I'd love to see a discussion about the history of the church's take on premarital sex, as well a discussion of the scripture describing sexual expectations and marital rituals and what that means in our modern context.

I also would love to have a discussion about what qualifies someone as "Christian" and "non-Christian," aka, who the rule "no sex" applies to. That's a tough line to draw, and I think it's a dangerous path to tread.

I think the post and ensuing comments might have strayed a bit from the original question: is "no sex before marriage realistic?" We have to acknowledge that puberty is happening at an earlier age than ever before, and people are getting married at a later age than ever before... so let's say someone doesn't get married till they're 30, but started puberty at 11. That's 19 years of no "sex" (however you define it) in a culture where sex is prevalent and urges are encouraged (or shamed into secrecy or not addressed, leading to ignorance of sex and its implications).

I'd really love to see our whole culture healthily embrace sexuality--to talk about it, talk about the consequences of it, talk about that sex is an act of love and is loaded with lots of emotion and isn't something that should be done lightly with anyone at any whim. It doesn't matter if you're a Christian or not. Certainly, talking about sex & its emotions and in the context of love & spirituality is a bit easier to justify, perhaps, but most churches never even take that road. Rather than talk about sex at all, we just say NONE till you're hitched. I don't know how many of my "good Christian friends" then end up feeling like sex is a terrible thing, something they can't discuss, and I even know of people who struggled in pain when they got married... struggled because their faith never addressed the physical bond two people share when they love one another.

So I'm stuck. I'm not sure sexuality can be simply reduced to a marital contract, something that our legal system has imposed on a spiritual practice. I also don't believe that our churches or our civil society is doing enough to educate people about the effects of sex. If we addressed it for its beauty and love in addition to all the "bad" that can come from it, maybe we'd have healthier families and fewer "social ills" as a result. Or maybe I'm just an optimist. :)

When you said this
UPDATE: This post was written strictly regarding non-Christian couples. It is written under the context of marrying people who do not go to church. Christians, to be sure, need to keep it in their pants.

then i understood.

I've struggled with this myself recently. A new couple who live together started attending our church a few months ago. They are amazing and my wife and I love spending time with them!
Recently the guy expressed interest in volunteering with our student ministry (FYI: I'm the student pastor). Truth be told, he would be an amazing volunteer but I can't reconcile the fact that they are living together. Where is the line? I landed on the fact that he is knowingly living in opposition to scripture so he won't be volunteering. So lame because I have other leaders who struggle with other stuff but they are striving to break the habit or cycle.
All to say, this couple have become great friends. The woman want me to baptize her and they have talked to me about starting premarital counseling.
In your post, you made a distinction between couples in and out of church but I feel the line is even more blurry than that. Most couples who live together are so intertwined that they can't fathom living apart. At times, it doesn't make logical sense for one of them to move out (not that that should matter). This couple bought the house together so that adds another layer of complexity.
To be honest, your post just got my mind trying to unravel this again.
Thanks for this post. It needs to be talked about more openly.

The problem is not whether the church should marry people who have sex before marriage. The problem is the wide spread but erroneous belief that the Bible forbids sex before marriage.

It does not.

It is better to prevent than to treat. I understand your thinking but still think that the fault of the church during those previous years is worst. The bad done, have to treat. And the others? will us wait them to engage in pre-marital sex to then have to treat again, and again, and again. Your insight came with a switch from a general perspective to a specific one. What you see if you step back and see from the general again? What you see if you think of you as a minister of God to the people (society) not for individuals?

It's a very real expectation. But that is not what the article is about. It is about whether or not to marry a non-Christian couple that is sleeping together. If that is the real question, then there are bigger issues than whether they sleep together or not. A marriage without Christ in the center, for instance, would be my concern.

But that in no way means that we shouldn't EXPECT couples to abstain until marriage.

Allowing for couple to cohabitate or be engaged in premarital sex prior to marriage is only living a Christ centered life superficially. Just because they feel that they are living a Christ centered life does not mean that Christ is apart of it. Pleasure and the good are not always the same. The meaning of sex is to create a bond between the couple and also strengthen their commitment to God as well as being open to the possibility of children. To deny any one part of this is to be living in sin.
We live in a broken world and part of the responsibility of any pastor is to help his church to be open to Grace and to live the best life possible. For you to allow for cohabitation or premarital sex is to deny them a better life and one that is not centered in Christ. I am not saying that you turn them away; however, it is your responsibilty to do what you know to be virtuous and to steer them to Christ. You can speak the truth, but do it lovingly. Make them realize how very important chastity is both inside and outside of marriage. To not do so, is to lead them further away from the truth and could cause you "to be thrown into the sea with a millstone around your neck." If they are ignorant of the truth, then it is your job to bring them to that truth. If they are obstinate against truth, then they are already not living a life that is Christ centered.

In a post-Christendom situation (where not everyone is a Christian), why do we continue to bless drive-thru marriages? It seems more like a form of nationalism (gotta keep society running!) than any real thick practice of evangelism, love, or social justice. The creepy government documents only reinforce that impression. Is the minister representing God or the state? Well, who has a bigger interest in marrying non-Christians? The People of God? Or society in general? I strongly suspect the latter, especially in North America.

Why are we so concerned about sex? Sex in the bible is pretty crazy stuff. However, the message of working for justice, feeding the hungry, and looking out for those who are vulnerable is a very clear theme throughout. Let's stop freaking out about sex and feed the hungry. Then they we will know we are Christians by are love for our neighbor not by our sexual behavior.

Sorry, I disagree - I think that's against scripture. Not saying you have to do it thru the state or anything, but God talks about committing to each other for life before having sex. And if you do have sex, then you have to marry them (old testament law, but still).