Is pre marital sex ok?

[gtsecc]

I mean God is love, and if I love someone then, well that is sort of like God's blessing on it?
Now that we have birth control, and everyone is doing it, no one really cares or waits for marriage any more. And marriage that is some sort of BS too isn't it? In the Bible people could have more than one wife and a couple of concubines too. Where in the Bible is one-man one-woman thing?
As long as we are careful and love the person and treat them well, that is all that matters. Marriage is a dead ritual, and I can’t even find the rubrics for it in the Bible.

[gitlance]

Am I allowed to give a five-word response to this question?

(Glen, you are too funny.)

[Tetzel]

On edit: Premarital sex is wrong because it is sex outside of marriage.

[RedneckAnglican]

uhhhh...no?...

[Naomi4Christ]

Well it's not nearly as bad as priests facing West! Now that's a true outrage

:D :D :D

[Torah613]

Gtsecc:

Why are you so concerned with the sins of others? I mean I thought we were supposed to focus on our own repentance and reach out with love to others. Apparently I missed the memo where it was "all about the Mass." strange, didn't knwo I was Irish....

Joe Zollars

[No Swansong]

Gtsecc:

Why are you so concerned with the sins of others? I mean I thought we were supposed to focus on our own repentance and reach out with love to others. Apparently I missed the memo where it was "all about the Mass." strange, didn't knwo I was Irish....

Joe Zollars


Joe while I sometimes find GT's posts too pithy for taste, he sometimes does a good job of pointing out inconsistencies (including his own). And he does make me think.

[RadixLecti]

Joe while I sometimes find GT's posts too pithy for taste, he sometimes does a good job of pointing out inconsistencies (including his own). And he does make me think.

I agree, there's nothing wrong with wanting to dig through some issues. How do you know this isn't something he's dealing with in his own life? Maybe he wants some Christians to help him gain some perspective or counsel on the issue.

[Simon_Templar]

so is it doubly bad if you have sex outside of marriage while facing west?

[No Swansong]

so is it doubly bad if you have sex outside of marriage while facing west?

Does it matter if you are facing the congregation? Oh I guess that is an entirely different issue. LOL.

[higgs2]

Does it matter if you are facing the congregation? Oh I guess that is an entirely different issue. LOL.

:eek: :o ^_^

[gtsecc]

I don't hear much theology in this thread.
I can make funny comments also, but this is too serious an issue to gloss over. The lack of response makes me really wonder, do we Episcopalians pick and choose what we want to do, and then back in the theology, or do we seek God's guidance and the will to be obedient.
It is no one's business, but my GF and I are committed to celibacy until marriage. Does my Church support me on this?
I am afraid it doesn't.

[karen freeinchristman]

I don't hear much theology in this thread.

There are other ways of 'doing theology'. One way is by looking at the Old Testament patterns of a wedding or marriage ceremony compared to what we have now. It is pretty different. Courtship is different (old-fashioned word, I know, but you get the meaning). Theology derived from experience. New emerging ways of doing theology. There isn't only one way of doing theology.

[gtsecc]

There are other ways of 'doing theology'. One way is by looking at the Old Testament patterns of a wedding or marriage ceremony compared to what we have now. It is pretty different. Courtship is different (old-fashioned word, I know, but you get the meaning). Theology derived from experience. New emerging ways of doing theology. There isn't only one way of doing theology.
Well, heck I know that, but do you understand what I am saying? I am saying that this is a serious issue, and would like to hear theology, rather than is it ok to do it if you face East? etc...

[karen freeinchristman]

Well, heck I know that, but do you understand what I am saying? I am saying that this is a serious issue, and would like to hear theology, rather than is it ok to do it if you face East? etc...
Yes, I hear what you are saying. Looking back at this thread, it is a little surprising that there is so much humour and not much serious discussion (if any).

I think that people should wait until they are married to have sex, but I also know what the reality is, and that people today do not usually wait. But I think encouraging and supporting people in waiting is a good thing. Difficult to enforce, however. Things happen. Then where do we stand? Obviously, we are not to judge, and we are to accept repentant people. What if we have people in our congregations that we know are engaging in sex before marriage? Do we confront them? If so, how do we go about it? It just all seems so intrusive. Teaching and preaching about purity and holiness is one option. But direct confrontation? Or even worse, shunning and gossiping? I don't think so. It's a big problem. The fact is, there are many big problems Christians are trying to deal with every day.

[gtsecc]

Enforce?

Heck no.

If I ask in TAW if it is ok, what do you think the answer is?

If I ask in OBOB, what do you think the answer is?

If I ask in STR, you can scroll up and see the answers.

[karen freeinchristman]

Enforce?

Heck no.

If I ask in TAW if it is ok, what do you think the answer is?

If I ask in OBOB, what do you think the answer is?

If I ask in STR, you can scroll up and see the answers.
The Anglican church is not legalistic, though. Why do you expect it to be?

[gtsecc]

The Anglican church is not legalistic, though. Why do you expect it to be?
You have got to be kidding me.
You are saying we can't tell people that pre-marital sex is wrong, because that would be legalistic?
Lord have mercy (40X)

[gtsecc]

On TAW there is a thread - how can I wait till my wedding night? What prayers did you say etc...

On STR, the same sort of thread doesn't even get taken seriously.

[Tetzel]

I don't hear much theology in this thread.
I can make funny comments also, but this is too serious an issue to gloss over. The lack of response makes me really wonder, do we Episcopalians pick and choose what we want to do, and then back in the theology, or do we seek God's guidance and the will to be obedient.
It is no one's business, but my GF and I are committed to celibacy until marriage. Does my Church support me on this?
I am afraid it doesn't.

I back you 100% on your commitment to celibacy until marriage. It's the right thing to do.

[karen freeinchristman]

On TAW there is a thread - how can I wait till my wedding night? What prayers did you say etc...

On STR, the same sort of thread doesn't even get taken seriously.

I think if someone were actually asking that question genuinely, and asking for prayer, etc., they would get an appropriate response. I don't think you were asking the OP out of a personal pastoral need (but I could be wrong, and I beg forgiveness if I am wrong).

[gtsecc]

I think if someone were actually asking that question genuinely, and asking for prayer, etc., they would get an appropriate response. I don't think you were asking the OP out of a personal pastoral need (but I could be wrong, and I beg forgiveness if I am wrong).
No, but it would be sort of a nice gesture if my church supported me.
I live in a world that is not typical for most - I have a lot of friend commited to celebacy, and they attend confession regularly. I talk to anglicans here, and they ask is confession even a rite still?

[CSMR]

Gtsecc:

Why are you so concerned with the sins of others? I mean I thought we were supposed to focus on our own repentance and reach out with love to others.
How can you reach out with love to others if you are not concerned with their sins?

[CSMR]

gtsecc your first post is a good one but was not in the style to receive very serious answers. If you are allowed a bit of wit then so should Mr. Tetzel be.

Non-marital sex is appaling. And it has become an ideology which has replaced christian love in western societies. (I used to think it must be impossible because if you loved someone how could you dishonour her? That was during an idealistic phase.)

[CSMR]

I talk to anglicans here, and they ask is confession even a rite still?
I agree with you here; this is someting I feel the church should bring back. Partly because as Karen said it is difficult to confront someone directly about many things.

[gtsecc]

My entire world of my 30 or so closest friends including Anglcians, Orthodox, and Roman Catholics all go to confession.

[pmcleanj]

I don't hear much theology in this thread.
Perhaps that is because you started the discussion with a fallacy -- the slippery slope argument -- and because in the past you have made it clear that you have an agenda of pushing liturgical restrictions onto the Anglican church that are not consistent with Anglican praxis.

Perhaps others suspect that you are trying to use the moral argument one might make against unchastity, as a lever to get them agree to burn incense, face east, add greek words to their liturgy bulletins, and otherwise conform to your parishes rather atypical usages.

[Angelwarrioress]

God designed it as one man, one woman one flesh. In the old testament man chose to have more than one wife and concubines, going against the orginal design and was a result of sin and the culture at that time.

[higgs2]

I don't hear much theology in this thread.
I can make funny comments also, but this is too serious an issue to gloss over. The lack of response makes me really wonder, do we Episcopalians pick and choose what we want to do, and then back in the theology, or do we seek God's guidance and the will to be obedient.
It is no one's business, but my GF and I are committed to celibacy until marriage. Does my Church support me on this?
I am afraid it doesn't.
Good heavens, gtsecc, what kind of support do you need? I think the church agrees, approves and supports this. do you need them to go out an monitor everyone else too in order to feel supported?

[Inside Edge]

It is no one's business, but my GF and I are committed to celibacy until marriage. Does my Church support me on this?...I am afraid it doesn't
I've never heard of a Church that doesn't support celibacy until marriage. I mean a mainstream Church - there was this cult on campus that was all into orgies and stuff...but you get what I mean (I hope).

[Simon_Templar]

Enforce?

Heck no.

If I ask in TAW if it is ok, what do you think the answer is?

If I ask in OBOB, what do you think the answer is?

If I ask in STR, you can scroll up and see the answers.

I think alot of us thought you were mostly joking around, which is why the responses have been light-hearted.

On a more serious note, pre-marital sex is not ok. In scripture it is evident that there are two sides to marriage. One is that marriage is a covenant under law, and the other is that marriage is a divine sacrament in which a husband and wife are joined by God himself in a sacred bond.
This is why Jesus, in his teaching on divorce clearly showed that there was a difference between what the law of Moses allowed, and what God intended.

Sex is an element specificly of that sacred bond, the joining of husband and wife. It rightly exists only within that sacramental relationship. To place it outside of that is at best a sacrelige and a blasphemy, and almost a kind of idolotry.
Consider that sex outside of marriage is something like a person without the benefit of ordination consecrating the eucharist for their own selfish benefit. It is taking something that belongs to a sacrament (like the ability to consecrate belongs to ordination) and using it in a profane manner for your own selfish reasons.

[Inside Edge]

The issue I have with unmarried sex is the naturalness of it. If we look at every species on the planet that reproduces sexually, scant few of them mate for life, and fewer yet are monogamous. We are (genetically, anatomically) so close to so many of these other creatures, to boot.

It's very difficult for me to wrap my brain around the concept that sex outside of marriage is categorically "blasphemy" or "sacriligious." If so, it is a very, very, very cruel thing to create such a world.

That isn't to say that we still shouldn't be doing it. I just can't make sense as to why anyone elevates it to a sacreligious level.

[No Swansong]

Well, heck I know that, but do you understand what I am saying? I am saying that this is a serious issue, and would like to hear theology, rather than is it ok to do it if you face East? etc...


To be fair GT I am not permitted to debate here and was simply trying to make a funny. If you must know I will state that it is my belief that the clear teaching of Scripture and Tradition is that Pre-Marital sex is fornication, a sin.
I share your concern that the ECUSA has been very ambiguous of late concerning the definition of sin and the identification of it.

[Simon_Templar]

The issue I have with unmarried sex is the naturalness of it. If we look at every species on the planet that reproduces sexually, scant few of them mate for life, and fewer yet are monogamous. We are (genetically, anatomically) so close to so many of these other creatures, to boot.

It's very difficult for me to wrap my brain around the concept that sex outside of marriage is categorically "blasphemy" or "sacriligious." If so, it is a very, very, very cruel thing to create such a world.

That isn't to say that we still shouldn't be doing it. I just can't make sense as to why anyone elevates it to a sacreligious level.

You realize, do you not that most of the natural world lives based on the principle of killing whatever gets in your way right? If your hungry you kill, if something threatens your position in society, you kill, etc etc...I once had a friend (no joke) who believed that he had the soul of a wolf (seriously.. no joke) and as a result he believed that he was bound by the laws of nature, not of human society. Let me tell you, he was one of the more scary individuals I've known because of the fact that he believed he had the perfect right to kill anyone who threatened his "pack" or who threatened his dominance in his pack. It was an interesting study in psychology

The point being, nature itself is tainted and cursed by sin.

[Colabomb]

Yes, I hear what you are saying. Looking back at this thread, it is a little surprising that there is so much humour and not much serious discussion (if any).

I think that people should wait until they are married to have sex, but I also know what the reality is, and that people today do not usually wait. But I think encouraging and supporting people in waiting is a good thing. Difficult to enforce, however. Things happen. Then where do we stand? Obviously, we are not to judge, and we are to accept repentant people. What if we have people in our congregations that we know are engaging in sex before marriage? Do we confront them? If so, how do we go about it? It just all seems so intrusive. Teaching and preaching about purity and holiness is one option. But direct confrontation? Or even worse, shunning and gossiping? I don't think so. It's a big problem. The fact is, there are many big problems Christians are trying to deal with every day.
Jesus' Message was Repent!

Jesus did not beat around the bush and "encourage" people to repent.

[Colabomb]

I am 18 years Old. I am a virgin.

If I am thirty and Unmarried, I will be a virgin.

If I am 60 and Unmarried, I will be a virgin.

Let me tell you something. As a teenager, I can tell you, if you have your mind on your business, avoid potentially dangerous situations, and call sin sin, it is not that hard.

(At least it isn't for me.)

[Colabomb]

We are not animals. Animals are not made in the Image of God.

[higgs2]

Jesus' Message was Repent!

Jesus did not beat around the bush and "encourage" people to repent.
that was his message?

[Tetzel]

Colabomb, I wish I could rep you again because you've been on fire lately. Must be some leftover energy from pentecost or something.

[Colabomb]

that was his message?
Partially.

[Colabomb]

17From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."

Our very lives are to be Repentant. We are sinners, and we must actively turn from that sin, wherever it rears its ugly little head.

[Inside Edge]

You realize, do you not that most of the natural world lives based on the principle of killing whatever gets in your way right? If your hungry you kill, if something threatens your position in society, you kill, etc etc
I see what you're saying, but I find it difficult to equate the reproductive urge with the urge to kill. By and large, they don't appear to be equal in intensity.

Maybe that's only because, by and large, human civilization has removed the day-to-day necessity to kill (we farm, we have complex legal political structures to manage shelter, posession, defense, etc). Maybe you're right, but there's something intuitive here that tells me they're not the same thing.

[Colabomb]

Perhaps that is because you started the discussion with a fallacy -- the slippery slope argument -- and because in the past you have made it clear that you have an agenda of pushing liturgical restrictions onto the Anglican church that are not consistent with Anglican praxis.

Perhaps others suspect that you are trying to use the moral argument one might make against unchastity, as a lever to get them agree to burn incense, face east, add greek words to their liturgy bulletins, and otherwise conform to your parishes rather atypical usages.
While I agree that GT has pushed agenda before, agenda I disagree with.....

How is the Slippery Slope a logical fallacy?

[pmcleanj]

... if you have your mind on your business, avoid potentially dangerous situations, and call sin sin, it is not that hard.

(At least it isn't for me.)
It was easy for me, too. And it's the wise choice for one's emotional and physical health, which is normally the case of such restrictions as God lays upon us. But it is absolutely NOT easy for everyone.

If chastity is easy for you, that's a gift of God. Boast in God and God alone, and have compassion and support for those of your brothers and sisters who have different gifts.

[Simon_Templar]

Originally I would not have classified slippery slope as a logical fallacy because it isn't in the same sense as say, a non sequitor, or an ad hominem. The more I thought about it, however, the more I would tend to think it is a logical fallacy in a sense. The statement that an argument is "a slippery slope" alledges that while an argument may appear good on the surface, in application it leads to different results than predicted.

For example, many people argue that abortion is a slippery slope, because although you can come up with circumstances in which abortion may seem justified, once you allow the taking of innocent life for any reason, it invariably leads to the cheapening of life and the broadening of circumstances under which life can be taken. (I'm not here intending to argue about abortion, but just using one of the arguments put forward on the abortion issue as an example.

Now, in this case the slippery slope could be viewed as a counter argument, rather than a fallacy in the original argument, which was my original tendancy. However, when you think about it, it really is pointing out a fallacy in the original arguement because it is alledging that the original argument predicts false results, or more accurately fails to conclude the correct results of the action in question.

Anyway, back to the question at hand. I struggle with lust all the time. I'm not in a relationship with anyone and I still struggle with it, so you can imagine that in intimate circumstances it only makes things more difficult.
However, when I consider how I would act were I currently in such a relationship, I know that if I were to give in to my desires, I would not be acting in love for the other person. The very definition of love is to do what is in the best interests of that which is loved, despite the cost to yourself.

[She]

When I was 24, I was a virgin (in every sense of the word, including never having masturbated, too). Then I met a boy who did not want to get married but said that he loved me. We continued to see each other for the next six years. He continued to say that he did not want to get married, yet. But he also continued to say that he loved me. My religious family and friends kept advising me to "dump" him. But I did not. I believed that he loved me. I put up with the persecution from my religious family. I put up with the scandal because I loved him. I have now been rewarded for that love. He is the most faithful and loving husband anyone could wish for.

A question to the people who are saying that premarital sex is wrong: Does that make masturbation OK then?

[Colabomb]

When I was 24, I was a virgin (in every sense of the word, including never having masturbated, too). Then I met a boy who did not want to get married but said that he loved me. We continued to see each other for the next six years. He continued to say that he did not want to get married, yet. But he also continued to say that he loved me. My religious family and friends kept advising me to "dump" him. But I did not. I believed that he loved me. I put up with the persecution from my religious family. I put up with the scandal because I loved him. I have now been rewarded for that love. He is the most faithful and loving husband anyone could wish for.

A question to the people who are saying that premarital sex is wrong: Does that make masturbation OK then?
That has been debated by many.

But I would like to point out that Christ said Lusting after a woman is the same as sleeping with her. The VAST majority of the time, there is lust involved in Masturbation.

[Tetzel]

A question to the people who are saying that premarital sex is wrong: Does that make masturbation OK then?

NO!

[Aymn27]

That has been debated by many.

But I would like to point out that Christ said Lusting after a woman is the same as sleeping with her. The VAST majority of the time, there is lust involved in Masturbation.
VAST majority?? rofl....

Ok, then what if it is thinking about your wife? What then Mr. Colabomb ;)

[Colabomb]

VAST majority?? rofl....

Ok, then what if it is thinking about your wife? What then Mr. Colabomb ;)
That's where it gets difficult lol ;)

[Tetzel]

VAST majority?? rofl....

Ok, then what if it is thinking about your wife? What then Mr. Colabomb ;)

It's not ok even if one is thinking about Colabomb's wife ;). I mean even if one is thinking about one's own wife, it's not ok.

[Aymn27]

It's not ok even if one is thinking about Colabomb's wife ;). I mean even if one is thinking about one's own wife, it's not ok.
rofl....

[Colabomb]

It's not ok even if one is thinking about Colabomb's wife ;). I mean even if one is thinking about one's own wife, it's not ok.
lol

[No Swansong]

lol



OK Larry, Curly, Moe that's enough.

[She]

NO!

So, in that case, what is the solution? If someone has a phobia about getting married, should they be "dumped" or should they be helped? If you love them, should you "let them go"? Then, what would the consequences be? Perhaps they would become promiscuous or perhaps they would spend the rest of their life masturbating. Also, if you "dump" someone you love, because they do not want to get married yet, you end up alone and tempted by masturbation, yourself. This is also wrong, perhaps worse than staying with someone you love. Masturbation is self-love. This is not what we were intended for. We were meant to love others, not ourselves.

[Naomi4Christ]

So, in that case, what is the solution? If someone has a phobia about getting married, should they be "dumped" or should they be helped? If you love them, should you "let them go"? Then, what would the consequences be? Perhaps they would become promiscuous or perhaps they would spend the rest of their life masturbating. Also, if you "dump" someone you love, because they do not want to get married yet, you end up alone and tempted by masturbation, yourself. This is also wrong, perhaps worse than staying with someone you love. Masturbation is self-love. This is not what we were intended for. We were meant to love others, not ourselves.

No one said the Christian life was an easy one.

[Inside Edge]

No one said the Christian life was an easy one.

^_^ Sure it is.

[Tetzel]

We should heed the teachings of our beloved apostle Paul

1 Corinthians 7

Teaching on Marriage

1Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband.
3The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband.
4The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
5(B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=7&version=49#cen-NASB-28493B))Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
6But this I say by way of concession, not of command.
7[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=7&version=49#fen-NASB-28495a)]Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.
8But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I.
9But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
10But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband
11(but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
12But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her.
13And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away.
14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.
15Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.
16For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?
17Only, as the Lord has assigned to each one, as God has called each, in this manner let him walk And so I direct in all the churches.
18Was any man called when he was already circumcised? He is not to become uncircumcised. Has anyone been called in uncircumcision? He is not to be circumcised.
19Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God.
20Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called.
21Were you called while a slave? Do not worry about it; but if you are able also to become free, rather do that.
22For he who was called in the Lord while a slave, is the Lord's freedman; likewise he who was called while free, is Christ's slave.
23You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.
24Brethren, each one is to remain with God in that condition in which he was called.
25Now concerning virgins I have no command of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who by the mercy of the Lord is trustworthy.
26I think then that this is good in view of the present distress, that it is good for a man to remain as he is.
27Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife.
28But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you.
29But this I say, brethren, the time has been shortened, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none;
30and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess;
31and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away.
32But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord;
33but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,
34and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
35This I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is appropriate and to secure undistracted devotion to the Lord.
36But if any man thinks that he is acting unbecomingly toward his virgin daughter, if she is past her youth, and if it must be so, let him do what he wishes, he does not sin; let her marry.
37But he who stands firm in his heart, being under no constraint, but has authority over his own will, and has decided this in his own heart, to keep his own virgin daughter, he will do well.
38So then both he who gives his own virgin daughter in marriage does well, and he who does not give her in marriage will do better.
39A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. 40But in my opinion she is happier if she remains as she is; and I think that I also have the Spirit of God.

[Simon_Templar]

So, in that case, what is the solution? If someone has a phobia about getting married, should they be "dumped" or should they be helped? If you love them, should you "let them go"? Then, what would the consequences be? Perhaps they would become promiscuous or perhaps they would spend the rest of their life masturbating. Also, if you "dump" someone you love, because they do not want to get married yet, you end up alone and tempted by masturbation, yourself. This is also wrong, perhaps worse than staying with someone you love. Masturbation is self-love. This is not what we were intended for. We were meant to love others, not ourselves.

wether or not you should dump them would depend entirely on wether or not God is leading you to be with them etc.
However, in general "missionary dating" is a very bad idea and has produced far more negative results than positive.

Now, in the case above, if he's not willing to get married, does this mean you should be willing to comprimise your beliefs? What you are asking seems to be "should his fear of marriage trump my desire to do what is right" and the answer is absolutely not. He can not want to get married all he wants, that doesn't mean you have to have sex with him.

If a guy will not marry you, AND demands that you sleep with him.. 99% of the time he is going to turn out to be an honorless lout, and he loves himself far more than he loves you.

Even in a circumstance such as that, God may have mercy and work things out.. but to recomend that as a course of action is just testing God.

[Tetzel]

If one wants to have sex, one should be married.

If one does not want to be married, one should not have sex.

[She]

Edit

[pjw]

I am 18 years Old. I am a virgin.

If I am thirty and Unmarried, I will be a virgin.

If I am 60 and Unmarried, I will be a virgin.

Let me tell you something. As a teenager, I can tell you, if you have your mind on your business, avoid potentially dangerous situations, and call sin sin, it is not that hard.

(At least it isn't for me.)
dude, backing you 100%. i wouldn't say it's necessarily hard, but for me that's because i never really have the temptation there, i don't have a GF or anything, any girl that i have even the slightest inkling of attraction towards always turns out to be either, 1. a non-Christian, 2. already have a boyfriend, or, 3. way older than me or otherwise completely incompatible. :)