to not understand Christians who have sex/live together before marriage then marry in church?

[onlytwo]

Posting here because I am genuinely confused and not trying to offend anyone.

I keep seeing couples who describe themselves as Christians who have been living together for years, sometimes with kids, then they get married in church with all the religious vows etc. I thought one of the key Christian teachings is no sex before marriage yet it seems really common that people ignore that part but still have a big church wedding.

AIBU to think it is hypocritical?

My concern is not with people who acknowledge they have fallen short and then choose to get married as a step toward aligning their lives with what they believe. That shows a desire to make things right, which is admirable.

What I am questioning is when people openly reject the idea that premarital sex is wrong at all, yet still want the appearance of a traditional Christian wedding without intending to live according to what that wedding represents. If someone sees marriage only as a cultural or social event, without respect for the faith’s teachings, it risks turning something meant to be a sacred covenant into an empty ritual.

It is not about punishing people for their past, but about taking seriously what marriage means in the Christian faith and whether people entering a church wedding actually intend to honour that commitment.

But when it comes to a church wedding, it is not just about personal interpretation. It is a public act in a specific religious context

Right and yet if someone finds it meaningful to marry in a Christian church. If a person with the religious / institutional authority thinks it appropriate and meaningful to marry them in that church. If those who are in attendance find it meaningful that they were married in that church..

yet you have decided that your personal interpretation renders the whole action hypocritical!!!!

I can’t think of attitude much less Christian personally…

I agree that Jesus taught love, compassion, and humility, and that we should not go around self-righteously judging others. But he also taught that love includes calling people to repentance and to live in alignment with God’s will. Jesus repeatedly warned against sin, called people to “go and sin no more,” and affirmed God’s moral standards, especially regarding marriage and faithfulness.

It is true that translations and interpretations of Scripture have been influenced by culture, but the core teachings on sexual ethics, marriage, and faithfulness have been remarkably consistent across two thousand years of Christianity. The idea that holy books are only “guides” ignores that Jesus and the apostles presented God’s commands as authoritative, not optional suggestions.

Focusing on your own life is important, but engaging in honest discussion about what faith teaches is not the same as self-righteous judgment. Christians are called to speak the truth in love, which includes upholding what Scripture says while extending grace and compassion. Silence or redefining sin to avoid discomfort is not the kind of love Jesus demonstrated.

OP, you need to accept that all major religions contain a range of different sects with more and less liberal views.

I was Christian for much of my life (C of E then Quaker) and never met other Christians in this context who had the remotest problem with sex before marriage.

Also not sure why it matters to you what these people do and believe, given it can't hurt you or others in any way?

(Or emotionally immature).

It’s true that Christians believe in God and Jesus, but Christianity isn’t just about a vague belief in those two figure. It is about following the teachings they revealed, which include clear moral and ethical standards. While there is room for different interpretations on some issues, the idea that everyone is free to redefine core teachings however they wish undermines the very concept of a shared faith.

If Christianity becomes entirely individual, with everyone deciding their own version of right and wrong, it stops being a faith based on God’s revealed truth and becomes just personal opinion. Jesus and the apostles taught that Christians are called to obey God’s commands, not invent their own rules.

Freedom of conscience is important, but it doesn’t mean we can simply discard or rewrite what Scripture has consistently taught about how believers should live.

People rarely endure torture and death for what they know is a hallucination or lie.

If you have a hallucination it seems real.

You are not enduring torture and death for what you know is a hallucination, but you don't know it's a hallucination!

I understand why you see it that way, but it is not about my personal interpretation. It is about what the Christian faith has consistently taught marriage to mean: a covenant before God reflecting lifelong faithfulness and sexual integrity. If someone openly rejects those teachings but still wants a church wedding for aesthetic or cultural reasons, it raises a legitimate question about whether they truly intend to live out what the ceremony represents.

Of course the decision of the minister and the couple’s loved ones matters, but Christian marriage is ultimately about making vows before God. If the couple and those officiating the wedding disregard what Scripture says marriage is supposed to be, that ceremony risks losing its meaning as a sacred covenant.

Pointing out that a Christian wedding should reflect Christian teaching is not unloving or un-Christian; it is a call to take seriously the faith that the ceremony claims to celebrate. True love and honesty require acknowledging when actions contradict beliefs, not ignoring that tension for the sake of appearances.

I agree that every major religion has a range of traditions and denominations with more and less liberal views. But the fact that some Christian groups or individuals have relaxed their stance on premarital sex does not change what Scripture and historic Christian teaching have consistently said on the matter. Diversity of opinion does not mean all views are equally aligned with what Christianity has taught for nearly two thousand years.

As for why it matters, it is not about trying to control others’ choices or being personally offended. It is about understanding how people who identify as Christian reconcile living in ways that directly contradict clear biblical teachings. If Christianity is going to mean anything beyond personal preference, there needs to be some connection between belief and practice.

Asking these questions is not about shaming or hurting anyone. It is about exploring whether the faith still calls believers to a distinct way of life, or whether it has simply become a label that can mean whatever each person wants.

For me I always felt that dogma was a huge barrier to a genuine relationship with god. If you’re tied up in knots trying follow all the rules you’ve lost sight of the essence of faith which is as Jesus said,

Matthew 22:36-40

New International Version

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

so I lived according to this and having sex was not hurting anyone it was expressing love.

however it seemed I was alone in this thinking even though it’s what Jesus reiterated all the time as well as literally sacrificing himself to save us from ‘sin’. The church I attended still had a culture of homophobia, holier than thou, faux kindness and I never fitted in. I liked a drink, a laugh and the friends who would be there for me were not the religious ones. I realised that organised abrahamic religion is shackled to its doctrine from 2000 years ago, whereas humans evolve in every sense. I broke my shackles and am religion free!

I completely agree that Jesus taught love as the greatest commandment and that faith without love is empty. But Jesus also said, “If you love me, keep my commands” (John 14:15), showing that love for God is inseparable from striving to live according to his teachings. The commandments to love God and love your neighbour summarise the Law, but they do not replace it with a vague feeling of goodwill; they call us to honour God in all areas of life, including how we use our bodies and conduct our relationships.

Expressing love is important, but Scripture consistently teaches that sexual intimacy is designed to be part of a lifelong covenant of marriage. Acting outside of that does not become right just because it feels loving in the moment. Love that aligns with God’s design means wanting what is best for others and
ourselves according to his standards, not just our own preferences.

I am sorry you experienced hypocrisy and hurt in church communities. Many churches and Christians fall short of living out Jesus’ love, but their failures do not change what he taught. Dismissing all of Christianity because some believers act unkindly or legalistically overlooks the heart of Jesus’ message, which includes both radical grace and a call to holy living.

As a pp said, you really need to accept that within every religion there are different sects with different interpretations. This is true of Christianity. The reality is that there are all kinds of ways of being Christian and understanding Christian teaching.

I personally find yours very unchristian. You might think the same of others. so we agree to disagree on what it is to be a true Christian.

All anyone can do is focus on their own personal relationship with God, Preach the values they believe in, sure, but also avoid judging others. That’s what Jesus commanded us to do after all. This thread is not that.

People sin every day. What is it about sex that makes it a bigger sin than negative speech, materialism, neglecting our role as stewards, harming animals, putting other things ahead of God? Etc etc.

Yes, I think sex is pretty unimportant in the scheme of things, especially once you’ve divorced it from patriarchal notions of the ownership of women’s reproductive capacity, the need for men to know thst their property is inherited by their ‘legitimate’ bloodline etc.

Haven't read the whole thread, but OP, I kind of get where you're coming from.

I was raised RC, and the vast majority of RCs I know - myself included - have used contraception, and had sex before marriage (or they didn't get married at all, and simply live together).

Yet, I've noticed a handful of those people like to brag about being "Godly" and "Good Catholics". They go to church and take communion without any hesitation. I couldn't do that, myself. It just wouldn't feel right.

That said, their actions are ultimately between them and their God. It's not for us to judge.

The key thing is that Christian’s know that God loves them, and that God is Good. God is kind and loving to those with pure hearts, and Christians know that sex within a loving relationship is pure of heart. In an evolved religion, rules and regulations are for beginners, and the higher the adepts understanding, the less need for petty controls.

Op I’ve been apologised to theoretically by lots of well meaning Christians who have attempted to question my decision but it doesn’t change the general attitude that always prevails. I just don’t fit in and don’t want to. I feel free. Jesus was a maverick of his time and rejected adherence to doctrine and no one liked it then, well no one with power and they still don’t like it now. People like rules and judging others as you are showing. I trust myself implicitly to not be an arsehole to others and it’s a great feeling. no questioning.
I can still dip into prayer etc if I feel like it but no way will I join in with any prescribed school of thought beyond country laws etc.

Many Christians today disagree about which parts of Scripture are authoritative, but that does not mean there is no objective truth or that Scripture is hopelessly unclear.

There is always objective truth.

The objective truth may be that there is no god and your scripture may be completely untrue. The objective truth may be that there is a god but your scripture is not the word of that god and is completely untrue. The objective truth may that there is a god, you picked the right one, the scripture is bang on, but people have been interpreting it correctly until now.

You haven't presented very good evidence why your singular version of the truth is more likely to be objectively true. "Because people have consistently believed it for thousands of years" is a pretty bad reason. They have consistently argued for slavery and used the Bible to justify it. Your interpretation of what the Bible says is that it is description not recommendation is a very modern one that fits

Wilberforce used the Bible to justify his crusade against slavery, just as Christian slave-owners used it as a justification for their enslavement of people. That's hardly a win for the core beliefs of Christianity. To me, it shows the progression of social morality sits beyond Christianity and contemporary Christians rejecting what Christians had believed for a very long time because they knew they could no longer justify the objective moral truth that slavery is wrong.

The Bible is unclear about slavery. It condones it. It makes peace with it. It provides workarounds for slave owners and enslaved people.

A book of moral truths that does not hold that slavery is always, indisputably wrong is not a good book of moral truths.

If your book of moral truths does not condemn slavery, I wouldn't pay much attention to what it says about sex before marriage.

I agree there are many denominations and interpretations within Christianity. But not every interpretation is equally faithful to what Jesus and Scripture actually teach. While it is true that each person must focus on their relationship with God, Christianity is not purely individual; it is built on shared truths revealed through Scripture and affirmed by the historic church.

Jesus absolutely warned against hypocritical judgment, but he also called his followers to hold one another accountable, saying, “If your brother or sister sins, rebuke them” (Luke 17:3) and teaching that truth and love go hand in hand. Pointing out where modern attitudes conflict with biblical teaching is not about condemning others but about honestly grappling with what it means to live according to the faith we claim to follow.

Disagreement over what it means to be Christian is not resolved by simply saying “agree to disagree.” If we are serious about following Jesus, we have to care about what he actually taught, not just what feels comfortable. Otherwise, Christianity becomes a matter of personal opinion rather than a faith grounded in God’s revealed truth.

You are right that Christians believe everyone sins in many ways, and things like gossip, greed, neglecting God’s creation, and idolatry are all serious in God’s eyes. Jesus warned about all of these, and it’s a mistake to single out sexual sin as if it’s the only thing that matters.

However, sexual sin carries unique weight in Scripture because it involves our bodies in a way that is deeply connected to our identity and to the covenant of marriage, which God designed to reflect his faithful love. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 6:18 that sexual sin is different from other sins because it is a sin “against your own body,” highlighting its uniquely personal and spiritual impact.

On a practical level, sexual sin often has consequences that other sins do not, like sexually transmitted infections, unintended pregnancies, and emotional wounds that can affect people for years. That doesn’t mean other sins are unimportant or that sexual sin is unforgivable. But it does mean Christians are called to take sexual ethics seriously as part of honouring God with every aspect of their lives, just as they should take seriously the call to avoid greed, cruelty or putting anything before God.

I appreciate your honesty and completely understand where you are coming from. I agree that everyone’s choices and relationship with God are ultimately personal and that each person will answer to God alone.

At the same time, when someone publicly claims to be a “good Christian” or “good Catholic” while knowingly rejecting core teachings of their faith, it raises legitimate questions about integrity. It’s not about judging them as people or pretending to be morally superior, but about acknowledging the tension between what the faith teaches and what is being practiced.

Pointing out that tension is not the same as condemning individuals. Rather, it’s a call for honesty about what it means to live according to the beliefs we profess, so that faith doesn’t become just a label but something we truly strive to follow.

OP the long and short of it is humans fuck up all the time. They’re unpredictable, they lie, contradict themselves and generally do what they want. They’re human, not robots. They follow their desires, say they’ll do something then don’t, make mistakes, are lazy etc etc.
There is no society where everyone genuinely follows the rules. Not one. If you can let go of that as an ideal you might be able to let others just do their own shit and you do yours. And forgive yourself when you mess up.

Humans are confusing.

I've never heard anyone say there were a "good Christian". That seems something that goes against what a good Christian would actually be!

I realised I never gave my personal point of view. First of all, I only claim to be a good person(overall). Religion wise, I have faith and I believe but I struggle very much with organised religion for many reasons, but I do keep giving it a go. Officially I’m Christian (first Orthodox, now Catholic). If me and OH (together 15 years, that’s longer than some marriages) decide to get married, it will probably be a registry wedding, rather than a Church one. Will it count? Will it not? I don’t know.

I genuinely do not believe God cares all that much about my sex life, but if He does, and He is the God I believe in (rather than the fire and brimstone one I grew up with ), then He also knows what’s in my heart , why things happened and He will understand. If He isn’t, well then I’m fucked anyway , because I failed in many other ways, not just “living in sin”.

You raise important points, and I agree that there is objective truth, whether or not it aligns with what I or anyone else believes. But it’s not enough to dismiss Scripture because Christians in the past misused it to justify things like slavery. The abuse of a teaching does not mean the teaching itself is false. Christians who defended slavery twisted Scripture to fit their interests, while others, like Wilberforce and abolitionists, rightly saw in the Bible the principles of human dignity and equality that pointed toward the immorality of slavery.

The Bible describes slavery in historical contexts, but it also lays the foundation for its rejection. Teachings like Genesis 1:27, which declares all people are made in God’s image, and Paul’s statement in Galatians 3:28 that in Christ there is neither slave nor free, directly undermine the idea that owning another human is acceptable. Early Christians could not abolish slavery in the Roman Empire overnight, but the moral trajectory of Scripture challenges injustice by affirming the inherent worth of every person.

Regarding sexual ethics, dismissing what the Bible teaches about sex because some Christians misused Scripture in other areas ignores the real question: what does Scripture actually say, and does it align with a coherent moral vision? The consistent biblical teaching on sex is rooted in marriage as a covenant reflecting God’s faithfulness, not casual pleasure.

You are right that tradition alone is not proof of truth, but the historic consistency of Christian teaching, the life and resurrection of Jesus, and the ongoing transformative power of his message provide compelling reasons to take the Bible seriously as more than a flawed human text.