Is cohabitation really a sin?

[Far Side Of the Moon]

Would God disapprove? What makes it wrong... I've had some people tell me it was but why exactly. Thanks.

 

[A_Thinker]

Would God disapprove? What makes it wrong... I've had some people tell me it was but why exactly. Thanks.

The scriptures say "yes" ... cohabitation (plus accompanying cohabiting activity) is wrong.

What's wrong with it ... is that it can lead to children born outside of the structure of marriage. Such has been shown to be detrimental to a child's successful development.

Also, there is more of a chance of sexual disease.

Of course, marriage doesn't perfectly protect one from these situations, but at least, you're starting out on the right foot ...

 

[Far Side Of the Moon]

The scriptures say "yes" ... cohabitation (plus accompanying cohabiting activity) is wrong.

What's wrong with it ... is that it can lead to children born outside of the structure of marriage. Such has been shown to be detrimental to a child's successful development.

Also, there is more of a chance of sexual disease.

Of course, marriage doesn't perfectly protect one from these situations, but at least, you're starting out on the right foot ...

Where in scripture does it say this? Not trying to be difficult just wondering where it can be found.

 

[A_Thinker]

Where in scripture does it say this? Not trying to be difficult just wondering where it can be found.

1 Corintians 7

1 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”

2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.

 

[hedrick]

What is your approach to Christianity? There are three major ones:

* Christianity is a living tradition. Decisions on basic matters of ethics are made by the tradition. (Catholic, Orthodox)
* The Bible is an instruction book. We expect to find answers there. (Conservative Protestant)
* The Bible is a witness to God’s actions and to Christ. It establishes basic principles, but it may not be appropriate to follow 1st Cent rules in the 21st Cent. (liberal Protestant)

The tradition is clear that sex is only for marriage.

The Bible has no explicit prohibitions, and in fact the OT has a relationship where sex is allowed but falls short of marriage (concubine). However Paul’s statements on sex pretty clearly imply that sex outside marriage is wrong. 1 Cor 7:36-38 assumes that if someone is unable to refrain from sex they will get married. See also 1 Cor 7:1-2, quoted above.

So depending upon your position
* no
* no
* maybe

CF rules don’t permit a serious examination of this question from the liberal perspective, which is why I say simply maybe. There are issues even for liberals, but I don’t think we can look at them here.

 

[Far Side Of the Moon]

1 Corintians 7

1 Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”

2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.

Wow. I have to look at this.

 

[Far Side Of the Moon]

Well I looked it up.... What if u marry quickly then?

 

[A_Thinker]

Well I looked it up.... What if u marry quickly then?

Marrying quickly might not be wise.

It depends on how long you have been involved with your intended. You should believe that you can build a viable permanent relationship with them, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do you part ...

 

[GTW27]

Would God disapprove? What makes it wrong... I've had some people tell me it was but why exactly. Thanks.

Perhaps a look at what He does approve of will help; Gen 2.24, Mathew, 19.5, Eph 5.31 and Mark 10.8. For it to be there 4 times, speaks volumns. For me to tell you otherwise would also be wrong. There is a mystery in the joining of the flesh between a woman and a man. This is only to be done under The Holy institution of marraige. This is His design, as are we. This was written assuming cohabitation involves sex. Happy Thanksgiving Far Side! Been awhile.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Living with someone isn't a sin, but its not a good idea. Its temptation at its peak. Now actually having sex with someone your living with, well thats a sin.

 

[whereloveandmercymeet]

Living with someone isn’t a sin. It’s what you do with them that may, or may not, be. And then usually that depends on your approach, like Hedrick says.

 

[EzekielsWheels]

Living with someone isn't a sin, but its not a good idea. Its temptation at its peak. Now actually having sex with someone your living with, well thats a sin.

Yeah I was wondering this myself. I don't believe it's a sin per se but the temptation to have sex before marriage is huge (only needs to happen once).

 

[Tolworth John]

Would God disapprove? What makes it wrong... I've had some people tell me it was but why exactly. Thanks.

Mariage is the noral arrangement through out the bible except for conqubines, but even these had rights.
So the 10C 'do not commit adultery' is speaking about having sex outside of ones marriage.

Apart from being obedient to God, secular science shows that marriage is best for everyone. see
Cohabitation May be Hazardous to Your health | The Stream
and
Moving In and Moving On
this report on the Harm it does to children:-
Behind The Scary New Findings About Unmarried Parents


Basicly follow the makers instructions be radicly different.

 

[Dave-W]

Thru the OT there is this phrase used to describe those who have sex outside of marriage: “Play the harlot.”

It was used primarily of women but could apply to guys as well. It was what we would now call “consensual” sex. It was routinely condemned as sinful.

In a 1976 booklet on covenant, Dr Derek Prince said that since sex connects a couple at a very deep level, without the covenant bonds of marriage, it does severe damage when the relationship falls apart. God’s direction that sex be limited to marriage is to keep us from being injured.

 

[Dave-W]

Well I looked it up.... What if u marry quickly then?

The text sees to indicate that it would be ok to do that. Most everyone I know (myself included) would say it is a bad idea.

The difference is back then EVERYONE knew that marriage was hard work; and once in a marriage, they worked hard to make it work. No one does that today.

 

[Sketcher]

If you cohabitate, people both inside and outside of the church will assume you are fornicating. That is not good. Furthermore, there's too much temptation in that situation to realistically not fornicate at some point.

And depending on the study you read, there's an increased chance of abuse and/or cheating in a cohabiting relationship. It doesn't really make sense then, to cohabitate with someone that you haven't vetted as much as someone you are going to marry. And if you're going to vet someone that much, might as well marry them. If you're unsure that you're ready to marry, hold off.

Do you want to go through the desert of living with someone you broke up with because you're both on the lease? No, you do not. Do you want to become a single mother as a result of one of these relationships going bad? No, you do not.

 

[Andrew77]

Well I looked it up.... What if u marry quickly then?

I've met people that are still suffering the consequences in their 40s, of choices they made in their 20s. You can play around with fire as much as you want. Just understand your chances of being burned, are pretty high.

The sin of fornication is clearly written. You are not supposed to be screwing someone you are not married to. I know several couples that wish they had not made such bad choices. A know a lady that will likely be single for the rest of her life, because she has an incurable illness, and no guy wants anything to do with her, and her son.

Does this mean, this will happen to you, if you do whatever you want? I don't know. But the chances of you ending up a single mother with an illness for life, is a ton lower if you do life right.

Now, can you have a male roommate? Yes.... but I would not suggest it. You can.

I had a female roommate years and years ago. Absolutely zero romantic interest. Zero. None. And we got along fine. But she was only a roommate. Actually she was a renter. I owned the house, and she was renting a room. She lost her job, and was getting kicked out of her apartment, and I offered to help her with a room to rent.

If you have any romantic interest whatsoever in the other person, then I would advise you to be wise, and not do that. In fact, even if you do not, I would consider it carefully, before going into this.

The bottom line is, if you want a real relationship, and a family, with a man... you need to wait until you are married, and married.

You shouldn't be dating a guy for longer than a year. You should be moving toward marriage, or moving on to someone else who does want to move towards marriage.

And get married as soon as you are ready. Don't do this waiting around until you are 40 to get married. That's insane.

And don't wait until you are "financially secure". Who is financially secure? When does that happen? Get married, and get "financially secure" together as a couple.

That's my advice. But don't be screwing around. You can ruin 20 years of your life, in 20 minutes with a guy you are not married to. Don't do it. Bad idea.

 

[Far Side Of the Moon]

The bottom line is, if you want a real relationship, and a family, with a man... you need to wait until you are married, and married.

You shouldn't be dating a guy for longer than a year. You should be moving toward marriage, or moving on to someone else who does want to move towards marriage.

And get married as soon as you are ready. Don't do this waiting around until you are 40 to get married. That's insane.

Why do you say that?( I think 2 years is suffice to know if you want to marry someone or not....anything else after then...youre just wasting time) But i do agree with not being with someone for 2+ years and you're doing all the wifely duties without a ring. A friend of mine has kids and been with her guy 9+ years still no ring. I feel id be so used if I do wifely duties for years and still don't get married its a waste of time and i wonder why guys lead some women on like that. You know you aren't going to marry them so why expect so much out of them?

 

[FireDragon76]

Our church tolerates this but we still encourage people to enter legal marriage whenever possible. Not because we think that people who are cohabitating are necessarily bad people, or because we think of marriage as a sacrament (we do not), but because we think those sorts of relationships deserve the legal protections afforded to marriage.

 

[Andrew77]

Why do you say that?( I think 2 years is suffice to know if you want to marry someone or not....anything else after then...youre just wasting time) But i do agree with not being with someone for 2+ years and you're doing all the wifely duties without a ring. A friend of mine has kids and been with her guy 9+ years still no ring. I feel id be so used if I do wifely duties for years and still don't get married its a waste of time and i wonder why guys lead some women on like that. You know you aren't going to marry them so why expect so much out of them?

There is no hard fast rule. Obviously, if 2 years is your standard, then great.

I would suggest that the risk involves, the point at which the women becomes 'invested'. Do you gather my meaning?

There is a point where women stays in the relationship, for no other reason, than because they have been in the relationship for a period of time. They are 'invested'.

When does that point happen? Hard to know exactly, but once that point is reached, it is far more difficult for a woman to disconnect.

So my general theory of relationships, is that you should know in under a year. You should be able to determine if:

(if you are a christian) 0. The man is also a christian. You should never date a non-christian.
1. The man is crazy.
2. The man's family is crazy.
3. The man works a job, and isn't a slob.
4. The man has a dictionary worth of ex-whatevers, and kids he is obligated to.
5. The man is worth marrying, your parents approve of him, and he actually wants to marry.

If he passes all that in 12 months, why would you wait? Start your life. Get married.

If he doesn't pass any of those.... you should move on. There is nothing to be gained by hanging out with any guy that doesn't pass the requirements.

The other side is, human nature, and sexual desire.

Here's the reality of human relationships. You are either growing closer, or drifting apart. There really is no in between. There is no point where you reach a static state. This is true pre-marriage as well.

So when you date for years on end, without getting married, you are begging to end up sleeping around before being married. And sleeping with a guy before getting married, is a great way to end up wrecking your life.

Not only do you invite all kinds of problems, but you sabotage your chances of ever getting married to the guy. Sad fact of modern western culture..... If the guy can get you to meet his needs before marriage... why get married?

I have met guys that were hot to get married. But the women wanted to live together before marriage. So they did. A year later, that same guy that was actually pushing to get married, now was completely against. Why get married? What for? He's getting what he wants already. He doesn't need to get married.

That women, absolutely destroyed her own relationship. They eventually broke up, and he found someone else. Meanwhile, she's now a single mother.

Dating for a long period of time, is very bad. It's not only just bad because you end up in bad situations like you mentioned, it is bad because it sabotages your own relationships.