Why do Christians have girlfriends/boyfriends before marriage when it is clearly against the message of Jesus

[fpt]

During the dating, each one has to have noble intentions in the respect of natural moral law: for instance, no lies, no sensual foreplay, no sexual foreplay, no sexual intellectual disorders…etc See the ten Rules of Old testament, in the catholic way, not in the approaches of other christian religions or Jewish views.

Only Catholic moral: not more and not less.

 

[Layp3rs0n]

If one is not bound to someone Sacramentally how is a relationship with a new bf or gf sinful? I will not treat you rudely or call you “idiotic” (as some here have on here-CHARITY everyone!) but do wish to understand your logic path here. No spiritual bond is created in dating. People who are not married are to treat each other as " brother and sister" prior to marriage. If no marriage is contracted, how do you find sin in this?

On another note, adultery is still not grounds for divorce. The word the protestants translate as adultery is “pornea” which actually translates as “unlawful”. The only way to disolve the marital union is either to die or if the union was never a union at all, ex. you discover the person you are married to is still married or a close relative. Interestingly this makes Baptism the more unitive Sacrament as THAT bond is not disolved by death.

 

[ffg]

I’m sure this has been stated already, but as a sacrament, marriage is more than a relationship, thus not on par with boy / girl friend relationships.

It should probably be noted (assuming others read the statement as I in the OP) that the view of sins of the flesh being only intercourse is incorrect.

 

[bilop]

If one is not bound to someone Sacramentally how is a relationship with a new bf or gf sinful? I will not treat you rudely or call you “idiotic” (as some here have on here-CHARITY everyone!) but do wish to understand your logic path here. No spiritual bond is created in dating. People who are not married are to treat each other as " brother and sister" prior to marriage. If no marriage is contracted, how do you find sin in this?

On another note, adultery is still not grounds for divorce. The word the protestants translate as adultery is “pornea” which actually translates as “unlawful”. The only way to disolve the marital union is either to die or if the union was never a union at all, ex. you discover the person you are married to is still married or a close relative. Interestingly this makes Baptism the more unitive Sacrament as THAT bond is not disolved by death.

Adultery is grounds for divorce. That doesn’t mean the Church allows remarriage; the requires a decree of nullity.

But, the Church does not require one to stay with a spouse who has cheated.

God Bless

 

[agnes_therese]

I see some of you Christians are nice and friendly until someone has different views and then you get angry and bitter. Quite amusing.

What’s “quite amusing” is you calling people “angry and bitter” just because they don’t agree with your personal opinion.

 

[twopekinguys]

My advice is I have a 1st Class Degree in Theology so you better stop getting so arrogant

I suggest you get your money back.

These people have given you sound answers, and you’re trying to argue apples and oranges.

Good try though.

 

[tijeras]

Can I just ask, LauraMajestic, what your goal is here? If you’re an atheist, then why do you care about any of this?

 

[atheistgirl]

Hello everyone.

I am here with a serious question and I warn you now this is going to be very challenging. If you do not want to be challenged please do not read.

Thank you

Excellent. Looking forward to this

So by Jesus’ logic let’s seriously think here for a second. If you divorce WIFEA to marry WIFEB, which Jesus says is adultery against WIFA, then surely having GIRLFRIENDA and then having GIRLFRIENDB is adultery to GIRLFRIENDA. How many girlfriends/boyfriends do most people have? Every ex-partner, according to Jesus, is adultery against that individual.

This passage really struck me when I was studying the Gospels because it’s very overlooked. Can you offer your interpretation on this?

:hypno::hypno::hypno:

Sarah x

 

[fpt]

My advice is I have a 1st Class Degree in Theology so you better stop getting so arrogant

It is not an idiotic argument.

Divorcing WIFEA and marrying WIFEB is adultery to WIFEA

therefore by Jesus’ logic

Breaking up with GIRLFRIENDA and going out with GIRLFRIEND B is unfaithful to GIRLFRIENDA

It’s straightforward.

A degree in catholic theology and in catholic philosophy??? **Or a degree in christian theology, but not catholic, may be in protestant theology? And, a degree in modern philosophy, not very classical???
**
What is your intellectual school? What are your intellectual masters? What are your intelectual streams?

 

[Delaine75]

My apologies if this seems uncharitable, but why is it that when you post a question on here, they are phrased in such a way that makes it seem that you’re trying to start trouble, and then your responses to the replies are usually on the arrogant, self-righteous side??

As much as you may disagree with it, Christians ARE free to date as many people as they wish before marriage. This does not mean that they are free to have sex with them. However, there is NOTHING wrong with simply dating someone. Period.

 

[sowinskija]

My apologies if this seems uncharitable, but why is it that when you post a question on here, they are phrased in such a way that makes it seem that you’re trying to start trouble, and then your responses to the replies are usually on the arrogant, self-righteous side??

As much as you may disagree with it, Christians ARE free to date as many people as they wish before marriage. This does not mean that they are free to have sex with them. However, there is NOTHING wrong with simply dating someone. Period.

Thank you. Well said and God Bless

 

[PennyinCanada]

The most obvious message is clear, divorce is adultery, but there is much more nuance in Jesus’ words. Look at the words of Mark, the earliest Gospel. Jesus explicitly says that if you divorce WIFE A and then marry WIFE B you are committing adultery on WIFE A. It’s plain and simple to see and it’s in the text of the Gospel of Mark itself.

So by Jesus’ logic let’s seriously think here for a second. If you divorce WIFEA to marry WIFEB, which Jesus says is adultery against WIFA, then surely having GIRLFRIENDA and then having GIRLFRIENDB is adultery to GIRLFRIENDA. How many girlfriends/boyfriends do most people have? Every ex-partner, according to Jesus, is adultery against that individual.

You may be assuming it’s adultery because boyfriends and girlfriends are sexually intimate and so it ‘looks’ the same to you. Is that correct?

Before the pill became widely available, to have sex with someone meant that you were making babies. God designed that if a couple wish to have sex with each other, they must first come before God and witnesses, declare their intent to be married to each other, and THEN they could be sexually intimate. The couple is entering into a covenant relationship, where God is the witness. Then any babies that are born have 2 parents to care for it.

With the arrival of the pill and other contraceptives, our understanding of entering into a covenant has disappeared. Young men and women are free to date, they are not free to be sexually intimate before they come before God and witnesses. If the world followed that law to the letter, today, do you know how many diseases would disappear? Including AIDS and some cancers. There would be no young women abandoned by their boyfriends who said “I love you”, used them, and disappeared. This is a major source of poverty and broken hearts. Those first born babies that were aborted would grow up and be the blessing to the world that God had intended them to be. Our cure for all the cancers could have been found already with who God had in mind, the intellect, the talent, the drive to know, but the babies were aborted. God’s design is what makes families grow and flourish, and make a stable economy, stable country. God promised blessings on those who walk in the way of a covenant, who respect the rules and boundaries as part of a wonderful design that bring blessing, and for generations. So if you sense there’s something wrong, well you are dead on there. Boyfriends do not have the ‘right’ to be sexually intimate with young ladies until they put a ring on her finger before God and friends. May that be your decision today. God loves you. You would weep with joy if you knew how much!

 

[Delaine75]

Well, now that it’s clear that this is a troll post, I suppose the only question is: does she genuinely not understand why her analogy does not hold (and so, genuinely think this is a convincing challenge to Biblical morality), or is she just seeing how many people she can get to argue with her?

I think you hit the nail on the head…

 

[thewanderer]

Hello everyone.

I am here with a serious question and I warn you now this is going to be very challenging. If you do not want to be challenged please do not read.

Thank you

So, whilst many Catholics forbid sex before marriage they do still have girlfriends/boyfriends and kissing. Sometimes this entails sexual contact (i.e third base: which is a hilarious way to go around the sin of intercourse). However, some are very conservative and only kiss their partner and think they are pure: they are not involved in any sin.

I warn you now that, according to the Gospels themselves, you are deeply wrong and I am going to use the words of Jesus himself to back me up.

Jesus discusses divorce and although he does admit the law of Moses have permitted the practical use of divorce (Mark 10.5, Matt 19.8 ) he states divorce is very wrong on a spiritual level:

Mark- 10.11-12

“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

Matt - 19.9

“I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

The most obvious message is clear, divorce is adultery, but there is much more nuance in Jesus’ words. Look at the words of Mark, the earliest Gospel. Jesus explicitly says that if you divorce WIFE A and then marry WIFE B you are committing adultery on WIFE A. It’s plain and simple to see and it’s in the text of the Gospel of Mark itself.

Matthew has a similar message except it is not as explicit as Mark and the effect is cancelled out if the wife has had an affair. It’s highly probable that Matthew is softening the message to appeal to his audience (as he does at other points in the Gospel such as with the message on the food laws). The later time of the writing of Matthew is also a factor. However Matthew is still saying that divorce is adultery.

So by Jesus’ logic let’s seriously think here for a second. If you divorce WIFEA to marry WIFEB, which Jesus says is adultery against WIFA, then surely having GIRLFRIENDA and then having GIRLFRIENDB is adultery to GIRLFRIENDA. How many girlfriends/boyfriends do most people have? Every ex-partner, according to Jesus, is adultery against that individual.

This passage really struck me when I was studying the Gospels because it’s very overlooked. Can you offer your interpretation on this?

Again you are displaying a huge lack of understanding about the Church. I am sorry, but from all of the posts I have seen you make so far I have been forced to come to the conclusion that you are just a troll. If you were truly interested in learning what Catholicism has to say about the topics you bring up you would not approach us with a derogatory/“aha, this time I’ll catch you guys out!” air which has come across in multiple of your posts/threads. My suggestion is that people stop responding to this OP unless she shows an actual desire to try and understand the whole worldview of Catholics.

 

[lerapt78]

OP, the title of the debate specifies boyfriend/girlfriend BEFORE marriage, but the argument you are presenting revolves around divorce and adultery – two completely different relationships – therefore, the evidence you provide cannot support the starting position.

Would you perhaps like to word your question differently?

 

[LauraMajestic]

I’ve done some more research on the issue and I can see where I have made a mistake.

YOU ARE ALL RIGHT I HOPE YOU ARE SATISIFIED

 

[maryjk]

I’ve done some more research on the issue and I can see where I have made a mistake.

YOU ARE ALL RIGHT I HOPE YOU ARE SATISIFIED

Well, now that it’s clear that this is a troll post, I suppose the only question is: does she genuinely not understand why her analogy does not hold (and so, genuinely think this is a convincing challenge to Biblical morality), or is she just seeing how many people she can get to argue with her?

Sounds like you were right, Transformer.

 

[Margarete_Faust]

Again you are displaying a huge lack of understanding about the Church. I am sorry, but from all of the posts I have seen you make so far I have been forced to come to the conclusion that you are just a troll. If you were truly interested in learning what Catholicism has to say about the topics you bring up you would not approach us with a derogatory/“aha, this time I’ll catch you guys out!” air which has come across in multiple of your posts/threads. My suggestion is that people stop responding to this OP unless she shows an actual desire to try and understand the whole worldview of Catholics.

Agreed.

And Laura, the “I hope you are all satisfied” comment is not really what we as members of this site are going for. We are not here to “trap the atheist”. We simply wish to respond to claims that actually address what is part of our doctrine, not to hear our faith being bashed in terms of generalizations. Believe me, I hear it enough in my daily interactions with my non-believing family and friends, and you are proving to be no different in discussion. Catholicism encourages studying and discussing doctrine on an elevated level. If that is what you wish to do, you have come to the right place. If not, you are going to be very frustrated with the time you spend on these posts.

Just do a little more research and please post sources when you have the supporting information. After all, isn’t that how people who formally study Theology are supposed to engage in discourse on a topic?

 

[LauraMajestic]

Agreed.

And Laura, the “I hope you are all satisfied” comment is not really what we as members of this site are going for. We are not here to “trap the atheist”. We simply wish to respond to claims that actually address what is part of our doctrine, not to hear our faith being bashed in terms of generalizations. Believe me, I hear it enough in my daily interactions with my non-believing family and friends, and you are proving to be no different in discussion. Catholicism encourages studying and discussing doctrine on an elevated level. If that is what you wish to do, you have come to the right place. If not, you are going to be very frustrating with the time you spend on these posts.

Just do a little more research and please post sources when you have the supporting information. After all, isn’t that how people who formally study Theology are supposed to engage in discourse on a topic?

I posted that as a joke.

Also, I have mentioned I have studied Theology. I made a simple Historical error.

 

[KP3243]

I’ve done some more research on the issue and I can see where I have made a mistake.

YOU ARE ALL RIGHT I HOPE YOU ARE SATISIFIED

Do you have any other questions, I assume the Catholics on here are confirmed so any one of us should be able to help if you do, it’s part of our job once we are confirmed we have to defend the faith and help others who have questions?