Sex before marriage?

[neo-x]

IMO, God did not establish all kingdoms, neither all ancients nor all present. Though I do think that God did establish governments that fall within his plans or are a part of it. To assume that God created all governments and regimes, ancient, present or the future, pushes the whole thing into an area of hard determinism and I do not find the idea, really credible.

[Ivellious]

I guess that was my point, Neo. I understand the idea that certain biblical nations may have been established (the Bible supports this I believe) but it seemed like a stretch in my opinion to conclude that all current nations are bound to and originate by God's hand alone.

[neo-x]

Some christian school of thoughts do however think that God establishes all powers. As I said earlier the idea is debatable. But it entirely depends on how we view God and his nature and from there we derive the logical or theological conclusions. You will find differing thoughts on this. Every proposition holds its own problems and merits, likewise. Though my personal take is that introducing hard determinism creates more problems into the whole idea, and it is not just this proposition alone because hard determinism would entail other ramifications as well.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

FL, I'm curious, do you really believe that God founded the governing states? That doesn't sound right at all, with the exception of the Jewish state of biblical times. I'm not talking about separation of church and state or anything, I'm just confused about what you mean when you say that.

Not to put words in FL's mouth, but I assume from Rom 13. Plus the multitude of OT verses that speak of God sovereignly establishing kings and kingdoms.

Jac understood; so did neo-x at first, but later he seemed to have changed his mind. Consider Romans 13:1. Anyway, all of this has little to do with the topic Sex before Marriage?

FL

[neo-x]

You are right FL, we'll keep to the topic of the thread

[PaulSacramento]

Marriage is a commitment, a commitment under GOD.
It is NOT about BEING married but the comment given between TWO people to become ONE.
It is not about the "legality" of marriage but the ideal of love given freely between two people that have commited to themselves under God.
Sex before marriage is a trickly question because of the context of what marriage is.
If i t is simply the "legal" agreement between two people then we have made something beautiful and fullfilling into something written on paper and sex into something as "part of the agreement" as opposed to an expression of love and commitment between two people.

I believe that sex is love making, which is the highest physical expression of love and intimacy, when two people become ONE and for that there MUST be a declared and wanted commitment to each other and THAT is far more than a piece of paper the tell OTHERS that you are married legally.

Know what I mean?

So, if I have not had a ceromony or legally binding marriage ( yet ) with my fiance, but we consider eachother married, are we married?

If you have made a commitment to each other UNDER God, in God's eyes I would say yes you are ( and all that goes with it).
A ceremony is just that and a legal document is worth only the paper it is written on ( if that) BUT a commitment before God FAR supersedes any of that, IMO of course.

[PaulSacramento]

I believe that sex is love making, which is the highest physical expression of love and intimacy, when two people become ONE and for that there MUST be a declared and wanted commitment to each other and THAT is far more than a piece of paper the tell OTHERS that you are married legally.

Know what I mean?

Yeah, I know what you mean. There isn't a biblically mandated ceremony called ''Wedding'' but once a couple are intimate, they are married in the eyes of God.

So, if I have not had a ceromony or legally binding marriage ( yet ) with my fiance, but we consider eachother married, are we married?

In the eyes of the State, you are just living together and unwed. God established the governing powers, so if you want to be legally married, get the ceremony over with.

FL

Correct, a marriage is legal in the eyes of the state ONLY when it is "certified and witnessed and documented".
As for a physical union being what makes a couple married in the eyes of God, that I don't agree.
It is the commitment made UNDER God that makes two people ONE.
That commitment must be professed by BOTH to God.

[Jac3510]

Correct, a marriage is legal in the eyes of the state ONLY when it is "certified and witnessed and documented".
As for a physical union being what makes a couple married in the eyes of God, that I don't agree.
It is the commitment made UNDER God that makes two people ONE.
That commitment must be professed by BOTH to God.

Agreed, although maybe FL should clarify what he meant. If the physical union alone made someone married, then all rapists would immediately be married to their victims. Further, that would make fornication technically impossible. In fact, sex outside of marriage would be impossible. Still further, that would imply that you weren't really married until you actually got around to doing the deed. But that doesn't make sense. I am pretty sure I was married to my wife several hours before we got to the honey moon suite.

In any case, it's also just as evident that signing a legal piece of paper isn't exactly the same thing as a marriage, either, for it seems neither sufficient nor necessary. I can think of plenty of instances that the State recognizes the legality of a "marriage" that I would dispute on philosophical and religious grounds. The norm, of course, is for the State to recognize the marriage, and that for good reason (the State has an economic interest in promoting marriage). But recognizing is not the same as declaring.

On the other hand, I would be careful about reducing marriage to just a commitment. It is more than that, for by its nature, marriage is inherently a public institution. It's more like a public declaration of a private commitment to a certain end, that end being toward the furtherance of society (either through the production of children, the rearing of children, the stabilizing of individuals, etc.). So I think there's truth in what both of you are saying. I think the difference really here is one of clarity, though I could, of course, be wrong.

[Ivellious]

Paul, when you say that marriage is only complete when both people involved commit themselves under God, are you implying that all marriages involving non-Christians aren't valid? That would mean that a Christian and an atheist can't get married, or that a Hindu couple will always be sinning when they have sex because they aren't Christian.

[PaulSacramento]

Paul, when you say that marriage is only complete when both people involved commit themselves under God, are you implying that all marriages involving non-Christians aren't valid? That would mean that a Christian and an atheist can't get married, or that a Hindu couple will always be sinning when they have sex because they aren't Christian.

Well, I leave that up to God to decide the "validity" or ANY relationship.
What I meant and was trying to convey is that it is the commitement between TWO people that God wants, not some paper or ceremony.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

Correct, a marriage is legal in the eyes of the state ONLY when it is "certified and witnessed and documented".
As for a physical union being what makes a couple married in the eyes of God, that I don't agree.
It is the commitment made UNDER God that makes two people ONE.
That commitment must be professed by BOTH to God.

In a sense, the Bible begins and ends with two marriages, and these can be found in Genesis 2 and Revelation 19. I considered what you said, above, and can see that you are right.

FL

+ + +

Agreed, although maybe FL should clarify what he meant. If the physical union alone made someone married, then all rapists would immediately be married to their victims. Further, that would make fornication technically impossible. In fact, sex outside of marriage would be impossible. Still further, that would imply that you weren't really married until you actually got around to doing the deed. But that doesn't make sense. I am pretty sure I was married to my wife several hours before we got to the honey moon suite.

At first, I thought you were splitting hairs. Then, after thinking about what you wrote, I can see that you are right and I was wrong. Thanks to you and PaulSacramento for setting me straight on this.

FL

+ + +

Paul, when you say that marriage is only complete when both people involved commit themselves under God, are you implying that all marriages involving non-Christians aren't valid? That would mean that a Christian and an atheist can't get married, or that a Hindu couple will always be sinning when they have sex because they aren't Christian.

An unbeliever has far more serious problems than worrying about whether or not God recognizes his marriage! Without Jesus as Lord of your life, you're bound for hell. Think about that.

FL

[tunde1992]

To me love is the ONLY reason to have sex
but what do i know am 14 .

[PaulSacramento]

To me love is the ONLY reason to have sex
but what do i know am 14 .

Apparently, quite a bit

[TransitMan]

Modern day "marriage" as in the whole priest and dress code and the large congregations ...the whole "ritual" etc etc is man made. There is no commandment in the bible that says one is to marry that way.

When 2 people have sex, they "are" married. It was this way with Adam and eve and its common sense really.

Plus if you cant get your head around it and insist on doing things "traditionally" as in by men, then also understand that priests are not allways at hand, neither are witnesses or even family. During certain wars, people would just commit to each other in private between them and have sex and they were married. A piece of paper (certificate) means nothing...its what is in both their hearts that counts.

[princeofpeace]

For me its simple, way too many times in the Bible where sex is presented as wrong when situation occured outside of marriage while every mention of sex being good is between Man and WIFE, not man and girlfriend, fiance, friend, lover, or hottie at the Bethlehem BAR.

Look at this, Matthew 1:18-25 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together , she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.19Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to makeher a publick example , was minded to puther awayprivily.20But while he thought on these things, behold , the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying , Joseph, thou son of David, fearnot to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceivedin her isof the Holy Ghost.21And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt callhis name JESUS: for he shall savehis people from their sins.22Now all this was done , that it might be fulfilledwhich was spokenof the Lord by the prophet, saying , 23Behold , a virgin shall be with child , and shall bring forth a son, and they shall callhis name Emmanuel, which being interpretedis , God with us.24Then Joseph being raisedfrom sleep didas the angel of the Lord had biddenhim, and took unto him his wife:25And knewher not till she had brought forthher firstborn son: and he calledhis name JESUS.

Joseph was engaged to Mary, but didn't have sex until after they were married, he even waited until after Jesus was born. If this wasn't a law, why in the world would Joseph wait till after marriage to be with Mary (I know I wouldnt)

Another verse is Corinthians 7:2 “But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.”

Notice again it doesnt say his own girlfriend, fiance, friend, lover, hunny bunny, or that same hottie at the Bethlehem BAR. PAY HUGE ATTENTION THAT IT WASNT WORDED "But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own woman, and each woman her own man.” God deliberately uses the word HUSBAND and WIFE even though HE used man and woman in the same sentence!!

If there are loopholes in this please let me know immediately but to me it looks to be shared between Husband and Wife