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?

It's pick and mix religion - adhere to bits you like, ignore the rules you don't.

Nearly everyone does, but I find it annoying too when they proudly label themselves as Christians but don't actually follow the rules/teachings of Christ, even the basic be charitable ones!

And so many people telling the OP that she's being judgemental - that's a pretty core part of Christianity. Believe, and follow the rules, or burn in hell for all eternity.

I dont consider the Roman Catholic Church to be true Christianity.
There's no Pope in the Bible. There's no Hail Mary's or rosary beads or praying to Saints in the Bible. The RC Church is a denomination that evolved from the early church same as all the other denominations. Just because its old doesn't mean its the oldest and most correct one.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this question, I have to say I wish society would back track to some degree about sex (whether before marriage or not). In my opinion, there is far too much emphasis on sex these days - it's everywhere you look - some of the scenes on TV are frankly disgusting and embarrassing. I also don't like the idea of people having sex just for sex's sake without the comfort of a loving relationship. Maybe I am old-fashioned but that's my view.

YABU. I had a friend who was a big no-sex advocate before marriage. Got married in a church to a man she did not love; she married him because he asked her. They got divorced 2 years later. She then married a man from overseas who was addicted to porn. He then shipped her back home and divorced her. Shes now married for a 3rd time.
Sex before marriage, IMO, is irrelevant. It’s the type of person you are that matters; you can be a complete dick and be a virgin, or have sexual partners and be the nicest person ever. It’s also incredibly damaging to drum into people that sex is bad and wrong - my mum was the same and I have never had a “normal” sex life, and I’ve only ever been with my husband as I was brought up to this that sex outside of marriage was an abomination, and it really isn’t.

I’m not a bible scholar but isn’t it full of contradictions? How is it possible then to take all of it literally? It seems odd to me that fundamentalists would seek to exclude people who don’t follow the bible to the letter. If you want people generally to follow Christian ethics, and presumably think this is for the good of society, it seems counterintuitive to say a whole load of people can’t be part of the gang.

Oh my goodness, where to even start?

1. Most Christians in the UK are not evangelicals. As such, the Bible itself plays second fiddle to official church teachings. This is handy as the Bible often contradicts itself.
2. The passages you have quoted are both St Paul. His teachings with regard to anything sex/ marriage/ roles related are often disregarded as they are incredibly misogynistic and bigoted by today’s standards - in short, he was very much a product of his time and is viewed as such by the majority of UK Christians.
3. British Christianity has been hugely influenced by our history. Marriage in common law ie: living with someone outside of marriage happened for centuries. The Church was actually pretty gentle about discouraging it especially among the lower classes and it was pretty much accepted even into the last century that the lower classes in particular would have sex and even children before marriage.
4. Jesus didn’t like people to be judgemental - perhaps read your Bible again and locate a certain passage about casting stones?

As it is claimed that Mary didn't have sex to conceive a child out of wedlock, I will take any interpretations with a massive pinch of salt.

What do you understand "fornication" to mean? The Oxford Dictionary defines it as "sexual intercourse between people not married to each other".

This discussion hinges on what is considered ‘marriage’ the bible doesn’t define it as a church wedding, it defines it as a commitment before God (who is everywhere if you believe this stuff) between one man and one woman who engage in a monogamous relationship with the goal of creating a self contained family. If you want to be really pedantic it actually says in some passages that a man leaves his father and mother and becomes joined with his wife, so any couples who live with their families wouldn’t be considered married.

No where in the bible does it actually say that sex before marriage is prohibited, it’s implied through use of derogatory terms like ‘fornication’ but not stated.

So how do you know what is correct then?

Absolutely. But who cares? The photos looked lovely. And then got my DC baptised to get into the best school, they did great.
I can live with it. For those that can’t, don’t.

Your stance is extraordinarily dated OP, and really does not represent modern day Christianity.

I was raised a Catholic (I’m not remotely religious now) with devout parents. I don’t know anyone at all that was a virgin on marriage and all of my Catholic former school friends lived with their partners and yes, we all got married in the Catholic Church! We’ve all had our kids baptised too, purely to get them into the Catholic schools rather than any spiritual ambitions. One of the few things I like about the Catholic Church, is how very relaxed it is. The official teachings may be stricter, but no-one is actually preaching fire and brimstone nor judging people in real life.

Christians today have evolved. Your view feels ludicrously outdated compared to how many Christians actually live.

The term Fornication is to indicate that it is sinful. In no way is it encouraging it

And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even. And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean. And whosoever toucheth her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even." (15:19-21)

You religiously follow this rule, right?

Respectfully, the Bible is very clear that sex outside of marriage is wrong and than sex is reserved for the commitment of marriage. There are very good reasons for this. You can easily look this up; there are multiple verses in the Bible supporting this. The reason it isn’t preached on much in main services is that it’s one of those subjects that isn’t appropriate for all ages and isn’t applicable to everyone. It’s a topic that is widely explored in the churches marriage and relationship courses etc. I’ve heard it discussed many times.
It is important that Christians try to practice what they preach, but in this life we are all broken human beings and we all need Gods love, Grace and forgiveness.

Why is it important to you they attend Catholic schools?

It’s more hypocritical of non-practising Christians/ proud atheists getting married in a church bc they want the traditional aspect and think it will look better in the photos. Or ppl getting their kids baptised when they never go to church, follow the bible in any way or intend raising their kids to. It’s just a tradition they want to do bc their friends/family have and another reason to celebrate in a pretentious way. You can celebrate babies without goring through the farce of ‘welcoming’ them into a religion you don’t believe in. You can also marry without doing so in front of a god you do not believe in. So hypocritical and bizarre.

You dont. You do whatever research you deem necessary to come to your own beliefs and so far as no one else's beliefs impact on anyone else, you live and let live and respect the different beliefs that other people have.

Very touchy subject this one!
I can be very literal, sometimes a strength, sometimes a flaw. But to me the absolutel vast majority of people aren’t religious at all no matter what they claim, they’re agnostic. They believe in something, and it’s a bit vague, and they generally call it ‘God’ and it generally means to behave in their personal view the way a good person would.

To me this is proven by the evolution of religion, reformation etc. Religious practice changes to reflect the populous/culture - we don’t change to suit God, Gods interpretation changes to suit us. People hold on to the the rituals of their culture and say ‘I’m XYZ’ but they’re not really. They’re just upholding their chosen cultural practice.

I maintain that if Religion disappeared today from the world with no memory of it - we’d have invented at least two new ones and a concept of a ‘god’’ by the day after.

Could you define sexual immorality or fornication? Does it actually say in the bible that sex without marriage is sexual immorality?

Only because the Catholic primary where we live, is the best state school in town and almost impossible to get into if not Catholic.

I suppose it all depends on if you believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, or whether you rely on your own experiential connection with the divine.

When you learn the history of the Bible and discover all its inaccuracies and contradictions, then the former position is hard to defend.

The letters you quote from, OP, are not the words of Christ, but of Paul, and like all humans, he had his own agenda. I suspect the 'thorn in his side' was sexual in nature.

I do not believe it is hypocrisy to decide your own moral position through prayer, and contemplation, and proceed accordingly.

I do not believe God has much interest in human sexuality, only in how a person uses their sexuality - someone who hurts their married partner through their sexual behaviour towards them is surely far more sinning than someone who has consensual sex within a committed relationship.

These are not key teachings in the sense that they are ideals, not prerequisites. For a start, Christianity teaches that we are fallen and fallible. Forgiveness of sins is central. It comes from faith in Christ not from adherence to no fornication. Obviously very traditional communities shun physical relationships before marriage, but progressive communities tend to see scripture as ‘of its time’.

Are you never hypocritical? Why are you so worried about inconsistency in the lives of others?

Watch the clip of the president talking to the conservative Christian woman in The West Wing about taking the Bible literally. Then you'll get it, OP.

How can you tell the difference?

I find it remarkable that anyone can believe that the social/moral codes in The Bible are just the beliefs prevalent in the middle-Eastern Bronze Age farming communities, so it's OK to ignore what they say about food or slaves or sex, but are happy to believe the same people had definitely nailed the reality of human existence, cosmology and the nature of the universe and written it down in their Important Book of Truth which we should all follow today

It's batshit crazy!