Celibacy marriage

[michalP]

Hello

First, let me apologize for my english (I'm not a native speaker) and I am posting for first time

I would like to discuss "Celibacy marriage" (which we are considering). Our view is:

The celibacy part
1) Husband and wife do not engage in any kind of sexual activity or activity that imply sexuality (touching private parts, ...)
2) Husband and wife do not see each other naked/half-naked
3) Husband and wife do not watch sexually explicit material and they do not touch

"allowed" affection example: Gentle kissing, hugs, resting head on shoulder, lying on lap or chest, arm around shoulder. (basically things parents do with their children (except for mouth kissing) to show affection)
Sleeping: separate bed in same room or single bed, if 1) and 2) remains in place.


The marriage part
Like any real marriage that lasts, this would be also based on spirituality, christianity. It is also sign of (hopefully lifelong) commitment. To put spouse needs above self. To love each other very much

Reason
Procreation - we currently do not plan children. As we find contraception (preservative, pill,...) not acceptable and in contradiction with Bible (for example Onan - take pleasure, do not take responsibility) this is only way to achieve that. This is not about money - we plan to donate to others in need major part of expenses that are related to parenthood.

Next reason is our mutual view of sex as:
1) Procreation (mentioned above)
2) Old, animal-like need (maybe as old as sin itself)
3) Bonding experience for couple

2 - we are hoping to "bypass" spiritually (as do catholic priests)
3 - we believe, that we are bonded very strongly. Mainly because spiritual connection easily overcome basic brain-bonding-chemistry. We know each other for some time now. We stay as virgins (no pre-marriage sexual activity) and we do not miss sex. Just being together, talking, kissing, reading, etc. is enough (this is not "just fallen in love" kind of thing when too much hormones are in play)

So, I would like to hear opinion of christian community about this. Do you think it is permissible ? Do you think it is sin to be in marriage and not have sex (and children) ?

Many thanks

 

[cowboysfan1970]

What you are talking about here is something called a Josephite Marriage. It's more or less where a man and a women get married and by mutual agreement they agree not to have sex. If the two are in agreement then it is not sin. You can't deprive or deny somebody of something that they don't want. The marriage is considered to be completely valid and indissoluble. If this is what you and your future wife want then you will have God's blessing. Sex is not required to make a marriage valid or official, the vows before God are. Now if someone was lead into marriage with the promise of there being sex and then the other decides that they don't want to then that is ground for annulment.

If the two of you are in agreement about there being no sex then you won't have a problem with it not being there. This will be a lot easier if both of you either have a very low sex drive or a non existent one. This might bring you both closer together spiritually in a way that sex couldn't. Sex is not the main thing in a marriage and there will come a time where a husband and wife can't perform for one reason or another. At that time if they don't have true spiritual development and closeness between them then they are going to be in real trouble. I know that there are going to be some that say what you are doing is wrong but you don't answer to them. If the two of you are committed to this marriage then your spiritual growth and closeness will become awesome.

 

[Johnnz]

You have some odd concepts about marriage and life in general as a Christian. What you described is not a biblical nor, and appears to go against somewhat sismilar views held by some in the church as Corinth. Paul very plainly adjusted their thinking on that.

John
NZ

 

[gods prophetess]

it sounds like you just have some odd concepts about marriage as a christian.im confused about your questian and this sounds like a josephite marriage but if your both in agreement whats the problem? praying for you both

 

[IisJustMe]

So, I would like to hear opinion of christian community about this. Do you think it is permissible ? Do you think it is sin to be in marriage and not have sex (and children) ?

Many thanks

Not a sin, but not practical, either. God gave man and woman to one another for the enjoyment of one another, spiritually, emotionally, intellectually, and physically. Note I placed the physical aspect last. That is because, while it is last method by which a husband and wife are to know one another, it is also the most sensual and the way in which not only they assure the "survival of the line" but also by which they complement one another, expressing love and affection for one another. Your idea is a bad one. It is not biblical.

 

[michalP]

Thank you for answers,

Not a sin, but not practical, either. God gave man and woman to one another for the enjoyment of one another, spiritually, emotionally, intellectually, and physically. Note I placed the physical aspect last. That is because, while it is last method by which a husband and wife are to know one another, it is also the most sensual and the way in which not only they assure the "survival of the line" but also by which they complement one another, expressing love and affection for one another. Your idea is a bad one. It is not biblical.

You do not think, that love can be expressed spiritually better than by sex ?
Well, and then there is the other thing: studies have shown that actual bonding between couple is not in act of sexual intercourse (which is often, frankly even in marriage driven by lust), but rather in cuddling, hudding and demonstrating (physical) affection in nonsexual way.

Doesn't that put sex in very, very strange way ? Paul says, that it is better no to act sexually. Why marriage cant be "just" unconditional love without sex (if consented by both parts) ?
And, when we follow Bible exactly (e.g. to have sex on regular basis) and NOT use contraception, sexually active people (25-40) years would have at least 10-12 children. So, how come christian families (in western world) have like 2-3 children in average ? There are two ways: either they are using contraception (=Onan=wrong) or they abstain (=wrong?) since there is no safe non-blocking contraception.

I'm not aware whether there is or is not verse in bible that prohibits unconsumed marriage?

(edit: I assume planning parrenthood (e.g. for financial reasons) is wrong, since you are enjoying sex with no responsibility for a time. (You could just start having sex when you are financially ready))

 

[rturner76]

I think a marriage has to be consummated to be valid. IT can be grounds for an annulment in the Catholic church I know.

I have seen marriages of homosexuals work before but they were still consumated

 

[juvenissun]

Hello

First, let me apologize for my english (I'm not a native speaker) and I am posting for first time

I would like to discuss "Celibacy marriage" (which we are considering). Our view is:

The celibacy part
1) Husband and wife do not engage in any kind of sexual activity or activity that imply sexuality (touching private parts, ...)
2) Husband and wife do not see each other naked/half-naked
3) Husband and wife do not watch sexually explicit material and they do not touch

"allowed" affection example: Gentle kissing, hugs, resting head on shoulder, lying on lap or chest, arm around shoulder. (basically things parents do with their children (except for mouth kissing) to show affection)
Sleeping: separate bed in same room or single bed, if 1) and 2) remains in place.


The marriage part
Like any real marriage that lasts, this would be also based on spirituality, christianity. It is also sign of (hopefully lifelong) commitment. To put spouse needs above self. To love each other very much

Reason
Procreation - we currently do not plan children. As we find contraception (preservative, pill,...) not acceptable and in contradiction with Bible (for example Onan - take pleasure, do not take responsibility) this is only way to achieve that. This is not about money - we plan to donate to others in need major part of expenses that are related to parenthood.

Next reason is our mutual view of sex as:
1) Procreation (mentioned above)
2) Old, animal-like need (maybe as old as sin itself)
3) Bonding experience for couple

2 - we are hoping to "bypass" spiritually (as do catholic priests)
3 - we believe, that we are bonded very strongly. Mainly because spiritual connection easily overcome basic brain-bonding-chemistry. We know each other for some time now. We stay as virgins (no pre-marriage sexual activity) and we do not miss sex. Just being together, talking, kissing, reading, etc. is enough (this is not "just fallen in love" kind of thing when too much hormones are in play)

So, I would like to hear opinion of christian community about this. Do you think it is permissible ? Do you think it is sin to be in marriage and not have sex (and children) ?

Many thanks

It is all good if you can do it, and if the marriage can sustain.

Like what Paul said, if doing these caused you to sin in other way, then I think it is better for you to give up and prepare to have children.

The basic problem in this issue: think carefully about the reason of rejecting contraception. I don't think sperm/egg cells are any different from the skin cells before they merged.

 

[Theofane]

I think a marriage has to be consummated to be valid. IT can be grounds for an annulment in the Catholic church I know.

I agree.

There's Genesis 2:24 to consider.

 

[seeingeyes]

I believe that married couples should have as much sex as they both agree to. If that is zero sex, then it is only between you and your wife. But a sex drive can change over the course of life.

What will happen if you are married for 10 years and then your wife decides she wants to have sex? Or what if she turns 32 and decides that her uterus feels empty and that she must have a baby? You will have to either concede your position, or allow her a divorce. Have you considered this?

But, assuming that you can both remain in agreement on this for the rest of your lives, the only thing I would argue against in your OP is sleeping in separate rooms/beds. There is an intimacy that only comes from sleeping in each other's arms, waking each other up with snoring, having your loved one within arms reach after a nightmare.

 

[michalP]

I believe that married couples should have as much sex as they both agree to. If that is zero sex, then it is only between you and your wife. But a sex drive can change over the course of life.

What will happen if you are married for 10 years and then your wife decides she wants to have sex? Or what if she turns 32 and decides that her uterus feels empty and that she must have a baby? You will have to either concede your position, or allow her a divorce. Have you considered this?

But, assuming that you can both remain in agreement on this for the rest of your lives, the only thing I would argue against in your OP is sleeping in separate rooms/beds. There is an intimacy that only comes from sleeping in each other's arms, waking each other up with snoring, having your loved one within arms reach after a nightmare.

I am not sure but I think that if my wife would like to have baby I would probably object for some period of time but as I love her very much I'm sure that eventually I would agree.

I'm mainly concerned if it is sin to be in marriage/relationship with everything related to it (caring,loving,helping,...) but not having sexual relationship (both for contraception reason and that we do not find sexual life that interesting. We like more just having each other)

 

[seeingeyes]

I am not sure but I think that if my wife would like to have baby I would probably object for some period of time but as I love her very much I'm sure that eventually I would agree.

I'm mainly concerned if it is sin to be in marriage/relationship with everything related to it (caring,loving,helping,...) but not having sexual relationship (both for contraception reason and that we do not find sexual life that interesting. We like more just having each other)

A celibate marriage would no doubt be the exception to the rule, but the Bible is silent on this issue. There is no need for us to make more laws to follow.

The biggest issue would be the practical considerations between husband and wife (which is true of all marriages).

 

[IisJustMe]

You do not think, that love can be expressed spiritually better than by sex?

Do you not think there is a spiritual aspect to true sexual intimacy between a husband and a wife? Ask yourself, why did God create a continuing sexual interest and sexual appeal in human beings? Our sexual desires go beyond child bearing years. It last well into our 70's, 80's, even 90's. They only thing that may nullify it is health concerns, and even then, ways can be found to enjoy one another at that advanced age and despite the health concerns. This in itself is a healthy trait of the human mind and is triggered by hormones that God designed the body to produce.

But why? God created this sustained interest in sex as a means for men and women to express love in marriage.

This is one of the great purposes for sex that many have failed to understand. A look at history reveals that we're no further along in understanding this aspect of God's design than were many bygone cultures. Studies have shown that actual bonding within a couple is not in act of sexual intercourse (which is often, frankly even in marriage driven by lust), but rather in cuddling, hugging and demonstrating (physical) affection in ways that do not have to lead to the sexual act

Some of the leaders in the early centuries of the Christian religion advocated views that caused marriage and sex to be held in low regard. Augustine, of the fourth century, wrote: "I have decided that there is nothing I should avoid so much as marriage. I know nothing which brings the manly mind down from the heights more than a woman's caresses and that joining of bodies without which one cannot have a wife" ( Christian History, 2000, Vol. 19, Issue 3, p. 36).

Augustine made this comment shortly after his conversion. Eventually he rose to a high position in the Catholic Church, and it wasn't long before his views and those of others resulted in marriage and sex being regarded as a less-honorable state than celibacy. The church came to erroneously teach that the sole purpose of sex was reproduction.

But was this all that God intended? Certainly not! God designed the male and female bodies to provide pleasure in marriage. Regrettably, one of the tragic results of distorted religious views stipulating that sex was given solely for reproduction was that it often caused enormous guilt in married couples who engaged in sexual behavior as an expression of their love for each other, as God intended.

It's long been a common practice among men to manipulate women just to obtain sexual favors from them. Women in turn manipulate men so they can get something in return. Sadly, this practice is still common even in the relationship between some husbands and wives. When such selfish attitudes persist in a marriage, at least one and possibly both mates use sex to get something, even if it is nothing more than sensual gratification, rather than to give and express love. Genuine love, as God designed it, is an act of giving. In marriage it is cherishing one's mate. It is an eagerness to please, help and encourage.

That sex is a means of expressing love is made plain in Paul's epistle to the Ephesians. "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for her,... that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies ... For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh" (Ephesians 5:25-31).

Doesn't that put sex in very, very strange way ? Paul says, that it is better no to act sexually. Why marriage cant be "just" unconditional love without sex (if consented by both parts)?

Out of context and incorrect application. As I've just shown, Paul did not discourage marriage or sexual intimacy. He is speaking to singles in your (incorrectly quoted) passage, regarding their apparent tendency to marry simply for the sake of having sexual access. Obviously that is the wrong use of the holy bond of matrimony, and Paul stated this clearly.

And, when we follow Bible exactly (e.g. to have sex on regular basis) and NOT use contraception, sexually active people (25-40) years would have at least 10-12 children.

Sorry, but what you have said here is not in the Bible. It is Catholic tradition, as I outlined above in regards to Augustine.

So, how come christian families (in western world) have like 2-3 children in average ? There are two ways: either they are using contraception (=Onan=wrong) or they abstain (=wrong?) since there is no safe non-blocking contraception.

Again, not biblical, but erroneously applied Catholic doctrine.

I'm not aware whether there is or is not verse in bible that prohibits unconsumed marriage?

Perhaps not, but there is obvious encouragement to consummate, and to claim otherwise is to ignore the scriptural evidence.

 

[cowboysfan1970]

I'm mainly concerned if it is sin to be in marriage/relationship with everything related to it (caring,loving,helping,...) but not having sexual relationship (both for contraception reason and that we do not find sexual life that interesting. We like more just having each other)

If neither one of you wants it or seeks it then no there is no sin. Someone can't be denied something they don't want. I know that there are people out there that eat souse and like it but not me. I don't even want to try it. Just the look of it is disgusting. If my supermarket stopped carrying it then my heart won't be broken because I don't want it in the first place. Likewise if somebody doesn't want sex they can't be denied it by someone else. But if one of you decides that they do want sex then the other one has to comply. That's why you both need to be 100% sure about this.

There are people that get married knowing that sex isn't and won't ever be in the picture for all types of reasons. Some because they just have no interest and others because of some kind of physical problem. I heard once of a man who had been born without his penis and he got married to a woman who knew that sex was never going to be a part of their marriage. I don't think that their marriage was in any way less or inferior or illegitimate. I think they were just as married as any other husband and wife. There are a lot of husbands and wives out there that might be having sex but that's about all they share. I don't know how that could be any better or more legitimate than a couple that maybe can't have sex but have much greater emotional and spiritual closeness.

 

[DamianWarS]

Abstaining from sex within marriage is as unbiblical as not wanting to have children within marriage. If you don't want to have sex for the sole purpose not to have children than your abstaining is just taking the place of a contraceptive. You think you are tricking the system by abstaining from sex but you are still taking in the pleasure of the marriage but at the same time making it impossible not to have children. This defiles some of the very fundamentals of marriage itself by refusing elements that it was designed around such as sex and procreation.

In most traditions, including Jewish, having sex is what physically joins the marriage and if you don't have sex then many will consider your marriage incomplete. In fact legally you can have a marriage annulled if it has not been consummated so you have even found a loop hole for divorce. What exactly do you think "becoming one flesh" (Gen 1:24) is talking about. I'm sure you can argue that it means spiritual, emotional and financial oneness but does it not also mean physical oneness? What exactly is a child? Is it not exactly half of the woman and half of the man fused together in perfect oneness from the result of a physical union between man and woman designed around sex?

Just look at how a woman's body is designed? With a typical 28-day cycle the woman has a practical 3-day window of fertility. With most woman menstrual cycles last 3-5 days which leaves 21-23 days to have sex without the possibility of getting pregnant and not during a menstrual cycle. If a couple had sex every 3 days then using the above info they would have sex 7 times in this cycle and only one of those times there would be the possibility of getting pregnant which is about 86% of the times that you have sex the only product that will get out of it is pleasure. With those numbers it almost suggests pleasure it a dominating effect of sex even over procreation.

I am fine with you saying you disagree with contraceptives but if you refuse to have sex with your spouse because you don't want to procreation then you should abstain from marriage as a whole.

 

[michalP]

Abstaining from sex within marriage is as unbiblical as not wanting to have children within marriage. If you don't want to have sex for the sole purpose not to have children than your abstaining is just taking the place of a contraceptive. You think you are tricking the system by abstaining from sex but you are still taking in the pleasure of the marriage but at the same time making it impossible not to have children. This defiles some of the very fundamentals of marriage itself by refusing elements that it was designed around such as sex and procreation.

In most traditions, including Jewish, having sex is what physically joins the marriage and if you don't have sex then many will consider your marriage incomplete. In fact legally you can have a marriage annulled if it has not been consummated so you have even found a loop hole for divorce. What exactly do you think "becoming one flesh" (Gen 1:24) is talking about. I'm sure you can argue that it means spiritual, emotional and financial oneness but does it not also mean physical oneness? What exactly is a child? Is it not exactly half of the woman and half of the man fused together in perfect oneness from the result of a physical union between man and woman designed around sex?

Just look at how a woman's body is designed? With a typical 28-day cycle the woman has a practical 3-day window of fertility. With most woman menstrual cycles last 3-5 days which leaves 21-23 days to have sex without the possibility of getting pregnant and not during a menstrual cycle. If a couple had sex every 3 days then using the above info they would have sex 7 times in this cycle and only one of those times there would be the possibility of getting pregnant which is about 86% of the times that you have sex the only product that will get out of it is pleasure. With those numbers it almost suggests pleasure it a dominating effect of sex even over procreation.

I am fine with you saying you disagree with contraceptives but if you refuse to have sex with your spouse because you don't want to procreation then you should abstain from marriage as a whole.

Actually there are two reasons:
1) Contraceptive (we currently do not plan children, and we are not willing to have sex purely for joy without possibility of procreation)
2) We do not find sex that interesting. If sex is mandatory in man-woman love union than we find it more like obligation than something we would spontaneously do

 

[DamianWarS]

abstaining from sex for the purposes of not procreating whether you like it or not is in itself a type of contraceptive. There are obviously more benefits in a marriage then just sex and you will be freely enjoying those pleasures but still actively engage in a form of contraceptive (abstinence) to ensure that you do not procreate. I really don't see the difference between that and a condom or "the pill" or other popular contraceptives.

be that as it may your views on this will be very uncommon to such a degree that many people will think the two of you as as little odd. When we do something that is so against the grain of our culture our culture begins to wonder why and usually will write you off and try and avoid you... even within the Christian community. We certainly do not do things just because everyone else is doing it however when it comes to sex within marriage you can be confident that you are doing something that God has ordained and designed our bodies for it (no matter how animal-like it may seem). If you become estranged to your culture then the gospel is wasted but if are able to identify your mission and reach people in their needs and understanding always using Christ's law as your compass then the gospel will be proclaimed and lived through you effectively.

I know it seems a little odd to say that having sex is better for the gospel and that's not exactly what I'm saying but more that abstaining from sex as a newly married couple will be a disservice to your testimony. I suggest the two you seek christian counseling to help identify exactly why is it you don't desire sex like you do. Sex is not the enemy and don't start condemning it simply because you don't want to have children. Use the "rhythm" method if you are so against contraceptives as morally speaking it is no different than abstaining to avoid procreation. At the very least have sex on your wedding night to physically join the marriage embracing the design of God.

 

[michalP]

abstaining from sex for the purposes of not procreating whether you like it or not is in itself a type of contraceptive. There are obviously more benefits in a marriage then just sex and you will be freely enjoying those pleasures but still actively engage in a form of contraceptive (abstinence) to ensure that you do not procreate. I really don't see the difference between that and a condom or "the pill" or other popular contraceptives.

When I read how good man-woman design is : wouldn't then two people procreate while kissing or hugging ?

Moreover, not being able to care / give best possible options for child is in Bible condemned as worse than being unbeliever. So every marriage has to be backed up financially ?

And, the last question: imagine two couples. One is waiting (e.g. 10 years to have child) by abstaining from sex, second use many tricks like counting days when yes and when no. So they are enjoying sex while completely "secure".
Are those couples equal from view of law ? I do not think so ...

And, as I said, not procreating is one reason. Second is, that I (we) just do not find sexual activity so thrilling. So having sex would be actually forcing (both of us). Is that OK?

 

[DamianWarS]

When I read how good man-woman design is : wouldn't then two people procreate while kissing or hugging ?

I don't really know what you mean by this. Obviously you cannot conceive when you kiss and hug but that is an example of an intimacy that may only happen between you and your spouse and so it is an example of a physical pleasure that comes along with getting marriage. However while you are freely enjoying yourselves like this you abstain from sexual intercourse to stop any kind of conception... this is "contra conception" or a contraceptive. Why don't you just have sex but don't [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] then you can enjoy the pleasure of sex but because you don't [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] there is no risk of Onan's curse that you are so worried about.

Moreover, not being able to care / give best possible options for child is in Bible condemned as worse than being unbeliever. So every marriage has to be backed up financially ?

what about caring for the needs of your wife? You are the male role of the marriage and in that you are to take the leadership of the marriage. No matter how modern society plays it up women enjoy being in healthy relationships where the male takes charge. This isn't to say that men abuse this privilege but it is done when a male properly identifies his role in marriage and acts accordingly to it. Your role is to love your wife and be the leader of the relationship. It is up to you to look at your relationship and initiate the needed focuses the two of you may lack to build a strong healthy relationship that is centered around God. If you lack in physical intimacy than the blame gets put on the leader and you need to lead your relationship into the a healthy focused marriage that can enjoy physical desire and intimacy. If your wife doesn't desire it and your don't desire it than start to do things to build that desire up between the two of you. Saying you don't desire it is a bad signal not a good one.

And, the last question: imagine two couples. One is waiting (e.g. 10 years to have child) by abstaining from sex, second use many tricks like counting days when yes and when no. So they are enjoying sex while completely "secure".
Are those couples equal from view of law ? I do not think so ...

What law you are trying to abide by? It the account of Onan? What law existed when Onan was around? I will give you a hint... there was no law at the time of Onan because there was no levitical priesthood established yet. You are removing an account from the bible from its context and rearranging it a little than trying to apply it to your own life. Onan was engaging in a practice very much unaccepted today. His brother died so it was his responsibility to carry on his brothers line by having sex with his sister-in-law so she would conceive in the name of Onan's brother. He did not want to have a child this way because he knew it would not be raised as his own so he withdrew from his sister-in-law in time that his seminal fluid would not enter her thus he was preventing the possibility of conception.

The law that eventually articulated this was the law of a Levirate marriage which is a when the brother of a deceased man is obliged to marry his brother's widow. This can be found in Deuteronomy 25:9-10 and it explains that if a man refuses to carry out this 'duty,' the woman must spit on the ground in front of him, take one of his shoes, and the others in the town must always call him 'the one without a shoe'. By Onan actions he refused to participate in this and tried to cover it up and lie about it. The action was consider evil by God and he was killed. How exactly does that relate do you? Marriage is designed around sex and sex is designed around pleasure, to reject these things is to reject the very design of God.

And, as I said, not procreating is one reason. Second is, that I (we) just do not find sexual activity so thrilling. So having sex would be actually forcing (both of us). Is that OK?

if you don't want to have sex because you have no desire for it than I would suggest you both have intimacy issues that you need to deal with. That really is not a good start of a healthy relationship and no matter if you choose to have sex or not I would suggest you talk to a christian counselor so you can address these intimacy issues and better prepare yourself for marriage and understand your reasons for this lack of desire.

if I told my wife that I no longer want to have sex because I no longer desire it she is going to feel like I no longer desire her and its going to effect our intimacy we have together. Sexual intimacy (when done in its proper context) accomplishes something that no other intimacy can because it makes the two of you completely vulnerable and exposed to each other but you surrender these feelings and simply put trust in your partner. It also has a focus that in general reciprocates the roles of marriage where the male is in control and the female is in submission yet the the actions of both are dictated by love for each other not selfish desires. Simple life-examples that can break these roles down for us in easy to follow and understanding lessons allow us to understand more clearly the roles of marriage; sex is an example of how this can be accomplished. In short if you don't have sex with your spouse you are missing out on one of the easy and most fulfilling intimacy and role lessons that marriage offers that God has designed and ordained. To quote some nonsense about Onan is missing the point completly.

 

[wannabeadesigirl]

Personally I would avoid placing myself in a situation in which temptation could arise. In 1st Corinthians 7:8 Paul says that widows and the unmarried ought to remain unmarried. However in 7:9 he says that people who burn with lust ought to get married so they don't put themselves in compromising situations.

It seems to me that Paul thinks if you are capable of living solitary and celibate then you should, to avoid placing more attention on your spouse than on God. Do you and your spouse have a plan to worship and pray together? Do you have plans to serve the community around you?


With that being said I think you ought to discuss the possibility of changing your minds about sex in the future. You should create a plan or an agreement that will allow you to engage in sexual activities as a devout married couple. Don't make an oath to never have sex, because you might change your mind.

Other than those contemplations I wish you the best future with your and your fiance.