Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Asking this after reading an interesting article about fornication.

here it is:


http://www.sabbathcovenant.com/doctr...on_defined.htm


Take a look then give some input.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

1. God did call it "fornication" when Israel committed idolatry, and worshiped other gods. He accused Israel of "whoredoms." However, this is an allegory, and doesn't necessarily indicate the whole definition of fornication.

2. In the OT, premarital sex was NOT met with the same punishments as other sexual sins, perversions or improprieties. It required the man who slept with the *maid* to either marry her or pay her father for taking her virginity.

That's the extent of my agreement with the article. Even though premarital sex wasn't punished with death, it still fell outside the lines of acceptable behavior, as illustrated by the need on the part of the man to set things straight through marriage or payment. Secondly, I disagree that fornication only refers to idolatry. It's a broad term that refers to many types of sexual sin:


porneia --

From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.


Sidenote: It's interesting that "pornography" and "fornication" share the same root word. :coffee2

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Unreal. If a man married a Woman and discovered she was not a virgin she was burned with fire.

Can you imagine the implications of this doctrine? Reminds me of Jezebel who taught the saints to commit fornication.

Plenty of "believers" fall into sexual sin as it is. Can you imagine the wickedness if this doctrine were followed?

Those who think they are really in love would many times be finding out it was no such thing and change their mind about their relationship.

If it is a "commited" relationship why not just do it right and get married.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Well, yeah, it's better to marry than to burn, I suppose. ;)

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

:blink :toofunny

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

I agree with you on that point which is also why I am so against the idea that God personally sets couples up together and tells them personally who they are to date and marry. The exact same thing happens: Man or woman meets someone and feels the tingles of infatuation and immediately interprets it as God tell her that HE is the one He wished her to wed!

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Just to be clear, are you talking about an unmarried couple who think they are in love, but don't get married, have sex anyway, then change their minds about being in love and break up?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

What about the man?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

He tries again with someone else.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

:ursofunny

:razz

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Why HE was considered a stud amongst his friends.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

When a couple begins attending church and are “living together” without being married, or two saints begin an intimate relationship without being married, I’ve seen different approaches. The first church I attended would require that they separate. If they wanted to marry they were to begin “dating” and become engaged later. However, pastoral leadership felt that such marriages weren’t going to last and often refused to have a large “church wedding” for the couple. The other church I attended left the couple alone to discover God’s will for their own lives in the hopes that they’d choose marriage.

Paul said something interesting:

I Corinthians 7:36 (KJV)
{7:36} But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of [her] age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

An elder up in his 80’s shared this verse with me. His interpretation surprised me, so I began to study alternate translations of the text. Here’s what it reads in several different versions:

1 Corinthians 7:36 (New International Version)
36 If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married.

1 Corinthians 7:36 (English Standard Version)
36If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry—it is no sin.

Corinthians 7:36 (New Living Translation)
36 But if a man thinks that he’s treating his fiancée improperly and will inevitably give in to his passion, let him marry her as he wishes. It is not a sin.

1 Corinthians 7:36 (New Century Version)
36 If a man thinks he is not doing the right thing with the girl he is engaged to, if she is almost past the best age to marry and he feels he should marry her, he should do what he wants. They should get married. It is no sin.

1 Corinthians 7:36 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
36 But if any man thinks he is acting improperly toward his virgin, if she is past marriageable age, and so it must be, he can do what he wants. He is not sinning; they can get married.

1 Corinthians 7:36 (Today's New International Version)
36 If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting beyond the usual age for marrying[a] and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married.

There are a couple interpretations of this text. The elder who spoke with me believes that the Scripture is talking about an unmarried couple who are devoted to one another. He broke it down like this:

If a man being convicted that he isn’t acting honorably toward the woman he loves, and she is of age to marry, and his passions are too strong to resist and he feels they aught to marry, they are allowed to marry. Sin isn’t counted against them. They should get married.

But other interpretations offer alternative ways of looking at this.

I believe in taking time with a couple that isn’t married. Allow them to begin integrating God into their lives. If they are truly in love and also fall in love with the LORD, eventually they will wish to surrender their entire lives to him and seek marriage. Should one of them resist the notion of marriage, the godly conviction upon one of them will eventually work to dissolve their relationship without the need of the church meddling. If both are resisting the notion of marriage, conviction from loving and biblical preaching will eventually bring a breaking point in spirit... repent or leave. I think this is best, especially if children are involved.

If a couple lives together without being married and both refuse to marry, and biblical preaching isn't affecting them for the good, sadly, the church may have to pull away from fellowshipping them.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

yes

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Thanks.

And sorry, but I'm still having trouble understanding that post. What doctrine are you referring to in "Can you imagine the wickedness if this doctrine were followed?" Is it the killing of a new wife who was not a virgin, which you had just mentioned?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Oh, Michael! If you don't help me understand your post, I'll just have to jump to my own conclusions!

:lol

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Hi Tim,

Im talking about the doctrine promoted in the first post. That if couples are in a "committed" but unmarried relationship they can have sex together and YHWH is ok with it.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

OK, thanks. (The link in the first post, I guess you mean. Not sure if the poster agreed with it or not!)

So, here's the example of wickedness you gave:

1. Couple is (or thinks they are) in love.
2. Couple has sex.
3. Couple discovers they aren't in love after all (or "falls out of love").
4. Couple breaks up.

And you think replacing step 2 as follows would be better (not wicked, or less wicked):

1. Couple is (or thinks they are) in love.
2. Couple gets married. (And presumably has sex.)
3. Couple discovers they aren't in love after all (or "falls out of love").
4. Couple breaks up.

Is that right?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Before "government" got involved, a marriage was any union solemnized by the church, minister, or family. It was largely a private affair. A couple would put their names together in the family Bible and it would be so.

Our modern era has seriously complicated some very simple and intimate things.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Relevant article:

The Decline of Marriage and Rise of New Families
November 18, 2010

Executive Summary
The transformative trends of the past 50 years that have led to a sharp decline in marriage and a rise of new family forms have been shaped by attitudes and behaviors that differ by class, age and race, according to a new Pew Research Center nationwide survey, conducted in association with TIME magazine, and complemented by an analysis of demographic and economic data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

To read entire article: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1802/dec...e-new-families

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

What if we had "common law" marriage laws throughout the United States?

Essentially that would legalize any couple "living together" who met certain standards. The institution of marriage was established to legally establish that a woman belonged to a given man, it ensured her some rights in the community in regards to care and protection, it also ensured some rights in the community for her children in regards to care and protection. If "common law marriage" laws existed throughout the country, society would grant any person cohabitating with someone for a given amount of time would certain rights to care and protection. In some common law states a common law wife can even get alimony if her common law husband leaves her. All she has to do is provide evidence that their union has met the standards of being a common law marriage.

Here's a short description of common law marriage standards that I found on the internet:

1.Ascertain if the state/country you are living in recognizes common-law marriages. Only a few states plus the District of Columbia recognize common-law marriages.
Currently, common-law marriages are recognized by: Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Washington, D.C.


2.Generally, there are four requirements for a valid common-law marriage. Just living together isn't enough to validate a common-law marriage.

3.Requirement One:
You must live together.

4.Requirement Two:
You must present yourselves to others as a married couple. Some ways of doing this are by using the same last name, referring to one another as husband or wife, and filing a joint tax return.

5.Requirement Three:
Although the time frame is not defined, you have to be together for a significant period of time.

6.Requirement Four:
You must intend to be married.

7.In the U.S., the agreement by every state to recognize as valid a common-law marriage that was recognized in another state has been challenged by many states creating state laws not recognizing same sex marriages valid in other locales. It is best to consult an attorney to make sure your common-law marriage is recognized in the state where you are currently residing.

8.Note:
The Social Security Administration will only recognize your common-law marriage if the state where you reside recognizes your common-law marriage.
To make sure that you would be eligible for survivor benefits, you need to go to a SSA office and fill out forms, provide statements from two blood relatives, and provide supporting evidence of your common-law relationship.


9.Your Federal Income Tax, Publication 17:
"Considered married. "You are considered married for the whole year if on the last day of your tax year you and your spouse meet any one of the following tests ... 2. You are living together in a common law marriage that is recognized in the state where you now live or in the state where the common law marriage began."
page 20

Seeing that the traditional "sacremental institution" of marriage has slowly fallen apart, would common law marriage laws allow more couples to enter into wedlock by virtue of the nature of their relationship, though without the "ceremony"?

Maybe the answer is getting Government out of the marriage business. It seems like everything GOVERNMENT touches begins falling apart. And why is GOVERNMENT so involved anyway? I think they found a way to make money by requiring marriage licenses etc. I'm just thinking out loud.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

I agree, and the government most always complicates things.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

GOVERNMENT is part of the problem is so many of these social issues.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Marriage without government involvement would be crazy.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Marriage with government involvement is pretty crazy!

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Sounds like we are danged if we do and danged if we don't!

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

:lol

For the record, we enjoy a wonderful, crazy marriage. :D

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

My first reaction to this thread title was "ahhhh...finally a thread I can really contribute to!" LOL

Though I don't know that I would call my little miracle "judgment", the all day long morning sickness isn't exactly a walk in the park!

To answer Michael's questions about why 2 people in a committed relationship don't just get married. We just don't see the need to rush into things. In our case we met, dated, fell in love. Per our worldviews (me as somewhat of an Anarchist with Christian Leanings, him as a Liberal Atheist) we had no moral objections to intimacy in a committed but non-marital relationship. A few months back we took the next step and officially "shacked up".

And while it was understood that we were moving towards an eventually long-time commitment, we were both content to continue to "test the waters" for a little while longer.

Of course, then I found out that I was expecting (a major surprise as it was not supposed to be possible!), and we did rush to get married then, but to be honest, it was mainly because my insurance didn't cover any maternity costs, and his insurance would only cover me and the baby if we were married.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Isn't it ironic that the result of your "wickedness" will be a wonderful, much loved, precious human being!

:yourock

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Why? If a man left his wife, she'd simply have to show that they shared names, lived together for some time, and filed taxes jointly. The court would then grant her all the rights of a wife in divorce proceedings. Interestingly, in states where common law marriages exist... the only way to dissolve one is through formal dissolution or divorce. The government is only involved to protect the rights of the parties involved... not to define or legislate marriage itself.

Why should the GOVERNMENT have a registry of who your spouse is? Isn't that your business?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

God knows how to make all things beautiful.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Well, can't really say that about all wickedness. (I wouldn't, anyway. ;))

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Sure I understand. For an anarchist and an atheist that may seem totally appropriate. However the God of scripture (Jesus) says they that do such things shall not enter his Kingdom.

Conduct for a disciple of Jesus is to be aimed at pleasing him.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

True that. ;)

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Um, wasn't it actually Paul that said that?

The only example I can think of where Jesus addressed people in a committed relationship that wasn't marriage is the Samaritan woman. He mentioned that she was currently shacking up, but that seems more to impress upon her who He is. Other than that he doesn't broach the subject at all, but goes on to talk about more important things. If her marital state mattered that much to Him don't you think there would have been a lecture and a stiff lecture accompanying all the talk of living water?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Jesus didn't come into the world to condemn the world, so I'm not surprised He didn't condemn the woman at the well for not being married to the man she was with at the time.
That doesn't mean He accepted her behavior as a Godly, legitimate expression of committment.
I for one am thankful He doesn't condemn, He draws with His Spirit and then deals with whatever He deems necessary as we respond to Him.

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Sure enough!

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Sure enough again!

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Remember when Judgment for premarital sex meant unplanned or unwanted pregnancy?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

Michael?

Re: Judgement for premarital sex??
 

And if he STILL doesn't answer?