The Christian Witness and Endorsing Fornication Between Any Two People

[Zaac]

33For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. 1 Corinthians 14:33

I often wonder how those who endorse fornication between the same sex or the opposite sex feel this affects their witness?

If you can twist Scripture to justify this sin, what witness do you have with an unsaved world as to why they need a Savior to forgive them of their sins?

 

[united4Peace]

Fornication...
Well we can look at it as sex between a couple who is not married to each other or to anyone for that matter...
Now the couple (regardless of sexuality) may truly love each other and be committed to each other...I do not consider that sin... and I do not believe God does either but I am not God and cannot think for God.

Fornication as in Adultery...someone cheating on their spouse...
Hmmm again circumstances....I wouldnt go and tell someone to go and cheat...but is the other spouse abusing the person verbally, physically, mentally, all 3 ?
Even if it is cheating without a reason I think that that is something that the person who is supposedly "sinning" needs to take up with God...
its not something for me to talk to them about...but for them to sit down and search in their hearts and really converse with God about and find what God wants them to do...find the right answer...
God works in mysterious ways...

 

[dayhiker]

I think that couples that are honest people and love each other will be respected by many non Christains. There are non-Christians of all types with all kinds of beleifs.

So I think this person who is honest and loving yet committing fornication as you define it will be quite open to talking about being in an honest loving relationship with God.

I think a libertaian will be more open to talking with a person that isn't guided by laws but by a relationship will find a Christain who says Christainity is about loving God and people more interesting to talk to.

dayhiker

 

[Zaac]

Fornication...
Well we can look at it as sex between a couple who is not married to each other or to anyone for that matter...
Now the couple (regardless of sexuality) may truly love each other and be committed to each other...I do not consider that sin... and I do not believe God does either but I am not God and cannot think for God.

But this is exactly what I mean. What happens to your Christian witness when you start telling people what you think or feel or believe instead of what GOD SAYS?

God's Word in NO WAY gives the impression that fornication is less than fornication just because two people are in a committed relationship.

Why do you feel this? Where does God's Word give you the impression that this is true?

Can you not see how basing truth on your feelings instead of God's Word opens the door for confusion?

Fornication as in Adultery...someone cheating on their spouse...
Hmmm again circumstances....I wouldnt go and tell someone to go and cheat...but is the other spouse abusing the person verbally, physically, mentally, all 3 ?

Still does not give the person who is abused license to sin by fornicating.

Even if it is cheating without a reason I think that that is something that the person who is supposedly "sinning" needs to take up with God...

God has already spoken to this so what is there to take up other than casting oneself prostrate before the cross in confession and repentance?

its not something for me to talk to them about...but for them to sit down and search in their hearts and really converse with God about and find what God wants them to do...find the right answer...
God works in mysterious ways...

Again, that response is UNBIBLICAL in accordance with God's Word.

18 When I say to a wicked man, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 19 But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself. Ezekiel 3:18-19

If you love your brother or the lost man, you will use God's Word to point out wrong.

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17

So I ask again, what becomes of a Christian witness when "Christians" start advocating that which goes against God's Word?

 

[Zaac]

I think that couples that are honest people and love each other will be respected by many non Christains. There are non-Christians of all types with all kinds of beleifs.

Does God's Word tell His people to respect unrepentant sinful behavior?

So I think this person who is honest and loving yet committing fornication as you define it will be quite open to talking about being in an honest loving relationship with God.

Honest as in admitting that his acts, according to God, are wrong, but that he chooses to commit them anyhow?

I think a libertaian will be more open to talking with a person that isn't guided by laws but by a relationship will find a Christain who says Christainity is about loving God and people more interesting to talk to.

dayhiker

1 John 2:4
The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

The law is from Christ. And in accordance with His Word, how does it not make the Christian who says this look like a hypocrite? How do you say you love God while advocating unrepentant disobedience to Him?

 

[united4Peace]

I dont think your catching what Im saying....
Christians and most others dont endorse Fornication persay...
No one goes out and says..."Cheat Cheat Cheat"

But its something we believe is between the person and God not between the person and society...
The person doesnt need stoned okay...we arent living in the OT times.

You said...Quote

But this is exactly what I mean. What happens to your Christian witness when you start telling people what you think or feel or believe instead of what GOD SAYS?

God's Word in NO WAY gives the impression that fornication is less than fornication just because two people are in a committed relationship.

Why do you feel this? Where does God's Word give you the impression that this is true?

Can you not see how basing truth on your feelings instead of God's Word opens the door for confusion?

no one really knows what God says...we can only pray on certain things and hope we have things right.
Yes we have the Bible but its inspired by God...not written by God. God speaks to us each individually...

Still does not give the person who is abused license to sin by fornicating.

No it doesnt...but it doesnt give anyone the right to judge except God.
And one should never ever say anything unless one has walked in anothers shoes...which one never will...again each of us are individuals and will do things differently in life. Each of us have different trials.

God has already spoken to this so what is there to take up other than casting oneself prostrate before the cross in confession and repentance?

I think when one takes it up with God as I said they are repenting in their own way...
That's the nice thing about having a relationship with God...God loves us and we can talk to God about things in our life...about things we do wrong...
Of course God knows everything but when we talk about things we have done wrong with God we get it off of our conscience and we feel better also...
So...you may want to throw yourself at God's feet but all I need to do to repent is just talk to God as God isnt a monster but a friend...

Ahhh What a Friend we have in Jesus

Again, that response is UNBIBLICAL in accordance with God's Word.

Please tell me how conversing with God about something is unbiblical?

 

[GwynApNudd]

Adultery is cheating on one's spouse. That breaks the marriage covenant and affects the whole family. That it is wrong is obvious.

All of the specific examples of fornication in the Bible involves sex with prostitutes, usually temple prostitutes, but the teachings about it clearly are intended to cover more than just that. I have no problem with calling any sex outside a marriage covenant fornication and naming it a sin.

-------

But what constitutes a marrige covenant, Biblically? It is a contract between two people (and sometimes their families). It was usually accompanied by a feast in celebration.

In modern, Western culture, there are three separate things that are called marriage.

The first is the commitment/contract that is essentially the same as the Biblical marriage covenant, although most of the attendant details are different and the celebration is optional.

The second is the registration of the partnership with the government. This involves the granting of a license, the affirmation of the intent to marry both orally and by signing the contract in the prescence of witnesses, including someone authorized to act as a notary for the state. And the 1300+ laws (In the US, there may be more or fewer in other countries) that affect married couples differently than single individuals. In most (but not all) jurisdictions, ordained ministers of most religions are authorized to notarize the affirmation, which allows, but does not compel the combination of this type of marriage registration with the third thing called a marriage -- a public declaration, before friends and family "in the prescence of God," usually followed by a celebration feast.

There are, or at least there have been in the not-to-distant past, jurisdictions that recognize commitments of the first kind, as marriage if they have been of a certain duration. And marriages of the second kind without a real commitment (marriages of convenience) are still entirely legal. So the three kinds of marriage are independant of one another.

Ideally, a Christian marriage would involve all three types. But sometimes there are good reasons why one or two types may not be available. For example, for gays in the US, the second type (government registration) is only available in Massachusetts, although second-class versions are available in a few other states. And the third type are only available in some congregations of some denominations.

When the other types of marriage are not available, it is not possible to combine them with the commitment/covenant. But that does not mean that the covenant is not a true marriage.

 

[Zaac]

I dont think your catching what Im saying....
Christians and most others dont endorse Fornication persay...
No one goes out and says..."Cheat Cheat Cheat"

If you're not doing as God says and pointing it out, you're endorsing it. This is where the church has been found wanting.

But its something we believe is between the person and God not between the person and society...
The person doesnt need stoned okay...we arent living in the OT times.

Who said anything about stoning? When did pointing out sin as sin become equated to stoning?

Have you ever witnessed to anyone? What are you sharing with them if not the way God's truth has liberated you as a Christian and how His death, burial , and resurrection provides the means for all to be freed the same way?

You said...Quote

no one really knows what God says...we can only pray on certain things and hope we have things right.
Yes we have the Bible but its inspired by God...not written by God. God speaks to us each individually...

And this goes right back to the crux of the OP? What becomes of the Christian Testimony when we blatantly question whether or not we have God's Word? What measure of truth do you stand upon? What truth do you share with people when you share the Gospel?

No it doesnt...but it doesnt give anyone the right to judge except God.

I don't know how many times and how many different ways it can be explained that you cannot make any decision without JUDGING. BIBLICALLY, do a study on judging and see if God has said that you are not to judge, or if He is directing us to righteously judge instead of hypocritically judging.

Seriously this whole judging issue is something that needs to be taught to Christians because countless Christians continue to errantly divide the Word to justify not righteously judging.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 NIV says: “All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

2 Timothy 4:2 NIV says: “Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage- with great patience and careful instruction.” Notice that in this verse we are told to rebuke and encourage; so we should not correct if we do not encourage.

Titus 2:15 NIV says: “These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.”

Ephesians 5:11 NIV says: “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.”

1 Corinthians 2:15-16 NIV says: “The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

1 Corinthians 6:2
Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases?

Be aligned with this simple teaching of the FULL COUNSEL of GOD'S WORD. He is telling us to righteously judge. He IS NOT telling us that we can't judge.

He is indeed the final judge. But He has given His people the authority to judge.

And one should never ever say anything unless one has walked in anothers shoes...which one never will...again each of us are individuals and will do things differently in life. Each of us have different trials.

That is your opinion. That is NOt BIBLICAL. DO I have to commit adultery to tell the adulterer that it is wrong? Do I have to murder someone to tell the murdere that it is wrong?

God's truth is ABSOLUTE. It does not change based upon our different trials. That's why it is truth.

I think when one takes it up with God as I said they are repenting in their own way...

You're continuing to make man's error. The way is Jesus Christ. It is NOT a "their own way" issue. You must repent the way that Christ says. And if you are professing to repent and you're advocating that which is still against what God's Word says,then you haven't repented.

That's the nice thing about having a relationship with God...God loves us and we can talk to God about things in our life...about things we do wrong...
Of course God knows everything but when we talk about things we have done wrong with God we get it off of our conscience and we feel better also...

There's a difference between getting something off your conscience and repenting. You can't truly repent without accepting wrong as wrong.

So...you may want to throw yourself at God's feet but all I need to do to repent is just talk to God as God isnt a monster but a friend...

Who said anything about God being a monster? But God is not mocked. repentance entails turning from sin and turning to Christ. It does not entail advocating the very sin of which you say you have repented.

Please tell me how conversing with God about something is unbiblical?

I wasn't referring to that part. I was referring to your response that " its not something for me to talk to them about".

That's unBiblical. How do you teach your kids right from wrong in accordance with God's Word? Do you not talk to them about it or just figure that your children who have not come to Christ are just gonna start talking to this Jesus with whom they have no relationship?

Christians are the instruments that God uses to show the unsaved why they need a Savior, and you have to show them that their sin causes them to be in need of a Savior. But you can't do that without showing them what their sin is.

 

[Zaac]

Adultery is cheating on one's spouse. That breaks the marriage covenant and affects the whole family. That it is wrong is obvious.

And it is with this same degree of obviousness that all fornication needs to be examined.

All of the specific examples of fornication in the Bible involves sex with prostitutes, usually temple prostitutes, but the teachings about it clearly are intended to cover more than just that. I have no problem with calling any sex outside a marriage covenant fornication and naming it a sin.

That's good because that's aligned with the FULL COUNSEL of God's Word.

-------

But what constitutes a marrige covenant, Biblically? It is a contract between two people (and sometimes their families). It was usually accompanied by a feast in celebration.

Nope.. The Biblical marriage covenant is between a husband, wife and Christ PERIOD.

You're running down a path that immediately authors confusion.

In modern, Western culture, there are three separate things that are called marriage.

The first is the commitment/contract that is essentially the same as the Biblical marriage covenant, although most of the attendant details are different and the celebration is optional.

The second is the registration of the partnership with the government. This involves the granting of a license, the affirmation of the intent to marry both orally and by signing the contract in the prescence of witnesses, including someone authorized to act as a notary for the state. And the 1300+ laws (In the US, there may be more or fewer in other countries) that affect married couples differently than single individuals. In most (but not all) jurisdictions, ordained ministers of most religions are authorized to notarize the affirmation, which allows, but does not compel the combination of this type of marriage registration with the third thing called a marriage -- a public declaration, before friends and family "in the prescence of God," usually followed by a celebration feast.

There are, or at least there have been in the not-to-distant past, jurisdictions that recognize commitments of the first kind, as marriage if they have been of a certain duration. And marriages of the second kind without a real commitment (marriages of convenience) are still entirely legal. So the three kinds of marriage are independant of one another.

Ideally, a Christian marriage would involve all three types. But sometimes there are good reasons why one or two types may not be available. For example, for gays in the US, the second type (government registration) is only available in Massachusetts, although second-class versions are available in a few other states. And the third type are only available in some congregations of some denominations.

When the other types of marriage are not available, it is not possible to combine them with the commitment/covenant. But that does not mean that the covenant is not a true marriage.

 

[UberLutheran]

So -- in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, California, Oregon and Washington (and for that matter, Canada, Iceland, Switzerland, Britain, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Hungary, Germany and Belgium) gay people are allowed to have the piece of paper which signifies that they are in a committed relationship and therefore allowed spousal benefits -- hence, by definition, they are not fornicating.

Unless, of course fundamentalist Christians are changing the meaning of "fornication" to mean something else, e.g. a "marriage" is the piece of paper signed by a member of the clergy acting as a representative of the state, which is given to the couple after the couple has been blessed in a Christian ceremony -- then any non-Christian heterosexual couple, any heterosexual who has been married by a justice of the peace, any atheistic heterosexual couple, and of course all gay couples are committing "fornication".

 

[UberLutheran]

And it is with this same degree of obviousness that all fornication needs to be examined.



That's good because that's aligned with the FULL COUNSEL of God's Word.

-------



Nope.. The Biblical marriage covenant is between a husband, wife and Christ PERIOD.

You're running down a path that immediately authors confusion.



And this is why in accordance with God's Word you will continue to be branded a false teacher. You continue to open the door that author's confusion that gives people cause to question the foundational truths that maintain the unity of God's Word.

You've incorrectly, unBiblically defined the marriage covenant and opened the door for confusion that is NOT of GOD, but your errant understanding.

Biblical marriage is defined as a union of two Christians, one male and one female, who are united before God by a member of the clergy representing the interests of the state, who, as an agent of the state, then furnishes the couple a piece of paper bestowing all the rights and privileges given by the state to the married couple.

All other unions, including heterosexual unions between non-Christians, atheists, people who are married by justices of the peace, and (of course) gays are not Biblically-defined marriages -- and hence, not marriages at all -- because (according to conservative Christianity), non-Christians have no knowledge of God and cannot be the recipient of God's blessings; and hence these relationships are not not consecrated, sacramentalized and blessed by a member of the clergy representing the interest of the state, who performs the marriage as an agent of the state and furnishes the couple a piece of paper bestowing all the rights and privileges given by the state to the married couple.

Wouldn't that be the correct interpretation of "Biblical marriage"?

 

[Zaac]

So -- in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, California, Oregon and Washington (and for that matter, Canada, Iceland, Switzerland, Britain, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Hungary, Germany and Belgium) gay people are allowed to have the piece of paper which signifies that they are in a committed relationship and therefore allowed spousal benefits -- hence, by definition, they are not fornicating.

The Biblical measure of what a marriage is does not center around the committment of the relationship, and thus the level of committment bears no relevance to whether or not tere is fornication taking place.

Unless, of course fundamentalist Christians are changing the meaning of "fornication" to mean something else, e.g. a "marriage" is the piece of paper signed by a member of the clergy acting as a representative of the state, which is given to the couple after the couple has been blessed in a Christian ceremony -- then any non-Christian heterosexual couple, ,

From the looks of it, it is you who are trying to change the Biblical definition of what a marriage is.

If you've got a nonChristian couple joined in marriage, the least of their problems is whether or not they are in a marriage covenant with Christ. They are lost and that needs to be addressed first.

any heterosexual who has been married by a justice of the peace

Marriage is still a covenant between a husband, wife, and God. A Christian enters into that covenant with God. Neither the pastor, priest, not justice of the peace can grant entry into this covenant.

any atheistic heterosexual couple,

If you've got a nonChristian couple joined in marriage, the least of their problems is whether or not they are in a marriage covenant with Christ. They are lost and that needs to be addressed first.

and of course all gay couples are committing "fornication

Yep. They are fornicating.

 

[Zaac]

Biblical marriage is defined as a union of two Christians, one male and one female, who are united before God by a member of the clergy representing the interests of the state, who, as an agent of the state, then furnishes the couple a piece of paper bestowing all the rights and privileges given by the state to the married couple.

Biblically, can you show support for this definition.

All other unions, including heterosexual unions between non-Christians, atheists, people who are married by justices of the peace, and (of course) gays are not Biblically-defined marriages -- and hence, not marriages at all -- because (according to conservative Christianity), non-Christians have no knowledge of God and cannot be the recipient of God's blessings;

Christianity doesn't say anything about God's blessings being an issue of what the nonChristian's knowledge. God blesses whomever HE chooses.

and hence these relationships are not not consecrated, sacramentalized and blessed by a member of the clergy representing the interest of the state, who performs the marriage as an agent of the state and furnishes the couple a piece of paper bestowing all the rights and privileges given by the state to the married couple.

Wouldn't that be the correct interpretation of "Biblical marriage"?

Nope. The interest of the state is a nonissue except to the government.

 

[UberLutheran]

Biblically, can you show support for this definition.



Christianity doesn't say anything about God's blessings being an issue of what the nonChristian's knowledge. God blesses whomever HE chooses.



Nope. The interest of the state is a nonissue except to the government.

But don't conservative Christians, and fundamentalists, believe that the duty of the government is to institute the law that conservative Christians and fundamentalists want; and the interests of conservative Christians and fundamentalists supersede those of mainstream and liberal Christians, and non-Christians?

 

[GwynApNudd]

Nope.. The Biblical marriage covenant is between a husband, wife and Christ PERIOD.

What about between a husband, two wives (one of whom was married in a fraudulent, bait-and switch contract), two concubines and Christ?

[bible]Genesis 29:16-35[/bible]

The Bible considers both of Jacob's marriages legal.

Jewish law considers the contract/covenant alone to be the defining feature of a marriage, and as I posted earlier, that is what the Bible agrees with

 

[Zaac]

But don't conservative Christians, and fundamentalists, believe that the duty of the government is to institute the law that conservative Christians and fundamentalists want; and the interests of conservative Christians and fundamentalists supersede those of mainstream and liberal Christians, and non-Christians?

Man, of course not. I told you, yall have got a different picture of fundamentalist Christians than I do. Fundamentalist Christians want the people in office who will support their causes just like the liberal and nonChristian want the people in office who support their causes.

If the government enacts a law that runs contrary to God's law, I am governed by God's law FIRST.

 

[UberLutheran]

The Biblical measure of what a marriage is does not center around the committment of the relationship, and thus the level of committment bears no relevance to whether or not tere is fornication taking place.



From the looks of it, it is you who are trying to change the Biblical definition of what a marriage is.

If you've got a nonChristian couple joined in marriage, the least of their problems is whether or not they are in a marriage covenant with Christ. They are lost and that needs to be addressed first.



Marriage is still a covenant between a husband, wife, and God. A Christian enters into that covenant with God. Neither the pastor, priest, not justice of the peace can grant entry into this covenant.



If you've got a nonChristian couple joined in marriage, the least of their problems is whether or not they are in a marriage covenant with Christ. They are lost and that needs to be addressed first.



Yep. They are fornicating.

So, gay people who live in a jurisdiction which sanctions civil unions or marriage between two people of the same sex, and who have gotten a civil union or a marriage, or a marriage performed by a Christian minister who is acting as an agent of the state and who has issued them a piece of paper as said agent of the state stating that the have all the rights and benefits of a married couple, are STILL fornicating?

Sounds like what you're saying is that Biblical law trumps civil law; and there is no real authority for civil law except for Biblical law (and that Biblical law and civil law should be the same).

Doesn't that violate the traditional Baptist belief of separation of church and state? Or have Baptists (and conservative) Christians done away with that, and favor the creation of a Christian state run (or dominated by) conservative and/or fundamentalist Christians, since conservative and/or fundamentalist Christians can now dictate to the state who is truly "married" and who is not?

 

[UberLutheran]

Marriage is still a covenant between a husband, wife, and God.

Even if the people involved are not Christians, and even if the people involved don't believe in God?

That's curious.

Wasn't it Bailey Smith, former President of the Southern Baptist Convention, who said in 1980 that God doesn't hear the prayers of a Jew?

 

[GwynApNudd]

The Biblical measure of what a marriage is does not center around the committment of the relationship, and thus the level of committment bears no relevance to whether or not tere is fornication taking place.

Now you are trying to make a point based on shifting between two different (but related) meanings of commitment. The one definition has exactly the same meaning as contract or covenant. The other, specific to interpersonal relationships, relates to the strength of the relationship, and the degree of involvement with one another.

While it is true that the validity of a marriage does not depend on the second definition, it is at the heart of the first. If there is a commitment, a contract, a covenant, there is a marriage. Period.

 

[UberLutheran]

The Biblical marriage covenant is between a husband, wife and Christ PERIOD.

And if Biblical marriage is a covenant between a husband, wife and Christ, period -- then other marriages (between non-Christians, atheists, etc.) are not Biblical marriages and thus, in the eyes of God, invalid.

YES or NO.