Is premarital sex moral or immoral?

[JJ50]

The ghastly JW cult make up their version of the elusive 'truth', then state it as fact. It hasn't stopped some of their number sexually abusing children.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm talking about what you said.

Could have fooled me.

Let me know what you don't understand.
You said... I think that abstaining from sex until marriage is generally a bad idea.

Note - sex until marriage. Why?
Because... you said...
- it can create pressure to marry just to have sex.
- it robs the couple of knowing whether they're compatible in an important way before they actually make the commitment of marriage.

What's the focus then? Sex.

No; sex is one of many factors that's important in a relationship.

It seems something is wrong with being married to someone you are attracted to because of their qualities - not look,,, That can be anyone, including a serial rapist and killer.

Did you read my post before hitting reply?

If one is not compatible sexually (in an important way) - what does that mean?

Google is your friend:

The Importance of Sexual Compatibility in a Relationship | Marriage.com

Good in bed? - then they should not get married. So have a bang before you decide. In fact, make it a good few. If you are not happy, move along. Find someone else, and repeat, until you decide, now I want to settle down.

That's what I am talking about.

If that's what you're talking about, then it seems like you half-read my post, added a whole bunch of bad assumptions, and took off on your own special tangent.

I said...
So it's lusting after the sex organs and the pleasure one can derive, rather than the love of the person.
In that case, why is such a person even thinking of marriage?

I don't know how you arrived at this belief. It sounds like your idea.

No, it sounds like what you assume my idea to be.

It also perpetuates the idea that marriage is a breeding arrangement and not a partnership based on love.

I don't know how you arrived at this either.

If you're curious, then maybe ask polite questions instead of attacking. I would have been happy to expand on my thought, but not now that it seems that you have no interest in reasonable discussion.

All in all, I'd say that a couple that abstains until marriage is setting themselves up for a higher risk of divorce.

The Science of Cohabitation: A Step Toward Marriage, Not a Rebellion
On average, researchers concluded that couples who lived together before they tied the knot saw a 33 percent higher rate of divorce than those who waited to live together until after they were married.

The connection between divorce and living together before marriage
....etc., etc.

Plenty of religions and cultures that preach abstinence also forbid divorce. They kinda go as a package. In many relationships in these religions and cultures, the couple doesn't divorce even if the relationship has failed. This skews the data.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Who cares?

I just thought you might want to be a fisher of men instead of making people run from your religion. Guess not.

 

[sooda]

A lot depends on intent. it is the condition of the heart that matters.

I think premarital sex is a good thing even if you and your partner decide against marriage.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

It was a lot of fun back in the days when dinosaurs ruled the earth and the tar pits were a threat rather than a tourist attraction and I was single.

That’s funny! Keep your sense of humor!

 

[nPeace]

Could have fooled me.


No; sex is one of many factors that's important in a relationship.


Did you read my post before hitting reply?


Google is your friend:

The Importance of Sexual Compatibility in a Relationship | Marriage.com


If that's what you're talking about, then it seems like you half-read my post, added a whole bunch of bad assumptions, and took off on your own special tangent.


No, it sounds like what you assume my idea to be.


If you're curious, then maybe ask polite questions instead of attacking. I would have been happy to expand on my thought, but not now that it seems that you have no interest in reasonable discussion.


Plenty of religions and cultures that preach abstinence also forbid divorce. They kinda go as a package. In many relationships in these religions and cultures, the couple doesn't divorce even if the relationship has failed. This skews the data.

It's not foreign to humans to misunderstand what's communicated.
So we both misunderstand each other, apparently.

I think your statements indicated what I politely asked here.
You think I attacked you by making a general statement, and asking a question.

Seems like some of us can be a bit touchy when particular posters cross their path... imo. It's okay. No offense taken on my part.
You don't have to worry about me getting in your hair again.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What does robocop always say?
What does robocop always say?
50 shades of gray.
50 shades of gray.
50 shades of gray.
One shade can get darker.
One shade can get lighter.

“....and most shades should go away.” Ta-da!

Is that good? For a poem? I just feel it has to rhyme...but that’s just me.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Google is your friend:

The Importance of Sexual Compatibility in a Relationship | Marriage.com

Really? Then, marriages today should have a higher percentage of lasting, than those that fail.

We don’t see that. At all!

 

[Spartan]

I just thought you might want to be a fisher of men instead of making people run from your religion. Guess not.

The truth makes people run. Misinformation - kicking Christ to the curb based on lies - makes people run. So run, Forrest, run. Be dumb. Run from the Savior.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

It's hard to get a clear message from a book with so many authors written over 1,200 years.

Since the 40 some Bible writers are in harmony with each other then it's easy to get a clear message.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The truth makes people run. Misinformation - kicking Christ to the curb based on lies - makes people run. So run, Forrest, run. Be dumb. Run from the Savior.

Meanwhile, you're running somewhere but not to heaven. You'll be wanting some ice and asbestos clothing where you're heading according to your own religion.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

If all that stuff is real I'd rather be in Hell than spending all eternity worshiping an egotistical, genocidal tyrant. Separation anxieties, after all, no longer apply to me in that case.

Since the Bible's hell is simply mankind's temporary stone-cold grave then No one can end up in biblical hell.
Biblical hell comes to a final end according to Revelation 20:13-14.
After everyone in hell (grave) is ' delivered up ' ( that means resurrected out of hell ) then emptied-out hall is cast vacant into that symbolic 'second death ' for vacated biblical hell.
As for the wicked they will be destroyed forever, perish forever - Psalms 92:7; 2 Peter 3:9.
Then, what is real is that Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will bring Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.
Mankind will see the return of the Genesis ' tree of life ' for the ' healing ' of earth's nations - Revelation 22:2.
This is why we are all invited to pray the invitation of Revelation 22:20 for Jesus to come !
Come and end all suffering on Earth - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8; Isaiah 33:24 - No one will say, "I am sick...."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Since the Bible's hell is simply mankind's temporary stone-cold grave then No one can end up in biblical hell.
Biblical hell comes to a final end according to Revelation 20:13-14.
After everyone in hell (grave) is ' delivered up ' ( that means resurrected out of hell ) then emptied-out hall is cast vacant into that symbolic 'second death ' for vacated biblical hell.
As for the wicked they will be destroyed forever, perish forever - Psalms 92:7; 2 Peter 3:9.
Then, what is real is that Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will bring Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.
Mankind will see the return of the Genesis ' tree of life ' for the ' healing ' of earth's nations - Revelation 22:2.
This is why we are all invited to pray the invitation of Revelation 22:20 for Jesus to come !
Come and end all suffering on Earth - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8; Isaiah 33:24 - No one will say, "I am sick...."

Says you. Other Christians say differently. Who is to be believed?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Adultery and miscarriage/abortion were property crimes, not immoral. Premarital sex and rape were condoned in the OT. Porn would have been, what, statues of nudes back then?

I do wish people would post where such Scriptures are located.
I see what is to be done with the type of crime committed at Deuteronomy 24:7; Exodus 21:16.
Death ( capital punishment ) I find to be the punishment in the case of rape at Deuteronomy 22:25
Since there we No nude statues allowed under the Constitution of the Mosaic Law, then they were against the Law.
- Exodus chapter 20.
Even the Christian congregation is to ' walk by faith ' Not by sighted objects - 2 Corinthians 5:7

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Says you. Other Christians say differently. Who is to be believed?

Other Christians or 'Christendom' ( so-called Christian but mostly in name only )
Simply line up beliefs against Scripture.
Put one's beliefs on one half of a paper and Scripture on the other half.
By taking one Bible topic or one subject at a time we can see the internal harmony among the many Bible writers.
Scripture is to be believed over church customs or church traditions - Matthew 15:9

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Simply line up beliefs against Scripture.

That's basically what you're doing.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Not only do I think premarital sex is perfectly fine, I think that abstaining from sex until marriage is generally a bad idea.
When a couple abstains until marriage:
- it can create pressure to marry just to have sex.
- it robs the couple of knowing whether they're compatible in an important way before they actually make the commitment of marriage.
It also perpetuates the idea that marriage is a breeding arrangement and not a partnership based on love.
All in all, I'd say that a couple that abstains until marriage is setting themselves up for a higher risk of divorce. Because of this, I think that this means that teaching abstinence is generally incompatible - or at least problematic - with upholding the sanctity of marriage.

If what is posted ^ above ^ is true, then divorce rates would be getting lower and lower.
The 'pressure to marry' is because a person fails to apply the advice found at Colossians 3:5 to deaden fleshly desire.
Don't allow the flesh to be master over the spiritual.
Habits are either: the best of servants or the worst of masters.
Bad fleshly habits, bad fleshly thinking can be the beginning of the core problem.

Back in the 60's I recall Brandon de Wilde said a man should have a least $5,000 in the bank before dating.
So, basically before looking at a woman a man should be in a financial position before looking at a woman.
To me, then the ' pressure ' would first be more about having good work habits.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Plenty of religions and cultures that preach abstinence also forbid divorce. They kinda go as a package. In many relationships in these religions and cultures, the couple doesn't divorce even if the relationship has failed. This skews the data.

Some religions also forbid marriage ( as found in the priesthood ) - 1 Timothy 4:3
The forbidding of divorce on any grounds is un-scriptural.
However, that does Not mean divorce is un-scriptural.
Jesus gave his reason for divorce as found at Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9.
Any form of 'sexual immorality' ( porneia ) is scriptural grounds for a scriptural divorce.
So, ' porneia ' would include having sex with an animal would be scriptural grounds for divorce.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

A lot depends on intent. it is the condition of the heart that matters.

The "condition of the heart" that matters.
I can agree with the 'heart conditions matters' because the Bible teaches the heart is treacherous at Jeremiah 17:9.
The heart is like having a traitor living within us.
The imperfect heart urges us to do something, and after we have done it, then it gives us all the reasons why we should Not have done what we did in the first place.
Jesus told us what comes out of the heart at Mark 7:20-23
Years ago people would say, " Don't let your heart rule your head ".
So, to me it seems they knew what they were talking about because heart-rule has caused STD's, divorce, etc.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Hey everyone. I wanted to debate about whether or not premarital sex is moral or immoral. I will take the Catholic side since I am Catholic. We believe that premarital sex is immoral. We believe that it is gravely sinful which means that if it is done with full consent of the will and knowledge of the gravity of the sin, it becomes a mortal sin which can send you to Hell.

Anyway, we Catholics believe that sexual intercourse has two purposes: procreation and the union of the spouses which have to be one man and one woman as we don't believe in same-sex marriages. Premarital sex is often violating the first purpose as it is often contracepted sex. Premarital sex always violates the second purpose since the two having sex with each other are not married.

We believe that the Bible speaks out against premarital sex but I will not quote all of the citations from the Bible about it at this time.

So, what do you think? Do you think premarital sex is moral or immoral? Why or why not?

I think it's unhelpful to look at sex in terms of moral or immoral, it's more constructive to look at it in terms of appropriate vs. inappropriate, and positive vs. negative.

Like, if you're in a long term committed monogamous adult relationship it's appropriate and positive, whether or not you have a marriage certificate. If you're a teenager having sex with multiple partners with no commitment, it's pretty inappropriate, and you're likely to wind up emotionally damaged. Both are examples of premarital sex, but very qualitatively different, I would argue.

Arbitrary "this is moral, this is immoral" declarations devoid of context aren't really helpful.