Sex before marriage in the christian faith

[Father Heathen]

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?

I obviously don't advocate abstinence, but that statement seems rather shallow.
I don't think people marry strictly for sex. If your husband lost his testicles in a horrible accident, would that be the end of your marriage?

 

[Alceste]

I obviously don't advocate abstinence, but that statement seems rather shallow.
I don't think people marry strictly for sex. If your husband lost his testicles in a horrible accident, would that be the end of your marriage?

I'm being facetious and responding to the equally shallow cliche "why buy the cow" etc.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

what does sex result in?

It results in pregnancy and life. life is sacred to God....especially human life because human life is created in his image. It needs to come into the world in a dignified way.

God is certainly concerned about living things. However all living things including us, exist by devouring other living things. We are made that way. Life depends on death. I have no reason to suppose that God did not intend this to be so.

This is why God is so strict on how sex is used. He wants a child to be born into the world in a secure environment where both parents are there for it.

I am sure that is no more than religious conjecture.
From a western social point of view, that seems to be the expected norm, but it is not the only viable system.

sex outside of marriage results in children without fathers, or they may end up in the abortion bucket.

It certainly can end up that way...it seems that in much of Europe single parents are coming to be close to a majority now. If you include unmarried parents that is certainly the case.
I see no evidence that God is frustrated by this trend.

That is not what God wants so he puts very tight restrictions on how sex is to be carried out.

God puts no restrictions on anything..... even Jesus aimed very little of his teaching toward sex.
I would agree that "religion" puts a strong emphasis on sexual matters, almost to the exclusion of more important ethical matters.

 

[Pegg]

God is certainly concerned about living things. However all living things including us, exist by devouring other living things. We are made that way. Life depends on death. I have no reason to suppose that God did not intend this to be so.

i agree with you on that, death brings new life to birth among the vegetation and animal kingdoms.... but i think he had other plans with regard to mankind in that regard.

I am sure that is no more than religious conjecture.
From a western social point of view, that seems to be the expected norm, but it is not the only viable system.

it seems to be the system God wants.

It certainly can end up that way...it seems that in much of Europe single parents are coming to be close to a majority now. If you include unmarried parents that is certainly the case.
I see no evidence that God is frustrated by this trend.

is it beneficial for a child to grow up without both parents? I've seen studies done where the opposite is true....children tend to do worse at school and delinquency rates are higher. Im yet to see any studies to show that single parent homes are better off.

God puts no restrictions on anything..... even Jesus aimed very little of his teaching toward sex.
I would agree that "religion" puts a strong emphasis on sexual matters, almost to the exclusion of more important ethical matters.

im not sure if you base this on what you've read in the bible or not, but i've read the bible cover to cover many times and i see plenty of evidence that sex outside of marriage, homosexuality, beastiality & prostitution are strongly condemned... even the death penalty was given under the mosaic law for sexual misconduct.

so im not sure where you get that idea, but from what i've read, it is very strongly condemned.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

im not sure if you base this on what you've read in the bible or not, but i've read the bible cover to cover many times and i see plenty of evidence that sex outside of marriage, homosexuality, beastiality & prostitution are strongly condemned... even the death penalty was given under the mosaic law for sexual misconduct.

so im not sure where you get that idea, but from what i've read, it is very strongly condemned.

The Old Testament Covers Jewish Law and social custom quite thoroughly, as does some of the New testament, though the early church and its Christian writers seems not to have been so obsessed with sex, as is the church is today.
However what has come down to us of Jesus own teachings, seem to put far less emphasis on sexual matters.

Up to modern times Marriage in the UK was more about contracts covering land and possessions. Official weddings were almost entirely limited to the gentry. Common law weddings were the norm for the poor and working folk, and did not involve anyone else, either church or civil. This practise moved to the USA and is still lawful in some states.
The early Protestant church under Luther and Calvin saw marriage as a purely civil matter and not a function of the church, but would bless the couple afterwards if it was requested..

 

[Pegg]

The Old Testament Covers Jewish Law and social custom quite thoroughly, as does some of the New testament, though the early church and its Christian writers seems not to have been so obsessed with sex, as is the church is today.
However what has come down to us of Jesus own teachings, seem to put far less emphasis on sexual matters.

Up to modern times Marriage in the UK was more about contracts covering land and possessions. Official weddings were almost entirely limited to the gentry. Common law weddings were the norm for the poor and working folk, and did not involve anyone else, either church or civil. This practise moved to the USA and is still lawful in some states.
The early Protestant church under Luther and Calvin saw marriage as a purely civil matter and not a function of the church, but would bless the couple afterwards if it was requested..

even if you think that there is not much said on sexual matters in the christian scritpures, you know there is plenty said of it in the Hebrew scritpures....and those laws we find in them are still Gods laws and still relevant for Christians. They give us a clear understanding of how God views sexual matters and even though the mosiac law is not binding to observe in the jewish sense, it is still binding to live by Gods righteous standards if we want to have a good relationship with God.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

even if you think that there is not much said on sexual matters in the christian scritpures, you know there is plenty said of it in the Hebrew scritpures....and those laws we find in them are still Gods laws and still relevant for Christians. They give us a clear understanding of how God views sexual matters and even though the mosiac law is not binding to observe in the jewish sense, it is still binding to live by Gods righteous standards if we want to have a good relationship with God.

Do not confuse Gods laws as defined by Jewish law or that believed by any other faith, with a requirement of God.
Certainly everyone will return to God when they die, what ever their faith had been or the set of laws they followed during their life.
However they lived their life, there is no chance that the taint of sin can return with them.

I personally think the "Beatitudes" gives a clear indication of Jesus priorities.
Any sin can breach the "targets" set by it. But they would all seem to have the common denominators of neglect or harm.

 

[Pegg]

Do not confuse Gods laws as defined by Jewish law or that believed by any other faith, with a requirement of God.
Certainly everyone will return to God when they die, what ever their faith had been or the set of laws they followed during their life.
However they lived their life, there is no chance that the taint of sin can return with them.

well the God im worshiping is the Jewish God, so i will certainly apply those jewish laws to my christian faith

Perhaps your comment indicates that you dont recognize Yahweh as God, and therefore i can understand why you would consider jewish law irrelevant. But you should probably take into consideration that Jesus himself was a worshiper of Yahweh/Jehovah and the laws he lived by were the jewish laws.... his own morals were based on those laws, so by learning those laws, we can understand Jesus even more fully which can only be considered a good thing.

I personally think the "Beatitudes" gives a clear indication of Jesus priorities.
Any sin can breach the "targets" set by it. But they would all seem to have the common denominators of neglect or harm.

and you dont think sex before marriage is harmful in some ways? Millions of unmarried young mothers is not harmful to their children or themselves? Teenagers who have to leave school to look after a baby is not harmful to her future prospects for finding work?

 

[Avicious]

You don't think sex before marriage is harmful in some ways? Millions of unmarried young mothers is not harmful to their children or themselves? Teenagers who have to leave school to look after a baby is not harmful to her future prospects for finding work?

I think surely this is harmful, to be a teenager raising a child. I think, though, that the unmarried mothers bit looks only on the surface. Tons of them were married at one point. They are divorced mothers. Raising a child that should be raised by both parents, they're heroes for doing such a thing. For being that strong.

That said, sex changes a lot of things, and I think it wise to live with whoever you may marry BEFORE you marry them, and to sleep with them. Why? Well, because sex changes everything, just as living together and being married does. These are things you should explore before making that life changing choice.

However, not using some form of control, that is harmful and down right stupid and they deserve whatever they get for not doing so. (Unless for other reasons such as rape or some such thing.)

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

well the God im worshiping is the Jewish God, so i will certainly apply those jewish laws to my christian faith

The God every one worships is the same God. That is if we believe there is only one god.

Perhaps your comment indicates that you dont recognize Yahweh as God, and therefore i can understand why you would consider jewish law irrelevant.

As my answer above... the name we ascribe to God is irrelevant, and only indicate our religions nomenclature.

But you should probably take into consideration that Jesus himself was a worshiper of Yahweh/Jehovah and the laws he lived by were the jewish laws.... his own morals were based on those laws, so by learning those laws, we can understand Jesus even more fully which can only be considered a good thing.

Jesus was a Jew and like all Jews, avoided using names that they ascribed to God.

His morals were based on Judaism. However in his teachings he change the emphasis from the negative Idea of a law based list of sins, to an positive Idea based one, which put the emphasis on sins of omission. This is indicated most clearly in the Beatitudes. Which give a very positive expression of what he admired and wanted us to follow. It changed the basis from one of "Fear" to one of "Love"

and you dont think sex before marriage is harmful in some ways? Millions of unmarried young mothers is not harmful to their children or themselves? Teenagers who have to leave school to look after a baby is not harmful to her future prospects for finding work?

Sex before marriage Is no more and no less sinful than sex after marriage.
Many people chose not to marry, and can live their lives and raise their children as equally well as married couples. Most marriages these days have no religious content at all. In the majority of Protestant countries only civil marriage is legal.

It is not sinful to be a single mother, or for a Gay couple to conceive and bring up children.
Contrary wise it is sinful to rape your wife or partner or otherwise abuse them.

Teenagers who conceive are perhaps ill advised, and should have use contraception. The potentially hard life that may follow is not sinful. nor is the sex or the getting pregnant.

 

[Muffled]

It did make practical sense in a time when sex would almost certainly produce a child, and women and children were completely economically dependent on men. Requiring life long commitment before sex is an obvious way to protect the interests of children in that context. Likewise, religious rules like "don't east shellfish" probably had a practical motive before we understood red tide.

Those conditions are no longer the case, thank God. Women can have sex without children and support ourselves. It's not surprising "no sex before marriage" has become little more than empty words parroted by hypocrites.

However I believe eating shellfish would not be considered a sin.

Its nice that you are able to discern God's purpose. I believe that sex is pertinent to a relationship whether children are present or not. I believe that a lifetime relationship (marriage) is preferable to fly by night relationships because they give a person stability. I believe fleeting relationships are damaging to the psyche.

 

[Muffled]

If you're a Baptist it is extremely bad to have sex standing up before marriage. Not only are you fornicating but you are also dancing.

I encountered someone from West Virginia who wasn't allowed to dance but my baptist church held dances in the fellowship hall. At the time I personnally did not feel comfortable with that even though I had no teaching on it but since becoming a christian I have come to see that religion encompasses life.

BTW secular dances held by a school usually prohibit dirty dancing and even non-school events have been raided by the police for that practice.

 

[Muffled]

I believe marrying someone before having sex with them is a sin.

What is the basis for your belief?

I believe a person should marry another person for better or worse. The relationship should define sex not sex the relationship IMO.

 

[Alceste]

However I believe eating shellfish would not be considered a sin.

Its nice that you are able to discern God's purpose. I believe that sex is pertinent to a relationship whether children are present or not. I believe that a lifetime relationship (marriage) is preferable to fly by night relationships because they give a person stability. I believe fleeting relationships are damaging to the psyche.

Assuming that you mean "anything less than marriage" when you say "fly by night relationships", I think you're wrong. My husband and I both had many serious relationships before we met, and I'm glad we did. We value each other more knowing how easy it is to get stuck in a relationship that doesn't work, with someone who just isn't right for you. We're better communicators than most couples we know, and have more fun in bed than I did with my first or second boyfriend.

Most importantly, neither of us are sitting around wondering if we could have done better, or wishing we'd played the field a bit more before settling down for life. I see both those factors destroying marriages all around me, particularly those of people who got married young.

 

[Avicious]

Assuming that you mean "anything less than marriage" when you say "fly by night relationships", I think you're wrong. My husband and I both had many serious relationships before we met, and I'm glad we did. We value each other more knowing how easy it is to get stuck in a relationship that doesn't work, with someone who just isn't right for you. We're better communicators than most couples we know, and have more fun in bed than I did with my first or second boyfriend.

Most importantly, neither of us are sitting around wondering if we could have done better, or wishing we'd played the field a bit more before settling down for life. I see both those factors destroying marriages all around me, particularly those of people who got married young.

I find this shcokingly true for many couples including me and mine.

we will most likely end for this reason and because he isn't good for me.

 

[Alceste]

I find this shcokingly true for many couples including me and mine.

we will most likely end for this reason and because he isn't good for me.

I've been there. I imagine we've all been there. The trick is not to get stuck there for life.

 

[ChristineES]

I obviously don't advocate abstinence, but that statement seems rather shallow.
I don't think people marry strictly for sex. If your husband lost his testicles in a horrible accident, would that be the end of your marriage?

I agree. Marriage is based on other things other than sex. If it is only based on sex, there is really no foundation if one of the partners sex drive changed or if one of them became unable to have sex anymore.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

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

A Frenchman

 

[Reverend Richard]

Originally Posted by Pegg
what would you call a republican who promotes government run welfare programs?

A Frenchman

Now that's funny! LOL!

 

[Muffled]

I agree. Marriage is based on other things other than sex. If it is only based on sex, there is really no foundation if one of the partners sex drive changed or if one of them became unable to have sex anymore.

This becomes particularly so in old age when the body goes through changes.