Christians' views on sex within/ outside marriage?

[MrsMerryHenry]

As ever I'm ruminating over various aspects of my faith and am interested to know what are the views of the Christians on mn about sex within/ outside marriage. I'm not referring to adultery; I mean do you think sex should only be for married couples, or do you take a different view? Or, like me, are you waffling somewhere around the middle? Why do you take the view that you do?

"Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." Although I'll pass on the swordfish for the time being, as I'm 38 weeks pregnant

The bible forbids sex outside marraige its called FORNICATION.

and is a SIN.

Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, [fn] fornication, uncleanness, lewdness,

Gal 5:20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies,

Gal 5:21 envy, murders, [fn] drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told [you] in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

Gal 5:23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.

Dont get shirty at me...take it to God.

donnymouse - do you get equally worked up about envy, jealousy and selfish ambition?

Yeah I do actually I hate all sin, and am so grateful that when I do sin and that I repent that the blood of Jesus cleanses me from all sin. I long to only be producing the fruit of the spirit and pray that God would help me to achieve this.

Thanks for your concern,

In Jesus.

now remind me again, who wrote Galations?

could it have been Paul, not exactly famed for his tolerant, moderate views on sex, particularly with respect to women?

Personally I would interpret 'fornication' as 'treating sex without the respect it deserves'.

I wonder what the original Greek of Gal 5:19 was?

NIV says 'sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery'
The Message renders it as 'repetitive, loveless, cheap sex; a stinking accumulation of mental and emotional garbage; frenzied and joyless grabs for happiness'
King James: 'Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness'
New Century: 'being sexually unfaithful, not being pure, taking part in sexual sins'

I think rather than using language such as fornication I'd take the whole thing back to its roots. In Genesis it is written that people were created male and female and designed to 'leave their father and mother and become one flesh' - so setting up God's mandate for marriage. Now, there's all sorts of stuff in the OT that doesn't sit with this spirit - eg Solomon and his harem - but as MP said the Bible is the story of humanity's journey with God and is written by fallible humans (though I believe that it is the inspired word of God in that it is helpful and vital for us as Christians for living this life.)
There's a whole bunch of stuff in one of Paul's letters (1 Corinthians possibly, can't think) about the relationship between Christ and the Church, and parallelling (sic) that with the relationship between husband and wife. This to me reflects what I think about sex, that it is actually a spiritual thing and ideally between two people for life in a committed/marital relationship. I don't however go in for sexual sin being any bigger than any other, I think the Church has mistakenly got too het up over such things and as has also been said there are more important thing such as justice and love for the poor. Jesus didn't have much to say about marriage (well a little bit) but a whole jot of stuff about looking after the oppressed and poor. That's where my priorities lie - and I'm one of them raving evangelical charismatics

randomtask - I am brought up very strict Methodist but rejected it and now believe in a 'God Figure' and have a personal morality code closer to Quakersism. This is an interesting point:

"I sometimes wish I hadn't had sex with anyone else."

Over the years I have felt increasingly happy and comfortable that DW was my first and only sexual partner. I always intended to marry her from the moment we met and were very deeply commited to each other before we slept together. DW is a lapsed Catholic so maybe our Christian upbringing had an influence but yes simplicity and personal morality were most important in our decision. I do not think it is wise to have sex with anyone without a real personal commitment to lifelong partnership.

However I do not judge others or usually voice my opinion as I believe morality and such decisions are entirely personal and come from within.

cornflakegirl - I am agreeing with a lot of what you are saying too. Despite rejecting fairly evangelical fundamenetalist Methodist teaching myself. I especially agree about no contraceptive being 100% effective. Having sex may result in children and that perhaps is why I think a deep commitment to a lifelong relationship is so important before contemplating sex. I do not think that has to be a formal marriage though - again a personal moral decision drawn from within us is far more important than the ceremony and a signature on a bit of paper.

I prefer to believe the Bible.

Jesus said 'MY sheep HEAR my voice and I know them'.

Jesus was the Logos, the word incarnate, I hear the word and don't put my own spin on it. You only put your own spin on it when your life does not line up with it and you want to live the way you want and not the way God says.

On judgement day all your own thoughts are not going to amount to a 'hill of beans'.

In Jesus

donnymouse - cream of chicken soup? swordfish? polycotton? short hair on girls?

Wow, thanks all for your input. I'm picking through all the comments here so apols if I take a while to get to yours!

AMuminScot - thought-provoking, as always. When you said: "Most of what the Bible has to say about sex is in the context of a society where women were either the property of their father or their husband, where raising a child without a father was impossible, where contraception was not available. So, it's a question of how we interpret any statements in a very different society." - hmm, I hadn't seen it that way. I'm all for contextualising the Bible in the culture within which it was written, without doing so I think we end up tryin ourselves up in knots over stuff that just isn't that important to God. I shall give your thoughts some thought.

Riven - I think we have to accept that society in Biblical times was just as messed up as our society is today, so it's imperative that we learn how to pick out the bits of the Bible which are influenced more by 'messed-up society' than by what God actually thinks. Tall order, isn't it? That's why I believe it's so important to engage our brains fully when we practise our faith.

MP - I love your comment about what people do consensually with their genitals! Beautifully worded!

And I prefer to believe the promptings of the indwelling Holy Spirit. When that, and concepts like love, grace, and justice contradict what the Bible says, then I believe in the living God, not the written one.

Reminder to self: click "Refresh" before posting...

What is this matter of the 'damage' that sleeping with different partners can do to us? I've never really heard a convincing explanation of this. I would genuinely love to hear more about what you (sorry, can't recall who posted this) believe this to mean.

ABetaDad (my moral twin!) - hear hear on "I do not think that has to be a formal marriage though - again a personal moral decision drawn from within us is far more important than the ceremony and a signature on a bit of paper." - historically, marriage as we now practise it is only about 200-300 years old. Prior to that, 'common law' marriage basically counted as a marriage for the average Joe and Jo Public.

Donnymouse - I think you're on a journey of faith, just as the rest of us are. All journeys lead to new discoveries, which sometimes change us and sometimes confirm our existing viewpoints. We're all at different points on that journey, and I really hope that as you open yourself up to God that you are able to go on absorbing all the richness, depth and downright hilarity of life that he/she intends for us.

For the others who are ribbing Donny - shame on you! (I say this with a cheeky smile!) Please don't pick on him/her too hard as an easy target.

I am not ribbing, I am genuinely interested in whether the OT is taken as seriously as the NT in these situations. Cornflake took it in the spirit in which it was intended.

And re the 'damage' I think it's because it trivialises and devalues what could and should be a precious and - well I wouldn't go so far as to say sacred, but some would - thing. It starts eating away at your respect for others and indeed for yourself.

AMIS - I totally agree with you about love, grace, etc being the absolute essentials of life and faith. If real love and acceptance of everybody doesn't come first, all our doctrine becomes utterly meaningless drivel.

My random thoughts on sex:

It's fun.

Apparently people who wait longer typically find it harder to have as much fun as people who don't wait so long. I have to ask myself what in our human-nessmakes this so. Since people in Biblical times were typically marrying in their early-mid teens, and nowadays it's late 20's onwards, what does this say about sex in the 21st century? Is keeping sex strictly within marriage a purely societal thing from a bygone age? I used to think that it was a hard and fast rule laid down by God, and now I tend to think not - though personally if I weren't married I seriously doubt that I'd be shagging people left, right and centre. I think I'd stick to keeping it within established, committed relationships.

I also agree with those posters who have said that there are far more important issues of social justice, etc, to which the church and individual Christians should be giving their full attention first and foremost.

Ok, sorry, MrsBadger - reading your words with no facial expression, etc makes it easy to interpret as teasing. Your 'cream of chicken soup' comment tickled me!

Re your explanation of 'damage' - does it start eating away at one's self-respect, then? I have only ever slept with my DH so have no experience of this.

Having had all sorts of damaging sex, I'm still unconvinced of the argument.

I do think it is good to have respectful and healthy sex and not to go around riding random people on the bus like a field of ponies, but does it REALLY compromise my humanity? I am not convinced.

Having said that, I think that perhaps there is something I cannot shake about penetrative sex being something ontologically different to non-penetrative sex: as though you open yourself up in another way. But is that true? I don't know. Perhaps not.

From my experiments into the matter I have failed to be convinced that wholesome, friendly sex is a destructive thing. Sex between friends can be huge fun and a lovely end to a nice dinner party.

I think God wants us to use our bodies in ways that make us happy providing we don't cause anyone harm or grief by doing this.

That's the thing with consensual adult sex, there isn't really a victim, is there?

Ontological. MP, you've just reunited me with one of my all-time favourite words. Bit of after dinner Antony Giddens, anyone? (perhaps not in the sense of 'after dinner' that you described, MP - I can think of plenty more suitable candidates ).

By the way, when I asked in my OP for the Christian viewpoint on sex it was implicit that this included the Biblical view, as I'm looking for the different interpretations that Xians make of the bits that the Bible says about sex.

TE - the thing is about your statements about marriage, that as a concept it is flexible and has changed a great deal over time. What counts as marriage in the 21st century is not identical to what counted as marriage in AD30. So this is why it's so important to engage with the text rather than just take it on board letter by letter.

Also, could you refer me to the parts of the Bible that say the things you said it says about sex - it would be useful for me to have that info as I contemplate this issue.

Tbh am not sure what you define a 'Christian' as being....if you take it to be that you believe in Jesus, then yes thats me. I was brought up in the Catholic faith and after 15 years of indoctrination left...for me being the most caring and loving person you can be is not down to any religion, its down to treating others as you would like to be treated yourself. As for sex, as long as both adults are consenting, then there's no problem. Why people are so hung up on the whole issue is beyond me! I have no time for 'man made' rules disguising themselves as the word of Christ/Jesus/whoever.....if folk were to start living their lives as they felt free to live instead of consulting on what the Bible etc said then perhaps folk would be happier...

K999 - your definition of Christian sounds perfectly acceptable to me! I ain't been to church for years...partly because of the 'man-made' stuff that just got on my tits in the end.

If I stood in a pulpit and said something challenging about how xyz in the church 'gets on my tits', you can bet your last penny that half the congregation would ignore the message and just focus on the fact that I'd said 'tits' in church!

hehehe very true