Pre Marital Sex and Marriage?

If that title does not grab a few eyes I'm not sure what will! Woo. Ha!

Well, as a heads up. I have been in a strict Southern Baptist church for the past couple of years and have truly listened, read and believe everything that I have been told (of course with some logical reasoning thrown in lol).

Well two weeks ago. I was talking with a fellow brother in Christ. He is a fellow college student studying, you guessed it, Ancient History in the Middle East, Mediterranean and Africa.He become a Christian at a small conference and has been studying like crazy every topic he can to come up with a biblical basis and to straighten out his ideology. This ranges from abortion to tithing to showing compassion to now premarital sex.

He told me he started in Exodus and Genesis and such trying to find out all that he could. And then went into the New Testament and this is his finding:

Throughout the entire Old Testament. The pre-marital sex problem wasn't present. It was unthinkable. The main problem was adultery, homosexuality and prostitution. You find no passages that show pre-marital sex to be a sin. The only supporting evidence is in Exodus and Deut. where a man must pay the dowry for seducing a virgin.

This is not a punishment for the sleeping with the virgin but rather a payment for initiating this form of "property damage" as wives and marriages were for the purpose of family growth, monetary relationships and acquisition of land! It is when a man rapes a married or engaged women that he is put to death. This is because it is adultery and it breaks property laws and its defacing or coveting another property. And because he is commit adultery.

The only forms of improper sexual conduct is that of prostitution, homosexuality and adultery (the big one). Now this ties in quickly into the New Testament. We see that the Old shows us what is sin or not in a way. Pre-marital sex is not included or even hinted, so we must see a New Testament revelation of this fact! But we do not:

Throughout the NT we see that adultery is once again condemned. We now have an introduction of "lust" in Matthew 5? Yet the Greek word stands for the definition "strong desire" with no sexual connotation. It is the same word as covet! The introduction of lusting for a women is no different than saying that you have a strong desire to take that wife from her husband. This ties together that the thought or desire to take a women and make her his own from a married man (or coveting intensely) is as bad as adultery. Its not the sexual thought of or sexual desire towards that women, but just the desire. The same word is use to say that "Jesus strongly desired to be with his disciples." Or using the definition of lust now associated with sex we would read, "Jesus strongly sexually desired to be with his disciples". The definition clearly shows that modern day and late 500AD ideas crept into the interpretation of the easy fact.

Now we move farther into the New Testament we have the only other factor of sexual immorality. This is once again in no way culturally or definition wise encompass premarital sex but rather prostitution, bisexual orgies, adultery and homosexuality. These were the sexually immoral things to do!

The word for "fornication" comes from the word "poernia" which means purely sexual immorality and not the word we associate for fornication. It is purely a interpretation and tactic to impress man's own ideas into scripture that doesn't exist! Premarital sex is never addressed or condemned or considered a sin. The modern day association and interpretation is purely human and not definite scriptural analysis.

---

Now onto marriage we do not assume that marriage happens at the formal ceremony. You do not need a marriage license to be married in God's eyes. But rather it is something totally different.

Its the life-long convent, the life-long loving commitment you make to each other that is required to be "married" in the eyes of the Lord. We reference Adam and Eve who had to "be fruitful and multiply". They never had a formal ceremony but they had to make a lifelong commitment. They had to have them two come into a single relationship.

Love is not a.... (talks about requirement for marriage isn't even love, because marriages long ago were based on families and money, but rather its all about the commitment)... they made the commitment to be together, to have a relationship between themselves with God. Sex doesn't equal the marriage, but the commitment does.

---

Now wow! I read through this and thought of all I have been taught (mind you there are PLENTY more pages on his entire ideas that he has learned and confirmed with various preachers). Its just an honest interpretation of the scriptures. He doesn't have a bias (he is married but was a virgin for a relationship for four year relationship just because he wanted to have that "first time" feeling at his wedding).

My thoughts are stirred up with this? He makes great points with various analysis. It really makes sense, and the one preacher we presented to it said he would study it and come back and talk to us, yet he hasn't responded to any emails or phone calls we give him?

I was curious other Christians, what you think of this?

__________________
"We were called to advance a Kingdom! To live with a passion, to fight for Him! And to only, every once and a while to drop our swords and look up for a smile" ~ Paul Washer

Psalm 144
Psalm 140

"I honestly believe that the American church of today preaching and teaching the Sinners prayer is creating a group of people who believe they have enough Jesus to be saved from Eternal Hell. And these souls will be harder to reach to than an indigenous tribe we could find."

Sexual mores have fluctuated all through the two Millennium of Christianity. In one late scripture a woman was fed to the lions because she gave up sex; On the other hand, the only valid reason for getting married in Paul's eyes, was if one "burned" with lust.

In pre-Christian Judea, a man might have a wife and several concubines. Or, several wives and several concubines. In the first century AD, laws were written in church rules against men having sex with boys. (Laws are written once problems pop up)

Queen Victoria actually did more to change the sexual mores in the United states than the combined weight of all the preachers up to that point.

In the time of Paul, plus or minus three hundred years, part of the soul departed with an Orgasm. On the other hand, a man was better off to spill his seed into the belly of a whore than on the ground through either masturbation or dreams;

A married couple following Judaic law had to leave the camp and wash after sex.

All kinds of guilt trips associated with sexuality have turned some psychotic!

I find the best advise was given by the author of Philip:

67. Do not fear the essence of the flesh, nor love it. If thou fear it, it will become thy master; if thou love it, it will devour thee (and¹) strangle thee. (¹asyndeton; Ps 56:4, Jn 6:63; hyperlinear)


We believe that all true marriages are made in heaven, and are predestined. On a personal note, I've seen many a couple that I knew were bound for divorce the moment the rings were exchanged, as well as "married" couples who just didn't know it yet.



It is said that when two soul mates meet for the first time, all of creation dips in their honor.

__________________
Pastor Alpha& Omega Christian Gnostic Church(retired)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Gnosis(direct experiential knowledge of God) It's not an "oh cool I'm a god" type thing. It's a calling up everybody you have ever known since childhood and apologizing for being a JERK type thing.~ Bro. Spark

Find Sophia's match for you at Gnosticmingle.com<-Not a real link "Duh"

is it a sin then to get with someone who had sex before ?

He's more or less correct, but don't think that pre-marital sex has been made OK by that information.

1 Corinthians 6:12

"All things are lawful to me, but all things are not profitable; all things are lawful to me, but I -- I will not be under authority by any;"

You will not be condemned, but neither will you be strengthened by having sex before marriage. If you are crying "too late!" then be comforted.

__________________
Pastor Alpha& Omega Christian Gnostic Church(retired)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Gnosis(direct experiential knowledge of God) It's not an "oh cool I'm a god" type thing. It's a calling up everybody you have ever known since childhood and apologizing for being a JERK type thing.~ Bro. Spark

Find Sophia's match for you at Gnosticmingle.com<-Not a real link "Duh"

Originally Posted by corymartin2012

I was curious other Christians, what you think of this?

We know that in ancient Israel virginity prior to marriage was cherished; So with regards to priests we have Lev. 20:7 "They shall not marry a prostitute or a woman who has been defiled; neither shall they marry a woman divorced from her husband. For they are holy to their God". With respect to the whole nation we have Deut. 22:20-21, "If, however, this charge is true, that evidence of the young woman’s virginity was not found, then they shall bring the young woman out to the entrance of her father’s house and the men of her town shall stone her to death, because she committed a disgraceful act in Israel by prostituting herself in her father’s house. So you shall purge the evil from your midst."

I suppose my position would be to say that the Hebrew Bible is quite clearly against sexual activity outside of the marriage covenant; recently I was reading an article in National Review and it provided the following definition of marriage which I thought was very helpful:

Marriage as a comprehensive union: Joining spouses in body as well as mind, it is begun by commitment and sealed by sexual intercourse. So completed in the acts by which new life is made, it is specially apt for and deepened by procreation, and calls for that broad sharing of domestic life uniquely fit for family life. Uniting spouses in these all-encompassing ways, it also calls for all-encompassing commitment: permanent and exclusive. Comprehensive union is valuable in itself, but its link to children’s welfare makes marriage a public good that the state should recognize, support, and in certain ways regulate.

The OT text cannot serve as a direct comparison, as western Christian culture does not completely parallel ancient eastern culture. What must be divined is the principle. There was a very important detail which really contrasts the two groups: the Jew who defiled a virgin was expected then obligated to her and expected to recompense her family. Our culture has a casual, 'love and leave' mentality that requires no commitment and sees nothing injurious in pre-marital sex.

In the NT we are acquainted with the concept of betrothal through the birth story of Jesus. This is similar, but not identical, to our engagement practice. The betrothed were bound together in covenant and to break the betrothal required 'putting away'. With this greater level of commitment came a greater level of freedom in personal matters.

The common practice of pre-marital sex is generally promiscuity and would relate well to the Biblical term 'harlotry', which is not portrayed in a favorable light. There must be some reason, discretion, and judgment applied in these matters. I would not rebuke two engaged persons for coming together sexually, if there engagement represented a true commitment and an intention to marry. Sadly, in our culture it is said sometimes that engagement just means you are dating seriously.

Ultimately, the most conservative course of conduct is generally the least objectionable. The problem is people want to find a loophole so they can do what they want. This is symptomatic of an un-transformed mentality.

Originally Posted by shanethetheologian

the most conservative course of conduct is generally the least objectionable

Surely we should be a bit more positive than this; it is not the least objectionable, it is that which is most commendable

I responded to the same post in Young Adults, http://www.christianforums.com/t7656218/#post60515718. I won't repeat it here, except to say that if you understand the NT context I think you'll see that Paul probably did oppose premarital intercourse.

In my response there I didn't give an opinion, because I'm not a young adult. I will here.

First, on marriage. I don't see what that has to do with pre-marital sex. If you're saying that Biblical marriage doesn't necessarily match what the county clerk thinks, I agree with you. But that doesn't mean that all extra-marital intercourse is OK because it counts as marriage Biblically. At least in the US, I don't know why you wouldn't do the full legal marriage if you wanted a Biblical marriage, but even if you didn't go through the legal process, the same Biblical principles apply, such as not divorcing except in extreme situations. A Biblical marriage is at least intended to be permanent. If you're engaging in premarital intercourse in a relationship that has this kind of permanent commitment, then I'd agree that you're really married from a Biblical point of view. I would, however, wonder why you wouldn't want it publicly registered.

But that's not what people normally mean by pre-marital intercourse. They are normally thinking of a temporary relationship. On that, I think 1st Cent Jewish practice is opposed, and the NT reflects that. So what if you want to do it anyway? At that point I you need to admit that you're going beyond what a traditional reading of the Bible would allow.

I am actually open to nontraditional readings. I'm willing to say that Paul's letters were written to 1st Cent Christians, and there may be differences today. As I noted in the other posting, among the differences today are a 10 year period between sexual maturity and marriage that normally didn't exist then. We're also no longer so committed to virginity that breaking up will leave the woman in an impossible situation for the rest of her life. But I do think the Bible suggests that permanent marriage is the best situation for sex. So I'm not quite ready to say that any sort of serial monogamy is just as good. I guess my advice is that if you really can't deal with a 10 year period of celibacy, you may be better to have a relationship that comes at close to Biblical ideas as possible than to burn, but I'd keep it to a minimum. I think promiscuity is an issue, and there seems to be evidence that having more partners makes an eventual permanent marriage harder. At any rate, I wouldn't want to see you think that it's OK because it's really marriage. Let's be honest where we're going beyond Biblical norms, and make sure we're prepared to accept the implications.

-----------

Incidentally, I agree with Shane that people probably did have sex during 1st Cent betrothals. I don't think it was officially allowed, just not considered a terrible thing. I'd say that same about modern engagements. But I didn't understand the OP as being directed specifically to the situation of an engaged couple.

Shane's suggestion that greater freedom is allowed in relationships with stronger commitment is surely right.

Betrothals were among wealthier families. Either the brides family, or sometimes both families would provide a house for the engaged couple. The betrothal period lasted six months, in which the couple cohabited. They were on their honor not to have sex. I think it was a "don't ask, don't tell arrangement"

In America's colonial period, engaged couples were allowed to "bundle"; that is an arrangement where a plank on edge was fastened to the bed over the quilts, with the couple sleeping on either side. Again, they were on their honor to stay apart, in a "don't ask, don't tell" arrangement.

__________________
Pastor Alpha& Omega Christian Gnostic Church(retired)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Gnosis(direct experiential knowledge of God) It's not an "oh cool I'm a god" type thing. It's a calling up everybody you have ever known since childhood and apologizing for being a JERK type thing.~ Bro. Spark

Find Sophia's match for you at Gnosticmingle.com<-Not a real link "Duh"