“A little less conversation, a little more action please
All this aggravation ain’t satisfactioning me…” – Elvis Presley.
Contrary to what Elvis Presley says, less conversation does not necessarily lead to more action. When God cannot be present in our conversations, we cannot expect any healthy progress in our spiritual lives.
Sometimes, we wonder why Christians come down hard on people who have romantic relationships with unbelievers. Christians are accused of labeling people who have non-Christian boyfriends or girlfriends – judgmentally tagging them as “unequally-yoked”. A justification is demanded.
Let’s go back to my last post, where Nehemiah kicked up a fuss about losing the “language of Judah”. Let me try to explain the biblical position against unequally yoked relationships, without using the New Testament.
Here is the simple rationale: The Israelites are rightly afraid of losing the presence of God in their lives along with the disappearance of the Hebrew language. Similarly, we should be afraid of losing the presence of God in our souls, if God is absent even in our everyday language. It all boils down to the issue of conversation.
To the Israelites, language was a barrier. God cannot be present in a husband-wife or parent-child relationship if the Hebrew language was not shared. Rightfully so. How can God be in the picture of such a relationship, if even reading of His Word together is not possible? How can the unbelieving spouse come to know God? How can the non-Hebrew speaking children learn about God?
For us, language is not a barrier. God’s Word is available today in English, Malay, and Chinese. But the question is, is God present in our relationships, romantic or platonic, even if both are speaking the same language? Consider the following questions:
1. If it is already hard for God to be talked about in the conversations of Christian families, how much harder will it be in families with unequally-yoked parents?
2. If it is already awkward for God to be mentioned among Christians friends of the same gender, how much more awkward will it be to a non-Christian person of our interest from the opposite sex?
3. If it is already strange for God to be preached in evangelism, how much stranger will it be in a romantic relationship?
4. If it is already hard for Christian parents to tell their children about God, how much harder will it be when you have an unbelieving spouse?
5. If it is already difficult to have meaningful conversations about God among Christians, how much harder will it be to live with an unbeliever for life?
The answer to all of the above, I believe, is: Impossible. Or, if I may say, by the grace of God… Near impossible.
Why is being unequally-yoked such a big issue? Because in an unequally-yoked relationship, God-talk is not possible. And why is God-talk so important in a relationship? Because it is similar with the problem of Israelite inter-marriages. When God is dropped out from our conversation, He is dropped out from our lives.
"That if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" (Romans 10:9-10).
9 comments:
The chilli padi of all chilli padis.
At the end of the day, person in unequally-yoked relationship needs to decide: God or other half??
This was the topic at Youth that I attended as a helper. There are many practical, everyday problems if one spouse is not a believer.
Will he/she complain about your tithing and giving? What about if you want to serve every Sunday, go on a missions trip, become full-time (with corresponding drop in income)?
Will he/she be alienated by worship, Bible studies, cell group meetings, open prayer? Apa lagi speaking in tongues.
Will he/she share the same (Godly and God-fearing) values, such as not flirting with other people, smoking, drinking, swearing, watching porn, or even wife beating? He/she is not a Christian after all, therefore does not subscribe to Christian values and norms.
Will you on the other hand be put off by various practices in his/her religion, e.g. ancestor worship, household idols, spiritual rituals, priests and mediums, chanting, 5 times a day prayer, etc.? (Don't forget to remember the everloving ISA before you complain about anything)
And of course, can he/she accept that you choose to love an invisible God more than even spouse and family?
my view for the man side.
god made woman frm man's flesh.so when we started a relationship,we r once again united together as one body.but we as men must lead them in godly way and stand up for them.using the reason unequally yoked to break up a relationship is not right.when our left hands sinned,we chop them away?
george lim
Leanne: Some people end up in an unequally-yoked relationship "unknowingly". E.g. both were non-Christians when they started out as a couple, but one of them became a believer along the way.
Some other people enter into an unequally-yoked relationship knowingly. E.g. The Christian chose to start a relationship with an unbeliever for some reasons.
In both cases, the answer (if they have not yet consummated their relationship in marriage) is inevitable: Either work out the obvious incompatibilities, i.e. both come to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Or make the painful choice of choosing between God or the other half.
Scott: Yup, I agree. Incompatibility in communication is already a big problem in itself in an unequally-yoked relationship. It is needless to say how much more the problems will be compounded in the other areas you mentioned.
All this problems can already be foreseen rationally without looking up the Bible. How much more clearer will it get if Scripture starts getting quoted.
George: True, God made the woman from the man's flesh.
And true, the man and the woman are united together as one body in a relationship. But that kind of "coming together as one flesh" only happens when the relationship has consummated in marriage. A dating couple has not "come together in one flesh" yet.
Even in the process of consummating a relationship in marriage (which I believe, is what courtship really means), the man and the woman must be in the process of "rightly being put together as one flesh". Yes, the man and woman are meant to be "put together as one flesh". But that does not mean we can "simply put them together".
How can we "put two people together as one flesh" in a way that pleases God, if one is of Christ and the other is of Belial?
I believe that is not possible in an unequally-yoked relationship.
If a break-up is the last resort, the man of God (or the woman of God) has to do it. Not merely using the label of "unequally-yoked" as an excuse. But as the right thing to do before the Lord, if all else have failed.
We were doing Bible study the other day. If you read Genesis 3:16 - "To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
I noticed that one of the specific consequences of sin was that the husband would rule over the wife.
This is as opposed to gently leading her, and being side-by-side partners with her. And I thought: Wife-beating, misogyny, mistreatment of women, lack of women's rights, rape... All stem directly from the original sin!
I think that is a slanted way of looking at Genesis 3:16.
The institution of the husband's authority over the wife started immediately after the fall, and it continued right up to the New Testament teaching about wives submitting to husbands.
The institution of order in a married relationship is meant to reflect the relationship between Christ and the church. Besides the practicality of having order in a household, it has great spiritual significance too.
It is not a gateway to the list of sins you mentioned conerning mistreatment of women. Having the husband to rule over the wife does not imply that cruelty to women is justified/explained as a spillover effect from the original sin of Eve.
What I mean is that rather than lovingly leading the wife in such a way that she willingly submits to his authority, the fallen husband now 'rules' over the wife (as in with an iron fist). We'd have to delve into the Hebrew however, that I can't manage yet.
Because of disobedience, the fall and the effects of sin, the ideal relationship between man and woman was marred. From a partnership of equals with the man assuming responsibility, it has degraded into a dictatorship with the man TAKING control without the corresponding responsible attitude. Like a despot, men today often force submission upon women instead of 'courting the voters'.
It's not to say that the curse specifically caused all the misogyny in today's world. But the attitudes of men and women as distorted by sin lead to the mistreatment of women.
With a Christ-like spirit in homes, the relationship is restored to God's original plan: Man lovingly and sacrificially leading, woman lovingly following. If the man does it right, she will WANT to follow him!
Even before the fall, Eve was Adam's helper. I extrapolate that to mean that even before the fall, the husband ought to be in charge and be responsible for the family.
At least, that's my opinion.
Post a Comment