Wikipedia articles on fornication and premarital sex

Sin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Sinful", "Sinner", and "Sinners" redirect here. For the trigonometric function commonly written as sin, see Sine. For other uses, see Sin (disambiguation), Sinful (disambiguation), Sinner (disambiguation), and Sinners (disambiguation).


 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this articleby adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(February 2012)




A Sistine Chapelfrescodepicts the expulsion of Adam and Evefrom the garden of Eden for their sin of eating from the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
In Abrahamiccontexts, sinis the act of violating God's will.[1][2][3][4]Sin can also be viewed as anything that violates the ideal relationship between an individual and God; or as any diversion from the ideal order for human living. To sin has been defined as "to miss the mark".[5]
Sins fall in a spectrum from minor errorsto deadly misdeeds. Catholicismregards the least corrupt sins as venial sins—which are part of human living and carry immediate consequences on earth, and, if unrepented for, more painful purgation, assuming the person is destined to heaven, as it is written in the formation letter "Purgatory", "most of the early Fathers of the Church speak of a cleansing fire, though we cannot tell whether this means actual or spiritual fire." [6]Conversely, sins of great evil are mortal sins—which bring the consequence of hellif they are not addressed either through an act of perfect contritionor going to confession about them.
Sins of careless living are considered [7]destructive and lead to greater sins. Another concept of sin deals with things that exist on Earth but not in Heaven. Food, for example, while a necessary good for the (health of the temporal) body, is not of (eternal) transcendental living and so, because the human being's fixation upon the temporal and its deceitful pleasures distracts and diverts human beings from righteousness, accordingly its excessivesavouring is considered a sin.[8]
Many Christians also categorize sin as an inevitable act that was passed down from generation to generation by the common ancestor, Adam.[9]Believers in this doctrine of original sinhold that like a disease, sin is the curse that poisons the heart of every human thereafter; and that every person is completely full of sin and cannot help thinking and acting on it. Romans 3:22-24 states: "This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, / for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, / and all are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."[10]


Contents [hide]
1Etymology
2Religions2.1Bahá'í
2.2Buddhism
2.3Christianity
2.4Hinduism
2.5Islam
2.6Judaism
2.7Shinto
3See also
4Notes and references
5Bibliography
6External links

Etymology[edit]
The word derives from "Old Englishsyn(n), for original *sunjō... The stem may be related to that of Latin sons, sont-isguilty. In Old English there are examples of the original general sense, ‘offence, wrong-doing, misdeed'".[11]The Biblical terms translated from New Testament Greek(αμαρτία - amartia) and from Hebrew as "sin" or "syn" originate in archeryand literally refer to missing the "gold" at the centre of a target, but hitting the target, i.e. error.[12](Archers call not hitting the target at all a "miss".)
Religions[edit]
Bahá'í[edit]


Main article: Bahá'í views on sin
In the Bahá'í Faith, humans are considered naturally good (perfect), fundamentally spiritual beings. Human beings were created because of God's immeasurable love. However, the Bahá'í teachings compare the human heart to a mirror, which, if turned away from the light of the sun (i.e. God), is incapable of receiving God's love.
Buddhism[edit]
Main article: Buddhist views on sin
Buddhismdoes not recognize the idea behind sin, but believes in the principle of karma, whereby sufferingis the inevitable consequence of greed, anger, and delusion (known as the Three poisons).[13]While there is no direct Buddhist equivalent of the Abrahamic concept of sin, wrongdoing is recognized in Buddhism. The concept of Buddhist ethicsis consequentialistin nature and is not based upon duty towards any deity. Karma is the direct result of the intention. Action is secondary. Karma whether good or bad is performed with Mind, Body and words would bring pleasant or unpleasant results. Defilement in mind cause the Karma and Karma defiles the being. One needs to purify his being with Four Satipatthanasto free oneself from the vicious circle. The purification reduces suffering and in the end one reaches Nibbana, the ultimate purification. An enlightened being is free of all the suffering and karmas. He would never be born again.
Christianity[edit]
Main articles: Hamartiologyand Christian views on sin
See also: Christian views on the Old Covenantand Seven deadly sins
In Old Testament, sin is often punished by death in different forms.[14]While some sins are forgiven by burnt offerings. [15]Christiansconsider most of the Laws of Old Testamentare defunct, although Jesusdid not mention that the Laws of Old Testamentare invalid.
In New Testamenthowever, the forgiveness of sin is effected through repentance which involves confessing the sin. Sin is forgiven, when the sinner acknowledges, confesses, and repents for his sin.[16]But in Epistle to the Romans6:23, it is mentioned that "the wages of sin is death", which is commonly interpreted as, if one does not repent for his sins he'll die. [17]
In Western Christianity, sin is believed to alienate the sinner from Godeven though He has extreme love for mankind. It has damaged, and completely severed, the relationship of humanity to God. That relationship can only be restored through acceptance of Jesus Christand his death on the cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for humanity's sin. Humanity was destined for life with God when Adam disobeyed God. The Bible in John 3:16says "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only begotten Son, so that whoever believes will not perish, but have everlasting life."
In Eastern Christianity, sin is viewed in terms of its effects on relationships, both among people and between people and God. Sin is seen as the refusal to follow God's plan, and the desire to be "like God" (Genesis 3:5) and thus in direct opposition to God's will (see the account of Adam and Evein the Book of Genesis).
Original sinis a Western concept that states that sin entered the human world through Adam and Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden, and that human beings have since lived with the consequences of this first sin.[18]
The snake who seduced Eve to eat of the fruit was punished by having it and its kind being made to crawl on the ground and God set an enmity between them and Eve's descendants (Genesis 3:14-15). Eve was punished by the pangs of childbirth and the sorrow of bringing about life that would eventually age, sicken and die (Genesis 3:16). The second part of the curse about being subordinate to Adam originates from her creation from one of Adam's ribs to be his helper (Genesis 2:18-25); the curse now clarifies that she must now obey her husband and desire only him. Adam was punished by having to work endlessly to feed himself and his family. The land would bring forth both thistles and thorns to be cleared and herbs and grain to be planted, nurtured, and harvested. The second part of the curse about his mortality is from his origin as red clay - he is from the land and he and his descendants would return to it when buried after death. When Adam's son Cain slew his brother Abel, he introduced murder into the world (Genesis 4:8-10). For his punishment, God banished him as a fugitive, but first marked him with a sign that would protect him and his descendants from harm (Genesis 4:11-16).
One concept of sin deals with things that exist on Earth, but not in Heaven. Food, for example, while a necessary good for the (health of the temporal) body, is not of (eternal) transcendental living and therefore its excessivesavoring is considered a sin.[8]The unforgivable sin (or eternal sin) is a sin that can never be forgiven. Matthew 1230-32 : “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
In CatholicChristianity sins are classified into grave sins called mortal sinsand pardonable sins called venial sin. Grave sins cause one to lose heaven unless the sinner repents and pardonable sins require some sort of penance either on Earth or in Purgatory.[19]
Jesus was said to have paid double for the complete mass of sins past, present, and to come in future. Even inevitable sin from our weakness has already been cleansed.
The Lamb of God was and is God Himself and therefore sinless. In the Old Testament, Leviticus(Specifically, 16:21)states that ‘the laying on of hands’ was the action that the High Priest Aaron was ordered to do yearly by God to take sins of Israel's nation onto a spotless young lamb.
Hinduism[edit]
In Hinduism, the term sin(pāpain Sanskrit) is often used to describe actions that create negative karmaby violating moral and ethical codes, which automatically brings negative consequences. This is similar to Abrahamic sin in the sense that pāpa is considered a crime against the laws of God, which is known as (1) Dharma, or moral order, and (2) one's own self, but another term apradha is used for grave offences.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Islamic views on sin
Muslimssee sin (dhanb, thanbذنب) as anything that goes against the commands of God (Allah). Islamteaches that sin is an act and not a state of being. The Qur'anteaches that "the soul is certainly prone to evil, unless the Lord does bestow His Mercy" and that even the prophetsdo not absolvethemselves of the blame.[Quran 12:53]It is believed that Iblis(Devil) has a significant role in tempting humankind towards sin. Sin is also defined in the hadith, a collection of Muhammad's sayings. It is reported by An-Nawwas bin Sam'an:

"The Prophet (Muhammad) said, "Piety is good manner, and sin is that which creates doubt and you do not like people to know it.""
— [Muslim]
Wabisah bin Ma’bad reported:

“I went to Messenger of Allah (SAWS) and he asked me: “Have you come to inquire about piety?” I replied in the affirmative. Then he said: “Ask your heart regarding it. Piety is that which contents the soul and comforts the heart, and sin is that which causes doubts and perturbs the heart, even if people pronounce it lawful and give you verdicts on such matters again and again.”
—[Ahmad and Ad-Darmi]]
In Sunan al-Tirmidhi, a Hadith is narrated:

Allah's apostle said, "Every son of Adam sins, the best of the sinners are those who repent."
—Sunan al-Tirmidhi,Hadith no. 2499
In Sahih Muslim, Abu Ayyub al-Ansariand Abu Hurairanarrated:

Allah's apostle said," By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if you were not to commit sin, Allah would sweep you out of existence and He would replace (you by) those people who would commit sin and seek forgiveness from Allah, and He would have pardoned them."
—Sahih Muslim, 37:6621
In Islam, there are several gradations of sin:
sayyia, khatia: mistakes (Suras 7:168; 17:31; 40:45; 47:19 48:2)
itada, junah, dhanb: immorality (Suras 2:190,229; 17:17 33:55)
haraam: transgressions (Suras 5:4; 6:146)
ithm, dhulam, fujur, su, fasad, fisk, kufr: wickedness and depravity (Suras 2:99, 205; 4:50, 112, 123, 136; 12:79; 38:62; 82:14)
shirk: ascribing a partner to God; idolatry and polytheism(Sura 4:48)
One may sincerely repent to God for the wrongs committed and seek forgiveness, as stated in the Quran, "Our Lord! Forgive us our sins, remove from us our iniquities, and take to Yourself our souls in the company of the righteous." (Al-Imran.193/ 3.193).

"Say O my slaves who have transgressed against their own souls despair not of the mercy of God, verily He forgives all sins, verily He is the oft-forgiving, most merciful."
— Qur'an, Az-Zumar)
Judaism[edit]
Main articles: Jewish views on sinand [[Maimonides Golden mean]]
Judaismregards the violation of any of the 613 commandmentsas a sin. Judaism teaches that to sin is natural thing because there is no man that is perfect and everyone has an inclinationto do evil "from his youth".(Genesis 8:21). The main thing is to try your best.[20]Sin furthermore has many classifications and degrees. Some sins are punishable with death by the court, others with death by heaven, others with lashes, and others without such punishment, but no sin with willful intentgo without consequence. Unintentionally sinsare not considered as sins, since you can't punish someone for something he did not know was wrong. Sins by errorconsidered as less severe sins. When the Templeyet stood in Jerusalem, people would offer sacrificesfor their misdeeds. The atoning aspect of Karbanotis carefully circumscribed. For the most part, Karbanot only expiate unintentional sins, that is, sins committed because a person forgot that this thing was a sin. No atonement is needed for violations committed under duress or through lack of knowledge, and for the most part, Karbanot cannot atone for a malicious, deliberate sin. In addition, Karbanot have no expiating effect unless the person making the offering sincerely repents his or her actions before making the offering, and makes restitution to any person who was harmed by the violation.[21][22]
All willful sinhas a consequence. The complete righteous suffer for their sins (by humiliation, poverty and suffering that God sends them) in this world and receive their reward in the world to come. Ihe in between (not complete righteous or complete wicked), repent their sins in hell and thereafter join the righteous. And the complete wicked cannot correct their sins in this world and hence do not suffer them here, but in gehinom (hell). The very evil do not repent even at the gates of hell. Such people prosper in this world to receive their reward for any good deed, but cannot be cleansed by and hence cannot leave gehinom, because they don't or can't repent. This world can therefore seem unjust where the righteous suffer, while the wicked prosper. Many great thinkers have contemplated this, but God's justice is long, precise and just.[22][23]
Shinto[edit]
Evil deeds fall into two categories in Shinto: amatsu tsumi, "the most pernicious crimes of all", and kunitsu tsumi, "more commonly called misdemeanors".[24]
See also[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Sin
Actual sin
Asceticism
Devil
Fall of Man
Hamartia
Hedonism
Internal sin
Morality
Mortal sin
Original sin
Religious law
Seven deadly sins
Sin-offering
Taboo
Total depravity
Venial sin
Notes and references[edit]
1.Jump up ^Action and Person: Conscience in Late Scholasticism and the Young LutherMichael G. Baylor - 1977, "defined sin, in an objective sense, as contempt of god" page 27
2.Jump up ^The Theology of the Oral Torah: Revealing the Justice of GodJacob Neusner - 1999, Page 523
3.Jump up ^The fall to violence: original sin in relational theologyMarjorie Suchocki - 1994 Page 29
4.Jump up ^Five Views on Sanctification- page 188, Melvin Easterday Dieter, Stanley N. Gundry - 1996 "The other is 'deliberate violation of God's known will"
5.Jump up ^Augustineeventually (after the Pelagian controversy) defined sin as a hardened heart, a loss of love for God, a disposition of the heart to depart from God because of inordinate self-love (see Augustine On Grace and Free Willin Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, trans. P. Holmes, vol. 5, 30-31 [14-15]).
6.Jump up ^[1][dead link]
7.Jump up ^"Holy Spirit Interactive: The Seven Deadly Sins - The List". Retrieved 1 March2015.
8.^ Jump up to: abHanegraaff, Hank. The Bible Answer Bookpp. 18-21. ISBN 0-8499-9544-2
9.Jump up ^"CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Original Sin". Retrieved 1 March2015.
10.Jump up ^Holy Bible, New International Version, Romans 3:22-24
11.Jump up ^"Oxford English Dictionary". Oed.com. Retrieved 2013-09-16.
12.Jump up ^Pagels, Elaine. The Gnostic Gospels. Vintage Books: New York, 1989. p. 123.
13.Jump up ^Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism, Soka Gakkai, "Three Poisons": "Greed, anger, and foolishness. The fundamental evils inherent in life that give rise to human suffering."
14.Jump up ^"Deuteronomy". Rational Wiki. Retrieved 13 April2015. "Chapter 13 Versus 1-11"
15.Jump up ^"Deuteronomy". Rational Wiki. Retrieved 13 April2015. "Chapter 14 Verses 9,10"
16.Jump up ^Schmaus, Michael (1975). Dogma: The Church as Sacrament. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. p. 220,222. ISBN 0-7425-3203-8. Retrieved April 11,2015.
17.Jump up ^"Romans 6:23". Biblehub. Retrieved 13 April2015.
18.Jump up ^"Catholic Encyclopedia: Original Sin". Newadvent.org. 1911-02-01. Retrieved 2013-09-16.
19.Jump up ^Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 1472. The Vatican.
20.Jump up ^"Maimonides on Life - Torah.org". Retrieved 1 March2015.
21.Jump up ^"Sacrifices and Offerings (Karbanot) - Jewish Virtual Library". Retrieved 1 March2015.
22.^ Jump up to: abRabbi Michael Skobac. "Leviticus 17:11". Retrieved 1 March2015.
23.Jump up ^"Reward and Punishment". Retrieved 1 March2015.
24.Jump up ^The Essence of Shinto: The Spiritual Heart of Japanby Motohisa Yamakage
Bibliography[edit]
Fredriksen, Paula. Sin: The Early History of an Idea.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. ISBN 978-0-691-12890-0.
Granoff; P E ; Shinohara, Koichi; eds. (2012), Sins and Sinners: Perspectives from Asian Religions. Brill. ISBN 9004229469.
Hein, David. "Regrets Only: A Theology of Remorse." The Anglican33, no. 4 (October 2004): 5–6.
Lewis, C.S. "Miserable Offenders": an Interpretation of [sinfulness and] Prayer Book Language [about it],in series, The Advent Papers. Cincinnati, Ohio: Forward Movement Publications, [196-].
Pieper, Josef. The Concept of Sin. Edward T. Oakes SJ (translation from German). South Bend, Indiana: St. Augustine's Press, 2001. ISBN 1-890318-08-6
Schumacher, Meinolf. Sündenschmutz und Herzensreinheit: Studien zur Metaphorik der Sünde in lateinischer und deutscher Literatur des Mittelalters. Munich: Fink, 1996.
External links[edit]
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Sins.
 Look up sinin Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
The Different Kinds of Sins (Catholic)





[show]
v·
t·
e

Hamartiology





















[show]
v·
t·
e

Theology






































































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v·
t·
e

Seven Deadly Sins

















































Categories: Christian hamartiology
Christian philosophy
Crimes in religion
Religious belief and doctrine
Sin
Religious terminology
Vices
Crime








Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk










Read

Edit

View history


















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Acèh
العربية
Aymar aru
Azərbaycanca
বাংলা
Беларуская
Български
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
ChiShona
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Gàidhlig
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
ಕನ್ನಡ
Kiswahili
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Limburgs
Magyar
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Саха тыла
Shqip
Sicilianu
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
ייִדיש
Žemaitėška
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 April 2015, at 15:07.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Useand Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin














Sin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Sinful", "Sinner", and "Sinners" redirect here. For the trigonometric function commonly written as sin, see Sine. For other uses, see Sin (disambiguation), Sinful (disambiguation), Sinner (disambiguation), and Sinners (disambiguation).


 This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this articleby adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(February 2012)




A Sistine Chapelfrescodepicts the expulsion of Adam and Evefrom the garden of Eden for their sin of eating from the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
In Abrahamiccontexts, sinis the act of violating God's will.[1][2][3][4]Sin can also be viewed as anything that violates the ideal relationship between an individual and God; or as any diversion from the ideal order for human living. To sin has been defined as "to miss the mark".[5]
Sins fall in a spectrum from minor errorsto deadly misdeeds. Catholicismregards the least corrupt sins as venial sins—which are part of human living and carry immediate consequences on earth, and, if unrepented for, more painful purgation, assuming the person is destined to heaven, as it is written in the formation letter "Purgatory", "most of the early Fathers of the Church speak of a cleansing fire, though we cannot tell whether this means actual or spiritual fire." [6]Conversely, sins of great evil are mortal sins—which bring the consequence of hellif they are not addressed either through an act of perfect contritionor going to confession about them.
Sins of careless living are considered [7]destructive and lead to greater sins. Another concept of sin deals with things that exist on Earth but not in Heaven. Food, for example, while a necessary good for the (health of the temporal) body, is not of (eternal) transcendental living and so, because the human being's fixation upon the temporal and its deceitful pleasures distracts and diverts human beings from righteousness, accordingly its excessivesavouring is considered a sin.[8]
Many Christians also categorize sin as an inevitable act that was passed down from generation to generation by the common ancestor, Adam.[9]Believers in this doctrine of original sinhold that like a disease, sin is the curse that poisons the heart of every human thereafter; and that every person is completely full of sin and cannot help thinking and acting on it. Romans 3:22-24 states: "This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, / for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, / and all are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."[10]


Contents [hide]
1Etymology
2Religions2.1Bahá'í
2.2Buddhism
2.3Christianity
2.4Hinduism
2.5Islam
2.6Judaism
2.7Shinto
3See also
4Notes and references
5Bibliography
6External links

Etymology[edit]
The word derives from "Old Englishsyn(n), for original *sunjō... The stem may be related to that of Latin sons, sont-isguilty. In Old English there are examples of the original general sense, ‘offence, wrong-doing, misdeed'".[11]The Biblical terms translated from New Testament Greek(αμαρτία - amartia) and from Hebrew as "sin" or "syn" originate in archeryand literally refer to missing the "gold" at the centre of a target, but hitting the target, i.e. error.[12](Archers call not hitting the target at all a "miss".)
Religions[edit]
Bahá'í[edit]


Main article: Bahá'í views on sin
In the Bahá'í Faith, humans are considered naturally good (perfect), fundamentally spiritual beings. Human beings were created because of God's immeasurable love. However, the Bahá'í teachings compare the human heart to a mirror, which, if turned away from the light of the sun (i.e. God), is incapable of receiving God's love.
Buddhism[edit]
Main article: Buddhist views on sin
Buddhismdoes not recognize the idea behind sin, but believes in the principle of karma, whereby sufferingis the inevitable consequence of greed, anger, and delusion (known as the Three poisons).[13]While there is no direct Buddhist equivalent of the Abrahamic concept of sin, wrongdoing is recognized in Buddhism. The concept of Buddhist ethicsis consequentialistin nature and is not based upon duty towards any deity. Karma is the direct result of the intention. Action is secondary. Karma whether good or bad is performed with Mind, Body and words would bring pleasant or unpleasant results. Defilement in mind cause the Karma and Karma defiles the being. One needs to purify his being with Four Satipatthanasto free oneself from the vicious circle. The purification reduces suffering and in the end one reaches Nibbana, the ultimate purification. An enlightened being is free of all the suffering and karmas. He would never be born again.
Christianity[edit]
Main articles: Hamartiologyand Christian views on sin
See also: Christian views on the Old Covenantand Seven deadly sins
In Old Testament, sin is often punished by death in different forms.[14]While some sins are forgiven by burnt offerings. [15]Christiansconsider most of the Laws of Old Testamentare defunct, although Jesusdid not mention that the Laws of Old Testamentare invalid.
In New Testamenthowever, the forgiveness of sin is effected through repentance which involves confessing the sin. Sin is forgiven, when the sinner acknowledges, confesses, and repents for his sin.[16]But in Epistle to the Romans6:23, it is mentioned that "the wages of sin is death", which is commonly interpreted as, if one does not repent for his sins he'll die. [17]
In Western Christianity, sin is believed to alienate the sinner from Godeven though He has extreme love for mankind. It has damaged, and completely severed, the relationship of humanity to God. That relationship can only be restored through acceptance of Jesus Christand his death on the cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for humanity's sin. Humanity was destined for life with God when Adam disobeyed God. The Bible in John 3:16says "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only begotten Son, so that whoever believes will not perish, but have everlasting life."
In Eastern Christianity, sin is viewed in terms of its effects on relationships, both among people and between people and God. Sin is seen as the refusal to follow God's plan, and the desire to be "like God" (Genesis 3:5) and thus in direct opposition to God's will (see the account of Adam and Evein the Book of Genesis).
Original sinis a Western concept that states that sin entered the human world through Adam and Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden, and that human beings have since lived with the consequences of this first sin.[18]
The snake who seduced Eve to eat of the fruit was punished by having it and its kind being made to crawl on the ground and God set an enmity between them and Eve's descendants (Genesis 3:14-15). Eve was punished by the pangs of childbirth and the sorrow of bringing about life that would eventually age, sicken and die (Genesis 3:16). The second part of the curse about being subordinate to Adam originates from her creation from one of Adam's ribs to be his helper (Genesis 2:18-25); the curse now clarifies that she must now obey her husband and desire only him. Adam was punished by having to work endlessly to feed himself and his family. The land would bring forth both thistles and thorns to be cleared and herbs and grain to be planted, nurtured, and harvested. The second part of the curse about his mortality is from his origin as red clay - he is from the land and he and his descendants would return to it when buried after death. When Adam's son Cain slew his brother Abel, he introduced murder into the world (Genesis 4:8-10). For his punishment, God banished him as a fugitive, but first marked him with a sign that would protect him and his descendants from harm (Genesis 4:11-16).
One concept of sin deals with things that exist on Earth, but not in Heaven. Food, for example, while a necessary good for the (health of the temporal) body, is not of (eternal) transcendental living and therefore its excessivesavoring is considered a sin.[8]The unforgivable sin (or eternal sin) is a sin that can never be forgiven. Matthew 1230-32 : “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. 31And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
In CatholicChristianity sins are classified into grave sins called mortal sinsand pardonable sins called venial sin. Grave sins cause one to lose heaven unless the sinner repents and pardonable sins require some sort of penance either on Earth or in Purgatory.[19]
Jesus was said to have paid double for the complete mass of sins past, present, and to come in future. Even inevitable sin from our weakness has already been cleansed.
The Lamb of God was and is God Himself and therefore sinless. In the Old Testament, Leviticus(Specifically, 16:21)states that ‘the laying on of hands’ was the action that the High Priest Aaron was ordered to do yearly by God to take sins of Israel's nation onto a spotless young lamb.
Hinduism[edit]
In Hinduism, the term sin(pāpain Sanskrit) is often used to describe actions that create negative karmaby violating moral and ethical codes, which automatically brings negative consequences. This is similar to Abrahamic sin in the sense that pāpa is considered a crime against the laws of God, which is known as (1) Dharma, or moral order, and (2) one's own self, but another term apradha is used for grave offences.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Islamic views on sin
Muslimssee sin (dhanb, thanbذنب) as anything that goes against the commands of God (Allah). Islamteaches that sin is an act and not a state of being. The Qur'anteaches that "the soul is certainly prone to evil, unless the Lord does bestow His Mercy" and that even the prophetsdo not absolvethemselves of the blame.[Quran 12:53]It is believed that Iblis(Devil) has a significant role in tempting humankind towards sin. Sin is also defined in the hadith, a collection of Muhammad's sayings. It is reported by An-Nawwas bin Sam'an:

"The Prophet (Muhammad) said, "Piety is good manner, and sin is that which creates doubt and you do not like people to know it.""
— [Muslim]
Wabisah bin Ma’bad reported:

“I went to Messenger of Allah (SAWS) and he asked me: “Have you come to inquire about piety?” I replied in the affirmative. Then he said: “Ask your heart regarding it. Piety is that which contents the soul and comforts the heart, and sin is that which causes doubts and perturbs the heart, even if people pronounce it lawful and give you verdicts on such matters again and again.”
—[Ahmad and Ad-Darmi]]
In Sunan al-Tirmidhi, a Hadith is narrated:

Allah's apostle said, "Every son of Adam sins, the best of the sinners are those who repent."
—Sunan al-Tirmidhi,Hadith no. 2499
In Sahih Muslim, Abu Ayyub al-Ansariand Abu Hurairanarrated:

Allah's apostle said," By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if you were not to commit sin, Allah would sweep you out of existence and He would replace (you by) those people who would commit sin and seek forgiveness from Allah, and He would have pardoned them."
—Sahih Muslim, 37:6621
In Islam, there are several gradations of sin:
sayyia, khatia: mistakes (Suras 7:168; 17:31; 40:45; 47:19 48:2)
itada, junah, dhanb: immorality (Suras 2:190,229; 17:17 33:55)
haraam: transgressions (Suras 5:4; 6:146)
ithm, dhulam, fujur, su, fasad, fisk, kufr: wickedness and depravity (Suras 2:99, 205; 4:50, 112, 123, 136; 12:79; 38:62; 82:14)
shirk: ascribing a partner to God; idolatry and polytheism(Sura 4:48)
One may sincerely repent to God for the wrongs committed and seek forgiveness, as stated in the Quran, "Our Lord! Forgive us our sins, remove from us our iniquities, and take to Yourself our souls in the company of the righteous." (Al-Imran.193/ 3.193).

"Say O my slaves who have transgressed against their own souls despair not of the mercy of God, verily He forgives all sins, verily He is the oft-forgiving, most merciful."
— Qur'an, Az-Zumar)
Judaism[edit]
Main articles: Jewish views on sinand [[Maimonides Golden mean]]
Judaismregards the violation of any of the 613 commandmentsas a sin. Judaism teaches that to sin is natural thing because there is no man that is perfect and everyone has an inclinationto do evil "from his youth".(Genesis 8:21). The main thing is to try your best.[20]Sin furthermore has many classifications and degrees. Some sins are punishable with death by the court, others with death by heaven, others with lashes, and others without such punishment, but no sin with willful intentgo without consequence. Unintentionally sinsare not considered as sins, since you can't punish someone for something he did not know was wrong. Sins by errorconsidered as less severe sins. When the Templeyet stood in Jerusalem, people would offer sacrificesfor their misdeeds. The atoning aspect of Karbanotis carefully circumscribed. For the most part, Karbanot only expiate unintentional sins, that is, sins committed because a person forgot that this thing was a sin. No atonement is needed for violations committed under duress or through lack of knowledge, and for the most part, Karbanot cannot atone for a malicious, deliberate sin. In addition, Karbanot have no expiating effect unless the person making the offering sincerely repents his or her actions before making the offering, and makes restitution to any person who was harmed by the violation.[21][22]
All willful sinhas a consequence. The complete righteous suffer for their sins (by humiliation, poverty and suffering that God sends them) in this world and receive their reward in the world to come. Ihe in between (not complete righteous or complete wicked), repent their sins in hell and thereafter join the righteous. And the complete wicked cannot correct their sins in this world and hence do not suffer them here, but in gehinom (hell). The very evil do not repent even at the gates of hell. Such people prosper in this world to receive their reward for any good deed, but cannot be cleansed by and hence cannot leave gehinom, because they don't or can't repent. This world can therefore seem unjust where the righteous suffer, while the wicked prosper. Many great thinkers have contemplated this, but God's justice is long, precise and just.[22][23]
Shinto[edit]
Evil deeds fall into two categories in Shinto: amatsu tsumi, "the most pernicious crimes of all", and kunitsu tsumi, "more commonly called misdemeanors".[24]
See also[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Sin
Actual sin
Asceticism
Devil
Fall of Man
Hamartia
Hedonism
Internal sin
Morality
Mortal sin
Original sin
Religious law
Seven deadly sins
Sin-offering
Taboo
Total depravity
Venial sin
Notes and references[edit]
1.Jump up ^Action and Person: Conscience in Late Scholasticism and the Young LutherMichael G. Baylor - 1977, "defined sin, in an objective sense, as contempt of god" page 27
2.Jump up ^The Theology of the Oral Torah: Revealing the Justice of GodJacob Neusner - 1999, Page 523
3.Jump up ^The fall to violence: original sin in relational theologyMarjorie Suchocki - 1994 Page 29
4.Jump up ^Five Views on Sanctification- page 188, Melvin Easterday Dieter, Stanley N. Gundry - 1996 "The other is 'deliberate violation of God's known will"
5.Jump up ^Augustineeventually (after the Pelagian controversy) defined sin as a hardened heart, a loss of love for God, a disposition of the heart to depart from God because of inordinate self-love (see Augustine On Grace and Free Willin Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, trans. P. Holmes, vol. 5, 30-31 [14-15]).
6.Jump up ^[1][dead link]
7.Jump up ^"Holy Spirit Interactive: The Seven Deadly Sins - The List". Retrieved 1 March2015.
8.^ Jump up to: abHanegraaff, Hank. The Bible Answer Bookpp. 18-21. ISBN 0-8499-9544-2
9.Jump up ^"CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Original Sin". Retrieved 1 March2015.
10.Jump up ^Holy Bible, New International Version, Romans 3:22-24
11.Jump up ^"Oxford English Dictionary". Oed.com. Retrieved 2013-09-16.
12.Jump up ^Pagels, Elaine. The Gnostic Gospels. Vintage Books: New York, 1989. p. 123.
13.Jump up ^Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism, Soka Gakkai, "Three Poisons": "Greed, anger, and foolishness. The fundamental evils inherent in life that give rise to human suffering."
14.Jump up ^"Deuteronomy". Rational Wiki. Retrieved 13 April2015. "Chapter 13 Versus 1-11"
15.Jump up ^"Deuteronomy". Rational Wiki. Retrieved 13 April2015. "Chapter 14 Verses 9,10"
16.Jump up ^Schmaus, Michael (1975). Dogma: The Church as Sacrament. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. p. 220,222. ISBN 0-7425-3203-8. Retrieved April 11,2015.
17.Jump up ^"Romans 6:23". Biblehub. Retrieved 13 April2015.
18.Jump up ^"Catholic Encyclopedia: Original Sin". Newadvent.org. 1911-02-01. Retrieved 2013-09-16.
19.Jump up ^Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 1472. The Vatican.
20.Jump up ^"Maimonides on Life - Torah.org". Retrieved 1 March2015.
21.Jump up ^"Sacrifices and Offerings (Karbanot) - Jewish Virtual Library". Retrieved 1 March2015.
22.^ Jump up to: abRabbi Michael Skobac. "Leviticus 17:11". Retrieved 1 March2015.
23.Jump up ^"Reward and Punishment". Retrieved 1 March2015.
24.Jump up ^The Essence of Shinto: The Spiritual Heart of Japanby Motohisa Yamakage
Bibliography[edit]
Fredriksen, Paula. Sin: The Early History of an Idea.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. ISBN 978-0-691-12890-0.
Granoff; P E ; Shinohara, Koichi; eds. (2012), Sins and Sinners: Perspectives from Asian Religions. Brill. ISBN 9004229469.
Hein, David. "Regrets Only: A Theology of Remorse." The Anglican33, no. 4 (October 2004): 5–6.
Lewis, C.S. "Miserable Offenders": an Interpretation of [sinfulness and] Prayer Book Language [about it],in series, The Advent Papers. Cincinnati, Ohio: Forward Movement Publications, [196-].
Pieper, Josef. The Concept of Sin. Edward T. Oakes SJ (translation from German). South Bend, Indiana: St. Augustine's Press, 2001. ISBN 1-890318-08-6
Schumacher, Meinolf. Sündenschmutz und Herzensreinheit: Studien zur Metaphorik der Sünde in lateinischer und deutscher Literatur des Mittelalters. Munich: Fink, 1996.
External links[edit]
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Sins.
 Look up sinin Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
The Different Kinds of Sins (Catholic)





[show]
v·
t·
e

Hamartiology





















[show]
v·
t·
e

Theology






































































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v·
t·
e

Seven Deadly Sins

















































Categories: Christian hamartiology
Christian philosophy
Crimes in religion
Religious belief and doctrine
Sin
Religious terminology
Vices
Crime








Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk










Read

Edit

View history


















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Acèh
العربية
Aymar aru
Azərbaycanca
বাংলা
Беларуская
Български
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
ChiShona
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Gàidhlig
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
ಕನ್ನಡ
Kiswahili
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Limburgs
Magyar
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Саха тыла
Shqip
Sicilianu
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
ייִדיש
Žemaitėška
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 April 2015, at 15:07.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Useand Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin











Total depravity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search




 A Sistine Chapel fresco depicts the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden for their sin of eating from the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The Five Articles of
 Remonstrance



Conditional election

Unlimited atonement

Total depravity

Prevenient grace

Conditional preservation

v ·
 t ·
 e
   

The Five Points
 of Calvinism
A "Page Polka" tulip
Total depravity

Unconditional election

Limited atonement

Irresistible grace

Perseverance of the saints
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Total depravity (also called radical corruption, or pervasive depravity), is a theological doctrine derived from the Augustinian concept of original sin. It is the teaching that, as a consequence of the Fall of Man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin and, apart from the efficacious or prevenient grace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God, refrain from evil, or accept the gift of salvation as it is offered.
It is advocated to various degrees by many Protestant confessions of faith and catechisms, including those of Lutheranism,[1][2] and Calvinism.[3][4][5][6] Arminians, such as Methodists, hold to total depravity, albeit not in the same way as the Reformed.[7][8]


Contents  [hide]
1 History
2 Theology
3 Criticism
4 See also
5 Notes
6 External links

History[edit]
In opposition to Pelagius, who believed that after the fall people are able to choose not to sin, Augustine of Hippo argued that since the fall all humanity is in self-imposed bondage to sin. All people are inescapably predisposed to evil prior to any actual choice, and unable to not sin.[9] Free will is not taken away in the sense of the ability to choose between alternatives, but people are unable to make these choices in service to God rather than self.[10] Thomas Aquinas also taught that people are not able to avoid sin after the fall, and that this entailed a loss of original righteousness or sinlessness, as well as concupiscence or selfish desire. Duns Scotus, however, modified this interpretation and only believed that sin entailed a lack of original righteousness. During the Protestant Reformation, the Reformers took Scotus's position to be the Catholic position and argued that it made sin only a defect or privation of righteousness rather than an inclination toward evil. Martin Luther, John Calvin and other Reformers used the term "total depravity" to articulate what they claimed to be the Augustinian view that sin corrupts the entire human nature.[11] This did not, however, mean the loss of the imago Dei (image of God). The only theologian who argued that the imago Dei itself was taken away and that the very substance of fallen humanity was sin was Matthias Flacius Illyricus, and this view was repudiated in the Formula of Concord.[12]
John Calvin used terms like "total depravity" to mean that, despite the ability of people to outwardly uphold the law, there remained an inward distortion which makes all human actions displeasing to God, whether or not they are outwardly good or bad.[12] Even after regeneration, every human action is mixed with evil.[13] Later Calvinist theologians were agreed on this, but the language of the Canons of Dort as well as the 17th-century Reformed theologians which followed it did not repeat the language of "total depravity", and arguably offer a more moderate view on the state of fallen humanity than Calvin.[12]
A form of the doctrine of total depravity, although not identical to the Calvinist position, was affirmed by the Five articles of Remonstrance, by Jacobus Arminius himself, and by John Wesley, who strongly identified with Arminius through publication of his periodical The Arminian and also advocated a strong doctrine of inability.[14] The Methodist Quarterly Review states that

It is not sufficiently known, we opine, that Methodists--the genuine Arminians of the present--do not entirely agree with this view of depravity. To what has been said, as being the Calvinist view of the total depravity of our nature, we do heartily assent, with the following exceptions:--First. We do not think that all men continue totally depraved until their regeneration. Secondly. We think man, under the atonement, is not, properly speaking, in a state of nature. He is not left to the unalleviated evils of total depravity. The atonement has not only secured grace for him, but a measure in him, by virtue of which he not only has moral light, but is often incited to good desires, and well-intended efforts to do what is perceived to be the divine will.[8]
Some Reformed theologians have mistakenly used the term "Arminianism" to include some who hold the Semipelagian doctrine of limited depravity, which allows for an "island of righteousness" in human hearts that is uncorrupted by sin and able to accept God's offer of salvation without a special dispensation of grace.[15] Although Arminius and Wesley both vehemently rejected this view, it has sometimes inaccurately been lumped together with theirs (particularly by Calvinists) because of other similarities in their respective systems such as conditional election, unlimited atonement, and prevenient grace. In particular, prevenient grace is seen in many of these systems as giving humans back the freedom to follow God in one way or another.
Theology[edit]
The term "total depravity", as understood in colloquial English, obscures the theological issues involved. Reformed and Lutheran theologians have never considered humans to be absent of goodness or unable to do good outwardly as a result of the fall. People retain the imago Dei, though it has been distorted.[12]
Total depravity is the fallen state of human beings as a result of original sin. The doctrine of total depravity asserts that people are, as a result of the fall, not inclined or even able to love God wholly with heart, mind, and strength, but rather are inclined by nature to serve their own will and desires and to reject the rule of God. Even religion and philanthropy are wicked to God[citation needed] because they originate from a selfish human desire and are not done to the glory of God. Therefore, in Reformed theology, if God is to save anyone God must predestine, call, or elect individuals to salvation since fallen man does not want to[citation needed], and is indeed incapable of, choosing God.[16]
Total depravity does not mean, however, that people have lost part of their humanity or are ontologically deteriorated, because Adam and Eve were created with the ability to not sin, and people retain that essential nature, even though the properties of their humanity is corrupted.[17] It also does not mean that people are as evil as possible. Rather, it means that even the good which a person may intend is faulty in its premise, false in its motive, and weak in its implementation; and there is no mere refinement of natural capacities that can correct this condition. Thus, even acts of generosity and altruism are in fact egoist acts in disguise. All good, consequently, is derived from God alone, and in no way through humanity.[18]
The total reach of sin taught with the doctrine of total depravity highlights people's dire need for God. No part of the person is not in need of grace, and all people are in need of grace, no matter how outwardly pious.[19] Feminist theologian Serene Jones sees the concept of total depravity as helpful because, according to Calvin, sin assaults the person from the outside in and occupies the whole self, allowing women to see how deeply oppression has harmed them and become part of their self-understanding.[20]
Criticism[edit]
The Catholic Church maintains that man cannot "be justified before God by his own works,... without the grace of God through Jesus Christ,"[21] thereby rejecting Pelagianism in accordance with the writings of Augustine and the Second Council of Orange (529).[22] However, the Catholic Church disagrees with the Protestant doctrine of total depravity, because the Catholic Church maintains humans retained a free but wounded will after the Fall.[23] Referring to Scripture and the Church Fathers,[24] Catholicism views human free will as deriving from being made in God's image.[25] Accordingly, the Catholic Church condemned as heresy any doctrine asserting "since Adam's sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished".[26]
See also[edit]
History of Calvinist–Arminian debate
Incurvatus in se
Christian views on the old covenant
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Andreä, Jakob; Chemnitz, Martin; Selnecker, Nikolaus; Chytraeus, David; Musculus, Andreas; Körner, Christoph (1577), Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord
2.Jump up ^ Melanchthon, Philip, ed. (1530), The Augsburg Confession
3.Jump up ^ Canons of Dordrecht, "The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine"
4.Jump up ^ Westminster Assembly (1646), Westminster Confession of Faith
5.Jump up ^ Westminster Larger Catechism,Question 25
6.Jump up ^ Heidelberg Catechism,question 8
7.Jump up ^ Arminius, James The Writings of James Arminius (three vols.), tr. James Nichols and W. R. Bagnall (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1956), I:252
8.^ Jump up to: a b George Peck, D.D., ed. (1847). The Methodist Quarterly Review (New York: Lane & Tippett) XXIX: 444. Missing or empty |title= (help)
9.Jump up ^ Kelsey, David H. (1994). "Human Being". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 176–178. Williams, Robert R. (1994). "Sin and Evil". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 201–202.
10.Jump up ^ Kelsey, David H. (1994). "Human Being". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 176–177.
11.Jump up ^ Williams, Robert R. (1994). "Sin and Evil". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 204.
12.^ Jump up to: a b c d Muller, Richard A. (2012). Calvin and the Reformed Tradition (Ebook ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. p. 51.
13.Jump up ^ Bouwsma, William J. (1989). John Calvin: A Sixteenth-Century Portrait. Oxford University Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 139.
14.Jump up ^ Sermon 44, "Original Sin."; compare verse 4 of Charles Wesley's hymn "And Can It Be".
15.Jump up ^ Demarest, Bruce (2006). The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books. p. 56. ISBN 978-1-58134-812-5.
16.Jump up ^ The Westminster Confession of Faith,9.3
17.Jump up ^ Shuster, Marguerite (2004). The Fall and Sin: What We Have Become as Sinners. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 159–160, 182.
18.Jump up ^ Ra McLaughlin. "Total Depravity, part 1". Reformed Perspectives. Retrieved 2008-07-14. "[Any person] can do outwardly good works, but these works come from a heart that hates God, and therefore fail to meet God’s righteous standards."
19.Jump up ^ Jones, Serene (2000). Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace. Minneapolis: Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 102–103.
20.Jump up ^ Jones, Serene (2000). Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace. Minneapolis: Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 120.
21.Jump up ^ Council of Trent, Session 6, canon 1.
22.Jump up ^ Judgements of the Council of Orange
23.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church Item 407 in section 1.2.1.7.
24.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church Item 1730
25.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church Items 1701-1709
26.Jump up ^ Council of Trent, Session 6, canon 5.
External links[edit]
The Bondage of the Will[dead link] by Martin Luther
On the Freedom of the Will[dead link], a book treating the extent of man's corruption by Jonathan Edwards
"Original Sin", a sermon by John Wesley
"The Circumcision of the Heart", a sermon by John Wesley
"Original Sin", a section from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology(2.8.13) discussing the corrupting effects of the Fall
"Human Inability" by Charles Spurgeon
The Total Depravity of Man by Arthur Pink
"Total Inability"[dead link] from Loraine Boettner's The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
"Human Depravity" from R. C. Sproul's Essential Truths Of The Christian Faith
"Total Depravity" by John Piper
Calvinism's Total Depravity A refutation of John Piper's article "Total Depravity"
"What do the Protestant Reformers Mean by 'Total Depravity'?" by Victor Shepherd
Many articles from a variety of authors supporting total depravity


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Hamartiology


Adam ·
 Evil ·
 The Fall ·
 Original sin ·
 Christian views on sin ·
 Imputation of sin ·
 Other views on sin ·
 Supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism ·
 Theodicy ·
 Total depravity
 

See also Apologetics ·
 Soteriology ·
 Demonology
 

  


Categories: Calvinist theology
Five Points of Calvinism
Lutheran theology
Methodism
Christian hamartiology
Arminianism
Christian terminology
Morality










Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Esperanto
Français
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
日本語
Polski
Português
Simple English
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 March 2015, at 00:10.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_depravity












Total depravity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search




 A Sistine Chapel fresco depicts the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden for their sin of eating from the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The Five Articles of
 Remonstrance



Conditional election

Unlimited atonement

Total depravity

Prevenient grace

Conditional preservation

v ·
 t ·
 e
   

The Five Points
 of Calvinism
A "Page Polka" tulip
Total depravity

Unconditional election

Limited atonement

Irresistible grace

Perseverance of the saints
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Total depravity (also called radical corruption, or pervasive depravity), is a theological doctrine derived from the Augustinian concept of original sin. It is the teaching that, as a consequence of the Fall of Man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin and, apart from the efficacious or prevenient grace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God, refrain from evil, or accept the gift of salvation as it is offered.
It is advocated to various degrees by many Protestant confessions of faith and catechisms, including those of Lutheranism,[1][2] and Calvinism.[3][4][5][6] Arminians, such as Methodists, hold to total depravity, albeit not in the same way as the Reformed.[7][8]


Contents  [hide]
1 History
2 Theology
3 Criticism
4 See also
5 Notes
6 External links

History[edit]
In opposition to Pelagius, who believed that after the fall people are able to choose not to sin, Augustine of Hippo argued that since the fall all humanity is in self-imposed bondage to sin. All people are inescapably predisposed to evil prior to any actual choice, and unable to not sin.[9] Free will is not taken away in the sense of the ability to choose between alternatives, but people are unable to make these choices in service to God rather than self.[10] Thomas Aquinas also taught that people are not able to avoid sin after the fall, and that this entailed a loss of original righteousness or sinlessness, as well as concupiscence or selfish desire. Duns Scotus, however, modified this interpretation and only believed that sin entailed a lack of original righteousness. During the Protestant Reformation, the Reformers took Scotus's position to be the Catholic position and argued that it made sin only a defect or privation of righteousness rather than an inclination toward evil. Martin Luther, John Calvin and other Reformers used the term "total depravity" to articulate what they claimed to be the Augustinian view that sin corrupts the entire human nature.[11] This did not, however, mean the loss of the imago Dei (image of God). The only theologian who argued that the imago Dei itself was taken away and that the very substance of fallen humanity was sin was Matthias Flacius Illyricus, and this view was repudiated in the Formula of Concord.[12]
John Calvin used terms like "total depravity" to mean that, despite the ability of people to outwardly uphold the law, there remained an inward distortion which makes all human actions displeasing to God, whether or not they are outwardly good or bad.[12] Even after regeneration, every human action is mixed with evil.[13] Later Calvinist theologians were agreed on this, but the language of the Canons of Dort as well as the 17th-century Reformed theologians which followed it did not repeat the language of "total depravity", and arguably offer a more moderate view on the state of fallen humanity than Calvin.[12]
A form of the doctrine of total depravity, although not identical to the Calvinist position, was affirmed by the Five articles of Remonstrance, by Jacobus Arminius himself, and by John Wesley, who strongly identified with Arminius through publication of his periodical The Arminian and also advocated a strong doctrine of inability.[14] The Methodist Quarterly Review states that

It is not sufficiently known, we opine, that Methodists--the genuine Arminians of the present--do not entirely agree with this view of depravity. To what has been said, as being the Calvinist view of the total depravity of our nature, we do heartily assent, with the following exceptions:--First. We do not think that all men continue totally depraved until their regeneration. Secondly. We think man, under the atonement, is not, properly speaking, in a state of nature. He is not left to the unalleviated evils of total depravity. The atonement has not only secured grace for him, but a measure in him, by virtue of which he not only has moral light, but is often incited to good desires, and well-intended efforts to do what is perceived to be the divine will.[8]
Some Reformed theologians have mistakenly used the term "Arminianism" to include some who hold the Semipelagian doctrine of limited depravity, which allows for an "island of righteousness" in human hearts that is uncorrupted by sin and able to accept God's offer of salvation without a special dispensation of grace.[15] Although Arminius and Wesley both vehemently rejected this view, it has sometimes inaccurately been lumped together with theirs (particularly by Calvinists) because of other similarities in their respective systems such as conditional election, unlimited atonement, and prevenient grace. In particular, prevenient grace is seen in many of these systems as giving humans back the freedom to follow God in one way or another.
Theology[edit]
The term "total depravity", as understood in colloquial English, obscures the theological issues involved. Reformed and Lutheran theologians have never considered humans to be absent of goodness or unable to do good outwardly as a result of the fall. People retain the imago Dei, though it has been distorted.[12]
Total depravity is the fallen state of human beings as a result of original sin. The doctrine of total depravity asserts that people are, as a result of the fall, not inclined or even able to love God wholly with heart, mind, and strength, but rather are inclined by nature to serve their own will and desires and to reject the rule of God. Even religion and philanthropy are wicked to God[citation needed] because they originate from a selfish human desire and are not done to the glory of God. Therefore, in Reformed theology, if God is to save anyone God must predestine, call, or elect individuals to salvation since fallen man does not want to[citation needed], and is indeed incapable of, choosing God.[16]
Total depravity does not mean, however, that people have lost part of their humanity or are ontologically deteriorated, because Adam and Eve were created with the ability to not sin, and people retain that essential nature, even though the properties of their humanity is corrupted.[17] It also does not mean that people are as evil as possible. Rather, it means that even the good which a person may intend is faulty in its premise, false in its motive, and weak in its implementation; and there is no mere refinement of natural capacities that can correct this condition. Thus, even acts of generosity and altruism are in fact egoist acts in disguise. All good, consequently, is derived from God alone, and in no way through humanity.[18]
The total reach of sin taught with the doctrine of total depravity highlights people's dire need for God. No part of the person is not in need of grace, and all people are in need of grace, no matter how outwardly pious.[19] Feminist theologian Serene Jones sees the concept of total depravity as helpful because, according to Calvin, sin assaults the person from the outside in and occupies the whole self, allowing women to see how deeply oppression has harmed them and become part of their self-understanding.[20]
Criticism[edit]
The Catholic Church maintains that man cannot "be justified before God by his own works,... without the grace of God through Jesus Christ,"[21] thereby rejecting Pelagianism in accordance with the writings of Augustine and the Second Council of Orange (529).[22] However, the Catholic Church disagrees with the Protestant doctrine of total depravity, because the Catholic Church maintains humans retained a free but wounded will after the Fall.[23] Referring to Scripture and the Church Fathers,[24] Catholicism views human free will as deriving from being made in God's image.[25] Accordingly, the Catholic Church condemned as heresy any doctrine asserting "since Adam's sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished".[26]
See also[edit]
History of Calvinist–Arminian debate
Incurvatus in se
Christian views on the old covenant
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Andreä, Jakob; Chemnitz, Martin; Selnecker, Nikolaus; Chytraeus, David; Musculus, Andreas; Körner, Christoph (1577), Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord
2.Jump up ^ Melanchthon, Philip, ed. (1530), The Augsburg Confession
3.Jump up ^ Canons of Dordrecht, "The Third and Fourth Main Points of Doctrine"
4.Jump up ^ Westminster Assembly (1646), Westminster Confession of Faith
5.Jump up ^ Westminster Larger Catechism,Question 25
6.Jump up ^ Heidelberg Catechism,question 8
7.Jump up ^ Arminius, James The Writings of James Arminius (three vols.), tr. James Nichols and W. R. Bagnall (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1956), I:252
8.^ Jump up to: a b George Peck, D.D., ed. (1847). The Methodist Quarterly Review (New York: Lane & Tippett) XXIX: 444. Missing or empty |title= (help)
9.Jump up ^ Kelsey, David H. (1994). "Human Being". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 176–178. Williams, Robert R. (1994). "Sin and Evil". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 201–202.
10.Jump up ^ Kelsey, David H. (1994). "Human Being". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 176–177.
11.Jump up ^ Williams, Robert R. (1994). "Sin and Evil". In Hodgson, Peter C.; King, Robert H. Christian Theology: An Introduction to Its Traditions and Tasks. Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 204.
12.^ Jump up to: a b c d Muller, Richard A. (2012). Calvin and the Reformed Tradition (Ebook ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. p. 51.
13.Jump up ^ Bouwsma, William J. (1989). John Calvin: A Sixteenth-Century Portrait. Oxford University Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 139.
14.Jump up ^ Sermon 44, "Original Sin."; compare verse 4 of Charles Wesley's hymn "And Can It Be".
15.Jump up ^ Demarest, Bruce (2006). The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books. p. 56. ISBN 978-1-58134-812-5.
16.Jump up ^ The Westminster Confession of Faith,9.3
17.Jump up ^ Shuster, Marguerite (2004). The Fall and Sin: What We Have Become as Sinners. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 159–160, 182.
18.Jump up ^ Ra McLaughlin. "Total Depravity, part 1". Reformed Perspectives. Retrieved 2008-07-14. "[Any person] can do outwardly good works, but these works come from a heart that hates God, and therefore fail to meet God’s righteous standards."
19.Jump up ^ Jones, Serene (2000). Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace. Minneapolis: Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). pp. 102–103.
20.Jump up ^ Jones, Serene (2000). Feminist Theory and Christian Theology: Cartographies of Grace. Minneapolis: Fortress Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 120.
21.Jump up ^ Council of Trent, Session 6, canon 1.
22.Jump up ^ Judgements of the Council of Orange
23.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church Item 407 in section 1.2.1.7.
24.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church Item 1730
25.Jump up ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church Items 1701-1709
26.Jump up ^ Council of Trent, Session 6, canon 5.
External links[edit]
The Bondage of the Will[dead link] by Martin Luther
On the Freedom of the Will[dead link], a book treating the extent of man's corruption by Jonathan Edwards
"Original Sin", a sermon by John Wesley
"The Circumcision of the Heart", a sermon by John Wesley
"Original Sin", a section from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology(2.8.13) discussing the corrupting effects of the Fall
"Human Inability" by Charles Spurgeon
The Total Depravity of Man by Arthur Pink
"Total Inability"[dead link] from Loraine Boettner's The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
"Human Depravity" from R. C. Sproul's Essential Truths Of The Christian Faith
"Total Depravity" by John Piper
Calvinism's Total Depravity A refutation of John Piper's article "Total Depravity"
"What do the Protestant Reformers Mean by 'Total Depravity'?" by Victor Shepherd
Many articles from a variety of authors supporting total depravity


[hide]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Hamartiology


Adam ·
 Evil ·
 The Fall ·
 Original sin ·
 Christian views on sin ·
 Imputation of sin ·
 Other views on sin ·
 Supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism ·
 Theodicy ·
 Total depravity
 

See also Apologetics ·
 Soteriology ·
 Demonology
 

  


Categories: Calvinist theology
Five Points of Calvinism
Lutheran theology
Methodism
Christian hamartiology
Arminianism
Christian terminology
Morality










Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Esperanto
Français
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
日本語
Polski
Português
Simple English
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 March 2015, at 00:10.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_depravity























Extramarital sex

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


Relationships


Types[show]














































Activities[show]










Endings[show]







Emotions and feelings[show]












Practices[show]











Abuse[show]





v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Extramarital sex occurs when a married person engages in sexual activity with someone other than his or her spouse. From a different perspective, it also applies to a single person having sex with a married person. Engagement in extramarital sex has been associated with individuals who have a higher libido (sex drive) than their partner.[1]
Where extramarital sexual relations breach a sexual norm, it may also be referred to as adultery, fornication, philandery, or infidelity. These terms may also carry moral or religious consequences in civil or religious law.


Contents  [hide]
1 Prevalence
2 Religions 2.1 Hinduism
2.2 Judaism
2.3 Christianity
2.4 Islam
3 Law
4 See also
5 References

Prevalence[edit]
American researcher Alfred Kinsey found in his 1950-era studies that 50% of American males and 26% of females had extramarital sex. [2] Depending on studies, it was estimated that 26-50% of men and 21-38% of women,[3] or 22.7% of men and 11.6% of women had extramarital sex.[4] Other authors say that between 20% and 25% Americans had sex with someone other than their spouse.[5] Durex's Global Sex Survey has found that 44% of adults worldwide have had one-night extramarital sex and 22% have had an affair.[6] According to a 2004 United States survey,[7] 16% of married partners have had extramarital sex, nearly twice as many men as women, while an additional 30% have fantasized about extramarital sex. There were also studies that have shown rates of extramarital sex as low as 2.5%.[3] As many authors[who?] conclude, these kinds of estimates are probably understated because extramarital sex is commonly disapproved of.
Religions[edit]
Main article: Religion and sexuality
See also: Marriage § Marriage and religion and Adultery § Abrahamic religions
Hinduism[edit]
Hinduism condemns extramarital sex as sinful.[8]
Judaism[edit]
The Torah prescribes the death penalty through stoning for adultery, which is defined as having sex with a woman who is married to another man. Two witnesses of good character had to testify in court for the case to be even considered by the judges.
Israelite and historic Jewish society was polygynous (one man could have many wives), so the marital status of the man was irrelevant. If a woman, however, is unmarried, a sexual relationship, though highly immoral and sinful from the religion's point of view, is not considered to be adultery, and therefore not punishable by death, but by lashing.
Any physical punishments for any sins were in effect at the times of Judges and the Holy Temple. Now, any physical punishment is prohibited by Judaism — as no proper judicial process can be provided until the Holy Temple is rebuilt by the Messiah.
Christianity[edit]
See also: Adultery § Christianity and Fornication § Christianity and premarital sex
Extramarital sex is considered to be immoral by most Christian groups, who base this primarily on passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, nor those who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.
It is listed as a sin here and in other passages (along with idolatry, theft, greed, lying, and sexual perversion). While the next verse from the above passage is quick to point out that although some Christians used to practice those sins—that they have since been "justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" and are thus forgiven their sins—extramarital sex has historically been considered to be one of the more serious and damaging sins, possibly because of passages like 1 Corinthians 6:18 that speak of it as sinning against one's own body.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Zina
See also: Adultery § Islam
Traditional interpretations of Islamic law (or Sharia) prescribe severe punishments for zina, or extramarital sex, by both men and women. Premarital sex could be punished by up to 100 lashes, while adultery is punishable by stoning. The act of sexual penetration must, however, be attested by at least four male Muslim witnesses of good character, the accused has a right to testify in court, the suspect's word or testimony is required to hold the most weight in the eyes of the judge(s), punishments are reserved to the legal authorities and the law states that false accusations are to be punished severely.[citation needed] The former regulations also make some Muslims believe, that the process's goal was to eventually abolish the physical penalties relating to acts of fornication and adultery that were already present within many societies around the world when Islamic teachings first arose. According to this view, the principles are so rigorous in their search for evidence, that they create the near impossibility of being able to reach a verdict that goes against the suspect in any manner.[9]
Law[edit]
See also: Adultery § Law
Extramarital sex is not illegal in many countries and most states in the U.S. Virginia prosecuted John Bushey for adultery in 2001.[10] Other states allow jilted spouses to sue their ex-partners' lovers for alienation of affections.[11]
Extramarital sex is illegal in some Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,[12] Afghanistan,[13][14][15] Iran,[15] Kuwait,[16] Maldives,[17] Morocco,[18] Oman,[19] Mauritania,[20] United Arab Emirates,[21][22] Qatar,[23] Sudan,[24] and Yemen.[25]
See also[edit]
Honor killing
On-again, off-again relationship
Swinging
Threesome
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ 1997, Vulnerability to HIV infection and effects of AIDS in Africa and Asia/India - Page 47, James Ntozi
2.Jump up ^ The Kinsey Institute. Data from Alfred Kinsey's Studies. Published online.
3.^ Jump up to: a b Choi, K.H., Catania, J.A., & Dolcini, M.M. (1994). Extramarital sex and HIV risk behavior among U.S. adults: Results from the national AIDS behavioral survey. American Journal of Public Health, 84, 12, pp. 2003-2007.
4.Jump up ^ Wiederman,M.W. (1997). Extramarital sex: prevalence and correlates in a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 34, 2, pp. 167–175.
5.Jump up ^ Atkins, D.C., Baucom, D.H. and Jacobson, N.S. (2001). Understanding Infidelity: Correlates in a National Random Sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 4, pp. 735-749
6.Jump up ^ Durex. The Global Sex Survey 2005. Published online.
7.Jump up ^ "American Sex Survey" (PDF). abcnews. 2004. p. 26. Retrieved 2009-09-04. Short Analysis here
8.Jump up ^ "The Hindu Mind: Fundamentals of Hindu Religion and Philosophy for All Ages", by Bansi Pandit, p. 361, 2001.
9.Jump up ^ www.asmasociety.org
10.Jump up ^ Hate the Husband? Sue the Mistress!
11.Jump up ^ Hate the Husband? Sue the Mistress!
12.Jump up ^ Jordan, Mary (21 August 2008). "Searching for Freedom, Chained by the Law". The Washington Post. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
13.Jump up ^ Ernesto Londoño (2012-09-09). "Afghanistan sees rise in ‘dancing boys’ exploitation". The Washington Post (DEHRAZI, Afghanistan).
14.Jump up ^ "Home". AIDSPortal. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
15.^ Jump up to: a b "Iran". Travel.state.gov. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
16.Jump up ^ "United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Summary Record - Kuwait". Unhchr.ch. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
17.Jump up ^ "Culture of Maldives". Every Culture. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
18.Jump up ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19049000
19.Jump up ^ Interpol"
20.Jump up ^ "2010 Human Rights Report: Mauritania". State.gov. 8 April 2011. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
21.Jump up ^ "Education in Dubai". Dubaifaqs.com. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
22.Jump up ^ Judd, Terri; Sajn, Nikolina (10 July 2008). "Briton faces jail for sex on Dubai beach". The Independent. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
23.Jump up ^ ""Sex outside of marriage is a criminal offense here," PH ambassador to Qatar warns Pinoys". SPOT.ph. 12 September 2011. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
24.Jump up ^ "Sudan must rewrite rape laws to protect victims". Reuters. 28 June 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
25.Jump up ^ "Women's Rights in the Middle East and North Africa - Yemen". Unhcr.org. Retrieved 2 August 2013.


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Outline of human sexuality

















































































































































































Portal


  


Categories: Sex
Marriage







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Tagalog
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 12 March 2015, at 13:45.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extramarital_sex















Extramarital sex

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


Relationships


Types[show]














































Activities[show]










Endings[show]







Emotions and feelings[show]












Practices[show]











Abuse[show]





v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Extramarital sex occurs when a married person engages in sexual activity with someone other than his or her spouse. From a different perspective, it also applies to a single person having sex with a married person. Engagement in extramarital sex has been associated with individuals who have a higher libido (sex drive) than their partner.[1]
Where extramarital sexual relations breach a sexual norm, it may also be referred to as adultery, fornication, philandery, or infidelity. These terms may also carry moral or religious consequences in civil or religious law.


Contents  [hide]
1 Prevalence
2 Religions 2.1 Hinduism
2.2 Judaism
2.3 Christianity
2.4 Islam
3 Law
4 See also
5 References

Prevalence[edit]
American researcher Alfred Kinsey found in his 1950-era studies that 50% of American males and 26% of females had extramarital sex. [2] Depending on studies, it was estimated that 26-50% of men and 21-38% of women,[3] or 22.7% of men and 11.6% of women had extramarital sex.[4] Other authors say that between 20% and 25% Americans had sex with someone other than their spouse.[5] Durex's Global Sex Survey has found that 44% of adults worldwide have had one-night extramarital sex and 22% have had an affair.[6] According to a 2004 United States survey,[7] 16% of married partners have had extramarital sex, nearly twice as many men as women, while an additional 30% have fantasized about extramarital sex. There were also studies that have shown rates of extramarital sex as low as 2.5%.[3] As many authors[who?] conclude, these kinds of estimates are probably understated because extramarital sex is commonly disapproved of.
Religions[edit]
Main article: Religion and sexuality
See also: Marriage § Marriage and religion and Adultery § Abrahamic religions
Hinduism[edit]
Hinduism condemns extramarital sex as sinful.[8]
Judaism[edit]
The Torah prescribes the death penalty through stoning for adultery, which is defined as having sex with a woman who is married to another man. Two witnesses of good character had to testify in court for the case to be even considered by the judges.
Israelite and historic Jewish society was polygynous (one man could have many wives), so the marital status of the man was irrelevant. If a woman, however, is unmarried, a sexual relationship, though highly immoral and sinful from the religion's point of view, is not considered to be adultery, and therefore not punishable by death, but by lashing.
Any physical punishments for any sins were in effect at the times of Judges and the Holy Temple. Now, any physical punishment is prohibited by Judaism — as no proper judicial process can be provided until the Holy Temple is rebuilt by the Messiah.
Christianity[edit]
See also: Adultery § Christianity and Fornication § Christianity and premarital sex
Extramarital sex is considered to be immoral by most Christian groups, who base this primarily on passages like 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, nor those who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.
It is listed as a sin here and in other passages (along with idolatry, theft, greed, lying, and sexual perversion). While the next verse from the above passage is quick to point out that although some Christians used to practice those sins—that they have since been "justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" and are thus forgiven their sins—extramarital sex has historically been considered to be one of the more serious and damaging sins, possibly because of passages like 1 Corinthians 6:18 that speak of it as sinning against one's own body.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Zina
See also: Adultery § Islam
Traditional interpretations of Islamic law (or Sharia) prescribe severe punishments for zina, or extramarital sex, by both men and women. Premarital sex could be punished by up to 100 lashes, while adultery is punishable by stoning. The act of sexual penetration must, however, be attested by at least four male Muslim witnesses of good character, the accused has a right to testify in court, the suspect's word or testimony is required to hold the most weight in the eyes of the judge(s), punishments are reserved to the legal authorities and the law states that false accusations are to be punished severely.[citation needed] The former regulations also make some Muslims believe, that the process's goal was to eventually abolish the physical penalties relating to acts of fornication and adultery that were already present within many societies around the world when Islamic teachings first arose. According to this view, the principles are so rigorous in their search for evidence, that they create the near impossibility of being able to reach a verdict that goes against the suspect in any manner.[9]
Law[edit]
See also: Adultery § Law
Extramarital sex is not illegal in many countries and most states in the U.S. Virginia prosecuted John Bushey for adultery in 2001.[10] Other states allow jilted spouses to sue their ex-partners' lovers for alienation of affections.[11]
Extramarital sex is illegal in some Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,[12] Afghanistan,[13][14][15] Iran,[15] Kuwait,[16] Maldives,[17] Morocco,[18] Oman,[19] Mauritania,[20] United Arab Emirates,[21][22] Qatar,[23] Sudan,[24] and Yemen.[25]
See also[edit]
Honor killing
On-again, off-again relationship
Swinging
Threesome
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ 1997, Vulnerability to HIV infection and effects of AIDS in Africa and Asia/India - Page 47, James Ntozi
2.Jump up ^ The Kinsey Institute. Data from Alfred Kinsey's Studies. Published online.
3.^ Jump up to: a b Choi, K.H., Catania, J.A., & Dolcini, M.M. (1994). Extramarital sex and HIV risk behavior among U.S. adults: Results from the national AIDS behavioral survey. American Journal of Public Health, 84, 12, pp. 2003-2007.
4.Jump up ^ Wiederman,M.W. (1997). Extramarital sex: prevalence and correlates in a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 34, 2, pp. 167–175.
5.Jump up ^ Atkins, D.C., Baucom, D.H. and Jacobson, N.S. (2001). Understanding Infidelity: Correlates in a National Random Sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 4, pp. 735-749
6.Jump up ^ Durex. The Global Sex Survey 2005. Published online.
7.Jump up ^ "American Sex Survey" (PDF). abcnews. 2004. p. 26. Retrieved 2009-09-04. Short Analysis here
8.Jump up ^ "The Hindu Mind: Fundamentals of Hindu Religion and Philosophy for All Ages", by Bansi Pandit, p. 361, 2001.
9.Jump up ^ www.asmasociety.org
10.Jump up ^ Hate the Husband? Sue the Mistress!
11.Jump up ^ Hate the Husband? Sue the Mistress!
12.Jump up ^ Jordan, Mary (21 August 2008). "Searching for Freedom, Chained by the Law". The Washington Post. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
13.Jump up ^ Ernesto Londoño (2012-09-09). "Afghanistan sees rise in ‘dancing boys’ exploitation". The Washington Post (DEHRAZI, Afghanistan).
14.Jump up ^ "Home". AIDSPortal. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
15.^ Jump up to: a b "Iran". Travel.state.gov. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
16.Jump up ^ "United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Summary Record - Kuwait". Unhchr.ch. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
17.Jump up ^ "Culture of Maldives". Every Culture. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
18.Jump up ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19049000
19.Jump up ^ Interpol"
20.Jump up ^ "2010 Human Rights Report: Mauritania". State.gov. 8 April 2011. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
21.Jump up ^ "Education in Dubai". Dubaifaqs.com. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
22.Jump up ^ Judd, Terri; Sajn, Nikolina (10 July 2008). "Briton faces jail for sex on Dubai beach". The Independent. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
23.Jump up ^ ""Sex outside of marriage is a criminal offense here," PH ambassador to Qatar warns Pinoys". SPOT.ph. 12 September 2011. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
24.Jump up ^ "Sudan must rewrite rape laws to protect victims". Reuters. 28 June 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
25.Jump up ^ "Women's Rights in the Middle East and North Africa - Yemen". Unhcr.org. Retrieved 2 August 2013.


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Outline of human sexuality

















































































































































































Portal


  


Categories: Sex
Marriage







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Tagalog
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 12 March 2015, at 13:45.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extramarital_sex
















Fornication

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Not to be confused with formication.



Paolo and Francesca, whom Dante's Inferno describes as damned for fornication. (Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, 1819)
Fornication is generally consensual sexual intercourse between two people not married to each other.[1][2] For many people, the term carries an overtone of moral or religious disapproval, but the significance of sexual acts to which the term is applied varies between religions, societies and cultures. The definition is often disputed. In modern usage, the term is often replaced with a more judgment-neutral term like extramarital sex.


Contents  [hide]
1 Etymology and usage
2 History 2.1 Britain
3 Abrahamic religions 3.1 Christianity 3.1.1 Fornication
3.1.2 Christianity and premarital sex 3.1.2.1 Jesus and the early church
3.1.2.2 Lutheranism
3.1.2.3 Calvinism
3.1.2.4 Anglicanism
3.1.2.5 Mennonites
3.1.2.6 Quakers
3.1.2.7 Methodism
3.1.2.8 Roman Catholicism
3.1.2.9 Evangelicalism 3.1.2.9.1 American Baptists
3.1.2.9.2 Southern Baptist convention
3.1.2.9.3 Pentecostals


3.2 Islam
3.3 Judaism
4 Eastern religions 4.1 Hinduism
4.2 Buddhism
5 Laws 5.1 United States of America
5.2 Islamic nations
6 See also
7 References

Etymology and usage[edit]
Prostitutes in ancient Rome waited for their customers out of the rain under vaulted ceilings,[3] and the Latin word for vaults, fornix, became a euphemism for brothels, and the Latin verb fornicare referred to a man visiting a brothel.[4][5][6] The first recorded use in English is in the Cursor Mundi, c. 1300; the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) records a figurative use as well: "The forsaking of God for idols".[7]
Fornicated as an adjective is still used in botany, meaning "arched" or "bending over" (as in a leaf). John Milton plays on the double meaning of the word in The Reason of Church-Government Urged against Prelaty (1642): "[She] gives up her body to a mercenary whordome under those fornicated [ar]ches which she cals Gods house."[8]
The Greek term porneia (πορνεία) which means "illicit sexual intercourse" was translated as "fornication" in the 1611 King James Version of the bible[9] and has also been translated as whoredom, sexual immorality or simply immorality.[10][11]
History[edit]

Globe icon.
 The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (February 2013)
Britain[edit]
In England in 1650, during the ascendancy of the Puritans, fornication was made a felony. At the Restoration in 1660, this statute was not renewed, and prosecution of the mere act of fornication itself was abandoned. However, notorious and open lewdness, when carried to the extent of exciting public scandal, continued to be an indictable offence at common law.[12]
In Britain in the 1170s, "it was common practice for ordinary couples to co-habit before marriage and for cousins to marry one another".[13] Sex before marriage only became equated with sinfulness with the passing of the Marriage Act 1753.[14]
Prior to the passing of this Act, laws against bastard children became more strict during the 1730s and 1740s.[15]
Indeed, there was very little stigma around bastards at any social level in medieval England.[16] For instance, William the Conqueror's right to succeed to the throne of Normandy was never questioned on the grounds he was a bastard nor, in his conflict with Harold Godwinson over who should rule England, was this issue raised as an argument against him. However, attitudes shifted a few generations later when bastards were no longer able to claim the English throne.[17]
Abrahamic religions[edit]
See also: Adultery § Abrahamic religions and Extramarital sex § Religions
Christianity[edit]
Fornication[edit]
See also: Extramarital sex § Christianity and Adultery § Christianity
The Pauline epistles contain multiple condemnations of various forms of extramarital sex. The First Epistle to the Corinthians states "Flee from sexual immorality" and lists adulterers and "those who are sexually immoral" among a list of in a list of "wrongdoers who...will not inherit the kingdom of God." [1 Corinthians 6:9][1 Cor 6:18] First Corinthians and the Epistle to the Galatians also address fornication.[Galatians 5:19][1 Corinthians 7:2] The Apostolic Decree of the Council of Jerusalem also includes a prohibition of fornication.
Christianity and premarital sex[edit]
There is much debate amongst Christians as to whether or not sex between two people who have never been married to anyone constitutes a form of fornication.[18] Witte argues that the Bible itself is silent on the issue of consensual, premarital sex between an engaged couple.[19] One theologian whose opinion stands contrary to Witte's claim was the medieval English monastic, John Baconthorpe, who believed it can be argued from the Bible that sex before marriage is immoral.[20] A more contemporary theologian, the modern day English Anglican Lee Gatiss also argues that premarital sex is immoral based on scripture. He states that, from a Biblical perspective, "physical union should not take place outside of a “one flesh” (i.e. marriage) union... In [1 Corinthians] chapter 7 Paul addresses the situation of two unmarried Christians who are burning with passion (7:8-9) who should either exercise self-control or get married (cf. verses 36-38). The underlying assumptions are the same as those in Deuteronomy 22."[21]
Some of the debate arises from the question of which theological approach is being applied. A deontological view of sex interprets porneia, aselgeia and akatharsia in terms of whether the couple are married or non-married. What makes sex moral or immoral is the context of marriage. By contrast, a teleological view interprets porneia, aselgeia and akatharsia in terms of the quality of the relationship (how well it reflects God's glory and Christian notions of a committed, virtuous relationship.)[22]
From its outset, Protestantism has been more dynamic in its understanding of sexuality than Roman Catholicism, as it has not been constrained by procreation ethics and, as a result, it has been able to incorporate modern understandings of the human being that have emerged over the last century. However, Protestants, like Catholics, continue to struggle with ethical conundrums presented by "alternative lifestyles" including sexual relationships between unmarried heterosexuals, and, for the most part, heterosexual marriage is considered the ideal context for sexual intercourse but many theologians accept premarital sex and, since the 1990s, every mainstream Protestant denomination has had taskforces working on questions of sexual ethics.[23]
The discussion turns on two Greek words—moicheia (μοιχεία, adultery) and porneia (el:πορνεία, from which the word pornography is derived). The first word is restricted to contexts involving sexual betrayal of a spouse; however, the second word is used as a generic term for illegitimate sexual activity. Elsewhere in First Corinthians, incest, homosexual intercourse (according to some interpretations)[24] and prostitution are all explicitly forbidden by name (however, the Septuagint uses "porneia" to refer to male temple prostitution). Paul is preaching about activities based on levitical sexual prohibitions in the context of achieving holiness. The theory suggests it is these behaviours, and only these, that are intended by Paul's prohibition in chapter seven.[25]
One major academic theological work that equates porneia with premarital sex is Kittel and Friedrich's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament from 1977. In defining porneia as fornication, it states that "The NT is characterized by an unconditional repudiation of all extra-marital and unnatural intercourse."[26] Likewise, Friberg's Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament defines porneia as being "generally, every kind of extramarital, unlawful or unnatural sexual intercourse."[27]
Lee Gatiss also argues that "porneia" does encompass premarital sex. He states that "the word “fornication” has gone out of fashion and is not in common use to describe non-marital sex. However, it is an excellent translation for porneia, which basically referred to any kind of sex outside of marriage... This has been contested... but the overwhelming weight of scholarship and all the available evidence from the ancient world points firmly in this direction. “Flee sexual immorality (porneia) and pursue self-control” (cf. 1 Thess 4:1-8) was the straightforward message to Christians in a sex-crazed world."[28]
A survey undertaken by the American Sociological Review between 2000 and 2008 covering 31 developing countries found that "94 percent of Jews... reported having premarital sex, compared to 79 percent of Christians, 65 percent of Buddhists, 43 percent of Muslims and 19 percent of Hindus."[29]
Jesus and the early church[edit]
Attitudes towards marriage and sexuality at the time of Jesus stemmed from a blend of Roman and Jewish ideas. For instance, during the lifetime of Jesus, there was a strong social disapproval amongst Romans of polygamy. This made its way into Judaism and early Christianity, despite the Old Testament portraying examples of this behaviour amongst patriarchs and kings.[30]
Jewish marriage in the time of Jesus was a two-stage process. First, there was a betrothal in which the man claimed the woman as his exclusive sexual property. Secondly, there was the marriage contract which specified what the bride and groom's families would give the couple and what the bride would obtain if she divorced. "At the time of Jesus, and in rural areas like Galilee, a young couple might well co-habit before the contract was signed “in order to get acquainted.”"[30] Jesus apparently did not condemn sex at the betrothal stage as there is no record of any statements of his about this in the Gospels.
Jesus' teaching on divorce raised "the status of the wife from disposable dependent of the man to part of his very flesh."[30]
After the crucifixion, the early Church's statements on marital affairs mainly concerned acceptable reasons for divorce and remarriage. Whilst Paul, in his epistles to early believers, emphasised that both celibacy and marriage were good forms of life, after his life the Church felt that celibacy was more virtuous and liberating. This focus came about because the early church was very ascetic, possibly due to the influence of Greek philosophical thought. The focus on celibacy meant that other issues relating to sexual morality for the non-celibate remained under-developed.[30]
Augustine of Hippo's views strongly influenced how later Christians thought about sex. In his later writings, he was "deeply suspicious of sexual passion" and this has influenced the outlook of all the major Christian denominations down to the present day.[31]
It was some time later, during the sixth century, that the Emperor Justinian formulated laws that were to become the basis of Western marriage law for the next millennia. Under his legislation, co-habiting couples were no longer recognised as married and their children were regarded as illegitimate, with the same status as the children of prostitutes. However, the status of illegitimate children could be updated if the parents later married.
Lutheranism[edit]
According to Susan C. Karant-Nunn and Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks in their book, Luther on Women, Martin Luther felt that "The sex act was of course sinful outside of marriage ..."[32] In his sermon on the Epistle to the Ephesians Chapter 5, Luther stated:
“ In naming uncleanness in addition to fornication, the reference is to all sensual affections in distinction from wedded love. They are too unsavory for him [Paul] to mention by name, though in Romans 1, 24 he finds it expedient to speak of them without disguise. However, also wedded love must be characterized by moderation among Christians.[33] ”
Luther however, in contrast to his Roman Catholic opponents, considered that it was not the Church’s business to define marriage law. He understood marriage to be a legal agreement rather than a sacrament.[30] He stated that a marriage was instituted by God but its regulation was the business of the State, not the Church. Doctor Luther defined marriage as "the God-appointed and legitimate union of man and woman in the hope of having children or at least for the purpose of avoiding fornication and sin and living to the glory of God. The ultimate purpose is to obey God, to find aid and counsel against sin; to call upon God; to seek, love, and educate children for the glory of God; to live with one’s wife in the fear of God and to bear the cross..."[34]
Martin Bucer argued that sexual intimacy belonged in marriage and that, in marriage, the man becomes "the head and saviour of the wife and forms one flesh with her in order to avoid fornication and that the wife is the body and help of her husband, again to avoid fornication." Marriage for him, though, not only meant the avoidance of sin and procreation of children but social and emotional bonding resulting in a fellowship.[35] As Selderhuis notes, for Bucer, "When people conduct themselves lasciviously, either as married or unmarried folk, they fall under divine judgement... Marriage... [is] the context in which sexual intimacy should have its place... Marriage is, after all, the only framework within which sexual desires can be legitimately satisfied."[35]
Immanuel Kant, who was raised as a Pietist, considered sex before marriage to be immoral. He argued that sexual desire objectifies the person you crave and, since no logically consistent ethical rule allows you to use a person as an object, it is immoral to have sex (outside of marriage). Marriage makes the difference because, in marriage, the two people give all of themselves to create a union and, thus, now have rights over each other as each now belongs to the other. As Kant himself puts it, “The sole condition on which we are free to make use of our sexual desires depends upon the right to dispose over the person as a whole – over the welfare and happiness and generally over all the circumstances of that person… each of them... [are obliged] to surrender the whole of their person to the other with a complete right to disposal over it.”[36]
In the current day, the Lutheran Church of Australia holds to the belief that premarital sex is sinful. It believes that sexual activity belongs within the marriage relationship only and that the practice of pre-marital sex is in "violation of the will of God."[37]
In the United States, pastors of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod undertook a survey on premarital sex amongst their congregations in 2010. "These Lutheran pastors reported that over 57 percent of the couples they now marry are living together prior to the wedding, and that the rate of cohabitation in their congregations is increasing." Despite this trend, the Synod believes that "Regardless of the reasons given for living together, cohabitation is simply wrong for Christians."[38]
Alternatively, the Wisconsin Synod takes the view that a Christian couple could engage in sex before marriage but for the fact it would be an act of defiance against civil and religious norms in society. On being asked this question by a couple, the Church's Paul Kleim stated, "Were there no civil laws regulating marriage or Christian rite publicly uniting couples in marriage, your commitment to each other before God would be sufficient basis for you to begin living together as husband and wife. However, the civil and religious expectations that prevail make it wrong for you to practice marriage without a license... In your wedding ceremony you will be asking God to join you in marriage, and you will be testifying to state and church that this is the beginning of your marriage. While sexual intimacy during your engagement might not be fornication, it would certainly be civil disobedience and spiritual dishonesty. And that's wrong before God."[39]
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) delivered a detailed document, entitled A Social Statement on Human Sexuality, in 2009. With regard to sex before marriage, the document, declares that "Because this church urges couples to seek the highest social and legal support for their relationships, it does not favor cohabitation arrangements outside of marriage. It has a special concern when such arrangements are entered into as an end in themselves. It does, however, acknowledge the social forces at work that encourage such practices. This church also recognizes the pastoral and familial issues that accompany these contemporary social patterns. In cases where a decision is made for cohabitation, regardless of the reasons, this church expects its pastors and members to be clear with the couple regarding the reasons for the position of this church and to support the couple in recognizing their obligation to be open and candid with each other about their plans, expectations, and levels of mutual commitment. Some cohabitation arrangements can be constructed in ways that are neither casual nor intrinsically unstable... This church believes, however, that the deepest human longings for a sense of personal worth, long-term companionship, and profound security, especially given the human propensity to sin, are best served through binding commitment, legal protections, and the public accountability of marriage, especially where the couple is surrounded by the prayers of the congregational community and the promises of God."[40]
The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland's stance on the issue is ambiguous. It strictly condemns extramarital sex but in relation to pre-marital sex it states only that "Sexuality disconnected from love and from responsibility enslaves people, bringing harm to themselves and others."[41]
According to the Kinsey Institute, "Today, the Swedish Lutheran Church is very liberal in action, but careful not to take formal stands in most sexual issues, such as premarital sex, cohabitation, and sex education."[42]
The Lutheran Church in Germany (EKD) has noted that all forms of long-term cohabitation are vulnerable and that legislators must give due recognition to the fundamental significance of marriage.[43] The Church has further stated that "Marriage and family alone can be considered as role models for living together."[44]
Calvinism[edit]
Calvinism has traditionally always asserted that engaging in premarital sex is a sin.[45] Calvin himself said little on why he thought engaged couples should not have sex and Witte believes his rationale for the prohibition was vague[46] but he did seek to reduce the length of engagements amongst couples in Geneva to less than six weeks, to reduce the temptation of premarital sex.[19] He agreed, though, with Luther that marriage was a legal matter for the state, not a sacramental matter for the church.[47]
John Witte, Jr. has written a study on John Calvin and marriage and family life. In it, he notes that "For Calvin, the Commandment against adultery was equally binding on the unmarried, and equally applicable to both illicit sexual activities per se, and various acts leading to the same. Calvin condemned fornication sternly -- sexual intercourse or other illicit acts of sexual touching, seduction, orenticement by non-married parties, including those who were engaged to each other or to others. He decried at length the widespread practice of casual sex, prostitution, concubinage, pre-marital sex, nonmarital cohabitation and other forms of bed hopping that he encountered in modern day Geneva as well as in ancient Bible stories. All these actions openly defied God's commandment against adultery and should be punished by spiritual and criminal sanctions. Calvin preached against fornication constantly... He often led the Consistory in rooting out fornicators and subjecting them to admonition and the ban, and to fines and short imprisonment."[48]
There were remarkably low rates of premarital conceptions and illegitimate births amongst Huguenots in seventeenth century France compared to the rates amongst their Roman Catholic opponents. This indicates how the Calvinists had internalised values that condemned premarital sex as immoral.[49][50]
The famous Swiss Huguenot theologian, Karl Barth, discussed sexual morality in his magnum opus, Church Dogmatics. He stated that “Coitus without co-existence is demonic"[51] ("demonic", in Christianity, simply meaning any sphere that does not submit to God.) Barth goes on to state that "the physical sexuality of man should form an integral part of his total humanity as male or female, and that the completion of the sexual relation should be integrated into the total encounter of man and woman. All right or wrong and therefore salvation or perdition in this matter depends on whether it is viewed in isolation and abstraction or within this whole... If it is not, if physical sexuality and sex relations have their own right and authority in which man and woman and their encounter may be controlled and fulfilled, then it is a demonic business. Naturally, the command of God will always resist any such idea of sovereign physical sexuality."[51] For Barth, to engage in sex outside of marriage is not only rebellious but dehumanising as it puts humans on the level of animals, driven by passion and a search for self-gratification.
Furthermore, for Barth, "A wedding is only the regulative confirmation and legitimation of a marriage before and by society. It does not constitute a marriage”.[51] Sex within marriage can be sinful as well unless it affirms the coexistence of the couple. This opens the door to a more holistic understanding of sex.
However, a few modern Swiss Reformed theologians, such as M. Cornuz, believe that premarital sex is permissible if the sexual activities take a form which respects the partner and helps the relationship grow in intimacy. These theologians hold that it is when a relationship is exploitive that it is sinful.[52][53] Hence, engaging in sex with prostitutes is always sinful as it is an exploitive relationship and does not allow the participants to grow in dignity.[54] This change has come about within the last two generations in Switzerland. Prior to that, the cultural norm was that the couple would not engage in sex before marriage. Modern Reformed theologians have endeavoured to meet the challenge of applying Christian teaching to this very different culture from that of the past.[55]
In summary, Cornuz and his colleagues feel that one should always be true to one's individual conscience, so if the person feels sex before marriage is sinful, that person should listen to his or her conscience and abstain.[56] Hence, it is up to the couple themselves to decide if engaging in premarital sex or remaining virgins is the best way for them to reflect the love of God in their relationship.[55]
French Calvinists hold to very high standards of ethics and feel themselves to be different from French Roman Catholics, in terms of attitudes and behaviour, including sexual behaviour. French Reformed Christians "are widely regarded as having particularly high standards of honesty and integrity."[57]
Scottish Calvinists remain deeply opposed to any kind of sex outside of marriage. In 2008, the Scottish health minister, Shona Robison noted, "There are deeply-held views on moral issues and cultural and lifestyle issues... The Highlands in general... have a strong Calvinistic streak, a prudish thing that sees sex as something that happens behind closed doors and drawn curtains. As a consequence of this and because of lack of a scene for gay people, both straight and gay people are being driven out into these isolated areas to have [casual] sex."[58]
The American Presbyterian Church, "like other Christian bodies [in the United States], has viewed marriage as a prerequisite to sexual intercourse and considered sex outside marriage a sin."[59]
The prominent conservative American Calvinist theologian, R. C. Sproul, opposes premarital sex on the grounds that the marriage covenant is an essential legal safeguard, protecting both members of the couple from each other's sinfulness.[60]
Anglicanism[edit]
The English reformers took a stern view of adultery and fornication, which Homily 11 of the First Book of Homilies (1547) defined to include “all unlawfull use of those parts, which bee ordeyned for generation."[61]
However, prior to the Marriage Act 1753, British couples could live together and have sex after their betrothal or "the spousals". Until the mid-1700s, it was normal and acceptable for the bride to be pregnant at the nuptials, the later church public ceremony for the marriage. With the Act in force, for the first time in British history, all marriages in England and Wales had to take place in their parish church. (The law also applied to Roman Catholics, but Jews and Quakers were exempt.) The Act combined the spousals and nuptials and, by the start of the 19th century, social convention and the Anglican faith prescribed that brides be virgins at marriage. Illegitimacy became more socially discouraged, with first pregnancies outside of marriage declining from 40% to 20% during the Victorian era but returning to 40% by the start of the 21st century.[14] The reason that the Hardwicke Act led to pre-marital sex being equated with sin is because, whilst the State defined who was married, it was the Anglican Church that was given the responsibility to police this law for the State.[61] Today, Britain remains abnormal amongst European nations in having Church weddings whereas most other nations on that continent insist on civil registrations leaving it up to the couple if they choose to have a religious ceremony as well.[61]
In the Victorian era, however, the English working class continued to have a different set of sexual mores from the upper-middle and upper classes. Premarital intercourse was considered acceptable for the working class but only after an extended period of courtship and occurred infrequently even then. The couple were expected to marry, though. Disgrace only arose if the female became pregnant and the couple did not marry.[62][63]
The 1984 Anglican booklet Forward to Marriage was also tolerant of premarital sex but strongly endorsed marriage as "a necessary commitment for a long-term relationship".[64]
In 1987, the General Synod of the Church of England asserted "(1) that sexual intercourse is an act of total commitment which belongs properly within a permanent married relationship, (2) that fornication and adultery are sins against this ideal, and are to be met by a call to repentance and the exercise of compassion."[65]
The 1988 Lambeth Conference declared in its Resolution on Marriage and Family that "Noting the gap between traditional Christian teaching on pre-marital sex, and the life-styles being adopted by many people today, both within and outside the Church: (a) calls on provinces and dioceses to adopt a caring and pastoral attitude to such people; (b) reaffirms the traditional biblical teaching that sexual intercourse is an act of total commitment which belongs properly within a permanent married relationship; (c) in response to the International Conference of Young Anglicans in Belfast, urges provinces and dioceses to plan with young people programmes to explore issues such as pre-marital sex in the light of traditional Christian values" (Resolution 34).[66]
The 1998 Lambeth Conference made a subsequent resolution. The Conference held "in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage" (Resolution I.10). This Resolution also commended a report on human sexuality entitled Called to Full Humanity which stated that "The Holy Scriptures and Christian tradition teach that human sexuality is intended by God to find its rightful and full expression between a man and a woman in the covenant of marriage, established by God in creation, and affirmed by our Lord Jesus Christ. Holy Matrimony is, by intention and divine purpose, to be a lifelong, monogamous and unconditional commitment between a woman and a man. The Lambeth Conference 1978 and 1998 both affirmed 'marriage to be sacred, instituted by God and blessed by our Lord Jesus Christ'. The New Testament and Christian history identify singleness and dedicated celibacy as Christ-like ways of living."[67]
A 2002 survey by the Church Times found that less than half of the 5,000 readers questioned said it was wrong for men and women to have sex before they married. Over 25% also said it was acceptable for a couple to live together without ever intending to marry.[68]
The 2003 report, Cohabitation: A Christian Reflection, produced by the Diocese of Southwark, found that the Church's traditional teaching that sex before marriage is wrong has been inherited from a different form of society from that of today but then cited research that illustrates the problems that accompany cohabitation, particularly with regard to raising children. It concluded that marriage is "a much more satisfactory social convention than cohabitation", but says that the Church has failed to present marriage in a way that captures the imagination of young people and that the Church needed to rise to the challenge and rediscover its confidence in marriage.[68]
The report noted that one problem for the Church is that there is no biblical text dealing explicitly with cohabitation, and clergy have no answer to the question they often face: "Where does it say in the Bible that I should not live and sleep with my partner?" The report notes that Paul gave a "cautious welcome" to marriage, but that there was also a "militant apostolic view" that favoured celibacy, which "was seen as more noble than marriage" by many early Christians. The report also noted that "the strict sexual codes of the earliest Christian communities helped to give them a separate identity distinct from the sexual hedonism of the pagan world."[68]
The report ultimately rejected the possibility that cohabitation with no intention to marry is acceptable for members of the Christian Church.[68]
In a 2004 interview, the Anglican Primate of Australia, Archbishop Peter Carnley, noted that heterosexual de facto relationships and a disinclination to commit were more serious worries for him than the same-sex marriage movement. When asked if he thought sexual morality was subjective, he disagreed, stating "I think it's possible to say, for example, that it is objectively quite clear that promiscuity is a bad thing".[69]
In 2009, N. T. Wright noted that, in popular discourse, there has been a "supposed modern and scientific discovery of a personal ‘identity’ characterised by sexual preference, which then generates a set of ‘rights’... Without entering into discussion of the scientific evidence, it must be said that the Christian notion of personal identity has never before been supposed to be rooted in desires of whatever sort. Indeed, desires are routinely brought under the constraints of ‘being in Christ’. This quite new notion of an ‘identity’ found not only within oneself but within one’s emotional and physical desires needs to be articulated on the basis of scripture and tradition, and this to my mind has not been done.... The church has never acknowledged that powerful sexual instincts, which almost all human beings have, generate a prima facie ‘right’ that these instincts receive physical expression. All are called to chastity and, within that, some are called to celibacy; but a call to celibacy is not the same thing as discovering that one has a weak or negligible sexual drive. The call to the self-control of chastity is for all: for the heterosexually inclined who, whether married or not, are regularly and powerfully attracted to many different potential partners, just as much as for those with different instincts."[70]



Prince William and Kate Middleton on the balcony of Buckingham Palace
The 1996 National Church Life Survey in Australia found that Australian Anglicans were more liberal about premarital sex than churchgoers from other denominations and more conservative than the general population. The survey noted a divide between Anglicans who wanted to support sexually active unmarried couples in their churches and others who didn't.[71] A 2009 survey found that Anglicans (along with Baptists, Roman Catholics and Uniting Church members) had become a little more accepting of premarital sex compared to a 1993 survey, whereas Pentecostal Christians had become markedly more conservative. 54% of Australian church attenders felt pre-marital sex was always or almost always wrong, whereas only 3% of non-church attenders thought it was always or usually wrong. Amongst those who attended church on a weekly basis, the percentage of those who thought pre-marital sex was always or almost always wrong rose to 67%.[72] Another survey confirmed that most non-religious Australians thought that premarital sex was acceptable and that there was a correlation between liberalism, education levels, lack of religious beliefs and a permissive attitude to premarital sex.[73]
In the United States, the Episcopal Church only approves "of sex between men and women who are married. In 1979, the U.S. church's governing body voted down a resolution to approve other sexual activity."[74]
Earlier, in 1987, Spong's Newark Diocese had commissioned a report that concluded that the "Episcopal Church should recognize and bless committed non-marital sexual relationships between homosexuals, young adults, the divorced and widowed ..." The report aimed "to ignite a new debate on sexual ethics among leaders of the nation's 3 million Episcopalians in the hope that they will amend church doctrine to embrace all believers. ... Spong, an advocate of the recommendations ... said his views are a minority position in the church."[74]
Former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams[75] and the Archbishop of York John Sentamu have expressed tolerance of cohabitation.[76] In 2011, the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, commenting on Prince William and Kate Middleton's decision to live together before their wedding, said that the royal couple's public commitment to live their lives together today would be more important than their past. Sentamu said that he had conducted wedding services for "many cohabiting couples” during his time as a vicar in south London.[77]
The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, did not personally believe sex outside of marriage to be a sin and noted in 2002 that he found it hard to reconcile his liberal personal beliefs with the public stance of the Church.[78][79] However, in 2008, Doctor Williams said, "Sex outside marriage is not as God purposes it... I always find it difficult to condense sexual ethics into a soundbite... All I can say is where the Church stands – it's not a question of what Rowan Williams's view is... the biblical view of sexual relations is consistently within the pattern of absolute mutual commitment, reflecting God's commitment to his people. And the assumption of the Bible is that that commitment is heterosexual. That is the framework we work in."[80]
In his 1997 essay, "Forbidden Fruit: New Testament Sexual Ethics", Dr Williams had noted, "I can't see that the New Testament easily allows any straightforwardly positive evaluation of sexual intimacy outside a relationship that is publicly committed [in marriage]."[81]
In 2013, Doctor Williams' successor, Justin Welby stated that "My understanding of sexual ethics has been that, regardless of whether it's gay or straight, sex outside marriage is wrong."[82][83] He reiterated this belief again later in 2013, further noting that "To abandon the ideal simply because it's difficult to achieve is ridiculous."[84] After Welby made his first statement, a Sunday Times poll found that "A majority of adults (69%, including 76% of those professing no faith) believe Justin Welby to be wrong in condemning sex outside marriage, while 17% think he is right (including 30% of Anglicans), and 13% are unsure."[85]
The Kinsey Institute comments that "Prior to the 1950s, the religious influences forming sexual constructs [in Britain] came almost exclusively from "the official church" of England, and "unofficially" from the other Christian denominations. In recent decades, the picture has become more complex. Since midcentury, the Church of England's approach to social morality and sexuality has fluctuated between two poles, the traditionalists and the modernists, or the "permission givers" and the "orthodox moral directors." With the national religious scene resembling the circular approach of the politicians to sexual knowledge and attitudes, the sociosexual control and influence appears to bounce back and forth between church and state according to a mutually cooperative formula. ... This doctrinal "pendulum" is confusing for the majority of the population who are not experts at moral and theological niceties and subtleties. The people themselves are part of the system of confusion: While expecting clear and definite moral messages from both establishment and Church, they reserve the right to judge the validity of those messages, even when they are biblically based."[86]
The 2013 British Social Attitudes survey found that member of the Church of England have become more accepting of pre-marital sex over the past 30 years. In 1983, 31% of British Anglicans surveyed thought that pre-marital sex was "always" or "mostly" wrong whereas, in 2012, only 10% thought this was the case. Likewise, in 1989, 78% of Anglicans surveyed thought that people should marry before having children. In 2012, this had declined to 54%.[87]
Mennonites[edit]
Mennonites believe that sex outside of marriage is sinful. The Mennonite Confession of Faith states “According to Scripture, right sexual union takes place only within the marriage relationship. Scripture places sexual intimacy within God’s good created order. Sexual union is reserved for the marriage bond.”[88]
Quakers[edit]
As part of their "simplicity" testimony, early Quakers held to traditional sexual values, including the belief that there should be no sex outside of marriage.[89] Quakers on the whole remained conservative on matters of sexual ethics until the early part of the twentieth century. [90] However, there is less consensus on this today at least at meetings of liberal Quakers.[91] These liberals form a minority view amongst Quakers, though.[92]
In general, Quakers have always focused on practical love and social aspects of faith, shunning doctrine, dogma and systematic theology. Most Friends hold views similar to Evangelicals on most theological and moral issues, including those relating to premarital sex.[93]
Methodism[edit]
The American Methodist theologian and pastor, Ben Witherington III, believes that "virginity in a woman was highly valued before marriage [in Biblical cultures]. ... In early Jewish law if you had sex with a woman you were considered married to her or you had shamed her. See the story of Mary and Joseph. Porneia can refer to all sorts of sexual sin including deflowering a virgin ... there was no dating or physical intimacy prior to an arranged marriage in the vast majority of cases. The notion of dating doesn’t exist in Jesus and Paul's world. Second, honor and shame cultures placed a high value on sexual purity. Notice how prostitutes were stigmatized. Women were mainly blamed for sexual immorality. Finally Jesus gave his disciples two choices in Mt. 19—fidelity in heterosexual marriage or being a eunuch! This means no sex outside marriage."[94]
The position of the United Methodist Church in the United States on the issue is as follows: "Although all persons are sexual beings whether or not they are married, sexual relations are only clearly affirmed in the marriage bond."[95]
By contrast, the Uniting Church in Australia is still formulating its views on the subject. It recognises the changes in marriage practice and lifestyle that have resonated throughout society and that the UCA is perceived by the public of being more accepting of the realities of humanity than many other denominations.[96][97] A report noted that scripture is not really about marriage as understood in contemporary western societies and, in fact, has very little to say about it. In the report, the church also acknowledged that many unmarried people had sex but neither condemned nor endorsed it, instead noting that there were many different views within the church.[96]
Stanley Hauerwas argues that questions about sex before marriage need to be reframed in terms of the narrative of the church. He asks individuals to consider if it is a pure or licentious lifestyle that will best prepare the Christian to live out and serve in the narrative of the church. Doctor Hauerwas goes on to conclude, "For the issue is not whether X or Y form of sexual activity is right or wrong, as if such activity could be separated from a whole way of life... The issue is not whether someone is chaste in the sense of not engaging in genital activity, but whether we have lived in a manner that allows us to bring a history with us that contributes to the common history we may be called upon to develop with one another. Chastity, we forget, is not a state but a form of the virtue of faithfulness that is necessary for a role in the community... what the young properly demand is an account of life and the initiation into a community that makes intelligible why their interest in sex should be subordinated to other interests. What they, and we, demand is the lure of an adventure that captures the imagination sufficiently that conquest means more than the sexual possession of another. I have tried to suggest that marriage and singleness for Christians should represent just such an adventure, and if it does not, no amount of ethics or rules will be sufficient to correct the situation."[98]
Roman Catholicism[edit]
Catholicism equates premarital sex with fornication and ties it with breaking the sixth commandment ("Thou shalt not commit adultery") in its Catechism:

Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.[99]
In the early Middle Ages, although the Church theoretically disapproved of nonmarital sex, it approved of it in practice, at least for males (females could be punished) and the practice was commonplace. The Third Council of Aachen (862) noted that premarital sex was quite permissible,[100] declaring it was "rare, almost unheard-of, for a man to remain a virgin until marriage."[101] (At the same time, the Church's attitude to the keeping of concubines was ambivalent.)[101]
Indeed, the Roman Catholic Church did not begin to actively condemn pre-marital sex until the twelfth century. The Paris-based "Reform Church" movement was a Catholic faction that attempted to refocus society's moral compass with a particular emphasis on sex and marriage. The movement sent priests to Wales where it was, up until that time, the norm for Christians to live together prior to marriage.[13]
Up until this period, marriage was considered a private contract between two people. They would make a pledge to each other and, from that moment on, they were considered married. This pledge could take place anywhere; it did not have to occur in a church and neither the church nor the state were involved. It was during the twelfth century that the Roman Catholic Church took control of the process of marriage. From that point on, to be legally recognised, a marriage had to take place in a church with a formal service conducted by a priest. At the same time, pre-marital sex came to be regarded as sinful. Hence all marriage and sexual activity now came under the control of the Church.[17]
At the time of the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church "officially advocated celibacy for the religious, and prohibited marriage, but allowed fornication and concubinage."[102] For instance, in 1527 all but 10 out of 200 Roman Catholic clergymen in Thuringia were living with women outside of marriage.[102]
The Council of Trent (which began in 1545 in reaction to the Protestant Reformation) formally ratified the Roman Catholic view that marriage was a sacrament and set strict guidelines around what constituted a legitimate marriage in Roman Catholic eyes.[103]
In his 1930 encyclical, Casti connubii, Pope Pius XI strongly condemned premarital sex and all forms of "experimental" marriage.[104]
The Roman Catholic belief that premarital sex is sinful was reasserted in Pope John Paul II's 1993 encyclical, Veritatis Splendor.[105]
In 2012, Pope Benedict XVI claimed that premarital sex and cohabitation were "gravely sinful" and "damaging to the stability of society".[106][107] The Roman Catholic Church continues to portray premarital sex as a shameful act and believes that sexual relations are only acceptable between a married couple.[108]
The 2012 British Social Attitudes survey showed that only one in ten British Roman Catholics and Anglicans thought that pre-marital sex was wrong (however, of those who attended Church on a weekly basis, only 23% thought it was permissible).[109]
A 1994 study of French Roman Catholics showed that 83% preferred to listen to their consciences rather than to the official position of the Roman Catholic Church when making major decisions in their lives, leading to 75% of Catholics, by 2003, to say that cohabitation outside of marriage is a personal matter and 13% to say whether it is right or not depends on circumstances.[110]
A 2004 survey showed vastly different attitudes amongst Roman Catholics in different nations. For instance, in Germany, 76% of Roman Catholics agreed or strongly agreed that cohabitation before marriage was acceptable. In Spain, that number was 72%, in the Czech Republic it was 66% and in France it was 62%. At the other end of the spectrum, only 32% of Australian Roman Catholics thought it was acceptable, followed by 39% in the Philippines and 43% in the United States.[111]
The same survey sought to show the number of Roman Catholics who believed that premarital sex is "not wrong at all" or "wrong only sometimes". In the Czech Republic, 84% of Roman Catholics believed this, in France it was 83% and in Germany it was 80%. At the other end of the scale, in the Philippines it was 21%, in Ireland it was 51% and in Australia and the United States it was 64%.[112] The survey also claimed that 40% of Roman Catholic women in the United States have cohabited outside of marriage.[113]
The 2013 British Social Attitudes survey showed that Roman Catholics have become even more accepting than Anglicans of having children outside of wedlock: in 1989, 73% of British Roman Catholics thought people should marry before having children; whereas, by 2012, just 43% thought so.[114]
A 2014 survey showed that most German Roman Catholics also disputed the Church's ruling against premarital sex.[115]
Evangelicalism[edit]
In his book Forbidden Fruit: Sex & Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers, Mark Regnerus notes that "Evangelical Christian teens are more likely to have lost their virginity earlier than mainline Protestants. They start having sex on average at age 16.3 and are more likely than other religious groups to have had three or more sexual partners by age 17."[116]
A 2012 study, the National Survey of Reproductive and Contraceptive Knowledge, found that 80% of young American evangelical Christians aged between 18 and 29 are having pre-marital sex.[117]
A 2014 press release from online dating websites announced the results of a poll of 2,600 Americans in their attitudes towards dating and sex.[118] The poll found that 61 percent of Christians believed they would have sex before marriage. Fifty-six percent found it appropriate to cohabit with a romantic partner after dating for a time between six months and two years. Fifty-nine percent said it doesn't matter who the primary breadwinner of the family is. And 34 percent responded that they would marry someone of a different faith.[119]
American Baptists[edit]
The American Baptist pastor and assistant professor, Jennifer Knust, believes that the Bible is contradictory on the subject of premarital sex and that some Bible texts, notably the Book of Ruth, present it as a source of God's blessing.[120][121]
Southern Baptist convention[edit]
A 2013 study of married couples in Southern Baptist churches in Texas found that over 70% of respondents reported having had premarital vaginal or oral sex.[122] The Southern Baptist scholar Frank Stagg interpreted the New Testament as saying that sex is reserved for marriage.[123] He maintained that the New Testament teaches that sex outside of marriage is a sin of adultery if either sexual participant is married, otherwise the sin of fornication if both sexual participants are unmarried.
The Southern Baptists' Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission also condemns premarital sex on the grounds of their interpretation of the Bible.[124] Feeling that marriage is a "divine institution"[124] the Southern Baptist position is closer to that of Roman Catholic sacramentalism than that of Luther and Calvin who maintained marriage was a legal agreement and the business of the State.[30]
Pentecostals[edit]
In Australia, Pentecostals are increasingly opposed to the concept of premarital sex. In 1993, 62% of Australian Pentecostals felt that sex before marriage was wrong. By 2009, that figure had jumped to 78%.[125]
Islam[edit]



 Islamic parts of the world where sex before or outside marriage is forbidden.[126][127] Sharia considers consensual premarital sex a hudud crime, and requires public punishment.
Islam forbids sex outside of marriage, both premarital sex and sex outside marriage (zina),[128] with the exception of sexual intercourse between male slaveholders and their female slaves.[129][130] Qur'an states:[131][132]

Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful deed, and an evil, opening the road to other evils.
— Quran 17:32

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication - flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.
— Quran 24:2
Sharia considers premarital and extra marital sex as two of six hudud crimes, that is, it is a crime against Allah.[133] As a hudud crime, it must be dealt with a fixed punishment.[134] Islam requires that Muslim society punish both the boy and the girl, who have engaged in premarital sex, with 100 lashes in public; for extra marital sex, the punishment required by Sharia is 100 lashes followed by stoning to death in public.[135] These punishments are also prescribed in Sahih Hadiths, the books most trusted in Islam after Quran,[136]

'Ubada b. as-Samit reported: Allah's Messenger as saying: Receive teaching from me, receive teaching from me. Allah has ordained a way for those women. When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female, they should receive one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in case of married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.
— Sahih Muslim, 17:4191
The act of sexual penetration must, however, be attested by at least four Muslim witnesses of good character, the accused has a right to testify in court, the suspect's word or testimony is required to hold the most weight in the eyes of the judge(s), punishments are reserved to the legal authorities and the law states that false accusations are to be punished severely.[137][138] The former regulations also make some Muslims believe, that the process's goal was to eventually abolish the physical penalties relating to acts of fornication and adultery that were already present within many societies around the world when Islamic teachings first arose. According to this view, the principles are so rigorous in their search for evidence, that they create the near impossibility of being able to reach a verdict that goes against the suspect in any manner.[139]
Beyond being a crime requiring punishment in worldly life, fornication is a sin leading to chastisement in after-life in Islam.[140]
Judaism[edit]
The Torah does not consider premarital sex a capital crime, unless one was already betrothed.[141]
To quote two sources, "The Torah does not outlaw it—as it does many other types of sexual relationships—and the child of such a union is not considered a mamzer (illegitimate). Nonetheless, marital sex is considered ideal, and premarital sex is traditionally not approved of. The negative attitude toward premarital sex, to a large degree, reflects the overwhelmingly positive attitude toward sex within marriage."[142] Likewise, "The only limits placed on sexual activities in the Torah are prohibitions against adultery and incest. In Biblical times, a man was not prohibited from having sexual relations with a woman, as long as it led to marriage. The Bible never explicitly states a woman and man may not have sexual intercourse prior to marriage; therefore, no sanction was imposed for premarital sex, but it was considered a violation of custom."[143]
Despite the fact it is not condemned in the Torah, Orthodox Jews are opposed to premarital sex.[144]
Eastern religions[edit]
Hinduism[edit]
Hinduism condemns pre-marital sex and adultery.[145][146] Among Hindu communities, sexual matters are left to the judgment of those involved and not a matter to be imposed through law.[147] Sexual behavior of Hindus are also governed by the prevalent practices of the society.[148][149][150] For example, Nāradasmṛti, one of many legal texts of Hindu communities in ancient India, states in verse 13.60-61,

If a man has intercourse with an attached woman somewhere other than his own house, it is known as adultery by the experts, but not if she came to his house on her own. It is not a punishable crime when someone has intercourse with the wife of a man who has abandoned her because she is wicked, or with the wife of a eunuch or of a man who does not care, provided the wife has initiated it, of her own volition.
—Nāradasmṛti 13.60-61[149]
The term "attached woman" in the above verse includes a woman who is either married and protected by her husband, or a woman is not married and protected by her father.[149] In verses 13.71-72, Nāradasmṛti states that a man should marry the woman, with whom he had consensual intercourse.[149][150]

If a man has intercourse with an unmarried woman, who consents to it, it is no offense, but he shall deck her with ornaments, worship her, and thus bring her to his house as his bride.
—Nāradasmṛti 13.72[150]
Manusmriti considers adultery as a source of personal trauma and social disorder, and prescribes rules for the property, maintenance and divorce rights of spouse not involved in the adultery, and the rights of offsprings if produced from sex outside marriage.[151]
In the diversity of Hinduism, a spectrum of views on sexual freedoms thrived in ancient India. Marco Polo, while visiting Hindu kingdoms in 13th century India, made the observation that social mores in India consider sex within marriage as proper and virtuous, although they don't consider any other sexual gratification to be a sin.[152][153]
Hinduism itself doesn't forbid remarriage but gives no importance to divorce either.[relevant? – discuss][154]
In Yoga school of Hinduism, five types of temperance (yama) are recommended for ethical life, the fourth[155] yama being celibacy and self-restraint from sexually cheating on one's partner. Marital fidelity, where all sexual thoughts and expressions are limited to one's spouse, is taught as a virtuous value.[156][157]
Buddhism[edit]
[icon] This section requires expansion. (September 2014)
Buddhism disapproves of fornication and adultery.[158] The precepts of Buddhism denounces fornication, thieving, lying, murdering and other acts.[159]
Laws[edit]
Fornication laws are mostly tied to religion and the legal and political traditions within the particular jurisdiction. Laws differ greatly from country to country.
United States of America[edit]
Ethical issues arising from sexual relations between consenting heterosexuals who have reached the age of consent have generally been viewed as matters of private morality, and so, have not generally been prosecuted as criminal offenses in the common law.[160] This legal position was inherited by the United States from the United Kingdom. Later, some jurisdictions, a total of 16 in the southern and eastern United States, as well as the states of Wisconsin[161] and Utah,[162] passed statutes creating the offense of fornication that prohibited (vaginal) sexual intercourse between two unmarried people of the opposite sex. Most of these laws either were repealed, were not enforced, or were struck down by the courts in several states as being odious to their state constitutions. See also State v. Saunders, 381 A.2d 333 (N.J. 1977), Martin v. Ziherl, 607 S.E.2d 367 (Va. 2005).
Some acts may be prohibited under criminal laws defining the offense of sodomy, rather than the laws defining the offense of fornication. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) rendered the states' remaining laws related to sodomy unenforceable. Lawrence v. Texas is also presumed by many to invalidate laws prohibiting fornication: the decision declared sodomy laws unconstitutional, saying that they interfered with private, consensual, non-commercial intimate relations between unrelated adults, and therefore were odious to the rights of liberty and privacy, such rights being retained by the people of the United States.
Islamic nations[edit]
In some Muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,[163] Afghanistan,[164][165][166] Iran,[166] Kuwait,[167] Maldives,[168] Morocco,[169] Oman,[170] Mauritania,[171] United Arab Emirates,[172][173] Qatar,[174] Sudan,[175] Yemen,[176] any form of sexual activity outside marriage is illegal.
See also[edit]
Casual sex
Religion and sexuality
Free love
Infidelity
Lust
Open marriage
Promiscuity
Zina
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "Fornication". Student Dictionary. Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 15 February 2013.
2.Jump up ^ "Fornication". TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved November 25, 2013.
3.Jump up ^ O'Gorman, James F. (1998). ABC of Architecture. U of Pennsylvania P. pp. 106–107. ISBN 9780812216318. Retrieved 15 February 2013.
4.Jump up ^ Christopher Francese (2007). Ancient Rome in So Many Words. Hippocrene Books. p. 146.
5.Jump up ^ The Merriam-Webster New Book of Word Histories. Merriam-Webster. 1991. p. 182.
6.Jump up ^ "Fornix, n.". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2001.
7.Jump up ^ "Fornication, n.1". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2001.
8.Jump up ^ "Fornicated, adj.". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2001.
9.Jump up ^ See Matthew 5:32 for usage of the word in English bibles
10.Jump up ^ "The English Standard Version". ChristianCourier.com. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
11.Jump up ^ "The Greek Lexicon". BibleStudyTools.com. Retrieved 4 February 2014.
12.Jump up ^ Wikisource-logo.svg "Fornication". New International Encyclopedia. 1906.
13.^ Jump up to: a b "Gerald of Wales: Patriotic Welshman or arrogant agent of English imperialism?". Wales Online. 3 October 2002. Retrieved 14 October 2013.
14.^ Jump up to: a b "The no-sex 'myth'". BBC. 3 October 2002. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
15.Jump up ^ [1]
16.Jump up ^ [2]
17.^ Jump up to: a b Medieval Lives - Birth, Marriage and Death: Episode Two (A Good Marriage). BBC. 16 October 2013. Retrieved 1 August 2014.
18.Jump up ^ [3]
19.^ Jump up to: a b Witte, John (2005). Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva: Courtship, Engagement, and Marriage. ISBN 9780802848031.
20.Jump up ^ [4]
21.Jump up ^ [5]
22.Jump up ^ [6]
23.Jump up ^ [7]
24.Jump up ^ arsenokoitēs (masc. noun of fem. 1st declension), literally a man who shares a bed with other men (see LSJ and BDAG).
25.Jump up ^ Koltun-Fromm, Naomi (April 2006). "Hermeneutics of Holiness: Syriac- Christian and Rabbinic Notions of Holy Community and Sexuality" (.DOC). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
26.Jump up ^ Kittel, G (ed):Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Volume VI, pages 579-95
27.Jump up ^ Friberg,T: Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament
28.Jump up ^ [8]
29.Jump up ^ "On sex, Muslims and Hindus practice what they preach". Christian Century. 30 October 2012. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
30.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f [9]
31.Jump up ^ [10]
32.Jump up ^ Susan C. Karant-Nunn and Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks (2003). Luther on Women. Cambridge University Press. p. 11. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
33.Jump up ^ [11]
34.Jump up ^ [12]
35.^ Jump up to: a b [13]
36.Jump up ^ Kant, I: Lectures on Ethics
37.Jump up ^ "Attitude to Birth Control" (PDF). 1968. pp. 1–2. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
38.Jump up ^ Bergmann, Rev. Kevin (June–July 2011). "Where Practice Doesn't Make Perfect". The Lutheran Witness. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
39.Jump up ^ Kelm, Paul E. (January 1984). "Premarital sex, tithing, and cremation". Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
40.Jump up ^ [14]
41.Jump up ^ "Catechism: Christian Doctrine of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland" (PDF). Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. 1999. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
42.Jump up ^ "Continuum Complete International Encyclopaedia of Sexuality: Sweden". Kinsey Institute. 2006. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
43.Jump up ^ [15]
44.Jump up ^ [16]
45.Jump up ^ Helm, Paul (July 2006). "Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva, Volume 1: Courtship, Engagement, and Marriage". Reformation21. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
46.Jump up ^ Helm, Paul (July 2006). Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva, Volume 1: Courtship, Engagement, and Marriage. Reformation21. Retrieved 3 October 2014.
47.Jump up ^ [17]
48.Jump up ^ [18]
49.Jump up ^ Philip Benedict (1 January 1991). The Huguenot Population of France, 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and Customs of a Religious Minority. American Philosophical Society. p. 101. ISBN 978-0-87169-815-5.
50.Jump up ^ "The Huguenot Population of France". Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. American Philosophical Society. 1966. p. 98. ISSN 0065-9746.
51.^ Jump up to: a b c Barth, K: Church Dogmatics
52.Jump up ^ "La sexualité avant le mariage, est-ce un péché?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 1 October 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
53.Jump up ^ "Sexualité, relations avant ou après mariage... qu'en dit la Bible?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 12 September 2004. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
54.Jump up ^ "Est-ce que coucher avec une prostituée est un péché?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 22 June 2010. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
55.^ Jump up to: a b "Est-ce important de rester vierge jusqu'au mariage?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 26 Mar 2005. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
56.Jump up ^ "Vierge pour le mariage?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 12 July 2005. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
57.Jump up ^ [19]
58.Jump up ^ [20]
59.Jump up ^ "Presbyterian Sex Report Attacks Church's Attitudes". Apr 1991.
60.Jump up ^ [21]
61.^ Jump up to: a b c [22][dead link]
62.Jump up ^ [23]
63.Jump up ^ [24]
64.Jump up ^ "Anglican church tolerant on premarital sex issue". The Free Lance-Star (London). Associated Press. 14 January 1984. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
65.Jump up ^ [25]
66.Jump up ^ "Lambeth Conference Archives - 1988 - Resolution 34".
67.Jump up ^ "Lambeth Conference Archives - 1998 - Resolution I.10".
68.^ Jump up to: a b c d Ruth Gledhill (March 31, 2003). "Church told to rethink bar on sex before marriage". The Times.
69.Jump up ^ [26]
70.Jump up ^ "Rowan’s Reflections: Unpacking the Archbishop’s Statement". The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
71.Jump up ^ Thomas R. Frame (2007). Anglicans in Australia. UNSW Press.
72.Jump up ^ [27]
73.Jump up ^ [28]
74.^ Jump up to: a b "Episcopal Unit Supports Non-Marital Sex". Los Angeles Times (Newark, New Jersey). Associated Press. 30 January 1987. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
75.Jump up ^ "Sex outside marriage is no sin, says Archbishop". Daily Mail (London). 17 Mar 2013.
76.Jump up ^ Ross, Tim; Wynne-Jones, Jonathan; Rayner, Gordon (29 April 2011). "Royal wedding: Archbishop backs William and Kate's decision to live together before marriage". The Telegraph (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
77.Jump up ^ Ross, Tim; Wynne-Jones, Jonathan; Rayner, Gordon (29 April 2011). "Royal wedding: Archbishop backs William and Kate's decision to live together before marriage". The Telegraph (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
78.Jump up ^ "Sex outside marriage is no sin, says Archbishop". Daily Mail (London). 17 Mar 2013.
79.Jump up ^ [29]
80.Jump up ^ George Pitcher (August 7, 2008). "Rowan Williams and sex: a clarification". Telegraph Blogs.
81.Jump up ^ Martyn Percy (ed.) (1997). Intimate Affairs: Sexuality and Spirituality in Perspective. Darton, Longman and Todd (London).
82.Jump up ^ ""Whether it's gay or straight, sex outside marriage is wrong" Archbishop Justin Welby". Anglican Mainstream. 17 March 2013. Retrieved 3 August 2013. "My understanding of sexual ethics has been that, regardless of whether it's gay or straight, sex outside marriage is wrong."
83.Jump up ^ Doughty, Steve (17 March 2013). "'My wife keeps an eye on my drinking and I never do it alone': Archbishop of Canterbury reveals his fears of following father into alcoholism". The Daily Mail (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
84.Jump up ^ Kellaway, Lucy (10 May 2013). "Lunch with the FT: Justin Welby". Financial Times. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
85.Jump up ^ Field, Clive (17 March 2013). "Sunday Times Religion Poll". British Religion in Numbers. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
86.Jump up ^ "Continuum Complete International Encyclopaedia of Sexuality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". Kinsey Institute. 2006. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
87.Jump up ^ [30]
88.Jump up ^ Church, published by arrangement with the General Board of the General Conference Mennonite; Board, the Mennonite Church General (1995). Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press. ISBN 0-8361-9043-2.
89.Jump up ^ [31]
90.Jump up ^ /
91.Jump up ^ [32]
92.Jump up ^ "Who are the Quakers and What do Friends Believe?". Got Questions.org. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
93.Jump up ^ "Who are the Quakers and What do Friends Believe?". Got Questions.org. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
94.Jump up ^ "Is Premarital Sex a Sin? Bible Scholars Respond". Kinsey Institute. 7 August 2012. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
95.Jump up ^ "Does The United Methodist Church believe that premarital sex is OK?". United Methodist Church. 2004. Retrieved 6 August 2014.
96.^ Jump up to: a b Bos, Robert (2013). "Views of marriage in the UCA: Report on a consultation process (PDF)". Retrieved 1 August 2014.
97.Jump up ^ Dowling, Heather (2012). "Sex, Marriage and All That Stuff)". Retrieved 1 August 2014.
98.Jump up ^ Hauerwas, S: A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic
99.Jump up ^ "Catechism of the Catholic Church - The sixth commandment". Vatican.va. 29 October 1951. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
100.Jump up ^ "German Kingdoms Of Early Medieval Europe". Women's Studies Encyclopedia. 1994. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
101.^ Jump up to: a b James A. Brundage (15 February 2009). Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe. University of Chicago Press. p. 146. ISBN 978-0-226-07789-5.
102.^ Jump up to: a b Clyde L. Manschreck (8 January 2009). Melanchthon: The Quiet Reformer. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 72. ISBN 978-1-60608-283-6.
103.Jump up ^ [33]
104.Jump up ^ Pius XI (December 31, 1930). "Casti connubii".
105.Jump up ^ [34]
106.Jump up ^ "Pope Benedict warns against gay marriage". BBC News. 9 March 2012.
107.Jump up ^ SARAH WOLFE (March 10, 2012). "The Pope Is Asking US Bishops To Crack Down On Gay Marriage, Cohabitation And Premarital Sex". Business Insider Australia.
108.Jump up ^ [35]
109.Jump up ^ "British Social Attitudes Survey, 2012".
110.Jump up ^ Alec G. Hargreaves; John Kelsay; Sumner B. Twiss (2007). Politics and Religion in France and the United States. Lexington Books. p. 84. ISBN 978-0-7391-1930-3.
111.Jump up ^ [36]
112.Jump up ^ [37]
113.Jump up ^ [38]
114.Jump up ^ [39]
115.Jump up ^ "German Catholics reject sex rules, bishops tell Vatican". ABC Australia. Retrieved 4 February 2014.
116.Jump up ^ Gilmour, Maggie (7 May 2010). "Let's face it, sex happens". CBC News. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
117.Jump up ^ [40]
118.Jump up ^ "ChristianMingle(R) and JDate(R) Release Second Annual State of Dating in America(TM) Report". Press Release/Marketwired. 21 Jan 2014.
119.Jump up ^ "Christians Are Following Secular Trends in Premarital Sex, Cohabitation Outside of Marriage, Says Dating Site Survey". Christian Post. Jan 2014.
120.Jump up ^ [41]
121.Jump up ^ [42]
122.Jump up ^ Rosenbaum JE, Weathersbee B (March 2013). "True love waits: do Southern Baptists? Premarital sexual behavior among newly married Southern Baptist Sunday school students". J Relig Health 52 (1): 263–75. doi:10.1007/s10943-010-9445-5. PMC 3156853. PMID 21274632.
123.Jump up ^ Stagg, Evelyn and Frank. Woman in the World of Jesus. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978. ISBN 0-664-24195-6
124.^ Jump up to: a b [43]
125.Jump up ^ [44]
126.Jump up ^ Ziba Mir-Hosseini (2011), Criminalizing sexuality: zina laws as violence against women in Muslim contexts, SUR - Int'l Journal on Human Rights, 15, pp. 7-31
127.Jump up ^ Haideh Moghissi (2005), Women and Islam: Part 4 Women, sexuality and sexual politics in Islamic cultures, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 0-415-32420-3
128.Jump up ^ Sakah Saidu Mahmud (2013), Sharia or Shura: Contending Approaches to Muslim Politics in Nigeria and Senegal, Lexington, ISBN 978-0739175644, Chapter 3
129.Jump up ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/slavery_1.shtml
130.Jump up ^ Muhammad Al-Munajid, Is it permissible for a man to force his wife or slave to have intercourse if she refuses?, IslamQA.com (accessed 01/09/2014)
131.Jump up ^ Muḥammad Salīm ʻAwwā (1982), Punishment in Islamic Law: A Comparative Study, American Trust Publications, ISBN 978-0892590155
132.Jump up ^ M. Tamadonfar (2001), Islam, law, and political control in contemporary Iran, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 40(2): 205-220
133.Jump up ^ Mohamed El-Awa (1993), Punishment in Islamic Law, American Trust Publications, ISBN 978-0892591428, pp 1-68
134.Jump up ^ Guy Bechor (2002), Between Vision and Reality: Law in the Arab World, IDC Projects Publishing House, pp. 103-112
135.Jump up ^ Ursula Smartt, Honour Killings Justice of the Peace, Vol. 170, January 2006, pp. 4-6
136.Jump up ^ Z. Mir-Hosseini (2011), Criminalizing sexuality: zina laws as violence against women in Muslim contexts, Int'l Journal on Human Rights, 15, 7-16
137.Jump up ^ www.usc.edu
138.Jump up ^ www.bbc.co.uk
139.Jump up ^ www.asmasociety.org
140.Jump up ^ A. Quraishi (1999), Her honour: an Islamic critique of the rape provisions in Pakistan's ordinance on zina, Islamic studies, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 403-431
141.Jump up ^ Steven L. Bridge (2009), Getting the Old Testament: What It Meant to Them, What It Means for Us, ISBN 978-0801045745, Chapter 5
142.Jump up ^ "Jewish Views on Premarital Sex". My Jewish Learning. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
143.Jump up ^ "Premarital Sex". Jewish Virtual Library. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
144.Jump up ^ "Premarital Sex, Orthodox Jews & Censorship". Jewish Journal. 15 December 2011. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
145.Jump up ^ Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty. The Origins of Evil in Hindu Mythology. University of California Press. p. 7.
146.Jump up ^ The Cultural Context of Sexual Pleasure and Problems: Psychotherapy with Diverse Clients, p. 175, by Cynthia A. Graham, Kathryn Hall
147.Jump up ^ Ramanathan and Weerakoon, The Cultural Context of Sexual Pleasure and Problems: Psychotherapy with Diverse Clients, p. 173-174, Editors: Cynthia A. Graham and Kathryn Hall, Routledge; Quote - "In this (Hinduism smritis) doctrine, sexual matters are not to be legislated but are left to the judgement of those involved."
148.Jump up ^ Ramanathan and Weerakoon, The Cultural Context of Sexual Pleasure and Problems: Psychotherapy with Diverse Clients, p. 173-174, Editors: Cynthia A. Graham and Kathryn Hall, Routledge; Quote - "The sexual behavior of Hindus are generally governed by the prescribed practices of the society."
149.^ Jump up to: a b c d Lariviere, Richard (2001). The Nāradasmṛti. pp. 391–393. ISBN 978-8120818040.
150.^ Jump up to: a b c Jolly, Julius (1876). Naradiya Dharmasastra. Trubner and Co. pp. 87–88.
151.Jump up ^ Olivelle, Patrick (2004). Manu's Code of Law. Oxford University Press. pp. 32, 325–329. ISBN 978-0195171464.
152.Jump up ^ Eraly, Abraham (2011). The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books. p. 440. ISBN 978-0670084784.
153.Jump up ^ Polo, Marco (2007). The Customs of the Kingdoms of India. Penguin Classics. ISBN 978-0141025407. "They eat no meat and drink no wine. They live very virtuous lives according to their own usage. They have no sexual intercourse except with their own wives. They take nothing that belongs to another. They would never kill a living creature. (...) On the other hand you should know that they do not regard any form of sexual indulgence as a sin."
154.Jump up ^ Studies in Hindu Law and Dharmaśāstra, Anthem Press, by Ludo Rocher, p. 293
155.Jump up ^ other four yama are: restraint from all violence and injury to others, restraint from starting or propagating deceit and falsehood, restraint from theft, restraint from avarice.
156.Jump up ^ Lochtefeld, James. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Rosen Publishing New York. p. 777 (Entry on Yama). ISBN 0-8239-2287-1.
157.Jump up ^ Himalayan Academy. "Celibacy and fidelity". Gutenberg. Kauai's Hindu Monastery, Hawaii. Retrieved October 5, 2014. "As the fourth yama, or restraint, brahmacharya is emulated in married life in the sense of fidelity, confining all sexual thoughts and expressions to one's spouse."
158.Jump up ^ Warren Matthews. World Religions. CengageBrain.com. p. 142.
159.Jump up ^ Takeuchi Yoshinori. Buddhist Spirituality: Later China, Korea, Japan, and the Modern World. Motilal Banarsidass Publisher. p. 169.
160.Jump up ^ Jim Thompson, The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Nov. – Dec., 1958), pp. 350–356
161.Jump up ^ Jim Thompson The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Nov. – Dec., 1958), pp. 350–356, 353
162.Jump up ^ "Utah Code, Title 76, Chapter 07. Offenses Against the Family".
163.Jump up ^ Jordan, Mary (21 August 2008). "Searching for Freedom, Chained by the Law". The Washington Post. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
164.Jump up ^ Ernesto Londoño (2012-09-09). "Afghanistan sees rise in 'dancing boys' exploitation". The Washington Post (DEHRAZI, Afghanistan).
165.Jump up ^ "Home". AIDSPortal. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
166.^ Jump up to: a b "Iran". Travel.state.gov. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
167.Jump up ^ "United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Summary Record - Kuwait". Unhchr.ch. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
168.Jump up ^ "Culture of Maldives". Every Culture. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
169.Jump up ^ Nakim, Nora (9 August 2012). "Morocco: Should pre-marital sex be legal?". BBC. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
170.Jump up ^ Interpol"
171.Jump up ^ "2010 Human Rights Report: Mauritania". State.gov. 8 April 2011. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
172.Jump up ^ "Education in Dubai". Dubaifaqs.com. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
173.Jump up ^ Judd, Terri; Sajn, Nikolina (10 July 2008). "Briton faces jail for sex on Dubai beach". The Independent (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
174.Jump up ^ ""Sex outside of marriage is a criminal offense here," PH ambassador to Qatar warns Pinoys". SPOT.ph. 12 September 2011. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
175.Jump up ^ "Sudan must rewrite rape laws to protect victims". Reuters. 28 June 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
176.Jump up ^ "Women's Rights in the Middle East and North Africa - Yemen". Unhcr.org. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
  


Categories: History of human sexuality
Sexual fidelity
Sexuality and religion
Marriage
Sex crimes











Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
বাংলা
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
Lietuvių
日本語
Português
Runa Simi
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
Tiếng Việt
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 April 2015, at 16:26.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornication














Fornication

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Not to be confused with formication.



Paolo and Francesca, whom Dante's Inferno describes as damned for fornication. (Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, 1819)
Fornication is generally consensual sexual intercourse between two people not married to each other.[1][2] For many people, the term carries an overtone of moral or religious disapproval, but the significance of sexual acts to which the term is applied varies between religions, societies and cultures. The definition is often disputed. In modern usage, the term is often replaced with a more judgment-neutral term like extramarital sex.


Contents  [hide]
1 Etymology and usage
2 History 2.1 Britain
3 Abrahamic religions 3.1 Christianity 3.1.1 Fornication
3.1.2 Christianity and premarital sex 3.1.2.1 Jesus and the early church
3.1.2.2 Lutheranism
3.1.2.3 Calvinism
3.1.2.4 Anglicanism
3.1.2.5 Mennonites
3.1.2.6 Quakers
3.1.2.7 Methodism
3.1.2.8 Roman Catholicism
3.1.2.9 Evangelicalism 3.1.2.9.1 American Baptists
3.1.2.9.2 Southern Baptist convention
3.1.2.9.3 Pentecostals


3.2 Islam
3.3 Judaism
4 Eastern religions 4.1 Hinduism
4.2 Buddhism
5 Laws 5.1 United States of America
5.2 Islamic nations
6 See also
7 References

Etymology and usage[edit]
Prostitutes in ancient Rome waited for their customers out of the rain under vaulted ceilings,[3] and the Latin word for vaults, fornix, became a euphemism for brothels, and the Latin verb fornicare referred to a man visiting a brothel.[4][5][6] The first recorded use in English is in the Cursor Mundi, c. 1300; the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) records a figurative use as well: "The forsaking of God for idols".[7]
Fornicated as an adjective is still used in botany, meaning "arched" or "bending over" (as in a leaf). John Milton plays on the double meaning of the word in The Reason of Church-Government Urged against Prelaty (1642): "[She] gives up her body to a mercenary whordome under those fornicated [ar]ches which she cals Gods house."[8]
The Greek term porneia (πορνεία) which means "illicit sexual intercourse" was translated as "fornication" in the 1611 King James Version of the bible[9] and has also been translated as whoredom, sexual immorality or simply immorality.[10][11]
History[edit]

Globe icon.
 The examples and perspective in this section may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (February 2013)
Britain[edit]
In England in 1650, during the ascendancy of the Puritans, fornication was made a felony. At the Restoration in 1660, this statute was not renewed, and prosecution of the mere act of fornication itself was abandoned. However, notorious and open lewdness, when carried to the extent of exciting public scandal, continued to be an indictable offence at common law.[12]
In Britain in the 1170s, "it was common practice for ordinary couples to co-habit before marriage and for cousins to marry one another".[13] Sex before marriage only became equated with sinfulness with the passing of the Marriage Act 1753.[14]
Prior to the passing of this Act, laws against bastard children became more strict during the 1730s and 1740s.[15]
Indeed, there was very little stigma around bastards at any social level in medieval England.[16] For instance, William the Conqueror's right to succeed to the throne of Normandy was never questioned on the grounds he was a bastard nor, in his conflict with Harold Godwinson over who should rule England, was this issue raised as an argument against him. However, attitudes shifted a few generations later when bastards were no longer able to claim the English throne.[17]
Abrahamic religions[edit]
See also: Adultery § Abrahamic religions and Extramarital sex § Religions
Christianity[edit]
Fornication[edit]
See also: Extramarital sex § Christianity and Adultery § Christianity
The Pauline epistles contain multiple condemnations of various forms of extramarital sex. The First Epistle to the Corinthians states "Flee from sexual immorality" and lists adulterers and "those who are sexually immoral" among a list of in a list of "wrongdoers who...will not inherit the kingdom of God." [1 Corinthians 6:9][1 Cor 6:18] First Corinthians and the Epistle to the Galatians also address fornication.[Galatians 5:19][1 Corinthians 7:2] The Apostolic Decree of the Council of Jerusalem also includes a prohibition of fornication.
Christianity and premarital sex[edit]
There is much debate amongst Christians as to whether or not sex between two people who have never been married to anyone constitutes a form of fornication.[18] Witte argues that the Bible itself is silent on the issue of consensual, premarital sex between an engaged couple.[19] One theologian whose opinion stands contrary to Witte's claim was the medieval English monastic, John Baconthorpe, who believed it can be argued from the Bible that sex before marriage is immoral.[20] A more contemporary theologian, the modern day English Anglican Lee Gatiss also argues that premarital sex is immoral based on scripture. He states that, from a Biblical perspective, "physical union should not take place outside of a “one flesh” (i.e. marriage) union... In [1 Corinthians] chapter 7 Paul addresses the situation of two unmarried Christians who are burning with passion (7:8-9) who should either exercise self-control or get married (cf. verses 36-38). The underlying assumptions are the same as those in Deuteronomy 22."[21]
Some of the debate arises from the question of which theological approach is being applied. A deontological view of sex interprets porneia, aselgeia and akatharsia in terms of whether the couple are married or non-married. What makes sex moral or immoral is the context of marriage. By contrast, a teleological view interprets porneia, aselgeia and akatharsia in terms of the quality of the relationship (how well it reflects God's glory and Christian notions of a committed, virtuous relationship.)[22]
From its outset, Protestantism has been more dynamic in its understanding of sexuality than Roman Catholicism, as it has not been constrained by procreation ethics and, as a result, it has been able to incorporate modern understandings of the human being that have emerged over the last century. However, Protestants, like Catholics, continue to struggle with ethical conundrums presented by "alternative lifestyles" including sexual relationships between unmarried heterosexuals, and, for the most part, heterosexual marriage is considered the ideal context for sexual intercourse but many theologians accept premarital sex and, since the 1990s, every mainstream Protestant denomination has had taskforces working on questions of sexual ethics.[23]
The discussion turns on two Greek words—moicheia (μοιχεία, adultery) and porneia (el:πορνεία, from which the word pornography is derived). The first word is restricted to contexts involving sexual betrayal of a spouse; however, the second word is used as a generic term for illegitimate sexual activity. Elsewhere in First Corinthians, incest, homosexual intercourse (according to some interpretations)[24] and prostitution are all explicitly forbidden by name (however, the Septuagint uses "porneia" to refer to male temple prostitution). Paul is preaching about activities based on levitical sexual prohibitions in the context of achieving holiness. The theory suggests it is these behaviours, and only these, that are intended by Paul's prohibition in chapter seven.[25]
One major academic theological work that equates porneia with premarital sex is Kittel and Friedrich's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament from 1977. In defining porneia as fornication, it states that "The NT is characterized by an unconditional repudiation of all extra-marital and unnatural intercourse."[26] Likewise, Friberg's Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament defines porneia as being "generally, every kind of extramarital, unlawful or unnatural sexual intercourse."[27]
Lee Gatiss also argues that "porneia" does encompass premarital sex. He states that "the word “fornication” has gone out of fashion and is not in common use to describe non-marital sex. However, it is an excellent translation for porneia, which basically referred to any kind of sex outside of marriage... This has been contested... but the overwhelming weight of scholarship and all the available evidence from the ancient world points firmly in this direction. “Flee sexual immorality (porneia) and pursue self-control” (cf. 1 Thess 4:1-8) was the straightforward message to Christians in a sex-crazed world."[28]
A survey undertaken by the American Sociological Review between 2000 and 2008 covering 31 developing countries found that "94 percent of Jews... reported having premarital sex, compared to 79 percent of Christians, 65 percent of Buddhists, 43 percent of Muslims and 19 percent of Hindus."[29]
Jesus and the early church[edit]
Attitudes towards marriage and sexuality at the time of Jesus stemmed from a blend of Roman and Jewish ideas. For instance, during the lifetime of Jesus, there was a strong social disapproval amongst Romans of polygamy. This made its way into Judaism and early Christianity, despite the Old Testament portraying examples of this behaviour amongst patriarchs and kings.[30]
Jewish marriage in the time of Jesus was a two-stage process. First, there was a betrothal in which the man claimed the woman as his exclusive sexual property. Secondly, there was the marriage contract which specified what the bride and groom's families would give the couple and what the bride would obtain if she divorced. "At the time of Jesus, and in rural areas like Galilee, a young couple might well co-habit before the contract was signed “in order to get acquainted.”"[30] Jesus apparently did not condemn sex at the betrothal stage as there is no record of any statements of his about this in the Gospels.
Jesus' teaching on divorce raised "the status of the wife from disposable dependent of the man to part of his very flesh."[30]
After the crucifixion, the early Church's statements on marital affairs mainly concerned acceptable reasons for divorce and remarriage. Whilst Paul, in his epistles to early believers, emphasised that both celibacy and marriage were good forms of life, after his life the Church felt that celibacy was more virtuous and liberating. This focus came about because the early church was very ascetic, possibly due to the influence of Greek philosophical thought. The focus on celibacy meant that other issues relating to sexual morality for the non-celibate remained under-developed.[30]
Augustine of Hippo's views strongly influenced how later Christians thought about sex. In his later writings, he was "deeply suspicious of sexual passion" and this has influenced the outlook of all the major Christian denominations down to the present day.[31]
It was some time later, during the sixth century, that the Emperor Justinian formulated laws that were to become the basis of Western marriage law for the next millennia. Under his legislation, co-habiting couples were no longer recognised as married and their children were regarded as illegitimate, with the same status as the children of prostitutes. However, the status of illegitimate children could be updated if the parents later married.
Lutheranism[edit]
According to Susan C. Karant-Nunn and Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks in their book, Luther on Women, Martin Luther felt that "The sex act was of course sinful outside of marriage ..."[32] In his sermon on the Epistle to the Ephesians Chapter 5, Luther stated:
“ In naming uncleanness in addition to fornication, the reference is to all sensual affections in distinction from wedded love. They are too unsavory for him [Paul] to mention by name, though in Romans 1, 24 he finds it expedient to speak of them without disguise. However, also wedded love must be characterized by moderation among Christians.[33] ”
Luther however, in contrast to his Roman Catholic opponents, considered that it was not the Church’s business to define marriage law. He understood marriage to be a legal agreement rather than a sacrament.[30] He stated that a marriage was instituted by God but its regulation was the business of the State, not the Church. Doctor Luther defined marriage as "the God-appointed and legitimate union of man and woman in the hope of having children or at least for the purpose of avoiding fornication and sin and living to the glory of God. The ultimate purpose is to obey God, to find aid and counsel against sin; to call upon God; to seek, love, and educate children for the glory of God; to live with one’s wife in the fear of God and to bear the cross..."[34]
Martin Bucer argued that sexual intimacy belonged in marriage and that, in marriage, the man becomes "the head and saviour of the wife and forms one flesh with her in order to avoid fornication and that the wife is the body and help of her husband, again to avoid fornication." Marriage for him, though, not only meant the avoidance of sin and procreation of children but social and emotional bonding resulting in a fellowship.[35] As Selderhuis notes, for Bucer, "When people conduct themselves lasciviously, either as married or unmarried folk, they fall under divine judgement... Marriage... [is] the context in which sexual intimacy should have its place... Marriage is, after all, the only framework within which sexual desires can be legitimately satisfied."[35]
Immanuel Kant, who was raised as a Pietist, considered sex before marriage to be immoral. He argued that sexual desire objectifies the person you crave and, since no logically consistent ethical rule allows you to use a person as an object, it is immoral to have sex (outside of marriage). Marriage makes the difference because, in marriage, the two people give all of themselves to create a union and, thus, now have rights over each other as each now belongs to the other. As Kant himself puts it, “The sole condition on which we are free to make use of our sexual desires depends upon the right to dispose over the person as a whole – over the welfare and happiness and generally over all the circumstances of that person… each of them... [are obliged] to surrender the whole of their person to the other with a complete right to disposal over it.”[36]
In the current day, the Lutheran Church of Australia holds to the belief that premarital sex is sinful. It believes that sexual activity belongs within the marriage relationship only and that the practice of pre-marital sex is in "violation of the will of God."[37]
In the United States, pastors of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod undertook a survey on premarital sex amongst their congregations in 2010. "These Lutheran pastors reported that over 57 percent of the couples they now marry are living together prior to the wedding, and that the rate of cohabitation in their congregations is increasing." Despite this trend, the Synod believes that "Regardless of the reasons given for living together, cohabitation is simply wrong for Christians."[38]
Alternatively, the Wisconsin Synod takes the view that a Christian couple could engage in sex before marriage but for the fact it would be an act of defiance against civil and religious norms in society. On being asked this question by a couple, the Church's Paul Kleim stated, "Were there no civil laws regulating marriage or Christian rite publicly uniting couples in marriage, your commitment to each other before God would be sufficient basis for you to begin living together as husband and wife. However, the civil and religious expectations that prevail make it wrong for you to practice marriage without a license... In your wedding ceremony you will be asking God to join you in marriage, and you will be testifying to state and church that this is the beginning of your marriage. While sexual intimacy during your engagement might not be fornication, it would certainly be civil disobedience and spiritual dishonesty. And that's wrong before God."[39]
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) delivered a detailed document, entitled A Social Statement on Human Sexuality, in 2009. With regard to sex before marriage, the document, declares that "Because this church urges couples to seek the highest social and legal support for their relationships, it does not favor cohabitation arrangements outside of marriage. It has a special concern when such arrangements are entered into as an end in themselves. It does, however, acknowledge the social forces at work that encourage such practices. This church also recognizes the pastoral and familial issues that accompany these contemporary social patterns. In cases where a decision is made for cohabitation, regardless of the reasons, this church expects its pastors and members to be clear with the couple regarding the reasons for the position of this church and to support the couple in recognizing their obligation to be open and candid with each other about their plans, expectations, and levels of mutual commitment. Some cohabitation arrangements can be constructed in ways that are neither casual nor intrinsically unstable... This church believes, however, that the deepest human longings for a sense of personal worth, long-term companionship, and profound security, especially given the human propensity to sin, are best served through binding commitment, legal protections, and the public accountability of marriage, especially where the couple is surrounded by the prayers of the congregational community and the promises of God."[40]
The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland's stance on the issue is ambiguous. It strictly condemns extramarital sex but in relation to pre-marital sex it states only that "Sexuality disconnected from love and from responsibility enslaves people, bringing harm to themselves and others."[41]
According to the Kinsey Institute, "Today, the Swedish Lutheran Church is very liberal in action, but careful not to take formal stands in most sexual issues, such as premarital sex, cohabitation, and sex education."[42]
The Lutheran Church in Germany (EKD) has noted that all forms of long-term cohabitation are vulnerable and that legislators must give due recognition to the fundamental significance of marriage.[43] The Church has further stated that "Marriage and family alone can be considered as role models for living together."[44]
Calvinism[edit]
Calvinism has traditionally always asserted that engaging in premarital sex is a sin.[45] Calvin himself said little on why he thought engaged couples should not have sex and Witte believes his rationale for the prohibition was vague[46] but he did seek to reduce the length of engagements amongst couples in Geneva to less than six weeks, to reduce the temptation of premarital sex.[19] He agreed, though, with Luther that marriage was a legal matter for the state, not a sacramental matter for the church.[47]
John Witte, Jr. has written a study on John Calvin and marriage and family life. In it, he notes that "For Calvin, the Commandment against adultery was equally binding on the unmarried, and equally applicable to both illicit sexual activities per se, and various acts leading to the same. Calvin condemned fornication sternly -- sexual intercourse or other illicit acts of sexual touching, seduction, orenticement by non-married parties, including those who were engaged to each other or to others. He decried at length the widespread practice of casual sex, prostitution, concubinage, pre-marital sex, nonmarital cohabitation and other forms of bed hopping that he encountered in modern day Geneva as well as in ancient Bible stories. All these actions openly defied God's commandment against adultery and should be punished by spiritual and criminal sanctions. Calvin preached against fornication constantly... He often led the Consistory in rooting out fornicators and subjecting them to admonition and the ban, and to fines and short imprisonment."[48]
There were remarkably low rates of premarital conceptions and illegitimate births amongst Huguenots in seventeenth century France compared to the rates amongst their Roman Catholic opponents. This indicates how the Calvinists had internalised values that condemned premarital sex as immoral.[49][50]
The famous Swiss Huguenot theologian, Karl Barth, discussed sexual morality in his magnum opus, Church Dogmatics. He stated that “Coitus without co-existence is demonic"[51] ("demonic", in Christianity, simply meaning any sphere that does not submit to God.) Barth goes on to state that "the physical sexuality of man should form an integral part of his total humanity as male or female, and that the completion of the sexual relation should be integrated into the total encounter of man and woman. All right or wrong and therefore salvation or perdition in this matter depends on whether it is viewed in isolation and abstraction or within this whole... If it is not, if physical sexuality and sex relations have their own right and authority in which man and woman and their encounter may be controlled and fulfilled, then it is a demonic business. Naturally, the command of God will always resist any such idea of sovereign physical sexuality."[51] For Barth, to engage in sex outside of marriage is not only rebellious but dehumanising as it puts humans on the level of animals, driven by passion and a search for self-gratification.
Furthermore, for Barth, "A wedding is only the regulative confirmation and legitimation of a marriage before and by society. It does not constitute a marriage”.[51] Sex within marriage can be sinful as well unless it affirms the coexistence of the couple. This opens the door to a more holistic understanding of sex.
However, a few modern Swiss Reformed theologians, such as M. Cornuz, believe that premarital sex is permissible if the sexual activities take a form which respects the partner and helps the relationship grow in intimacy. These theologians hold that it is when a relationship is exploitive that it is sinful.[52][53] Hence, engaging in sex with prostitutes is always sinful as it is an exploitive relationship and does not allow the participants to grow in dignity.[54] This change has come about within the last two generations in Switzerland. Prior to that, the cultural norm was that the couple would not engage in sex before marriage. Modern Reformed theologians have endeavoured to meet the challenge of applying Christian teaching to this very different culture from that of the past.[55]
In summary, Cornuz and his colleagues feel that one should always be true to one's individual conscience, so if the person feels sex before marriage is sinful, that person should listen to his or her conscience and abstain.[56] Hence, it is up to the couple themselves to decide if engaging in premarital sex or remaining virgins is the best way for them to reflect the love of God in their relationship.[55]
French Calvinists hold to very high standards of ethics and feel themselves to be different from French Roman Catholics, in terms of attitudes and behaviour, including sexual behaviour. French Reformed Christians "are widely regarded as having particularly high standards of honesty and integrity."[57]
Scottish Calvinists remain deeply opposed to any kind of sex outside of marriage. In 2008, the Scottish health minister, Shona Robison noted, "There are deeply-held views on moral issues and cultural and lifestyle issues... The Highlands in general... have a strong Calvinistic streak, a prudish thing that sees sex as something that happens behind closed doors and drawn curtains. As a consequence of this and because of lack of a scene for gay people, both straight and gay people are being driven out into these isolated areas to have [casual] sex."[58]
The American Presbyterian Church, "like other Christian bodies [in the United States], has viewed marriage as a prerequisite to sexual intercourse and considered sex outside marriage a sin."[59]
The prominent conservative American Calvinist theologian, R. C. Sproul, opposes premarital sex on the grounds that the marriage covenant is an essential legal safeguard, protecting both members of the couple from each other's sinfulness.[60]
Anglicanism[edit]
The English reformers took a stern view of adultery and fornication, which Homily 11 of the First Book of Homilies (1547) defined to include “all unlawfull use of those parts, which bee ordeyned for generation."[61]
However, prior to the Marriage Act 1753, British couples could live together and have sex after their betrothal or "the spousals". Until the mid-1700s, it was normal and acceptable for the bride to be pregnant at the nuptials, the later church public ceremony for the marriage. With the Act in force, for the first time in British history, all marriages in England and Wales had to take place in their parish church. (The law also applied to Roman Catholics, but Jews and Quakers were exempt.) The Act combined the spousals and nuptials and, by the start of the 19th century, social convention and the Anglican faith prescribed that brides be virgins at marriage. Illegitimacy became more socially discouraged, with first pregnancies outside of marriage declining from 40% to 20% during the Victorian era but returning to 40% by the start of the 21st century.[14] The reason that the Hardwicke Act led to pre-marital sex being equated with sin is because, whilst the State defined who was married, it was the Anglican Church that was given the responsibility to police this law for the State.[61] Today, Britain remains abnormal amongst European nations in having Church weddings whereas most other nations on that continent insist on civil registrations leaving it up to the couple if they choose to have a religious ceremony as well.[61]
In the Victorian era, however, the English working class continued to have a different set of sexual mores from the upper-middle and upper classes. Premarital intercourse was considered acceptable for the working class but only after an extended period of courtship and occurred infrequently even then. The couple were expected to marry, though. Disgrace only arose if the female became pregnant and the couple did not marry.[62][63]
The 1984 Anglican booklet Forward to Marriage was also tolerant of premarital sex but strongly endorsed marriage as "a necessary commitment for a long-term relationship".[64]
In 1987, the General Synod of the Church of England asserted "(1) that sexual intercourse is an act of total commitment which belongs properly within a permanent married relationship, (2) that fornication and adultery are sins against this ideal, and are to be met by a call to repentance and the exercise of compassion."[65]
The 1988 Lambeth Conference declared in its Resolution on Marriage and Family that "Noting the gap between traditional Christian teaching on pre-marital sex, and the life-styles being adopted by many people today, both within and outside the Church: (a) calls on provinces and dioceses to adopt a caring and pastoral attitude to such people; (b) reaffirms the traditional biblical teaching that sexual intercourse is an act of total commitment which belongs properly within a permanent married relationship; (c) in response to the International Conference of Young Anglicans in Belfast, urges provinces and dioceses to plan with young people programmes to explore issues such as pre-marital sex in the light of traditional Christian values" (Resolution 34).[66]
The 1998 Lambeth Conference made a subsequent resolution. The Conference held "in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage" (Resolution I.10). This Resolution also commended a report on human sexuality entitled Called to Full Humanity which stated that "The Holy Scriptures and Christian tradition teach that human sexuality is intended by God to find its rightful and full expression between a man and a woman in the covenant of marriage, established by God in creation, and affirmed by our Lord Jesus Christ. Holy Matrimony is, by intention and divine purpose, to be a lifelong, monogamous and unconditional commitment between a woman and a man. The Lambeth Conference 1978 and 1998 both affirmed 'marriage to be sacred, instituted by God and blessed by our Lord Jesus Christ'. The New Testament and Christian history identify singleness and dedicated celibacy as Christ-like ways of living."[67]
A 2002 survey by the Church Times found that less than half of the 5,000 readers questioned said it was wrong for men and women to have sex before they married. Over 25% also said it was acceptable for a couple to live together without ever intending to marry.[68]
The 2003 report, Cohabitation: A Christian Reflection, produced by the Diocese of Southwark, found that the Church's traditional teaching that sex before marriage is wrong has been inherited from a different form of society from that of today but then cited research that illustrates the problems that accompany cohabitation, particularly with regard to raising children. It concluded that marriage is "a much more satisfactory social convention than cohabitation", but says that the Church has failed to present marriage in a way that captures the imagination of young people and that the Church needed to rise to the challenge and rediscover its confidence in marriage.[68]
The report noted that one problem for the Church is that there is no biblical text dealing explicitly with cohabitation, and clergy have no answer to the question they often face: "Where does it say in the Bible that I should not live and sleep with my partner?" The report notes that Paul gave a "cautious welcome" to marriage, but that there was also a "militant apostolic view" that favoured celibacy, which "was seen as more noble than marriage" by many early Christians. The report also noted that "the strict sexual codes of the earliest Christian communities helped to give them a separate identity distinct from the sexual hedonism of the pagan world."[68]
The report ultimately rejected the possibility that cohabitation with no intention to marry is acceptable for members of the Christian Church.[68]
In a 2004 interview, the Anglican Primate of Australia, Archbishop Peter Carnley, noted that heterosexual de facto relationships and a disinclination to commit were more serious worries for him than the same-sex marriage movement. When asked if he thought sexual morality was subjective, he disagreed, stating "I think it's possible to say, for example, that it is objectively quite clear that promiscuity is a bad thing".[69]
In 2009, N. T. Wright noted that, in popular discourse, there has been a "supposed modern and scientific discovery of a personal ‘identity’ characterised by sexual preference, which then generates a set of ‘rights’... Without entering into discussion of the scientific evidence, it must be said that the Christian notion of personal identity has never before been supposed to be rooted in desires of whatever sort. Indeed, desires are routinely brought under the constraints of ‘being in Christ’. This quite new notion of an ‘identity’ found not only within oneself but within one’s emotional and physical desires needs to be articulated on the basis of scripture and tradition, and this to my mind has not been done.... The church has never acknowledged that powerful sexual instincts, which almost all human beings have, generate a prima facie ‘right’ that these instincts receive physical expression. All are called to chastity and, within that, some are called to celibacy; but a call to celibacy is not the same thing as discovering that one has a weak or negligible sexual drive. The call to the self-control of chastity is for all: for the heterosexually inclined who, whether married or not, are regularly and powerfully attracted to many different potential partners, just as much as for those with different instincts."[70]



Prince William and Kate Middleton on the balcony of Buckingham Palace
The 1996 National Church Life Survey in Australia found that Australian Anglicans were more liberal about premarital sex than churchgoers from other denominations and more conservative than the general population. The survey noted a divide between Anglicans who wanted to support sexually active unmarried couples in their churches and others who didn't.[71] A 2009 survey found that Anglicans (along with Baptists, Roman Catholics and Uniting Church members) had become a little more accepting of premarital sex compared to a 1993 survey, whereas Pentecostal Christians had become markedly more conservative. 54% of Australian church attenders felt pre-marital sex was always or almost always wrong, whereas only 3% of non-church attenders thought it was always or usually wrong. Amongst those who attended church on a weekly basis, the percentage of those who thought pre-marital sex was always or almost always wrong rose to 67%.[72] Another survey confirmed that most non-religious Australians thought that premarital sex was acceptable and that there was a correlation between liberalism, education levels, lack of religious beliefs and a permissive attitude to premarital sex.[73]
In the United States, the Episcopal Church only approves "of sex between men and women who are married. In 1979, the U.S. church's governing body voted down a resolution to approve other sexual activity."[74]
Earlier, in 1987, Spong's Newark Diocese had commissioned a report that concluded that the "Episcopal Church should recognize and bless committed non-marital sexual relationships between homosexuals, young adults, the divorced and widowed ..." The report aimed "to ignite a new debate on sexual ethics among leaders of the nation's 3 million Episcopalians in the hope that they will amend church doctrine to embrace all believers. ... Spong, an advocate of the recommendations ... said his views are a minority position in the church."[74]
Former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams[75] and the Archbishop of York John Sentamu have expressed tolerance of cohabitation.[76] In 2011, the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, commenting on Prince William and Kate Middleton's decision to live together before their wedding, said that the royal couple's public commitment to live their lives together today would be more important than their past. Sentamu said that he had conducted wedding services for "many cohabiting couples” during his time as a vicar in south London.[77]
The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, did not personally believe sex outside of marriage to be a sin and noted in 2002 that he found it hard to reconcile his liberal personal beliefs with the public stance of the Church.[78][79] However, in 2008, Doctor Williams said, "Sex outside marriage is not as God purposes it... I always find it difficult to condense sexual ethics into a soundbite... All I can say is where the Church stands – it's not a question of what Rowan Williams's view is... the biblical view of sexual relations is consistently within the pattern of absolute mutual commitment, reflecting God's commitment to his people. And the assumption of the Bible is that that commitment is heterosexual. That is the framework we work in."[80]
In his 1997 essay, "Forbidden Fruit: New Testament Sexual Ethics", Dr Williams had noted, "I can't see that the New Testament easily allows any straightforwardly positive evaluation of sexual intimacy outside a relationship that is publicly committed [in marriage]."[81]
In 2013, Doctor Williams' successor, Justin Welby stated that "My understanding of sexual ethics has been that, regardless of whether it's gay or straight, sex outside marriage is wrong."[82][83] He reiterated this belief again later in 2013, further noting that "To abandon the ideal simply because it's difficult to achieve is ridiculous."[84] After Welby made his first statement, a Sunday Times poll found that "A majority of adults (69%, including 76% of those professing no faith) believe Justin Welby to be wrong in condemning sex outside marriage, while 17% think he is right (including 30% of Anglicans), and 13% are unsure."[85]
The Kinsey Institute comments that "Prior to the 1950s, the religious influences forming sexual constructs [in Britain] came almost exclusively from "the official church" of England, and "unofficially" from the other Christian denominations. In recent decades, the picture has become more complex. Since midcentury, the Church of England's approach to social morality and sexuality has fluctuated between two poles, the traditionalists and the modernists, or the "permission givers" and the "orthodox moral directors." With the national religious scene resembling the circular approach of the politicians to sexual knowledge and attitudes, the sociosexual control and influence appears to bounce back and forth between church and state according to a mutually cooperative formula. ... This doctrinal "pendulum" is confusing for the majority of the population who are not experts at moral and theological niceties and subtleties. The people themselves are part of the system of confusion: While expecting clear and definite moral messages from both establishment and Church, they reserve the right to judge the validity of those messages, even when they are biblically based."[86]
The 2013 British Social Attitudes survey found that member of the Church of England have become more accepting of pre-marital sex over the past 30 years. In 1983, 31% of British Anglicans surveyed thought that pre-marital sex was "always" or "mostly" wrong whereas, in 2012, only 10% thought this was the case. Likewise, in 1989, 78% of Anglicans surveyed thought that people should marry before having children. In 2012, this had declined to 54%.[87]
Mennonites[edit]
Mennonites believe that sex outside of marriage is sinful. The Mennonite Confession of Faith states “According to Scripture, right sexual union takes place only within the marriage relationship. Scripture places sexual intimacy within God’s good created order. Sexual union is reserved for the marriage bond.”[88]
Quakers[edit]
As part of their "simplicity" testimony, early Quakers held to traditional sexual values, including the belief that there should be no sex outside of marriage.[89] Quakers on the whole remained conservative on matters of sexual ethics until the early part of the twentieth century. [90] However, there is less consensus on this today at least at meetings of liberal Quakers.[91] These liberals form a minority view amongst Quakers, though.[92]
In general, Quakers have always focused on practical love and social aspects of faith, shunning doctrine, dogma and systematic theology. Most Friends hold views similar to Evangelicals on most theological and moral issues, including those relating to premarital sex.[93]
Methodism[edit]
The American Methodist theologian and pastor, Ben Witherington III, believes that "virginity in a woman was highly valued before marriage [in Biblical cultures]. ... In early Jewish law if you had sex with a woman you were considered married to her or you had shamed her. See the story of Mary and Joseph. Porneia can refer to all sorts of sexual sin including deflowering a virgin ... there was no dating or physical intimacy prior to an arranged marriage in the vast majority of cases. The notion of dating doesn’t exist in Jesus and Paul's world. Second, honor and shame cultures placed a high value on sexual purity. Notice how prostitutes were stigmatized. Women were mainly blamed for sexual immorality. Finally Jesus gave his disciples two choices in Mt. 19—fidelity in heterosexual marriage or being a eunuch! This means no sex outside marriage."[94]
The position of the United Methodist Church in the United States on the issue is as follows: "Although all persons are sexual beings whether or not they are married, sexual relations are only clearly affirmed in the marriage bond."[95]
By contrast, the Uniting Church in Australia is still formulating its views on the subject. It recognises the changes in marriage practice and lifestyle that have resonated throughout society and that the UCA is perceived by the public of being more accepting of the realities of humanity than many other denominations.[96][97] A report noted that scripture is not really about marriage as understood in contemporary western societies and, in fact, has very little to say about it. In the report, the church also acknowledged that many unmarried people had sex but neither condemned nor endorsed it, instead noting that there were many different views within the church.[96]
Stanley Hauerwas argues that questions about sex before marriage need to be reframed in terms of the narrative of the church. He asks individuals to consider if it is a pure or licentious lifestyle that will best prepare the Christian to live out and serve in the narrative of the church. Doctor Hauerwas goes on to conclude, "For the issue is not whether X or Y form of sexual activity is right or wrong, as if such activity could be separated from a whole way of life... The issue is not whether someone is chaste in the sense of not engaging in genital activity, but whether we have lived in a manner that allows us to bring a history with us that contributes to the common history we may be called upon to develop with one another. Chastity, we forget, is not a state but a form of the virtue of faithfulness that is necessary for a role in the community... what the young properly demand is an account of life and the initiation into a community that makes intelligible why their interest in sex should be subordinated to other interests. What they, and we, demand is the lure of an adventure that captures the imagination sufficiently that conquest means more than the sexual possession of another. I have tried to suggest that marriage and singleness for Christians should represent just such an adventure, and if it does not, no amount of ethics or rules will be sufficient to correct the situation."[98]
Roman Catholicism[edit]
Catholicism equates premarital sex with fornication and ties it with breaking the sixth commandment ("Thou shalt not commit adultery") in its Catechism:

Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.[99]
In the early Middle Ages, although the Church theoretically disapproved of nonmarital sex, it approved of it in practice, at least for males (females could be punished) and the practice was commonplace. The Third Council of Aachen (862) noted that premarital sex was quite permissible,[100] declaring it was "rare, almost unheard-of, for a man to remain a virgin until marriage."[101] (At the same time, the Church's attitude to the keeping of concubines was ambivalent.)[101]
Indeed, the Roman Catholic Church did not begin to actively condemn pre-marital sex until the twelfth century. The Paris-based "Reform Church" movement was a Catholic faction that attempted to refocus society's moral compass with a particular emphasis on sex and marriage. The movement sent priests to Wales where it was, up until that time, the norm for Christians to live together prior to marriage.[13]
Up until this period, marriage was considered a private contract between two people. They would make a pledge to each other and, from that moment on, they were considered married. This pledge could take place anywhere; it did not have to occur in a church and neither the church nor the state were involved. It was during the twelfth century that the Roman Catholic Church took control of the process of marriage. From that point on, to be legally recognised, a marriage had to take place in a church with a formal service conducted by a priest. At the same time, pre-marital sex came to be regarded as sinful. Hence all marriage and sexual activity now came under the control of the Church.[17]
At the time of the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church "officially advocated celibacy for the religious, and prohibited marriage, but allowed fornication and concubinage."[102] For instance, in 1527 all but 10 out of 200 Roman Catholic clergymen in Thuringia were living with women outside of marriage.[102]
The Council of Trent (which began in 1545 in reaction to the Protestant Reformation) formally ratified the Roman Catholic view that marriage was a sacrament and set strict guidelines around what constituted a legitimate marriage in Roman Catholic eyes.[103]
In his 1930 encyclical, Casti connubii, Pope Pius XI strongly condemned premarital sex and all forms of "experimental" marriage.[104]
The Roman Catholic belief that premarital sex is sinful was reasserted in Pope John Paul II's 1993 encyclical, Veritatis Splendor.[105]
In 2012, Pope Benedict XVI claimed that premarital sex and cohabitation were "gravely sinful" and "damaging to the stability of society".[106][107] The Roman Catholic Church continues to portray premarital sex as a shameful act and believes that sexual relations are only acceptable between a married couple.[108]
The 2012 British Social Attitudes survey showed that only one in ten British Roman Catholics and Anglicans thought that pre-marital sex was wrong (however, of those who attended Church on a weekly basis, only 23% thought it was permissible).[109]
A 1994 study of French Roman Catholics showed that 83% preferred to listen to their consciences rather than to the official position of the Roman Catholic Church when making major decisions in their lives, leading to 75% of Catholics, by 2003, to say that cohabitation outside of marriage is a personal matter and 13% to say whether it is right or not depends on circumstances.[110]
A 2004 survey showed vastly different attitudes amongst Roman Catholics in different nations. For instance, in Germany, 76% of Roman Catholics agreed or strongly agreed that cohabitation before marriage was acceptable. In Spain, that number was 72%, in the Czech Republic it was 66% and in France it was 62%. At the other end of the spectrum, only 32% of Australian Roman Catholics thought it was acceptable, followed by 39% in the Philippines and 43% in the United States.[111]
The same survey sought to show the number of Roman Catholics who believed that premarital sex is "not wrong at all" or "wrong only sometimes". In the Czech Republic, 84% of Roman Catholics believed this, in France it was 83% and in Germany it was 80%. At the other end of the scale, in the Philippines it was 21%, in Ireland it was 51% and in Australia and the United States it was 64%.[112] The survey also claimed that 40% of Roman Catholic women in the United States have cohabited outside of marriage.[113]
The 2013 British Social Attitudes survey showed that Roman Catholics have become even more accepting than Anglicans of having children outside of wedlock: in 1989, 73% of British Roman Catholics thought people should marry before having children; whereas, by 2012, just 43% thought so.[114]
A 2014 survey showed that most German Roman Catholics also disputed the Church's ruling against premarital sex.[115]
Evangelicalism[edit]
In his book Forbidden Fruit: Sex & Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers, Mark Regnerus notes that "Evangelical Christian teens are more likely to have lost their virginity earlier than mainline Protestants. They start having sex on average at age 16.3 and are more likely than other religious groups to have had three or more sexual partners by age 17."[116]
A 2012 study, the National Survey of Reproductive and Contraceptive Knowledge, found that 80% of young American evangelical Christians aged between 18 and 29 are having pre-marital sex.[117]
A 2014 press release from online dating websites announced the results of a poll of 2,600 Americans in their attitudes towards dating and sex.[118] The poll found that 61 percent of Christians believed they would have sex before marriage. Fifty-six percent found it appropriate to cohabit with a romantic partner after dating for a time between six months and two years. Fifty-nine percent said it doesn't matter who the primary breadwinner of the family is. And 34 percent responded that they would marry someone of a different faith.[119]
American Baptists[edit]
The American Baptist pastor and assistant professor, Jennifer Knust, believes that the Bible is contradictory on the subject of premarital sex and that some Bible texts, notably the Book of Ruth, present it as a source of God's blessing.[120][121]
Southern Baptist convention[edit]
A 2013 study of married couples in Southern Baptist churches in Texas found that over 70% of respondents reported having had premarital vaginal or oral sex.[122] The Southern Baptist scholar Frank Stagg interpreted the New Testament as saying that sex is reserved for marriage.[123] He maintained that the New Testament teaches that sex outside of marriage is a sin of adultery if either sexual participant is married, otherwise the sin of fornication if both sexual participants are unmarried.
The Southern Baptists' Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission also condemns premarital sex on the grounds of their interpretation of the Bible.[124] Feeling that marriage is a "divine institution"[124] the Southern Baptist position is closer to that of Roman Catholic sacramentalism than that of Luther and Calvin who maintained marriage was a legal agreement and the business of the State.[30]
Pentecostals[edit]
In Australia, Pentecostals are increasingly opposed to the concept of premarital sex. In 1993, 62% of Australian Pentecostals felt that sex before marriage was wrong. By 2009, that figure had jumped to 78%.[125]
Islam[edit]



 Islamic parts of the world where sex before or outside marriage is forbidden.[126][127] Sharia considers consensual premarital sex a hudud crime, and requires public punishment.
Islam forbids sex outside of marriage, both premarital sex and sex outside marriage (zina),[128] with the exception of sexual intercourse between male slaveholders and their female slaves.[129][130] Qur'an states:[131][132]

Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful deed, and an evil, opening the road to other evils.
— Quran 17:32

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication - flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.
— Quran 24:2
Sharia considers premarital and extra marital sex as two of six hudud crimes, that is, it is a crime against Allah.[133] As a hudud crime, it must be dealt with a fixed punishment.[134] Islam requires that Muslim society punish both the boy and the girl, who have engaged in premarital sex, with 100 lashes in public; for extra marital sex, the punishment required by Sharia is 100 lashes followed by stoning to death in public.[135] These punishments are also prescribed in Sahih Hadiths, the books most trusted in Islam after Quran,[136]

'Ubada b. as-Samit reported: Allah's Messenger as saying: Receive teaching from me, receive teaching from me. Allah has ordained a way for those women. When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female, they should receive one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in case of married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.
— Sahih Muslim, 17:4191
The act of sexual penetration must, however, be attested by at least four Muslim witnesses of good character, the accused has a right to testify in court, the suspect's word or testimony is required to hold the most weight in the eyes of the judge(s), punishments are reserved to the legal authorities and the law states that false accusations are to be punished severely.[137][138] The former regulations also make some Muslims believe, that the process's goal was to eventually abolish the physical penalties relating to acts of fornication and adultery that were already present within many societies around the world when Islamic teachings first arose. According to this view, the principles are so rigorous in their search for evidence, that they create the near impossibility of being able to reach a verdict that goes against the suspect in any manner.[139]
Beyond being a crime requiring punishment in worldly life, fornication is a sin leading to chastisement in after-life in Islam.[140]
Judaism[edit]
The Torah does not consider premarital sex a capital crime, unless one was already betrothed.[141]
To quote two sources, "The Torah does not outlaw it—as it does many other types of sexual relationships—and the child of such a union is not considered a mamzer (illegitimate). Nonetheless, marital sex is considered ideal, and premarital sex is traditionally not approved of. The negative attitude toward premarital sex, to a large degree, reflects the overwhelmingly positive attitude toward sex within marriage."[142] Likewise, "The only limits placed on sexual activities in the Torah are prohibitions against adultery and incest. In Biblical times, a man was not prohibited from having sexual relations with a woman, as long as it led to marriage. The Bible never explicitly states a woman and man may not have sexual intercourse prior to marriage; therefore, no sanction was imposed for premarital sex, but it was considered a violation of custom."[143]
Despite the fact it is not condemned in the Torah, Orthodox Jews are opposed to premarital sex.[144]
Eastern religions[edit]
Hinduism[edit]
Hinduism condemns pre-marital sex and adultery.[145][146] Among Hindu communities, sexual matters are left to the judgment of those involved and not a matter to be imposed through law.[147] Sexual behavior of Hindus are also governed by the prevalent practices of the society.[148][149][150] For example, Nāradasmṛti, one of many legal texts of Hindu communities in ancient India, states in verse 13.60-61,

If a man has intercourse with an attached woman somewhere other than his own house, it is known as adultery by the experts, but not if she came to his house on her own. It is not a punishable crime when someone has intercourse with the wife of a man who has abandoned her because she is wicked, or with the wife of a eunuch or of a man who does not care, provided the wife has initiated it, of her own volition.
—Nāradasmṛti 13.60-61[149]
The term "attached woman" in the above verse includes a woman who is either married and protected by her husband, or a woman is not married and protected by her father.[149] In verses 13.71-72, Nāradasmṛti states that a man should marry the woman, with whom he had consensual intercourse.[149][150]

If a man has intercourse with an unmarried woman, who consents to it, it is no offense, but he shall deck her with ornaments, worship her, and thus bring her to his house as his bride.
—Nāradasmṛti 13.72[150]
Manusmriti considers adultery as a source of personal trauma and social disorder, and prescribes rules for the property, maintenance and divorce rights of spouse not involved in the adultery, and the rights of offsprings if produced from sex outside marriage.[151]
In the diversity of Hinduism, a spectrum of views on sexual freedoms thrived in ancient India. Marco Polo, while visiting Hindu kingdoms in 13th century India, made the observation that social mores in India consider sex within marriage as proper and virtuous, although they don't consider any other sexual gratification to be a sin.[152][153]
Hinduism itself doesn't forbid remarriage but gives no importance to divorce either.[relevant? – discuss][154]
In Yoga school of Hinduism, five types of temperance (yama) are recommended for ethical life, the fourth[155] yama being celibacy and self-restraint from sexually cheating on one's partner. Marital fidelity, where all sexual thoughts and expressions are limited to one's spouse, is taught as a virtuous value.[156][157]
Buddhism[edit]
[icon] This section requires expansion. (September 2014)
Buddhism disapproves of fornication and adultery.[158] The precepts of Buddhism denounces fornication, thieving, lying, murdering and other acts.[159]
Laws[edit]
Fornication laws are mostly tied to religion and the legal and political traditions within the particular jurisdiction. Laws differ greatly from country to country.
United States of America[edit]
Ethical issues arising from sexual relations between consenting heterosexuals who have reached the age of consent have generally been viewed as matters of private morality, and so, have not generally been prosecuted as criminal offenses in the common law.[160] This legal position was inherited by the United States from the United Kingdom. Later, some jurisdictions, a total of 16 in the southern and eastern United States, as well as the states of Wisconsin[161] and Utah,[162] passed statutes creating the offense of fornication that prohibited (vaginal) sexual intercourse between two unmarried people of the opposite sex. Most of these laws either were repealed, were not enforced, or were struck down by the courts in several states as being odious to their state constitutions. See also State v. Saunders, 381 A.2d 333 (N.J. 1977), Martin v. Ziherl, 607 S.E.2d 367 (Va. 2005).
Some acts may be prohibited under criminal laws defining the offense of sodomy, rather than the laws defining the offense of fornication. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) rendered the states' remaining laws related to sodomy unenforceable. Lawrence v. Texas is also presumed by many to invalidate laws prohibiting fornication: the decision declared sodomy laws unconstitutional, saying that they interfered with private, consensual, non-commercial intimate relations between unrelated adults, and therefore were odious to the rights of liberty and privacy, such rights being retained by the people of the United States.
Islamic nations[edit]
In some Muslim countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,[163] Afghanistan,[164][165][166] Iran,[166] Kuwait,[167] Maldives,[168] Morocco,[169] Oman,[170] Mauritania,[171] United Arab Emirates,[172][173] Qatar,[174] Sudan,[175] Yemen,[176] any form of sexual activity outside marriage is illegal.
See also[edit]
Casual sex
Religion and sexuality
Free love
Infidelity
Lust
Open marriage
Promiscuity
Zina
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ "Fornication". Student Dictionary. Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 15 February 2013.
2.Jump up ^ "Fornication". TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved November 25, 2013.
3.Jump up ^ O'Gorman, James F. (1998). ABC of Architecture. U of Pennsylvania P. pp. 106–107. ISBN 9780812216318. Retrieved 15 February 2013.
4.Jump up ^ Christopher Francese (2007). Ancient Rome in So Many Words. Hippocrene Books. p. 146.
5.Jump up ^ The Merriam-Webster New Book of Word Histories. Merriam-Webster. 1991. p. 182.
6.Jump up ^ "Fornix, n.". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2001.
7.Jump up ^ "Fornication, n.1". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2001.
8.Jump up ^ "Fornicated, adj.". Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 2001.
9.Jump up ^ See Matthew 5:32 for usage of the word in English bibles
10.Jump up ^ "The English Standard Version". ChristianCourier.com. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
11.Jump up ^ "The Greek Lexicon". BibleStudyTools.com. Retrieved 4 February 2014.
12.Jump up ^ Wikisource-logo.svg "Fornication". New International Encyclopedia. 1906.
13.^ Jump up to: a b "Gerald of Wales: Patriotic Welshman or arrogant agent of English imperialism?". Wales Online. 3 October 2002. Retrieved 14 October 2013.
14.^ Jump up to: a b "The no-sex 'myth'". BBC. 3 October 2002. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
15.Jump up ^ [1]
16.Jump up ^ [2]
17.^ Jump up to: a b Medieval Lives - Birth, Marriage and Death: Episode Two (A Good Marriage). BBC. 16 October 2013. Retrieved 1 August 2014.
18.Jump up ^ [3]
19.^ Jump up to: a b Witte, John (2005). Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva: Courtship, Engagement, and Marriage. ISBN 9780802848031.
20.Jump up ^ [4]
21.Jump up ^ [5]
22.Jump up ^ [6]
23.Jump up ^ [7]
24.Jump up ^ arsenokoitēs (masc. noun of fem. 1st declension), literally a man who shares a bed with other men (see LSJ and BDAG).
25.Jump up ^ Koltun-Fromm, Naomi (April 2006). "Hermeneutics of Holiness: Syriac- Christian and Rabbinic Notions of Holy Community and Sexuality" (.DOC). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
26.Jump up ^ Kittel, G (ed):Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Volume VI, pages 579-95
27.Jump up ^ Friberg,T: Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament
28.Jump up ^ [8]
29.Jump up ^ "On sex, Muslims and Hindus practice what they preach". Christian Century. 30 October 2012. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
30.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f [9]
31.Jump up ^ [10]
32.Jump up ^ Susan C. Karant-Nunn and Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks (2003). Luther on Women. Cambridge University Press. p. 11. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
33.Jump up ^ [11]
34.Jump up ^ [12]
35.^ Jump up to: a b [13]
36.Jump up ^ Kant, I: Lectures on Ethics
37.Jump up ^ "Attitude to Birth Control" (PDF). 1968. pp. 1–2. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
38.Jump up ^ Bergmann, Rev. Kevin (June–July 2011). "Where Practice Doesn't Make Perfect". The Lutheran Witness. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
39.Jump up ^ Kelm, Paul E. (January 1984). "Premarital sex, tithing, and cremation". Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
40.Jump up ^ [14]
41.Jump up ^ "Catechism: Christian Doctrine of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland" (PDF). Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. 1999. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
42.Jump up ^ "Continuum Complete International Encyclopaedia of Sexuality: Sweden". Kinsey Institute. 2006. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
43.Jump up ^ [15]
44.Jump up ^ [16]
45.Jump up ^ Helm, Paul (July 2006). "Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva, Volume 1: Courtship, Engagement, and Marriage". Reformation21. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
46.Jump up ^ Helm, Paul (July 2006). Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva, Volume 1: Courtship, Engagement, and Marriage. Reformation21. Retrieved 3 October 2014.
47.Jump up ^ [17]
48.Jump up ^ [18]
49.Jump up ^ Philip Benedict (1 January 1991). The Huguenot Population of France, 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and Customs of a Religious Minority. American Philosophical Society. p. 101. ISBN 978-0-87169-815-5.
50.Jump up ^ "The Huguenot Population of France". Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. American Philosophical Society. 1966. p. 98. ISSN 0065-9746.
51.^ Jump up to: a b c Barth, K: Church Dogmatics
52.Jump up ^ "La sexualité avant le mariage, est-ce un péché?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 1 October 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
53.Jump up ^ "Sexualité, relations avant ou après mariage... qu'en dit la Bible?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 12 September 2004. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
54.Jump up ^ "Est-ce que coucher avec une prostituée est un péché?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 22 June 2010. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
55.^ Jump up to: a b "Est-ce important de rester vierge jusqu'au mariage?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 26 Mar 2005. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
56.Jump up ^ "Vierge pour le mariage?" (in French). Questiondieu.com. 12 July 2005. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
57.Jump up ^ [19]
58.Jump up ^ [20]
59.Jump up ^ "Presbyterian Sex Report Attacks Church's Attitudes". Apr 1991.
60.Jump up ^ [21]
61.^ Jump up to: a b c [22][dead link]
62.Jump up ^ [23]
63.Jump up ^ [24]
64.Jump up ^ "Anglican church tolerant on premarital sex issue". The Free Lance-Star (London). Associated Press. 14 January 1984. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
65.Jump up ^ [25]
66.Jump up ^ "Lambeth Conference Archives - 1988 - Resolution 34".
67.Jump up ^ "Lambeth Conference Archives - 1998 - Resolution I.10".
68.^ Jump up to: a b c d Ruth Gledhill (March 31, 2003). "Church told to rethink bar on sex before marriage". The Times.
69.Jump up ^ [26]
70.Jump up ^ "Rowan’s Reflections: Unpacking the Archbishop’s Statement". The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc.
71.Jump up ^ Thomas R. Frame (2007). Anglicans in Australia. UNSW Press.
72.Jump up ^ [27]
73.Jump up ^ [28]
74.^ Jump up to: a b "Episcopal Unit Supports Non-Marital Sex". Los Angeles Times (Newark, New Jersey). Associated Press. 30 January 1987. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
75.Jump up ^ "Sex outside marriage is no sin, says Archbishop". Daily Mail (London). 17 Mar 2013.
76.Jump up ^ Ross, Tim; Wynne-Jones, Jonathan; Rayner, Gordon (29 April 2011). "Royal wedding: Archbishop backs William and Kate's decision to live together before marriage". The Telegraph (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
77.Jump up ^ Ross, Tim; Wynne-Jones, Jonathan; Rayner, Gordon (29 April 2011). "Royal wedding: Archbishop backs William and Kate's decision to live together before marriage". The Telegraph (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
78.Jump up ^ "Sex outside marriage is no sin, says Archbishop". Daily Mail (London). 17 Mar 2013.
79.Jump up ^ [29]
80.Jump up ^ George Pitcher (August 7, 2008). "Rowan Williams and sex: a clarification". Telegraph Blogs.
81.Jump up ^ Martyn Percy (ed.) (1997). Intimate Affairs: Sexuality and Spirituality in Perspective. Darton, Longman and Todd (London).
82.Jump up ^ ""Whether it's gay or straight, sex outside marriage is wrong" Archbishop Justin Welby". Anglican Mainstream. 17 March 2013. Retrieved 3 August 2013. "My understanding of sexual ethics has been that, regardless of whether it's gay or straight, sex outside marriage is wrong."
83.Jump up ^ Doughty, Steve (17 March 2013). "'My wife keeps an eye on my drinking and I never do it alone': Archbishop of Canterbury reveals his fears of following father into alcoholism". The Daily Mail (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
84.Jump up ^ Kellaway, Lucy (10 May 2013). "Lunch with the FT: Justin Welby". Financial Times. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
85.Jump up ^ Field, Clive (17 March 2013). "Sunday Times Religion Poll". British Religion in Numbers. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
86.Jump up ^ "Continuum Complete International Encyclopaedia of Sexuality: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". Kinsey Institute. 2006. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
87.Jump up ^ [30]
88.Jump up ^ Church, published by arrangement with the General Board of the General Conference Mennonite; Board, the Mennonite Church General (1995). Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press. ISBN 0-8361-9043-2.
89.Jump up ^ [31]
90.Jump up ^ /
91.Jump up ^ [32]
92.Jump up ^ "Who are the Quakers and What do Friends Believe?". Got Questions.org. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
93.Jump up ^ "Who are the Quakers and What do Friends Believe?". Got Questions.org. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
94.Jump up ^ "Is Premarital Sex a Sin? Bible Scholars Respond". Kinsey Institute. 7 August 2012. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
95.Jump up ^ "Does The United Methodist Church believe that premarital sex is OK?". United Methodist Church. 2004. Retrieved 6 August 2014.
96.^ Jump up to: a b Bos, Robert (2013). "Views of marriage in the UCA: Report on a consultation process (PDF)". Retrieved 1 August 2014.
97.Jump up ^ Dowling, Heather (2012). "Sex, Marriage and All That Stuff)". Retrieved 1 August 2014.
98.Jump up ^ Hauerwas, S: A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic
99.Jump up ^ "Catechism of the Catholic Church - The sixth commandment". Vatican.va. 29 October 1951. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
100.Jump up ^ "German Kingdoms Of Early Medieval Europe". Women's Studies Encyclopedia. 1994. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
101.^ Jump up to: a b James A. Brundage (15 February 2009). Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe. University of Chicago Press. p. 146. ISBN 978-0-226-07789-5.
102.^ Jump up to: a b Clyde L. Manschreck (8 January 2009). Melanchthon: The Quiet Reformer. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 72. ISBN 978-1-60608-283-6.
103.Jump up ^ [33]
104.Jump up ^ Pius XI (December 31, 1930). "Casti connubii".
105.Jump up ^ [34]
106.Jump up ^ "Pope Benedict warns against gay marriage". BBC News. 9 March 2012.
107.Jump up ^ SARAH WOLFE (March 10, 2012). "The Pope Is Asking US Bishops To Crack Down On Gay Marriage, Cohabitation And Premarital Sex". Business Insider Australia.
108.Jump up ^ [35]
109.Jump up ^ "British Social Attitudes Survey, 2012".
110.Jump up ^ Alec G. Hargreaves; John Kelsay; Sumner B. Twiss (2007). Politics and Religion in France and the United States. Lexington Books. p. 84. ISBN 978-0-7391-1930-3.
111.Jump up ^ [36]
112.Jump up ^ [37]
113.Jump up ^ [38]
114.Jump up ^ [39]
115.Jump up ^ "German Catholics reject sex rules, bishops tell Vatican". ABC Australia. Retrieved 4 February 2014.
116.Jump up ^ Gilmour, Maggie (7 May 2010). "Let's face it, sex happens". CBC News. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
117.Jump up ^ [40]
118.Jump up ^ "ChristianMingle(R) and JDate(R) Release Second Annual State of Dating in America(TM) Report". Press Release/Marketwired. 21 Jan 2014.
119.Jump up ^ "Christians Are Following Secular Trends in Premarital Sex, Cohabitation Outside of Marriage, Says Dating Site Survey". Christian Post. Jan 2014.
120.Jump up ^ [41]
121.Jump up ^ [42]
122.Jump up ^ Rosenbaum JE, Weathersbee B (March 2013). "True love waits: do Southern Baptists? Premarital sexual behavior among newly married Southern Baptist Sunday school students". J Relig Health 52 (1): 263–75. doi:10.1007/s10943-010-9445-5. PMC 3156853. PMID 21274632.
123.Jump up ^ Stagg, Evelyn and Frank. Woman in the World of Jesus. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978. ISBN 0-664-24195-6
124.^ Jump up to: a b [43]
125.Jump up ^ [44]
126.Jump up ^ Ziba Mir-Hosseini (2011), Criminalizing sexuality: zina laws as violence against women in Muslim contexts, SUR - Int'l Journal on Human Rights, 15, pp. 7-31
127.Jump up ^ Haideh Moghissi (2005), Women and Islam: Part 4 Women, sexuality and sexual politics in Islamic cultures, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 0-415-32420-3
128.Jump up ^ Sakah Saidu Mahmud (2013), Sharia or Shura: Contending Approaches to Muslim Politics in Nigeria and Senegal, Lexington, ISBN 978-0739175644, Chapter 3
129.Jump up ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/slavery_1.shtml
130.Jump up ^ Muhammad Al-Munajid, Is it permissible for a man to force his wife or slave to have intercourse if she refuses?, IslamQA.com (accessed 01/09/2014)
131.Jump up ^ Muḥammad Salīm ʻAwwā (1982), Punishment in Islamic Law: A Comparative Study, American Trust Publications, ISBN 978-0892590155
132.Jump up ^ M. Tamadonfar (2001), Islam, law, and political control in contemporary Iran, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 40(2): 205-220
133.Jump up ^ Mohamed El-Awa (1993), Punishment in Islamic Law, American Trust Publications, ISBN 978-0892591428, pp 1-68
134.Jump up ^ Guy Bechor (2002), Between Vision and Reality: Law in the Arab World, IDC Projects Publishing House, pp. 103-112
135.Jump up ^ Ursula Smartt, Honour Killings Justice of the Peace, Vol. 170, January 2006, pp. 4-6
136.Jump up ^ Z. Mir-Hosseini (2011), Criminalizing sexuality: zina laws as violence against women in Muslim contexts, Int'l Journal on Human Rights, 15, 7-16
137.Jump up ^ www.usc.edu
138.Jump up ^ www.bbc.co.uk
139.Jump up ^ www.asmasociety.org
140.Jump up ^ A. Quraishi (1999), Her honour: an Islamic critique of the rape provisions in Pakistan's ordinance on zina, Islamic studies, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 403-431
141.Jump up ^ Steven L. Bridge (2009), Getting the Old Testament: What It Meant to Them, What It Means for Us, ISBN 978-0801045745, Chapter 5
142.Jump up ^ "Jewish Views on Premarital Sex". My Jewish Learning. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
143.Jump up ^ "Premarital Sex". Jewish Virtual Library. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
144.Jump up ^ "Premarital Sex, Orthodox Jews & Censorship". Jewish Journal. 15 December 2011. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
145.Jump up ^ Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty. The Origins of Evil in Hindu Mythology. University of California Press. p. 7.
146.Jump up ^ The Cultural Context of Sexual Pleasure and Problems: Psychotherapy with Diverse Clients, p. 175, by Cynthia A. Graham, Kathryn Hall
147.Jump up ^ Ramanathan and Weerakoon, The Cultural Context of Sexual Pleasure and Problems: Psychotherapy with Diverse Clients, p. 173-174, Editors: Cynthia A. Graham and Kathryn Hall, Routledge; Quote - "In this (Hinduism smritis) doctrine, sexual matters are not to be legislated but are left to the judgement of those involved."
148.Jump up ^ Ramanathan and Weerakoon, The Cultural Context of Sexual Pleasure and Problems: Psychotherapy with Diverse Clients, p. 173-174, Editors: Cynthia A. Graham and Kathryn Hall, Routledge; Quote - "The sexual behavior of Hindus are generally governed by the prescribed practices of the society."
149.^ Jump up to: a b c d Lariviere, Richard (2001). The Nāradasmṛti. pp. 391–393. ISBN 978-8120818040.
150.^ Jump up to: a b c Jolly, Julius (1876). Naradiya Dharmasastra. Trubner and Co. pp. 87–88.
151.Jump up ^ Olivelle, Patrick (2004). Manu's Code of Law. Oxford University Press. pp. 32, 325–329. ISBN 978-0195171464.
152.Jump up ^ Eraly, Abraham (2011). The First Spring: The Golden Age of India. Penguin Books. p. 440. ISBN 978-0670084784.
153.Jump up ^ Polo, Marco (2007). The Customs of the Kingdoms of India. Penguin Classics. ISBN 978-0141025407. "They eat no meat and drink no wine. They live very virtuous lives according to their own usage. They have no sexual intercourse except with their own wives. They take nothing that belongs to another. They would never kill a living creature. (...) On the other hand you should know that they do not regard any form of sexual indulgence as a sin."
154.Jump up ^ Studies in Hindu Law and Dharmaśāstra, Anthem Press, by Ludo Rocher, p. 293
155.Jump up ^ other four yama are: restraint from all violence and injury to others, restraint from starting or propagating deceit and falsehood, restraint from theft, restraint from avarice.
156.Jump up ^ Lochtefeld, James. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Rosen Publishing New York. p. 777 (Entry on Yama). ISBN 0-8239-2287-1.
157.Jump up ^ Himalayan Academy. "Celibacy and fidelity". Gutenberg. Kauai's Hindu Monastery, Hawaii. Retrieved October 5, 2014. "As the fourth yama, or restraint, brahmacharya is emulated in married life in the sense of fidelity, confining all sexual thoughts and expressions to one's spouse."
158.Jump up ^ Warren Matthews. World Religions. CengageBrain.com. p. 142.
159.Jump up ^ Takeuchi Yoshinori. Buddhist Spirituality: Later China, Korea, Japan, and the Modern World. Motilal Banarsidass Publisher. p. 169.
160.Jump up ^ Jim Thompson, The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Nov. – Dec., 1958), pp. 350–356
161.Jump up ^ Jim Thompson The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Nov. – Dec., 1958), pp. 350–356, 353
162.Jump up ^ "Utah Code, Title 76, Chapter 07. Offenses Against the Family".
163.Jump up ^ Jordan, Mary (21 August 2008). "Searching for Freedom, Chained by the Law". The Washington Post. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
164.Jump up ^ Ernesto Londoño (2012-09-09). "Afghanistan sees rise in 'dancing boys' exploitation". The Washington Post (DEHRAZI, Afghanistan).
165.Jump up ^ "Home". AIDSPortal. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
166.^ Jump up to: a b "Iran". Travel.state.gov. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
167.Jump up ^ "United Nations Human Rights Website - Treaty Bodies Database - Document - Summary Record - Kuwait". Unhchr.ch. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
168.Jump up ^ "Culture of Maldives". Every Culture. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
169.Jump up ^ Nakim, Nora (9 August 2012). "Morocco: Should pre-marital sex be legal?". BBC. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
170.Jump up ^ Interpol"
171.Jump up ^ "2010 Human Rights Report: Mauritania". State.gov. 8 April 2011. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
172.Jump up ^ "Education in Dubai". Dubaifaqs.com. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
173.Jump up ^ Judd, Terri; Sajn, Nikolina (10 July 2008). "Briton faces jail for sex on Dubai beach". The Independent (London). Retrieved 3 August 2013.
174.Jump up ^ ""Sex outside of marriage is a criminal offense here," PH ambassador to Qatar warns Pinoys". SPOT.ph. 12 September 2011. Retrieved 3 August 2013.
175.Jump up ^ "Sudan must rewrite rape laws to protect victims". Reuters. 28 June 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
176.Jump up ^ "Women's Rights in the Middle East and North Africa - Yemen". Unhcr.org. Retrieved 2 August 2013.
  


Categories: History of human sexuality
Sexual fidelity
Sexuality and religion
Marriage
Sex crimes











Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
বাংলা
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
فارسی
Français
한국어
Hrvatski
Interlingua
Italiano
עברית
Lietuvių
日本語
Português
Runa Simi
Русский
Simple English
Slovenčina
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
Tiếng Việt
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 April 2015, at 16:26.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornication