Is fornication sinful?

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Surprised to say, for perhaps the first time since Cassius joined, I actually sort of agree with him.  (And I really admire his honesty!)

Premarital sex has never been something I take lightly in spite of my liberal attitude on pretty much everything else.  Indeed, sex shouldn't be taken lightly, and I don't think one has to believe in X, Y, Z to agree with that.  It is - or at least, should be, in my opinion - taken as a strong expression of love.  And, I can't help but feel that it's given such little value nowadays what with its commercialization and popularization.  Of course, it's always been abused and taken to bizarre extremes, but we've evolved to the point where sex is merely another way of pleasing oneself.

So, I guess I can't come up with a one-word answer for this.  Promiscuity is something I will always take issue with, but it's not the be-all end-all of society and a universal condemnation of premarital sex isn't going to change much of anything.  You can be as pure as you want (or think you are) for not masturbating.  If you think abstaining from that stuff will make up for your countless other faults, good for you.  But, if that's as far as Christians are willing to go, then we really need to assess whether or not this is all worth it.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

How many people who have posted here have had sex?

Well, I for one haven't, and in all honesty sex has become less and less appealing to me as time goes on, probably because I'm becoming less idle than I used to be and have better goals to think about.  So, whether I die a virgin or not is of zero concern to me.  I don't see how that discredits an honest, personal opinion, though.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Something I should have touched upon more in my post: early last month, I wanted to hear what Christians in my 'circle' thought about pornography, and moreover, sexuality and culture in general.  Of course, few people were willing to partake in the discussion given that it's not something most are comfortable with being open about.  But, the guy who runs the page told me something that I found satisfying, even though it wasn't exactly the clear-cut answer I was seeking in the first place.

That is, in short, pornography wasn't as much the discomfort I found as it was sexuality.  America, through its popularization of sex, shows all the symptoms of the sexually oppressed.  However, Christians should be circumspect in pronouncements of harm without real facts and evidence.  This can easily be extended to premarital sex.  You can be as vague or as detailed about how you think God wants you to behave, but at the end of the day, it will always be regarded as opinion wrapped in religious packaging.  That doesn't settle the argument.  Promiscuity clearly has a strong, poisonous trait to it and can prevent one from functioning in a healthy way, but that doesn't mean everyone who has sex without taking their marriage vows (which is well beyond the majority of the world population) is 'evil.'

Indeed, as I have implied, I think there are strong secular arguments to be made against taking sex for granted or using it as a means of self-gratification, but consent and harm done is always key.  All people should be expected to oppose coercion or involvement of children in sex, but failing that, let's go back to what we absolutely know is wrong and uncompromising.  Don't use sex as yet another excuse to establish hierarchy be it based on gender, sexuality, or moral character.  God is still going to be God if you "miss the mark" (literally what "sin" means) or not.

I realize there was little point in me having wrote that given that everyone here has pretty much made up their mind on how the Bible should be interpreted, if taken seriously at all, but that's what's come to be my 'rule of thumb' throughout my reading.  If you still think that memorizing Bible verses and having all the right opinions on wedge issues makes you a good or better person, then great.  Do what makes you happy.  Just don't use it as a way to play "gotcha" on someone who isn't playing by the same arbitrary rules as you are, and don't think that using horror stories and ultimately toothless threats is going to make people conform the way you want people to conform.  I promise you - you will lose.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Yes, there can be moderates in any religion, but moderate Muslims and Jews are going to go to hell just like conservative Muslims and Jews. Neither religion places any faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, so the adherents of both will not go to heaven if they continue on their path. 

Hahaha.  What a sad, sorry little excuse for a human being you truly are.

I'm just glad that this sense of certainty and false security you've created for yourself is enough for you to get by in this life.  After all, most of us are going to hell, as you said.  Shouldn't someone be happy?

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Yes, there can be moderates in any religion, but moderate Muslims and Jews are going to go to hell just like conservative Muslims and Jews. Neither religion places any faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, so the adherents of both will not go to heaven if they continue on their path. 

Hahaha.  What a sad, sorry little excuse for a human being you truly are.

You realize there are tons of Christians who believe this, right? You may find it disgusting, but it's hardly unique to this guy. I'm pretty sure most large Christian denominations teach that view.

And an increasing number of them are not.

Even if 99% of Christian churches taught it, why should that change my perspective?  We're only going by what we think is right here, are we not?

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Hahaha.  What a sad, sorry little excuse for a human being you truly are.

Scott, do you believe non-Progressive Christians are going to hell for our beliefs?

Note: I don't quite believe in what Never Convinced posted, I believe in Invincible Ignorance, but that's beside the point.

Well, because you guys don't interpret the Bible the same way I do, I'd say yes - you are most certainly going to Hell.

Does that make you feel better?

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Hahaha.  What a sad, sorry little excuse for a human being you truly are.

Scott, do you believe non-Progressive Christians are going to hell for our beliefs?

Note: I don't quite believe in what Never Convinced posted, I believe in Invincible Ignorance, but that's beside the point.

Well, because you guys don't interpret the Bible the same way I do, I'd say yes - you are most certainly going to Hell.

Does that make you feel better?

No, because now I'm unsure of whether or not you're being serious and am also unsure if you were of what your actual answer would be.

While I find it a tad amusing that you couldn't tell whether or not I was being serious, I'm mostly saddened that it wasn't obvious.

As far as my personal opinion of Hell goes, I've already spoken about it.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Yes, there can be moderates in any religion, but moderate Muslims and Jews are going to go to hell just like conservative Muslims and Jews. Neither religion places any faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, so the adherents of both will not go to heaven if they continue on their path. 

Hahaha.  What a sad, sorry little excuse for a human being you truly are.

You realize there are tons of Christians who believe this, right? You may find it disgusting, but it's hardly unique to this guy. I'm pretty sure most large Christian denominations teach that view.

And an increasing number of them are not.

Even if 99% of Christian churches taught it, why should that change my perspective?  We're only going by what we think is right here, are we not?

Sure, I'm just pointing out that Never doesn't believe that stuff because he's a demented weirdo. He believes it because it's what mainstream Christianity teaches.

Thank you, Speaker Deus.

Yes, I believe hell is a very real place, but I don't want anyone to go there. Honestly, I am unhappy at the thought of Scott being condemned to hell for not becoming a Christian, and knowing that any of my current non-Christian friends and family (like my grandmother and several of my aunts, uncles, and cousins) will be condemned to hell because they did not accept salvation before they die.

I don't believe that Islam and Judaism are paths to heaven; only Christianity is. I can be a very forward person, and I will let someone know that I am a Christian upfront and that I believe faith in Christ is the only way to heaven if asked about my religious beliefs. I can never back down from that, because I want as many people as possible to go to heaven. If that makes me a "sad excuse of a human being", so be it. I am not trying to start a flame war here.

And many of those religious people you say are going to hell, quite ironically, think you are going to hell for being a Christian and not embracing their religion.  But that's beside the point.

I think I've made it plainly obvious on here that I am a Christian.  I would never compromise on what I say I believe, but I realize my beliefs deviate so far from what the fundamentalists believe that, in some circles, I would not be considered a Christian.  And I am absolutely fine with that.  If I don't pass a person's litmus test, I don't care what group they want to lump me with that isn't Christian.  If I need to be excluded from that person's vision of Heaven for them to feel more righteous and more secure about themselves, who am I to say they can't?  I might not return the favor, but, hey, such is why we have freedom of religion.

Just don't expect horror stories, empty threats, or cherrypicked Bible verses to sway me to your side, because they won't.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

If I believed in Hell, I'd think it would make far more sense to condemn people to Hell for not believing in God rather than for being Jewish or Muslim - or for being of any theistic religion for that matter, even those "heathenish pagan Gods."

Last night I tried digging up an old Pew poll on the number of Christians who believe in people of other faiths attaining salvation, but instead I found an article on a religion-related website denouncing that poll for faulty questioning, so I didn't bring it up.  Still, if I were to assume I'd say that most Christians, even the most conservative types, don't believe that all Jewish people are going to Hell.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Ernest said on the first page that he considers one-night stands to be for the purpose of mere sexual satisfaction only.  I don't think he takes an entirely laissez-faire approach to sex like you seem to think he does, Simfan.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Yes, but where does he (or you or one in general) draw the line?

I mean, do I want to engage in casual activity? Sure? Do I want to have a nice big slice of chocolate cake? Yes. Do I want to sleep until two in the afternoon? Of course. But does that make any of that the right thing to do? No.

For me, personally?  I've already explained my opinion on this a few pages ago.  Christians need to be circumspect of pronouncements of harm when there's no clear evidence of harm.  But, that should not be taken as a blanket rule on all things involving sex.  If you are thoughtlessly promiscuous, the chances of having to face severe physical or mental consequences are considerably high, and I don't think one would dispute that regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof.  My rule of thumb, though I am still a virgin and plan to be for a very long time for personal reasons, is that one is always better off not being promiscuous.  That will make you far more likely to live a happy and healthy life.

You and Ernest are obviously far different from each other when it comes to theology.  That's fine.  But, you can't tell someone that what they are doing is wrong simply because it doesn't align with your lifestyle or subjective beliefs.  You cannot tell someone that they aren't playing by the rules when they're playing an entirely different board game.  Maybe you aren't doing that, and if you're only pressing Ernest on this to get his perspective, that's fine.  But, sex is largely about power, and I think that trying to force someone to abstain from sex is not much better than forcing someone to engage in sex.

(Now obviously, I find the latter much more traumatizing than the former, but hopefully you understand what I'm trying to convey.)

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I mean there is the "gut" feeling of it being wrong. But then there is the strong, if not completely unambiguous, scriptural support for its sinfulness. Looking at that way, we are really all playing the same "game" here, and attempting to deal in absolutes.

I mean it's very easy to say on the face of it that consensual, casual sex is "harmless" provided one is safe about it. But the idea of something being morally acceptable simply because both parties consent to it is something completely abhorrent- it isn't a morality at all but rather a total relativism.

So there are two things working against it- the first being a feeling of maturity and morality associated with the self-denial and restraint of abstinence, and the clear Biblical condemnation. Indeed, it almost seems like the ultimate temptation, a flagrant invitation to sin. And perhaps a rather personal third- a wholesale perception of the whole thing being exceptionally vulgar.

But I mean, there is no escaping it!- it is wrong. Completely and totally wrong. And yet here we are, with wild urges. One has to ensure he is not "carried away and enticed by his own lust." (James 1:14)

It's wrong to you, yes.  You've established your opinion well.  In fact, I commend you for acting according to what you genuinely believe is right and confessing your struggles in upholding those values.  However, everyone does not simply understand scripture, or the way it should be applied, the same way you do.  So, for that reason, you and Ernest are not playing the same "game."  That's not to say there are no moral absolutes - Ernest never denied that there is, in fact, 'right' and 'wrong' - but, you each have your own understanding on what those moral absolutes are.

Even those who say that you should not interpret the Bible based on your own understanding don't truly understand what they are talking about.  No one has a "God's eye view" of reality, so by our very nature we are tethered to our biases and cultural influences.  At the end of the day, you need to find peace in the fact that you may be wrong.  And, of course, as a Protestant, I do not believe that the law is what saves you, but I do believe that the formula for living a wholesome life is available to all those who seek it.  That formula need not be available only to those who go to my church every Sunday.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Ernest, out of curiosity - would you consider having sex with any more than one person, at any given period, immoral?  In other words, is a person who falls out of what was a committed relationship and establishes a similar relationship with another person acting wrongly?

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Well, I'm sure that's the majority opinion here as well- just that not a lot of people are taking part.

Well, a plurality of the board is non-religious and most members are sadly uninterested in anything having to do with religion beyond what biased sources want them to perceive it as, so "sin" isn't even a concept to most people.