Why is fornication a sin...

Why is fornication a sin? I understand one night stands are morally wrong but what’s wrong with sex in a straight monogamous relationship before marriage?

Attached: C6BCFC91-028B-4BDC-B212-73688E798250.jpeg (450x448, 25.08K)

Other urls found in this thread:

dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles3b.htm#122
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

That its before marriage, read your Bible

if you can't wait until marriage it means sex for you is more important than marriage. Marriage is a Sacrament. Of course putting sexual desire over a Sacrament is a sin, user

Because God says so.

Attached: do-not-be-deceived.jpg (960x960, 912.42K)

Just get married.

nice meme

it's not a meme

Traditional marriage is.
Not the perversion of future no fault divorces our legal system supports.

what false bible translation is that from?

I used to agree with that but now that whole “it’s more important” thing seems silly to me now. If two people love each other why not? What is marriage in the eyes of God even?

Are you functionally illiterate or just b8ing? I hope for you it's the latter.

Hebdidn't say that. He just asked what version it is.

Sex is rightly ordered to its unitive and procreative purposes. The proper place for procreation is in a family. Easy.

Not to be that guy, but nowadays there is a huge divorce industry going on.

It has become profitable for many THOTs to make tactical fast marriages and get handsomely rewarded in cash after divorce.

If divorce was forbbiden I would agree with every anti-fornication post ITT. But we don't live in such a time.

But with divorce industry going on delaying and being very reluctant about marriage saves your family assets.

Because you're not in an actual committed relationship under God. It's easy to jump from relationship to relationship having sex. Sex was created by God for procreation and the ultimate act of love. Sex without a marriage bond cheapens the relationship to something animalistic. It doesn't last and prevents love from developing.

So commit already instead of having the benefits of marriage without the hard part!

You wanna know why? Here's why. Because consequence free sex necessarily leads to consequences. Because biking in Europe and making money is no exchange for raising a child. Pray for this woman.

Only because the men they married were spineless enough to let them walk all over them, or aggravated their spouses to wanting nothing to do with them (and honestly there is no shortage of this today). And yes, I know that we can extrapolate the causes this whole issue from the man and women themselves, their families, friends to society, but as much of a patriarchalist as I am, if a marriage fails, it's probably the man's fault for being weak and refusing to take control, or being ecessively zealous about it (which is in turn just another form of weakness). If you are a married man and don't look to St Joseph as your guide and inspiration in the married state, then forget it.

This is a defeatist attitude. "Once upon a time" is not a legitimate defence, and it's the same one used by any lukewarm sort when confronted with a controversial topic.

I thought it would have a pro-life ending, but she shows absolutely no remorse. Even wanted to look at the bloodied aborted fetus when it was taken out and dumped in a bag. Amazing.

Look at what Thomas Aquinas wrotr back in the middle ages. That should at least give you an outline of an argument.

dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles3b.htm#122

and if those two don't end up being married the partner they were sleeping with will be listed as a premarital sexual partner.

Those graphs are definitely still relevant, whether you originally saw them that way or not.

Good work, user.

I'd rather not. She seems like a terrible person.

All the more reason to pray for her

That turns the holy mystery of marriage into just being God's approval for consommating one another. Come on now.

You've never had premarital sex, huh? It's good, but then you clearly show you don't know what it's like.

Marriage is a sacrament. It mystically unites two persons so that they become one, in spirit and sacramentally, thus uniting them also to Christ. It crowns a man and a woman as the head of the household, which is itself a church. Man becomes united to woman just as Christ is united to His Church.

You shouldn't become one flesh without being one in marriage first. You are not yet mystically united and submitted to one another, so you're just desecrating a body that is an icon of God.

This is just a whole bunch of cases of someone going " X is related to Y therefore X causes Y" ignoring the tonne of factors that cause X that likely also influence Y.

I wish people wouldn't do this, it doesn't serve anyone well and it's just dishonest.

No, Paul says so. I consider myself a Christian, but I've yet to believe that the Holy Spirit was speaking through him.
I can't believe that things like hair length are actually cared about by God.

cause babies deserve stable mothers and fathers, not "boyfriends and girlfriends", and premarital sex will result in babies if you're doing it right and raw

What if they live in a country where it takes months to be married? There are some countries where the government interferes too much in people's lives.

I've been waiting 7 years to marry my girlfriend because we were underage for most of that time, and now she needs to become a catechumen and convert before the Church can marry us.

There are no excuses. Wait until marriage, because you're not sacamentally united until then.

This guy gets it

I knew a couple in college who had been together since high school and they were waiting until marriage to preserve her purity. I thought to myself, "Well, good for them! Nice to see a young couple engaging in moral actions." Found out later they were doing butt stuff because "anal doesn't count".

I died a little.

You're confusing the Mosaic Law (Old Covenant) with the New Covenant which is to Love God with all your heart, soul, and being. Answer me this question, under which Covenant did Adam live under after the Fall? Apparently somebody had to teach Cain and Abel how to perform sacrifices in the first place.
O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. (Psalm 119:97)

Attached: bible.png (800x800, 19.02K)

...

big wew

Attached: 1499279083503.jpg (564x428, 52.54K)

tell me another one

Attached: 4ac700acbe3126b085c4cb41e399a1ed3cc86ca15b254477945795fc558dcb9d.png (480x454, 332.64K)

How drunkard-like is "not going to heaven" drunk?

Attached: checkmate.png (700x635, 221.91K)

The TR.

It's called "common law marriage". Depends on your jurisdiction whether the courts recognize such a marriage.

That's for legal purposes. Holy matrimony has nothing to do with whether your government recognizes it, only your church. If you want to be married, you need to make the vows in front of an ordained minister.

Same goes for the rest of you in this thread. Legally endorsed 'marriage' is a sham that we acquiesce to because it makes the paperwork easier. If you've said the vows in front of a priest, you're married, regardless of whether you have a marriage license. If you haven't said the vows in front of an ordained minister, you're not married, whether you have a marriage license or not.

As to OP's original question, there are only two possibilities here. Either:

1) The couple is going to get married eventually, in which case there's no reason not to wait for marriage, especially if you get off your duff and marry her. Waiting was one of the best decisions I ever made, and not waiting causes a whole host of issues, the greatest of which is separating yourself from God by sinning. The Bible doesn't say to wait until you really love somebody. It says to wait until marriage.

2) The couple is not going to get married, in which case you have not only sinned against the Lord, you have committed adultery against your future wife.

Either get married or keep it in your pants, and repent for even thinking such a thing is ok.

You seem to be misdirection here. It was paul who said that men should have short hair and women should have long hair.

*misdirecting

The Bible talks about marriage many times, but think about what the New Testament talks about the marriage procedure. It talks about wedding feasts and the groom arriving at night with a shout. Ordained ministers doing specific ceremonies notably do not make an appearance.

Think about the Acts of the Apostles. Many of the people in it were married. Yet when the apostles baptize someone and his entire household, there is no mention of performing a Christian marriage ceremony so that the man and his wife are no longer living in sin. Marriage in Greece and Rome was considered a civil contract, and the apostles implicitly accepted its validity. In fact marriage as a Christian religious ceremony didn't get its start until later.

What, then, makes a marriage?

Having sex is a sin tbh but due to the coldness of your hearts God pardons you.

God is actually ok with homosexuality and rape, so long as you open up your heart to his warmth.

Perhaps he's talking about proper gender roles instead of literally hair length?

Proof on that.

I guess you'll find out once you end up in the place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. I'm not here to win an argument, just giving you a message, it's up to you to do whatever you want with it.

You're just as much a Christian as a Mormon. Have you forgotten Matthew 7:21?

Attached: pasiondecristo.jpg (420x292, 27.15K)

The bible doesn't actually define what makes a a marriage. The bare minimum it seems is sex.

This also answers OPs question - sex in a straight monogamous relationship before marriage isn't a thing, at that point you're basically married but without the pompous ceremony and government acknowledgement. And yes, this means that a breakup from a relationship he talks about would be the same as divorce. And we know what Jesus thinks about divorce.

There's a reason that Paul said that marriage is probably not worth it.

Grover has been around 50 years now, or 18418 days. That's only 57 sins a day.
He breathes, say, 45,000 times a day.
His every breath not 279% devoted to God is a sin, for the one who gave us breath deserves every one of them back.

That should say

You give in to desires of flesh and what good comes out of it? I've had numerous partners in straight monogamous relationships. Not a single one led to marriage and our God given purpose and joy of family.

It is written (Tobit 4:13): "Take heed to keep thyself . . . from all fornication, and beside thy wife never endure to know a crime." Now crime denotes a mortal sin. Therefore fornication and all intercourse with other than one's wife is a mortal sin.

Further, nothing but mortal sin debars a man from God's kingdom. But fornication debars him, as shown by the words of the Apostle (Galatians 5:21), who after mentioning fornication and certain other vices, adds: "They who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God." Therefore simple fornication is a mortal sin.

Further, it is written in the Decretals (XXII, qu. i, can. Praedicandum): "They should know that the same penance is to be enjoined for perjury as for adultery, fornication, and wilful murder and other criminal offenses." Therefore simple fornication is a criminal or mortal sin.

Without any doubt we must hold simple fornication to be a mortal sin, notwithstanding that a gloss [St. Augustine, QQ. in Deut., qu. 37 on Deuteronomy 23:17], says: "This is a prohibition against going with whores, whose vileness is venial." For instead of "venial" it should be "venal," since such is the wanton's trade.
On order to make this evident, we must take note that every sin committed directly against human life is a mortal sin. Now simple fornication implies an inordinateness that tends to injure the life of the offspring to be born of this union. For we find in all animals where the upbringing of the offspring needs care of both male and female, that these come together not indeterminately, but the male with a certain female, whether one or several; such is the case with all birds: while, on the other hand, among those animals, where the female alone suffices for the offspring's upbringing, the union is indeterminate, as in the case of dogs and like animals.
Now it is evident that the upbringing of a human child requires not only the mother's care for his nourishment, but much more the care of his father as guide and guardian, and under whom he progresses in goods both internal and external. Hence human nature rebels against an indeterminate union of the sexes and demands that a man should be united to a determinate woman and should abide with her a long time or even for a whole lifetime.
Hence it is that in the human race the male has a natural solicitude for the certainty of offspring, because on him devolves the upbringing of the child: and this certainly would cease if the union of sexes were indeterminate.

This union with a certain definite woman is called matrimony; which for the above reason is said to belong to the natural law. Since, however, the union of the sexes is directed to the common good of the whole human race, and common goods depend on the law for their determination, it follows that this union of man and woman, which is called matrimony, is determined by some law.
Wherefore, since fornication is an indeterminate union of the sexes, as something incompatible with matrimony, it is opposed to the good of the child's upbringing, and consequently it is a mortal sin.

Nor does it matter if a man having knowledge of a woman by fornication, make sufficient provision for the upbringing of the child: because a matter that comes under the determination of the law is judged according to what happens in general, and not according to what may happen in a particular case.

Probably if it becomes life consuming, like you need to drink every day. There's nothing really wrong some drinks every now and then though.

Attached: Christchan drinking.png (640x693, 140.1K)

Sex is meant to imitate and show the sheer, powerful unity of the covenantal relationship first between the Persons of the Trinity, second between God and His people, and finally to complete the image of God, man and wife, as one flesh.

To copulate without covenant is to mock that image of God, hence why fornicators are evil.

"And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability" (2 peter 3:15-17)
Begone Muhammad!

Which comes from the Mosaic Law first, which also forms the basis of the law. And those who belittle the least of the laws of God, Moses or not, will be least in the Kingdom. (See Matthew 5:17-19, James 2:10) Begone Marcion!

No, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is about literal hair length because it fits the proper gender roles. (And btw, a woman's long hair serves as a covering per verse 15c, so she does not need an artificial one, so it's not about artificial head coverings either as some would believe. In fact, to make women wear coverings yet allowing them to cut the length of their hair is perhaps more heinous against God's created sexual roles. God hates the lukewarm)

Attached: huging each other.jpg (500x389, 80.61K)

^Never read the Bibles' definition of marriage, eh?
In a marriage, the husband provides for the wife and children. The wife is subordinate to her husband, and it is the role of both to raise their children to be upright members of the faith. It is clearly outlined as more than just sex. There are also specific moral laws in Leviticus for marriage. Jesus taught the importance of a lifelong marriage, and how it is sacred. For God Himself to use marriage as a symbol for His love for the Church shows how tremendously important it is, enough to be called a sacrament.
It is far from being "probably not worth it", you completely misunderstand what Paul is saying in that passage.

He did not say that.

When will you guys, every ascetic 4th cen. onward, admit you abused 1 Corinthians 7 to hell and back to grossly beat married people and singles over the head with false shame?

absolute madman

pretty sure Christ would still consider that a lawful marriage

Who? When?

Marriage has always been considered a blessed vocation, but celibacy done in imitation of Our Lord is of equal merit; no, even better.

Fornication harms your marriage. You're creating deep spiritual ties with someone who is not your partner, and your eventual marital bond will be less because of it. Heck, you don't even need a bible to know this. Even a secular humanist can derive a morality for celibacy before marriage using purely biological imperatives.

Attached: DeNXOVgVQAAo4qA.jpg (960x960, 95.2K)

Because there is nothing holding you together. Christian marriage is a certain way for a reason. When you go up to the altar and say that you are going to be with this person until death, you are making a promise that you cannot keep on your own. You do not know what lies ahead.

Marriage is important because when you get married in a church, surrounding by a congregation, they will hold you to that marriage.

When your love fades and it's not as fun anymore having sex with this person, you still have to stay together and build something meaningful. There's no leaving.

Because marriage is hard. It's the ultimate act of empathy, of one person relating to another (man to woman, which is significant also because men and women are naturally different from each other, you need to consider the "Other" to make it work). If you bail when you encounter your first problem, you just end up both taking your problems with you into your next relationship and destroying that too. Because you never resolved them.

"Monogamous long term relationships" are a meme. Most of the time they last five or ten years and disintegrate and you move onto the next one which will probably be shorter. All the while, you keep that escape pod ready knowing that if you don't like what's going on you can leave and justify it to yourself.

I think a lot of you are missing OP's point. He's saying that Paul is the only man strictly against sex before marriage. We are trying to find out the desire of God, and in the Biblical text, the only person explicitly against sex before marriage as done by the priest seems to be Paul. Now I can get into the usual cases and list the arguments and counterarguments, but what we are trying to determine is where in the Bible does it show that it is God's will that sex before marriage not be done? Before answering, give an example that is clearly stating or implying sex before marriage and not an overall fornication that has the meaning of general sexual sin, which is what we are trying to clarify in this case.

Consent to sex is consent to pregnancy, and by extension parenthood. Every time you have sex outside of wedlock, you're consenting to a child being conceived and being born outside of wedlock. Can you see the problem with this?

Yes. But what do you call wedlock? Does it require the service of a priest? And most importantly what is God's will? I see the social problem you are trying to point out that may arise, however here we are trying to find out what He wishes first and foremost

A relationship that is non-sexual is more pure than a relationship that revolves around lust.

Well, in the Catholic understanding, the sacrament of marriage takes place when a baptised man and a baptised woman consent to be married to each other until death. The priest is there only to witness the sacrament.

Isn't it pretty obvious? Do you think that He wants all children to be born to a loving home, or to an already broken home?

why is anything a sin? Let's all go to a gay orgy and do heroin, we're not hurting any body.

Attached: asianssuck.png (983x1024, 143.31K)

Unfortunately no, morality isn't clear and neither does God's will seem to be either. There needs to be scriptural evidence or something will not be taken as God's will. And you are not addressing fornication there, which is the topic

Well, okay. Do you really think that Christians got the issue of premarital sex wrong for 2000 years, and only now do we understand what God really wants?

This is the problem with Protestantism: You can interpret Scripture any way you want. Most often Protestants do it so that Scripture conforms to our sinful tendencies.

First you are once again not addressing the issue. I won't respond again if you do not directly address fornication, and why it is against God's Will. I am not a protestant, I am a Catholic, and while I understand the nature of tradition, you need to address the issue at hand. This is the problem with Catholics since time immemorial, since we do not address the issues directly, and only rely on intuition, which is not always right.

Also, if you refuse to accept Church teaching on fornication, you are by definition NOT Catholic.

I do accept them but I also question them. But goodbye

The scriptures, and the natural order, teach us that the two shall become one flesh upon the consummation of their marriage, i.e. sex. The two become one flesh, and you are always connected to the person you've had sex with, spiritually and physically, just look at how women retain the DNA of men they've had sex with, regardless of pregnancy. A monogamous relationship outside of marriage has literally no reason to not have a marriage ceremony, thereby making it a natural marriage.

To be Catholic you must accept the baseline of all other Catholic teaching: That the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ, and that the Holy Spirit guides it so that it never teaches error in matters of faith and morality.

If you question one of its teachings on matters of morality, you are by extension questioning God Himself. This is the cardinal sin of pride.

You need to get yourself on the bible and get off your sinking ship to hell before it's too late

I never understood these questions asking us to psychoanalyze what God was thinking when He made these rules.

Modernist pick up lines

Attached: ....jpg (513x1092, 383.98K)