Premarital Sex and the Bible

[Trailblazer]

So you're picking one particular translation, the KJV, where "fornication" is found and assume it applies to all those Bibles where it isn't found. How about if I pick one particular translation, say the NLT, where "fornication" isn't found and assume it's translation "immoral" applies to the KJV. Think that's fair? According to your logic, of course it is.

Are you saying that there are Bible translations where the word fornication is not found in any verses? If not, it might still be implied. For example, it says sexual immorality in some of the translations.

Then why doesn't he say so? In most of the 59 translations I surveyed he doesn't.

You can say it's so and not in accord with God, but it's just a rationalization.

The upshot of this is that you shouldn't be forcing words into his mouth where he isn't saying them.

Are you actually saying that in 59 translations it does not say that or even imply it ANYWHERE?

I guess if it is not clear Christians are left to decide for themselves what is allowed and what is prohibited. The Bible has many translations and many verses that seem to contradict each other so if one really wants to I guess they can say that it is okay to have premarital sex and different churches might have different views on that.

Christianity is a lawless religion since Christians are saved by grace, by the blood of Jesus... So even if they do sin they are saved anyway... What is the motive for them not to sin? Perhaps that is why many Christians pay little attention to what it says in the Bible about sexual immorality.

I am glad I am a Baha’i because we have Laws and the Baha’i Laws are unambiguous with regards to sex outside of marriage.

From the Book of Laws which is the Most Holy Book of the Baha’i Faith:

“The Bahá’í teachings on sexual morality centre on marriage and the family as the bedrock of the whole structure of human society and are designed to protect and strengthen that divine institution. Bahá’í law thus restricts permissible sexual intercourse to that between a man and the woman to whom he is married.” The Kitáb-i-Aqdas, p. 223

Mind you, those Laws do not apply to anyone but Baha’is.

 

[Skwim]

Are you saying that there are Bible translations where the word fornication is not found in any verses?

Yes. I know that at least the

New Living Translation
New International Version,
English Standard Version,
Christian Standard Bible,
New English Translation,
Reina-Valera 1960,
Latin Vulgate,
Morphological Greek New Testament,
Textus Receptus
​

don't contain it.

If not, it might still be implied.

And it might not. Thing is, guessing isn't acceptable.

Are you actually saying that in 59 translations it does not say that or even imply it ANYWHERE?

My mistake. It should have read, "Then why doesn't he say so? In most of the 59 translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9 I surveyed he doesn't."

.

 

[Skwim]

Search an older translation for "virgin" and you'll find everything.

You search, and tell me what you find.

.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes. The

New Living Translation
New International Version,
English Standard Version,
Christian Standard Bible,
New English Translation,
Reina-Valera 1960,
Latin Vulgate,
Morphological Greek New Testament,
Textus Receptus
​

don't contain it.


And it might not. Thing is, guessing isn't acceptable.


My mistake. It should have read, "Then why doesn't he say so? In most of the 59 translations of 1 Corinthians 6:9 I surveyed he doesn't."

.

You are right.... It should be clearer in the Bible because guessing is not acceptable... However, I don't have to worry about that... Because I am not a Christian I know exactly what I am not supposed to do. The standard for sexual behavior is much higher in my religion, but I like it that way.

 

[savagewind]

I am sorry. I do not understand the point you are trying to make with these verses.

Why did he say it? Why didn't he add that it is wrong?
For what purpose was it included in "God's Word"?

 

[savagewind]

I guess if it is not clear Christians are left to decide for themselves what is allowed and what is prohibited.

Love is allowed. Selfish sex isn't allowed. The sex that is about giving to the other person is alright (not perfect, but acceptable). The sex that is about taking from the other person is wrong.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Did you even try to google it?

If you are interested in the benefits of waiting:

Statistics | WaitingTillMarriage.org

I just googled the above but understand that statistically, waiting is better. God just knew that sex before marriage ruins the success rate.

If you wouldn't buy a cheap car without taking it for a test drive, why in the world would you sign a legally binding contract to another human being before knowing if you're sexually compatible with them or not? Makes zero sense.

 

[Kenny]

If you wouldn't buy a cheap car without taking it for a test drive, why in the world would you sign a legally binding contract to another human being before knowing if you're sexually compatible with them or not? Makes zero sense.

That is the funniest overused quote I have ever heard. Not to mention since when is a successful marriage based on sex (however good it may be)? Logically, if it was based on sex, it automatically becomes unsuccessful when performance is not longer in ones capacity.

edited: Not to mention that comparing a person with a used car is a horrible analogy

 

[Trailblazer]

If you wouldn't buy a cheap car without taking it for a test drive, why in the world would you sign a legally binding contract to another human being before knowing if you're sexually compatible with them or not? Makes zero sense.

You would do it if you considered God’s will more important than your mundane physical desires...
You would do it if you realized that an All-Knowing and All-Wise God knows more than you do about what is best for you.

A human being is not a car. We are spiritual beings, not physical bodies.

A long time ago, a friend who is a member of my religion posted this on his forum and he gave me permission to share it.... Here are some excerpts from his post:

“Our spiritual nature cannot be developed except by “dying to self” and “living in God.” God has given us a dual nature: one material and one spiritual. Sex is part of the material nature, however much it may be able to play a role in a truly loving relationship. It is not what we are, even though people insist that it is.

God is calling us to struggle against our lower nature and to become who we truly are: not material beings, not sexual beings, but spiritual beings who are in control of the physical side of our nature and who can thus find true happiness living in conformity with His will. Although not scriptural, there is a possible explanation of why He has made it so hard that I ran across long ago in a Baha'i children's book: Because if it were too easy, it wouldn't be worth anything. Or put another way, because only by being challenged can we really prove our love for God.”

 

[Trailblazer]

Why did he say it? Why didn't he add that it is wrong?
For what purpose was it included in "God's Word"?

I really have NO idea.

 

[Trailblazer]

Love is allowed. Selfish sex isn't allowed. The sex that is about giving to the other person is alright (not perfect, but acceptable). The sex that is about taking from the other person is wrong.

Where is that stated in the Bible? Do you think that is what Jesus meant in John 4:17-19?

 

[whirlingmerc]

Sorry but "sexual immoral" doesn't necessarily = "fornication."

.

It's broader hence inclusive

Some problems with fornication include
making it more difficult to bond for a lifetime
the future spouse having to cope with the ghost of past flings
risking abortion of an innocent life

 

[Rational Agnostic]

That is the funniest overused quote I have ever heard. Not to mention since when is a successful marriage based on sex (however good it may be)? Logically, if it was based on sex, it automatically becomes unsuccessful when performance is not longer in ones capacity.

edited: Not to mention that comparing a person with a used car is a horrible analogy

Of course people are far more important than used cars. All the more reason to carefully decide who your life partner is and know as much as you can about them before you commit yourself to them. Would you sign any other legally binding contract without knowing *all* details of what you are getting yourself into? If you wouldn't, then it makes even less sense to marry someone without knowing everything about them first and hence, having sex with them first.

 

[savagewind]

Where is that stated in the Bible? Do you think that is what Jesus meant in John 4:17-19?

Surely, you do not trust that everything a person has to know can be found in the Bible. Do you? If lying with a man if you are a woman or lying with a woman if you are a man is really against the will of God to do, Jesus should have said so and it could have been recorded there. It wasn't and I think the reason is that a person should trust his or her own conscience about the matter. Just keep it clean and safe.

I am sure that sex between unmarried couples is sometimes more righteous where there is love than sex between married couples where there is no love.

I agree that it is wise for a woman of childbearing status to be legally married to the man before she has sex, but it is my opinion that the temptation to play him is strong. When I was young, to be attractive to a man but to abstain from sex with him was called a cock tease. Can I say that?

I really can't settle on a decision of right and wrong in this instance because I am not a man and I believe the urge is sometimes much stronger for intercourse for him than it is for her.

 

[savagewind]

Of course people are far more important than used cars. All the more reason to carefully decide who your life partner is and know as much as you can about them before you commit yourself to them. Would you sign any other legally binding contract without knowing *all* details of what you are getting yourself into? If you wouldn't, then it makes even less sense to marry someone without knowing everything about them first and hence, having sex with them first.

I think that a wise person is able to deduce what sex will be like just by getting to know the other person and by asking pointed questions.

 

[Skwim]

It's broader hence inclusive

But only for those behaviors that have been specifically included, and as far as the Bible goes premarital sex has not been. You don't get to choose.

Some problems with fornication include
making it more difficult to bond for a lifetime
the future spouse having to cope with the ghost of past flings
risking abortion of an innocent life

And of course you wouldn't say this unless you had conclusive evidence, so please share. I await.

.

 

[Trailblazer]

Surely, you do not trust that everything a person has to know can be found in the Bible. Do you? If lying with a man if you are a woman or lying with a woman if you are a man is really against the will of God to do, Jesus should have said so and it could have been recorded there. It wasn't and I think the reason is that a person should trust his or her own conscience about the matter. Just keep it clean and safe.

Nobody said that sex is forbidden; only that fornication is forbidden. I am not a Christian so I do not know if Christians expect non-Christians to adhere to the Bible.

Why do people have to have sex out of wedlock, why not ask yourself that. Why can’t they get married if they love each other? If they do not love each other and are not willing to make a commitment to each other, they should not have the benefits that are designed for married people. Of course that is a belief that is religiously based so non-religious people can do whatever they want to.

Since Jesus did not specifically refer to fornication as a sin, we do not have that in the gospels, but logically speaking we cannot just assume Jesus thought it was a-okay.

Then we have Paul who did say fornication is a sin, and that is the Christian religion.

If you leave people to trust themselves all they do us follow their physical desires... That is one reason why we have the Bible and other scriptures.

When it comes to sex our consciences are not reliable because people can rationalize anything they want to do. That is precisely why there have to be religious laws.

What it boils down to is trusting self or trusting God.

I am sure that sex between unmarried couples is sometimes more righteous where there is love than sex between married couples where there is no love.

You might be right, but that is not for us to decide because we do not make the rules since we are not God.
But if you are not a Christian you are not bound by the Bible.

I agree that it is wise for a woman of childbearing status to be legally married to the man before she has sex, but it is my opinion that the temptation to play him is strong. When I was young, to be attractive to a man but to abstain from sex with him was called a cock tease. Can I say that?

I do not know if you are old enough to remember but I was a teenager during the hippie era. It was after the 1960s when women had become liberated so hippies were into not only drugs but also free love. I was not raised in any religion. Both my parents dropped out of Christianity before their children were born. All my friends were having sex but I knew I had to wait until I got married, and I did. I will never regret that choice.

I really can't settle on a decision of right and wrong in this instance because I am not a man and I believe the urge is sometimes much stronger for intercourse for him than it is for her.

It does not matter if they are a man or a woman. The point is that people can resist the urge if they have strong religious convictions. My husband was a virgin when we got married and he was 42.

 

[Trailblazer]

But only for those behaviors that have been specifically included, and as far as the Bible goes premarital sex has not been. You don't get to choose. .

It has been forbidden by Paul... You do not get to choose.

1 Corinthians 7:2

 

[Trailblazer]

Of course people are far more important than used cars. All the more reason to carefully decide who your life partner is and know as much as you can about them before you commit yourself to them. Would you sign any other legally binding contract without knowing *all* details of what you are getting yourself into? If you wouldn't, then it makes even less sense to marry someone without knowing everything about them first and hence, having sex with them first.

Knowing how they will function sexually is not knowing about them as a person. Knowing them is knowing their character. Any issues related to sex can be addressed if people love each other and are committed to one another and making the marriage work, and if not the marriage was not worth anything.

A person's character is pretty much set by age five so that is what is important to know. The only programs I have time to watch on TV anymore are Forensic Files and Investigation Discovery. On those programs is the evidence that sex does not make a marriage work. Of course there us so much more evidence than we see on true crime dramas.

What do you think happens when people get older and can no longer have sex? If their marriage was based upon sex they have nothing left.

I know all of this by personal experience because I got married three weeks after I met my husband. I was 32 and he was 42 and we were both virgins. We had some problems but nothing that a good sex therapist could not address. We kept that guy in business for about a year, but after that it was smooth sailing. Anyone can learn to drive a car and once you learn you do not forget.

Sexual problems in a marriage are usually symptomatic of other problems in the marriage, not the cause of them. Finding another sexual partner that seems to be more desirable does not solve the problem because people normally carry their relationship problems to the next relationship.

 

[Kenny]

Of course people are far more important than used cars. All the more reason to carefully decide who your life partner is and know as much as you can about them before you commit yourself to them. Would you sign any other legally binding contract without knowing *all* details of what you are getting yourself into? If you wouldn't, then it makes even less sense to marry someone without knowing everything about them first and hence, having sex with them first.

Except for many reasons:

1) You can hire someone and be "compatible"
2) Statistically, success goes does if you have sex before marriage
3) It's the soul compatibility that makes the difference

Someone has fed you a lie.