NYC signing September 1,2009 Nintendo Store - NYC

Image via Wikipedia

Focus on the Family’s community action affiliate Citizen Link issued a statement yesterday to “pray hard” for Justin Beiber, after he answered a question about sex before marriage from Rolling Stone in this way, “I think you should just wait for the person you’re…in love with.” He also said, “I don’t think you should have sex with anyone unless you love them.”

Chad Hills, writing for Citizen Link, asks whether Beiber’s statement should cause concern and then launches into a discussion about the difference between love as a feeling, versus love as a commitment. Obviously, commitment is the clear winner here.

The thing is, Beiber’s view is scriptural. Biblically, there is no separation between sex and marriage. So, the prepubescent teen idol is right, you should “wait for the person you’re in love with,” then, if and when you have sex with that person, know that you’re married, Biblically, and you have to commit! (Remember that, Justin and Selena!)

Of course, this isn’t the way we typically think of it, and to an extent, my tongue is in my cheek, but this reveals the way Christians have ceded marriage to the government. Sex before government marriage is a non-issue. And sex with or without government sanction is the consummation of Biblical marriage. Thus, there’s really no such thing as sex before marriage.

That being said, we should pray for Beiber, but his sex life needn’t be our primary concern.

About The Author

Jonathan D. Fitzgerald

Editor | Follow him on Twitter.

0 Responses to Justin Beiber Understands Biblical Sex Better than Focus on the Family

  1. jmj says:

    I’m glad you asserted that marriage and sex are inseparable in the Bible. It is interesting, therefore, that from Genesis to Jesus, marriage is universally defined as between a man and a woman.

    I don’t care, personally, if the government sanctions gay marriage or not. Nor am I smart enough to know why people experience attractions to others of the same gender.

    But, by your own words, we can agree that homosexuality as a lifestyle is not compatible with the Bible.

    • NotStradamus says:

      So where does the bible define marriage as between one man and one woman? I can’t find any such references but I know of many references to polygamy.

      One of the Bible’s earliest polygamists was the Israelite patriarch Jacob. When Jacob lusted after Rachel, the daughter of Laban, Laban sent his other daughter, Leah, to the bridal bed instead. When Jacob discovered that he had been tricked, he bargained with Laban and ended up marrying both his daughters and eventually ended up with 4 women as wives/concubines.

      Jacob was just one of many polygamists in the Bible. Some others included Gideon (Judges 8:30), Elkanah, father of the prophet Samuel (1 Samuel 1:2), and kings such as Abijah (2 Chronicles 13:21), Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:21), and Jehoiada (2 Chronicles 24:3). Most famously, Solomon himself had “seven hundred wives… and three hundred concubines” (2 Kings 11:3).
      God even gives rules for multiple marriage:
      Exodus 21:10, Deuteronomy 21:15-16

      • jmj says:

        You’re right. My point was that the Bible never defines marriage as between a man and a man or between a woman and a woman.

  2. Marty M. says:

    Jonathan,

    First of all, I have quite enjoyed following your posts on Patrol. However, you’re only half right, and the half of the discussion that you are completely missing is the role of the Church. Evangelicalism’s unhealthy ecclesiology does, like you suggest, push marriage into the realm of the secular government, whichI completely agree is a problem. However, while you are right to point out that sex and marriage are inseperable in scripture, this does not mean that they are identical, which is the reason that sex before marriage is such a problematic thing (and a real thing, though it is a real contradiction). Marriage is a commitment that occurs before God and in the context of the Christian community. Now, I only know your perspectives in so much as I’ve followed them on Patrol, but this post betrays only the other side of the same problem in evangelicalism, which is an unhealthy ecclesiology–instead of pushing marriage out of the church and into the realm of the secular, you’ve pushed marriage out of the church and into the realm of the private.
    –Marty

    • Fitz says:

      Marty, I agree with you about marriage being “before God and in the context of Christian community.” I think I was only “half right” because I was only being half serious. Which, isn’t fair, probably, for such a serious topic as Christian marriage, but I guess I was feeling a little bit of Friday friskiness.

      Thank you for this addendum, though, I think it completes a thought that I, myself, failed to.

  3. Matthew Eric Baker says:

    Marty M,

    applause.

    Matt

  4. marilette says:

    Agreed.

    – Marilette

  5. Matthew Eric Baker says:

    Fitz, http://www.theomag.com responded to your assertion.

  6. Fitz says:

    Thanks for bringing your article to my attention (why not just say “I responded to you at theomag?”)

    Anyway, though I appreciate the interaction, I’m not sure this necessarily constitutes a response, so much as a bit of name-calling. First, “liberal Christian blogosphere writer” is a very strange construction. Are you saying I’m a liberal Christian or a writer who writes in the liberal Christian blogosphere? Or, perhaps both? Also, I think to say that I am either “ignorant of biblical text, tradition, and consensus of hermeneutical interpretation” or “volitionally rebel” against God’s intention is a bit of reductionism and assumes too much. It doesn’t allow for the possibility that neither of these apply and I simply come to different conclusions from you.

    • Matthew Eric Baker says:

      A gentlemen never offends or name calls accidentally. I’m glad you responded. You are an excellent writer and perhaps “blogosphere” was a less than necessary description of what you do and “writer” would have been sufficient. A merited correction, sir!

      Reductionism serves one well in the pursuit of truth. Lots of claims can be made but not all claims can be true. From do you draw your conclusions regarding this subject? It certainly isn’t the scriptures and it certainly isn’t traditions. The simply drawn conclusions you come to are mere relative claims. From what well did you draw your conclusions other than the well of your own understanding? Which the author of Proverbs warns God’s people not to lean on in chapter 3 verse 5. If marriage is anything other than what the biblical prescription overwhelmingly describes; argue such a point instead of subjecting such a point.

      I tend to doubt you are ignorant of biblical text but, then again, it is a rather great read and it often surprises me, a bible teacher. Rather, I think you volitionally rebel by way of your appeal to a relative ethic. What you perceive as correct is correct regardless if God’s revelation says otherwise. You want to stand but you have nothing solid to stand upon.

      Thank you for replying…sorry for not just saying “I responded to you at theomag” it was a collaborative effort and I couldn’t take all the credit. Thus, it read over-dramatically…we’ve all been there, right?

      Matt.

  7. Matthew Eric Baker says:

    P.S regarding the initial issue. Bieber and his Papa are heading to Heffs Playboy mansion…I’m sure its just a missions trip. Check the link http://wellandtribune.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2993018

  8. Anne says:

    This is a very late post, but I only came across this blog recently.

    NotStradamus, you are only referencing OT passages. Jesus said, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh.What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” (Mark 10:7-9 ESV), referencing Genesis 2:24. While this passage is concerned with divorce, I think it poignant to point out that He spoke in singular terms (ONE flesh). In addition, the first people on this earth were monogamous. There is Paul in Ephesians 5:31, talking about A man and A woman becoming ONE flesh.

    Nowhere in the OT does God say about polygamy, “It is Good.” Consider that there is a prostitute in the bloodline of Christ; God works through humanities mistakes and imperfections, even polygamy. Of course he gives rules around it! People are fallen people and who knows what results would have ensued without some kind of perameter. There is murder and sodomy and rape in the Bible, does that justify them in society?

  9. Samantha Hart says:

    So by this article, I am now married to two men? Last year I was seduced and had an unintentionally had an affair.
    I thought I was a strong person but discovered I am not.
    Am I now married to two men?

Leave a Reply

Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.