#so unless we read the transcript in very bad faith and assume that she was talking about the hypothetical scenario of íf the fears leave;

[gammija]

ive been trying for 30 mins to write a post about why the Web's plan is still confusing, but I think I should face the truth and admit to myself that it's not that it makes no sense, it's just... so convoluted

[blessedarethebinarybreakers]

Answer asap (I feel bad saying that, but I'm stuck). Do you have any resources for dating/not dating non-christians? A dear friend of mine told me they care for me, and I feel the same for them, but... all the resources online warn again and again not to date non-christians lest they endanger my faith. I feel like going forward with this would be ignorant at best and would set us both up for heartbreak. And I fear my fear itself would lead to me trying to convert them. But I still care for them.

Hey, anon! Thanks for reaching out -- the rhetoric among many Christians against interfaith relationships, particularly with the argument that they’re “unequally yoked,” is something I haven’t addressed in years, and have been meaning to discuss again. 

Little disclaimer at the start that this stuff is so contextual, and it’s personal -- I don’t know your life as well as you do, or this friend of yours like you do. Maybe what i say doesn’t fit you and your situation. 

_____________

To begin, I firmly believe that interfaith relationships can be and often are truly beautiful, holy partnerships. (This includes relationships in which one or multiple members identifies as an atheist / otherwise doesn’t ascribe to a particular religion.) 

When both (or all) members are respectful of one another’s beliefs, and find as much joy in learning as in teaching their partner(s), their unique perspectives can deeply enrich one another. You can bear good fruit together that glorifies God and nourishes others. 

This being said, you definitely want to at least begin working through your worries and fears before starting to date this person. If you enter the relationship overwhelmed with fear or guilt about dating them, it’ll bring a lot of resentment and angst. The rest of this post points out things you’ll want to reflect on and read up on before entering this or any interfaith relationship -- and offers resources that can help.

_________

Interfaith Partners: Always “Unequally Yoked”?

I’m sure you’ve seen a certain phrase on those websites you mentioned, drawn from 2 Corinthians 6:14 -- “unequally yoked.”  I’m going to end this post with some alternative ways of interpreting this verse, but what Christians who advise against interfaith relationships take it to mean is something like this:

Just as two animals yoked to the same plow should be of equal strength and on the same page so that one doesn’t do more of the work, or get tugged away from the work by the other one, two partners should also be of equal “spiritual” strength and on the same page when it comes to their faith...

And of course, these people will say, a person who is Christian is definitely spiritually stronger than any non-Christian -- and a non-Christian might just pull them away from The Way, getting them to skip church or prayers or even stop being Christian entirely.

But there are a lot of assumptions there that don’t hold true in every relationship, right? First off, who says every Christian is necessarily “spiritually stronger” than every non-Christian? To claim that is to assume that non-Christians don’t also have access to spirituality or to the Divine -- which I’m going to push against throughout this post. 

Furthermore, the assumption that a non-Christian partner will definitely harm your own Christian faith doesn’t have to be true, as I’ll get to in a second.

So yeah, keeping these assumptions about an interfaith relationship being inherently “unequally yoked” in mind, and with a plan on returning to this phrase at the end, let’s move on to specific things you should think about before entering an interfaith relationship. 

______________

Must a non-Christian partner “endanger” your faith -- or can they enrich it?

If being open to learning about how our fellow human beings perceive the world, humanity, and the divine “endangers one’s faith,” perhaps that kind of faith was not made to last. Perhaps it has to give way in order to birth a new, deeper faith -- a faith that is bold enough to wrestle with God as Jacob did; broad enough to survive questions and doubts and times of grief; and wise enough to perceive the Spirit blowing wherever She will (John 3:8), not only among Christians.

If your partner truly respects you and your faith even if it’s different from theirs, they’ll do what they can to help you be the best Christian you can be -- or at the very least, they will give you the space and time you need to go to church, pray, etc. And you will do the same, helping them to be the best Muslim, Buddhist, or simply person they can be.

I highly recommend asking this friend of yours before you start dating what their thoughts are on your being a Christian, and/or on Christianity in general.

Is it something that makes them happy for you? is it something that makes them deeply uncomfortable? or something that they don’t have strong feelings one way or the other on? .

How “involved” would they be open to being in your faith? Would they be interested in going to church with you, as long as they could trust you weren’t trying to force them into anything? Would they enjoy talking about your varying beliefs together and how they impact your lives? Or would they never ever want you to bring up Christianity (which I imagine for you would be a deal breaker)? .

Be open and honest with one another about what expectations you each have about things like boundaries around discussing faith, about time and space you each want for practicing your faith, etc. As you seem aware, it’s better to get all this clear before you start dating, to avoid problems later down the road! 

For an example of what such discussions might look like, I found this story from Robert Repta, a Christian man married to a Jewish man. Their union, he says, has included working out what it means not only to be gay persons of faith, but also persons of two different faiths:

“Ultimately, what happened was that in our struggles to find ourselves, we ended up growing closer together. We both supported and challenged each other. We began asking each other bigger life questions and talking about religion, God, science. Both of our lives were evolving, and what started to happen was that we started seeing the similarities in our core beliefs more than the differences. Some of those beliefs even evolved along the way.

We both believed in God. We both believed that God is love. We volunteered together. He would occasionally come with me to church, and I would occasionally go with him to the synagogue. Eventually, I could see that the common thread between us was unconditional love. The same unconditional love of God.”

_____________

On pressuring a non-Christian partner to convert -- assumptions about Christian superiority & fearing for their afterlife destination

It’s really good you recognize that it might end up being hard for you not to try to get this person to convert! Before dating them, you should keep reflecting on this and decide whether that’s something you can let go of or not. If it’s not, then you’re probably right in thinking this relationship won’t work out. 

It would be highly disrespectful to this person you care about to pressure them to become a Christian in order for you to feel okay about being with them. (And for more thoughts on how evangelism and conversion as carried out by many Christians isn’t what Jesus had in mind, see this post.) Doing so would imply a lot of things, including that you don’t think they’re a worthy or equal partner unless they make this big change, that whatever beliefs or ideologies they currently hold are inferior to yours, etc.

In order for your interfaith relationship to go well, you would need to come to understand non-Christians as being equally made in God’s image, equally worthy of dignity, equally capable of doing good in the world. You’d have to come to believe that there is much of value within their own religion / ideology that you as a Christian could learn from. 

Let’s bring in our lovely Christian/Jewish couple from before: as his relationship with David developed, Robert discovered that 

“God is not conformed to this world we live in; God does not belong solely to the Pentecostals or the Baptists, to the Jews or Gentiles, to Muslims or Zoroastrians. Two of the most profound self-identifiers God calls himself in the Bible is “love” and “I am.””

Here are a few resources that can help you explore the idea that other religions are as valid as Christianity and also have much wisdom to bring to the world:

I highly recommend you check out the book Holy Envy by Barbara Brown Taylor to help you explore how you can be a devout Christian and learn from and form mutual relationships with persons who are not Christian. You can check out passages from the book in my tag here. .

You might also like my two podcast episodes on interfaith relationships (in general, not romantic ones, but the same material applies) -- episode 30, “No One Owns God: Readying yourself for respectful interfaith encounters” and episode 31, “It's good to have wings, but you have to have roots too": Cultivating your faith while embracing religious pluralism.” You can find links to both episodes as well as their transcripts over on this webpage. .

There might also be some helpful stuff in my #interfaith tag or #other faiths tag if you wander around. .

Simply getting to know whatever religion this friend does belong to (or what ideologies and value systems they maintain if they’re atheist / non-religious) can also be super helpful. Ask them what resources they can think of that can help get to know their religion as they experience it. Attend worship service (virtually works!), seek out folks on social media who share their religion, etc. I bet you’ll find a lot that you have in common -- and hopefully you’ll find some of the differences thought-provoking and enriching to your own understandings of Divinity!

I’m guessing a lot of your worry stems from the assumption that non-Christians don’t go to heaven. If you believe that not being a Christian leads to hell after death, it’s very hard to view non-Christians and their beliefs as equal to your own!

That Holy Envy book discusses this genuine fear many Christians have on behalf of non-Christians, and how to let it go.  .

Here’s a post with links to other posts describing the belief that many faithful and serious Christians hold that non-Christians don’t all get whisked to hell. .

And a post on the harm done by fearmongering about hell. .

Finally, a little more on the academic side but if you’re interested in some history behind Christian views of hell that can help you see that there really is no one “true” belief here, check out the links in this post.

_______

Reinterpreting “unequally yoked”

I said we’d get back to this, and here we are! While the easiest to find interpretation of 2 Corinthians 6:14′s “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers” is that it argues against interfaith marriage, there are other ways to read this text.

I adore this article I found on the passage from a Christian minister who is married to a Hindu monk -- “Unequally Yoked”: How Christians Get Interfaith Marriage Wrong.” Incredibly, Rev. J. Dana Trent writes that when she and her now-husband dug into 2 Corinthians 6:14 to see what it was all about, she found that 

“An ancient scripture meant to deter us from getting involved with each other actually brought us together. Our core beliefs in God became the focus of our study and relationship, not the issues that divided us.”

She also explains that biblical scholars say this verse isn’t even specifically about interfaith marriage -- which becomes clear when you read the full chapter surrounding it! It’s more general -- about the hazards of “working with” an unbeliever.

And what exactly is an unbeliever? Paul and other “believers” of these very early days of Christianity had a different definition than we might today -- an “unbeliever” wasn’t synonymous with “non-Christian,” because Christianity hadn’t even solidified into an actual religion yet! Instead, a nonbeliever was "anyone exposed to but was not faithful to Christ’s teachings—someone not characterized by devotion, love, peace, mercy, and forgiveness.” 

In other words, if a person in those early days was told about the good news of Jesus that entailed things like liberation of the oppressed and love of neighbor, they didn’t have to “become a Christian” to accept that good news. And thus, Rev. Trent continues,

“Today, my husband’s deep Hindu faith has taught me to dig deeper into what Jesus would have me do. Perhaps Paul might have even considered me an “unbeliever,” as I claimed to be a baptized Christian, but my life did not inwardly and outwardly reflect the Gospel. Since marrying Fred, I re-attuned my life to Christian spiritual practices: spending more time in contemplative prayer, practicing non-violence through a vegetarian diet, limiting my consumption, and increasing my service to others.

Much to many Christians’ dismay, it took a person of another faith—a seemingly “unequally yoked” partner, to strengthen my Christian walk.”

Isn’t it beautiful to hear how this relationship between a Christian minister and Hindu monk has born good fruit for both of them? They help one another become the best Christian and best Hindu they can be, respectively. They are both so deeply committed to faith -- that doesn’t sound like an “unequal yoking” to me.

______

Whew, this got long! But it’s a big topic, and one I hope you’ll take the time to explore. Bring God into it; bring your friend into as much as they’re comfortable. And feel free to come back and ask me more questions as you go.

If anyone knows of other articles or other resources that explore the good fruit that can come from an interfaith partnership, please share! 

[toyfrog]

Yes I watched The Kaplan Episode.

Daniel Cerone in my opinion is one of the best character writers in the biz…. I loved Kate Kaplan as a character. But I don’t feel she should’ve been the baddie. And I resent Red shooting her because in my opinion he never would have. He abhorred violence. In Marvin Gerard, spousal abuse crossed the line. So now Kate is a survivor but she’s a bad person?

It does not compute. It’s a heartbreaking twist that will lead Kaplan to join Annie at last. And for what?

To give Tom a story. It is unforgivable to lie to your audience. It’s worse to have others do damage control inyour place because you can’t admit you lied to your viewers.

So, be that as it may..,I’m being asked about Red/Katarina Is he The Dad?

“The Appearance of Truth” is the theme and it’s a cop out. When it comes down to canon these writers are stingy. (Basically because they cannot agree on soul creative rights and Sony wants money off it.) Do they make it up as they go along? Yes. A lot of us do, but most show runners have the arc completed before, even next season halfway complete. This season they had no arc, and it shows through execution, lack of continuity, imbalance to character screen time, overabundance of cheap marketing, it goes on and on.

What you watched last night was a culmination of season 3’s Knauf arc infused into season 4.

If you recall in the Vehm by Vincent Angelli:

“I’m a bad man. I kill people. And every time I do, a piece of me dies with them.”

“I always wanted to be a boyscout.”

Recall those hints? Dembe saying, “that’s enough”

Ok.

Well that’s what you’re seeing now. Everyone question Raymond, even the task force.“

"Don’t fret Harold. I’ll be the declarer you be the dummy and together we’ll win the hand.”

Well last season Cooper, Aram, Ressler, and Samar were tired of being the “dummy.”

“Just because you’ve been bumped up to first chair in an orchestra doesn’t mean you can compose a symphony.”

Last season Ressler *was* the mastermind of who betrayed Red and why. Red knew in Dawn Denoon he could not search and do a moral inventory of himself without Donald.

This Season? Oh it was “Tom”

I loathe agenda driven behind the scenes back stabbing garbage. Professional sets do not engage in such foolery but this circus really…

A mess.

This is no different they just changed Kaplan to the bad blacklister because they did not have one. I think it’s a mistake personally, because the hype on turning victim Kaplan into the baddest of the bad scorned means last season when they had her betray Red, according to Ryan Eggold who said Bokenkamp boasted, “it was Tom’s plan., is just deceptive.

No it was originally Ressler’s plan with a happy ending at S3 with Red leaving the task force and Liz life to let her have that normal life. Then all hell breaks loose. Instead, they fractured an intelligent plot, dumbed down every character and then in Season 4 never gave them a voice to express their betrayal. Its why Diego has had no storyline for 15 months, and probably, is on his last five weeks unless viewers don’t speak up. This show will change things on a dime. They did last season. They did in Season 2. They did in Season 1.

The only character that deserves to die after this fallout are Tom, Kaplan, and Hitchin.

The rest is about cutting the budget and supplying serious shockudrama to get the ratings up, go into a new direction…. and add two new Sony actors to the show…

And purge the rest.

But I digress.

Anyhoo….

Last season.

"Why because I didn’t get Daddy’s permission?”

Yes, Tom knows.

“Preparing for war.”

“What War?”

“Ours.”

All that is from S3.

Now this season:

“Yes, Elizabeth is my daughter.”

She’s his daughter, but he’s not her father.

Do we get this play on words?

When Katarina gave birth, she never got a paternity test. She only knew one thing she loved Masha so “the truth doesn’t matter. It is the appearance of truth” that does.

Bokenkamp said last season “is it safe to assume Tom is the father of Liz baby?”

“I don’t think it’s safe to assume that I think it’s good to anticipate that.”

Yes so what is it that Liz said in the Vehm?

“I assume Tom is the father.”

“I haven’t told him.”

Liz has never said if Tom *is* and with Megan’s hint about Liz being unfaithful, that connects to Eli Matchett in S3 and it’s not Nick. So, now we see her mother fogging up the windows in the back of a car with….Raymond.

In Philomena you will see two forbidden lovers fogging up the windows kissing inna parked car.

In the Apothecary, the theme (don’t you guys read the transcripts?) is Marriage, betrayal, the appearance of truth and infidelity.

Escaping to motels, and celebrating anniversaries and birthdays. Raising a family from prison.

In Natalie Luca you had forbidden love-the most romantic scene Samar ever seen. Watching the person you love die in your arms. They fell for each other at work, talk about forbidden love. It even explains how they could love each other without touching….

Significant to Liz life and her parents.👇🏻

Kirk was her husband. He was out of town a lot. On business. While he was away, Katarina wasn’t faithful. She was having sex with other men.

Mainly, “the American.” He was her mark, but their affair did not stop afterward it kept going.

But the paternity is down to three men. Two Americans, and Kirk. Both Red and Kat knew Sam. He was a grifter, a criminal trying to get his life straight.

What was Liz father?

“My real father was a criminal.” Her mother died from weakness and shame.

In S1.

“Everything about me is a lie.”

“Criminals are notorious liars.”

“You will always be her father Sam.”

“Are you my father?”

“No your father is dead.”

“And I know what happened that night to my father. I shot him.”

“Yea.”

“That’s why you erased my memory. You’re my sin eater.”

Right here the story should’ve shifted. Liz trust for Red should’ve grown not regressed.

“I never wanted you [Beat] to grow up like me.”

“Is he her father?”

“I don’t know Kate I never found out.”

“It’s Raymond. He took Masha because he thinks she’s his.”

Lady Ambrosia:

“Your mother was ever the same after that. The man she loved killed by the child she adored it was too much.”

“So I killed both of my parents.”

“You were a child. None of this was you fault. There never should’ve been a gun around for you to grab.”

“I ran out of gas.”-Madeline Pratt

Katarina and Kaplan left the Summer Palace for America after Masha. Because Red took her.

But Liz lives in Summer Palace again because she’s young in the yard with her mother in Mato.

Ressler and Red are the only men that have been to Summer Palace.

Liz will go back in these final episodes.

Lady Ambrosia:

“Your parents loved each other very much. The Cold War was hard– too hard for your father. When the Soviet Union was collapsing, he took you from her. She gave up everything to follow him, to follow you.”

“The night of the fire– that’s what they were arguing about?”

Nope it was the fulcrum. Liz lived in Summer Palace when she wasn’t a baby because the night of the fire is five years into the future.

Red was married, had Carla and Jennifer. And Liz. Red took Liz as an infant.

Katarina gets Masha to Kaplan night of the fire because of “the dead man on the floor.” She’s looking for a new place for them to live.

A week later she can’t go home she calls from a payphone. She wants Kaplan to give Masha up to Sam.

Go back to Cape May: the arson Katarina had. The dead man on the floor.

“He’s coming.” “Who’s coming.”?

US intelligence and KGB. They know about her affair with Raymond.

“Your mother, despite what he’d done, she wanted him back. She wanted them to be a family. As much as it pains me to say it, he was probably… the only man she ever really loved.”

And I shot him.

“It was an accident.”

Liz accidentally shot “the bad man.”

Stewmaker

“You’re a monster.”

“Yes.”

“How can you live with yourself?”

“By saving your life.”

Katarina and Red at that point were enemies. He wanted the fulcrum he needed it to blackmail US intelligence so to leave them alone otherwise they’d kill him and her. It’s why he sold secrets to North Korea and Soviet Union:

Katarina set the fire. But it was Red who pulled Liz from the flames.

“Tell me. I need to know. Your mother was never the same after that. The man she loved killed by the child she adored– it was… just too much. Two months later, she went to Cape May and left her clothes on the beach, walked into the ocean, and was never seen again.”

“So, that night, I killed both my parents.”

“You were a child. There should never have been a gun for you to grab. Looking back, I’m not sure I shouldn’t have raised you myself. I don’t want you looking back with that kind of regret.”

All that played out.

Now liz’ regret is coming.

Agnes.

But focus on the man Liz shot. The scars on Red’s back. He and his family were to die in that fire.

“There was so much blood.”

But he survived.

His family. Carla and Jennifer are in WITSEC

Red was gone all this time recuperating. Where he was is the next leg of the mystery. He knew after stealing secrets, he was safer dead than alive. So you have him blackmailing, building an organized criminal empire for 25 years through Russian Oligarchs, collapse of Soviet Union, the cartels-burning down the earth in order to one day walk back into her life but this time with ammunition to protect her.

In the farmer parable Red explains when he comes home from work one day…crops are burned, his children gone, “it is now he who burns, he who slaughters, and in the end he knows that he must pay.”

He also mentions children. Two.

Red wasn’t a good man. He had affairs on Carla, abandoned his other daughter to appease Liz, and keep her safe. He wanted to raise her but if it got out about who she is, who her “father is,” the danger was too immense. To protect Jennifer and Carla he abandons them and turns the other way.

In Mako Tanida, Red warns Ressler to stay in the light, “go home!” Red didn’t after the fire. He wanted revenge and Justice. He became a criminal. Stole secrets betrayed his country.

What is Ressler about to do?

Hitchin cannot be arrested, she runs the courts. She will pay off judges. So now Ressler like Red knows, once he crosses over, there’s no turning back.

Back to Liz and why the mystery s being revealed aside from the fact that they dismantled a fine piece of television just to do a spin off nobody wanted for a character audience feels is worse than Mr. Kaplan because he hurt Liz the most.

That logic right there doesn’t make any sense.

Liz is the target because of who and what she saw happen in that house. The Fulcrum was only part of the story. Who wanted it besides Red and Katarina *Is* the story. Red wanted to know what happened the night of the fire. Diane Fowler knew. Fitch knew. The Director knew.

“I know who you really are, Raymond. Who you are to her. And I know why you did this. Does she?”

“I know what happened, that night, Red. To your family.” Mr. Kaplan cleaned up Diane Fowler. Her body is about to be revealed…the task force has no idea about this.

Cooper suspects.

Kaplan does.

So is he her father?

Legally, no. Her father is dead. “You will always be her father Sam.”

But yes, Elizabeth is his daughter.

He had no legal claim to her when she was a child. She was Kirk’s.

Now: liz and Katarina are similar.

Both are known to be unfaithful. Liz was seeing someone when she first met Tom. Liz was also seeing someone after Tom re entered her life in S2.

“He worked, I didn’t.”

“How did that work out for ya?”

“Not so great.”

Liz too, is keeping a secret. Like her mother.

And Kaplan knows. It’s why she can gain access to Liz apartment. She knows everything.

Hold on to this because I’m not doing another.

The point is.

Red believed Liz was his child. Red wanted Liz to be his child. Red loves Liz like a father. Red fell in love with her mother a Russian sleeper agent. Red had a longtime affair with Katarina.

You cannot do Red/Liz in the romantic sense after that. Period.

So….

Even if he turns out Red to *not* be her bio dad-It never mattered to Raymond. He loved Liz that much. In his mind, “you will always be her father Sam.”

But Yes, Elizabeth is his daughter.

Okay done.