How can a Christian and a neo-pagan coexist as mates?

I have nothing to contribute except to say that every time I read this thread title it reminds me of a seventies-style They Fight Crime! show.

EDIT: nevermind

edited 10th Jan '11 3:50:44 PM by Pykrete

^ I thought Paul was the one who said/wrote that while fornication is a sin and one should be chaste, if one can't keep to chastity, then it is better that they be married than burn.

He grudgingly allowed marriage for those reasons, yes. He did want everyone to remain single.

4 yeah, me too.

Yes, Paul advocated chastisy.

Likely so he didn't have to get married and could screw all the sexy Roman Hard Gay guys.

edited 10th Jan '11 4:00:39 PM by Diamonnes

Paul was keen on chastity wasn't he... Also probably more than a bit cracked in the brainpan.

Personally, I'd probably get along just fine with Paul, though I can see how he'd come off as a huge jerk to anyone interested in having any kind of relationship. Didn't the Bible contain tons of that kind of thing? I'm sure I can think of at least a few Old Testament characters who had multiple wives without God so much as batting an eye.

No, Paul actually wrote the lions share of relationship advice.

Kinda like taking alcohol recommendations form a teetotaler.

But outside his writings, the Bible doesn't have a ton to say regarding how relationships work, not as clear as what Paul wrote anyway.

Edit: Misunderstood the post first go around...

edited 10th Jan '11 4:05:36 PM by Justice4243

Paul condemns homosexuals as well as fornicators.

Why do you assume he's gay simply because he advocates chastity?

Becuase he seems to hate physical intimacy in a time where (to put it bluntly) it was really common, and because he seems to have an unending stream of profanity to throw at people he doesn't agree with, but loves Jesus with a kind of frantic worship that would have been worrying to all?

I dunno, I barely know the guy, its just that might be brought up.

Ok, that's a bit more helpful.

So, polygyny in the Old Testament.

I'm not sure/don't remember what Paul's reasoning, if any was for talking about this in context of a man and his one wife (though he may have thought, "One is enough to remove these horrible lustful impulses.")

Honestly, Paul's stuff reads more like commentary to me in some places than holy writ.

edited 10th Jan '11 4:11:40 PM by Justice4243

So he disagrees morally with what was going in Rome at the time, I think pretty much any Christian would agree that their level of sexual immorality was, well, immoral. The idea that everybody who opposes sexual hedonism is secretly gay is simply beyond stupidity.

The other 11 Apostles also worshipped Jesus, and so did many disciples.

Oh come now, pretty much the entire ancient world was lustful to the Nth degree, do not doubt it. And Considering that the other disciples had wives (at least one of them did anyway) I think it might be more Paul's personal grievieances getting in the way of doctrine.

I'm not saying he was gay, just that he wasn't a good human being.

Getting woefully off-topic here but:

The "Paul hates fags" idea is admittedly, a little vague. Or rather, comes from one or two verses that aren’t consistently translated the same way.

Less vague then a lot of the Bible, but definitely not as clear as most think. The idea that they're more a blanket, "Damn it, Romans! Stop boinking everything with a hole and a pulse!" would have a lot of merit.

Not sure how I’d rate Paul as a human regarding his entire life. Funnily enough, he was probably pretty dochetastic as a Jew but accomplished quite a bit of good (from a humanitarian perspective anyhow) while a Christian.

Still a douche, especially as his ideas lead (like a long line ofdodgt justification) to the ridiculous idea of Clerical celibacy.

Acknowledging that you are going off-topic does not change the fact that you are going off-topic.

I'd assume that was directed at me, but I haven't posted in this thread in a page or two.

So, what does coexistence really mean? Is a constant attempt to convert one another truly coexistence? Hmmmm...

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Paul didn't intend for his letters to become holy scripture and a fair amount of the trouble they caused is more people taking them and running away with his teachings then really sitting and listening to the dude that told others Not to pass judgement.

She was talking to me, dude.

edited 10th Jan '11 4:42:18 PM by Justice4243

Mea Culpa. I shall cease posting unless it is relevent.

Paul is rather specific in that the Christian in a married couple shouldn't attempt to convert the non-Christian.

Granted the passages may not necessarily pertain to modern day issues, however Paul does state that only one person in the couple is required to bring "holiness" to the coupling and the ensuing offspring.

I'd still imagine a husband/wife trying desperately to convert their spouse is "doing it wrong."

Outside marriage is another matter entirely, though. However, still debating passages from the same source (Paul).

edited 10th Jan '11 4:53:11 PM by Justice4243

Back on topic; As a Christian, I have no idea how a relationship between a Christian and a Pagan could work long term. I couldn't see myself doing it for a number of reasons. For one thing, marriage and kids. Which temple do you get married in? Do you have a preist/pastor marry you? What about when kids come, what will you teach them? Where will they go on Sunday, since church going is typically a family thing. As a Pagan, would you let her baptise the kids? I know as a Christian, I wouldn't let my hypothetical kids attend Pagan rituals.

Also, the whole eternal destination thing would always be on my mind.

Friends? Yes, it can definitely work. Dating with long term goal eventually ending in marriage? I can't fathom how this would work. Maybe it's just me.

Most Neopagan rituals aren't really geared for children anyway, and some groups have a minimum age requirement. The celebrations are another matter, but you really shouldn't worry about that any more than you would worry about them attending a Jewish friend's Passover seder.

edited 10th Jan '11 9:11:19 PM by Karalora

To put it simply: if I had a kid they'd be handicapped and so would their kids and so on and so forth. If Shel had a kid it would have her handicap (admittedly not as limiting but still) and she'd die in childbirth. So, hypothetical kids would be crippled for life and without a mother. No thanks, I think I'll get clipped ASAP as planned.

Since children aren't an issue that will ever come up, we can pretty much ignore that.

Just curious though, I can see why you wouldn't let your kid into a pagan ritual (not that they'd be allowed anyway), but what about the celebrations and general practices? Assuming that you're with a pagan, would you have something against Junior watching their other parent do magic or pray to a god that's not yours? If so, how is it fair to expect them to adhere to your beliefs rather than his/hers, despite you both being parents?

If it were even possible for us to have kids (let's use adoption as an example) I would let them go to Christian churches and gatherings if they wanted too, and (since the particular faith I follow doesn't have rituals with any explicit sexual context aside from optional nudity) they could come to any rituals I attended, and I'd teach them about the goddess if they asked. Would this really be such an issue for the other side?

Shel's also voiced her belief in a purgatory wherein people who were good in life but didn't know this Jesus dude suffer for a while until they get to know him, so the 'eternal destination' thing isn't an issue.

edited 10th Jan '11 9:58:23 PM by Diamonnes

Well, since you asked I will offer my viewpoint. Note that I do not mean to hurt your feelings or belittle you. I'm only stating how I would act in these scenarios.

If it were even possible for us to have kids (let's use adoption as an example) I would let them go to Christian churches and gatherings if they wanted too, and (since the particular faith I follow doesn't have rituals with any explicit sexual context aside from optional nudity) they could come to any rituals I attended, and I'd teach them about the goddess if they asked. Would this really be such an issue for the other side?

Honestly, yes, it would be a pretty big issue, since it blatantly leads them away from God. I suppose it would ultimately be their choice if they converted to Paganism in adulthood, but I would have pretty big issue with them being raised like that from the very begining. And letting them do both would be quite confusing for the child. One can't be both Christian and Pagan, it just doesn't work that way, and it could lead to heresy which is arguably worse.

Assuming that you're with a pagan, would you have something against Junior watching their other parent do magic or pray to a god that's not yours?

This would be iffy, but I suppose observing would be alright. Can't shelter them too much. I don't think I would allow participation though.

If so, how is it fair to expect them to adhere to your beliefs rather than his/hers, despite you both being parents?

You're right, it wouldn't be fair to my hypothetical Pagan wife. Which is precisely why I wouldn't marry somebody who's belief structure was that different from my own.

edited 11th Jan '11 1:01:02 AM by washington213

What, so sending Kids to Christian things, and telling them about how "daddy is a pagan" are mutually contradictory because they may embrace paganism more than Christianity? If one of those religions (or you know, neither/both) makes the better arguement to them in their formative years (and there is always the possibility of changing/losing faith later during teenage years) then why should they follow the other?

I mean, what you are arguing for is essentially "Christianity is right, and your godlessness is showing". It's the worst kind of hypocrisy.