Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then I posit that pre-marital sex is NOT a sin because times have changed. Here's my logic.
Christians love to claim that polygamy, though "allowed" by God, was never part of his plan. So He allowed it because in times of war and male dominated societies, women needed places to live and so sometimes being part of sister wives was a "necessary evil". However, this is faulty logic and can be applied to de-criminalize pre-marital sex for the same reasons.
We no longer live in times where women have no rights. Women are independent, and do not rely on men to take care of them (the way they used to have that survival need back in OT times). So, with this being the case, polygamy is no longer a necessary evil. Ok, so we are on the same page. But, if times have changed, then that also means that because of women's independence, they no longer are property of their family to become property of their husband. Women are not bought and sold anymore. No more dowries.
Because of the above, a woman cannot bring shame to her father's house for not being a ready virgin when he gives her up to the prospective husband. In those days, women's rights were that of being property, so virginity was expected or else shame would be brought upon the family. But this is no longer the case. Few father are *ashamed* of their daughters not being virgins. Sure, one could say as a father that they expect their daughter to be pure or at the very least not promiscuous, but there aren't many fathers these days that will publicly shame their daughter for not holding up the virginity standard.
Also, because of women's rights and societal developments, arranged marriages are no longer necessary. So this again takes the whole "women who are virgins are more valuable" stigma away, since arranged marriages are not practiced in Western society, kind of how polygamy isn't. So, a woman's value is not determined by her virginity, so her prospective husband would probably not care if the father of his bride didn't give him a virgin.
With this being the case, wouldn't it make sense to stop calling pre-marital sex a sin since society has no need for virginity, being that we have adopted new standards and have discarded old norms like dowries and polygamy?
I see this logic used to call polygamy a sin. I use it to stop calling pre-marital sex a sin. If one can argue that polygamy was a necessary evil because of how difficult it was to be a single woman back then, couldn't we argue that pre-marital sex could be necessary in today's environment considering how high the divorce rate is and how fast horny Christians rush into marriage without truly taking the time to see if they are compatible on ALL levels?
I just find this moral relativism used by certain Christians to be horribly hypocritical, so I want to give some of them a taste of their own medicine. Because after all, how much sense does it make to say that God allowed something back then because the times were different and then to turn around and say that He can't allow something NOW for the same reason?
You are building your argument based on a translation of a select group of individuals and trying to logically support your argument based on that. The problem is, your argument doesn't hold any merit against those Christians who disagree with that premise.
One thing that is missing from this conversation is while there were clearly men of God who were polygamist during Biblical times, they were not in anyway encouraged to do so. If anything, you can see the patterns of their behavior with having multiple wives actually lead them to issues within their family.
Abraham - married Hagar after Sarai. Had a Ishmael together but he never inherited the blessings of Abraham. Was separated from Abraham and inherited a separate nation.
David - children fought with one another, including one of his sons killing another. His daughter was raped by his son. Solomon eventually gave over to sinfulness and lead to his demise. Also lost his son that he had with Bathsheba.
Solomon - wives turned him away from God, raised adversaries against him.
Now the point is, while God did not stop polygamy from happening, he certainly did not bless or sanctify those unions in anyway. If anything, you can argue that those unions lead to curses on those families. The truth is God still judged them for their actions. While many are looking for God to condemn every single sinful thing that was done, that is not how God operated. God has never forced people to believe in him but he judged those who did not keep his commandments. There is a clear pattern established with polygamy that shows that those who did it had problems with their off spring.
You are building your argument based on a translation of a select group of individuals and trying to logically support your argument based on that. The problem is, your argument doesn't hold any merit against those Christians who disagree with that premise.
One thing that is missing from this conversation is while there were clearly men of God who were polygamist during Biblical times, they were not in anyway encouraged to do so. If anything, you can see the patterns of their behavior with having multiple wives actually lead them to issues within their family.
Abraham - married Hagar after Sarai. Had a Ishmael together but he never inherited the blessings of Abraham. Was separated from Abraham and inherited a separate nation.
David - children fought with one another, including one of his sons killing another. His daughter was raped by his son. Solomon eventually gave over to sinfulness and lead to his demise. Also lost his son that he had with Bathsheba.
Solomon - wives turned him away from God, raised adversaries against him.
Now the point is, while God did not stop polygamy from happening, he certainly did not bless or sanctify those unions in anyway. If anything, you can argue that those unions lead to curses on those families. The truth is God still judged them for their actions. While many are looking for God to condemn every single sinful thing that was done, that is not how God operated. God has never forced people to believe in him but he judged those who did not keep his commandments. There is a clear pattern established with polygamy that shows that those who did it had problems with their off spring.
Moses?...You are still ignoring the fact that HaShem stated to David through Nathan that He would have given David more wives than what He had already given him...
Moses?...You are still ignoring the fact that HaShem stated to David through Nathan that He would have given David more wives than what He had already given him...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
