Why is it so important for Christians that Christ not have sex or be married?
965194
Because it isn't in the handbook
877188
Hi. I am a Christian woman. I am married now, but did have sex before marriage. I was not a Christian at that time, but did struggle with temptations as a Christian before marriage. I give all glory and credit to Jesus for giving my husband and I the strength to resist temptation before marriage. Our first kiss as a couple was at the altar.\nI think that a vast majority of people who claim Christianity as their religion either do not understand their claim well enough for it to be true and sincere in them or they are too caught up in the temptations of life and not caught up in the focus and strength of Christianity - namely Jesus Christ and His accomplishments in life, death, and the resurrection.\n\nIt is disturbing the number of people who claim allegiance to Christ and then fail to follow Him in His commands. None of us is perfect. Biblically we are all sinners in need of our Savior, Christ, and this issue is yet further proof that becoming a Christian isn't an instant fix of flaws. Christianity is meant to be a process of growing in relationship with the Savior who saved us once from eternal damnation in hell and is saving us daily from our own weakness toward sin which brings death into our lives (although some sins bring death of emotional, relational, social, spiritual, etc. not just the regular physical death you think of.) Those people who are truly "saved" and living daily in a relationship with Jesus Christ through His presence in our lives will WANT to or be motivated to "do the right thing" because we want to please Him. Those who claim Christianity as only a Sunday service or social lifestyle simply will not find the strength or reason, when it comes down to temptation, to do the right thing, or they do it for the wrong reason only to give in later. The reason is that they have not really "meet" Jesus Christ and confronted their need for salvation in a sincere way or they have, but they choose the religious box over the relationship that changes a life.\n\nI hope that helps a little. I applaud you in your stand for No Sex Before Marriage. That is an honorable decision that is too foreign in today's society.
697089
In the bible it says that sex before marriage is wrong if there is no commitment between two people. "Marriage" as referred to in the bible is symbolic for a relationship/connection/love/commitment.\n\nThus you don't need to be married (literally) to have sex but you need to be committed.\n\nI feel that it is all about morals and there is no right or wrong. it's your own decision. Personally I believe that sex before commitment/love is wrong
925733
Hopefully nothing. Although Paul speaks well of Love he speaks poorly of relationships and people are constantly misquoting him for thier own purposes. If Paul had his way the human race would have died out about 1900 years ago. Being a virgin was the best but it was better to wed than to burn. Eek. I'll follow Jesus rather than Paul.
404349
It is very untrue. As in most religions, they are not supposed to have premarital sex, but they certainly aren't all over there packing fudge, either. Would you screw a man just cause you couldn't get some p***y?
1151907
I get your point but why take away the 10 commandments? Those are things that hurt people and God wants us to love others. Those commandments were given so that we are educated on what hurts people if we do those things. Honestly the church and man really dont understand the concept of what Christ's love is. ya I like to go out on Sat nights too and I sleep in haha
247175
No, because Jesus never married.
446702
I really don't think it's an issue of what's wrong or right or if you "sin" that's a bad thing.  The point of all the preaching is about what is best for you spiritually.  The people that do the preaching have turned it into what's bad and good and make it a morality issue.  \n\nReally, what you need to think about is what does sex do to you.  Promiscuous sex solely for seeking pleasure can run the risk of addiction, disease, etc., and isn't good for the soul or heart.  In a karmic sense, sex in marriage as an expression of love is less of an attachment - meaning one is less likely to get caught up in it and with love and responsibility of the marriage it kind of nullifies the lust from sex.\n\nSo the question is what is your spiritual quest or goal?  Nothing?  Just getting to heaven?  Or do you want to become a saint?  If you just want to get to heaven then I don't think sex in marriage or with commitment and love will keep you from that.  If you're looking to be a saint then letting go of desires and being celibate is probably necessary.
638858
I am what others call a fundmentalist Christian, and I see NOTHING wrong with sex IN MARRIAGE. This is one of the reasons why God wanted the book in the bible. to affirm the sancity of MARRIAGE between a man and a woman. Also to picture God's love for His people. today it would picture The Love Jesus has for His church.
183508
When you know a person without sex first, and you really want to be with each other all the time, the sex will come naturally and be mindblowing.  Courting use to be the way it was done years ago.  I believe that's why older couples have remained married for so long, because they got to know each other first and decided to committ the rest of their lives to each other before they had sex.
1143390
You are right.  Both biblical Judaism and biblical Christianity forbid such relations before marriage.  Immorality is prevalent in the West because, generally speaking, they have no fear of God.  It is as 2 Timothy 3:5 says, they have a "form" of godly devotion but prove false to its power.  And it is as 2 Timothy 4:3 says, they have gathered preachers to tickle their ears and tell them what they want to hear.  Thus they learn that "as long as you love each other, it is alright."  These ones have watered down the very word they claim to believe.
184755
Celibacy is a legacy of the roman christianism.\n\nIn the early christianism, all apostoles, or most of trhem were married, and wemen were present there.\n\nThetrue reason of celibacy is economic, church wouldnt pay for the priests families. Thru the times, women were gradually stripped from clerical rights or duties, and the cicil rights also. Men were stripped from the rights to have sex in the first place (cant sleep with your wife), and family afterwards (cant have a wife) These councils were:\n\nCouncil Elvira year 306, Spain, Decree 43: "every priest that sleeps with his wife the night before mass will loos his job"\n\nCouncil of Nicea, year 325: Priests, once ordained, cant get married.\n\nCouncil of Laodicea, year 325: Women can not be ordained. this suggests that before there were women in priesthood.\n\nYear 385: Pope Siricio abandons his wife to become pope, it is decreed that priests cant sleep with their wife whatsoever.\n\nforward in time:\nYear 1123: Pope Calixto II: Council of Letrán I decrees that clerical mariages are no longer valid. \n\n1545 to 1563: Council of Trento establishes that celibacy and virginity are superior than marriage.\n\nBut in the twentieth century there is a turn:\n1930: Pope Pío XI: sex can be good and holy.\n1962: Pope John XXIII: Council Vaticano II; marriage is equivalent of virginity.\n\n"Celibacy is not essential for priesthood, it is not a law promulgated by Jesus Christ" Declatation of Pope John Paul II - July 1993
965077
Jesus never condoned sex outside of marriage and is believed to have been celibate for his entire unmarried life. I think he would be closer to the viewpoint of the Catholic Church.\n\nThe Catholic Church believes there is nothing sinful about being homosexual. But homosexuals like all unmarried people are called to celibacy.\n\nThe Church specifically says that homosexuals "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided."\n\nWith love in Christ.
16412
I believe so. It's in the bible. Fornication (sex before marriage) should not be committed. Share that special something with that special someone.
1052194
This is a common misconception about Christianity.  First of all, consider the context.  Paul (an apostle of Jesus Christ), was living and preaching during a time when women had no rights, no social position, no voice, nothing but the name of the husband they were attached to.  And even that was tenuous; under Jewish law, a man could divorce a woman without much cause, but a woman could not divorce her husband.  And divorce was pretty much a death sentence for a woman:  she often wound up destitute and in dire straits.  (Even so in the case of being widowed; wives didn't inherit their husband's wealth...that was passed to the first born son or back to the man's family.)\n\nAnyway, in this climate of gender inequality, Paul laid down godly guidelines for marriage.  "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.  Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church....  Husband, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy.... In this same way, husband ought to love their wives as their own bodies.  He who loves his wife loves himself...."\n\nThere's a lot about ancient Jewish culture that, if understood, helps us to understand correctly just what Paul was saying.  He wasn't saying wives are 2nd class citizens in the house; on the contrary!  He was saying wives are equal in position to their husbands, and that husbands (who previously had treated their wives shabbily, but blamelessly under the law), were to change their way of thinking and treat their wives with dignity, respect and love.  \n\nThe passage quoted above has far more to say to husbands than it does to wives.  And consider the following verse:  "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her..."  (Ephesians 5:25).  How did Christ love his church?  He DIED for his church!  He gave up all the rights he had as the Son of God, humbled himself even to the point of death on a cross (the worst and most humiliating form of Roman execution there was), and laid down his life so that his "bride" (the church) could live.  He did it because he LOVED his "bride" and had the best in mind for "her."  That is pretty heavy stuff!  And a HUGE responsibility for a husband!  It means that a husband is to be humble, just as the wife is to be!\n\nWives are to respond to this type of love with submission.  Does this mean wives have no voice?  Certainly not!  What it does mean is that a household needs a leader.  God has appointed husbands for that role.  A household also needs a follower to that leader; God has appointed wives for that role.  The point of these roles is to serve as an example to others of the relationship of Jesus (the Head) to his church (the "bride"), as well as the relationship of God the Father (Head) to Christ the Son (in submission).  And when a husband and wife are living according to their respective roles, there is peace and harmony in the home.  I know because I have lived in peace for 16 years with a man who understands what the Scriptures really mean.  And believe me...I'm no meek woman.  He and I make decisions together; but if there is a decision to be made where we're in conflict, it's my role to submit.  I don't like it, but I do it because my submission to my husband is first and foremost a matter of submission to God and His word.  Sometimes that's the only way I can do it.  And when I DO (and when my husband is "loving me sacrificially"), we are both blessed in ways we never thought possible.\n\nPeople put so much emphasis on only Paul's teachings regarding husbands and wives, and put way too much emphasis on the wife's role of submission.  It's really not that big of a deal when it's applied properly.  But one thing people conveniently overlook is the beginning of that pass
1164713
That is a question that I have pondered myself and a very good one might I add. God created sex, and sexual organs or feelings. It's good, clean and healthy. But the church I think view it differently in the aspect of "holier than thou" or than the world when its really not the issue. Sex is derogatory in the world in most cases such as rape, adultery etc. Therefore the church feels the need to be set apart because "religious people" don't do those things...Well that is not the case, I feel the same way that even kids in the church need to know about rape, adultery, and etc. Huh even some pastor's that I know of committed adultery in the church.
1010413
I am not a Christian but my best friend is, and the truth is that true Christians that are actually devoted to church and go everyday don't even follow this rule.  I know my best friend does't.  According to the bible, thats the only reason you're suppose to have sex, to reproduce.  But no, not from whai I know and not from what I have been told from a Christian.  Christians do have sex for recreational purposes.