Ok,ok! So I slept through all those years of Bible study! But seriously, can the SDopers tell me where the Bible says you should remain a virgin until being married? Or, is this simply some noble opinion from darker ages to avoid bringing shame unto her family? If the latter, what is the origin of this stigma?
(When answering, it would help me if you could please specify if you’re citing a passage from the Old or New Testament.)
Maybe I’m naive? But, the Boards are a great chance to ask everything I wanted to know but was afraid to ask…
But the question is, what did God endow humans with sexuality for? (I presume in response to this sort of question, the presumption of a God who gives laws, and specifically the one of the Bible, is a reasonable axiom.)
And the general answer is that it was for two or three purposes: procreation, of course, and oneness. I think it’s a reasonable assumption that having a father present and active in a child’s life, in addition to a mother, is a good thing. Unrestricted sex without contraception (which has only been something one can be confident of within the lifetimes of about half the adults on this board) results in children with no committed father present and intimately connected with them. And, for Christians, Paul gets positively lyrical on the idea that when you make the two-backed beast, you’re not just getting metaphorical – there’s a real, if mystical, bond between the participants in intercourse.
Logical conclusion is that the God-given purpose of sex is best achieved within marriage. Since we’re supposed to give God our best efforts, anything else is by definition sin.
Remember that for the majority of the time this rule held sway, there was only a year or two between completing puberty and arriving at marriageable age – time enough for courtship and arriving at conclusions as to what you wanted in a spouse, but not an interminable period of adolescent frustration. That’s mostly a Victorian addendum to the basic Christian concept.
(It would be helpful if a Jew could speak to this issue on the basis of the Jewish understanding, which I don’t believe myself competent to express.)
Jesus also says that lusting after a woman you’re not married to (let alone forking her) is adultery, so at the very least, you’re sinning in that respect, even if there’s no specific “until marriage” clause.
…presuming that you equate any premarital sex with the fornication of which Paul warns. I’m not prepred to argue that one way or the other. (Do not prsume to quote the dictionary on the definition of “fornication,” unless you have proof that Paul had a Merriam-Webster handy to check words as he was writing.)
I’d imagine in an ancient society that lacked effective means of birth control, yet where “illegitimate” births were still a severe taboo, a “no sex before marriage” rule would be pretty sure to pop up.
The NWTHS, by the way, is the edition used by the Jehovah’s Witnesses - or was 15 years ago, anyway, when I bought my copy from the guy living downstairs. It’s quite good … a reasonably good index and a few appendices. Next time they knock on your door, make their day and ask them to sell you a Bible!
Interesting. Westcott is a classic scholar, less than respected by modern scholarshp, but not without influence still. (He was not a JW.)
My understanding of porneia was “sex for thrills,” one-night stands and the like, as opposed to sex between people in a relationship. (Following the law of some states, the dictionary does define it as any sex by unmarried persons – but that’s derivative of a traditional interpretation of Paul’s meaning, rather than the other way around.
You can have sex with her, but then you’ve got to marry her:
From Exodus 22:15-16
If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, he must pay a dowry and must marry her.
If her father refuses to allow him to marry her, then he must pay [the father] the usual dowry money for virgins
Of course, if she’s already married or betrothed and you have sex with her, you’re both, if you’ll excuse the pun, screwed.
When completed, this Sumerian Dictionary will date to roughly 2,700 B.C.E. I’ve been searching, and cannot find a confirmed dictionary that predates this one that has been compiled with any kind of scientific and historical rigor.
Assuming that we all believe in the calendar currently in use ( opposed to the Jewish Calendar, which makes today Sun, 17 August 2003 - 19th of Av, 5763 ), then this Sumerian calendar predates the Crucifixion by roughly 2,734 years. Give or take a month.
Paul may not have had a Mirriam-Webster, but it is undoubtedly true that formal language predated the writing of Paul. He could have well consulted a current dictionary (sic).
