Where is the Bible against sex out of wedlock?

  • Thread starter Thread starter larsegarots
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Some versions of the bible translate fornication from the Greek word porneia, which does not necessarily mean fornication - sexual immorality is another translation that is used in other versions of the bible.
Incorrect.

If you have to invent facts to support your position, your position is unsupportable.
 
From your link.
Porneia:
illicit sexual intercourse
adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.

Dictionary defenition of Fornication:

for·ni·ca·tion /ˌfɔrnɪˈkeɪʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fawr-ni-key-shuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. voluntary sexual intercourse between two unmarried persons or two persons not married to each other.

If Porneia is defined as Fornication (as per your link) and fornication is defined as above… how can you argue that porneia is not fornication?
 
If Porneia is defined as Fornication (as per your link) and fornication is defined as above… how can you argue that porneia is not fornication?
Fornication is one possible definition, which logically it doesn’t follow that its the only definition or the one intended by the author. Here’s an analogy to your question:

Definition of Fag:
A junior boy who acts or acted as servant a senior boy at a British independent school, a cigarette, or a homosexual.

If Fag is defined as a cigarette as above, how can you argue that a Fag is not a cigarette?
 
Fornication is one possible definition, which logically it doesn’t follow that its the only definition or the one intended by the author. Here’s an analogy to your question:

Definition of Fag:
A junior boy who acts or acted as servant a senior boy at a British independent school, a cigarette, or a homosexual.

If Fag is defined as a cigarette as above, how can you argue that a Fag is not a cigarette?
:hypno:

Bad example. None of the definitions for fornication are mutually exclusive. In your example they were. Sorry, dude, you cannot reasonably argue that 3500 years of Jewish tradition and 200 years of Christian tradition got it wrong and you are the first person to figure out the mistake. What you are suggesting is just hooey.

Since I am not interested in silly sophistry and intellectual dishonesty, I am bowing out of this thread.
 
"You have heard that it was said, `You shall not commit adultery.’ ****But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matt 5:27-28 (RSV)

That’s “every one.” The KJV has “whosoever.” Look it up. If our Lord had meant “married men,” He’d have said so. He was not speaking in parables, here; we should take Him literally.

Another poster pointed out, in another thread, that, just because we are not married does not mean we are innocent of adultery. We are cheating on our Spouse, whether that spouse is a person of the opposite sex (even one we haven’t yet met), or God and His Church.

It’s true that he said “looks at a woman”. It’s (unfortunately) still true today that sexual sin is taken less seriously for men than for women. He’s “sowing his wild oats;” she’s a slut. The Pentateuch was clear that *both *persons taken in adultery were to be punished. I do not think that our Lord was seriously suggesting that lesbianism was OK, or that sex between unmarried persons was, either.

You’re really stretching, Lars.

God bless you with truth,

Ruthie
 
…you are the first person to figure out the mistake. What you are suggesting is just hooey.

Since I am not interested in silly sophistry and intellectual dishonesty, I am bowing out of this thread.
I am not the first person to wonder about this. A simple search in google or other threads suggests that the bible does not conclusively mention fornication.

“…the Greek word porneia (from which the word pornography is derived) and its literal meaning is debated among Scripture scholars.”
This is from a catholic source:
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0610btb.asp

I checked three versions of the bible: New International Version, English Standard Version, and the King James Version. Of these three, only the King James Version contains the word ‘fornication’. The other two do not, and use ‘sexual immorality’. For example, take Matthew 15:19:

KJV:
For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

NIV:
For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.

To make the matter more interesting, definitions of words change over time. Fornication, in the King James era, meant general sexual immorality.
columbiaseminary.org/coffeetalk/068.html

Suggesting that I am intellectually dishonest for trying to find the truth, is hypocritical if you are asserting the meaning, while the meaning is debated among Scripture scholars.

So for me, the question remains: does the bible specifically condemn sex out of wedlock? If the only versus are based on the word pornea, then I am not convinced.
 
I’m not arguing whether or not sex out of wedlock is moral or immoral.

I’m trying to determine if sex out of wedlock is specifically mentioned in the bible. Versus that just refer to ‘sexual immorality’ would not convince someone its a sin if that person that thinks sex out of wedlock is not immoral.

The verses mentioning ‘fornication’ were translated from the Greek word ‘porneia’, which doesn’t necessarily mean fornication, but rather ‘sexual immorality’.

I’ll state again, I’m not arguing that sex out of wedlock is moral - I’m just trying to determine if the bible specifically mentions sex out of wedlock.
**Sexual immorality means sex outside marriage. **

If a person does not think that “sex out of wedlock” is immoral then they are not Christian to start with because all Christians know sex outside marriage is immoral. Such a person would obviously not care anyway even if scripture specifically stated “sex outside marriage is forbidden”.
 
Fornication is one possible definition, which logically it doesn’t follow that its the only definition or the one intended by the author. Here’s an analogy to your question:

Definition of Fag:
A junior boy who acts or acted as servant a senior boy at a British independent school, a cigarette, or a homosexual.

If Fag is defined as a cigarette as above, how can you argue that a Fag is not a cigarette?
Read the context of the sentence. In the example you gave, I would challenge you to write a snetence that might make a reader misunderstand your intention of the use of the word Fag. The chances are that the reader WILL figure out what kind of fag you are referring to from the context of the sentence(s).

As for your defenition of the origin of the word fornication… you seem to be grasping at straws and looking for justification for immoral acts. I would argue that the author meant ALL forms of Porneia, which are included in the defenition supplied by your link. They are all sexually immoral acts, where a cigarrette and a homosexual certainly are not interchangeable in the least, nor can they even be vaguley regarded as the same in any contextual sentence you might create. I suggest you read ahead a chapter and beyond a chapter, get a feel for whether the author is talking about a cigarette or a homosexual, and then draw your conclusions. Or in the case of the biblical author, do the same and use ALL forms of the word Porneia and you will likely come to the same conclusion… that all forms of sexual immorality :adultrey, fornication, homosexuality and sex with animals are all interchangeable in the passage, and the author likely meant ALL of these in his context.

Than again, what do I know though, I still watch cartoons. I LOVE the Flinstones.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top