Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Fornication is forbidden either sex.Strictly speaking biblically, a single woman can have sex with either a married or unmarried man - or, reverse that - a married or unmarried man can have sex with a single woman - without committing adultery because adultery only happens when a husband's exclusive sexual rights to his wife are broken. So also, a male can be married to 100 women, have sex with them all, then go out and have sex with 100 unmarried women, and not commit adultery. But if he has sex with 1 woman married to someone else, he commits adultery.
The plot thickensHate to say it but this also seems to be the source of Paul's terminology: "Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For 'the two,' He says, 'shall become one flesh.' (1 Cr 6:16)
I think, sometimes, we all have a tendency to follow after Bill Clinton's evasive thinking, in that if we feel we can fool people, we can probably fool God, too.
The modern church's traditions about marriage is not what Scripture says it should be.
For example, most of the modern church would demand that a couple receive a license from the state before being married by an officiant (representative of the state). On the other hand, Scripture does not 1. require state licenses, 2. or officiants. It seems to merely require consent.
The modern church deems couples sleeping together "before marriage" to be a morally gray area - frowned upon as fornication, but is not considered adultery. Scripture, on the other hand, says that, if you're a woman, the first man you sleep with is basically your husband, and all who you sleep with after that are actually committing adultery with you against your "first partner". If you're a man, the first woman you sleep with is basically your wife, and all whom you sleep with after that are additional wives or concubines which you are obligated to support.
So, I agree with you ... once you live and sleep with someone, you are, for all practical purposes, married in God's eyes.
You either love your wife, or you just selfishly want to let "Little Willie" go out and play. You can try to fabricate all the word games with it you want, but you have no way out of facing the truth.
Indeed! In looking into multiple wives allowed men an interesting society develops. One much more preferable to that we find today IMO.I think some genuinely want instruction, and to understand,
Civil statutes require their license to create their civil union or civil "marriage" (aka forming a corporation comprised of partners). God's Law has different requirements to form a Scriptural marriage.It is the law that requires the license, and the bible tells us to respect the law.
"Living with" points to uniting oneself into the House of another for joint purposes.I agree that the "modern" church view it as a gray area. Most don't, though. My husband is not the first man I had sex with. My first husband was not the first man I had sex with. The first man I had sex with is not my husband. I am only married to one man, and he's the one that counts. The sin I first committed when I was 19 has long been forgiven. We are not committing adultery in any way. You added the "live with". Why?
Just the foolishness of that phrase precludes any rational discussion.Ok, let's say the prevailing teaching in the Church is that all sex, even within marriage is evil. In that case, your words here would appear to support the error by opposing any questions by labeling them as being selfishly and sexually motivated.
At what point should it be permissible to question what we are being taught and to want to know the truth? Answer: it has always been, and always will be permissible, else we would be required to adopt, obey and never question error.
Just the foolishness of that phrase precludes any rational discussion.
Civil statutes require their license to create their civil union or civil "marriage" (aka forming a corporation comprised of partners). God's Law has different requirements to form a Scriptural marriage.
Civil unions <> Scriptural marriageTo Caesar belongs "civil unions". To God belongs Scriptural marriage.
"Living with" points to uniting oneself into the House of another for joint purposes.
To incorporate all the times and ways adultery is used in both the OT and NT, I would suggest it means: Any involvement in the damaging of a covenant relationship which can be between God and man or man and woman is adultery.
No, civil law requires a license to create a corporation which they've called "marriage". Just because they created something called "marriage" does not make it the same "marriage" which conforms to Scripture.I'm not talking about civil unions. I'm not united in a civil union, I'm married. Before our pastor would conduct the marriage, we had to get a license from the county, because that is what the law requires. I've never bought into the idea that two people could just look at each other and decide "well, we're married in the eyes of God now" and be done with it.
One can live with someone, and not have sex.err...what? That still doesn't answer my question. Why not just keep it at "having sex with someone unites them in marriage before God's eyes"?
I think this whole "technicality" thing is the very issue Jesus addressed when He spoke about our heart attitudes.
Preacher, or no preacher, church, or no church, ceremony, or no ceremony, if you have chosen to live with and sleep with someone, you KNOW you are married to that person. And if you cheat, then you cheat, even if no one can nail you to the wall with a specifically binding definition of adultery.
I don't imagine God likes us playing games like that.
You either love your wife, or you just selfishly want to let "Little Willie" go out and play. You can try to fabricate all the word games with it you want, but you have no way out of facing the truth.
One can live with someone, and not have sex.
Throw in a witness or two, and why not?I've never bought into the idea that two people could just look at each other and decide "well, we're married in the eyes of God now" and be done with it.
That has never been the definition of marriage. Why should it be now?err...what? That still doesn't answer my question. Why not just keep it at "having sex with someone unites them in marriage before God's eyes"?
Throw in a witness or two, and why not?
That has never been the definition of marriage. Why should it be now?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?