Tell me more ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote -3 down vote favorite
2

The dictionary defines sin as an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law I assume that divine law is also open to reason. The so called golden rule states (Matthew 7:12)"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

Murder is a sin because you don't have right over another person's life in the same way as another person doesn't have right over your life. Stealing is sin because I don't have right over another person's property nor would I like anybody else to take what is mine, on the other hand smiling is not a sin because you don't encroach on another person's right when smiling and you may actually like being smiled upon.

Let me get to the point, in the old testament David(considered a prophet) did not sin when he engaged with concubines and slave girls who were not legally wives. If I define adultery as having sex with another man's wife, David has not broken the law. However today if two(unmarried) consenting adults have sex, that's adultery by biblical standards. From my understanding its encroaching on another person's right that seems to define sin.

Coming back to the question: Is sex between two consenting adults sin if so why. OR why would God mind when two people are having fun and not hurting anybody. Thanks.

share|improve this question
8  
With respect to all parties, the final request of a "logical reason" rather than a "divine reason" kind of misses the point of the site, especially since the word "sin" has little to no meaning outside of a religious context. – Kaz Dragon Nov 7 '12 at 8:43
A request for a logical reason does not imply that a divine one is not acceptable its just says about the priority. I don't understand the grounds on which this question has been downvoted. – Martin.kv Nov 7 '12 at 10:45
4  
The previous commentor was not the person who downvoted. I was. If you hover over the downvote button on quesitons, the suggested reasons for downvotes include lack of research, unclear or not useful. I think this question has aspects of all of those. It's built on some very faulty premises, doesn't show any research effort, isn't even really directed at Christianity much less a specific tradition (which is what would be needed here) and although it could be reworked, I don't think the current form is very useful. – Caleb♦ Nov 7 '12 at 11:54
2  
In fact I think it should be closed until these issues get fixed, but I didn't want to step in as a moderator. I think you'll find the community probably will do that without me. You should probably review meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/690/30 for ideas on how to form a question that is a better match for this site. – Caleb♦ Nov 7 '12 at 11:54

closed as not a real question by Andrew, David Stratton, warren, Affable Geek, Jon Ericson Nov 7 '12 at 18:41

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, see the FAQ.

1 Answer

up vote 14 down vote accepted

Sin is not merely defined by one person encroaching on another person's rights. Pride, greed, envy, bitterness, and many other such things are sins, but they do not encroach on anyone else's rights. So, then, why are these considered sins by God? It seems the key point is that each of them is a departure from the righteousness of God.

In the case of two consenting adults, you assume that each of these people have title to their own lives. According to the Bible, "a man's life is not his own" (Jeremiah 10:23), but belongs to God Himself. So, we should certainly consider the consent of the other person, but we cannot forego the consent of God Himself.

When David prays his prayer of repentance over his sin with Bathsheba in Psalm 51, he says, "Against you, you only have I sinned..." (Psalm 51:4) David understood that the primary infraction was not again Bathsheba or even Uriah, but against God. It is His standard and His holiness that matters--not the consent of any mere mortal.

Another note is that the eating of the fruit of the tree in the Garden of Eden did not infringe on any other person's rights--but it still went against the command of God.

I know, O Lord, that the way of man is not in himself, that it is not in man who walks to direct his steps. Jeremiah 10:23 ESV

"Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment." Psalm 51:4 ESV

"but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat[d] of it you shall surely die.” Genesis 2:17 ESV

share|improve this answer
5  
+1 for sin being "a departure from the righteousness of God." – Joe Nov 7 '12 at 13:51
+1 for "a man's life is not his own" – tunmise fashipe Nov 10 '12 at 7:24

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.