Why single Christians are having sex

[OneLight]

In keeping with my line of thought, I need to say that a bride is a woman in preparation for being married, and the bridegroom is a man in preparation for being married. The marriage ceremony, which we call a wedding, is the formal and customary celebration which gives legitimacy to their intent to BE MARRIED ... or literally, have sex, or be "one flesh" with each other.

The point I had hoped to make, is this: God is very specific about what happens when a man lies down with a woman ... even in such extreme cases as when a man lies down with a prostitute, he is literally "one flesh" with her ... I Corinthians 6:16. Historically, it was customary that couples which had gone thru the wedding ceremony were not considered to be literally and truly Married until they consumated their vows by having sexual intercourse, and this could prove problematic in cases of inheritance or rights of rulership if it could be established that they were merely wedded, and not truly married.

If a man is considered to be "one flesh" with a woman simply by having sex with her, that gives me the indication that marriage does not occur during the wedding ceremony, but during the sex. Apparently, one can be one flesh with a woman without having gone thru a formal wedding service, which means that "getting married" must have meant something else entirely to God than what it means to us today. Indiscriminate sex is abhorrent to God, hence, His commandments concerning the need to avoid adultery and fornication.

Of course, it is far better that two people take the time to legitimize their desire to be one flesh by initiating a wedding ceremony beforehand, but the plain truth appears to be that the ceremony is not what makes the marriage happen, it is the sex. Which puts a whole 'nother spin on just how important it is to remain chaste until we are truly ready to be lifelong mates with each other.

Do you consider someone who commits fornication to be married? If they commit fornication with numerous partners, are they married to all of them? I don't see them as being married. When Jesus was speaking to the Samaritan woman, he said plainly that the man she was with was not her husband, but she had been married 5 times in the past. I think a commitment between the couple and God is required to make a marriage. It doesn't necessarily need the blessings of the government, but I do believe it requires a commitment.

I understand where you are going with this, because this is what I thought until I read your statement and have to ask, how can God "commit" to sin if a person has been married before and divorced unless the spouse died? There is also the argument of in the case of adultery?

[NGKnightfell]

In keeping with my line of thought, I need to say that a bride is a woman in preparation for being married, and the bridegroom is a man in preparation for being married. The marriage ceremony, which we call a wedding, is the formal and customary celebration which gives legitimacy to their intent to BE MARRIED ... or literally, have sex, or be "one flesh" with each other.

The point I had hoped to make, is this: God is very specific about what happens when a man lies down with a woman ... even in such extreme cases as when a man lies down with a prostitute, he is literally "one flesh" with her ... I Corinthians 6:16. Historically, it was customary that couples which had gone thru the wedding ceremony were not considered to be literally and truly Married until they consumated their vows by having sexual intercourse, and this could prove problematic in cases of inheritance or rights of rulership if it could be established that they were merely wedded, and not truly married.

If a man is considered to be "one flesh" with a woman simply by having sex with her, that gives me the indication that marriage does not occur during the wedding ceremony, but during the sex. Apparently, one can be one flesh with a woman without having gone thru a formal wedding service, which means that "getting married" must have meant something else entirely to God than what it means to us today. Indiscriminate sex is abhorrent to God, hence, His commandments concerning the need to avoid adultery and fornication.

Of course, it is far better that two people take the time to legitimize their desire to be one flesh by initiating a wedding ceremony beforehand, but the plain truth appears to be that the ceremony is not what makes the marriage happen, it is the sex. Which puts a whole 'nother spin on just how important it is to remain chaste until we are truly ready to be lifelong mates with each other.

Do you consider someone who commits fornication to be married? If they commit fornication with numerous partners, are they married to all of them? I don't see them as being married. When Jesus was speaking to the Samaritan woman, he said plainly that the man she was with was not her husband, but she had been married 5 times in the past. I think a commitment between the couple and God is required to make a marriage. It doesn't necessarily need the blessings of the government, but I do believe it requires a commitment.

I understand where you are going with this, because this is what I thought until I read your statement and have to ask, how can God "commit" to sin if a person has been married before and divorced unless the spouse died? There is also the argument of in the case of adultery?

It is in the book of John chapter 4 that we find the story about the Samaritan woman at the well. Here are the pertinent verses:

15The woman said to Him, "Sir, give me this water, so I will not be thirsty nor come all the way here to draw." 16He said to her, "Go, call your husband and come here." 17The woman answered and said, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her, "You have correctly said, 'I have no husband'; 18for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly."

In keeping with my thoughts about the concept of marriage as that of being in a sanctified state of "one flesh" with our partner, and that the Lord honors a committed relationship, the word "husband" simply refers to the man in the committed relationship. Jesus said the woman had had five husbands, which means that she had entered into five distinct committed sexual relationships. The man she currently was with was NOT her husband, which means that either she, or the man, was in it purely for the recreation, and not for the long haul, in which case what she was likely committing with him was fornication, or maybe even adultery, depending on the status of the man she was living with.

The Bible does not say that she had divorced those five men, only that she had had five husbands with whom she enjoyed the married status. It could just as easily have been that she had been widowed five times. Back in those days, a widow was supposed to marry her husband's brother in order to keep the family line going. If she had been one of those unfortunate souls for whom the brothers kept dying on her before she could get with child, then perhaps she was pretty soured on the entire sanctified marriage relationship, and chose fornication instead.

That is why fornication and adultery are so deadly to us ... Yes, in essence, when we "sleep around" we are "marrying" a variety of partners with no intention of honoring them as a spouse, and we are cheapening the sanctity of what marriage is all about, and betraying that very real bond that has been formed as a result of the chemical interaction.

Edited May 15, 2013 by NGKnightfell

[GoldenEagle]

It is in the book of John chapter 4 that we find the story about the Samaritan woman at the well. Here are the pertinent verses:

15The woman said to Him, "Sir, give me this water, so I will not be thirsty nor come all the way here to draw." 16He said to her, "Go, call your husband and come here." 17The woman answered and said, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her, "You have correctly said, 'I have no husband'; 18for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly."

In keeping with my thoughts about the concept of marriage as that of being in a sanctified state of "one flesh" with our partner, and that the Lord honors a committed relationship, the word "husband" simply refers to the man in the committed relationship. Jesus said the woman had had five husbands, which means that she had entered into five distinct committed sexual relationships. The man she currently was with was NOT her husband, which means that either she, or the man, was in it purely for the recreation, and not for the long haul, in which case what she was likely committing with him was fornication, or maybe even adultery, depending on the status of the man she was living with.

The Bible does not say that she had divorced those five men, only that she had had five husbands with whom she enjoyed the married status. It could just as easily have been that she had been widowed five times. Back in those days, a widow was supposed to marry her husband's brother in order to keep the family line going. If she had been one of those unfortunate souls for whom the brothers kept dying on her before she could get with child, then perhaps she was pretty soured on the entire sanctified marriage relationship, and chose fornication instead.

That is why fornication and adultery are so deadly to us ... Yes, in essence, when we "sleep around" we are "marrying" a variety of partners with no intention of honoring them as a spouse, and we are cheapening the sanctity of what marriage is all about, and betraying that very real bond that has been formed as a result of the chemical interaction.

So if two people who love each other decide to be committed to each and have sexual intercourse they're married in God's eyes? Is this what you're saying?

God bless,

GE

[Guest Butero]

In keeping with my line of thought, I need to say that a bride is a woman in preparation for being married, and the bridegroom is a man in preparation for being married. The marriage ceremony, which we call a wedding, is the formal and customary celebration which gives legitimacy to their intent to BE MARRIED ... or literally, have sex, or be "one flesh" with each other.

The point I had hoped to make, is this: God is very specific about what happens when a man lies down with a woman ... even in such extreme cases as when a man lies down with a prostitute, he is literally "one flesh" with her ... I Corinthians 6:16. Historically, it was customary that couples which had gone thru the wedding ceremony were not considered to be literally and truly Married until they consumated their vows by having sexual intercourse, and this could prove problematic in cases of inheritance or rights of rulership if it could be established that they were merely wedded, and not truly married.

If a man is considered to be "one flesh" with a woman simply by having sex with her, that gives me the indication that marriage does not occur during the wedding ceremony, but during the sex. Apparently, one can be one flesh with a woman without having gone thru a formal wedding service, which means that "getting married" must have meant something else entirely to God than what it means to us today. Indiscriminate sex is abhorrent to God, hence, His commandments concerning the need to avoid adultery and fornication.

Of course, it is far better that two people take the time to legitimize their desire to be one flesh by initiating a wedding ceremony beforehand, but the plain truth appears to be that the ceremony is not what makes the marriage happen, it is the sex. Which puts a whole 'nother spin on just how important it is to remain chaste until we are truly ready to be lifelong mates with each other.

Do you consider someone who commits fornication to be married? If they commit fornication with numerous partners, are they married to all of them? I don't see them as being married. When Jesus was speaking to the Samaritan woman, he said plainly that the man she was with was not her husband, but she had been married 5 times in the past. I think a commitment between the couple and God is required to make a marriage. It doesn't necessarily need the blessings of the government, but I do believe it requires a commitment.

I understand where you are going with this, because this is what I thought until I read your statement and have to ask, how can God "commit" to sin if a person has been married before and divorced unless the spouse died? There is also the argument of in the case of adultery?

It is in the book of John chapter 4 that we find the story about the Samaritan woman at the well. Here are the pertinent verses:

15The woman said to Him, "Sir, give me this water, so I will not be thirsty nor come all the way here to draw." 16He said to her, "Go, call your husband and come here." 17The woman answered and said, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her, "You have correctly said, 'I have no husband'; 18for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly."

In keeping with my thoughts about the concept of marriage as that of being in a sanctified state of "one flesh" with our partner, and that the Lord honors a committed relationship, the word "husband" simply refers to the man in the committed relationship. Jesus said the woman had had five husbands, which means that she had entered into five distinct committed sexual relationships. The man she currently was with was NOT her husband, which means that either she, or the man, was in it purely for the recreation, and not for the long haul, in which case what she was likely committing with him was fornication, or maybe even adultery, depending on the status of the man she was living with.

The Bible does not say that she had divorced those five men, only that she had had five husbands with whom she enjoyed the married status. It could just as easily have been that she had been widowed five times. Back in those days, a widow was supposed to marry her husband's brother in order to keep the family line going. If she had been one of those unfortunate souls for whom the brothers kept dying on her before she could get with child, then perhaps she was pretty soured on the entire sanctified marriage relationship, and chose fornication instead.

That is why fornication and adultery are so deadly to us ... Yes, in essence, when we "sleep around" we are "marrying" a variety of partners with no intention of honoring them as a spouse, and we are cheapening the sanctity of what marriage is all about, and betraying that very real bond that has been formed as a result of the chemical interaction.

That is an interesting thought, that the woman could have been a widow 5 times over? I think it unlikely, but that is an interesting thought, and one I hadn't considered. There is still one question. If you are having recreational sex, would you say that means you are not married to each person you were with, but if the relationships were committed between the two people and God, they are married? I have trouble believing the woman of Samaria wasn't in at least a long term relationship, as in being shacked up? I just don't think she was looking at her status as being married? Where do you believe the line changes from fornication to marriage? Here is another question. The bill of divorcement was in the law of Moses, so there had to be some kind of recognition that a couple was married in the first place. In other words, just because two people lay together, and remain in the same household for a time, doesn't mean they would need a bill of divorcement to split up and marry, so where does divorce come in?

[Guest Butero]

In keeping with my line of thought, I need to say that a bride is a woman in preparation for being married, and the bridegroom is a man in preparation for being married. The marriage ceremony, which we call a wedding, is the formal and customary celebration which gives legitimacy to their intent to BE MARRIED ... or literally, have sex, or be "one flesh" with each other.

The point I had hoped to make, is this: God is very specific about what happens when a man lies down with a woman ... even in such extreme cases as when a man lies down with a prostitute, he is literally "one flesh" with her ... I Corinthians 6:16. Historically, it was customary that couples which had gone thru the wedding ceremony were not considered to be literally and truly Married until they consumated their vows by having sexual intercourse, and this could prove problematic in cases of inheritance or rights of rulership if it could be established that they were merely wedded, and not truly married.

If a man is considered to be "one flesh" with a woman simply by having sex with her, that gives me the indication that marriage does not occur during the wedding ceremony, but during the sex. Apparently, one can be one flesh with a woman without having gone thru a formal wedding service, which means that "getting married" must have meant something else entirely to God than what it means to us today. Indiscriminate sex is abhorrent to God, hence, His commandments concerning the need to avoid adultery and fornication.

Of course, it is far better that two people take the time to legitimize their desire to be one flesh by initiating a wedding ceremony beforehand, but the plain truth appears to be that the ceremony is not what makes the marriage happen, it is the sex. Which puts a whole 'nother spin on just how important it is to remain chaste until we are truly ready to be lifelong mates with each other.

Do you consider someone who commits fornication to be married? If they commit fornication with numerous partners, are they married to all of them? I don't see them as being married. When Jesus was speaking to the Samaritan woman, he said plainly that the man she was with was not her husband, but she had been married 5 times in the past. I think a commitment between the couple and God is required to make a marriage. It doesn't necessarily need the blessings of the government, but I do believe it requires a commitment.

I understand where you are going with this, because this is what I thought until I read your statement and have to ask, how can God "commit" to sin if a person has been married before and divorced unless the spouse died? There is also the argument of in the case of adultery?

That is a good question. How does God look upon someone in a marriage where a divorce took place that was not Biblical? If God considers every couple who shacked up married, even though there was no official ceremony, how many people are really divorced and re-married in the sight of God and don't realize it? These are all important questions to consider.

[JTC]

I almost can't believe what I'm reading here. If anyone thinks having sex makes a man and woman married in the eyes of God you are very mistaken. Sharing orgasm with the same person will, over time, create a feeling where the 2 are bonded together. But this isn't making them 1 flesh. It's a psychological phenomenon, not a spiritual one. It's also a sin in the eyes of God.

[NGKnightfell]

// "So if two people who love each other decide to be committed to each and have sexual intercourse they're married in God's eyes? Is this what you're saying?

God bless,

GE" //

Not quite. The commitment to one another is what sanctifies their marriage and makes it holy and undefiled in God's sight. They become Married as soon as they have sexual intercourse. The confusion over this line of thinking stems from the fact that most folks do not understand that the word "marry" simply means "to join two things together to make them one." The Bible tells us that this occurs when a man leaves his family and cleaves (clings) to his wife, and science has shown that our bodies do indeed bond together as one during sexual intercourse. If sexual intercourse is not "cleaving" I don't know what is...

In our culture, we very closely associate the fact that when two people declare their intention to marry (to join with each other in the act of sex in order that they become one flesh) they very often participate in a wedding ceremony beforehand, that includes the sharing of rings or the speaking of vows, which officiates the beginning of their new life together. In just such a situation, the man officially declares that he is now a husband, and the woman a wife, and for the most part, folks consider it to be SIN to have sex without benefit of having first had this ceremony, this speaking of vows.

It is my contention that the issue is much simpler, and has been so from the very beginning ... to be married is to have bonded with another person via sex. The SIN is not that of having sex without the ceremony - the SIN is treating that sex as a recreational activity without ever taking upon oneself the implied role of husband and wife which such a union automatically creates, nor even of intending to. We humans had created the wedding ceremony to instill and enforce the seriousness of bonding with another human, because we humans tend to think by the seat of our pants rather than our hearts, and the wedding ceremony helps put a brake on the raging hormones that would otherwise lead us astray.

But the original question was to discuss why CHRISTIANS would ever want to commit the "sin of having sex without being married" - and my response is that they are not sinning, per se, when they "just live together" - by simply having sex, they are already MARRIED, but without the benefit of having taking formal vows. Such a relationship may carry with it a great many social and traditionally religious taboos, but unless they betray their bonds and stop being loyal to their sex partner by having sex with someone else, then they are not actually SINNING before GOD.

Hope that helps ... 8-)

[BlessedByTheBest]

are there or are there not examples of formal wedding ceremonies in scripture, commanded by God?

if not, then how are a man and woman officially considered husband and wife?

also, what are we to make of King Solomon's 700 wives, princesses, and 300 concubines?

was he in sin by having multiple partners although they were all considered wives?

what would be the biblical difference between a wife and a concubine?

[NGKnightfell]

// "Here is another question. The bill of divorcement was in the law of Moses, so there had to be some kind of recognition that a couple was married in the first place. In other words, just because two people lay together, and remain in the same household for a time, doesn't mean they would need a bill of divorcement to split up and marry, so where does divorce come in?" // - Butero

Jesus spoke concerning the topic of divorce. He stated that Moses allowed the Israelites to issue divorce papers to each other because it was recognized that humans are incredibly flawed, and have been known to get involved sexually with someone before they had completely absorbed all the ramifications of what they were getting themselves into. Those raging hormones have apparently been a problem all along. God allowed the Israelites to divorce one another, but it was never God's intention that we just willy-nilly hop from bed to bed, or to simply "put aside our spouses" on a whim, because it has been God's intention all along that we mate with our partners FOR LIFE. What is implied, however, is that a formal 'bill of divorcement' would only be necessary because the couple had become formally married in the first place.

If we, during the course of our married relationship, suddenly grow cold in our love for our spouse, which can happen in relationships where one or both spouses are incredibly selfish with one another, the New Testament allows for them to "separate" from each other for a time, and remain separate and single or else become reconciled. Selfishness is not sufficient excuse for a person to betray the bonds that they had willingly established, and just set them aside in order to find someone that "was more fun to be with". Such a betrayal of the bonding for such an arbitrary reason causes anyone that would subsequently marry that set aside person to be committing adultery with them.

Jesus did say that marital infidelity, on the other hand, IS suffienct grounds for terminating a married relationship. If a man or a woman simply cannot keep their hands off of other people, then they are betraying the bonds they made with their first partner, and they should end the marriage. In the simplest terms possible, it needs to be said that a Married couple are those that had begun having sex, and that an UN-Married couple are those that have had NO sexual relations with each other. The wedding ceremony is not what physically bonds two people together ... the sex is.

What gives me the greatest hope of all is knowing that once a man or woman comes to acknowledge the Lord in their lives, and are reborn, then their minds and their hearts become more like Him, and their lives begin to take on the attributes of holiness and righteousness. If we were once inclined to follow the rules and the dictates of society, and we had formerly given in to our lusts, and fornicated and committed adultery with one another, both with or without having had a formal wedding ceremony, before we met Christ, and then repented of those sins, then the blood of Christ has washed away all stain of that sin, and we are new creatures. We are now free to begin living our lives FROM THAT POINT ON as if we had never sinned.

All along the way, we find ourselves waffling back and forth between honestly wanting to obey all the commandments of God and inevitably finding ourselves once again mucking in the mire of our old sin nature, and needing to be cleaned up and forgiven all over again. Our lives are a process, and as we grow in understanding and in spiritual maturity, it becomes easier to fight those old temptations, until we are able to finally LIVE TOTALLY in sober self control, and we are able to STOP SINNING.

Until that time comes, God extends to us mercy and grace, both chastising us when we become rebellious, and being sympathetic when we go off half-cocked in the heat of passion and find ourselves in situations we really should not have gone into. We will be surrounded by brothers and sisters who are also in a process of learning how to trust God instead of their own lusts, and we need to be gracious and merciful, stern and sympathetic with each other as well. It is so easy for us to point at one another, and call other people "sinners" or "fornicators" or "adulterers" based on our own standards of righteousness, and to forget that all of us are in this together.

... I just noticed how "preachy" those last few paragraphs sounded, but it felt necessary to say those things in context with everything else I have said. Sometimes we get all caught up in the "letter" of the law that we forget the "spirit." That, and I never seem to be able to say anything in just one or two lines. Please know how much I appreciate y'all giving me so much space to "be myself" in. Your patience with me is a balm to my soul ... 8-)

May God bless us all ...

[NGKnightfell]

are there or are there not examples of formal wedding ceremonies in scripture, commanded by God?

if not, then how are a man and woman officially considered husband and wife?

also, what are we to make of King Solomon's 700 wives, princesses, and 300 concubines?

was he in sin by having multiple partners although they were all considered wives?

what would be the biblical difference between a wife and a concubine?

Excellent questions...I have always wondered what the difference was between a wife and a concubine. I could not find any reference to God being offended, or accusing the men of gross sin because of having concubines and multiple wives ... although there is one passage in the New Testament for men who wanted to be BISHOPS of the church: they had to be the husband of only ONE woman, and have their family under tight control and be above reproach in all things. It would seem that multiple wives were still in vogue in the early church, and after Pentecost, it was abundantly clear that a man with more than one wife would NOT be a very effective leader in the church.

I got the general feeling from Scripture that wives and concubines were different only in terms of some form of official capacity in relationship to the husband, quite possibly political (in the case of Solomon) and perhaps just a matter of societal standing (in the case of Jacob. Leah and Rachel were wives because they were Jacob's cousins, and Bilhah and Zilpah were concubines because they were Leah's and Rachel's maidservants.)

In keeping with my entire line of thought, the concept of multiple wives and having concubines being acceptable to God lead me to believe that it was the COMMITMENT between two people having sex that was important, and that a married relationship did not automatically mean an exclusive one between a man and ONLY one woman. If a man was able to properly care for more than one woman, he was welcome to as many wives and concubines as his income could support. The woman was not allowed to share her bed with any other man, nor was the man allowed to share his bed with anyone that he was not able to bring into his home and make into a part of his family. Either situation would be considered adultery.

It would seem that the notion of marriage ONLY being between one man and one woman exclusively is a New Testament tradition. Personally, the notion of single-minded fidelity to only one woman is much more in keeping with God's laws than the idea that a man can sow his oats in as many female pastures as he could support, and that Jesus understood the heartache a woman must have felt all those many centuries in days gone by, knowing that if she was not somehow "good enough" for her husband, he could simply add to his harem.

Think about it a moment ... if we were to bring back the Old Testament traditions of men having as many wives and concubines as they liked, men would no longer need to feel guilty about having a mistress in addition to a wife in this day and age. He would just need to make her a concubine, or just marry her as well, and bring her into his home. Egad! I am grateful we don't ascribe to polygamous relationships anymore!!!

Careful reading of the Old Testament shows that while having multiple wives was acceptable, all those women, with their many contradicting mannerisms, was a hot bed of trouble for Solomon. They led Solomon to serious idolatry as he tried to satisfy their emotional as well as physical needs, and they brought their pagan beliefs into Jerusalem.

It goes without saying that making the relationship OFFICIAL, and formally establishing the roles of husband and wife in a vow taking ceremony is emminantly superior to "just shacking up," and I must beg pardon of all those that have come to believe I think otherwise.

It does not, however, negate what I had been saying all along, that the bonding mechanism between men and women was put there by God right in our bodies, and the effect is physcal, NOT purely spiritual nor psychological, and the fact that our culture and our religious institutions go to such great lengths to advocate vows of fidelity lend credence to just how serious and permanent this bonding really is.

Blessings to all.