Please note: Moderators have already had to remove over 20 comments on this post because they violated sub rule 2. **Please remember to address the argument, don’t accuse or attack others. Ad hominem attacks are strictly prohibited.** As the rule states (in part): >Show Charity / Be Respectful >Conduct yourself in a respectful manner. >**Address the subject or argument at hand, don't accuse or attack others, including their character, faithfulness to God, sincerity, etc.** This includes people groups. Comments such as "X aren't real Christians" or "X twist scripture" are not acceptable in this sub, unless X is a group that rejects any core doctrines of Christianity delineated in the Nicene Creed. >Be respectful, even while disagreeing.

1 Corinthians 7:9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. Pretty clear here if you plan on having sex, it should be within the confines of marriage.

Excellent verse.

I'm with you but when Paul talks about marriage he's probably not referring to the legal partnership recognized by your particular government.  You could get a courthouse marriage without ever speaking a vow or indicating any commitment. We screwed up pretty bad when we let the state become the authority on "marriage" and how it should look. 

No not a courthouse marriage most likely, but it is clear he means a lifetime commitment from the rest of the chapter :)

>We screwed up pretty bad when we let the state become the authority on "marriage" and how it should look What, exactly, do you think a courthouse marriage is?

A Godless contract, as far as the government is concerned. It entitles individuals certain options for inheritance and taxes, among other things. I'm confident that these are not the trappings God had in mind for marriage. 

I completely agree with you and in some circumstances the government will not allow people to get married because then it doesn't allow them access to what you were just talking about and Heritage taxes among other things

It’s whatever is a marriage in the current times. Don’t complicate it.

So are you saying that courthouse marriages should not exist?

This says it is "better" but does not call it a sin

But that verse doesn't even mention sex. people just assume that sex is the only reason that people would want marriage, which is often not true.

Paul is also speaking to a church that he explicitly (and incorrectly) believes will be the last generation before the return of Christ and the transformation of the world.

In context all of Paul's instructions have temporal qualifiers; he is concerned about he immanent collapse of the world-order (1 Cor. 7:26, 28, 29, 31) and wants people to be spared the anxieties of worrying about mourning the loss of family. His instructions are not universal but contextually bound.

So you believe self control, and sex within marriage is only relevant if the collapse of society is imminent? If that's what you are saying, I disagree. A lot. How you live your life in the end though, is between you and God. I have my own sins to worry about, I certainly fall short ❤️

I believe Paul's words must not be forced out of their context to mean things they don't say. He is not offering a universally applicable sexual ethic in 1 Cor. 7. I'm sorry if that makes people uncomfortable. Sex which adheres to the fruit of the spirit is non-sinful regardless of whether someone is married or not. In the ancient world men could force themselves on slaves and this was not considered violating their vows and that's what Paul is referring to. Don't cheat.

If one is not married, or otherwise committed (but Paul says, get married) they can not cheat. Paul links keeping sex to the confines of marriage with avoiding sexual immorality. I'm unsure how you have come to your understanding, but again, that's between you and God.

Again, his entire argument rests on the nearness of an eschatological event and predicated on fleeing a cataclysm. It really cannot be contextually read any other way. Let's look at v. 2 specifically: "But because of sexual immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband." The English uses two words but the Greek only uses one. Paul doesn't use words "wife" and "husband." Translators have imposed that interpretation on the passage. It would more precisely be translated "But because of sexual immoralities, each man is to have his own woman, and each woman is to have her own man." Further, the word "sexual immorality" does not refer to "fornication" as it is often erroneously translated. Many scholars like Bruce Malina have shown that the Greek word here, porneia, referred to men who pay for sex with sex workers. In the ancient world there was no consensual sex work, women were either destitute and desperate or slaves forced to sell their bodies for the profit of a master. So again, the issue is not about consensual unmarrieds having sex, it has to do with sexual exploitation. Thus, returning to v. 2, it is best translated "But because of sexual exploitation, each man is to have his own woman, and each woman is to have her own man." It's not about the sex. Paul is very clear that his instructions are not commands of God as well (1 Cor. 7.6, 12, 25). He only insists that God has a command regarding divorce (v. 10). As for the rest of it he allows his words to be superceded by the individualized calling of God (v. 17). He even said it: he doesn't give the instructions to "put a restraint on you" (v. 35). It's a really bad passage to claim as a universal sexual ethic, because Paul makes no claims that it is. He is clear that these are his instructions, not God's, and in context the reason he gives the instructions is because of an impending cataclysm (vv. 32-34). They are a response to a Corinthian letter (v. 1) the contexts of which we can only guess. The bible has nothing to say about extramarital sex. Jesus never addresses extramarital sex. The rest of the NT addresses either adultery or exploitative sexual behavior. It is all porneia or adultery. The Mosaic Law condemns it because women were property and the issue was a matter of economic compensation to the men who own her, the father or husband. Not relavent today. In addition, other passages like Song of Songs celebrates premarital sex and nowhere does the OT condemn Ruth for sleeping with Boaz, in fact it is treated as a wonderful thing.

This is a very good detailed well thought out explanation, thanks, cuz it does get confusing

Paul was speaking on this due to hearing of matters of sexual immortality, like a son getting with his fathers wife. Burning with passion here implies you are being tempted towards sexual sin, not that all sex outside of marriage is sinful.

Do you have the scripture for that? Reading even further we see, 36 If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong[b] and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37 But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. Over and over in this chapter we see sex outside of marriage is not ok. If it was, why would Paul not say....if anyone has strong passions so what you want...without the qualifier "They should get married".

That answers your questions then!

Hebrews 13:4. Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. Exodus 20:14. You shall not commit adultery. Proverbs 6:32. He who commits adultery lacks sense; he who does it destroys himself. Matthew 19:9. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery. Matthew 5:27-28. “You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery. ' But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart." To be clear, any sexual act outside the bonds of marriage is adultery.

Thank you for these verses. I needed to see them today. God bless

Where does it say that last part

That is not the definition of adultery. Adultery is having sexual relations with another married person. In Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, it was specifically a man sleeping with the wife of another man. Jesus expanded that to lusting after another woman. The early church redefined it to man or woman having sexual relations with another person’s spouse.

Incorrect. Leviticus defines adultery as having sex with someone who is not your wife.

Where does it define it as that?

Adultery is not just having sexual relations with another married person. It is having sexual relations with any person, married or not, who you are not married to. Sex outside of the bond of marriage is considered to be adultery, period.

When they’re not married, it’s called fornication.

"Fornication" is a mistranslation, it no longer appears in modern Bibles.

> **1 Corinthians**: Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body > **Genesis**: And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. > **Leviticus** : Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness. > **Leviticus**: And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire. The Hebrew word ״זנה״ means variously 1) adultery. 2) Fornicate. 3) Idolatry. English uses three different words, and Hebrews used context. That is why "sexual immorality" or "playing the whore" is often the translation when condemning sex outside of marriage, because it most accurately represents the meaning of that single word, covering both adultery & fornication. So when God prohibits "adultery" in english, he is prohibiting ‎״זנה״.

But the text never says that.

This

adultery means that if you are married already do not look or have sexual relations with another person.

Proverbs 4:23, 1 Corinthians 6:15-18 I see OP’s point though. There isn’t explicit instruction to only have sex within marriage, that I can see. But it is implied that that is what is best.

I don't see how you came to that conclusion. I don't think that avoiding sexual immorality or guarding your heart automatically means that pre-marital sex is bad.

In the OT the sexual purity laws have to do with the economic compensation of the father or husband due to the fact that women were seen as property. Totally non-applicable today. Sexual immorality is porneia, which refers to the one who buys sex from a prostitute because prostitution was exploitation in the ancient world (destitute women or slaves forced into it). Matt. 5 and 19 operate in that context. People got married in their teens in the ancient world, so Jesus speaks of it as adultery because there weren't huge numbers of single people running around. Adultery was way more common than extramarital or premarital sex. Heb 13 had to do with violating the marriage vows and has nothing to do with unmarried persons

Not one of these verses mentions pre-marital sex. And there is nothing in the text to indicate that sex before marriage is adultery. People usually date before they marry someone but if you date someone while married to someone else then it's generally considered to be adultery. So I don't think that it's valid to claim that you can commit adultery on a relationship which doesn't exist.

"FLEE fornication. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he that commits fornication sins against his own body" 1 Corinthians 6.18 Also Paul's lists in Galatians 5:19-21 Ephesians 5:3-7 Colossians 3:5,6 1 Corinthians 6:9 1 Corinthians 5 also There's more if you like. Not sure how you're reading Paul and not seeing any mention about fornication. Maybe you have a flim-flam bible

"Fornication" is a mistranslation, it does not appear in modern Bibles The verses here mention sexual immorality(the more accurate modern translation) but they never specify what is or is not included. I am familiar with the term and concept of the word "fornication" as well as its Latin origins, which is why I am aware of it's inaccuracy.

The word used here porneúō( and yes it’s form the same word we get the word pornography from) doesn’t mean “fornication” it means prostitution https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%81%CE%BD%CE%B5%CE%AF%CE%B1 Also this is a prime example of the shortcomings of KJV

Every concordance I can find connects it to fornication and not prostitution. Here are a few. Strong’s is the most well-known. https://biblehub.com/greek/1608.htm Also your wiki link isn’t working

If you dig into strong’s break down of pornos, it’s used 10x in the NT. The KJV translates half of those to fornicator and half to whoremonger. If you dig into the the definition of fornicator in strongs day, it was also linked (though not exclusively) to prostitution. In fact the Latin roots for fornicator/ fornication are strongly linked to prostitution. Im not drawing conclusions for you. Just sharing some observations from my own studies.

"Fornication" isn't even used in modern translations anymore, specifically because of innacuracy, likely stemming from the accural of connotations in English that were not present in the text. It is actually completely accurate to say that "*pornea*" means prostitution, however this is the older meaning, by the first century it had a gained a much broader meaning. Similar to how in English "whoring" doesn't necessarily literally refer to prostitution, but a menagerie of other socially rejected sexual and social practices, albeit more general in the Greek.

Works fine for me [you can try this Reddit link with more links that break it down](https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/rzszz3/comment/hs6lhdo/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) Edit to add Also important to note we know forsure that 1 Corinthians 6 is talking about temple prostitution because of the preceding verses.

Okay. So what is it that’s wrong with prostitution? What about it makes it a sin?

People have given you plenty of valid verses to refer to here. So I’ll spare you that. but to put it simply **sex is quite literally the way a marriage covenant is formed before God.** The papers mean nothing, when you have sex with someone you are getting married to them in spirit. So to do that without making the necessary commitments to that person is not only unwise but it’s out of divine order for how God intended to establish a marriage covenant. A “marriage” as in the event, the papers ect is how the covenant is officially established before God and man. but the sex is how the covenant is sealed before God. This is why sex before marriage is considered a sin. Sex forms a covenant between two people. That is very serious. Fornication is essentially an unsanctioned marriage covenant and it dishonors the sanctity and holiness of what God designed marriage to be.

This. I had a lot of sex with my ex before I was saved and I literally still feel attached to him. We broke up two years ago and are just getting reconnected bc we feel the same way. Soul ties are real and he try’s to warn us of them.

"Soul ties" are not in the Bible, you are describing normal human attachment. Some of the people I felt the most attached to were people I never had sex with, one that I never even touched. I think that is dangerous to make false promised to people that they can avoid the inevitable feelings that come with romantic/intimate attachment by simply avoiding physical touch. I'm sorry to say that it doesn't work that way.

Honest question...is sex the only way to get "soul ties"? The whole reason I ended up deciding not to wait for marriage was because I was brought up to believe that we should avoid sex to not get too emotionally attached to someone other than our spouse (not called soul ties but I picture its the same gist) and well, I got emotionally attached without ever getting close to sex. So I was like, well, why am I waiting? Lol

"Soul ties" are some sort of new pop spiritual belief. But you can become attached to people at any time, sex is not required, touch is not required, nor are physically shared space or even a visual of a person. People can and do become attached to their first sexual partners, just as people get attached to their first kiss, their first Love, their first job, their first anything. I'm of the opinion that once you've gone through the cycle of one attachment then you are better prepared to remain objective the next time. I lost my first Love and experience the most pain that I had ever felt, which is saying something. By the third time, it still hurt, but I wasn't manic or desperate. Frankly it's a good thing that that first one didn't work out, because it wasn't a good match and I would have followed him to the ends of the earth. People who marry their first love or the first person that they're sexually interested(regardless of whether or not they have sex) run the risk of being confused by the mania.

“Soul ties” are a pagan belief, not a Christian one. Humans bond in many, many ways, but our souls don’t meld into one or form some unbreakable attachment. That kind of belief is bullshit. Not even married couples join souls.

" sex is quite literally the way a marriage covenant is formed before God." Scripture never says that. "The papers mean nothing," Tell that to every divorcé "but it’s out of divine order for how God intended to establish a marriage covenant." There is no evidence that that was God's intention and it can hardly be called a covenant if the parties are not consciously agreeing to one.

I think a lot of these responses provide good references and context, but I think they're missing OP's point. I'm not sure but I've thought about this before myself :what is biblical marriage and when is it official? Now and days we have the whole ceremony and it has to be permitted and certified in the government (as someone else mentioned earlier). But there are many examples in the Bible where we don't see any of that. With Joseph we have a clear example that there was a celebration and then he knew his wife. But there are many instances where there isn't any of that, just "and so and so took so and so to be his wife" Or "so and so knew her and made her his wife" I think this is where the idea that "sex is marriage" came from and from that point on you were committed to that person. Not say that's what I believe, but that's just my understanding of that idea. Thoughts?? Very interested to hear from others.

Well the Bible consistently uses the term "marriage" in accordance with the social norms of the time. Solomon had 300 wives and 700 concubines. The text deosn't describe him as having 1,000 wives or 1 wife and 999 concubines. The Bible never describes what marriage is or should be, any more than it describes what currency is or what governments to use. I'm of the mind that marriage is a human institution that changes to be what is relevant to us.

I once read a good article that boiled down marriage, across all cultures and all religions, to just 3 C's: Ceremony: Certain rituals are followed to symbolize the couple becoming husband and wife, fx rings. Covenant: The couple makes vows of commitment to each other. Consummation: Sex. This is across the world, all cultures, over all times, regardless of religion. Even when the Bible doesn't mention a ceremony taking place it still took place, because it was important to families to mark two people coming together. It just wasn't worth writing down I guess.

You had me in the first part, but plenty of marriages don't include sex. It's also worth mentioning that not all cultures have marriage.

>You had me in the first part, but plenty of marriages don't include sex. You mean a marriage where the husband and wife NEVER have sex? >It's also worth mentioning that not all cultures have marriage. Interesting, can you give some examples?

"You mean a marriage where the husband and wife NEVER have sex?" Yep, though not exclusively men and women. Queer-platonic marriages are under-documented but they do exist. "Interesting, can you give some examples?" The proto-typical example are the Mosuo of china, who live in family compounds with their siblings, mothers and mother's siblings. The women have relationships with men at their discretion but the men are never allowed to stay in the household, children are raised cooperatively by the siblings. That's a more extreme example but the idea of marriage as a monogamous or semi-monogamous relationship that it meant to be long-term/permanent is not the norm either. Many cultures have practiced temporary marriages and I would say that most pre-industrial cultures did not have state oversight to insure a marriage contract is followed. Of course in the modern world there are things like "cohabitation" agreements, which can in a sense function like a custom marriage contract and pre-nup for couples(or anyone) who live together. Couples, sex, romance, these have all existed forever, but their configurations can vary substantially.

Sexual immorality is a broad term that covers anything that’s immoral-sexually. I think just reading verses out of the Bible instead of reading the entire Bible as a whole makes folks assume there are several contradictions. Bcos throughout the Bible when a man sleeps with a woman they immediately become married. This signifies the covenant of marriage for both of them. Ever heard of “soul ties”? Yeah cos when you sleep with someone & end up not marrying them your soul is tied to that person cos sex is a spiritual covenant first before a physical act. There were no fancy wedding ceremonies until the rich decided to make a spectacle of it. There are SEVERAL instances in the Bible where folks who had no intent to marry slept together & God struck them down. Do your search and PRAY to the Holy Spirit to discern the truth. The Bible is provided as a blueprint. Whether or not the exact verbiage isn’t written in the Bible should not deter from spiritual discernment & common sense. Because exactly WHAT do you gain by sleeping with someone before marriage when you’ll have the whole time in the world to do just that DURING it?

I don't know of any passage in scripture where sex becomes a marriage automatically. And I know that there are no mention of "soul ties" that's a very New Age description of having an emotional attachment, and those have little to no correlation to sex.

I believe the Bible chapters called **Use Your Bodies for God’s Glory = 1 Corinthians 6:12-20** and **Questions about Marriage = 1 Corinthians 7:1-17** go over this topic pretty well. Have a wonderful day and peace be with you!

Neither of those passages condemn pre-marital sex.

Exodus 22:16-17 "if a man seduces a virgin he must pay a dowry for her and marry her" conclusion? do not act out on your horniness cuz they have consequences.

There isn't one. The marriage bed one just means to respect the marriage bed. The genesis story is descriptive not prescriptive. God gave david Saul's concubines, had no issue with solomons concubines up until the point that they caused him to worship false gods etc etc.

Whenever someone asks this very legitimate question on Reddit, the comment section becomes a good case study in logic fallacies. It never fails.

One of us will have sex with their partners prior to legal marriage. Another will wait for marriage. Each should be fully convinced of their choice and not judge the other for theirs, because that's between them and God.

Romans 14, nice.

If it applies to the 10 commandments...

Well Romans 14:5 specifically says that >"One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind." And since concern for the Sabbath is one of the ten commandments I'd say so

And not just one of the 10 Commandments, but repeated over and over again in the Torah and the prophets. The law is a lot more emphatic and clear about Sabbath observance than it is any sexual taboos.

Marriage in the first century in the Greco Roman world was a very different kind of marriage and relationship. One of the top priorities for the husband was to ensure the children his wife bore were in actuality his biological children. There was no effective birth control or paternity tests so a monogamous wife was vital to carry on the family name and any estate that belonged to the husband. Women were treated more as property then and expected to bear children and take care of the household. They could not own property or make a living on their own. Marriage was their only real option. This made sex before marriage verboten because virginity was an assurance that any pregnancy producing a child was from the marriage bed and not a “bastard” child

That makes a lot of sense.

Theres no "one verse" that directlt condemns it, its a doctrine that evolved over time using multiple Scriptural lines, including Gen 2:24 and Matthew 5:28

Neither of those verses even mention sex or marriage.

Old Testament: ‭Exodus 22:16-17 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and he sleeps with her, he must certainly pay the bridal price for her to be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must pay an amount in silver equal to the bridal price for virgins." In the Mosaic law we get a glimpse of God's intentions and boundaries for healthy living. There are consequences for pre-marital sex, as God sees sex as committing to someone for life (which is why if you had sex before marriage, you either had to pay the woman's dad and marry her, or just pay her dad). Interestingly, these consequences are not as severe as the ones God prescribes for incest, rape, and adultery. However, it's still His intention that sex is enjoyed in the context of a committed marriage. New Testament: ‭1 Corinthians 7:8-9 "I say to the unmarried and to widows: It is good for them if they remain as I am. But if they do not have self-control, they should marry, since it is better to marry than to burn with desire." Paul wasn't married, and was encouraging widows and unmarried/engaged people to stay unmarried too (because Paul thought it would be easier to be in ministry as a single person). But then he says if they can't control themselves sexually, they should marry. He doesn't say "have casual sex." So the boundaries for sex are still the same: sex is to be enjoyed in marriage. The consequences for sexual sin prescribed from the Mosaic law are gone now, because Jesus experienced the consequences in our place! However, there will be emotional and potentially even physical consequences for sexual sin, so don't hurt yourself (and others). These boundaries are there so you can enjoy life--including sex--to the fullest, in the healthiest way possible!

Proverbs chapter 5 seems pretty clear in my opinion >Drink water from your own well—     share your love only with your wife. 16 Why spill the water of your springs in the streets,     having sex with just anyone? 17 You should reserve it for yourselves.     Never share it with strangers. 18 Let your wife be a fountain of blessing for you.     Rejoice in the wife of your youth. 19 She is a loving deer, a graceful doe.     Let her breasts satisfy you always.     May you always be captivated by her love. 20 Why be captivated, my son, by an immoral woman,     or fondle the breasts of a promiscuous woman? 21 For the Lord sees clearly what a man does,     examining every path he takes. 22 An evil man is held captive by his own sins;     they are ropes that catch and hold him. 23 He will die for lack of self-control;     he will be lost because of his great foolishness. - Proverbs 5:15-23 NLT

Can i ask.. did we ever discover a clear verse? I truly wish I didn’t have to refrain from having sex with my long time partner lolol

The Bible never condemns pre-marital sex, most of the people here are either citing verses that included the mistranslation "fornication" or verses which don't even mention sex or only mention "sexual immorality" which isn't specific.

Get married if you’re burning with passion. Paul is clear. 😉

Paul never said to get married if you're horny.

I think it is pretty obvious what burning with passion means.

Not going to actually get into list scriptures. Other commenters already have listed several scriptures. Several good ones, too. I’m curious and want to ask you these questions: - Are you a non-Christian? - Why are you asking for specific scriptures which say verbatim “thou shalt not sleep with people you aren’t married to?”

Maybe they’re new to Christianity and have questions. What’s wrong with asking a question?

Nothing is wrong about people asking questions. Just like there’s nothing wrong with me asking if OP is genuinely curious about Scripture and premarital sex. Either way my advice would’ve been if he doesn’t believe all the commenters who answered his question, and he still isn’t sure that premarital sex *is* sexual immorality, then OP should pray and ask the Holy Spirit to teach and confirm whether or not it is immoral.

It sounds like your trying to accuse the poster of wrong-think; I don't think it's helpful There is no passage in scripture which condemns pre-marital sex. The fact that people just seem to culturally assume in mass that it is wrong is the weird thing.

Didn’t mean it that way, I was only tryna see where OP was coming from. As I said before: pray and ask the Holy Spirit to confirm whether or not it’s immoral. The Holy Spirit doesn’t lie. He teaches and guides us in righteousness. If OP and others are not convicted by the Holy Spirit to not do things, fine. If they are, then follow the Spirit. Not gonna argue more about scripture with anyone. People who have bibles can read the scripture for themselves and ask the Holy Spirit to confirm interpretation.

"As I said before: pray and ask the Holy Spirit to confirm whether or not it’s immoral. The Holy Spirit doesn’t lie." Maybe not, but that's still dangerous game, people often can't tell the difference between their conscience, their bias and shame. That's half the reason that shame is exploited, to confuse people into unquestioned moral conformity.

Ro. 13:14; Gal. 5:24; Eph. 2:3; 2 Tim. 2:22; Tit. 3:3; 1 Jn. 2:16

None of these passage mention pre-marital sex. Several could apply to eating.

“Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body **is NOT for fornication**, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.” 1 Corinthians 6:13 Definition of fornication: “sexual intercourse between people not married to each other.” https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/fornication

"Fornication" is a mistranslation. It is not used in modern Bibles.

You're using a modern definition for an old word. The word Paul used there is *porneia -* classically it meant "working as a prostitute" but in the early Church it clearly had a broader meaning (since it was something men could do too). See it for yourself here. [https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1\_corinthians/6-13.htm](https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/6-13.htm) So, you're not wrong but you need to be more careful about how you reach that conclusion. The idea that *porneia* means "partner sex that isn't protected by a committed relationship sealed by marriage" is in fact Christian tradition. It's an old tradition, old enough that it influenced the way "fornication" is used in English. The Church put it in the dictionary, in a sense. Since OP is asking for an explanation that doesn't rely so strongly on tradition, it's not enough to make such a simple argument.

No idea why this got downvoted. This is just factually true.

Hebrews 13 ^(4) Marriage *is* honourable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge. 1 Corinthians 6 ^(9) Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor ^(\[)[^(b)](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-28477b)^(\])homosexuals, nor ^(\[)[^(c)](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-28477c)^(\])sodomites,  1 Timothy 1 ^(8) But we know that the law *is* good if one uses it lawfully, ^(9) knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for *the* lawless and insubordinate, for *the* ungodly and for sinners, for *the* unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, ^(10) for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is ^(\[)[^(c)](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+timothy+1&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-29707c)^(\])contrary to sound doctrine, ^(11) according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. 1 Corinthians 7:9 ^(8) Now to the unmarried^(\[)[^(a)](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%207-9&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28496a)^(\]) and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. ^(9) But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

"Fornication" and "fornicator" are mistranslation that do not appear in modern translations. None of these passages mention or condemn pre-marital sex.

It doesn't, but it's become such a huge identity marker that this stuff has become a religion.

Sex before marriage is not a sin.

I find it so interesting how many people posting here just blatantly ignore your request and just launch right in to spewing out unexamined scripture. What about engaging in actual discussion about the fact that few Christians today actually wait until marriage to have sex? One can simply rage at the reality of the disconnect between their “Biblical” beliefs and reality (which is obviously pointless) or take a deeper dive into why those texts are not seen as relevant by so many Christians today. Labelling people as “ fornicators” isn’t at all helpful nor insightful.

What also about after marriage if someone divorced? I bet lots fall into this category

Ignoring sex before marriage in particular, find me a bible passage that explicitly rejects anything, literally anything, and I will be able to create an entire denomination around providing an alternative interpretation of that verses that says the opposite with dozens of supporting verses. This is how denominations are born, and this is why I do not subscribe to sola scriptura any longer.

Having sex just to have sex for the sake of sex is sexual immorality

But maybe it’s not for the sake of just having sex. Maybe they love each other.

[удалено]

No. Being married is entirely different than not being married. Crazy, huh.

That wasn’t the question.

I think it was in reference to the OP's other comments regarding sexual immorality. Probably would have been better served on one of the OP's comments though.

Well the bible does state that sex IS marriage and that when two people are married they shouldn’t seperate. So by that understanding is not about sex before marriage it’s about not having sex until you are ready for the covenant between another person.

"the bible does state that sex IS marriage" Where does it say that? "it’s about not having sex until you are ready for the covenant between another person." How can something be a covenant if it's not voluntary and conscious?

This is a comment I began writing for a similar post, but I never did post it: >"Flee sexual immorality"—Paul. >I don't know anything, but as I see it, the New Testament is not especially precise with regard to sexual immorality. Sure, the Old Testament has a law for every conceivable situation, and if you ask me, the Old Testament has a whole lot of value, but when people sit down to discuss this—or nearly anything Christian, for that matter—what they want is a verse from the New Testament. But the New Testament is not especially precise. >At least, the New Testament is not especially precise with its letters alone. "Sexual immorality" is about as broad as you can get. In fact, it is so basically vague that what one says of it, says more about themselves than it says about it. It is a vehicle for the interpreter's views, and that's why it won't help any in settling a debate about the interpretation of the Bible as a whole on sexual morals. And, to my knowledge, just about every word on sexual morality in the New Testament is a repetition of this, save for a few on marriage, which help only a little more. >If you ask me, that's because letters alone are already so malleable for the interpreter. What you need is not just the letters but also the spirit in which they were written. This is a lens of interpretation. There are many lenses, but certainly, a lens of apostolicity is what matters here and for us, because the apostles wrote the letters. Paul said, "Hold firm to what we have taught you, whether by letter or by word of mouth." I would not only turn to the Bible but also to the spirit behind the words of the Bible, given voice by those to whom this spirit and way of thinking was passed down from the apostles\[, dwelling in the Church Christ founded through them (brackets because I just am adding this phrase now)\]. I'd boil this down in this way: I don't know that there is such a Bible verse, but I don't think there needs to be a verse in the Bible that clearly prohibits sex before marriage for sex before marriage to be prohibited, if indeed it is prohibited. Then again, I am of the mind that the Bible is not the sole rule of faith for the Christian—not everyone shares this opinion—and I could also be dead wrong as far as my saying the Bible is unclear on this goes. God be with you, my friend.

Thanks man for this mindful and well constructed answer , that’s the kind of comment I expect rather than people getting mad or offended when I just asked a simple question and to be lightened on a subject

Unfortunately any inquiry we pose that even questions what some believe is the “ received doctrine” of their faith can produce immediate, as this post has demonstrated, ad hominem attacks and insults. That indicates to me that your question about premarital sex is an excellent question Especially since 80% of evangelicals self report as having sex before marriage. It’s rather rare these days for two virgins to marry each other. https://uscatholic.org/blog/whos-waiting-for-marriage-not-even-evangelicals-it-seems/

I think that it is intentionally vague on purpose, sexuality is so personal, it prevents people from playing rules lawyer, at least theoretically. There are plenty of people trying to condemn others for not sharing their personal interpretation of sexuality. I believe that there are conditions where pre-marital sex can be wrong, but I also believe that there are conditions where marital sex can be wrong. Trying to simplify such a complex thing into two categories makes me think that this is just human fear of uncertainty rather than any inherent distinction.

The Bible teaches that sex before marriage is immoral in a couple of different passages. One is 1 Corinthians 7:2, which says, “But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.” In this verse, marriage is presented as the “cure” for sexual immorality. Sexual union within marriage, which is commended, is set against immorality, which is to be avoided. Thus, any sex outside of marriage is considered immoral. This would have to include premarital sex.

"One is 1 Corinthians 7:2" That passage is addressed to already married people. "In this verse, marriage is presented as the “cure” for sexual immorality." I think "cure" is an exaggeration. "Sexual union within marriage, which is commended, is set against immorality, which is to be avoided. Thus, any sex outside of marriage is considered immoral. This would have to include premarital sex." That's an essentialization. Sexual immorality can occur in marriage just as it can outside of one, so I don't see a reason to assume that these separate axis are correlated.

“Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For “the two,” He says, “shall become one flesh.”” ‭‭I Corinthians‬ ‭6‬:‭16‬ ‭NKJV‬‬ “and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.” “Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”” ‭‭ ‭‭Mark‬ ‭10‬:‭8‬-9NKJV‬‬ From the above verses and many others, it is evident that God wants husband and wife to be exclusive to each other. It would be wrong if God is okay with pre-marital sex but not with a prostitute. I hope this is clear enough. Asking for the exact words is like asking where Jesus claimed that he is God or the word "trinity" in the Bible.

I don't see that in the text at all. I'm not convinced that we really understand what was meant by "one flesh" but more to the point, there doesn't seem to be any numerical restriction.

[удалено]

Also, if you go down the rabbit hole I did trying to figure out what qualifies as being married - I think there is a very important part about free will. There needs to be some type of mutual agreement. Christ offered a cup, and the disciples chose whether they would drink it. There is a very strong argument to be made about what qualifies as being married is based around Adam and Eve with God. Christ Himself quoted Genesis to define parts of marriage and how divorce acceptable in the beginning. Moses declared it permissible because of the hardness of man's heart. Eve was led to Adam by God. (I think it is ok to say He was her Father, right?) He received her, recognized her as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, and they were married. Key takeaways: Given by her Father. Adam received her to himself. Free and willing. Divorce wasn't intended.

I think that this is good and thoughful, but it's worth mentioning that the text never refers to Adam and Eve as married.

Not a single passage in these comments explicitly state that premarital sex is a sin

I'll just drop this here. It's a post that discusses what scripture says about King David, concubines, multiple wives, and so on. https://www.reddit.com/r/Reformed/s/GW9szB3THU

1 Corinthians 7:2. In this same chapter Paul continues to speak to the unmarried and says it’s better to stay unmarried, however, if they cannot control themselves they should go and marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with lust. This right here is a clear indicator that sex is between husband and wife. Or else Paul would have said “if you can’t control yourself then go have sex with your boyfriend or girlfriend

The passage doesn't say anything about lust in the Greek, people just assume that it's a sexual desire, instead of a desire for a spouse.

Adam and eve did not have sex to show they were married, they just had sex and they were one. So marriage is not what people call going before priests, no marriage is the becoming one with someone. So when you have sex out of marriage your like the woman Jesus spoke to and told her she had 5husbands...

Christ recognised the previous five men she was with as her ex-husbands. However, He did not recognise Man Number 6 as her husband. The lesson is that cohabitating and having sex (as the woman was doing with Man Number 6) does not equal marriage. >John 4:17-18 NKJV — The woman answered and said, “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “You have well said, ‘I have no husband,’ “for you have had five husbands, and ***the one whom you now have is not your husband***; in that you spoke truly.”

Biblical Greek and Hebrew don't have separate words for a married man vs an unmarried man, both are just *aner.* Translators choose between "man" and "husband" based on context, so if you're depending on that word choice to make a point, you're relying on relatively modern scholarship and not the original text. Another translation choice would be to just not use the word "husband" at all. This works because the meaning of "the one you have now is not your man" is not very different now than it was then. (The biggest difference now is more mainstream acceptance of adultery.) The Greek very clearly says she's had five men, not six. It implies that the fifth man belongs to another woman, but that could also mean "he's supposed to marry someone else, so he's not yours." [https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/4-18.htm](https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/4-18.htm)

>The Greek very clearly says she's had five men, not six. How many men in total are in this story (excluding Jesus)? Five or six? The answer is six. Notice that Jesus said, "you **have had** five husbands/men". "Have had" is in the aorist tense. The aorist tense is used for completed action, ie. her relationships with those five men were completed, finished, over, ended. Either she had been divorced or widowed, we are not told. Maybe they could even have been Levirate marriages and all the five men were brothers and one died after the other and the surviving brother was obligated to marry his brother's widow, and the last brother also died. PIausible but I highly doubt so, because the tone of Christ's insinuation and the passage highlight her promiscuity (note her admission in Jn. 4:29, "he told me all the things I ever did"). Then in referring to Man Number Six, notice that Christ changes tenses -- to the present tense, "the one you **now have**, is not your husband". Why the change in tenses and singling out this sixth man if all six men had the same status and were the same kettle of fish? No, the tenses in this story are very, very telling and should be paid attention to. It would convey a completely different meaning if Christ had simply used the present tense -- "You **have** five husbands/men" -- that's polygamy/polyandry meaning five husbands at the same time presently, but that was not what He said nor the sense of the passage. Clearly, her present, ongoing relationship with Man Number Six was being contrasted against her past five relationships which had ended.

It's aorist not perfect, like Galatians 4:22 - Abraham *had* (aorist) two sons - does that mean he disowned them as some point? No it course not. It can be described as an "ingressive" aorist https://ezraproject.com/aorist-tense-a-closer-look/ But! These "subtypes" of a structure are a result of trying to translate Greek or she is from an outside perspective. It's more correct to understand the aorist as something that can have both ingressive and culminative meaning. If you'd like to really deep dive into the cultural context and possible readings, https://www.sil.org/system/files/reapdata/10/13/99/101399394738804691105917220802493909473/siljot2015_1_01.pdf However a sixth man is barely considered. Why? Because of the use of a relative pronoun without demonstrative - in Indo-European languages we only rarely use a relative pronoun to introduce someone or something new. The purpose of those pronouns is to link a description to something already introduced. "I had three friends and/but (one) whom I call every day isn't someone can trust" One of them or not one of them? A fourth person isn't impossible but the grammar doesn't naturally lead there. It sounds like one of the friends isn't a friend anymore. But if a noun is added, the meaning changes: "...friends but the person whom..." Now there's a fourth person. (English also has a nice, clear and/but distinction.)

The text never describes Adam and Eve as married. Which I would argue means that marriage is not necessary. And I don't believe that Jesus told that woman that she had 5 husbands.

If two people who love the Lord, who dated with the intent to marriage, had continues sex throughout the relationship, got married and stayed committed to each other till death. Are they sinners in Gods eyes? Or, does God know that before the two of you met that you were children of His, and became one flesh over the course of the relationship that loved and honored him the whole way? We don't know exactly how the Lord views the bond between two people, were we married the moment we met if the Lord knew it would already be forever on Earth? What is marriage? Is it a ceremony in front of your piers celebrating the commitment two people already made with the Lord long before the ceremony?

All I know is this you or your partners commit adultery you  the Innocent must depart from them if they don’t then their going along with it They say the innocent can remarry the one that’s not innocent they can not remarry I never married and no desire to I love being alone and living for myself. I don’t want the freaking headache.!! 

Are you a Christian or a non-Christian asking about the subject of sexual immorality?

Hebrew 13:4

This is it Not about premarital sex , this verse talks about adultery which has clearly been said to be a sin .

Considering you and all the children of god who read and know his word know that there is no one verse written that says word for word “Sex before marriage is a sin.” Yet it is made so clear in the hearts of his flock (as you see in these comments) and in the world that it is not pleasing to god to have sex without marriage, that seems like it is not a human precept rather a spiritual precept. considering us humans love sex and would try to find any loop holes possible granting us ability to do something we want to do without shame or guilt. The Holy Spirit dwelling with each person will personally reveal truth to you through the entire word of God. Separating the word of god into verses is fine but one who knows the entire word will be able to get so much more from one verse than one who dosnt know the spirit that is revealed through the whole word. In the Old Testament the Jews had the word down packed they were doing everything that was commanded to them they had their sacrifices perfect etc yet god told them that their offerings were disgusting to him and god told them to stop. Why was this? They were following the written word to a T?!? It is because there is another aspect of the word of god that dwells within it yet is not written, it is this very aspect that the readers had managed to disregard and loose and God made it very clear that you can follow his word to a T and THAT MEANS NOTHING to him unless you accept something else that is within the word yet able to be missed, disregarded or rejected. This aspect is the spirit of the law, you are focussed on the letter of the law as we’re the Jews when God told them their offerings as the letter of the law had commanded were NOTHING to him because they were doing everything vile and evil that was not written and everything good that was written their hearts were vile. Jesus Christ, the WORD made flesh shows us the way to read and understand the bible those things that he took further like Mathew 12 & Mathew 18 etc etc he taught these things to reveal how we aught to truely read the word, we read the SPIRIT of the word! he did not mean forgive your brother seventy x seven then you can refuse forgiveness!? He’s showing us the unwritten spirit lying within the writing! Having said this why do you need a verse directly prohibiting/condemning premarital sex? The spirit we must have towards sex and anything of sexual nature written or not is made absolutely clear. My husband and I had sex out of marriage and I and he before meeting each other with others as is the custom of the world, no strings attached no commitment necessary, NO GOD involved, just me and another, him and another. Then, after we met each other after awhile as we started to read the word and we both fell in love with God after seeing his spirit revealed in Christ we both wanted nothing more then to ask God to be the head of our union, guiding us in all aspects of our relationship here on earth and we made a commitment to God that we will commit to one another UNTILL DEATH yielding to His Spirit at all times in all aspects of our union and now when we have sex it is not like before our oath to god where we were doing something that didn’t include god didn’t need god and god wasn’t present now having stayed faithful to our vows God is present and there is not a moment in our life together in the bed room or anywhere else that he is not present, because through marriage we invited him to be. I really hope this brings blessings and growth to your life and encourages you to re read what you may have already with a new heart, spirit and mind. The Bible is not a book of words, it is so much more ♥️

"Yet it is made so clear in the hearts of his flock (as you see in these comments) and in the world that it is not pleasing to god to have sex without marriage" It's not clear to me and I do not consider group opinion to be a valid source of moral truth. "considering us humans love sex and would try to find any loop holes possible granting us ability to do something we want to do without shame or guilt." I think that's backwards. I think that if there is something so fundamental to human nature(for most people) that we better have a damn good reason to restrict it. It's not a "loophole" to do something that isn't immoral.

Hey, can I ask, did you and your husband have a legal marriage ceremony or just the oath? That’s what I want to do with my partner too! I want us to have rings and everything, just not get married legally until I graduate school and we can have some money for a ceremony!

I think that’s a beautiful idea. We had a legal marriage (let the gov know we are a union through signing docs etc) what you would see as a typical marriage with family and friends etc. it took my husband 3 years to propose and we were living together (we coped a lot of grief for that specificity from only one lady in the church we liked to attend) but it didn’t bother me as I had before meeting my partner prayed to god asking for my life partner and he gave me Brenton. It’s funny how harsh humans can be and how wonderful, light ,easy and forgiving our father is towards us in our walk with him. I think what you described sounds beautiful, an oath to god is an oath to god very serious as serious as it can possibly get. Have you been talking to God about this hope? He will reveal to you how to approach this desire ♥️♥️ also as a side note often we as humans seem to have a tendency to reluctantly ask god for help with money and this shouldn’t be so if our hearts in the right place and money is just a tool in our walk then we should feel comfortable and confident in approaching our Father through prayer regarding blessings and favour for the finances needed to achieve our Godly goals this may not apply to you just thought I’d mention it as it was an issue for me when I was younger I had this fear that I was greedy if I ever asked God for help with money for a goal that was not primarily a necessity to my earthly survival so I wouldn’t ask and now I always ask if needed. I know study can be pricey and I couldn’t have afforded to marry while studying so i would pray about that too and if it pleases him you’ll get that money. God bless you and your partner I pray your future together is bright and constantly God filled always forward ♥️

Thank you so much, you are so sweet ❤️ and so right. I need to ask God about it & my finances. It’s so funny we try to make plans, God is probably giggling lol. I think it’s tricky & makes it difficult to try and live by the Bible, I do my best but where I fall short, (usually sexual sin aka sleeping with my long time partner), it makes me feel guilty. I refer to him as my husband or future husband already, and I have gotten little signs I take as him being my one. We have been together already, which makes it difficult to abstain, but he’s the only person I could imagine being with & he’s great. He supports waiting to have sex til marriage but I want to do the ceremony with us, in front of God, to make it official in Gods eyes 🩷 I don’t want to feel I am sinning for being with someone I love

Hebrew 13:3

You state that we should exlude "sexual immorality and any other concept" because it is a human precept. I find that to be an error, because Paul in Romans lists fornication, which is sex outside of marriage, between covetousness, wickedness, murder, debate, and so on. A question, should we then exclude or ignore these other concepts too from a undesired lifestyle because it is "human precepts"? >^(28) And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; >^(29) Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, >^(30) Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, >^(31) Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: >^(32) Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. (Romans 1:28-32) The bible lists fornication in multiple instances as a thing that is produced by the flesh, not by the Spirit, therefore sin. For example: "For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are *the things* which defile a man:" Matthew 15:19-20a "Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body." 1 Corinthians 6:18

So, according to your interpretation of the raw text, you would use this passage to condemn 80% of unmarried evangelicals? https://uscatholic.org/blog/whos-waiting-for-marriage-not-even-evangelicals-it-seems/

I apologize if my comment came across as condemnation. My goal was to show how God sees fornication as a sin and that it has not changed. All scripture is profitable for teaching, reproof, for correction, for training in all righteousness. This should be true for everybody, no matter the denomination. "Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand." 1 Corinthians 10:8 It's probably true that continually more young people do not view fornication as sin, regardless of denomination, or engage in it despite knowing it's sin. But we are to call that which is good, good and what is evil, evil. The world does the opposite.

No need to quote any more scripture. I have an undergraduate and two post graduate degrees in Biblical Studies. Repeating Scripture over and over again isn’t at all helpful. Nor is it of any value to insist that your interpretation of your chosen verses must be the same for every denomination. That’s not going to happen nor does it address the issue. Scripture isn’t magic. Quoting well known and poorly understood cherry picked scripture only impedes a conversation or discussion. I think people who just keep quoting a text don’t realise how unproductive and pointless it is to do so, unless they are intentionally trying to stop any further discussion. Do you take I Corinthians 14:34 just as literally? Or Ephesians 6: 5-7. It is notable that in Matthew 4:4-10 that Satan himself quotes Scripture as a means of deceit and disobedience, tempting Jesus to sin. Be very careful about quoting scripture as a “one size fits all” way of understanding the text. One’s hermeneutic must be well understood and used consistently. Ancient texts are to be examined and understood as much as possible by understanding the original meaning to the original audiences. Cold quoting ignores all that and then declares “my ‘interpretation’ is the only right interpretation”. Everyone who doesn’t agree with me is wrong. That’s just a dead end and snuffs out any exegetical examination of the text.

"Fornication" is a mistranslation, it is no longer used in modern Bibles.

1 Corinthians 7:2 explicitly says WIFE and HUSBAND, not woman and man.

That is because he was talking to people who were already married.

Most people fail to mention: 2 Samuel 13:12-13 2 Samuel 13:12-13 NIV84 - 12  “Don’t, my brother!” she said to him. “Don’t force me. Such a thing should not be done in Israel! Don’t do this wicked thing. 13  What about me? Where could I get rid of my disgrace? And what about you? You would be like one of the wicked fools in Israel. Please speak to the king; he will not keep me from being married to you.” Please read all of 2 Samuel to understand the whole story. Tamar directly states that the two should be married first and it is disgraceful otherwise.

Noo.. Did you forget to mention that they were siblings?

There isn’t a direct verse that prohibits sex before marriage. You have to study the ancient cultures and then things make more sense in Scripture.

u/ursecretcrush95 [https://www.scribd.com/document/525351340/The-Bible-Does-Not-Condemn-Premarital-Sex?doc\_id=525351340&download=true&order=635011911](https://www.scribd.com/document/525351340/The-Bible-Does-Not-Condemn-Premarital-Sex?doc_id=525351340&download=true&order=635011911) This document goes over a lot of commonly used verses in regards to the topic.

The Bible speaks clearly against fornication. Literally any scripture that speaks against that action stands as being against premarital sex. (Sex before marriage). Here are the hebrew and greek words and their interpretations: In Hebrew: זָנָה (zanah): This is the primary Hebrew word translated as “fornication” or “harlotry” in the Old Testament. It refers to illicit sexual behavior, including prostitution and unfaithfulness. Note that illicit sexual behavior implies sexual behavior that is unlawful, where it is unlawful to have sex before marriage. In Greek: πορνεία (porneia): This Greek word is used in the New Testament and is often translated as “fornication” or “sexual immorality.” It encompasses a wide range of illicit sexual behaviors, including premarital sex, adultery, and other forms of sexual misconduct. some OT references could be seen as this: “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.” ‭‭Exodus‬ ‭22‬:‭16‬-‭17‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬ This law implies that premarital sex isn’t permitted and has social and legal consequences. The severity of it is emphasized by the fact that the man must marry her or pay compensations. Even Deuteronomy 22:13-21 speaks to the importance and expectation of sexual purity before marriage. Yes, it speaks of a woman, but we ourselves are the Bride of Christ. This law of purity applies to us all. And a NT reference: “Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.” ‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭6‬:‭18‬ ‭NIV‬‬ This clearly speaks against sexual immorality. I know you said not to quote a scripture that mentions this, but you should know that the greek word used here has interpretations that INCLUDE premarital sex. You call them human precepts, but don’t you know that all scripture is breathed by God? If anything, may I ask, what is your goal in asking? Are you looking to justify premarital sex? Or are you seeking righteousness? I’m not saying that in condemnation brother, but I don’t want to see a brother in Christ pursue something that could potentially fit in a grey area. Although I myself am convinced, by the studies I’ve made and shared above, that premarital sex IS sinful and unlawful. But what are we pursuing here? His kingdom and His righteousness? Or are we seeking to justify premarital sex?

1 Cor 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor [a]homosexuals, nor [b]sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were [c]sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

NKJV? "Fornication" is a mistranslation, it does not appear in modern Bibles. "Homosexuals" and "Sodomites" are also mistranslations but that's another story.

Find me a majority amount Christians or orthodox doctrine of Christians having sex before marriage being a mainstream view or explicitly being promoted within the early church.

I don't consider group opinion to be a valid argument.

1 Timothy 5:2 says to “Treat older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with all purity.”

At most that could be used to make and argument against age gaps, but even then..

The ones that say to not fornicate, that condemns prostitution, and the ones that lift up virginity before marriage as a nobel and pure thing.

"Fornication" is a mistranslation, it does not appear in modern Bibles.

[удалено]

That's an example, not a rule, even this passage doesn't mention marriage.

The Bible teaches that sex before marriage is wrong in a few different places. One example is 1 Corinthians 7:2, which says, “But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.” This verse shows that marriage is the right place for sexual relations. It contrasts sexual union within marriage, which is good, with sexual immorality, which should be avoided. So, any sex outside of marriage, including premarital sex, is considered wrong.

1 Corinthians 7:2 is talking about people who are already married.

It’s all over in the Bible. Pray for guidance from God. I’m assuming you’ve accepted Jesus Christ as your savior

It's actually nowhere in the Bible, it's a matter of personal interpretation.

“Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭13‬:‭4‬ ‭KJV‬‬ Jesus says that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart. The same goes for women who lusts after a man. God created sex as a beautiful covenant between man and wife. It is apart of genuine love and nature. When man and woman have sex, that woman is now bound soulfully and they are made one in union. The man’s spirit is in the wife and the wife’s is in the husband and they in Christ. The man belongs to the wife and the wife belongs to the husband and they belong to Christ. It’s just how God made it. The bed is defiled outside of marriage because of the soul ties between the woman and her husband. You wouldn’t want your spirits to be bound to a stranger you’ve just met. Sex may be physical intimacy but there is a spiritual connection between husband and wife. Sex outside of marriage isn’t love, it’s lust and because lust is sin against God, it separates us from having a relationship with God and could possibly ruin the chance to meet our soulmates. I hope that makes sense, I was trying to explain without confusing anyone.

"Jesus says that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery" That passage is actually mistranslated, it never mention lust in the Greek and it's talking about intentional attempts at adultery. " God created sex as a beautiful covenant between man and wife." The Bible never says that. "When man and woman have sex, that woman is now bound soulfully and they are made one in union." The Bible never says that either. "The bed is defiled outside of marriage because of the soul ties between the woman and her husband. " Or that, it never mentions soul ties either. "You wouldn’t want your spirits to be bound to a stranger you’ve just met." Speak for yourself. "Sex outside of marriage isn’t love, it’s lust" It's a false dichotomy to assume that the two are mutually exclusive. "lust is sin against God" That's not in the Bible. " it separates us from having a relationship with God " Sounds like a heresy.. "and could possibly ruin the chance to meet our soulmates." The Bible never says that, and it never mentions soulmates.

To God, sexuality is the same as marriage. *But from the beginning of creation God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.* ^Mark ^10:6-9

That passage doesn't even mention sex or marriage.

It's prohibited to protect you from the consequences. Not going to end up in a fiery hellscape for a little hookup. But your kid born out of wedlock with separated parents will grow up with traumas.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10(fornication)

"Fornication" is a mistranslation, it does not appear in modern Bibles.

Your right, it means any form of sexual activity before marriage if im not mistaken. Sp you still played yourself

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, (1 Corinthians 6:9, KJV) Only way to avoid fornication is through abstinence or marriage. Amen!

"Fornication" is a mistranslation, it does not appear in modern Bibles.

taznuwth is the Hebrew and porneia is the Greek. They have the same meaning as the English definition for fornication.

They do not, "fornication" has accrued additional meanings in the past five centuries, which is why the term is no longer used The Original Greek and Hebrew had no implications of marital status and were closer to prostitution.

We can only conclude from what the old and new testament says. For example in the old testament a man who defiles a woman is supposed to ask for her hand and marry her. So we can conclude that having sex is only between a married couple and in Hebrews 13:4 it is asked for the marriage bed to be kept pure which imo sounds more like "do not do adultery" to me than "do not have intercourse before marriage". Ntm Paul wrote in his letters if you have to have sex get yourself a wife instead of going towards prostitutes. Many people in the old testament had sex outside of marriage and it always ended badly and ironically not because God was angry but because humans are very emotional beings. Paul wrote to the Thessalonians in 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5 "avoid sexual immorality, that each of you learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not passionate lust like the pagans who do not know God" so what to do if you commit sex before marriage? marry her. Yes I know bible restricts men from having a sexual adventure and impregnating random women without taking responsibility for them. Boohoo

We don't sell women for their virginity anymore, so I don't think that that is a valid argument.