Is premarital sex really a sin?

[Triumphant_Loser]

You seem to be missing the point.
I know the fire exists.
I know consequences exist.
I know the judge exists.

Bold empty threats from an imaginary being do not impress.

But how else are they gonna up the membership and get a little $$$ in the offering plate?

 

[sojourner]

The issue comes down to an issue of authority.

Does the individual decide what is right or wrong, or does God?

God has said in his word that premarital sex is wrong, Jesus said if you look on a woman to lust after her in your heart, you have committed adultery already in your heart.

The problem is that God created men and woman to marry and to be in a permanent relationship so that they could raise godly children, premarital sex is wicked mainly because it is rebellion against what God says is right or wrong, but some other reasons would be that it contradicts the family structure that God has ordained, Also kids growing up without both a mom and dad in the same home has devastating consequences on the kids, I know because I am one of them, and it took the grace of God to change my life and get me heading in the right direction. God has ordained that sex be something reserved for marriage.

But really the issue comes down to who is your final authority, you and your feelings, sexual impulses, and desires, or God.

That is the basic problem every human being must face, it is the reason why people embrace atheism and why they reject God, because people do not want to submit to the authority of God, we are all rebels, we have all rejected God, Romans 3:23 for all have sinned... We have all lied, cheated, stolen, hated someone, had lust in our heart, and done wicked ungodly things that we knew were wrong when we did them, yet man loves his sin so much that he tries to find intellectual arguments and reasons to ease his conscience and make himself feel better. One day all will stand before God and all will be guilty of sin, your only hope is that you repent of your sins and turn to Jesus Christ, he died on the cross for the penalty of your sin. Romans 10:13- for whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

My suggestion for all reading this is, do not seek for ways to justify your sin, go to God and admit that the sin you love is wicked, and confess your sinfulness to Christ, and ask him to save you, and he will cleanse you of your sins and change your life. That is what happened to me, I was a drug addict and a fornicator and I always was seeking ways to justify my sin, but we all know deep down inside that we are wrong. You know the truth, For those who have ears to hear, Hear me, God is warning you, Repent from your sins and turn to Christ now while you still can, What shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and yet lose his own soul? Why do ye labor for that which satisfies not? Jesus told a woman at the well, whoever drinks of this water shall thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I give shall never thirst. How has the waters of sin satisfied you? it always leaves you thirsty, there is living water. I'm sure many will mock at this message, but God is speaking to someone, you know if he's speaking to you, listen to his voice.

The issue comes down to what one believes about the bible.

 

[sincerly]

The issue comes down to what one believes about the bible.

Right! and the consequences therein remain as stated therein.

 

[sojourner]

Right! and the consequences therein remain as stated therein.

Only for those that believe those consequences as a result of a certain belief about the directives therein.

Such forms of "reality" are neither ubiquitous nor binding.

 

[McBell]

Hi Mestemia, "imaginary"? What I see is real. What I see could not have spontaneously appeared from nothing. What I see came about for a purpose---not from chance nor out of chaos.
Therefore, what I see does "impress" the consequences which you acknowledge as existing are, also, real.

You are either to ignorant of the topic or to dishonest about it for me to be bothered with it with you any further.

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by sincerly View Post
Right! and the consequences therein remain as stated therein.

Only for those that believe those consequences as a result of a certain belief about the directives therein.

Such forms of "reality" are neither ubiquitous nor binding.

What those Scriptures declare isn't dependent on what one believes, but only in what they have recorded in them. "and the consequences therein remain as stated therein."

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by sincerly View Post
Hi Mestemia, "imaginary"? What I see is real. What I see could not have spontaneously appeared from nothing. What I see came about for a purpose---not from chance nor out of chaos.
Therefore, what I see does "impress" the consequences which you acknowledge as existing are, also, real.

You are either to ignorant of the topic or to dishonest about it for me to be bothered with it with you any further.

As far as the topic and the scriptural answer, premarital sex without the intent to follow through to marriage to that one of the opposite sex is "Sin".

 

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by sincerly View Post
Right! and the consequences therein remain as stated therein.



What those Scriptures declare isn't dependent on what one believes, but only in what they have recorded in them. "and the consequences therein remain as stated therein."

Sure they are, because they only carry the authority that one invests in them. To many people, the bible is not in the least an authority -- they don't believe it. Therefore, the condemnation therein has no bearing upon them. The bible's authority (as I said before) is not ubiquitous.

 

[McBell]

As far as the topic and the scriptural answer, premarital sex without the intent to follow through to marriage to that one of the opposite sex is "Sin".

My apologies.
I did not mean the thread topic.
I meant the slight tangent we were on.

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by sincerly View Post
Originally Posted by sincerly View Post
Right! and the consequences therein remain as stated therein.

What those Scriptures declare isn't dependent on what one believes, but only in what they have recorded in them. "and the consequences therein remain as stated therein."

Sure they are, because they only carry the authority that one invests in them. To many people, the bible is not in the least an authority -- they don't believe it. Therefore, the condemnation therein has no bearing upon them. The bible's authority (as I said before) is not ubiquitous.

Sojourner, Right! many do NOT believe, but that doesn't change what is in the Scriptures. That is the freedom one has--no coercion--but the consequences(known/refused) are dependent upon one's choice. Therefore, are ubiquitous. One's beliefs doesn't change What HE has said/recorded therein.

As recorded in Gen.3:4, "Ye shall not surely die"---But "many" do so daily.

 

[sojourner]

many do NOT believe, but that doesn't change what is in the Scriptures.

But it does change the truth of what is in them. Truth is relative to one's perspective.

One's beliefs doesn't change What HE has said/recorded therein.

"HE" didn't say or record anything therein. The authors were all very human.

 

[sincerly]

Quote:
many do NOT believe, but that doesn't change what is in the Scriptures.[/quote]

But it does change the truth of what is in them. Truth is relative to one's perspective.

Sorry, but what one's perspective is concerning what is written still does not change the truth of what is recorded. One's perspective only tells what one has concluded for himself.

One's beliefs doesn't change What HE has said/recorded therein.

"HE" didn't say or record anything therein. The authors were all very human.

Those human(Inspired writers)authors acknowledged that what they were recording was from the "HE"/Almighty Creator GOD.

 

[sojourner]

Sorry, but what one's perspective is concerning what is written still does not change the truth of what is recorded. One's perspective only tells what one has concluded for himself.

Of course it does, because what is recorded is the opinion/perspective of the writer. Some may agree with that opinion; some may not. The "truth" revealed is nothing more than one opinion or perspective of truth.

Those human(Inspired writers)authors acknowledged that what they were recording was from the "HE"/Almighty Creator GOD.

No. They didn't. Subsequent audiences have attributed that to them.

 

[jonathan180iq]

In the Bible, married dudes do it with women who aren't their wives all the time.

Is it OK to bang lots of women as long as you're married?
But unless you're married sex is a no-no?
Is that why so many of these fundamentalist families rush to get married - for the banging?

If there is one aspect of the fundamentalist concept of marriage, it's their belief that women need to be sexually available to their man all the time, whenever he wants, day or night...ya know, because Adam was a man and needed and partner and having insatiable lust is totally fine, as long as it's with your wife, and then subsequently any other woman that you choose... But not before marriage.

 

[sincerly]

Sorry, but what one's perspective is concerning what is written still does not change the truth of what is recorded. One's perspective only tells what one has concluded for himself.

Of course it does, because what is recorded is the opinion/perspective of the writer. Some may agree with that opinion; some may not. The "truth" revealed is nothing more than one opinion or perspective of truth.

Right! "of course it does" is because "one's perspective only tells what one has concluded for himself"---NOT what the writer under inspiration of GOD has said in the message. And as such, the reader "concludes" an "opinion"---but not necessarily the "Truth".

Those human(Inspired writers)authors acknowledged that what they were recording was from the "HE"/Almighty Creator GOD.

No. They didn't. Subsequent audiences have attributed that to them.

The "thus saith the LORD GOD" denotes they DID. and Yes, it is "subsequent audiences"/today's non-believers who denounce the Creator GOD and HIS instructions for righteous living who do the "attributing".

Gen.1:27-28 and 2:24 are still the rule of The Creator GOD.
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply,..."

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

Two males or two females (unions) do NOT reproduce offspring.

 

[sojourner]

"one's perspective only tells what one has concluded for himself"---NOT what the writer under inspiration of GOD has said in the message. And as such, the reader "concludes" an "opinion"---but not necessarily the "Truth".

Remember that one's perspective also dictates what one writes -- and as such, the writer concludes his opinion -- but not necessarily the truth.

The "thus saith the LORD GOD" denotes they DID.

I could say "thus saith the Lord;" no one would believe me. it denotes, again, an opinion.

Gen.1:27-28 and 2:24 are still the rule of The Creator GOD.
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply,..."

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

Two males or two females (unions) do NOT reproduce offspring.

Again -- an opinion of the writer. And one that's been shown to be incongruent with reality as we now perceive it.

 

[sincerly]

Again -- an opinion of the writer. And one that's been shown to be incongruent with reality as we now perceive it.

Yes! Yes! Yes! The red tells it all. It isn't that the writings/Scriptures have been rendered invalid, but that the beliefs of some of the "Now perceiving ones" are not congruent with the reality of the Scriptures.

Those inspired writers didn't record their "opinions", but the messages they were asked/told to give to the people.
The Scriptures (Lev. 20:13) "Thou shalt say": "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

 

[sojourner]

Yes! Yes! Yes! The red tells it all. It isn't that the writings/Scriptures have been rendered invalid, but that the beliefs of some of the "Now perceiving ones" are not congruent with the reality of the Scriptures.

Those inspired writers didn't record their "opinions", but the messages they were asked/told to give to the people.
The Scriptures (Lev. 20:13) "Thou shalt say": "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

No. The factual veracity of the texts is in question, because the reality they portray is incongruent with known facts about the world. The writers did record their opinion, because that's all anyone records: their own perspective.

The text you cite is no longer relevant in light of what we now know about human sexuality. It represents the perspective of the writer.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Those inspired writers didn't record their "opinions", but the messages they were asked/told to give to the people.
The Scriptures (Lev. 20:13) "Thou shalt say": "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

I hear a whole lotta talk from the fundies, but they're still too scared to pick up those stones. I'll be here waiting for whenever ya'll get the courage to actually start following through with the hatred and violence that your book teaches.

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by sincerly View Post
Yes! Yes! Yes! The red tells it all. It isn't that the writings/Scriptures have been rendered invalid, but that the beliefs of some of the "Now perceiving ones" are not congruent with the reality of the Scriptures.

Those inspired writers didn't record their "opinions", but the messages they were asked/told to give to the people.
The Scriptures (Lev. 20:13) "Thou shalt say": "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

No. The factual veracity of the texts is in question, because the reality they portray is incongruent with known facts about the world.

Those same Scriptures record the behavior of the human race for thousands of years. Those texts are still valid and the veracity of them has been rebelled against since mankind's imaginations have continually been stayed upon the "evil".

The text you cite is no longer relevant in light of what we now know about human sexuality. It represents the perspective of the writer.

Human sexuality has been understood since Adam "knew" Eve and Cain was the product. The "lust of/for sexual stimulation" is known to be satisfied in many ways, but the Creator GOD specified the only method approved by HIM to prevent many problems. Those were recorded by those Inspired writers as they were so inspired by GOD.

The writers did record their opinion, because that's all anyone records: their own perspective.

See above.