1 Corinthians 8-9 is proof that sex before marriage is a sin correct? I was arguing with someone that it was proof that it is a sin to have sex before marriage. Am i right?
To the unmarried and widowed i say that it is good for them to remain single as i am
But if they can not exercise sel-control they should marry.For it is better to marry
than to burn with passion
Corinthians 1
-
Furstentum Liechtenstein
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:55 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: It's Complicated
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: Lower Canuckistan
Re: Corinthians 1
There is a lot of religion mixed in with the concept of «sex-before-marriage», whatever that is. From a biblical perspective, it would be more correct to say that sex = marriage. In other words, choose your partner carefully because you'll either be marrying that person or commiting adultery.Nineveh wrote:1st Corinthians 8-9 is proof that sex before marriage is a sin correct? I was arguing with someone that it was proof that it is a sin to have sex before marriage. Am i right?
FL
Hold everything lightly. If you don't, it will hurt when God pries your fingers loose as He takes it from you. -Corrie Ten Boom
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +
Re: Corinthians 1
1st Corinthians 8-9 is proof that sex before marriage is a sin. The Bible is very explicit regading sexual immorality. Often people want to make excuses for their immoral behavior. One way is to say sex is equal to marriage. That would be a divorce lawyers dream come true since the divorce rate would sky rocket 
-
Furstentum Liechtenstein
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:55 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: It's Complicated
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: Lower Canuckistan
Re: Corinthians 1
How so?Appolyon wrote:1st Corinthians 8-9 is proof that sex before marriage is a sin.
Correct. Sexual immorality is defined as homosexuality, fornication/adultery, lust and brazen lasciviousness (Numbers 25:6 is an example of this last one.) If there are others that I've forgotten, remind me.Appolyon wrote: The Bible is very explicit regading sexual immorality.
I'm not making excuses; I'm married!Appolyon wrote:Often people want to make excuses for their immoral behavior. One way is to say sex is equal to marriage.
I understand where you're coming from. There is a sense in which you are correct, as God did give «some to be pastors and teachers,» (Eph 4:11) and any pastor/priest/rabbi worth his salt will tell you that marriage is necessary before intimacy. And on the whole, I agree. I agree from the standpoint of social mores and from marriage's witnessing aspect: it is good to marry, and it is good for others to see you get married because God wants commitment and a wedding is (well...was!) a great statement about life-long commitment both for you to make and for others to witness.
Here is where I do not agree:
1. I have not found any biblically mandated procedure for marriage...the ceremony is not spelled out, in other words. Perhaps this is where those «pastors and teachers» come in but that would leave us with the same claim that the Catholic Church makes: that tradition and church teaching are part of holy writ. Well...maybe they were right after all.
2. Marriages in the Bible are either described as a feast (our wedding reception) or are simply consummated.
3. There was no pastor/priest/rabbi at the first recorded marriage in history (Gen 2:23). There was only commitment and a Witness.
4. It is possible to imagine situations where a legal marriage is not possible: a) two Chistians on a deserted island with no one to officiate. (Far fetched!) b) A newly regenerated Christian with an unregenerate live-in mate. (Quite common!) c) A newly regenerate unmarried Christian couple with children (Common.)
I don't know anybody on a deserted island, but I have come across both b) and c) above. In both cases, the couples eventually married but not out of religious obligation. Rather, they married for the right reasons: commitment and witness.
I know a young couple now in situation b+). «B+» because the regenerate Chistian lady is pregnant.
Marriage is important but the actual ceremony is just fluff nowadays.
FL
Hold everything lightly. If you don't, it will hurt when God pries your fingers loose as He takes it from you. -Corrie Ten Boom
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +
-
The11thDr.
- Established Member
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 6:14 am
- Christian: No
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: I don't believe in creation
Re: Corinthians 1
yea because if you are married, every kind of action becomes acceptable right? 
Trust me, I'm the doctor.
-
Angellicrequiem
- Newbie Member
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 3:37 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
Re: Corinthians 1
Interesting query, however biblical marriage only requires intention and witness, after that only your devotion to each other. Then again King David was married to more women than days of the year, so I'm unsure how that factors in to current views of matrimony. As for ceremony, you can get that at a drive-thru window these days (sigh), or pay more for a wedding than you will for your car. Seems to me the pageantry is completely unnecessary, then again my wife and I purposely remained together for 5 years and got married after our 2 children were born (my youngest was just over a year old). We had remained faithful, and have always, but everyone we knew in the church had been divorced multiple times, so I rather enjoyed the judgmental sneers. To be perfectly honest, after one 'christian' woman who had been married 4 times (currently trying to find #5) dared to call my children 'unclean bastards' I replied with one phrase:
"Perhaps my children are bastards by definition. You Ma'am, are a legalized whore."
Even the good reverend couldn't contain his laugh fast enough.
"Perhaps my children are bastards by definition. You Ma'am, are a legalized whore."
Even the good reverend couldn't contain his laugh fast enough.
-
The Protector
- Recognized Member
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 1:58 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Washington, D.C.
Re: Corinthians 1
I have been struggling with this question myself. You see, I am currently engaged to be married. My fiancee and I currently live on opposite sides of the country due to where we got in to graduate school. We have maintained our relationship throughout, and with only one more year to go I proposed early in the Summer. We have set a date to be married in August of next year. We have abstained from sex throughout our relationship, but I am visiting her right now and she has told me that she would like to finally make love. Obviously, as any red-blooded young man would, I want SO BADLY to do just that... but more than anything I want to live a life that is pleasing to God.
I had read before that that sex between an engaged couple was not prohibited in scripture, so I decided to read up on the issue. What I have read indeed supports what Lichtenstein says here, and some say that some of scripture even suggests that it was understood and expected that betrothed couples may engage in sexual relations. Chidren born to betrothed couples were considered legitimate, apparently-- which is certainly something that surprised me, but makes sense; after all, the church didn't appear to give Joseph and Mary any hassle about Jesus' legitimacy, even though they must have thought Jesus was the product of sexual union between the then-betrothed and officialy unwed couple (having not had the benefit of a visit from Gabriel, so far as we know). The actual marriage ceremony was always a secular social and legal practice, not a spiritual one, and it doesn't mark the beginning of the marriage any more than a baptism marks the beginning of one's relationship with God; it is an important event that acts as a public pronouncement, but the actual marriage begins with sexual union, just as one's relationship with God begins at conception. I suppose this is why a "marriage" that is never consummated can be annulled (or at least that was my understanding): The marriage never existed in the first place. All of this would support the idea that forming sexual union with my intended would not be sinful; it would simply mean that she and I would be married in God's eyes at that point.
However, having said all of this, it is clear that engagements in biblical times were not viewed in the same way as they are now. The obvious Case in point: an engaged couple is now expected to NOT engage in sex until after the wedding ceremony. Leaving aside whether or not that expectation is scriptural, the expectation now exists that a Christian couple living Godly lives will abstain until after the ceremony. While I am not a slave to dogma and tradition, the fact that this expectation exists leads me to be concerned that consumating before the ceremony could damage my witness to others; even if doing so is not sinful according to scripture, that fact that it is perceived to be by others may brand me as a hypocrit. Or worse, it may encourage others to follow a "if it feels good it isn't really sinful" path. "That's only if others' find out," you may say. But as Christians we should be honest in our presentation of ourselves; it would not be Godly to present ourselves to the world as not married, while carrying on a marriage in private.
Anyway, that's kind of where I'm at right now. From what I've read in scripture, I tend to think that engaging in sexual union before the public ceremony is sort of like polygamy: not necessarely prohibited, but not exactly God's ideal either. Any thoughts?
I had read before that that sex between an engaged couple was not prohibited in scripture, so I decided to read up on the issue. What I have read indeed supports what Lichtenstein says here, and some say that some of scripture even suggests that it was understood and expected that betrothed couples may engage in sexual relations. Chidren born to betrothed couples were considered legitimate, apparently-- which is certainly something that surprised me, but makes sense; after all, the church didn't appear to give Joseph and Mary any hassle about Jesus' legitimacy, even though they must have thought Jesus was the product of sexual union between the then-betrothed and officialy unwed couple (having not had the benefit of a visit from Gabriel, so far as we know). The actual marriage ceremony was always a secular social and legal practice, not a spiritual one, and it doesn't mark the beginning of the marriage any more than a baptism marks the beginning of one's relationship with God; it is an important event that acts as a public pronouncement, but the actual marriage begins with sexual union, just as one's relationship with God begins at conception. I suppose this is why a "marriage" that is never consummated can be annulled (or at least that was my understanding): The marriage never existed in the first place. All of this would support the idea that forming sexual union with my intended would not be sinful; it would simply mean that she and I would be married in God's eyes at that point.
However, having said all of this, it is clear that engagements in biblical times were not viewed in the same way as they are now. The obvious Case in point: an engaged couple is now expected to NOT engage in sex until after the wedding ceremony. Leaving aside whether or not that expectation is scriptural, the expectation now exists that a Christian couple living Godly lives will abstain until after the ceremony. While I am not a slave to dogma and tradition, the fact that this expectation exists leads me to be concerned that consumating before the ceremony could damage my witness to others; even if doing so is not sinful according to scripture, that fact that it is perceived to be by others may brand me as a hypocrit. Or worse, it may encourage others to follow a "if it feels good it isn't really sinful" path. "That's only if others' find out," you may say. But as Christians we should be honest in our presentation of ourselves; it would not be Godly to present ourselves to the world as not married, while carrying on a marriage in private.
Anyway, that's kind of where I'm at right now. From what I've read in scripture, I tend to think that engaging in sexual union before the public ceremony is sort of like polygamy: not necessarely prohibited, but not exactly God's ideal either. Any thoughts?