| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| berkano |
Posted - 04 Nov 2006 : 03:48:22
I just listened to a radio talk show host berate a man who is living with a woman who is not a Christian. I read an article on sex outside of marriage between an unmarried man and unmarried woman in the truth section that said such is not a sin.
http://ecclesia.org/truth/women_sin.html
I wonder if anyone has thoughts on this.
No, I am not shacking up with anyone, no I do not have a girlfriend, and no, I am not involved in any kind of sexual relationship. Just curious about this topic because if Richard Anthony's article is right, then people are calling sin that which is not condemned in God's word.
Berkano |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Thomas Jeffrey |
Posted - 28 Dec 2009 : 17:11:37
Christians are to be the salt of the Earth. Salt flavors, cleanses, heals, and sometimes stings. What this means is that Christian ways are different than those of the world. To recapture some of this flavor, sometimes we need to remember the 'old ways', which on most accounts should be the present ways.
Remember the saying, "when will you make an honest woman out of her?" It boils down to coverture. An unwed woman who is living with a man, and enjoying all of the 'benefits' that marriage has to offer, still does not have his name, or Lawful cover. This is likened to a bondmaid at best and a harlot at worst. This may be okay and accepted in the worldly ways of things, but not in the Christian ways.
This is not to say that an unwed man and unwed woman, living separately, who need the occassional company and comfort that each other can provide, can't get together once in a while. (As long as they aren't sleeping around with others as well, for that is 'fornication' in the old sense.) It means that if they are living in the same house, they need to get married, or at least proclaim their spiritual marriage publicly for her sake. Not only to keep from being looked down upon by other women or talked about by men in the community, but for cover.
When a woman leaves the protection of her father's house, she has no cover. Women need the protection of Lawful cover. Only the man can provide this cover by claiming publicly, with her consent, that they are married and one flesh. This is what Christians do.
If a woman is living with a man as husband and wife, and sharing the bed, they are already spiritually married whether or not they have a formal wedding. If they are living together as husband and wife, they are married in God's eyes. If they refuse to recognize this and claim it, only then do they risk sin by a future separation (should they split) of what God has joined. Remember, we must look at the spirit of the law.
BTW, a Christian man walking faithfully in The Way would not be living with a non-Christian woman in that manner anyway. This man obviously needs to rethink his position, but at the same time, he should not be publicly berated. |
| yardstick |
Posted - 24 Dec 2009 : 01:16:11
quote:
Originally posted by Linc
Excellent article. I only have one small problem with it. Richard Anthony doesn't appear to have fully embraced the return of the institution of slavery when he wrote it. When you have Biblical slavery, then you understand peoples relationships to each other much better. A daughter belongs to her father. When a man sleeps with a virgin, he is stealing; that is, he is violating another man's property rights.
Apart from the weakness of neglecting a fathers property rights, and his authority over his offspring, the article is good. But it very much is important to respect fathers property rights in their daughters.
Also, because Richard didn't understand slavery, he didn't correctly interpret the case where a man seduces a slave-wive. The reason they are not put to death is for reasons of justice. The slave girl is not killed because she is her masters property. He has a right to her services, even though she did sin against him by adultery. And because the slave girl will not be killed, it would be unjust to kill the man. For the law must be applied equally.
This judgement is further enforced by the penalty to the woman who grabs another mans testicles in a fight. She is not killed, but her hand is chopped off. Again, the reason is that although the woman sinned, her husband has a right to her services and shouldn't be punished for her sins.
Justice is at issue here. Just because you may get off with a lighter penalty, doesn't mean you didn't sin. Justice is corrective and reparative, not punitive.
Good article Anthony. I hope I've given you food for thought.
Linc
Interesting comment. How does this work with respect to the 7 year rule regarding slaves? In particular:
quote:
...When you have Biblical slavery, then you understand peoples relationships to each other much better. A daughter belongs to her father...
Your comment here implies the daughter is the slave of the father? Perhaps you could clarify? |
| OldModelT |
Posted - 23 Dec 2009 : 21:41:44
I have a question about the true biblical meaning of the word "fornication" versus the carnal Roman Catholic meaning. I do want to know its precise meaning so it can be avoided but I am very certain that it does not necessarily mean "sex between unmarried people" as used to regulate and browbeat the members of corporate "churches" who have joined themselves (adultery? fornication?) to the god of this world. I think that "premarital sex" is an oxymoron because sex constitutes marriage. I know that fornication can take place with married people as well as with unmarried people, and that it is also a sin against one's own body. So what is it? Gluttony? Smoking? Drunkenness? Drugs? It must be something that replaces the worship of our Lord and Saviour since that is essence of our existance (Mt 4) — whom do we chose to worship? |
| Linc |
Posted - 11 Nov 2006 : 02:08:32
Excellent article. I only have one small problem with it. Richard Anthony doesn't appear to have fully embraced the return of the institution of slavery when he wrote it. When you have Biblical slavery, then you understand peoples relationships to each other much better. A daughter belongs to her father. When a man sleeps with a virgin, he is stealing; that is, he is violating another man's property rights.
Apart from the weakness of neglecting a fathers property rights, and his authority over his offspring, the article is good. But it very much is important to respect fathers property rights in their daughters.
Also, because Richard didn't understand slavery, he didn't correctly interpret the case where a man seduces a slave-wive. The reason they are not put to death is for reasons of justice. The slave girl is not killed because she is her masters property. He has a right to her services, even though she did sin against him by adultery. And because the slave girl will not be killed, it would be unjust to kill the man. For the law must be applied equally.
This judgement is further enforced by the penalty to the woman who grabs another mans testicles in a fight. She is not killed, but her hand is chopped off. Again, the reason is that although the woman sinned, her husband has a right to her services and shouldn't be punished for her sins.
Justice is at issue here. Just because you may get off with a lighter penalty, doesn't mean you didn't sin. Justice is corrective and reparative, not punitive.
Good article Anthony. I hope I've given you food for thought.
Linc
quote:
Originally posted by berkano
I just listened to a radio talk show host berate a man who is living with a woman who is not a Christian. I read an article on sex outside of marriage between an unmarried man and unmarried woman in the truth section that said such is not a sin.
http://ecclesia.org/truth/women_sin.html
I wonder if anyone has thoughts on this.
No, I am not shacking up with anyone, no I do not have a girlfriend, and no, I am not involved in any kind of sexual relationship. Just curious about this topic because if Richard Anthony's article is right, then people are calling sin that which is not condemned in God's word.
Berkano
|
|
|
