Can Christians have threesomes?

Jay Dee

Can Christians have threesomes?

May 23, 2015

I wish this was a joke, but I received this question this week in from our Have A Question page: Are threesomes in marriage a sin I’ll be honest, I contemplated not answering it.  I really thought the answer was that obvious.  Then I did

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

ICanChristiansHaveThreesomes wish this was a joke, but I received this question this week in from our Have A Question page:

Are threesomes in marriage a sin

I’ll be honest, I contemplated not answering it.  I really thought the answer was that obvious.  Then I did some searching, and found multiple sites with supposedly Christian sex advice saying that threesomes were okay.  So, I figured I should write about it, since it seems people are getting a lot of bad advice out there.

Alright, just in case someone who is reading doesn’t know what a threesome is: a threesome is having sex between three individuals at the same time.

In all cases this either breaks down into a cases of fornication, adultery, or a mix of the two (with the odd exception being polygamy, which we’re not going to discuss, because we already beat that topic to death).

So, if a husband and wife invite another married person into their bed, that falls under adultery, regardless of whether or not they are consenting, or their spouses is consenting.  It’s still adultery.

If a husband and wife invite a non-married person into their bed, then that falls under fornication…and adultery.  And as we’ve discussed previously, fornication (sex prior to marriage, or without marriage) is also sinful and damaging.

Every argument I’ve seen either tries to do away with these two fundamental points, or side steps them and obscures the real issues by getting into a debate about what the Bible explicitly says about threesomes (which is very little, and only indirectly).  But, the Bible is very clear on this simple fact: Sex is valid only for a man and a woman who are already married, to each other.  No one else.  No exceptions.  No extenuating circumstances.  In every other case it is damaging to your relationship with that other person, to your spouse (present or future) and to God.

Your Turn

That’s all I’m going to say on the topic.  Anyone else want to jump in?

37 Questions for spouses to ask each other about sex

Subscribe to get the 2 page PDF full of questions to help you and your spouse start to talk about your sex life.

We won't send you spam. Unsubscribe at any time.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

123 thoughts on “Can Christians have threesomes?”

  1. libl says:

    Even in polygamy in the Bible it indicates one on one sexual times. Jacob didn’t seem to have sex with Rachel and Leah at the same time.

    1. Chris Tian says:

      Great point!

    2. HopefullyHelpful says:

      I would say that would have been “unwise”, but not because of Jacob, though. I think Jacob’s case best outlines the Law that says a man could not have sisters as concurrent wives. I figure Solomon may have had to, or else most his harem would have been feeling neglected a bit.
      Jay Dee, I love those little magnet toys.

    3. Ericka says:

      Agree

    4. Joseph vincent says:

      Just to apologise I have dyslexia and I use voice activated software so sometimes some of my comments might not read well I often go on sites where people debate what’s right and wrong in relationships regarding homosexuality marriage etc I just find it so sad that people spend so much time I’m saying Bible says this is wrong the Bible says that is wrong I think at the end of the day when we meet god he’ll be so much more concerned whether we obeyed the commandment to love God and secondly to love each other and part of that is to be respectful of other people when they do do activities you don’t agree with I think God will be so much more concerned with how we treat each other how we love each other how we build each other up how we protect people who were victimized I’m not doubting that there are certain behaviours that’s wrong however I think God will care so little about what we physically do do under the sheets what gender they are his concern will be how we love each other how we protect the hurt the lonely the damaged the hungry the unloved how we truly love our neighbour and I think when people right on these forums I call people sinners and point out what’s wrong and what’s adulterous they just utterly missed the point that at the end of the day love protecting people far more important I used to work as a youth worker and some people would get very hot up if they found two young people we’re living together it would be so important to tell them it was wrong tell them that God found on it you don’t have have permission to do this I think unless you’re willing to build long lasting friendships with people and even then love covers a multitude of wrong I really think again when we meet god things that we thought was so important God will just have so much compassion with but I think God will treat very seriously when we have disrespected people not loved each other not cared for our neighbour not protected the week I know some people want to write straight back point to all the verses in the Bible which say I’m wrong just pause for one minute and think I’m not saying things aren’t wrong I’m just saying our priorities are so skewed when I told somebody some stuff that was going on in my life in one person cried with me and accept me or somebody else was just completely obsessed with quoting the Bible and telling me I have to forgive in the end I was able to forgive people not because bible verses were quoted at me but because those people who loved me walked in the mud with me loved and protect me does that mean I didn’t tell me when they thought I was wrong now but the most important thing they did was show me god’s love and that isn’t quoting bible verses that people and telling them their sinnners this is truly not out job so when you reply back to this pause for a second talk to each other like real human beings rather than just quoting bible verses thanks a lot

      1. Jay Dee says:

        I think we often confuse two very different circumstances: if the person hasn’t accepted Christ, or is a new convert, or in some other way isn’t willing to accept the accountability that comes with following Christ, then yes, it makes no sense to hold them accountable to standards they don’t agree with or have agreed to adhere to.

        However, if they do, which I’m going to assume the majority of my readers accept the Bible as it’s written as a guideline for our lives, and as such anything violating that is an act of sin, then it would be immoral for me to not to hold them accountable. So, when people ask questions about what the Bible says, I can’t give any answer but what I believe.

        Whether or not they want to be held accountable to the Bible or accept my interpretation of it is up to them. If they don’t, I have no right to hold them accountable to it.

        Does that makes sense?

        P.S. Most dictation software you can add punctuation. That would help the readability of your comment a lot.

    5. Anonymous says:

      Proverbs 5:15 Let water from your store and not that of others be your drink, and running water from your fountain.

      Proverbs 5:16 Let not your springs be flowing in the streets, or your streams of water in the open places.

      Proverbs 5:17 Let them be for yourself only, not for other men with you.

  2. Chris Tian says:

    I’ve seen those nonsense sites too, funny but they always seem to be advocating two women and one man and never two men with one woman which to me says it all. Not just adultery and fornication but there’s the issue of possible homosexuality as well.

  3. lollipop man says:

    You said it the bible speaks plainly about the subject and no matter how one tries to turn it to fit what they want to do God’s word is forever settled in heaven

  4. Jenny says:

    I can’t believe that’s issue either. Crazy what people can be convinced of.

  5. JG says:

    Can’t believe someone even asked this question. In order to ask it, in your heart you would have to be so detached from the true Biblical meaning of marriage. Surely, if you have the type of marriage God intended, you wouldn’t even need to entertain the idea of a third party. The question was clearly asked from a place of, ‘How much can I get away with as a Christian?’ as opposed to ‘how can I honour God in through my sexuality?’ Very disturbing.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Sadly I feel this is how the majority of Christians view the concept of sin. More a checklist than seeing the underlying relationship. This of course extends into marriage.

    2. Roger says:

      The problem JG is your response portrays the judgementalism we believers are known for. I am not talking about whether threesomes, foursomes, fivesomes, you get the idea are morally wrong by God’s standards but rather “can’t believe someone even asked this question.”

      Perhaps less judgementalism and more love/forgiveness would help people love the Jesus we love.

      1. Jay Dee says:

        This presumes that judgement and love/forgiveness are mutually exclusive.

      2. Chris Tian says:

        I don’t think JG’s point was judgemental at all, I think the point is he/she can’t believe the question was asked because even the unsaved regard that kind of thing as wrong or at the very least kinky or unusual. Even in our society we only advocate one to one relationships so the disbelief probably stems from wondering why someone would think that Christians would be okay with something when the unsaved are not when generally people understand that Christians are a bit more “straight-laced” than non-Christians. If anything it’s judgemental to say his/her comment was judgemental. #SplintPlank

      3. JG says:

        If this were an unbeliever who asked this question, I would not respond the way I did. I expect an unbeliever not to have the same understanding or boundaries that we have. However, I do not expect people who profess to be believers to have these questions. You don’t even have to be a Christian to know that a marital relationship is meant to be shared between those two spouses alone. So, I am astounded that Christians desire to have a third party in their marriage and think it might be okay. We are called to be light to the world, not to be LIKE the world. We are called to be different and I expect believers who profess Christ to know that. We live in a society that is preoccupied with ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’. But Jesus had no qualms with calling a sin a sin – He repeatedly called people to repentance, which is to change, and to separate from sin. And He wasn’t afraid that people wouldn’t love Him if He told the truth. Paul the Apostle admonished people not to be conformed to this world but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds. And when writing to the New Testament Church, Paul said firmly that certain ungodly behaviours should not even be named amongst the church. Am I judgemental for expecting the same standards that Jesus and Paul expected? I don’t think so. We get so caught up in this gospel of ‘mercy’ . But we forget that the Bible clearly states that God is also a God of judgement who COMMANDS us to be holy.

        1. R Sherrin Peterson says:

          Paul… I love our Lord. BUT, he has made it so hard for me to feel valued because he has put men above women. I spent many years away from our Lord because of Paul. I hate being a women. Paul cemented my feelings as a 2nd class citizen.

          1. Jay Dee says:

            I’m curious – how did he do that?

    3. HopefullyHelpful says:

      If they’re not in a sanctioned polygynist marriage. . .(look at a couple of posts back), maybe, but perhaps they’re:

      So desperate that they want to be in one. . .

      Or just starting with their studies and don’t really know much yet.

      Or are being thrown into a loop by Ecc 4:11-12.

      We don’t know the context of that brief, short blurb. So I would just mention about passages that prove the point and try to leave out judging motives.

      1. Jermel Edwards says:

        Reading anything out of context will confuse any one, amd you will be able to turn it into what ever you want. Good or bad.

    4. G.A says:

      To JG I do not feel that it is wrong to ask any question when the bible is involved. The fact that they asked the question shows that they are seeking advice. This forum may have helped someone or a couple from making a mistake.

  6. marriedheat says:

    I’m always amazed at what people justify as good and righteous. At the same time, it’s good people ask these questions and have intelligent people to respond. It’s better than to wonder or get “worldly” advice.

  7. LatterDay Marriage says:

    Sex is supposed to be a physical, emotional and spiritual bonding experience. I don’t see how that can happen between 3 people at the same time. At best it could be physical only.

    There will always be those who seek to justify their favorite sins and wolves in sheep’s clothing seeking to lead others astray. I shake my head in disbelieve over anybody who actually thinks a threesome is OK with God.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Yet I barely find a Christian site saying it’s wrong, and many saying it’s right. I think sometimes we think things are too obvious and so leave our community open to bad teaching.

      1. FarAboveRubies says:

        Perhaps the true issue is…everybody jumping on the “Christian” bandwagon regardless of their relationship with God. I tend to not even use the word “Christian” to describe myself anymore. It’s sad but true. The word “Christian” is used so loosely that it waters down the true meaning of the word. I say I am someone who sees the bible as historical facts inspired by God. I also add that I am a follower of Jesus and have the Holy Spirit dwell within me.

        Not all “Christian” sites are followers of Jesus. You will know them by their fruits.

        1. Jay Dee says:

          I think C.S. Lewis predicted that the word ‘Christian’ would be watered down in such a way. I fear it will get worse.

  8. J. Parker says:

    I was glad to see how to-the-point you were in this post. There really needn’t be a long exegesis of various scriptures, because it’s a pretty straightforward deal: no adultery. So thanks for that!

    And yeah, I think some people would be surprised what I’ve heard a few advocate in the sexual arena while still pronouncing themselves solid Christians. It can boggle the mind…

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Some topics require a bit more, but yeah, this seemed pretty black and white to me. And I agree, I’ve seen a lot of ‘Christian’ sites with some pretty strange sexual advice. Some of them are almost laughable…until you realize how many people they’ve potentially led astray…

  9. Alex says:

    Absolutely not–no threesomes in a healthy, Christian marriage. I had a threesome with a girl I dated in college (the other girl was a friend of hers) and it ruined our relationship. We broke up within a few weeks. It was devastating to what we had, how ever “hot” it may have seemed at the time. No threesomes in a healthy marriage–hell no.

    1. David Justin Bibby says:

      One of my friends tried this, (a suggestion from his wife).. Their marriage was already rocky from the start and their experiment put the final nail in the coffin. It’s a total mess right now. He’s living with the “other girl” now and his wife moved out of state. Is he happy? Not at all! The “other girl” is basically a platonic roommate with her own boyfriend now… while he pines and wonders why nobody wants to be with him. He’s depressed beyond measure, but refuses to allow God into his heart. All I can do now is pray for him.

    2. b says:

      In that regard, you were already fornicating. Are you sure that living a life of fornication is not what ruined your relationship. Perhaps the threesome was just icing on the cake.

  10. Annonymous says:

    In the past six months my husband has mentioned several times that he wants to watch me have sex with another guy. He also often teases me that I masturbte during the day thinking about another mans penis in me. This turns him on even though I tell I’m I don’t so either of those.
    Does this mean he fantasizes about other woman while we have sex? What makes him want me to have sex with someone else? I’m so hurt by this and having a really hard time wanting to have sex with my husband now. I usually have sex for his sake, and when I enjoy it too I cry myself to sleep after feeling like I was used. It makes me feel like he does not love me and he only wants me for sex and I alone am not even enough.

    1. HopefullyHelpful says:

      Have you asked him what gets him so excited about seeing some other man’s privates in you? Is he perhaps into the Japanese “assembly line” porn? And what if you preferred the other man to your husband?

      Unfortunately, what you described is not as uncommon as you might think. For both sexes. But it is abusive of him and you should confront him to stop and get in touch with your pastor or elders. This is not really healthy mentally nor spiritually.

  11. Anonymous says:

    I have a question I’m hoping men can help me with. My husband recently admitted he’s used porn our whole marriage(14 years). He’s started rethinking everything he was taught about God. Lately he’s brought up a lot of new stuff sexually. He thinks it’d be great to have group sex, to watch porn together, to watch me have sex with another man, to go to sexy massage parlor and watch each other get a going over by someone else, he wants to go skinny dipping as a group with others. He’s brought up each thing at least twice in the last few weeks. He cannot understand at all why this hurts me. I’ve cried myself to sleep so much and sometimes go sleep in another room. Of course he’s sorry later and after a few days I’m starting to believe him and we have sex. Now when I get hurt again, he’ll say things like “well you didn’t seem to hurt last night when we had sex”. He tells me he loves me and is not just using me as a sexual outlet. He often talks about regretting being brought up in the church and wished he’d had wilder teen years but he was to scared of going to hell if he did. Why does he bring up this stuff? It makes me feel so used, like I am not good enough for him, that he want to see more women and wants to share me. It really hurts.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Unfortunately sin that is left undealt with in our life often leads to more and “greater” sins (sins that have a deeper impact, not that they are more, or less, sinful). His porn use is leading to this. It is slowly rewiring his brain and causing him to drift further from God.

      What can you do? Pray for him, with him if possible. Talk to your pastor, or a trusted elder. And stand your ground on the moral issues.

      Check out 1 Peter 3. I think you’ll find some biblical advice there for your situation.

    2. HopefullyHelpful says:

      Whatever you do, do not lose hope yourself nor let your faith be diminished. As Jay Dee, do not isolate yourself. Soon as you can, bring this up with your pastor or elders, if only for your own good and spiritual reinforcement.

      Was there a sudden turning point in your marriage? New Job? New friends? That sort of things?

      A long-term porn problem can easily dominate someone, but I’d be more concerned about his recent spiritual crisis. Find the trigger or you won’t find the problem. Pray for insight and wisdom and strength. You are going to need all of them. If he does not want to meet with congregation members, you may have to address his spiritual issues yourself. And as Jay Dee also mentioned, firmly stand your moral ground. Be the anchor.
      Prayers go with you.

  12. Annoymous says:

    What does a wife do if her husband wants to get a dildo so that it can be used during sex along with dirty talk in a way to simulate a threesome. He expressed interest in threesomes and watching me with another man, but I won’t do it.
    I feel really hurt, I feel that I am not good enough. The anxiety is so great that I’m not sure I can stay married. I feel like I can’t trust him now. Most of which stems from the feeling of betrayal that he wanted to share me sexually, but simulating it in bed causes the same feelings in me, that sex isn’t about us anymore, but about how turned on he gets when fantasizing me with other men. I do not want to play along with that type of role play.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      So don’t. Set a boundary, and if he brings in other people (physically or just in role-play or fantasy), then stop, tell him you said you would not participate in it, and then leave the bedroom.

  13. IamKing says:

    I disagree,if a married couple are open to experience their sexual fantasies together,why will it be a sin?God gives us all free will and the desires of our hearts.He only reads the heart.Therefore, if a mans’ wife crave another woman to join them occasionally, or even then woman sole purpose is to satisfy them,and she’s single,why would it be a sin within the present of his wife and she partaking?

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Just because they think it’s okay, doesn’t mean it isn’t adultery.

      Sin is categorized as anything not in-line with God’s will, and the Bible is very clear that sex is between a husband and wife alone. Therefore, anything outside of that is sin, and since God only wants the best for us, anything that is sin will harm us, and our relationship with God. In this case, I’d also say it will harm your relationship with your spouse as well.

      We don’t get to choose what’s a sin and what isn’t by how we feel. Our feelings are not the standard (thank God).

      1. IamKing says:

        Have you meet anyone that has died and went to heaven, returned,and said threesomes in a marriage is a sin?We all relie on our Faith,and speaking from my 40+ years as a man of God,as Christ my Lord and Savior, everyone has they personal relationship with God individually.I love my wife,and I know she loves me,and if she wants to open that door, I’m going to be right there to support her.We are one,and if there’s a punishment from my God for participating with my wife in filling her all wants,that will be something I’ll have to be revealed from above,no man on this earth can persuade me to believe otherwise. People today read,research, and seek resources, me,I live my life,and allow God to guide me.The best wisdom is learned by experience. Not resources.

        1. Jay Dee says:

          No, that would be impossible. You don’t get to heaven until the resurrection, and that doesn’t happen until Jesus returns. Another one of those things in the resource I call the Bible. I’ll take that resource over experience any day.

          As for deciding to follow your wife instead of God…well, there’s a long line of people who made the same mistake: Adam, Abraham, Solomon, Samson (not married, but you get the point). Be careful with what your primary relationship is.

          Here’s hoping your wife is wiser and doesn’t lead you to sin.

          1. IamKing says:

            Everyone will be held accountable for their own actions,and just as the movie we watched yesterday called “St.Vincent”. There are individuals amongst us live a normal comfortable full life on earth….,not fellowshipping with many other Christians because we seek God selfishly,our lifestyle is consider Consecrated.The Law is written on our hearts, and we know what’s right and what’s not. Since my marriage, (3yrs),and prior,I’ve experience what St.Paul calls ” ineffable things”
            I understand your views my brother.

        2. Jermel Edwards says:

          You sound like a person speaking from the flesh and not the spirit…have you read any thing in the Bible that says and HE SLEPT WITH BOTH WIVES AT ONE, or anything close to it…you remind me of Adam. Doing whatever to please his wife instead of God. If you was a true follower of Christ then you would rebuke your wife for doing such a thing

        3. Krista says:

          Romans 1:27,’ In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.’

          As a Christian who did this (threesome), the damage it does – maybe not the first time (for me it was the first time the damage is irrevocable.
          ‘Whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven’ and you are are consenting to your spouse being with another woman sexually whether they have intercourse or not and in your presence. Unfortunately in my case, he left for the other female having had an affair with her on the side after the threesome. Just heartbreaking.
          Or you might get a female who is really attracted to your husband and is not there for the threesome at all, too many variables and none of them end well.
          Proverbs:
          ‘Can a man scoop fire into his lap
          without his clothes being burned?
          28 Can a man walk on hot coals
          without his feet being scorched?
          29 So is he who sleeps with another man’s wife;
          no one who touches her will go unpunished.’

          Even if he/she is unmarried she belongs to her future husband.

  14. bill says:

    Years ago there were those that believed we were not supposed to have ‘HOT’ sex, but rather boring sex where both members were almost fully clothed. In fact at one time recreational sex between a husband and a wife was considered adultery because it was not for the purpose of procreation. I am not saying a threesome is right or that it is wrong. I am simply stating the fact that beliefs have obviously changed over the years and yet they were all supposedly inspired by Gods word. You say there should be no adultery period to which I agree. But I wonder what the word adultery truly means. I have heard it defined as the breaking of the marriage covenant and that if both members are willing and consent then the covenant is not broken. Yet your interpretation is any sort of sex outside of wedlock even if the couples both consent. It is confusing and frustrating so I look for answers and get met with the same judgmental attitude as I experienced all my young life in the church…at least from some of those commenting. Perhaps we lived the lifestyle for years and like it yet now we are told we can’t do it anymore and do not understand why. So we research and reach out for answers and are met with judgment from those who do not have the right to judge me. This is not the case, but what if it were? Did your attitude cause a brother or sister to stumble because you treated them like they were stupid? Or because you treated them with disgust and disdain? Your view of disgust is, I dare say, a selfish view and not holy anger. YOU view it as disgusting and it shows through your post resulting in a downgrading of anyone asking a real question. This is not God speaking through you, it is a revelation of how YOU feel toward the person asking such a disgusting question…and it shows. Check your own soul before you judge others.
    I am thankful to those on here who are not like this and take this question very seriously and treat it with respect. While I did not find anything I had not already read elsewhere, I thank you for addressing the issue

    1. Jay Dee says:

      It is sad that those beliefs existed, when Song of Solomon clearly showed otherwise. However, there are no verses in the bible saying that having threesomes are okay.
      But, we do have verses that say sex should be between 2 people: two shall become one (Genesis 2:24, 1 Corinthians 6:16, Mark 10:8). Not three shall become one.

      As for a definition, I think Duet 22:22 spells it out fairly simply: “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.”

      So, that rules out threesomes fairly easily.

      As for not having the right to judge you, assuming you are a Christian, then I am in fact called to judge you when I see sin in your life. All Christians are: “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”” – 1 Corinthians 5:12-13

      Or “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” – John 7:24

      Or “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.” – 1 John 4:1

      Or “Preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.” – 2 Timothy 4:2

      I could go on, but I think that’s enough.

    2. Will says:

      You want to sin against God. You want someone to tell you that adultery and fornication are just fine. Nope. Wrong. Sin is sin.

  15. DiddyO says:

    Not only are you cherry picking definitions from the scriptures but you seem to be misapplying them as well. For example, fornication is used quite differently in the OT than in the NT, and then again differently in Revelations. What we understand most from a comprehensive view of this topic is that betrayal and deception are what is abhorrent to the Lord. It is not any action but rather the heart that sins. Your narrow view here is tantamount to the ancient idea of a rape victim being guilty….soiled as it were. Perhaps references to specific scriptures and noyes towards the character of God would bolster your argument, but those are all but absent here…perhaps to make room for your adverts which serve to peddle your wares.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      I disagree, I think the Bible is consistent on the topic of married sexuality, and I think my views are representative of that. Yeah, it might be a narrow view, but, again, the Bible speaks of “narrow paths” being God’s views. Wide roads are generally not seen as kindly.

      And I disagree that this is akin to a rape victim being guilty (which I don’t agree with either).

      The reason I didn’t reference specific scriptures here is because I did in several posts I linked to. Oh…and it’s blog…there’s isn’t a limit on vertical space that I need to make room for links to things. You don’t have to read them, I won’t be offended.

    2. R Sherrin Peterson says:

      I totally agree. Wasn’t it Jesus that told us to be weary of men that fabricated the truth during the final days? I want to see NT scripture that specifically says that something is a sin. I don’t want to see YOUR nterpretation of scripture. The Word, Relationship and life should be between you and God. God was very jealous. I don’t see Him advocating more then 1 sexual partner but according to most pastors I won’t continue to enjoy sex with my husband in heaven any way.

      1. Jay Dee says:

        I’m curious – why NT scripture? Do you not believe the OT is the Word of God?

        If you don’t want to see my interpretation of scripture – you should probably stop reading an opinion blog 🙂

  16. EmoWolf says:

    I see what your talking about but you have to realize, the bible was made by a human man. Not God himself.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Well, if you believe that, then you aren’t a Christian, and you have no requirement to follow God’s moral standards. However, I believe He set these standards for our protection, so while you may not have a religious reason to follow them, there is still yet a practical one, and if you don’t, you will learn why threesomes are a bad idea … even if you don’t credit God for warning us against them.

      1. Reneweddaily says:

        I agree that the scripture is clear on marriage (though there are instances in the Old Testament like King David, that can be confusing for a NEW Christian). The only requirement for salvation is John 3:16. I say this with love – you do not know this person, you do not know how long they may have been in the faith. We are on our own journey with God and only He knows our hearts. I’m not saying we can’t be stern but it should always be done with love

        The original question that was asked was most likely from a new Christian or from someone that is searching for God. At least they were looking for answers instead of just doing what they wanted. Sometimes we just need someone to help guide us that’s why we need to come together discuss our issues and pray with and for each other.

        A blog like this is good, so keep up the good work. May God bless you

        1. Jay Dee says:

          Hi there,

          Thanks for the kind words 🙂

          I would love to believe it’s only new Christians who think like this, however I know a man who sent to seminary and is now divorced because he insisted on having an open marriage, and when his wife refused to do so, he had an affair.

          This was not a new Christian, this was a man who at one point thought he was going to be a pastor, and is still a professing Christian, born and raised in the church.

  17. David says:

    Growing up i was raise as a Baptist and for different reasons i left the church as a teenager. One thing i was taught was that God original intented for there to be one man and one woman in marriage. The past year i had met a woman who had guided me back to God and made me a believer again with her herself recently becoming a believer. Well here is where it became confusing to me since the woman’s sister-in-law who herself is a “Christian”. The sister jn law at the time was part of a polygamy type “marriage” where it was her and other woman and a man. Far as i know there isn’t a legal marriage contract between any of them. But as far as they are concern they view themselves as married. They bonded through God as they phrase it. For reasons i won’t go into. The female friend who guilded me back to God had moved in with her sister-in-law cause her husband was a abuser. Her sister and her marriage group brought my friend back to Christ. In time the friend decided she wanted to be part of the marriage group where it now became one man and three women. Instead of each “wife” having their own bedroom and the “husband” is assign certain nights with esch one as usually done in some polygamous marriages.. They all share one bed. All 3 women involve are bisexual not only they consider themselves married to the man but the 3 women consider to be married to each other as well. As the sister-in-law told me once.. Yeah they have a “unusual” relationship. Since they bonded through God and not through man in a form of a marriage license. They see nothing wrong with what they are doing including engaging in group sex. My friend end up being very upset with me cause i didn’t approve of their living arrangements. Which end up leaving me confuse wondering if God approve of what they are doing even through my friend and her group put God and Jesus above them and everything they do.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Just because you invoke God’s name, doesn’t mean that you are following His will. The Bible is quite clear about one woman and one man, about sex being only “valid” as monogamous, and not a group activity. Just because they like it, doesn’t mean it’s okay.

  18. Petra Spahr says:

    Just like He made the other creatures, God did not make us humans sexually monogamous. The marriage vow is to love and support one another, and my husband and I have done so. We have, however, other relationships, me more so than my husband. It works this way because as a woman I have the capacity to fully satisfy more than one man and have always allowed my husband to take me whenever he wants.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Well, then God made a horrible mistake by telling us to be monogamous….

      No, I think this is a rationalization so that you can avoid the guilt of having multiple adulterous relationships.

    2. Will says:

      People do many things because they feel right. From shoplifting, to cruelty to animals to sleeping with multiple people. All are sins. Trust the Bible, not your “feelings.”

  19. Vincent says:

    I would automatically assume that threesomes are bad, wrong, totally against anything God would ever want in a marriage etc. But I do think it’s wrong to think this is a ludicrous question. This is certainly not cut and dry. As most people have already acknowledged God did sanction marriage to multiple wives in the past. You can argue the ins and outs of that but the fact remains – if God never changes then he obviously does not think it disgusting for one man to sleep with multiple women in a married relationship. Therefore, logically having sex with multiple women in the same week if married to them would not seem to have been an abomination to God in the past. It doesn’t seem too much of a step then that sleeping with them at the same time would be a huge leap. These are just facts – you can’t use the bible to back up arguments if you are then going to ignore the other inconvenient examples in the bible that seem wrong. I often think about things like this in the bible and wonder why no one talks about it. There are things in the bible that I don’t understand. For example, I would consider anyone who took a baby lamb and killed it as a sacrifice to be extremely cruel. I’m not saying God is. I’m saying I just don’t get it. Also asking someone to kill their son. I don’t get that either. I know people can explain why it happened etc but if you heard about it in another religion – would you not think it odd? I just think Christians like to think of God in their terms and according to what they think and sometimes ignore the inconvenient stuff like cutting off of hands etc – that’s in the bible too. I saw a video of it being done in Saudi Arabia and it was barbaric.. I don’t understand why God allowed that to go in the bible. That brings me to another point. Since the books of the bible were chosen by religious clerics with some discarded and some left in – isn’t it hard to say that it is a divine book when it’s a collection of books selected by mere mortals? We know what happens when mankind gets involved with divine matters. The people that selected the books might have been the same type that condoned the crusades etc which surely were barbaric acts committed in the name of God. I think the threesome question was a valid one – because it’s about time people answered the difficult questions according to the bible and not according to how they have been conditioned to think. According to the bible it seems God would not find someone sleeping with multiple women a completely disgusting thing. Am I wrong?

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Hi Vincent,

      Yeah, I think you have some things sort of mixed up here. Firstly, the books of the Bible were just chosen arbitrarily by “some clerics”. They were filtered for consistency, and as a result many books were found not to be inspired, as they did not have a consistent message of salvation. The Bible today is not a man-made book. It’s too perfect to be one. There are no logical inconsistencies in it (though sometimes we have trouble seeing the underlying construct). So, while they may appear to have been selected by “mere mortals”, I sincerely believe God’s hand was in it. Otherwise, there’s no way a collection of books from dozens of authors could manage to be so consistent spanning thousands of years of teachings.

      Secondly, I don’t believe God ever condoned multiple wives. See this post for my thoughts on that.

  20. Vincent says:

    Someone above mentioned this verse too; ‘“If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.”

    That being said – again – at some point it was biblical to murder 2 people if they were caught committing adultery. That seems clear. So should we view people who commit honour killings these days as doing something that God would be horrified at? You could argue that it’s no longer biblical but you can’t argue that God has never condoned it.. I’m saying these things to ask people’s opinions – not to stir up trouble by the way..

    1. Jay Dee says:

      No, you can’t argue that it’s no longer biblical. It’s in the bible, so it’s biblical. However, you can argue that it’s not longer applicable.

      Israel was a unique situation: a nation, a family and a religion. We have no structures like that left in the world. Likewise the world was a very different place. Yearly wars, atrocious temple practices, very little morality. God was protecting His people in that sort of context. In our culture today it’s hard, if not impossible, for us to appropriately judge what it would have been like in that era, living in those circumstances.

  21. Wonder Worrying Warrior says:

    I read the commentary and I really felt that it answered a question for me that I already knew the answer to. I am saved, but my wife isn’t. Granted my walk isn’t the most perfect, there are some things (that seem obvious) in regards to what you should and should not do when it comes to a Christian marriage (a threesome being one of them). When I was running around, unsaved, I participated in this behavior. It is not something I desire in my marriage. I have had marriage end due to adultery (on the wife’s part) and when I remarried, I thought (based off of discussions with my new wife) that these types of thinking and such are not to be a part of our marriage. Regardless of that, she hasn’t fully suppressed those urges. Granted she said that she will “be okay if I don’t want to” but the fact she “wants to” is hard for me to grasp. In an argument recently she stated that the sex in our marriage was BORING (despite my ability to pleasure her) and when I asked her “what would make sex not boring” this subject resurfaced. I heard many of you question how could someone be so “idiotic” to think that something so seemingly obvious exist in a Christian marriage. I truly feel that I am prime example that it is. It shouldn’t be a matter of whether I want to please my wife, but whether am I not pleasing God because I chose to indulge, or will I not please God because I chose not to make my wife happy. Many scripture speak of men being subject to their wives and don’t provoke them, wives be subject to their husbands, and for husbands to love the wife as much as God loved the church, but now am I in danger of losing the love from my wife because I knowingly choose to not please her in this way? Should I love her less because she thinks this way and I don’t? I was truly angry, then I had to ask myself, “if she doesn’t honor the sanctity of marriage (she is willing to let me sleep with another woman) then why should I? Could it be one of these things where she learns the hard way that it isn’t all our fantasies that need fulfilling? I know many of you will question my Christianity, just as much as someone may have questioned yours, but remember not a one of us is righteous. We are all trying to get there. I am trying not to lose my wife if God indeed tended for her to be with me (God’s will). If this is HIS will (as I have had a very sexually infused past), does it mean that it is okay to travel down this road? I have told her that an action of this magnitude could “open Pandora’s Box;” return me back to a life of sin that will easily ruin the home life I have grown to love these short 3 years.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. – Matthew 10:35-36

      Ultimately, the question is: Who will you follow? God or your wife.
      The Bible has many stories of what happens when you choose your spouse over God. Adam & Eve, Abram and Sarah, Samson and Delilah (I know, not married, but still).

      If you choose your wife, then yes, it’s likely you will draw further from God and you may both be lost. But, if you choose God over your wife, yes, you might lose your wife. But, you might show her how convicted you are and that might convict her. The Bible says unbelieving spouses are sanctified by their believing spouse. In other words, your righteous living can inspire them to change. But, that’s contingent on you going through the process of sanctification as well. If you abandon God and put your wife in His place, then you seem to know: it will ruin not only your marriage but also damage your relationship with God.

  22. Heartbroken in New Marriage says:

    Wow I am so glad I found this site. My husband keeps bringing up having a threesome. I made the mistake of doing it once before in a previous relationship. It changed the relationship dynamic forever. All I want is our marriage to be a commitment emotionally and physically between me and him. My husband says because he has never had a threesome and I have I should not be upset because he will never care about another girl how he cares about me. I’m devastated. I pray everyday that God will help him understand why he should not fulfill his fantasy. Our sex life can easily be good or I can be in tears feeling totally worthless. I have tried to learn how to do everything he likes and I feel like he is just wanting to engage in his pleasures and forget about our marriage and especially my feelings. I no longer feel loved or wanted in the same way by the man who I am still so in love with and completely committed to. He says I am making a big deal. I just can’t believe he would want to actually fulfill sleeping with another woman in a degrading animalistic way where me and the other woman are nothing but his pleasure harem. I have tried to talk to him about this however he hears what he wants to hear and makes me feel incredibly guilty. I know 100% on my part I have been completely faithful to him in the way that God intended, I pray everyday for help. I love him I’m so scared I’m going to be pressured into doing the threesome it will ruin our marriage the worst part I really don’t feel like he even cares.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      That’s a difficult circumstance to be in. I’m sorry that you’d still dealing with the fallout from past indiscretions.
      Your husband knows that you had a threesome in the past, have you also shared that it ruined the relationship?

      I’m hoping that past experience will keep you strong. Knowing that if you follow through, it will likely destroy your marriage as well.
      In the end, though, it’s really deciding who you will follow: your husband and God. If you cave to your husband’s desires in this, you will be violating God’s counsel for us, and I’m afraid you’ll likely deal with the natural consequences of that sin. That’s what He’s trying to protect us from, as you’ve found out in your own life.

      Your husband cannot force you to go against God’s will, however uncomfortable he makes it. But, if he continues to push you towards it, I highly suggest bringing in a third party. Someone who can act as a rational outside opinion who can speak to your husband and offer biblical counsel. Pastor, elder, friend, whatever. There must be someone in your life you trust that is worth the discomfort of bridging the topic in order to hopefully save your marriage if it comes to that.

      Don’t be pressured into it. Find help before that point. Please.

    2. Don says:

      So you were willing to have group sex before your husband, but now refuse the same with him. Do you not love him as much as your prior partner? I could see that this would make your husband feel like much kess of a man.

      1. Jay Dee says:

        I think you missed the point… She loves him more, that’s why she doesn’t want to. She’s seen what it can do to a relationship and doesn’t want to inflict that on her marriage. If anything, her husband should feel like more of a man because she wants to keep him to herself as well as keep their relationship intact.

  23. Anonymous says:

    It’s not that people are easily convinced of these unfeasible things, but rather they are just wallowing in sin, lust, and desire, and thereby rationalize their way into something like this.

  24. JoMama says:

    Nasty!

  25. Anonymous says:

    Ah, but if you’re NOT married… I think its ok for a man to have two or more female lovers simultaneously. I think as far as being single and dating someone goes. The bible says that its good to behave as if your married, but you really don’t HAVE to.. Correct me if I’m wrong.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      I know of no verse that tells single people who are dating to act like they’re married.
      Quite the opposite in fact. 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 says that if you are single and have sexual desire, your only recourse is to get married. Anything else is sin.

  26. Raphael Tisserand says:

    “An adulterer was a man who had illicit intercourse with a married or a betrothed woman, and such a woman was an adulteress. Intercourse between a married man and an unmarried woman was fornication” – adultery as defined in Easton’s Bible Dictionary

    The biblical definition of adultery is different from a modern dictionary definition. You’ll either have to continue using that biblical definition of what constitutes adultery or you’ll have to accept that cultural definitions of adultery can change.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      “Adultery is the act of unfaithfulness in marriage that occurs when one of the marriage partners voluntarily engages in sexual intercourse with a person of the opposite sex other than the marriage partner.” – Holman Bible Dictionary

      There doesn’t seem to be consensus.

      Irregardless, it’s still sexual immorality and a sin. It doesn’t change anything substantive. You’re arguing nomenclature.

      1. Raphael Tisserand says:

        The definition in Holman’s Bible Dictionary is inaccurate. It isn’t based on the Bible or on historical sources. Do you accept that the definition I supplied above is still valid for modern day morality (with all it would imply) or do you accept that the practical definitions of things like adultery can change?
        Define “sexual immorality”. Because if you can’t then you’re the one caught up on nomenclature.

        1. Jay Dee says:

          I don’t have the credentials nor the depth of knowledge of Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic to argue between Holman and Easton. All I’m saying is that there doesn’t seem to be a consensus.

          I think Baker’s Evangelical Dictionary seems to sum it up well:

          Sexual activity is to be confined to the marriage relationship, and if a married man or woman has sexual intercourse with someone other than the spouse, that person has committed adultery.

          Note, he seems to agree with Holman.

          The Nave Topical Bible states for fornication, which I’d say sexual immorality includes:

          It regards as immoral any sexual relations outside marriage or with any person other than one’s marriage partner

          Note, he also seems to agree with Holman.

          Charles Buck Theological Dictionary states:

          Whoredom, or the act of incontinency between single persons; for if either of the parties be married, it is adultery.

          Again, agreeing with Holman. Also – Watson’s Biblical & Theological Dictionary takes this definition verbatim.

          The King James Dictionary states:

          The incontinence or lewdness of unmarried persons, male or female also, the criminal conversation of a married man with an unmarried woman.

          I think it’s safe to extrapolate and say sex between a married woman and unmarried man would also be included.

          It seems to be the general consensus is that sex between people who are not married is wrong. So, that leaves threesomes outside the bounds of what is right, good, moral, lawful, etc..

          1. Raphael Tisserand says:

            Leviticus 20:10 makes no mention of the marital status of the man involved, only the woman. The crime was sexual intercourse with another man’s wife, a property crime against the woman’s husband. There is no mention of sexual intercourse between a married man and an unmarried female being considered adultery.

            Leviticus 18:18 is possibly referring to a threesome type situation. Don’t marry two sisters lest you take them to bed at the same time. I’ll accept that it could be referring to the possibility of Rachel and Leah style jealousy but it seems awfully specific. Why mention only sisters and not any other kind of jealousy that can come up between rival wives?

            Exodus 22:16 likewise doesn’t mention the marital status of the man involved, nor does it mention whether or not the man was a virgin or what is to be done if a man has sexual intercourse with a woman who isn’t a virgin. Biblically there is no expectation that males have to be virgins before marriage. Nowhere is male virginity even mentioned in the Bible except for one place in Revelation that cannot be taken as prescriptive.

            Are you going to accept that sexual practices can change with culture or are you going hold with a strict biblical view of the matter (and all that it implies). A strict Ancient Near East view of sex is, needless to say, very different than one most Christians of today hold to.

            1. Jay Dee says:

              The entirely of the Bible I think makes it very clear – sex is intended to be within marriage and marriage is intended between a husband and wife.

              That is the view I hold to because I believe it is immutable. Whatever culture does is besides the point.

              1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                You didn’t answer my points about the verses I quoted and how they don’t mention male virginity or men’s marital status.

                Do you accept the Bible’s strict definition of fornication and adultery or do you admit that cultural practices can change? Because your view is different from the Bible’s definitions.

                1. Jay Dee says:

                  I do not believe the Bible is a technical legal document. You’re looking for loopholes and technicalities, and I don’t believe that’s how God operates. I think the message of the Bible is clear, as I stated.

                  What are you trying to justify here? Are you looking to engage in a threesome and be able to stand before Him and say “well, you didn’t expressed forbid it!”? I don’t think it’s going to work that way.

                  I sincerely believe that God doesn’t want people to engage in threesomes, not for some cultural or arbitrary reason, but simply because it will harm us.

                  So, no, I’m going to argue individual verses, because I think the entire message of the Bible is very clear, and I think there’s no point. The biblical scholars have already done so with far more training and understanding of context than I have, and you rejected them out of hand simply because you don’t like the answer.

                  1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                    The Law Of Moses, of which Leviticus is a part, is a technical legal document.

                    How do you explain why the Bible never mentions male virginity outside a brief mention in Revalation nor requires that that males remain virgins before marriage?

                    Sorry, but your view of sex is the one that needs go be justified here. And I don’t think you’re done a very good job of it.

                    1. Jay Dee says:

                      That’s only one book. Deuteronomy would be the second of course. The rest of the Bible isn’t. If you limit yourself to Leviticus and Deuteronomy, you’re missing the point of the Bible. I’m not sure why I need to explain why the Bible never mentions male virginity specifically. Paul is clear – if you want sex, get married. I think that sums it up nicely.

                  2. Raphael Tisserand says:

                    I didn’t reject the books that you quoted because I didn’t like the answer. I rejected them because they are incorrect. They don’t take Jewish and Roman law on adultery into account. They are using a more recent concept of adultery that the original audience wouldn’t have recognized.

            2. Raphael Tisserand says:

              “An intercourse between a married man and an unmarried woman was simply fornication…This Oriental limitation of adultery is intimately connected with the existence of polygamy. If a Jew associated with a woman who was not his wife, his concubine, or his slave, he was guilty of unchastity, but committed no offense which gave a wife reason to complain that her legal rights had been infringed. If, however, the woman with whom he associated was the wife of another, he was guilty of adultery — not by infringing his own marriage covenant, but by causing a breach of that which existed between this woman and her husband”- McClintock And Strong’s Bible Encyclopedia

              Roman law also held to this view of adultery whereby intercourse between a married man and unmarried woman was not considered adultery, despite not allowing for polygamy at all.

              The problem with all of the books you quoted is that they don’t take historical sources into account on this matter. Instead they take a modern definition of adultery and read it back into the text.

              1. Jay Dee says:

                I’m really not sure what you’re arguing for here. Fornication is still sexual immorality. It still doesn’t make it right.

                1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                  What I’ve demonstrated here is that a biblical definition of adultery is different from a modern one. It’s a demonstration that almost all modern Christians have adapted to cultural views on sex. And, as I demonstrated elsewhere, fornication doesn’t apply to males unless they deflower a virgin (at least according to the Bible).

                  1. Jay Dee says:

                    What are you looking for here? What’s your end goal? I’m still not sure. Would you like me to re-write the article to replace “adultery” with “sexual immorality”?

                    1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                      No, I don’t think it would be a sin since fornication doesn’t apply to males and it wouldn’t be adultery. I would however caution anyone engaging in such an action to think very hard and weigh it out before going forward with it.

  27. Raphael Tisserand says:

    The Bible is, among other things, a written body of law. Not just the Law Of Moses, but all of its moral instruction is a form of law.

    No written body of law can possibly address every circumstance.

    The Law of Moses does not require a male to be a virgin at marriage; in the polygamous culture of Israel a man taking a second or third wife would by definition not be a virgin. Unmarried likewise “sowed their wild” oats before marriage.

    Paul assumes a culture where marriages are arranged or contracted for economic reasons and people married at young ages.

    Dating and marriage for love is a recent human invention. Was your marriage arranged? Did you pay your wife’s father a bride price? Then you didn’t practice biblical marriage. Everyone makes cultural adaptations.

    Following the traditional script of “no sex outside of monogamous heterosexual marriage” will, contrary to Paul’s intent, make it more difficult to get married not easier.

    Following the “traditional script” is maladaptive under current conditions.

    Deus Absconditus hasn’t seen fit to send us any new legal rulings to address this situation.

    Therefore, it is up to the Church to legislate on the matter.

  28. Jay Dee says:

    I think we have a fundamental disagreement about what the nature of God, the Bible and the church is.
    But no, I’m not going to condone destroying the sanctity of marriage because you don’t like the restrictions.

    1. Raphael Tisserand says:

      Sanctity of Marriage, huh? That horse left the barn a long time ago. Pretending it didn’t is pure foolishness. There is nothing left to conserve. Biblical marriage no longer exists in our world.

      Did you get married for economic reasons or was it based on romantic compatibility? Was your marriage arranged? Did you pay your wife’s father a bride price? Do you consider your wife your property?

      Everyone makes concessions to cultural conditions.

      How do you explain the fact that the Bible doesn’t require men to be virgins before marriage?

      1. Jay Dee says:

        Like I said, we have fundamentally different approaches to Christianity. You have a list of rules, checklists and regulations that you’re trying to rationalize around. I’m interested in relationships. A relationship with God, with my wife, kids, friends, etc.. So, yes, I believe I have a biblical marriage. I understand you don’t.

        1. Raphael Tisserand says:

          “Relationships, not rules”.
          What a cliche.
          Funny, it’s usually the person arguing against the traditional script who busts that one out.

          You hold to the traditional script on sex while simultaneously fully accepting dating culture and the modern meaning of marriage. That isn’t tenable. It’s a new patch on old cloth.

          Was your marriage an economic arrangement? Did you date first or was it prearranged with your wife’s parents?

          Why doesn’t the Bible require men to be virgins before marriage?
          In at least one survey, 60% of women said they wouldn’t date a virgin. Pairings between virginal females and sexually experienced males are ubiquitous in romance novels geared to women. The opposite pairing is almost unheard of. Turns out women don’t find male virginity an attractive trait.

          Remaining abstinent under current conditions only ensures you will remain unmarried.

          The traditional script is maladaptive. Biblical marriage is dead and it isn’t coming back in our lifetimes. The best thing to do is play the hand we’re dealt and learn to adapt to the conditions we find ourselves in.

          1. Raphael Tisserand says:

            “In a commune in California, sometime in the 1960s, about forty boys and girls gathered in accord with the principles of the strictest sexual communism: forming an established couple was prohibited, partners were to be rotated, and preference based on aesthetic or cultural criteria was rejected. At the end of a year, some of the members who were obese or ugly found that they were being refused access to other members’ bedrooms and started wandering about on the veranda during the evening, begging for a bed and repeating: who wants me?”- Pascal Bruckner

            That’s the world we find ourselves in. Going to church won’t fix it. There are no individual solutions to systemic problems.

            1. Jay Dee says:

              I don’t think the actions of a bunch of ashiest communist children are proof that God’s laws don’t matter anymore.

              1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                That’s the world you live in today.
                Now who only cares about rules?
                What is the purpose of biblical law?
                What happens when following the law becomes maladaptive?
                Who decides what is to be done when written law can’t address a crisis?
                There are no personal solutions to systemic problems.

                “It is interesting to note that the ‘sexual revolution’ was sometimes portrayed as a communal utopia, whereas in fact it was simply another stage in the historical rise of individualism. As the lovely word ‘household’ suggests, the couple and the family would be the last bastion of primitive communism in liberal society. The sexual revolution was to destroy these intermediary communities, the last to separate the individual from the market. The destruction continues to this day”- Michel Houllebecq

                The Bruckner quote illustrates the same thing. Free love and “communal utopia” gives way almost immediately to ruthless competition. We live in a market society dominated by the social values of the soft-Marxian Left. Sounds like a contradiction, but it isn’t. Not when you study it.

                How are we supposed to live in such a society? Holding to the traditional script will get you nowhere. We aren’t going back to normal. The Bible sets the norm, but we aren’t in normal circumstances. We are in exceptional circumstances.

                1. Jay Dee says:

                  What is the purpose of biblical law?

                  I just preached a half a sermon on that. You can read or listen to it here.

                  So you’re answer to everyone breaking the rules is to do away with the rules? That’s going to cause you a lot of pain.

                  How are we supposed to live in such a society? We aren’t. We are to be the exception. We’re the proof that not follow God’s Truth leads to destruction. And yes, we will be persecuted for it. They will hate us for our devotion to God. They will call us intolerant and legalistic. They will eventually try to legislate us, imprison us and likely hunt us down. We will have to choose between life and God one day. Some already make that choice. Many will give in. Maybe even most. How are you going to make it to a life or death choice when you want to abandon God’s Truth because of sex?

                  1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                    I read that sermon. I disagree on your interpretation of law. If you want to convince me, you’re going to have to accept my view of the purpose of law, for the sake of argument.

                    There’s the “rules” and then there is reality. Following the rules is maladaptive in the face of reality. Forget about following the rules; the game isn’t even being played anymore.

                    Biblical marriage is dead. There is nothing to conserve anymore. How do we live in reality as it exists now?

                    1. Jay Dee says:

                      If you don’t think God is relevant anymore, then I don’t think we have a common worldview to discuss.

                  2. Raphael Tisserand says:

                    The Bible isn’t God. The Bible was written for our benefit, not God’s. No written law can deal with every circumstance.

                    In Shusako Endo’s novel Silence a Portuguese priest is told to trample on a fumie, (an image of Christ) by Japanese authorities who want to stop the spread of Christianity in the country.

                    “The priest raises his foot. In it he feels a dull, heavy pain. This is no mere formality. He will now trample on what he has considered the most beautiful thing in his life, on what he has believed most pure, on what is filled with the ideals and the dreams of man. How his foot aches! And then the Christ in bronze speaks to the priest: ‘Trample! Trample! I more than anyone know of the pain in your foot. It was to be trampled on by men that I was born into this world. It was to share mens’ pain that I carried my cross’. The priest places his foot on the fumie.”

                    1. Jay Dee says:

                      No, the Bible isn’t God, but it is His word. I still believe it is relevant.

          2. Jay Dee says:

            Cliché it may be, but that’s how I see the Bible.

            I don’t know what you mean by “fully accepting dating culture”. We haven’t discussed dating. As for the rest, again, you’re arguing a legalistic approach to the Bible. The questions aren’t valid from my perspective. 60% of women wouldn’t date a virgin? What about women in the church? Why would you date a woman not in the church? Useless stat.

            I have only had sex with my wife. I know many people who have the same experience. Last time I asked, about 1/3 of the men and 1/4 of the women had the same experience. And additional 15-20% said they had only had sex with their now spouse. It may not be the majority, but it certainly doesn’t “ensure you will remain unmarried” by any stretch.

            The traditional script isn’t maladaptive at all. I still believe it’s ideal. I see a lot of the pain that prior partners brings into marriages. My inbox is full of people sharing it. Biblical marriage isn’t dead. The majority might not be following it, and they’re suffering for it, but don’t use that as an excuse to share in their pain.

            Me, I will continue to work to adapt my life around God, not asking God to adapt around me. I’ll teach my children to do the same.

            1. Raphael Tisserand says:

              You probably didn’t have an arranged marriage. You probably got married because you were “in love”.
              Same goes for almost all modern Christians.
              The idea of dating and marrying “for love” is totally foreign to the Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures the Bible was written in. It was hoped that love would eventually develop but wasn’t the reason for marriage. The Roman general Pompey was even privately mocked for being too infatuated with his wife.

              Only in such a culture, where marriage is primarily economic and people married young, does restricting sex to marriage make sense. The Church has by and large accepted the new meaning of marriage but holds on to a view of sex that is only workable under the old meaning.

              As you get older the dating pool shrinks, refusing to engage in sex with a dating partner only further disqualifies you, and in this society the girl at the coffee shop probably isn’t a Christian in any meaningful way.
              Going to church to meet people is just as useless. It’s all on dating apps nowadays. Dating apps, and the dating market in general, favours women and a few successful men. For everyone else it’s a scam.

  29. Raphael Tisserand says:

    All written bodies of law have limits. Whether it’s a constitution written for a political State or the Bible written by prophets and apostles under God’s inspiration. A written body of law can’t think or speak. It can’t clarify or amend its own rulings. It can’t make decisions or react to emerging circumstances. It can’t address anything that the original writers didn’t anticipate or see fit to mention.

    There always has to be someone who decides on how the law is to be applied/interpreted and decides on the course of action during a crisis that the normal laws can’t address.
    God, unfortunately, has not chosen to make Himself available in the midst of the crisis posed by the condition of the sexual marketplace.
    So, it’s up to the Church. It’s up to us.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. – Hebrews 4:12

      I think God’s word is alive and well, and God speaks through it constantly. If you feel He’s unavailable, maybe you should spend more time reading scripture and praying. I’d say he makes Himself very available. Usually reminding me of His law when I least want Him to 🙂

      1. Raphael Tisserand says:

        It’s the most cliché advice of all. Pray and read the Bible. They all say that. Doesn’t work.
        There are no individual solutions to systemic problems.

        Who decides what is to be done in the event of a crisis that Bible can’t address? The traditional script only makes sense in a culture where marriage is economic and people get married at young ages. The Bible sets the norm but we aren’t in normal circumstances. The normal laws on sex are unworkable under current conditions. “There exists no norm that is applicable to chaos. For a legal order to make sense, a normal situation must exist”. We live in no normal situation.

        “I will not punish your daughters when they play the whore, nor your brides when they commit adultery; for the men themselves go aside with prostitutes and sacrifice with cult prostitutes, and a people without understanding shall come to ruin” – Hosea 4:3

        The younger generations are the daughters in this equation. Our parents and grandparents gave us this world and we try our best to live in it. “What can we do other than work, sleep, and do the best we can?”

        I’m clearly not getting through to you here. What can’t you accept? You are worse than most of the other people I’ve discussed this with because you at least grudgingly accept that the sexual market is broken, but God forbid we do anything about it. Ignorance is bliss. You’re better off sticking your head in the sand than to recognize the problem and then do nothing about it.

        1. Jay Dee says:

          What can’t I accept? Oh, that’s simple. Our culture has shown that sexual immorality causes problems. Your solution – double down – have the church okay sexual immorality as well. In short, you’ve taken a “if you can’t beat them, join them” approach. The problem is, the sides are God vs Satan. You’re advocating abandoning God and joining the enemy. I think that’s the core of my problem with your viewpoint.

          Then, to add to it, you’re answer to “God isn’t available” is to again, double down, and reject prayer and scripture reading as advice on how to connect with Him. In short, again, pushing Satan’s agenda.

          I think that’s the biggest problem I see.

          1. Raphael Tisserand says:

            There are no individual solutions to systemic problems. If you disagree, justify your position.
            So what do you suggest we do? Got any ideas? The economic view of marriage is not coming back in our society. Arranged marriages aren’t going to come back into fashion. Almost the whole Church has accepted the modern view of sex and marriage based on romantic love. We aren’t going back to a culture where people marry at 17. The sexual market as we know it will not collapse in our lifetimes. There is no norm that is applicable to chaos. If you disagree with that, then justify your position. Paul and the other biblical authors wrote law applicable to normal circumstances. But we are not in normal circumstances. Biblical marriage no longer exists. Your marriage isn’t even biblical. You accepted the modern view of marriage but still cling to reserving sex for marriage as if it still made sense under the new concept of marriage.

            The Bible assumes a culture where people marry young and marriages are arranged. That does not exist in our culture, so saving sex for marriage is unworkable.

            What is it going to take to convince you?

            Why doesn’t the Bible require men to be virgins before marriage or even mention male virginity? What are the practical implications of this?

            1. Raphael Tisserand says:

              In answer to your accusation that I advocate abandoning God:

              “The priest raises his foot”…

            2. Jay Dee says:

              There are no individual solutions to systemic problems.

              There is no solution to this problem. Stop trying to save the world. It cannot be saved. You cannot fix it. I cannot fix it. Collectively, we cannot fix it. God cannot even fix it. It cannot be fixed. That’s why it will all be destroyed.

              So, then the answer is an individual solution. Individuals can be saved. Will you still be there after it’s destroyed and recreated? That requires a relationship with God, which leads me back to the prayer and scripture reading, and following Him. Ideally also leading others to Him as well.

              What do I suggest we do? The same thing I’ve been saying all along – follow God. Teach others about Him. There will be a small few who listen and believe. The entire point of this blog is to help marriages so that they can go out and do kingdom work and not be fighting a war on two fronts. We will not save this planet or it’s people. We are abandoning it. The only question now is are you coming with, and who are you bringing.

              So, what will it take to convince me that we can fix a planet that God has deemed unfixable? Well, I supposed I’d have to no longer believe the Bible or in God.

              1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                Now who’s a pessimist? If you really don’t think that solutions exist then why are you even running this site?

                How does restricting sex to marriage make sense in a culture where marriages aren’t arranged and people marry later in life? Do you admit it deny that the Bible was written in a culture where marriage had a different purpose and meaning? Would Paul have recognized modern dating culture or would he have been baffled by it?

                Why does the Bible not require male virginity before marriage?

                1. Jay Dee says:

                  I didn’t say no solutions exist. I said no systemic solutions exist. And I also already said that the purpose of my site is to improve marriages so they can go out and do that kingdom work of bringing Christ to others, so they can be saved.

                  1. Raphael Tisserand says:

                    The Bible assumes a society where marriages were based on economics and people married young. You still haven’t adressed that. How does restricting sex to marriage make sense in a culture where people marry for love and marry close to 30 on average? The Church has already adapted to the modern view of marriage. Unless you had an arranged marriage and paid your wife’s father a bride price then so did you. Would Paul or Moses have recognized today’s marriage and dating practices?

                    You also still haven’t addressed why the Bible doesn’t require male virginity before marriage.

                    1. Jay Dee says:

                      I don’t think the Bible assumes any such thing, and if you believe it does, then you have a serious problem. If you believe God did not provide us adequate direction for our present age, then either God is not wise, or He is not all knowing, or He is not all powerful, or He is not loving. In short, He’s not the God of the Bible and the entire thing falls apart.

  30. Raphael Tisserand says:

    Dating culture and the concept of marriage for love are relatively recent phenomena in human history. Marriages in biblical times were either arranged or they were agreed to for economic reasons. Do you accept or deny this? If you deny it then try to explain away the mountains of historical evidence that says otherwise. I see very few Christians advocating for the return of arranged marriages. Even the courtship championed by Evangelical purity culture is only a century or two older than dating. The Church has accepted and adjusted to the new reality of how marriages are formed in our culture. But if you accept that, then it makes no sense to continue believing that sex activity must be restricted to marriage. Would Paul have recognized our culture’s dating practices? Did they have Tinder in the Greco-Roman world?

    No norm is applicable to chaos. No written law can cover every possible contingency. Books can’t make decisions. If there are no systemic solutions and no personal solutions then why continue to follow the traditional script? What concrete benefit comes from it? No, avoiding abstractions like “sin” isn’t a concrete benefit.

    Why doesn’t the Bible require male virginity before marriage?

    1. Jay Dee says:

      This getting repetitive.

      Marriages in biblical times were either arranged or they were agreed to for economic reasons. Do you accept or deny this?

      I deny it. Some were, not all.
      Jacob and Rachel are an example of love at first site. He sees her and wants her. Leah’s is arranged, but that doesn’t detract from the fact Rachel’s wasn’t.
      Boaz and Ruth – Boaz is kind to Ruth – that’s what started their relationship.
      David and Bathsheba – not a great start to the relationship, but it wasn’t arranged nor for economic gain.
      Xerces and Esther – she won a contest, so not arranged. She didn’t choose to enter it, so not for economic gain.
      David and Abagail – interesting story, but again, not arrange nor for economic gain it would seem.

      If there are no systemic solutions and no personal solutions then why continue to follow the traditional script?

      I think there are personal solutions. Never said there weren’t. I think that might be part of the issue here – you’re waiting for someone else to fix the system so you don’t have to work on yourself. You just want the church to hand you a girl to have sex with so you don’t have to actually work to be worthy of a wife.

      Why doesn’t the Bible require male virginity before marriage?

      Already answered this. I think it does. It’s just not explicit. Stop asking just because you don’t like my answer.

      I still think you’re part of the incel movement.

      1. Raphael Tisserand says:

        I don’t think you understand what I mean by economic. I don’t just mean for money. Look at the Greek etymology of the word economic to see what I’m getting at. The establishment of a household, the production of progeny, etc.

        Jacob and Rachel- he made an economic arrangement (7 years of labour) with her father in order to marry her.

        Ruth and Boaz- Ruth got Boaz to marry her in order to be her “kinsman redeemer”. Depending on how you want to translate a particular passage, it’s even possible she seduced him so that afterward he would feel honour bond to marry her.

        Xerxes and Esther- she spent a night with him (with all that implies) and, yes, won a contest. She indeed didn’t have much a choice. So much for marriage for love.

        David and Bathsheba/Abigail were also both cases of marriage because of social status/economic reasons. In the case of Bathsheba there was also the element that David had gotten her pregnant and had to do the “right thing”.

        Even in cases where mature adults decided between themselves to get married it was more for reasons of social status. Marriage was about the establishment of a household and the production of offspring than the romantic fullfilment of the participants. The romantic view of marriage is a new phenomenon in human history. How much scholarship have you read on the history of marriage? You are reading your 21st century biases into the Biblical text and assuming that people were going on dates and marrying because they were “in love”.

        I am part of no movement.

        Do you or do you not admit that getting married is much harder now and the dating market is hyper-competitive? Do you or do you not admit that the purpose and meaning of marriage has changed? Do you or do you not admit that the Church has by and large accepted the modern meaning of marriage?

        So we are making this about me now, are we? Well I followed the “traditional script” to the letter and it got me nowhere. There is nothing left to conserve.

        P.S. I delete the list of books you posted. I read half the first book. It’s garbage. I won’t contribute to people reading it.

        1. Jay Dee says:

          Well, maybe you should tell people ahead of time you’re going to be using Greek definitions instead of English ones…
          Anyways, using that definition, I definitely got married for economic reasons. I wanted to establish a household and have kids – progeny, to continue to blood line.
          In that case, I change my answer. Yes, I definitely think people in the Bible married for economic reasons, as do people today.

          Do you or do you not admit that getting married is much harder now and the dating market is hyper-competitive?

          Well, I have 3 siblings, all of which are married. My wife has 4 sisters, 3 of which are married, one has no interest in romantic relationships. All the cousins I know are married. So, no. I can’t say it seems to be particularly difficult.

          So we are making this about me now, are we? Well I followed the “traditional script” to the letter and it got me nowhere.

          And we’re back to the same problem again – legalism. You’re following a script rather than building relationships, with God and others. Women aren’t interested in guys who follow scripts. They’re interested in people they have relationships with. My wife was my friend. Then we courted. Then we married. We don’t have a date for when we started “dating” (if you can call it that), because it just sort of changed from one relationship into another. We don’t have an official engagement date either. We went looking for rings together. Bought it, had to wait for it to get resized, then I gave it to her. But that date isn’t really significant in and of itself. I don’t even remember when it was.

          Build relationships. Stop trying to follow rules, find workarounds, get the system to work for you, etc.. You’re missing the point of life.

          1. Raphael Tisserand says:

            It is one thing to refuse to read the books I recommended you read. It is another thing to delete the comment itself. I now fully convinced that you are dishonest and not operating in good faith.

            Repent.

            1. Jay Dee says:

              I will not be coerced into spreading depression and the incel mentality. I believe we are done here.

Share your thoughts

X
Hi there! Looking for a discount ?

Login/Signup and win a chance to spin the wheel

Close Now