The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Pre-marital sex


#1

Okay, well, I’m new here. I’m wondering if there is anyone else here eho believes the pre-marital sex is not sinful? And for those who say, “that’s impossible, because you’re married once you have sex,” I have a problem with that. Back in the OT time, men paid a higher brideprice to marry virgins over nonvirgins. But the thing is, if a guy does in fact marry a non-virgin, that means she had sex (obviously). But she is obviously not married to whoever she had sex with. In fact, that is covered by an OT passage: Exodus 22:16 - 17, “If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the dowry for virgins.”
Note, the present tense, to be his wife. That leads to to believe she isn’t his wife already, despite the fact that they had sex. Also, the father could choose for his daughter to not marry the man, so they would not be married, despi

Anyway, for scriptural and logical arguments, follow this link: libchrist.com/bible/contents.html
Disclaimer: I agree with everything on this site except for one. Abortion. They believe it is not sinful. I disagree. But I agree with them on everything else.

And here is the main argument page from that link:
Premarital Sex - Not A Biblical Conflict
Extensive Biblical Discussion

There is absolutely nothing in the bible forbidding premarital sex. It is one of the traditions that is man made to control people. The only reference is in the OT and in the NT only the total mistranslation of the Greek word “porneia” as “fornication” - a clear lie that has no basis.

I hear from so many Christian women who say there biggest mistake was not having more sex before marriage and now find themselves in such a totally unsatisfying relationship physically. Where is one to learn good sex skills when both partners are ignorant? There is far more to sex than just having intercourse. Studies show about 40% of women never have an orgasm from just intercourse and most women enjoy far more. That is why so many women are sexually frustrated when a man doesn’t have a clue- how is he supposed to learn, or the women learn of her own sexuality if they go into marriage clueless without much experience?

Due to the patriarchal society, a family with sons was stronger than a family with daughters. However, cultures find ways to balance wealth and power. In the OT culture, a man seeking marriage would pay the father of the bride. The value of the bride was determined by many factors including her beauty, ability to bear children, strength, various household skills and even her status as a virgin. You find an example of this in the story of Jacob and Leah and Rachel.

Also remember in biblical times most young women were betrothed based on a family financial deal. Sometimes she never even had met her husband until the wedding day. And once betrothed they families had to wait until the girl was 12.5 year old before they could marry. Since most boys and girls were married by the time of puberty and there was little dating, singles sexuality was never an issues.

In biblical times there was nothing wrong with a married man having as many wives as he could afford, concubine and “common” prostitutes. Adultery was only wrong for a married women, since it violated her husbands property (and sexual) rights over her and his other wives or concubines.

In biblical times men were masters, and ruled over women and their children. Women had very few rights, and men often bought women from their families or at an auction usually at age 12.5. Women were owned property of a man. Father own women (daughters, wives, concubines, handmaidens, servants etc) and if you wanted to have sex with one of his property, then you had to ask him permission.

To sell a daughter they would get more money if she was a virgin, non-virgin were cheaper to buy. If a man bought a daughter at a virgin price and she was not (after he had sex with her and the bedding was not bloody), then he could return her to the father and get his money back.

Some Concubines were war gifts to soldier for fighting good in battle. They would kill all the men and then divide up all the women to the fighting men. Some concubines were bought at auctions. Prostitute rented themselves on time-limited basics and was never wrong (common not temple prostitutes worshiping the fertility gods - idolatry was wrong not prostitution). It was better to buy a woman then rent one. They had no condoms, or birth control or modern medicines in the Bible days. Most sex rules were just to solve a practical problem of the time.

Today women have the same sexual freedoms that men have always had. But to try and preach that responsible non-monogamy, premarital sex, swinging, polyamory or fornication is somehow wrong, simply shows biblical ignorance. But the sexual repressive teachings that developed in the middle ages are still followed today based on repressive Christian traditions - out of ignorance and having no biblical basis.

OT Passages
Exodus 22:16 - 17, “If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the dowry for virgins.”

Deuteronomy 22:28 - 29, “If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.”

This Exodus passage is one of the few passages that deal directly with the issue of premarital sex. There are a couple of important points concerning this passage. First, neither the man or woman is rebuked or punished for any sin (compare with Deut. 22). The man is required to seek marriage but can be refused by the father. The key here is that there is no punishment for the man and woman having sex. The punishment is for the change in value of the woman as bride. The term “virgin’s dowry” implies that there was a special dowry (probably of greater compensation) for her virgin status and since she is no longer a virgin, the father is still payed the dowry as compensation regardless of whether she marries the guy or not. Also note that there is no law concerning the pre-marital sexuality of men or unbetrothed non-virgin women.

The passage in Deut. refers to a rape not consensual pre-marital sex. In order to remedy this crime, the man must take the woman into his household and care for her. He cannot divorce her. The rape of a married or engaged woman carried the death penalty. The rape of a virgin who is not engaged carries a lesser penalty. And while the penalty may seem unjust by our culture’s standpoint, the penalty was probably very just for that culture.

In Deut. 22 there is a clear example of what happens to a woman who has had sex prior to her marriage but deceives her parents and husband into believing that she was a virgin and accepted money (“playing the harlot in her father’s house”) for her virgin status. Although the severe penalty for such a deception is stoning, the husband can show love, forgiveness and mercy.

There are two other examples of pre-marital sex in the OT. In Deut. 21:10 there is another case study of how a man is to handle a captive woman. If he desires her as a wife, he must follow the conditions and then sleep with her. If she is found pleasing, he has the option to marry her or he can send her away. The book of Esther also describes how Esther is brought into the King’s household to become a part of the King’s harem.

In every case of pre-marital sex in the Bible there is no punishment for the sexual act. The only penalty is the compensation to the father for the woman’s change in status.

Writers Comments:
G. Rattray Taylor, author of Sex in History: [The adultery Commandment, essentially a property offense against another’s mate, does not require] that a man should restrict his attentions to his wife; indeed, when a wife proved barren, she would often give one of her handmaidens to her husband that she might bear children for him. Nor was there any ban on premarital sex; it is seldom appreciated that nowhere in the Old Testament is there any prohibition of unpremeditated fornication–apart from rape, and subject to a father’s right to claim a cash interest in a virgin. Once a girl had reached the age of 12 1/2 years, she was free to engage in sexual activity, unless her father specifically forbade it.

A document commissioned by the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church (Continuing the Dialogue, published by Forward Movement, Cincinnati, 1995) stated on page 45 that the passages in this Biblical story (SONG OF SONGS )are “in praise of sexual love, celebrating youthful passion, with no reference to marriage… It affirms that sexual love is in itself good and beneficial.”

In Sexual Paradox: Creative Tensions in Our Lives and in Our Congregations (Pilgrim Press, New York, 1991), Celia Allison Hahn noted on page 192 that “The story (SONG OF SONGS ) is clearly not about marriage or procreation … but about the delights of erotic love.”

In New International Biblical Commentary: … Song of Songs (Henderson Publishers; Peabody, Massachusetts; 1999), Roland E. Murphy and Elizabeth Huwiler noted on page 243 that “According to many [interpreters], the central couple is not married. This view is supported by the fact that the lovers must part in the morning… Also, most of the couple’s lovemaking apparently takes place out of doors, in the wilds, and in gardens… [Overall, the text] does not seem to insist that the appropriate expression of sexuality is necessarily limited to marriage.”

NT Discussion
There is nothing said about premarital sex in the New Testament.

The scriptures were not written in English. “Fornication” is a great example of the lies in translation of some bibles. Some English bibles say that, others say the more correct translation “sexual immorality”. The koline Greek word that has been mistranslated as fornication is porneia. There is no biblical basis whatsoever to translate porneia into fornication (singles sex).

Porneia meant sexual immorality which included:

  1. Sex during women’s menstruation.

  2. Adultery which biblically was understood by the Hebrews to mean wrong for a married women to have sex with another man since violated her husbands property rights. It was never understood to be wrong for a married man since his wife had no such rights. The married man could have as many wives and concubines (breeders) as he wished as long as not married (another man’s property. Nothing ever was wrong with singles sexuality. “Fornication” is a total mistranslation of Greek “porneia”

  3. Pagan sex goddess prostitution. Porneia as used in I Cor 6-9, falsely translated in some bibles as fornication was actually the practice of the prostitutes in the Temples of Corinth selling their services as a part of pagan fertility goddess worship which was what Paul was warning against. Not even specifically about prostitution (still legal and very popular in Israel today) but used as a pagan sexual goddess worship.

  4. Pederasty - one of the worst of all sexual sins that took various forms: The practice of pederasty falls into three distinct styles. First is the relationship between an older man and a young boy. Second is the practice of slave prostitutes. Third is that of the effeminate “call boy” or prostitute. Other practices included a heterosexual male degrading another heterosexual male by anal intercourse after capturing them in battle. Another practice was heterosexual’s using anal intercourse to drive out other heterosexual strangers they didn’t like such as the case of the Sodom story. It had absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality as we know it today, which is simply being as God designed some people to be.

Adultery in biblical times did not mean what it means to us today. Clearly there was never a word said about the fact Hebrew men could have as many wives, concubines (breeders) and “other women” as they could afford. THIS IS NOT ADULTERY, in the Hebrew understanding of the Adultery Commandment of Moses. Adultery as understood by what Moses said was only wrong for married women, never a married man.

Christ taught in the Sermon on the Mount that the only law is the law of love. He demonstrated this by reversing four of the OT laws which conflicted with loving people. Therefore anything that was hurtful, not by mutual consent etc. would be immoral for a Christian, but obviously not loving sexuality regardless of marital status or natural sexual orientation.

For those that want to do their own serious research by looking at both sides of issues here is some suggested bibliography for serious study of Christian sexual issues. In addition we have a HUGE biblical research section covering just about any question / challenge that has come up in the last 10 years at The Bible, Christianity & Sexual Issues section of libchrist.com or direct link:
libchrist.com/bible/contents.html

Note on the word porneia: I was playing aroung with a greek lexicon once, and I typed in porneia, and it came back as meaning ‘prostitution idolatry’, i.e., the number 3 on the list of things sexual immorality meant.


#2

Hi Luke,

As a 14 year old young man, your hormones may be pushing for justification of premarital sex. As my husband has been known to say to himself “Don’t allow the little head tell the big head what to do”!

I have 8 children between the ages of 8-26. My oldest 3 are married. My son married first at age 21 and was a virgin (his hormones were pushing, but he chose to wait until marriage). My oldest daughter referred to herself as a member of the VIEW club into her 20’s (virgin in every way- she never even kissed anyone). And my younger married daughter dated the same boy since she was 14 until they married when she was 21. They are lovely girls too, not ugly or anything. Link to Photo. I think you are better off setting your face like flint toward monogamy. Sure, that will require a lot of self discipline and self control, but I guarantee that God is ready willing and able to grow those character traits in you as you wrestle through this with Him.

Here are some passages for your meditation:


#3

Gem: I do realize that the reason I began looking to prove that premarital sex is not sinful is because of my hormones. That doesn’t make my above argument any less valid. As for the verses you posted, the link I gave will show you articles that either show how those verses do not ban premarital sex, or give logic that you yourself can use to show that those verses don’t ban premarital sex. Did you look at the link I posted at all?
I do not believe that God wants everyone to be monagamous, and I know he does not want us to just have sex with one person in our life. Why would a loving God want us to wait to have sex, when our hormones are killing us, making us want to have sex? Back in biblical times, people were married as soon as they were sexually mature. They didn’t have to worry about that. But things are different today. And I don’t believe a loving God would restrict us at all from taking part in an enjoyable activity that He created, as long as it doesn’t hurt anybody (such as rape).


#4

Premarital sex might be a sin under the definition of fornication.

Premarital sex might not be a sin, but if God and wisdom have anything to say about it…waiting until you have a relationship that is life-lasting and stable is the best option. No good sense in dropping your pants for the first girl who spreads her legs, only to find that you’ve lost your virginity and given yourself in full bareness to a ridiculously poor stewardess who has next to no capacity for taking care of the heart - you.

Marriage isn’t just license for sexual intercourse, it is the means by which a relationship ideally is mutually caring and follows the Christian lifestyle of living by Love, not by flesh.

I have my own views on marriage, views that do not necessitate church or governments signing a piece of paper. But the heart of marriage is a thing in which I stand with nearly medieval conservative conviction; “don’t make yourself a harlot, wait until your “rib” returns and then become one flesh again”.


#5

Hi Luke,

You can be faithful to one woman and see where that leads, or you can be faithless to many women and see where that leads. You cannot do both. You get to choose. Choose wisely.


#6

I skimmed through the material you posted from the link and frankly, a lot of it is quite offensive to me in the view of women that it perpetuates.

Men have permission from God to be adulterous but women don’t? Women are property. Women are breeders. That right there was enough from your website to put up a lot of red flags. Sounds like a lot of men who have confused the 1 dimensional pictures on their computer with the flesh and blood daughters of God.

PRAY about it Luke.

Because character and self control is important to God.
Did you read the scriptures in my post? I especially like 1 Cor 9:27 in the RSV which was my first Bible:
“I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified”

I have told all my children that if they can’t wait, bring me the papers and I will sign so they can marry. In my state, I think the youngest legally allowed is age 16 with a parents signature, but there may be other states with a younger limit. Your parents could take you and your beloved across the border to tie the knot :stuck_out_tongue: Perhaps they can even arrange a marriage for you because I think that was the practice in Biblical times and I’m sure they will have discernment to choose well. :mrgreen:

It does hurt people. My 14 yo daughter has a classmate named Summer who just had an abortion. And the boy she thought loved her broke up with her (because he was upset with her for having the abortion he didn’t approve of) He’s moved on to an interest in a nice christian girlfriend of my daughter. But my daughter’s gf doesn’t believe in premarital sex, so he goes back and uses Summer for sex every once in awhile.

Is Summer hurt?

Every girl you have sex with and then leave will be hurt. Not to mention that you can catch and spread STD’s. Interestingly, HPV doesn’t do boys much harm but it can KILL girls (it is the primary, if not exclusive, cause of cervical cancer). I wonder why a loving God allows some people to pay such a high high price for “free” sex? If you and your future wife are monogamous, you will never get nor give STD’s.


#7

Why does it matter if she got hurt, if she agreed to have sex? If he raped her, it would be a different story completely. But it was consensual. People can get hurt in relationships without sex as well. Let’s say a guy and a girl have been dating for 2 years and the girls is in love with the guy. And let’s say they have not had sex in those two years. And let’s say that one day, the guy breaks up with the girl. She is heartbroken and in pain. Now, was it a sin for those two to ever start dating? No. Was it a sin for the guy to break up with the girl? No. Because even though the girl was hurt, she agreed to enter into the relationship with the knowledge that it was possible she could end up heartbroken. It’s the same way with sex.


#8

Since when does non-monagamy always equal cheating? If you went to my link, you probably would have discovered that while they condone non-monagamy, they don’t condone cheating. Non-monagamy is only okay if you have permission.


#9

In Jewish culture back then, yes, men had permission. That is how they interpreted God’s Law. Today, of course that is not true. No one has permission to commit adultery. And really, back then, God didn’t want anyone commiting adultery either. But it was accepted culturally, like tradition. You know, the sort of thing Jesus accused the pharisees of putting before the actual Law. Which is why adultery is wrong for everyone today. And premarital sex is NOT adultery (there is an article about that on the link I posted, but I’ll post it here if you’d like).


#10

I think you are misunderstanding the article. The writer in no way is suggesting that that is how women should be treated today, only that that is how women were treated back then.


#11

The word fornication is a mistranslation of the Greek word porneia. Did you read the article I posted?

I do want to be dating the person I lose my virginity to, because I’ll remember that moment forever, and I don’t want it to be with a person who I barely even knew. But after that, even that doesn’t particularly matter to me, though I do want to fall in love, so I would want to try dating anyone who I’m interested in sexually to see if our personalities are a good match. But in general, I think most Christians try to make sex something that it’s not. I see sex as a fun and enjoyable thing to do, especially (but not only) with someone you love. As for the whole ‘the two will become one fless argument’, one possible interpretation is that that is referring to a baby, as the the flesh of the one baby is a combination of the two parents.

I have my own views on marriage as well. Mainly, I believe that marriege isn’t for everyone. MT 19:12 “For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”
It seems that Jesus is using ‘Eunuch’ as a synonym for renouncing marriage, as he interchanges the two in the verse. God, absolutely does not like divorce. Marriage, I believe, is not having sex, nor is it a government signing a piece of paper. It is purely making a covenant before God. And divorce breaks that covenant, thereby displeasing God. I believe that you should not marry someone unless you are ABSOLUTELY sure that you want to spend the rest of your life with them. And by this I mean, you have to love them, and they have to love you, to the point that you KNOW that no matter what you or he/she does, you will always love each other. Only then should you get married. And not everyone will find someone like that, as Jesus pointed out. You could still have a loving sexual relationship with a person, but if you don’t KNOW that you want to spend the rest of your life with them, as I laid out above, then you shouldn’t get married.


#12

My son broke up with a girl when he was about 19. They actually started dating when he rented a room in their family’s home for awhile, so they LIVED together. Believe me, the fact that they never had sex made the break-up a LOT easier and less painful for both of them. BOTH of them told me this. And now my son is happily married with no regrets and no ghosts.

Makes me sad that you profess to represent Christ but you don’t care if you hurt a young lady with scars that will never go away. It appears that the things you are ingesting have already sown a callousness…

I repeat my earlier suggestion to stop seeking the opinions of people online and PRAY ABOUT IT!
Christians should be like Christ, and God will help you get there if you will seek Him.


#13

If they never had sex, how do they know that the break up would have been harder had they had sex? There is no way for them to have known that. Also, the experiences of one couple in no way means that EVERY couple will have the same experiences. That is a logical fallacy.

If a girl agrees to do something, how is it my fault if she gets hurt? Also note that there is the possiblilty of myself getting hurt by the girl as well. Anyway, as an analogy, let’s say that ten years from now, a friend of mine asks me to give him a ride. And let’s say I do give him a ride. And let’s say that I get in a car crash and my friends dies. Was giving my friend a ride sinful, because he might (and did) have gotten hurt?

I do pray about it.


#14

I did, and I’d say that given that sin is anything that causes evil harm; pre-marital sex that harms and degrades the relationship to one of fleshliness is to me a sin, marriage or not. Any relationship that is sexual, I feel, ought to be a relationship worthy of being monogamous. Otherwise I question the motive.

The way I see it, if you love your girlfriend enough, you won’t make her share. If she loves you enough, she won’t make you share. If you agree to mutual sharing, then I’d question the root of the relationship itself.

Sex isn’t just pleasure, it is ideally a high expression of love; in that it is a creative act, and a unifying act. Sex isn’t just about the genitalia. It is first and foremost in the heart, and in the head before it is ever in the hips.

I would say, if you’re not spiritually strong enough to marry, you’re not spiritually strong enough to have sex.


All in all, I have a difficult time seeing your view given that…unfortunately, you’re only two years approx into puberty. In the nicest way possible, I would be more comfortable giving your views credit if they were matured under the test of genuine love in a relationship, without sex being the core foundation of it. Having my own experiences in relationships; which even without sex were supremely hurtful when broken, I cannot see your polyamorous views as valid in comparison to a genuinely stable, monogamous, mutual relationship in which sex is a part of it.

God did not invent any pleasure to be taken lightly, or abused. A wife is a husband’s glory, and a husband is a wife’s glory. God does not share his glory with anyone, neither should a husband or wife.

Given that sex is ultimately meant to be the giving of oneself over to your mate, I feel that there are two overarching options as far as sexual relationships go.

Either it is fully loving and the full giving of one’s full self over - in which case you have only one self to give and therefore cannot give to more than one person. Or else it is weak, and in being weak a poor thing altogether; mere thrill without the true pleasure of love. Love should never be weak.

In the full giving of one’s self to another, the heart goes with it and is subject to vulnerability; a humility that is noble and good. When that heart is broken there is a horrible pain, and so sex is something someone should be careful in, and if one is wise give that heart in sex only to someone who is committed for life.

If it is the latter, the mere obtaining of an orgasm…Then I’d say it isn’t even the premarital sex itself that is the sin, but the selfishness and lack of wisdom behind it, the lovelessness. Or else the love is weak, and uncommitted - which is not love to begin with, but lust. Lust is a sin, sex or not.


#15

[Edited a few things above]


#16

I agree. But just having sex with your girlfriend doesn’t ‘degrade the relationship to one of fleshliness’ IMO.

You make it seem like monagamy is the ‘holy grail’ of relationships or something of that sort. Like all good relationships should monagamous. But why? If you can have multiple kids and love each one as much as if you only had one, why can’t you do the same thing with partners?

See above.

Note that you said ideally. And note that I said especially if you love the person.

Why?

Actually I’m almost 4 years into puberty. I started just after I turned 11, and I turn 15 in a month. But anyway, note that* I *myself am not sure if I want to be polyamorous. I am merely contending that it is a valid and non-sinful option.

Could you expand on that a bit?

Things aren’t always that black and white. That is a false dichotomy.

The thing is, you are supposed to fully give yourself over to GOD. So if you can’t fully give yourself over to more than one person, how can you love anyone besides God?

libchrist.com/bible/lust.html


#17

I replied once to this but it seems to have disappeared.

There are so many red flags on this subject, it’s hard to keep them straight.

First, it sounds by your responses that you’re not looking for advice, you’re looking for justification and argument.
Second, you’re playing with fire. It’s like any other addiction, you willingly put yourself in questionable circumstances and later wonder why everything fell apart. People who play with fire get burned and this is one of those things that you’re going to have to find out for yourself.

Are you going to hell for it? I don’t even believe in eternal hell so that’s a no-brainer . . but I do believe in hell and I think you’re setting yourself up for a heavy dose of it with your casual thinking on this subject. The whole idea that we can take the gift of reproducing life and use it for our own personal desires . . .doesn’t ‘that’ kinda set a warning light off that this is a dangerous road for you?

Granted, spirit is willing and flesh is weak, but if you’re looking for Biblical justification, knock yourself out but if people are saying it’s Scripturally okay and you’re looking here to support that, I think all you’re going to accomplish is stirring up a bees nest with it.

Look, it’s not meant to be a toy. You want the rush without the responsibility. Are you ready to be a Father? I really think if you laid your arguments down for a bit and listened to your heart, you already know the answers to this . . .but your mind is throwing out all of these reasons why you think it’s okay . . .if you really thought it was okay, you wouldn’t be posing the question in this kind of an arena in the first place. But the bottom line is, taking a powerful gift and treating it with such a casual approach is only going to lead to disaster and I’m not even one that is comfortable in painting such pictures. But so far you don’t seem to be picking up on the cautions given and if you’re going to pursue your natural desires, fine, but let’s not play games here, this is serious. You’re claiming people are making a big issue out of a small thing and the problem is, in your youth, you’re taking a precious thing and trying to make it out like one would with a casual picnic. There’s nothing casual about it.

Being intimate with someone is more than just the rush of the moment when you satisfy your lustful desires. It changes things. It affects relationships. It affects how you think about the opposite sex in general . . .it’s a whole beast within itself. I don’t really know what it is you’re looking for here, and I don’t think you’re really interested in guarding your heart at all. I just find this whole line of thought perplexing at best.

If you’re not careful, it’ll control you instead.


#18

No, I’m not ready to be a father. But, 1. Who says I’m going to have sex NOW. I might wait till I’m 18 (I’m probably not though). 2. If you use proper protection, the odds of the girl getting pregnant are like 1 in 10 million at best. Meanwhile, the odds of me getting struck by lightning at some point in my life is 1 in 600,000.
And anyway, I’m ready for the other responibilities. I want to fall in love. I’d prefer to have sex with someone I’m in love with, but I don’t have to be in love with them.

I posted this question here to see if any other person here thought the same way I do, and perhaps to debate a bit. No other reason.

So you do admit that it is our natural desire to have sex. If that’s true, why would God limit our natural desires that He gave us?


#19

My own humble theory on the foundation of relationships: Love is the core foundation, with sex and friendship as supporting foundations. You cannot have a relationship without love. While you can have a relationship without sex (but I wouldn’t advise it), you can’t have one without physical attraction, which goes along with sex. While you can have a relationship without friendship (but I woudn’y advise it) you can’t have a relationship without being attracted to each other’s personality, which goes along with friendship. And I believe that if you’re physically attracted to someone, it’s perfectly fine to have sex with them, but you should attempt to see if you’re attracted to their personality. If so, then you should date them (If you haven’t had a few dates already). If you find a person of the opposite sex who’s personality you find attractive, but you don’t find them physically attractive, then you should be friends with them, but you shouldn’t date them, and probably wouldn’t want to have sex with them.


#20

You have come to the wrong place if you are looking for justification to have sex with girls. If you want to have sex, go to it. If you want God to justify it, I think you will be waiting for a long time. When you said, “Why would a loving God…” about having sex I couldn’t help but laugh. Since when was God ever shy about making us wait, or causing us some level of discomfort if it would lead to some virtue on our part? I was married at age 30 as a virgin! It was hard, but it was not impossible, and it was more than worth it! My wife and I have only been with each other and there are no comparisons to other lovers; there is no, “where did you learn that from” or “well my other lover liked that” or any other things that can cause pain or jealousy. We have just had our 18th anniversary and boy has it been worth it! The scriptures are all about love and love is difficult. Fighting for love means sacrifice of self and selfish desires. Giving the gift of your virginity to your wife would be one of the greatest gifts you could ever give to her and is a gift worthy of your short-term frustration and pain. I’m sure that I’ll have no influence on your thoughts, but you are starting from the wrong point of view. When you start from the point of view of love you are not asking about what is best for you or what you want, you are asking what would be best for the other (each of you should consider one another as more important than yourself - phillipians). Your question needs to be, “How might I please my Lord in everything I do?” Live life in that direction and you will do well!