Does having sex make you married?

[just_monicat]

The issue at hand is not "sex before marriage". Scriptures says that if two have this attraction to one another, and even act on it, they have not sinned.

1 Corinthians 7
36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

The sin is them not remaining together.

i'm not sure if i am completely following, but if so, that's an interesting take on that verse that i didn't see. i had to go back and re-read it again with fresh eyes, and i don't know that i come to the same conclusion that you did.

for my benefit, i'm using the amplified version

• .
  9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.​
  
  
  
  • Like
  
  
  Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.
  ​
  
  
  
  
  

  Reply

  

  Reply With Quote

  

  ​
  Blog this Post
  
  
• 1 Minute Ago
  #33​
  
  
  
  
  Markum1972
  
  
  
  Senior Member
  
  
  Join DateMarch 25th, 2013Age42Posts696Rep Power2
  
  [h=2]
  
  Re: Does having sex make you married?[/h]
  The issue at hand is not "sex before marriage". Scriptures says that if two have this attraction to one another, and even act on it, they have not sinned.
  
  1 Corinthians 7
  36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.
  
  The sin is them not remaining together.​
  
  
  
  • Like
  
  
  Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.
  ​
  
  
  
  
  

  Reply

  

  Reply With Quote

  

  ​
  Blog this Post
  
  
• [h=3]
  
  Quick Reply[/h]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

36 But if any man thinks that he is not acting properly toward and in regard to his virgin [that he is preparing disgrace for her or incurring reproach], in case she is passing the bloom of her youth and if there is need for it, let him do what to him seems right; he does not sin; let them marry.

my reading of that leads me to conclude that if they are already planning to marry, they are instructed to marry (sooner vs. later) rather than incur the repercussions of (among other things) sin.

one of the reasons i brought up pre-marital sex is because such a thing wouldn't exist if marriage simply had a cause and effect relationship with sex.

so i would ask you, then: does pre-marital sex even exist?

 

[just_monicat]

The issue at hand is not "sex before marriage". Scriptures says that if two have this attraction to one another, and even act on it, they have not sinned.

1 Corinthians 7
36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

The sin is them not remaining together.

ok, that's a different take on that verse than i read. i actually went back again to look at it with fresh eyes, and have a bit of a different conclusion.

36 But if any man thinks that he is not acting properly toward and in regard to his virgin [that he is preparing disgrace for her or incurring reproach], in case she is passing the bloom of her youth and if there is need for it, let him do what to him seems right; he does not sin; let them marry. (AMP)

to me, that verse speaks to avoiding the consequences of sinful action by choosing to marry (rather than delay) someone who's already intended for marriage.

so in this case, the important distinction is "his virgin" meaning that they've already declared their intention to marry.

to me, the "intention of marriage" is a concept that seems very important in the distinction what makes a marriage recognized as such.

the sex itself isn't enough for her to be his wife.

 

[just_monicat]

oh i am so sorry for the extra posts, all.

i should know better than trying to multi-task. : )

 

[RedTent]

Another example I included was incest.

To the horror and shame of society, way too many people are subjected to sexual abuse within their own families.

If a young woman is abused by her own father, a cousin, brother, etc., are they required to marry? I would think, absolutely not! And if she is abused by her mother's boyfriend/husband (who is not her father), should she be required to marry him, especially if he is already married to her mother?

Again, I would think not, but I'm always open towards learning if there are passages that state something otherwise.

It is the sex act that makes two into one. But two do not become one in a Godly way, without it being sinful, when sex is only done in a material way. That is ungodly, sinful sex, and will be handled like a very serious sin. If someone has been unjustly treated, has been wronged in this way, God is a just God and everything will be done to see justice is done.

A marriage license is a material thing, not spiritual even though God gives governments jurisdiction to authorize marriage license. This is explained in the book of Romans. A person who refuses a marriage license to represent marriage usually also refuses the spiritual responsibility of marriage. However the true author of marriage is God, not government.

If someone is forced to be a partner to sin, then that person is abused and mistreated in the worse way. All the powers of heaven come to her aide and gather around her to work for love and justice for her.

To search the bible where scripture backs this up, do look up all scripture says about justice. Because the OT uses living people in everyday circumstances to show God principles, by following those lives sometimes we can see, better, how God is working, especially as prophets are there in the verses to explain it to us.

 

[Markum1972]

Another example I included was incest.

To the horror and shame of society, way too many people are subjected to sexual abuse within their own families.

If a young woman is abused by her own father, a cousin, brother, etc., are they required to marry? I would think, absolutely not! And if she is abused by her mother's boyfriend/husband (who is not her father), should she be required to marry him, especially if he is already married to her mother?

Again, I would think not, but I'm always open towards learning if there are passages that state something otherwise.

Abusive situations would not fit within the parameters of what God created as natural affection. Natural affection involves love. These things are called corrupt and vile affections. The scriptures cover this so I would be in full agreement with you in that these are not cases where the two are bound to remain together.

Incest is also covered in scripture. God told Moses that it was no longer necessary. It had been quite some time since Noah. God said no more of this behavior as it causes confusion. I can look up the script if you would like but I think we are DEFINITELY in agreement on these things.

 

[cinder]

If sex=marriage then

• Child molestation = marriage
• Rape = marriage
• Sex when your self control is severely impaired by substances = marriage
• Being trafficked and sexually exploited = marriage

Now while there are consequences to any of these actions, the sex = marriage idea means that I can "biblically" be forced into a bad marriage that is completely beyond my control. If sex = marriage what should those who have been through such circumstances (which is a significant portion of the world's population) do? Are we really going to take a position that tells them the God of redemption and hope says the only righteous course of action is to spend their lives alone or with the person who has abused them?

Now to answer some of the Biblical arguments (because I completely agree that we need to be led by the Bible)

The woman at the well- if she acknowledges that Jesus speaks the truth when he says she has had 5 husbands but has a non-husband man now, she must have been married to them by the definitions of her culture, not just a special standard Jesus had in mind but didn't mention in that conversation.

1 Cor 7:36-37 - since this passage continually references virginity and the decision to marry or not to marry, it is unreasonable to interpret it as "if they have had sex already, let them marry". The context supports the idea of not treating a woman well by being engaged to her but never getting to the marriage. And since it refers to a person's own thoughts on the matter or opinion, it must be a situation not nearly as clear cut as sleeping with her.

I would argue that Jesus' statement about people getting married right up until Noah entered the ark ( Luke 17:27) as well as the presence of the words husband and wife in Genesis tells us that marriage is an ancient idea, and we can see that almost every culture in history has had some form of formal marriage ceremony and that the ideal of sexual exclusivity was a part of marriage.

So, I conclude that marriage is a godly social construct. Sex should be limited to marriage, but one does not necessarily equal the other and never has. After all, no one upon hearing that some guy slept with their little sister is going to say congratulations on your marriage. They are much more likely to be angry that their sister was taken advantage of. Much of the Bible was written at a time when part of the worship of other gods was to go and sleep with the temple prostitutes. If people redeemed out of such a background could go on to have godly marriages, why do we want to make it hard for modern day people?

 

[Markum1972]

ok, that's a different take on that verse than i read. i actually went back again to look at it with fresh eyes, and have a bit of a different conclusion.

36 But if any man thinks that he is not acting properly toward and in regard to his virgin [that he is preparing disgrace for her or incurring reproach], in case she is passing the bloom of her youth and if there is need for it, let him do what to him seems right; he does not sin; let them marry. (AMP)

to me, that verse speaks to avoiding the consequences of sinful action by choosing to marry (rather than delay) someone who's already intended for marriage.

so in this case, the important distinction is "his virgin" meaning that they've already declared their intention to marry.

to me, the "intention of marriage" is a concept that seems very important in the distinction what makes a marriage recognized as such.

the sex itself isn't enough for her to be his wife.

I agree because either could choose to leave the other. Marriage is the commitment to remain together, forsake all others, and let no man divide asunder what God put together. This commitment should be made when two become one flesh if it has not already been made beforehand. In either case, it pleases the Lord.

1 Corinthians 7
34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

This begs the question if a harlot repents, is she still defiled? a divorced woman, same thing... if she's given a certificate of divorce, is she still defiled?

The BIGGEST Question I have is: If someone is not part of the Body of Christ... does this rule apply still? Can't hold non-believers to these rules and laws can we?

I expect more of the Body of Christ, non-believers aren't under the spirit or the law I thought.

Here is a good question for sure. For the sake of focusing on moreso one aspect you bring up, let's simplify it to; can a harlot or and adutlerer or anyone is such circumstance repent?

Here I think is the best story. Jesus shows the way!

John 8

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
[SUP]2 [/SUP]And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
[SUP]4 [/SUP]They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
[SUP]6 [/SUP]This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
[SUP]9 [/SUP]And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
[SUP]10 [/SUP]When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
[SUP]11 [/SUP]She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
[SUP]12 [/SUP]Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.
[SUP]14 [/SUP]Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.
[SUP]15 [/SUP]Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
[SUP]16 [/SUP]And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.
[SUP]17 [/SUP]It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
[SUP]18 [/SUP]I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
[SUP]19 [/SUP]Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.
[SUP]20 [/SUP]These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.
[SUP]21 [/SUP]Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
[SUP]25 [/SUP]Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.
[SUP]26 [/SUP]I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.
[SUP]27 [/SUP]They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
[SUP]28 [/SUP]Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
[SUP]29 [/SUP]And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.
[SUP]30 [/SUP]As he spake these words, many believed on him.
[SUP]31 [/SUP]Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
[SUP]32 [/SUP]And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
[SUP]33 [/SUP]They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
[SUP]34 [/SUP]Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
[SUP]35 [/SUP]And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
[SUP]36 [/SUP]If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
[SUP]37 [/SUP]I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
[SUP]38 [/SUP]I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
[SUP]39 [/SUP]They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
[SUP]40 [/SUP]But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
[SUP]41 [/SUP]Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
[SUP]42 [/SUP]Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
[SUP]43 [/SUP]Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
[SUP]44 [/SUP]Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
[SUP]45 [/SUP]And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
[SUP]46 [/SUP]Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
[SUP]47 [/SUP]He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
[SUP]48 [/SUP]Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
[SUP]49 [/SUP]Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.
[SUP]50 [/SUP]And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth.
[SUP]51 [/SUP]Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
[SUP]52 [/SUP]Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.
[SUP]53 [/SUP]Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?
[SUP]54 [/SUP]Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
[SUP]55 [/SUP]Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.
[SUP]56 [/SUP]Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
[SUP]57 [/SUP]Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
[SUP]58 [/SUP]Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
[SUP]59 [/SUP]Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.


Bit lengthy I realize. Was meaning moreso the story relating to your comment being verses 1-15, but, eh why not get a full gospel chapter I figure for Resurrection Week Bible goodness

 

[GodIsSalvation]

If sex=marriage then

• Child molestation = marriage
• Rape = marriage
• Sex when your self control is severely impaired by substances = marriage
• Being trafficked and sexually exploited = marriage

• 
  
  Well molestation would be moreso like a very evil fornication, not so much sex like marriage all that. Not to diminish its sinfulness, but just making a distinction here, still is not good and is evil obviously. I need not even write such a thing for ye good peoples to know that.

Er sadly yes technically all that and such be "marriage" but obviously you see where its all wrong its more like anti-marriage its sinful and degrading and wrong obviously because it goes against love. These are why these things are wrong.

 

[DarlinNadia]

We can't & don't..God does though. Ever hear of Judgement Day?

Where is it at in 1 Cor 13 ? Love keeps no record of wrongs. If my sin was buried with Christ and Christ overcame my sin, why then will God bring it up on the day of Judgement? I have some issues on this detail which I continue to pray about.

It's like when someone prays for something over and over again.. why not just pray once and have faith God will handle it...to pray and pray about something is like believing God hasn't heard you the first time. (I pray for things over and over again.. much like I tell my daughter over and over again that I love her... but the point is still the same)

 

[Markum1972]

If sex=marriage then

• Child molestation = marriage
• Rape = marriage
• Sex when your self control is severely impaired by substances = marriage
• Being trafficked and sexually exploited = marriage

Now while there are consequences to any of these actions, the sex = marriage idea means that I can "biblically" be forced into a bad marriage that is completely beyond my control. If sex = marriage what should those who have been through such circumstances (which is a significant portion of the world's population) do? Are we really going to take a position that tells them the God of redemption and hope says the only righteous course of action is to spend their lives alone or with the person who has abused them?

Agreed with you in my last post. lol

Now to answer some of the Biblical arguments (because I completely agree that we need to be led by the Bible)

The woman at the well- if she acknowledges that Jesus speaks the truth when he says she has had 5 husbands but has a non-husband man now, she must have been married to them by the definitions of her culture, not just a special standard Jesus had in mind but didn't mention in that conversation.

We cannot assume that this woman was having sex with the man she was with. My grandmother lived with a man for 50 years after the passing of her husband, yet never had sex with him. This is a common presumption made that is not written in the scriptures.

1 Cor 7:36-37 - since this passage continually references virginity and the decision to marry or not to marry, it is unreasonable to interpret it as "if they have had sex already, let them marry". The context supports the idea of not treating a woman well by being engaged to her but never getting to the marriage. And since it refers to a person's own thoughts on the matter or opinion, it must be a situation not nearly as clear cut as sleeping with her.

This is true. It does not state that they had intercourse. Uncomely/unseemingly could mean many other things. What is evident is that he should not be ashamed for the affection that he had and understand that God created this between a man and woman. It also says to not deny them to be married.

 

[Markum1972]

Well molestation would be moreso like a very evil fornication, not so much sex like marriage all that. Not to diminish its sinfulness, but just making a distinction here, still is not good and is evil obviously. I need not even write such a thing for ye good peoples to know that.
[/LIST]

Er sadly yes technically all that and such be "marriage" but obviously you see where its all wrong its more like anti-marriage its sinful and degrading and wrong obviously because it goes against love. These are why these things are wrong.

Right... well put... let's not forget the leaving of mother and father and "clinging". It is a beautiful loving act. There is no sacrifice or love involved in abusive situations. Those are vile affections and abominable to God.

 

[DarlinNadia]

Lot and his daughters. They weren't married and they had sex.

 

[Grace-Like-Rain]

.

Wow, this thread blew up while I was away. I gotta say how amazed I am that this has been discussed in such a godly way by everyone, and I'm impressed with the valid arguments on both sides.

Here's another one to consider though:

John 4:16-19

[SUP]16 [/SUP]Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.
[SUP]17 [/SUP]The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:
[SUP]18 [/SUP]For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.
[SUP]19 [/SUP]The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.


So how could the Samaritan woman have had 5 husbands yet not have a husband? Simple answer, she slept with 5 different guys.

But if she'd been with five guys (husbands), and then she was with a sixth guy, by your argument the sixth man would have also been listed as a husband. What sets the 6th man apart from the first 5?

Okay Western concept of marriage I think is what confuses some. Basically in the olden days marriage consists of two basic principles:

1. Man and Woman leaving their parent's care

2. Them having sex and thus beginning a family

Fornication is any unclean sexual act. Sex with an animal is fornication, masturbating is fornication, adultery is fornication.

The 5th husband of the Woman at the Well is not technically her hhusband because technically she is an adulteress against her first husband.

If she was an adulteress against her first husband with her sixth, then why are the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th also listed as being her husbands? Any man after the first one would have been not technically a husband due to adultery, right?

The only way I can view this passage with consistency is to assume that she'd had a marriage contract with the first 5 men, but did not have one with the 6th man. If that weren't the case, then either ALL of the men after the first one would NOT have been husbands, or else all of them without exception WOULD have been husbands.

On fornication, you are saying that sex between two single people is never a sin because it is considered "clean" since they are both unattached?

The issue at hand is not "sex before marriage". Scriptures says that if two have this attraction to one another, and even act on it, they have not sinned.

1 Corinthians 7
36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

The sin is them not remaining together.

This is very interesting. I had to look it up and read more about it. Here is a commentary offering another possible interpretation to the scripture. It leads that the man with "his virgin" is actually the father, not the husband-to-be.

But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry. Nevertheless he who stands steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but has power over his own will, and has so determined in his heart that he will keep his virgin, does well. So then he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.


a. If any man thinks he is behaving improperly towards his virgin: The man Paul refers to is the father of a young woman or man of marrying age (his virgin). The behaving improperly has nothing to do with any kind of improper moral behavior, but with denying his daughter or son the right to marry, based on the way Paul values singleness.

i. Remember that in this ancient culture, a young person's parents had the primary responsibility for arranging their marriage. So based on what Paul has already taught, should a Christian father recommend celibacy to his child?

ii. The term virgin includes the young of both sexes.

b. Let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry: Paul says it is not wrong for a father to allow his young daughter to marry, even allowing for the desirability of singleness at the present time.

c. Because singleness does have its benefits, Paul will recommend it, not only to individuals, but also to fathers in regard to the marrying off of their daughters.

d. He who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better: For Paul, the choice between married and single was not the choice between good and bad, but between better and best. And for Paul, in light of the present circumstances, he regarded singleness as best.

 

[RedTent]

Lot and his daughters. They weren't married and they had sex.

There was a LOT of ungodly sex illustrated in OT, and every time God shows it as not how our world was created to be.

Just as in every other biblical question we have, we have to put all of scripture to work to find how God looks at it. Front and Center has to be the simple picture of Godly sex, with a male and female uniting themselves again, as Adam and Eve united, to form a union that creates a Godly family.

Whenever there is a variation of that, we must go to scripture to find out what we are to do to heal that sin. Sometimes that is just a matter of Christ.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

.

Wow, this thread blew up while I was away. I gotta say how amazed I am that this has been discussed in such a godly way by everyone, and I'm impressed with the valid arguments on both sides.



But if she'd been with five guys (husbands), and then she was with a sixth guy, by your argument the sixth man would have also been listed as a husband. What sets the 6th man apart from the first 5?

No, the first guy she married be her official husband. The 5th guy is the guy she with now (or err, back then almost 2000 years ago). Lol I assume it to be true be her reaction, she thought Jesus was a prophet for knowing this! And of course he points her to Him being the Messiah and show forgiveness and kindness to her. Not sure what happen to her afterwards, but I have faith I think maybe her meeting with Jesus helped her.

 

[DarlinNadia]

No, the first guy she married be her official husband. The 5th guy is the guy she with now (or err, back then almost 2000 years ago). Lol I assume it to be true be her reaction, she thought Jesus was a prophet for knowing this! And of course he points her to Him being the Messiah and show forgiveness and kindness to her. Not sure what happen to her afterwards, but I have faith I think maybe her meeting with Jesus helped her.

wait what?? How is this Biblical?

 

[GodIsSalvation]

wait what?? How is this Biblical?

How else she have 5 husbands and none be her husband including the one she with now (now meaning almsot 2000 years ago by a well)?

 

[Animus]

Fornication in scripture is not defined this way. Fornication is the result of joining yourself to more than one person by not remaining with the person you have become one body with. Nowhere in scripture will you find it described as "sex before marriage". That is a man-made understanding. Let scripture define itself. Line upon line, precept upon precept.

Nowhere in scripture is fornication defined the way you define it; you are defining adultery, and there is already a word for that in the Bible and it is used frequently, but separately from fornication. We can see from the scriptures that fornication is sex outside of marriage.

The Bible says that if two people consensually commit fornication that they should get married, but it doesn't say that they already are married.

Exodus 22:
16 "If a man ENTICES a virgin who is NOT BETROTHED (engaged), and lies with her, he shall surely PAY the bride-price for her to be his wife. "

However, if one of them is engaged to be married, and it is consensual,

23 "If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her,
24 "then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor's wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you.

But if it is not consensual, the violated person is free of any sin,

25 "But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die.
26 "But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter.
27 "For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her.

Even early on the bible talks about going through the formalities of marriage. It says marriage is separate from sex, as two people that have had sex are told to then get married.

 

[DarlinNadia]

How else she have 5 husbands and none be her husband including the one she with now (now meaning almsot 2000 years ago by a well)?

those 5 husbands do not have to be HER husband, if she's sleeping around she might be sleeping with the husbands of other women.. Hence NONE are her​ husband