” by Paul.

 

[Valletta]

As I mentioned in my OP, my wife is a non-practicing Catholic as I'm sure a great number of other Catholics are as well. Nothing different with the Protestant Christians as well. My wife seemed confused when I asked her if she was a Christian, she responded with I'm Catholic. It was like she didn't understand that all of God's Children are Christians no matter what their Denomination is, was. I also mentioned that I claim no Denomination no matter what church I might attend. If one is a non-practicing Christian, irregardless of church affiliation, then are they bearing fruit, are they contributing to the growth of God's Kingdom, are they setting a good example to others who are not Christians? What I find difficult to understand, is those like my wife who attended Catholic schools, why don't they know the Bible? I'm not speaking of the entirety of the Bible, just having a basic knowledge and understanding. My concern about her and the perhaps millions of Christians that are Christian In Name Only (CINO). She does listen when I share with her what the Bible says, but so many times, it's like she never heard it. She isn't alone, I've encountered many Protestants and Catholics that don't read, study, or have much knowledge about the Word other than what they hear or see in church. This is a sad state of affair, but even worse, does God know them as Children of His? Yes, to be sure, He knows who are His and who aren't. Then again only He know if they may become His Child in due time.

I agree everyone should at least know Bible basics. That being said, many Protestants are Bible-only while Catholics are not. So in proper Catholic schools, particularly before the culture changed in the late 1960s, the approach to Catholic education would be to emphasize the principles of our religion, which are spelled out in the Catholic Catechism. Now the Catechism relies heavily on the Bible, and so does the Catholic mass liturgy. Thus Catholics typically don't know chapter and verse(a Catholic invention) but the more they go to mass and study the Catechism the more they are exposed to Holy Scripture. But some parts of the Bible they may well never have heard or only have heard once every three years (through the liturgy). I would say starting in the sixties, because of influences of the culture, Catholic children were not even taught the Catechism, Catholic universities took bishops off of their boards, and Catholic schools became more and more like secular schools. The situation seems to be reversing with Catholic schools, there are Catholic Bible classes on EWTN, online, and my parish holds occasional classes.

 

[ThisIsMe123]

why don't they know the Bible?

What makes you think Catholic's don't know the Bible, excerpts from the Bible are read every Sunday at Mass, for instance, "A reading from Matthew"....and 14:13-21 would be recited in front of the Mass....heard this many times.

So where did you get this idea that they don't know the Bible?

 

[ThisIsMe123]

I agree everyone should at least know Bible basics. That being said, many Protestants are Bible-only while Catholics are not.

Again...in the bolded...wrong!

Now the Catechism relies heavily on the Bible

Wait....um, you just contradicted yourself.

 

[Valletta]

Again...in the bolded...wrong!



Wait....um, you just contradicted yourself.

Bible-only meaning sola-scriptura. Catholics are not sola-scriptura.

 

[Valletta]

What makes you think Catholic's don't know the Bible, excerpts from the Bible are read every Sunday at Mass, for instance, "A reading from Matthew"....and 14:13-21 would be recited in front of the Mass....heard this many times.

So where did you get this idea that they don't know the Bible?

The comments applied to someone that went through a Catholic educational system yet did not know some Bible basics. Of course there are Bible knowledgeable Catholics and Protestants. A Catholic who went through the Catholic educational system but didn't study the Bible outside of what is taught in school or at mass could benefit greatly by studying the Bible and gain a deeper understanding of God's covenants and salvation history. You get what you put into it. For example, Melchizedek is the first priest, a high priest, encountered in the Bible. He was also the king of Salem. If you study, you find out Salem was later known as Jerusalem. He offered bread and wine. Jesus, in the first mass, offered his own Body and Blood, which Jesus offered under the appearance of bread and wine. We see, as we do so often in the Bible, the old fulfilled in the new.

 

[BFOJ1950]

Yea, It's never Roman Catholics claiming to be the only Catholics. They never twist words.

Peace and Blessings

From my observation, both listening and seeing, there are Christians in just about any church, it's not the church that makes one a Christian. But God knows the heart and CINO's are most likely in just about any church as well. Folks need to get serious about growing in the Word and living more Christ-like for we are near or in the End Times.

 

[lismore]

That being said, many Protestants are Bible-only while Catholics are not.

Hello! Coming from a Catholic family background myself I would say Roman Catholics see their source of authority as coming from Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium. They see Salvation as being by faith and works. Many Evangelicals might see the Scriptures as their sole source of authority and Salvation by grace alone. The Roman Catholic scriptures are also larger, containing many apocryphal books. The Catholic Bible has 73 books, the Evangelical or Protestant Bible 66 books. These can be significant differences to work out, a different source of authority, a different means of salvation and a different Biblical Canon.

The gentleman in post #14 might be encountering these differences and wondering how to work out his marriage on a daily basis. I hope they can find an equilibrium in their faith and have a happy life together.

God Bless All

 

[lismore]

We should date unbelievers if we can't find anyone in the church.

IMHO that is bad advice.

1 Corinthians 6:14-18 is a New Testament passage that forbids this, it ask what fellowship does Christ have with Satan, or light with darkness?

At one time we were dead in trespasses and sins, now in Christ we have been made alive. Of what use then is this spiritual necrophilia, seeking out someone who is dead in their trespasses and sins as a marriage partner? Perhaps if a believer has much in common with an unbeliever they may have some deep soul searching to do. Birds of a feather flock together.

If you look at the OT you can see how serious this issue is taken:

Malachi 2: 11 Judah has not been faithful. A very sinful thing has been done in Israel and in Jerusalem. For Judah has made unclean the holy place of the Lord, which He loves. And he has married the daughter of a strange god. 12 May the Lord cut off from the tents of Jacob every man who does this, even if he brings a gift in worship to the Lord of All.

Remember also what happened to Solomon, when he married pagans. Solomon, a wise man could not prevent himself from being dragged over the abyss by his pagan wives:

1 King 11:1-13 King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh’s daughter—Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians and Hittites. They were from nations about which the Lord had told the Israelites, “You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods.” Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been. He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. So Solomon did evil in the eyes of the Lord; he did not follow the Lord completely, as David his father had done.

On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable god of Moab, and for Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. He did the same for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and offered sacrifices to their gods.

The Lord became angry with Solomon because his heart had turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice. Although he had forbidden Solomon to follow other gods, Solomon did not keep the Lord’s command. So the Lord said to Solomon, “Since this is your attitude and you have not kept my covenant and my decrees, which I commanded you, I will most certainly tear the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your subordinates. Nevertheless, for the sake of David your father, I will not do it during your lifetime. I will tear it out of the hand of your son. Yet I will not tear the whole kingdom from him, but will give him one tribe for the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem, which I have chosen.”

God Bless You

 

[bèlla]

It has been proven over time that inequitable pairings have a greater impact on believers than the other party. Lee Strobel covers it well in Spiritual Mismatch. If that doesn't sway you from your path read the firsthand accounts of others who followed suit. There's a plethora of Christian books and ministries devoted to the subject. If you continue beyond that point you'll encounter the 'know better effect'.

That's the practical consequence of disobedience. You assume it will take a year or so but you're deluded. The average is 14 and it may be greater now. Fourteen years of toiling before they give their life to God. Men fare better and their spouses usually move quicker than the reversed scenario. But I've spoken to women who waited 20 years. You could raise a child in that period. It's frightening to contemplate.

The bible warns us about the heart. When it's engaged we see the bright side and downplay the challenges. We often assume it will go our way although experience says otherwise. But we'll be the exception we tell ourselves.

There's a reason we're warned against these pairings. Whether they're romantic or not. The root differs and that's the problem. You're relying on them to do the right thing but they don't have the foundation in God you possess.

Some people resist our efforts in ways we wouldn't expect. Some grow hostile, angry and belligerent. They don't want to hear it anymore. And some walk away and find another who shares their perspective. You can save yourself a lot of heartache and frustration by choosing companions rooted in the Rock.

~bella

 

[Valletta]

Hello! Coming from a Catholic family background myself I would say Roman Catholics see their source of authority as coming from Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium. They see Salvation as being by faith and works. Many Evangelicals might see the Scriptures as their sole source of authority and Salvation by grace alone. The Roman Catholic scriptures are also larger, containing many apocryphal books. The Catholic Bible has 73 books, the Evangelical or Protestant Bible 66 books. These can be significant differences to work out, a different source of authority, a different means of salvation and a different Biblical Canon.

The gentleman in post #14 might be encountering these differences and wondering how to work out his marriage on a daily basis. I hope they can find an equilibrium in their faith and have a happy life together.

God Bless All

The Catholic Church chose the books of the Bible in a process that spanned centuries, and the final canon of 73 books was finalized in the late 300s, in the very same order, as the ones we use today. All apocryphal text was rejected. Protestants dropped seven books of the canon in reformation time (they took the order of books from Catholics and that order is part of Protestant tradition today), although the books were physically contained within the KJV until the 1800s.

 

[lismore]

The Catholic Church chose the books of the Bible in a process that spanned centuries, and the final canon of 73 books was finalized in the late 300s, in the very same order, as the ones we use today. All apocryphal text was rejected. Protestants dropped seven books of the canon in reformation time (they took the order of books from Catholics and that order is part of Protestant tradition today), although the books were physically contained within the KJV until the 1800s.

Good to hear from you! I hope you're day is going well. I checked in the copy of the Catholic bible I still have from the old days, it contains seven Apocryphal books: Tobit, Judith, 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Book of Wisdom.

But the main point for the gentleman in post #14 is that if he's doing a bible study with his wife they may well be reading from significantly different bibles and with a different mindset. Salvation by grace or salvation by faith and works. It may well be an issue to overcome. God Bless You

 

[Valletta]

Good to hear from you! I hope you're day is going well. I checked in the copy of the Catholic bible I still have from the old days, it contains seven Apocryphal books: Tobit, Judith, 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Book of Wisdom.

But the main point for the gentleman in post #14 is that if he's doing a bible study with his wife they may well be reading from significantly different bibles and with a different mindset. Salvation by grace or salvation by faith and works. It may well be an issue to overcome. God Bless You

Again, all apocryphal text, and there was plenty, was rejected by the Catholic Church. Only God-breathed text was chosen. It is nice to read the actual story that Hebrews refers to, those who were tortured for the belief in resurrection, which is one of my favorite passages in the Bible and is found only in 2 Maccabees. To me it would be an extremely unlikely outcome for a person to come away with a different mindset because of those seven books.