Sex before marriage - is it right or wrong?  First of all from a Biblical perspective, the very question is a meaningless one.  Going back to the garden of Eden, we find two naked humans together and God says (this happens before the fall ok!!!) "Be fruitful and multiply" and they get busy with it!  That my friends is Biblical marriage.  The technical theological term is "one flesh", meaning that they had sex.  It is sex which makes a person married, not the ritual and not the piece of paper.  In ancient times, families would arrange a marriage between them and they would covenant together to not wage war or to begin to trade favourably with each other.  They would get together for a party, the patriarchs would grab each other by the testicles (from where we get the word "testament" ie. covenant!) and sware an oath that they were now one people just as their children would become one flesh.  They would even hang around in the marriage chamber to make sure that the job was done right!  Sex was the act which "sealed" the covenant.  This is very basic stuff.  What this means for us today is that if you have sex with someone, according to the Bible, you are now married!!  The Torah had specific laws which enforced this.  Of course, with marriage would also come the responsibility of it.  Romantic love was not the issue here at all - if a man had sex with an unmarried woman, she became his wife - receiving all the rights and privileges of that - or else she and her family had to be generously compensated with a "bride price".

  Let me tell you a story - I know of two young people.  Both are the children of Christian leaders in my community.  The got caught having sex (there was a scandal!).  Oh dear - sex before marriage - how sinful!  So the parents resolved to cover it all up.  The young man remained with his parents, but the girl was sent away to boarding school.  This is a fairly normal scenario for many Christian families - the problem is that it is an immoral crime.  First of all, I don't care how old they were, or whose children they were, nor how scandalous it was - before God those two "kids" were old enough to get jiggy with it and so they were married.  But the parents did the worst thing they could - they separated the pair and forced them apart.  The likelihood of these two actually getting to the accepted marriage ritual isn't very likely.  They are being kept apart lest they sin again.  They will probably be forced into celibate separation and will most likely end up marrying someone else.  This is what the Bible calls adultery!  Now - the moral thing to do would be to make those two actually take responsibility for their passionate action and realize that they are now married.  It does not matter that they haven't finished school or got a job, nor bought a house - they are married - young people, deal with it!  Sounds cruel?  No way - they now have it very good!  Surrounded by the love and support of their parents, they can now get into learning about the joys and freedoms of responsible adulthood, and best of all they can now have sex and because everyone now knows, it is ok. 

  So - sex before marriage is, well, technically impossible.  The important thing is, do they love each other?  By love, I don't mean the mushy romantic feeling of infatuation, but rather the choice we make to do good to each other even if we don't feel "in-love".  I choose to love someone, to do good and not evil to them.  I am committed to care for them and be responsible.  That's not to say that nice feelings can't be a part of it and there are plenty of perks, not the least of which is sex itself, that we can enjoy.  But the point is that we have become fixated upon the ritual and that is one of the reasons why so many "Christian marriages" are so screwed up (pun not intended). 

  Formal marriage ceremonies, sanctioned by church and state are a recent modern phenomenon.  Originally as I have already said, marriage was an arranged covenant between two families.  In the middle ages, the religious system (ie. the Church of Rome) established two things - priestly celibacy and formal marriage for the nobility.  The purpose of this was to control people sexually and also to control the inheritance of property.  The celibate priesthood were the spiritual elite because they were "morally pure", thus creating an immoral underclass of the sexually active.  The only way then to be both sexually active and be morally pure at the same time was to get priestly permission in the form of formal marriage.  This gave organized religion a huge amount of power over people, because while permission for sex could be granted by the church, it could also be withheld.  In Christian society, to not have Christian marriage meant that any children would be bastards and that they would not be able to inherit the property of their parents.  This was another reason why priests were celibate - so that church property remained in the hands of the church, and not given away to the heirs of priests.  To be excommunicated by the church meant that a persons marriage was now illegitimate, their ownership of inherited property was invalid and any children were the results of "sin" and therefore legally were "non persons".  For the nobility of Feudal Europe this was a threat they would do anything to avoid.  In this way the marriage ceremony has become the focus rather than the actual relationship of the couple involved.  Peasants on the other hand were property less slaves and so in medieval times did not require formal marriage.  That didn't happen until much later as feudalism fell apart.  It all comes down to the religious system controlling people and their property (which is why we now also need the permission of the state as well!!).  God and morality have nothing to do with this.  The reason why "sex before marriage" has become such an immorality is because it in effect gives back to the individuals involved the sovereignty over their own sexuality again, leaving out the religious "middle men" completely. 

  True Christian marriage takes place between two consenting adults and their families - church and state and their demands have nothing to do with it - it is a matter between them and God and no-one else.  That's not to say that we can't get together for a party to celebrate the fact that SEX IS MARRIAGE and that indeed LOVE IS ALL WE NEED.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Ecclesian

G'day Mike - here's my next response -

 I am quite excited about your response Mike and I actually expected it.  In discussion with another friend recently on this same topic of sex before marriage, he pointed out to me the problem of drawing strongly upon the Hebrew/Biblical sexual model.  Let me explain.  For many Christians the Bible is authoritative and many like to have that authority "quoted" to them in order to be convinced of "God's Word" in any given matter.  It is a great temptation to use the Bible "against" literalist Fundamentalist type Christians, especially when certain scriptures can make such strong statements.  An example of this is the way that the Bible so clearly seems to support polygamy as a sexual "norm" for the Hebrew people, in particular during Old Testament times.  The question then is  - how much should we see scripture as "authoritative in our conduct"?  In my comments about the Bible I discuss our human experience of "spiritual events", but  that in itself is not enough to make something true.  Just because a majority of people believe something doesn't make it right.  Still, I believe that the only way to actually find out what is true or not true, about how to live sexually specifically, we must learn to tolerate the different "models" of sexuality that people have and then watch to see the consequences of their behaviour.  For example, compulsory celibacy as a sexual model is a failure - just ask the Shakers, a religious sect that has died out because they demanded celibacy of their people.  I also believe that the sexually repressive culture of conservative Christianity has also failed and is untenable because the great majority of us continue to live in sexual frustration and a "sexually sick" culture.  The Hebrew model of sexuality is just another model.  Just because it is found in the Bible doesn't mean that it shouldn't be questioned as well.  Essentially, the Hebrew model involves a strong patriarchal system where men have almost unlimited sexual freedom - a number of non monogamous relationships can be found in the scriptures - polygamy, concubinage, the kinsman redeemer relationship, sexual hospitality etc.  One thing though, the Torah did attempt to regulate this behaviour and keep men responsible for the sexual relationships they initiated.  The idea that one is "married" to one's sexual partners, is an attempt by the Hebrew model to force promiscuous men in Hebrew society to "look after" the vulnerable women and children in their society, not just continue to sexually exploit them.  I suppose that I applied that idea in principle in my example of the young people caught having sex.  The principle is that sex is something special and that we should be responsible for our actions and be prepared to make commitments to our lovers, not just see sex as a recreational pastime.  In today's world, we have responded to the Hebrew model in a number of ways - traditional Christianity has set out to abolish the ancient sexual freedoms that Hebrew males had and impose a strict monogamy.  The problem with this is that historically most humans have lived in non monogamous relationships - tribal peoples in particular, in both patriarchal and matriarchal societies, and have been used to much greater sexual freedom than what we experience today.  The other response has been the feminist approach - to seek the same kind of sexual freedoms that men in patriarchal societies have always enjoyed - that is access to multiple lovers.  This has produced sexual licence in our society and what might be called "serial monogamy" where we marry and divorce multiple times, leaving behind us a string of broken relationships.  All of this is discomforting.  What should we do?  I don't believe that imposed monogamy has worked.  People keep breaking out and forming other relationships - sexual "cheating" is very common.  What we need to do is find a way to have sexual freedom, but also continue to be loving, responsible and maintain appropriate commitments with our sexual partner/s.  If this then requires us to make "agreements" with each other, both formal and informal, we should do so.  You ask what constitutes "one flesh" - well for the ancient Hebrews they would assume sexual intercourse itself - because that is what produces children.  Other "non coital" sexual behaviours nevertheless lead us into emotional attachments and intimate relationships that we should take care with, to ensure that people are not hurt in the process.  I believe that the big issue here then is that we are completely open and honest sexually - cheating sexually is universally destructive.  To be sexually responsible means that we must give each other "permission" for the relationships we enter into and deal with that other universally destructive thing - jealousy.  Jealousy comes from this idea that I can "own" another person and demand their exclusive attention.  This is I believe quite immoral - yet we continue to act that way towards each other.  Our "agreements" need to be considerate of all these issues.  In the end we will form all kinds of different relationships and commitments and all the people in our circle of love and caring will be free to remain there - love and commitment, along with freedom, means we do not have to abandon anyone, even if the nature of our relationships change over time.  The only way to abolish divorce is to abolish enforced legalised monogamy as well. 

   Hope this answers some questions,