• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Profane Relationships

Obviously, in this situation, sex is not being treated with due respect. This isn't the intended situation at all. As long as sex is respected as an integral part of a marriage covenant and the involved parties do not break any laws, they can in no way be profaning what is designed to unite two unique individuals. So, NetWatchR, it seems to me that, when both the husband and wife are cool with enjoying some Barry White and some racy getups withing their marriage, they aren't debasing a thing. ; )
 
But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 1 Corinthians 7:2

This verse also seems to separate sex from marriage, in agreement with Exodus 22:16 and the Book of Numbers concerning vows. This seems to be saying that sex outside of marriage is sexual immorality, and if sex equaled marriage, there would be no reason for this verse, because everyone who had sex would have at least one husband and at least one wife. We have vows with the Most High, a covenant that YaH equates with marriage vows, but we have never had sex with Him, right? If sex equaled marriage and a vow, there would be no need for marriage vows, oaths, promises, or covenants.

Also, David's son, Amnon, just before he raped his sister, Tamar, she pleaded with him to ask their father for her hand in marriage first, saying she was sure their father would agree to it. So, if sex did equal marriage, why would she plead with him to wait until they were married? She said if he didn't wait for that, she would be disgraced and he would do wickedness and be a wicked fool in Israel.

Also, Judah lied with Tamar, who he thought to be a harlot. Ironically, another Tamar. When Judah was going to have her killed for the act when she was discovered to be pregnant, she was accused of playing the harlot. If she was now married to the man she had lied with, in this case, Judah, then why would she be killed for being pregnant by her husband? Some might say she was betrothed (engaged or married) to Judah's youngest son at this point, but she is not accused of adultery, just playing the harlot. At any rate, in Genesis 38, Judah is clearly ashamed of his lying with a harlot and tries to keep it secret, then when he realizes that Tamar has identified Judah as the father of her baby, he confesses that she is more righteous than he. Obviously, he considered his act in lying with a woman he was not married to and who he thought to be a harlot, a sin.

Deut 22 discusses sexual sin and lists several situations in adultery and fornication (separately). It mentions the judgement against a woman playing the harlot in her father's house, sex outside of marriage, fornication, not adultery. Also:

If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you. Deut 22:23-24

Did you catch that? It is calling a betrothed or engaged woman's fiancé, her HUSBAND, eventhough the marriage has not been consummated yet, as she is still a virgin, the verse states. Reading on to the next verse, it says that the man who lies with a betrothed woman shall die. Why? Because her vows to her husband make her married, not her lying with him, as she is only betrothed, not married, and she is still a virgin. So, if a man lies with her while she is betrothed, it is adultery, so he must die. If she does not cry out, them being in the city, where someone could have heard her, it is assumed she was not raped, that she was willing, and so she, too, must die, for committing adultery. Keep reading, and it tells us that the man is stoned because he humbled his neighbor's WIFE. They had not yet had sex, they were just betrothed with vows, and she was his WIFE, married, just not consummated.

Regarding a woman's vows, I think you all are forgetting something. Not all single, virgin women have an earthly father as her head. There are orphans, there are women like myself, abandoned by the father while still in the womb, with no male relative as head. I was raised in my mother's home, and she had no idea of my father's whereabouts or his family's whereabouts, whether he was dead or alive. She was a harlot, and an adulteress at the same time. My husband could not ask a man on this earth for my hand in marriage. We went by the standards written in our Heavenly Father's word to tell us if we have permission from HIM. We found we did, because we were equally yoked in belief in that written word. After marriage, we had a disagreement and I had doubts about the decision to marry him, and my Father in Heaven rebuked me saying, "Is this how you are going to treat the husband that I GAVE to you?" That removed all doubt from my heart and reminded me that it was YHUH that brought us together and that we should let no MAN separate us, including ourselves. May all earthly fathers seek YaH's will for their daughters and just seek a man of equal yoke (Acts 15:19-21) and add no other burdens on them than this, remembering that it is better to marry than to burn with lust, as long as it is a marriage in YHUH.
 
There is a strong parallel.

If a wife has sex with her husband, that is right (holy?). If she has sex with another man that is adultery - probably the deepest error possible related to marriage.

If we worship God, that is holy. If we worship a false god, that is idolatry - probably the deepest error possible related to God.

If holy just means set-apart for a particular purpose, then sex is holy, as it is set-apart for a particular use.


I agree with enlargeourtents that sex does not equal marriage. Marriage always has two elements - a covenant, and consummation. The covenant should occur first (betrothal, or in our culture spoken wedding vows), often the covenant occurs second when people have jumped the gun, and scripture provides for both instances (the laws around marriage when a man has slept with a virgin). But each element is strong enough to have started off the marriage process, and require a resolution to be come to - either the other element added as well to confirm the marriage, or a penalty applied and the partial union dissolved (e.g. when the father says no).

When there has been a covenant made (betrothal / vows), they are considered married. They need then to go ahead and consummate it at some point, because we have clear instructions that husbands and wives are not to deny each other. But obviously this may be delayed for some time due to practicalities (particularly in cultures where betrothal occurs early, while the woman is underage).

When there has been sex without a covenant, there are a few options:
- The woman was already taken by someone else (betrothed or married). This is sin to be punished, not a marriage as she wasn't available.
- The woman was available, a virgin, and the father says yes. Marriage.
- The woman was available, a virgin, and the father says no. No marriage, pay a penalty, union dissolved, back to square one.
- The woman was available and had no father or was a widow / divorcee no longer under his authority, agreed to sex. Probably marriage, her agreement to sex can probably be considered her agreement to marriage.
- The woman was available and was a prostitute, so was uniting herself with many different men, for payment. Can't be considered marriage, because the "covenant" she agreed to was not to be united, she specifically agreed to a different covenant - monetary payment. Furthermore if she was united to everyone she slept with she'd be polyandrous and things would get really messy. As far as I can see from scripture this is very very inadvisable, you really shouldn't do it, prostitutes are spoken against all over the place - but technically I can't find a sin here because no punishment is specified in scripture. Not saying you should do it, just saying this is another case where in my reading of it sex does not equal marriage. Of course we are specifically told that if a man unites with a prostitute he becomes "one flesh" with her. Does this refer to just consummation, or full union in marriage? Personally I think just consummation, but I could be wrong. This is complex.
- Rape - slightly modifies a few above points obviously.

With Judah and Tamar, he didn't seem ashamed of sleeping with her at first. He is travelling with another man (Gen 38:12), yet this doesn't stop him going to a woman sitting "in an open place" (v14) - his friend clearly knew. Afterwards he sends his friend to the local men to ask where he could find the prostitute (v21). Now lots of men know, no shame here. They respond "there was no prostitute". Now, as I read it, Judah panics. If there was no prostitute, who did he sleep with? Was it somebody's wife? When he hears this he immediately stops looking for her because he doesn't want to find out that he had committed adultery and be "shamed" (v23).


So yes, I suppose sex is supposed to be set-apart, "holy". It can also be "profaned", made common, by being done in other circumstances that are not the ideal intention. Some of these profane circumstances are sin requiring punishment - e.g. adultery - while others may just be strongly inadvisable but not technically punishable sin - e.g. prostitution - but still "profane".
 
It seems to me that the recurring theme here is that this sex is profane, yes, but profane because the man has no intention of following through in the marriage. Since sex is, as I understand it, the consumation of marriage (before or after vows are agreed upon) the issue with fornication is neglect. So, sex is profaned by disconnecting it from marriage, rather than being something separate from marriage that can be profaned under certain circumstances. It seems like semantics, but I think that it is actually a very important distinction.

Basically: sex should be a physical form of a marriage vow, and making it anything else is sinful.

As for the synonymity of betrothal and marriage, I disagree. Possibly another issue of semantics, but to me it appears to be the difference between someone taking something that belongs to another person (such as stealing a hundred dollars) in the case of adultery, versus taking something that will be someone else's eventually (such as stealing a wages someone has yet to collect.) The significance there, I think, is that, while it is adultery to take a man's betrothed, the betrothal is not the same as a marriage, just a promise of a promise to come.

Basicslly: The woman still belongs to her betrothed by right, so taking her is a sin, but she is not his yet because they have not consummated. Otherwise, it would be pointless to draw distinction between married and betrothed, even though the Bible does.
 
Betrothal and marriage are not completely synonymous - but under the Law they are treated as if they are the same. Because they are very very similar, betrothal is very close to marriage.
Remembering that betrothal is a firm commitment, not just a statement of intent, in our modern society betrothal is effectively synonymous with wedding vows. It's when the formal agreement is made. In our culture, you say the vows in the afternoon and consummate it that evening, ideally. For the afternoon you are technically "betrothed" - promised but not yet consummated. But if a bride sneaks off with the best man and has sex at the reception, would we consider her to be committing adultery? Certainly. Because although the marriage has not yet been consummated, we look on this technically betrothed couple as already married. We even call them "husband" and "wife".

Not disagreeing with you, just clarifying!
 
It is well understood that Judah was in sin at this time in his life, and that his lying with a harlot was heaping sin upon sin, the icing on the cake, the straw that broke the camel's back. First, he sinned against his brother, Joseph, when he became jealous of him, causing the next sin, desiring to kill him, causing the next sin, putting him in a pit and selling him as a slave, causing the next sin, lying to his father, causing the next sin, leaving his father's house before marriage and going to live among the Canaanites, causing the next sins, taking a Canaanite wife, befriending a Canaanite, resulting in evil offspring who were killed by YHUH, leading to his trip with his not virtuous friend to shear his sheep, happening upon Tamar who he thinks is a harlot. Here's the text I was speaking of that leads me to believe that he was ashamed of his deed with "a harlot":

Meanwhile Judah sent the young goat by his friend the Adullamite in order to get his pledge back from the woman, but he did not find her. He asked the men who lived there, “Where is the shrine prostitute who was beside the road at Enaim?” “There hasn’t been any shrine prostitute here,” they said. So he went back to Judah and said, “I didn’t find her. Besides, the men who lived there said, ‘There hasn’t been any shrine prostitute here.’” Then Judah said, “Let her keep what she has, or we will become a laughingstock. After all, I did send her this young goat, but you didn’t find her.” About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar is guilty of prostitution, and as a result she is now pregnant.” Judah said, “Bring her out and have her burned to death!” As she was being brought out, she sent a message to her father-in-law. “I am pregnant by the man who owns these,” she said. And she added, “See if you recognize whose seal and cord and staff these are.” Genesis 38:20-25

Judah told Hirah to forget about getting back his identification lest they become a laughing stock. He was ashamed, or else they would not need to worry about people laughing at them. Also, Judah says Tamar is worthy of death for prostituting herself. Why would it not be a sin for him to lie with a prostitute if he condemns her for prostitution, a sin deserving death? HE WAS THE ONE WHO SLEPT WITH THE PROSTITUTE AND HE CONDEMNS HER TO DEATH?! Do you see, Samuel, how your understanding in the matter sounds hypocritical? I must say, it does sound like a typical man's response perspective, though, lol, it's not a sin to sleep with a harlot but the harlot must die for sleeping with her customer, lol. We see that Tamar knew Judah would be ashamed and that he was in sin and she concealed his sin by sending a private messenger to Judah with the identity of the father. I imagine that if Judah would have been travelling with his father, Jacob, he would not have veered off the path to shear his sheep to sleep with a harlot. Thankfully this whole realization by Judah, that Tamar was more righteous than he, that he was a sinner, was key to leading him to repentance and going back to His father's house and going with them down into Egypt at the time of the famine leading them to realize Joseph was still alive and it was all for a reason.

Another example in scripture that demonstrates that sex does not equal marriage, is Joseph's marriage to Mary. She was a virgin, had never been with a man, and Joseph was considering divorcing her when he realized she was pregnant. If they aren't joined with vows, there's no reason for divorce, because sex has not happened yet.

Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the messenger of YHUH had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Yahusha. Matthew 1:24-25

Here it says Joseph TOOK Mary UNTO HIM as HIS WIFE, and knew her not until after Yahusha was born. Remember, before Yahusha was born, they travelled together as a married couple to register as a family where JOSEPH was from, so she left her father's house and clung to her husband and became a family as a married couple with Joseph as her head, before sex, before Yahusha was born.

We need to make sure we understand the law before we start making judgements on it. If you say sex is marriage, then you condemn me, my husband, and many others who have had sex before marriage, you condemn our union as a married couple, and falsely according to scripture, according to the laws of marriage, divorce, adultery, fornication, etc...I and my husband repented of sexual sin, namely fornication, before marriage. We did not commit fornication with one another before marriage, nor did we ever commit adultery by sleeping with someone who was married or not biblically divorced. We are not adulterers, nor were we ever, but we WERE fornicators, though not anymore, as we turned from that sin. Adultery is a specific type of fornication having to do with vows. Context throughout the Old and New Testaments shows a distinction. There are different words in the Greek, porneia is fornication, adultery is moicheuo. Learn the law, then you learn to judge righteously, be very careful not to judge in error, lest you falsely accuse and misinterpret the law, and you sin.
 
I am NOT arguing for prostitution at all! Please let me be clear on that. However I am trying to be consistent with scripture to the best of my ability.

Note that Tamar was betrothed to Judah's son. So if she were to have sex with anybody else, under any circumstances, this would be adultery, a sin punishable by death. Prostitution or no prostitution. And at this point Judah didn't even know she'd been a prostitute, he had no idea how she had got pregnant - just that she had had sex. So the fact that Judah called for her to die says nothing about his views on prostitution, he'd have called for this regardless of whether he felt prostitution was right or wrong.

Also, Judah had already sinned against Tamar by denying her marriage to his son, forcing her into the situation that she found herself in. So his statement that she is more righteous than he is a confession of sin, but not necessarily a confession that him sleeping with a prostitute was sinful, it is more consistently understood in my mind as a confession that withholding his son from her was sinful.

And Judah was certainly sinful in this time of his life. I am not excusing him, or holding him up to be righteous in any way. Nor am I arguing for prostitution. I just feel that this example does not actually provide evidence for the point you were using it to make. In the interests of sticking solely to the text and not presuming it says something additional, however much we might want it to say this, I am presenting an alternative perspective on the situation.

And I am not promoting prostitution (have I said that enough yet?) :D

Agree with you on Mary & Joseph. Note that "took her as his wife" can be read as "treated her as his wife even though he hadn't consummated the marriage yet", which is consistent with the principle that marriage needs both covenant and consummation, eventually.
 
“I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything. You say, “Food for the stomach and the stomach for food, and aluhym will destroy them both.” The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for YHUH, and YHUH for the body. By his power YHUH raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Messiah himself? Shall I then take the members of Messiah and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.” But whoever is united with YHUH is one with him in spirit. Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from aluhym? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor aluhym with your bodies. 1 Corinthians 6:12-20

It helps to look at context, as people pull this about one being united sexually with another out of context, so let's put it back in and look at the whole text about it instead of one verse. Let's also remember that scripture says that there must be at least 2 or 3 witness to establish a matter under heaven. So, if we want to establish that sleeping with someone makes you married to them, then we would have to provide at least one other witness of that in scripture, according to scripture. We also have to remember that scripture does not contradict scripture, so 1 Corinthians 6 cannot contradict 2 Samuel, Deut 22, Exodus 22, Matthew 2, Numbers 30, etc...

Context says this is speaking spiritually. You can be united as one flesh with a group of people in prayer, belief, worship, like mind, sin, etc...there are many ways to be united with someone in many different ways. That doesn't make you married. Granted, the context somewhat sounds like that because of the reference to the two becoming one flesh and how that is a quote from Genesis referring to Adam and Eve's status as husband and wife. But then in the same context you have YHUH talking about how we are one flesh with aluhym and Messiah, but did we have sex with them? Of course not. Sex does not equal marriage, but when one has sex with another, they are uniting themselves with the other person physically and spiritually, temporarily, if there are no vows of life-long commitment made, just as one unites themselves in idolatry with others and that is spiritually related to being in bed with them and other gods.

Samuel, I know you are not advocating prostitution, lol. You said that you did not see where in the bible it calls doing that a sin, maybe not those words exactly, but you are hesitant to identify the act as a sin. I am trying to help you see where it is called that in the Bible, lest you someday fall into that sin or shrug your shoulders at someone else who commits it thinking it's not a big deal, and also trying to help others who are seeking and confused about the scriptures on this topic. I believe that was one of the questions in the original post, whether sex with an unmarried woman outside of marriage is a sin, whether she is a prostitute or not. Obviously there is confusion and there are scriptures that can clear up that confusion, as YHUH is not the author of confusion.

Scripture says a woman can be killed for the act of prostitution, and it states a father is not to cause his daughter to be a prostitute lest the land be defiled by sexual sin. If the father sins, and the prostitute sins, does not the man who lies with the prostitute also sin? Did you catch that in those verses above in 1 Corinthians 6? Sexual immorality and fleeing from it is the point of it all, and it says:
"Shall I then take the members of Messiah and unite them with a prostitute? Never!"

'Do not profane your daughter by making her a harlot, so that the land will not fall to harlotry and the land become full of lewdness.' Leviticus 19:29

“‘Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled. Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the foreigners residing among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled. And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you. Everyone who does any of these detestable things—such persons must be cut off from their people. Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am YHUH your aluhym.’” Leviticus 18:24-30

No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute. Deuteronomy 23:17

You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute into the house of YHUH your aluhym to pay any vow, because YHUH your aluhym detests them both. Deut 23:18

"I will not punish your daughters when they turn to prostitution, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery, because the men themselves consort with harlots and sacrifice with shrine prostitutes-- a people without understanding will come to ruin! Hosea 4:14
 
Good explanation of the "one flesh" phrase not equalling marriage, I thoroughly agree.

You state "Scripture says a woman can be killed for the act of prostitution" - could you provide a reference please? I've never found such a passage.

The law does have some firm things to say about prostitutes:
- Don't force your daughter into prostitution. This recognises that prostitution is abusive, and prevents anyone being forced into it.
- Don't be a "shrine prostitute". Note that the Hebrew behind this is very clearly referring to someone who is serving a false god, it basically means "priestess", the word is related to the word "holy", it means "don't be someone set-apart for service to a false god". Many ancient religions had prostitution as part of their worship, and this is forbidden - because all forms of idolatry are forbidden.

The thing I have never managed to find, however much I have hunted, is anywhere where it says something like "don't sell sex" or "don't buy sex". It's just not there. And the more I ponder it, the more I think this is deliberate.

Because the fact is that most prostitutes don't choose to be prostitutes. They are forced into it as a last resort when they have no other way of putting food on the table. They are women in desperate need, who have not managed to be supported through legitimate means - they can't get a husband or a decent job. So they sell their body as a last resort. And are not penalised for this, because God is merciful. But in an ideal world it would never happen, and in a Christian community it should never happen, because all women should be provided for and all men should be willing to support them honourably without expecting sex to do so.
 
Wow, that's a lot of words. You didn't deal with the fact that the one flesh is used in the marriage passage about a man leaving his parents and cleaving to his wife as well as the passage about not sleeping with prostitutes. You also don't deal with the fact that there is no prescribed vow or ceremony for a marriage in scripture as well as no example of anyone taking one. Isaac just took Rebecca into his mother's tent for example and they were then together. Also, what you call fornication doesn't exist in scripture. The sexual sins are clearly enumerated and sex outside of marriage isn't there. At all. When the phrase fornication is used in the New Testament it is referring back to the acts forbidden in the Old Testament. So in order to have sex outside of marriage you have to invent a whole log of things.

If it is possible you need to find where it is defined and what the penalty is or its not even a sin since without law no sin is imputed. Then you need to find out why sleeping with a prostitute makes you one flesh with her if sex isn't marriage. Also, talking about context is almost always code for explaining why the Bible doesn't mean what it clearly says.
 
Fewer words then! :D
1) Sex outside of marriage not fornication - I agree. Fornication is sex forbidden in the Law, and that isn't there. Either that means it doesn't exist, or that it isn't sin. You're concluding it doesn't exist, I'm concluding it's not sin except for in those specific cases where it is forbidden. This is tricky, a case can be made for either interpretation, I outline my present understanding but am learning all the time.
2) Needing a vow - I agree no vows are outlined in scripture. By "covenant" I mean an agreement of some form. With Isaac, there was an agreement with the father of the bride negotiated by the servant. Father of the bride must agree, and that's the covenant generally. Certainly no need for formal vows - but a formal or informal covenant is always present.
 
If marriage is two people who (1) covenant and (2) become one flesh physically, and both aspects are necessary for a marriage to have taken place, then a man certainly becomes one flesh with a prostitute just as much as he becomes with a wife - yet is not married to her unless he also forms a covenant with her.

If all there is for marriage is to become "one flesh" physically, then a man becomes one flesh with a prostitute and is married to her.

The phrase "one flesh" is consistent with either interpretation, it isn't a proof-text that distinguishes between them. The question is therefore which view is more consistent with the entirety of scripture. And that is certainly debatable, I'm not saying I've got it all worked out, but I am presenting the view I tend to lean towards these days.
 
Well obviously I disagree with you but as long as your working it out through scripture its none of my business.
 
I was thinking as much about the casual sex (sex without commitment) that is prevalent in this age. Which if I understood enlargeourtent is what they repented of. While I think I understand where Samuel is coming from i would believe profanity would cover prostitution making it unholy.

From my study of adultery and finding out it has a very specific definition ( a wife has to be involved) led me to research fornication which also is specific. ( a cult prostitute has to be involved)

Therefore it seems to me that the term fornication as used earlier didn't fit the sin ,rather it would have been a sin of profanity. Still sin, just not a death sin. Something to think about - enlargeourtent-

One verse that I keep coming back to is Ephesians 5:5 and the term whoremonger. Maybe it's just the culture I live in but it seems like it could encompass prostitution.
I like the input on this subject but please lets not get pushy on our own understandings. I like when we can lay out what we believe and even when others share why they can't believe that way. As long as its sharing and not pushing.

Love the Truth
 
ZecAustin said:
Well obviously I disagree with you but as long as your working it out through scripture its none of my business.
Click to expand...
I appreciate this quote. Cheers .
 
Yes, prostitution is most certainly profane, which is why we are told repeatedly not to do it. But as discussed earlier, I don't think profane necessarily means "sinful", just not ideal. Yet still we shouldn't do it, so regardless the effect is the same and I'm just splitting hairs.

yoderfamily said:
One verse that I keep coming back to is Ephesians 5:5 and the term whoremonger. Maybe it's just the culture I live in but it seems like it could encompass prostitution.
Click to expand...
The Greek here is "pornos", male form of "porn" meaning prostitute. So it's mainly, in my mind, referring to male prostitutes.
It might refer to all male prostitutes in general.
Or it could be referring to the sort of male prostitutes the Ephesians would have had in great numbers - male temple prostitutes - which were already condemned in the Old Testament. As far as I can see there is no separate word for a temple prostitute in the Greek like there is in Hebrew, so male temple prostitute would be translated "pornos", and this would be a restatement of the same old law.
It does not refer to female prostitutes in any way, this is definitely the male form of the word.
 
I have to admit that this topic has me a little spun up. I'm trying to keep perspective. I know everyone who posts here desires to be godly and diligently and earnestly searches scripture for the answers to their questions, so please forgive me if I come across a little heated. I don't mean to, I'm just a very high strung, excitable individual at times.

It seems to me that no is paying enough attention to 1 Corinthians 6:16. The language there when referring to the joining of our bodies with a prostitute is the same as used in Matthew 19:5-6, Mark 10:7-8 and Ephesian 5:31 for marriage. Now this seems like it isn't insignificant. If such a tacitly uncommitted arrangement still results in a "one-flesh" situation I would need to see proof that "casual sex" wouldn't as well.

This is not an inconsequential matter. Adultery is a serious sin, one punishable by death. There is a practical consideration as well, if we are marrying women in God's eyes and then essentially putting them away unlawfully by not affording them their continuing due (whatever you think that may be) we are then barred from remarrying ourselves and as polygynists both aspiring and realized that could put our future "marriages" outside of God's blessing.

Also, if we are counting on the women committing adultery first, as would be the case with a prostitute or an extremely loose woman, then we are at very least profiting off of their sin but in fact may be pushing them further into their isolation from God. At very least this would not be loving our fellow man and could even have us looking around for a millstone to tie around our necks when the time comes.

Now I know that no one who has posted here is out trolling for tricks in the family station wagon nor are they on adultfriendfinder looking for sexy parties. But my sense is that there are a lot of people who do read these posts and get a lot of guidance, or excuses in the worst cases. An academic debate like this needs to have large disclaimers everywhere that what we are doing is putting actions in their proper biblical perspective, NOT advocating for lifestyles, life choices or life altering behaviors.

Just to show I'm not the typical dispensationalist, I do not take the view that every activity that leads to a rush of blood to the more socially unacceptable areas of the body is inherently evil or restricted solely to the marital couch. But when we are talking about the act that physically represents our relationship with God, we need to be very clear. It's like mixing nitroglycerin, you want to be very sure that you know what you're doing.
 
hmm..., well, I came across this verse in the KJV, interesting in the Hebrew, so maybe not every marriage requires sex (Mary and Joseph), but maybe all sex requires marriage:

And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. Exodus 22:16

What if there was no father to refuse the marriage? No other male relative? What if they guy didn't pay the bride price? Is she still his wife?

I know this verse was already mentioned earlier in the thread, but with a different translation I was able to see it in a different light. My husband and I have some praying and fasting to do.
 
...and what if she was willing to marry but he rejected her as Amnon rejected Tamar?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top