AH..I don’t think I personally know of a single Christian who doesn’t at some level believe that pre-marital sex is wrong whether they admit it to you or not.

Then what are we arguing about? Apparently you concur that Christians understand this doctrine.

Knight50 wrote:

“Obviously I think there are principles, and that they do work. Rather than yell back and forth I am a free wo/man I can do what I want (duh), why not try to identify the consequences (good and bad) of physical boundaries, and why would we violate them. Heck maybe those of us who discern pre-marital intercourse is a bad choice cause more often leads to bad marriage should rethink our positions, and consider maybe we just have a personal hang-up that needs fixing. So are there principles are not....or is this just a matter of personal preference (like what kind of pizza one likes) and has nothing to do with the success (or failure) of relationship building.”

I thought I’d go back to the original post to answer this rather than just jump in in the middle of this thread. I’ve already stated that it is probably impossible to determine whether pre-marital intercourse leads to a bad marriage due to all the various personality and situational factors that lead to a break up. So, you can think of the advantages and disadvantages of both sides - for example, is pre-marital sex indicative of a less serious or selfish attitude about sex? Does self imposed celibacy indicate sexual hang-ups or frigidity that may seriously impede marital contentment? Problem is, all this is on a continuum from person to person and couple to couple - no black and white answer.

This of course presupposes we consider the disadvantages of pre marital sex on a mental/physical health basis, not on a religiously based moral basis. I think Knight50 is mixing the two or using one to justify the other. If you are looking at a universal “principle” then it must be for all people, not just those of a particular creed. Human behaviour is too complex to make principles of something like this….

Is it? As a Christian, I believe that human behavior is too complex for a human to make or discover all the principles of wise behavior. However, I do not believe that this is beyond God's capacity.

In fact, I think it is quite appropriate to "mix" mental/physical health concerns with religiously based moral concerns. Cornelius Plantinga argued this quite effectively, in my opinion, in his essay The Sinner and the Fool.

Sure they know it at some level, but if they don't admit that to you, it doesn't take away the validity of their Christianity as you suggest. For that matter, even if they start a pre-marital sex campaign, it's still not our place to Judge them as Christians. The classification and defintion of one's religous status is not for man to define.

I understand that this post was started with a different question in mind and I appoligize for my intrusion. Statements such as the ones I read seem to be a bit of a trigger for me. Maybe because I could hear my ex saying that or maybe because it's my belief that such a judgmental statement doesn't fit and goes against the doctrine that I believe in.

I'm trying to understand the original intent of this thread. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> THere's no way for us to agree on these issues, right? For us to agree on "right" or "wrong" for other people, or who's a Christian, who's not, etc.

Was the intent of this thread to be a survey? Of our opinions regarding Pre-marital Boundaries? Sure, there's negative consequences (STD's, pregnancy, emotional tug-of-war, sin, etc). Each person has to weigh the benefits (needs- met, intimacy, fun, exercise <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />, stress-relief, etc) vs consequences for themselves, based on their beliefs. My opinion is that it's OK with safe limits and boundaries. The benefits outweigh the possible consequences. I'm willing to suffer the consequences of my actions. Maybe I'm wrong, and if I am, that's between me and God, and He'll show me and correct me. I'm sure I have lots of areas of my life that needs correcting. I am a Christian, and I'm no more a sinner than anyone else.

P.S. I also don't like knight's use of the word "promiscuous". He's using it as the opposite of abstinence, and that's not what some of us are advocating.

Oh, and it's not your opinions that annoy me. I agree with some of your opinions, and respect the freedom of anyone (almost <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />) to express them... it's the way you express them that annoys me. Does that annoy you?

Faith, is there a better word? Promsicuity is sexual intercourse ourside of marriage (or it's equivalent). Seems an appropriate label, why does it bother you? It could range from "sleeping around" with a different partner daily, monthly, yearly, every 10 years or whatever, makes no difference, although the consequences will vary with frequency of partner changes. Fewer is definitely better. Further we tend to think of retaining the same partner for say a year or more as a "relationship" having some sort of value (it doesn't)....could just call longer frequencies serial promiscuity I suppose. The boundaries are very very clear, and irrefutable....one is either in a lifetime committment ("marriage" is out label for that), or one is not...right? Those are the two conditions human beings exist in. Now they may choose to opt out alltogether of romantic pursuits, but otherwise it is one or the other. Since sex is a powerful and and consequence laden activity we recognize celibacy (or abstinence) and it's opposite..promiscuity.

These aren't value judgements, they are behavioral labels. One could easily be in a highly dysfunctional (and dreadfully unhealthy) marriage, or one could be in a very functional, and reasonably healthy promiscuous relationship...but that is not the point. The point is, can we identify the nature of sexuality, it's effects on us, and then draw several conclusions...the first being that is it true, decideing when to have sex is important to our well-being, in fact so important, a foolish decision can literally kill us, but lots of other bad consequences too, so it behooves us to consider boundaries (and ignore feelings). Secondly is it true that sex in a marriage is different than sex outside of marriage in terms of benefits/consequences.

I did not bring in the religious arguments (but they inevitable appear), you said you are a Christian, but that you think sex outside of marriage is ok. The Bible is our only source of Christian religious doctrine, do you believe the Bible instructs us that sex can be experienced whenever one wants, regardless of ones marital condition? If so, can you specify that Scripture?

No, doesn't annoy me faith, I am not much hungup on how people express themself, long as they make sense, and stick to the subject...rather than making the speaker the issue. Is a given people are going to annoy each other, can't avoid it, but one can stay on topic, do you agree?

“””Is a given people are going to annoy each other, can't avoid it, but one can stay on topic, do you agree?”””

Yes one could stay on the topic, but more often then not on these types of discussions, one person will begin attacking or forcing their views rather than discussing them and then the topic gets sidetracked as this one has.

“””do you believe the Bible instructs us that sex can be experienced whenever one wants, regardless of ones marital condition? If so, can you specify that Scripture?”””

What kind of statement is that? It’s traveled from pre-marital sex to any type of sex. Not only that, the statement is totally ludicrous. And unless you are living a “perfect” life, then I can show in scripture where “PRIDE” is talked about in the big book and where it is said that no sin is greater than another. Actually, there was one that tried to live a sinless life and found that he became too proud of himself, knowing that pride separate one from God he stopped his experiment concluding that it is impossible for one to live a sinless life regardless of their beliefs. If a sinless life were attainable, Jesus’ death would have no meaning.

That being said, I would agree that along with lying, cheating, stealing, having impure thoughts, not helping my brother, having pride, being greedy, homosexuality, abortion, looking at porn and many many more that having sex outside the confines of marriage are all sins. None greater than the other and all worthy of forgiveness. Now you may proceed with the I’m being hypocritical argument. But here’s the bottom line, I know right from wrong and many times I choose the wrong way and that’s ok. With full knowledge and understanding of just that, my Master laid down His life.

Now, I’m going to make one more observation and then unless you wish to discuss further, it may be best that I bow out of this one. Knight, I’ve never really conversed with you before and have no idea what your story/history is. I will say that in this thread I feel as if you are trying to force your beliefs on anyone who remotely disagrees with you which in a relationship would be devastating and lead to many resentments. Below is a little snip-it from a religion site that I regularly browse. I only post this in case you feel that maybe there is some room for growth in that area.

Best of luck to you and may God richly bless you.


AlmostHome

Unmasking Hidden Pride
By Alfred H. Ells

Hubris (pride) was the character flaw that caused many to fail in Greek mythology. In my counseling practice I have noticed that it is also the stumbling block for many….. The wisdom of Proverbs declares in verse 11:2 that "when pride comes, then comes dishonor," and in verse 16:18 " Pride goes before destruction. And a haughty spirit before stumbling ."

Remember the Biblical story of Nebuchadnezzar, the king, who was made to live and eat with the beasts of the field and wild donkeys because of his pride? Daniel 5:21 declares that he was "given grass to eat like cattle, and his body was drenched with the dew of heaven until he recognized that the Most High God is ruler over the realm of mankind and that He sets over it whomever He wishes."

Pride is probably the major reason for a lack of favor with God and therefore lack of success in ministry. It is also the major root issue in failure. As James 4:6 declares " . . . God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to the humble."

Though this failure principle is commonly known in ministry circles, few of us readily admit to having pride and still fewer seem to actively repent. Because pride can be very subtle in its manifestations, many do not know the telltale signs of pride. Consider the following characteristics of hidden pride and see if God reveals any indications of pride in your life. Be brave. Ask those who know you well if they see any of these characteristics in your life.

Signs of Pride

1. Insecurity. Insecurity is the root of many unhealthy and ungodly behaviors. It provokes us to want the lavish praise and attention of others too much. Much of pride is motivated out of one’s unmet need for self-worth. Finding one’s identity and security in Christ is a must to avoid pride.

2. The need to be right. Ever encounter someone who has a hard time being wrong? This is a symptom of pride. The need to be right prevents one from appropriately evaluating issues as well as themselves (Galatians 6:3). A person who needs to be right has an exalted investment in himself or herself and thinks that he/she knows better than others. In religious circles, the need to be right is frequently manifest through always saying ‘God told me’ or ‘God showed me’.

3. Being argumentative. Individuals, who argue their point of view, especially to those in authority over them, are allowing pride to get the best of them. At the root of their argument is a belief that they are right and the other is wrong and that their will should prevail. It is appropriate to advocate for a point of view or position but not to do so in such a manner that you are more invested in your opinion than in arriving at a mutual understanding.

4. More invested in being heard than in hearing. When someone develops a pattern of needing others to listen to them rather than first hearing others, pride is motivating the need. The need to be heard is common among clergy who are insecure. Oftentimes, the individual does not feel loved or valued unless people "hear them out." In truth, this is often just an expression of insecurity and pride.

5. Anger. Anger is a self-justifying emotion. This means that the nature of anger is to prompt us to justify our position and blame another for the wrongdoing. Justification of self leads to denial of our own complicity or wrongdoing. The scripture warns that the "anger of man does not accomplish the righteousness of God." (James 1:20). An individual who is angry a lot is suffering from pride.

6. Irritability and impatience. Even though I am a counselor, it was only recently that I learned that the root of impatience in my life is anger and therefore pride. When we are unable to be patient with another and are irritated, it demonstrates a haughty view of self. We feel that our views, time or needs are more important that the other persons. This again is more an indication of our pride than someone else’s slow movement or imperfection.

7. Lack of submissive attitude. Submission is the voluntary placement of oneself under the influence, control or authority of another. When an individual pledges their submission to you or another, yet is critical or argumentative of that authority, then pride is the hidden issue. The test of humility and submission is being able to say ‘yes’, maintain a positive attitude and trust God, especially when the decision of your authority goes against your grain or better judgment.

8. Not easily corrected. Ever work or live with someone who won’t receive any negative or corrective feedback? This too is pride. Before he died, a pastor in the East Valley was noted for being easily entreated and able to receive corrective feedback from others. He would thank the person for the negative feedback and commit to pray about it, seek counsel and get back to the person with what conclusions he came to. He was a role model for many of us.

9. Receiving correction but not changing. I worked with a man who often would receive my correction and say thank you for the feedback, but would never change. This too is a form of pride. The individual was placating me and people-pleasing me, telling me what I wanted to hear but not really taking the feedback to heart. His insecurity and fear prevented him from truly changing.

10. Needing others to take your advice. Counselors, such as myself, easily fall into the trap of having to have others take their advice. Advice should always be offered without strings attached. If you find yourself resenting the fact that your advice is not followed, look deeper at the motivating issues in your life.

11. Being stubborn. Webster’s dictionary defines stubbornness as "unduly determined to exert one’s own will, not easily persuaded and difficult to handle or work, resistant." The root issue of stubbornness is willfulness, which is ‘I want what I want when I want it’. Another name for pride.

12. Comparisons and competition. 2 Corinthians 10:12 makes it clear that comparing oneself with others is unwise. Comparison is a form of competition. It is often overt. For example, emphasizing the size of one’s church, the number of converts, etc. However, it can also be the subtle sin of heart that inwardly grieves when another is more successful or rejoices when another pastor’s ministry enters hard times. The motive of heart is pride.

Not any kind of sex almost home, mostly "sex" refers to intercourse in these sorts of discussions. Get back to you on other things.

According to Webster’s (http://www.meriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=promiscuous), promiscuity when referring to sex is sex with more than one partner (I’m assuming that means not necessarily at the same time) or casual, irregular sex. Haven’t done any surveys yet, but I think that most people would agree that a committed sexual relationship with one person is not a promiscuous one. Using that term to define a committed sexual relationship among two unmarried people is an attempt to create a moral high ground by formulating a false dichotomy (any sex outside of marriage is promiscuous and, therefore, wrong.)

I don’t think it is possible to argue whether it is wrong from a health perspective, so your only choice is to argue it from a moral perspective and, in your case, a moral perspective based on religious belief. Even among Christians, there is debate, or at least differing attitudes on this.

Since sex is a powerful and and consequence laden activity we recognize celibacy (or abstinence) and it's opposite..promiscuity.

I would argue that creating this rigid duality so simplifies the degrees of commitment in relationships involving sex that perhaps it is pointless to discuss it. I’m trying to understand your thinking. I think you create these behavioral labels in order to make value judgments easier. By labeling things black or white, in your mind you eliminate the gray area. Others here seem to be saying - degrees of gray are ok - that’s what we all end up deciding individually.

Knight50:
Those of us who disagree, thinking that choice reduces the likelihood of being in a healthy realationship, seem to annoy these folks.

I’m curious, what do you think the negative consequences are of pre- or non-marital sexual relations of two people in an exclusive relationship?

Also, I think what “annoy(s) these folks” is the false dichotomy I refer to above. If believing this helps you make good life choices for yourself, fine, but I think that many intelligent, ethical people would beg to differ.

"God's law was given so that all people could see how sinful they were. But as people sinned more and more, God's wonderful kindness became more abundant. So just as sin ruled over all people and brought them to death, now God's wonderful kindness rules instead, giving us right standing with God and resulting in eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more kindness and forgiveness? Of course not! Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it?" (Romans 5:20-6:2)

Three points:
1. God is patient and understanding and forgiving.
2. Forgiveness does not free one from all consequences.
3. Choosing the wrong way is not OK.

Accepting forgiveness and grace after one repents is a very different thing from deliberately choosing to do what one knows is wrong in expectation of forgiveness.

Knight50
You were the one who originally defined a "principle" as something that would have "negative consequences for everyone". That was YOUR definition that I was working off from. In view of that definition, I believe that my discussion and viewpoints had some validity.

In terms of priciples or laws of nature related to "psychology", it's been my experience that there's so much we don't know about the human psyche that it's difficult to reach a consensus about what constitutes a specific "psychological" issue and its "outcome". Typically these studies utilize "observable behaviors" for purpose of research, or an individual's perception of something. In such testing, there is also the issue of one's cultural, racial, spiritual, influence. This "influence" includes the people who developed the research study, the reseachers, and those being studied. Attempts are made to set "controls". How do we really know that we have adequate or accurate "controls"? Attempts are made to randomize a study population, or more clearly define those involved in a study, but in the end the results are based on statistics. Statistics are "odds" or "likelihoods". For me, this whole process involves a lot of room for errors in terms of determining whether or not something has the same consequences (perceived as 100% negative or 100% positive) by 100% of the human population.

I have counseled a number of individuals who have abuse experiences in their lives. In our country, studies indicate that approximately 30 to 33% of individuals who have been sexually abused will go on to become sexual abusers themselves. Why don't all become abusers, or none?

What about other cultures and faiths when it comes to sexual choices and behaviors? In some tribes it is expected that a partner will come to a marriage with sexual experience. In some faiths multiple wives are seen as acceptable and a blessing, as they will help create more babies to become followers of "God".

There are marriages in which there has been no pre-marital sex that do have great longevity...but the longevity has been a living hell due to abuse. The spouse won't leave because "God doesn't allow divorce except in cases of adultry". That would not constitute a healthy marriage in my definition.

Studies do indicate that living together before marriage (which most agree does include sex), is not an indicator of how "successful" one's marriage might be. In fact, as noted, there is often a higher failure rate of marriages of individuals who have lived together before marriage. But, is this because of the pre-marital sex? Or is it because couples who choose that type of relationship have autonomy-intimacy issues to start with? Or......?

Yes, sperm can have an influence on attachment for women. But, so does a man's sweat!

I think that one's religious beliefs can serve as a basis for a very healthy lifestyle. I have also seen the opposite. The religious beliefs one has been raised on becomes a source of constant self-blame, shame, guilt, etc. even when the person is a "true believer" and is genuine in their efforts to follow the right path to God as revealed in Scripture.

I'm not convinced that there's "proof" that pre-marital sex always leads to an unhealthy marriage and, ultimately, divorce. It might increase or decrease one's odds. But again, related to whose definition of a neg. or pos. consequence, or "health", or what even constitutes a "marriage"?

Human beings are marvelous and mysterious creatures! Just when I think a certain response or behavior is a "given", I'm amazed at their ingenuity and survival skills! I guess that's one reason that I don't believe that any specific religious belief system or "science" has all the answers for everyone as to what will guarantee a specific outcome in human behavior.

There used to be a poster and I can't for the life of me remember his name.
He was married to Thinker.....
anyone?....

These posts remind me of him.

(oh...and put me down "for" pre-marital sex. Toss me in with the rest of the hedonist serial-promiscuious lot. There is NO WAY I'll marry somebody who can't fill that need. And I'm not getting married for an awfully long time, not going without it in the meantime.)

GNP,

Thank you for taking the time to post that information!

Although these boards are not the place to argue about whose beliefs are right, Christians vs. non-Christians, for those of us who do profess to be Christians, I think we all need to look long and hard at what you posted and apply it not to just the pre-marital or extra-marital sex issue but to our lives in general.

We (includes me) all need to remember that although God's grace through Jesus's death and ressurection allows our sins to be forgiven, we need to "repent" (turn from the sins).

Sure, we'll slip from time to time. I'm sure I slip daily on one thing or another. I recognize that I am not there yet, but am working to do better, with God's help. My hope is that as I look back over my years as a Christian, I will see some sort of growth and improvement.

To just live as one pleases and do what you want no matter if it's right or wrong in God's eyes, and then to say "I'm a Christian, and because of Jesus, I'm forgiven", in my opinion, is very risky.

I refuse to judge others' hearts or whether they really are what they say they are (i.e., my XH who claims to be a Christian but is actively in a relationship with and is engaged to a woman who is still married to another man). That's God's job.

snl.... I agree. Very similar. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/ooo.gif" alt="" /> Have thought so myself... but decided he wasn't. Maybe they're twins. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

YESSSSS....thank you Faith!

Heartmending, you said what I've been thinking and did it in an extremely articulate way. Hats off to you!!