Sex before marriage in the christian faith

[Alceste]

Yes....... I figured the age gap (between 14 and 20's!) as I wrote, and should have noted that.

Decades ago I was 'connected' to a religious (but not christian) group through my 1st wife. This group had a rigid 'no sex before marriage' rule. Oh dear...... the divorces! The marriage would take place, then, not that long afterwards, the stories would creep out into the community, about what she or he 'did or did not want'. Then the separation. Then the divorce. Of course, the backbiting broke a strict religious code, but that didn't seem to matter as much as the no-sex-before thing.

I now believe that a 'no-sex-before' tenet is absolutely totally high-risk dangerous.

I tend to agree. My Christian friends who "waited" did a heck of a lot of fooling around. You can get some idea what you're getting into by narrowing your definition of what constitutes "sex" WAY down. They seem very happy together.

What you want to avoid is this type of thing:

[youtube]Xp-jZyzQSms[/youtube]
YouTube

 

[ChristineES]

I still don't see absolutely any problem with waiting until you are married. If you don't follow the faith then you are not obligated.

It is rather disquieting to me that people spend so much time worrying about what others are doing rather than looking at themselves- and that includes Christians and non-Christians. People who wait judging those who didn't and those who don't wait judging those who do. It's on both sides and it's kind of depressing. Anything we Christians consider a sin is only between each of us and God- and anyone else who is affected. Otherwise, we ought to stay out of it.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I still don't see absolutely any problem with waiting until you are married. If you don't follow the faith then you are not obligated.

It is rather disquieting to me that people spend so much time worrying about what others are doing rather than looking at themselves- and that includes Christians and non-Christians. People who wait judging those who didn't and those who don't wait judging those who do. It's on both sides and it's kind of depressing. Anything we Christians consider a sin is only between each of us and God- and anyone else who is affected. Otherwise, we ought to stay out of it.

Well, I couldn't care less if people want to wait or not. If it works for them, I say go for it.

I do wonder if that includes Vegas weddings, however. If a couple says they waited until they got married 4 hours after they met, is that considered legitimate by folks who thinks it's better to wait?

Again, my own personal opinion is whatever floats yer boat, go for it.

 

[ChristineES]

Well, I couldn't care less if people want to wait or not. If it works for them, I say go for it.

I do wonder if that includes Vegas weddings, however. If a couple says they waited until they got married 4 hours after they met, is that considered legitimate by folks who thinks it's better to wait?

Again, my own personal opinion is whatever floats yer boat, go for it.

I got married in Reno. Is that the same? We were married in the Chapel of the Bells 21 years ago. Kind of funny. Sometimes I wonder if I hadn't waited, that I would have had a better marriage, though. No one said being a Christian was easy.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I got married in Reno. Is that the same? We were married in the Chapel of the Bells 21 years ago. Kind of funny. Sometimes I wonder if I hadn't waited, that I would have had a better marriage, though. No one said being a Christian was easy.

LOL I don't know. I know I've met couples who married the day after they met at a bar because one or both were committed to saving themselves for marriage.

If they divorced 2 months later, I wonder if it's considered legitimate in the eyes of the Christian community, considering it might be looked at as another version of the serial monogamy we see a lot in society.

 

[Skwim]

if any christian is endorsing sex before marriage, they should not be calling themselves a christian and they should absolutely not be teaching christianity to anyone else.

It continues to amuse me when people of a particular faith, which are almost always Christians, include or exclude others from the faith by how closely their beliefs match up. It's little different than saying, "You should not be calling yourself a black person unless you're as black as I am," or, "You're not properly dressed for Church unless you dress as I do."

While I understand this need to regard those characteristics that destinguish ones self as X as defining, it's rather amusing to those of us who stand outside the circle of X and see such hubris for what it is.

 

[crownbest]

These people you call Christian are Not christiaNs they only use this avenue to accomplish their selfish interest. The bible warn against. Therefore those that practise it are not christian.

 

[crownbest]

The bible say believe not every spirit, but TRY the spirits whether they are of GOD. Because many false prophet are gone out into the world. (1jo 4:1-3). Therefore be wise.

 

[Pegg]

It continues to amuse me when people of a particular faith, which are almost always Christians, include or exclude others from the faith by how closely their beliefs match up. It's little different than saying, "You should not be calling yourself a black person unless you're as black as I am," or, "You're not properly dressed for Church unless you dress as I do."

While I understand this need to regard those characteristics that destinguish ones self as X as defining, it's rather amusing to those of us who stand outside the circle of X and see such hubris for what it is.

what would you call a republican who promotes government run welfare programs?

 

[Alceste]

what would you call a republican who promotes government run welfare programs?

A Republican.

Seriously, do you think the republicans want to eliminate welfare altogether?

That would be too irresponsible, even for them.

 

[Pegg]

A Republican.

Seriously, do you think the republicans want to eliminate welfare altogether?

That would be too irresponsible, even for them.

c'mon i think you know where i was going with that... im not debating politics here lol

 

[Alceste]

c'mon i think you know where i was going with that... im not debating politics here lol

ok, fair enough.

I still disagree though. Every denomination of christianity cherry picks the rules that are consistent with the social norms of their community, and many are not all that bothered anything Paul said (better to marry than burn) or any OT rules.

If women have their hair uncovered, wear mixed fabrics, eat shellfish or speak in your church, what's the difference between that and premarital sex? It's all prohibited.

 

[Reverend Richard]

Your uncle was very 19th century. These days people get married because they fall in love and want to live together. It's no longer a purely economic arrangement for women - sex in exchange for a house to live in and food to eat. Thank God, we're finally allowed to have more interesting jobs.

It's time to put that expression out to pasture.

LOL! Tell that to my nephews who are in their late teens and early 20s.

As far as I can tell male (and female) hormones have not changed that much since the 1800s, and the single bars are more prevalent, and busier, than ever. There are a lot "freebies" being exchanged, without commitment nor the expectation of one.

And the "why buy the cow" also works the other way for women...i.e. why buy the bull (and the b.s.) when the girls can get the steak for free. I don't see the arrangement as unfair, but today, frequent casual sex is like playing Russian roulette with your health.

 

[Alceste]

LOL! Tell that to my nephews who are in their late teens and early 20s.

As far as I can tell male (and female) hormones have not changed that much since the 1800s, and the single bars are more prevalent, and busier, than ever. There are a lot "freebies" being exchanged, without commitment nor the expectation of one.

And the "why buy the cow" also works the other way for women...i.e. why buy the bull (and the b.s.) when the girls can get the steak for free. I don't see the arrangement as unfair, but today, frequent casual sex is like playing Russian roulette with your health.

That's why God gave us condoms.

Besides, who buys a cow without trying the milk first? What if you get a non-producing cow?

 

[Skwim]

what would you call a republican who promotes government run welfare programs?

I don't call them anything other than what they call themselves.

 

[Pegg]

ok, fair enough.

I still disagree though. Every denomination of christianity cherry picks the rules that are consistent with the social norms of their community, and many are not all that bothered anything Paul said (better to marry than burn) or any OT rules.

If women have their hair uncovered, wear mixed fabrics, eat shellfish or speak in your church, what's the difference between that and premarital sex? It's all prohibited.

there are some very definite and clear rules though...fornication is one of them and that includes sex outside of wedlock

I just dont know how anyone claiming to follow the christian faith can overlook things which are so obvious...i can understand the debating over less obvious rules, but this one sticks out like a sore thumb

 

[Alceste]

there are some very definite and clear rules though...fornication is one of them and that includes sex outside of wedlock

I just dont know how anyone claiming to follow the christian faith can overlook things which are so obvious...i can understand the debating over less obvious rules, but this one sticks out like a sore thumb

That just happens to be one rule that suits the norms and expectations of your personal sect of christianity. There are lots of other sects. Premarital sects, even!

 

[Pegg]

....frequent casual sex is like playing Russian roulette with your health.

not to mention the trail of unfathered children who grow up disadvantaged and in poverty

 

[Pegg]

That just happens to be one rule that suits the norms and expectations of your personal sect of christianity. There are lots of other sects. Premarital sects, even!

yes, cherry pickers

 

[Skwim]

there are some very definite and clear rules though...fornication is one of them and that includes sex outside of wedlock

I just dont know how anyone claiming to follow the christian faith can overlook things which are so obvious...i can understand the debating over less obvious rules, but this one sticks out like a sore thumb

So obviously those who divorce for reasons other than adultery, and practicing homosexuals are not Christians even though in every other way they qualify as such.

This why your claim that people are not Christians unless they conform to your requirements comes off as hubris. Which is fine, but don't expect anyone else to pay any attention to your claim, other than to tell you we are aware of what a narrow minded position you're operating from: JWs are the only Christians in the world.