pre-marrial sex wrong?

[PACKY]

I call myself a follower of christ yet i have pre-marrial sex, I AM in a commited relationship and have intercourse with only one person does tat make me a sinner? or does god want us to be happy?,, I try to stay away from the whole fire and brimstone thing because all that does is scare people away from god and christ,,,, yet i also shy away from the "if it feels good do it" school of thought, any help? (scriptual or evidence)
thank you everyone!!!
god bless and stay strong in faith!

 

[Corey]

That depends on your point of view about marriage...

Quite frankly, most of the Bible's rules regarding sexuality were to control women and perserve the genetic heritage of the patriarchal line or promote social harmony.

They didn't have birth control then. We do now.

 

[fluffy_rainbow]

To put it bluntly, yes, you are sinning. You have bought into satan's lie that it's alright to have sex so long as you're in a committed relationship. What you have done is robbed yourself and your girlfriend of the wonderful sexual relationship God designed to be enjoyed only within the confines of marriage. Does it feel good? Of course, the Bible never claims it doesn't; however, there are so many verses about why pre-marital sex is frowned upon by God:

[font=Arial, Helvetica]"What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.' For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.'" (NIV, Mark 7:20-23)

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (NIV, 1st Corinthians 6:9-11)

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; (NIV, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5)

[/font]“The body, however, is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body; God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take Christ's members and make them the members of a prostitute? Of course not!” - 1 Corinthians 6:13-15

“This is the will of God, your holiness: that you refrain from immorality, that each of you know how to acquire a wife for himself in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion as do those who do not know God. For God did not call us to impurity but to holiness. Therefore, whoever disregards this, disregards not a human being but God...” – 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8

The NIV translation has, for whatever reason, substituted what the original text said "fornication" with "sexual immorality". Fornication is having sex out of wedlock.

 

[PACKY]

Thanks for th input and help!
God Bless.......

 

[fluffy_rainbow]

You're welcome. I would highly encourage you and your girlfriend to read Elisabeth Elliot's Passion in Purity.

 

[NewSong]

I call myself a follower of christ yet i have pre-marrial sex, I AM in a commited relationship and have intercourse with only one person does tat make me a sinner? or does god want us to be happy?,, I try to stay away from the whole fire and brimstone thing because all that does is scare people away from god and christ,,,, yet i also shy away from the "if it feels good do it" school of thought, any help? (scriptual or evidence)
thank you everyone!!!
god bless and stay strong in faith!

Hello BlessedBeTheMeek:

I hold a different point of view than most of the churches and Christians and have found a few that hold my belief and quite frankly I am going to take an unpopular stand here. All the way through my Bible I have found that there was no such thing as the "marriage ceremonies" we have today! So I have asked what defines marriage? God you and that person? I have looked throughout God's word and can find all different things that define marriage but not the way we have it today. That is not GOD. That is some man blowing it way out of proportion and making a loot off of it.

I was reading Ruth one day and was blown away that she laid at Boaz's feet before she became his official wife. There are many instances and so many different things vary today that I will tell you that it is not what some church, society or even religion tells you but what God and you and that individual know beyond a shadow of doubt.

Sexual impurity cannot occur with the pure in heart. Sexual impurity occurs with women sleeping with women and men sleeping with men, and animals and vulgar things like that. I do not want to be misunderstood in saying it is okay to have sex before marriage because that is not what I am saying. I am saying that perhaps the definition of marriage is different and that perhaps the marriage occurs with the union of man,woman and God and that it does not require the fanfare held by "religion" or society.

However, if you were dating my daughter, you better believe that I would expect you to treat her like a lady and that I would expect as her parent that you would not do anything that you would not expect to last you a life time and that you would be willing to lay down your life for. I would expect my daughter to be treated properly and lady like and I would expect her to treat the man with respect and honor also and what goes on behind closed doors is not any of my business now that she is a grown woman but I would rip a head off if they dishonored her and walked out on her.

Don't take your relationship lightly and watch the hormones talking.

MAKE SURE it is right with GOD and if it isn't then get rid of it. (Behaviors of course and maybe the person)

NewSong

 

[JustJack!]

So it's a sin. Doesn't mean it's wrong.

 

[fluffy_rainbow]

All the way through my Bible I have found that there was no such thing as the "marriage ceremonies" we have today!

Um, did Jesus not turn the water into wine at a wedding? Even in Old Testament culture, there were legal marriage ceremonies.

So it's a sin. Doesn't mean it's wrong.

For a Christian it means it's wrong. It's quite simple....sin=wrong.

 

[CrystalBrooke]

To put it bluntly, yes, you are sinning. You have bought into satan's lie that it's alright to have sex so long as you're in a committed relationship. What you have done is robbed yourself and your girlfriend of the wonderful sexual relationship God designed to be enjoyed only within the confines of marriage. Does it feel good? Of course, the Bible never claims it doesn't; however, there are so many verses about why pre-marital sex is frowned upon by God:

[font=Arial, Helvetica]"What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.' For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.'" (NIV, Mark 7:20-23)

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (NIV, 1st Corinthians 6:9-11)

[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica]It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; (NIV, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5)

[/font]“The body, however, is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body; God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take Christ's members and make them the members of a prostitute? Of course not!” - 1 Corinthians 6:13-15

“This is the will of God, your holiness: that you refrain from immorality, that each of you know how to acquire a wife for himself in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion as do those who do not know God. For God did not call us to impurity but to holiness. Therefore, whoever disregards this, disregards not a human being but God...” – 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8

The NIV translation has, for whatever reason, substituted what the original text said "fornication" with "sexual immorality". Fornication is having sex out of wedlock.

great post

 

[PACKY]

thanks again to all of you, sometimes you really need the insight of a stranger looking in, I no longer call you strangers but CF freinds and really do appreciate the advice and help that you have offered!
GOD bless you and stay strong in the faith!

 

[The Story Teller]

What About Abstinence?



I was holding a notice from my 13-year-old son's school announcing a meeting to preview the new course in sexuality. Parents could examine the curriculum and take part in an actual lesson presented exactly as it would be given to the students.



When I arrived at the school, I was surprised to discover only about a dozen parents there. As we waited for the presentation, I thumbed through page after page of instructions in the prevention of pregnancy or disease. I found abstinence mentioned only in passing. When the teacher arrived with the school nurse, she asked if there were any questions. I asked why abstinence did not play a noticeable part in the material.



What happened next was shocking.



There was a great deal of laughter, and someone suggested that if I thought abstinence had any merit, I should go back to burying my head in the sand.



The teacher and the nurse said nothing as I drowned in a sea of embarrassment. My mind had gone blank, and I could think of nothing to say.



The teacher explained to me that the job of the school was to teach "facts," and the home was responsible for moral training.



I sat in silence for the next 20 minutes as the course was explained. The other parents seemed to give their unqualified support to the materials.



"Donuts, at the back," announced the teacher during the break.



"I'd like you to put on the name tags we have prepared-they're right by the donuts-and mingle with the other parents.



Everyone moved to the back of the room.



As I watched them affixing their nametags and shaking hands, I sat deep in thought. I was ashamed that I had not been able to convince them to include a serious discussion of abstinence in the materials. I uttered a silent prayer for guidance.



My thoughts were interrupted by the teacher's hand on my shoulder.



"Won't you join the others, Mr. Layton?" The nurse smiled sweetly at me. "The donuts are good."



"Thank you, no," I replied.



"Well, then, how about a name tag? I'm sure the others would like to meet you."



"Somehow I doubt that," I replied.



"Won't you please join them?" she coaxed.



Then I heard a still, small voice whisper, "Don't go." The instruction was unmistakable. "Don't go!"



"I'll just wait here," I said.



When the class was called back to order, the teacher looked around the long table and thanked everyone for putting on nametags. She ignored me.



Then she said, "Now we're going to give you the same lesson we'll be giving your children. Everyone please peel off your name tags." I watched in silence as the tags came off.



"Now, then, on the back of one of the tags, I drew a tiny flower. Who has it, please?"



The gentleman across from me held it up.



"Here it is!" "All right," she said.



"The flower represents disease. Do you recall with whom you shook hands?"



He pointed to a couple of people. "Very good," she replied.



"The handshake in this case represents intimacy. So the two people you had contact with now have the disease."



There was laughter and joking among the parents.



The teacher continued, "And whom did the two of You shake hands with?"



The point was well taken, and she explained how this lesson would show students how quickly disease is spread.



"Since we all shook hands, we all have the disease."



It was then that I heard the still, small voice again. "Speak now, it said, "but be humble."



I noted wryly the latter admonition, then rose from my chair.



I apologized for any upset I might have caused earlier, congratulated the teacher on an excellent lesson that would impress the youth, and concluded by saying I had only one small point I wished to make.



"Not all of us were infected," I said. "One of us ... abstained."



Robert Layton

Condensed From Ensign







"You shall not commit adultery."

Exodus 20:14 NKJV



"Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse: the blessing, if you obey the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you today; and the curse, if you do not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside from the way which I command you today, to go after other gods which you have not known."

Deuteronomy 11:26-28 NKJV



Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. Because of these things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience, Colossians 3:5-6 NKJV



Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.

Hebrews 13:4 NKJV

Submitted by Richard

 

[The Story Teller]

For Better or Worse . . . Mostly Worse



BreakPoint with Charles Colson

July 24, 2002



The State of Our Marital Unions



Tina wants to get married, but her boyfriend Ted just wants to move in. Ted is an exceptionally honest young man, so here is what he says: "Tina, I'm fond of you, and I want to live with you for the following reasons. First, it will make it easier for me to enjoy regular sex. Second, I want to protect my assets—assets I'd have to share with you if we got a divorce. Third, you already have kids, and I don't want to support them. Fourth, I'm waiting for my perfect soul mate to come along. Until I meet her, I'd like to live with you."

Sound convincing? Probably not. Tim's arguments are incredibly insulting. And yet, according to a new study, these are exactly the reasons men want to live with women—reasons that not only insult women, but also make them big losers on the domestic front.

At Rutgers University, researchers with the National Marriage Project have published a report called "Why Men Won't Commit: Exploring Young Men's Attitudes about Sex, Dating, and Marriage." The study offers the top ten reasons men are reluctant to say, "I do." Among them: They can get all the sex they want without marriage. They want to enjoy the single life as long as possible. They want to avoid the financial pitfalls of divorce. And they're afraid marriage will demand too many changes and compromises. Apparently, their live-in girlfriends can get used to their bad habits or leave.

Most galling of all is the admission by men that they don't want to marry their girlfriends because they're waiting for their "true love" to come along. Then they'll tie the knot, buy a home, and father kids. Meanwhile, their live-ins can pick up their socks and provide sex-on-demand.

Grandma was right: Men won't buy the cow if they can get the milk free.

Grandma was echoing the wisdom of the biblical writers. Read the Old Testament, and you'll get a picture of how carefully the ancient Israelites protected unmarried women: They knew how predatory, how utterly selfish, men can be. Taking on the responsibilities of a wife and children involved hard work that would last a lifetime. And men were only motivated to shoulder those responsibilities because their culture demanded it.

Modern women have far more freedom of movement than their sisters in the ancient world. But human nature is still fallen. This means that men are as predatory as ever—and women today are paying the price for it in a culture that doesn't demand marriage.

I hope this report serves as a wake-up call to women who think men who want to cohabit have marriage on their minds. Most of them do not. Pastors ought to make this report a subject of a sermon. And if they know couples in their congregations are living together, they ought to encourage them to either marry—or separate.

I hope you'll read the full Rutgers report . If enough women read it, maybe the day would come when men who invite women to live with them would get what they deserve: a slap in the face for that kind of insult.



Submitted by Richard

 

[BarbB]

Thanks for the great stories, Story Teller!

 

[MoodyBlue]

Yes, men are such terrible beasts, taking advantage of naive women.

 

[flicka]

I never did like being compared to a cow and I wouldn't want a man who I could only get to the alter by offering sex (ie: my virginity) up as a reward for marrying me. There is so much more to be concerned about in marriage, but sex does seem to be the bottom line for alot of people.

 

[The Story Teller]

Thanks for the great stories, Story Teller!

Only the Best for my friends..

 

[Ledifni]

"Not all of us were infected," I said. "One of us ... abstained."

And that one, by abstaining, showed hostility, coldness, and a distant attitude to everyone there. Her statement at the end, though it may be emotionally satisfying to those who agree with her, accomplished nothing but very effectively maligned and probably angered the rest of the group.

If one wishes to present an image of a respectful, mature person who avoids pettiness, but is worried about disease, one can wear gloves, and shake hands safely. Or one can politely explain the situation and express a personal preference to abstain. And in such a case, one does not (or should not) wait for the opportunity to "make a point" and vocally condemn everyone else for shaking hands, simply because shaking hands can spread disease.

Sex is much the same. It is a personal choice whether to abstain; if the risks seem to outweigh the benefits in your opinion, then it is your choice to abstain, and I applaud your willingness to make a definitive choice. However, if others feel that the benefits tip the scale, and they choose differently, who are you to malign them for their choice? Do you rail against sky-divers? Their sport is quite dangerous. It is a choice that they make, and they could make a safer choice if they so desired. Why, then, do you rail against the sexually active but not the physically active? Is it not the responsibility of each individual to choose the direction of his or her life?

 

[fluffy_rainbow]

Ledifni, sadly, the "world" has reduced sex to nothing more than an act that feels good. It doesn't matter who you're having sex with, what the physical or emotional reprocussions could result, or what gender they are. Here's an analogy, since the one about shaking hands seems to hold no water with you. And since you have no gender icon, I'm assuming you're a guy. Forgive me if I'm wrong. This analogy is done from that perspective:

It's your wedding day, a day that I would like to think would be one of the greatest days of your life. Your beaming bride stands face to face with you and as the judge/pastor/officiant asks her if she takes you as her husband four guys walk up to where you're standing and huddle around you. They grab her hands along with you. Her smile fades and you're probably demanding an explanation. She cries and explains that these are guys from her past, all of whom she had given her heart to thinking they were "the one". You get them to leave you alone and the wedding comes to a conclusion, yet you're still a bit shaken up about the scene at the altar.

So then you're on your honeymoon and you're starting to push the events from earlier out of your mind as you prepare to consummate your marriage. You're right in the middle of the act when those four pesky guys come back! They sit on the edge of the bed and whisper things like, "hey, peaches...show him that little trick I taught you." "hehe he doesn't have the mad skills I had, does he luv?" I'm certain you would be furious. The reality is, that is the way it is when you give your heart and body to anyone but the person you're married to. You take a little piece of that person around with you. The ghosts from your past haunt you on your wedding day. They haunt you during sexual relations. They're not always at the forefront of your mind, but every once and awhile they show up.

 

[Ledifni]

Tina wants to get married, but her boyfriend Ted just wants to move in. Ted is an exceptionally honest young man, so here is what he says: "Tina, I'm fond of you, and I want to live with you for the following reasons. First, it will make it easier for me to enjoy regular sex. Second, I want to protect my assets—assets I'd have to share with you if we got a divorce. Third, you already have kids, and I don't want to support them. Fourth, I'm waiting for my perfect soul mate to come along. Until I meet her, I'd like to live with you."

These are the real reasons men move in with their girlfriends? The reasons men would admit if they were "honest?" Then I'm glad all the guys I know are wierd, strange people who actually think before they move in with their significant other.

I just ended a three-year relationship, two of which years I lived with her. You think the above are the reasons I lived with her? I'll tell you why I did. I moved in with her because I wanted to wake up every morning with the woman I love in my arms.

I did not marry her because I don't believe in marriage, for two reasons. First, I could not take out a contract on our love without feeling that I had cheapened and materialized what we had. I want to be with my significant other because we want to be -- not because the law says we have to be. Second, I don't believe that it is possible to promise someone that you will be with them until one of you dies, because you cannot predict your future and you do not know that you will always have the choice to be with that person. And if you cannot know whether you will keep a promise, what right do you have to make it? Doubly so for a promise of this magnitude.

Does this make me a predator? Perhaps. Maybe the moral thing would be to abstain from romance as long as I do not feel right with marriage. Personally, I believe that sex and romance are beautiful things in and of themselves; there is no requirement of permanence, and after all, nothing is permanent anyway. To the best of my ability, I treat others morally and respectfully, in a caring and nurturing manner, and I do not lightly hurt others or throw away my commitments or my love. If this is predatory, I am not ashamed.

But I will let you in on a little secret: There are quite as many predatory women as predatory men, and these women are every bit as damaging as their male counterparts. Women just use different means than men do.

 

[Ledifni]

Ledifni, sadly, the "world" has reduced sex to nothing more than an act that feels good. It doesn't matter who you're having sex with, what the physical or emotional reprocussions could result, or what gender they are. Here's an analogy, since the one about shaking hands seems to hold no water with you. And since you have no gender icon, I'm assuming you're a guy. Forgive me if I'm wrong. This analogy is done from that perspective:

It's your wedding day, a day that I would like to think would be one of the greatest days of your life. Your beaming bride stands face to face with you and as the judge/pastor/officiant asks her if she takes you as her husband four guys walk up to where you're standing and huddle around you. They grab her hands along with you. Her smile fades and you're probably demanding an explanation. She cries and explains that these are guys from her past, all of whom she had given her heart to thinking they were "the one". You get them to leave you alone and the wedding comes to a conclusion, yet you're still a bit shaken up about the scene at the altar.

So then you're on your honeymoon and you're starting to push the events from earlier out of your mind as you prepare to consummate your marriage. You're right in the middle of the act when those four pesky guys come back! They sit on the edge of the bed and whisper things like, "hey, peaches...show him that little trick I taught you." "hehe he doesn't have the mad skills I had, does he luv?" I'm certain you would be furious. The reality is, that is the way it is when you give your heart and body to anyone but the person you're married to. You take a little piece of that person around with you. The ghosts from your past haunt you on your wedding day. They haunt you during sexual relations. They're not always at the forefront of your mind, but every once and awhile they show up.

I would whisper lovingly in my bride's ear that I care only about her life with me now, and that her past is neither my business nor my concern. Then I would call any available security to detain these men for trespassing on a private ceremony and disrupting a wedding. Finally, I would turn to my bride-to-be and give my heart to her as I had planned.

What, did you expect me to say I'd throw someone I loved out on her ass just because she'd had the temerity to love others in the past? Why would someone's past lovers even be a concern aside from possible health risks? I can't understand why such a thing would even matter to you.

EDIT: Yes, you're correct, I'm a guy. *goes to update profile*