Fornication is not a topic that is commonly discussed these days but, make no mistake, the topic is on the minds of tens of millions of citizens within the Socialist Democracy of Amerika. Fornication is defined as having a sexual relationship with someone outside the bounds of a marriage covenant. Fornicators are people who have sex with other people to whom they are not married. If the fornicator is married the sexual act is called adultery. I am not writing about adultery today. I am writing about fornication and the simple truth is that what was once considered to be a serious sin is now a commonly accepted practice and generally considered to be morally good.
God has an opinion about fornicators. He says, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God." In another part of the Bible God says, "Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge." Is there anything in those two statements that is hard to understand? I don't think so. God makes it pretty clear that people who practice fornication are eternally damned to the Lake of Fire if they do not repent of their sin. You might want to think about that before you go out on your next hook up.
Back in 2003 a young Evangelical by the name of Joshua Harris wrote a book entitled "I Kissed Dating Goodbye." In that book he took a biblical stance on what is generally called "dating." Dating today essentially means having sex with multiple partners, usually not at the same time but not necessarily so, and Harris' book took the hard line that a Christian should not even touch a woman in an erotic fashion. Although Harris did not build his principle about non-contact during dating from specific biblical passages, he nevertheless told the biblical truth about the practice of erotic touch. I Corinthians 7 contains the biblical teaching about erotic touch and it is pretty clear. "It is good for a man not to touch a woman..." is the basic principle. All erotic touch prior to marriage is sin and Harris taught that principle. You can imagine the firestorm that created both inside and outside of Evangelicalism.
According to this website, "As many as 80 percent of unmarried evangelical young adults have had sex, according to an analysis of a study on sexual activity in the upcoming October issue of Relevant, a Christian magazine. Young
adults between the ages of 18 and 29 who identify themselves as
evangelicals are almost as sexually active as their non-Christian peers..." If that assertion is correct, and I see no reason to challenge its truthfulness, then roughly 80 to 90 percent of all non-married people are serial fornicators. (As a side note....once again I wonder how anyone, especially Evangelicals, can invoke God to bless Amerika given the fact that half of the citizens are adulterers, the other half are fornicators and over a million of our citizens are murdered each year in abortion mills.) This is true for both Evangelicals and people who despise the God of the Bible. With such a strong degree of support for the practice of fornication it is to be expected that those who practice it will seek to find moral justification for their behavior. Since fornicators are generally not overly concerned with making an argument for why fornication is just dandy in the eyes of God they instead seek to discredit those Christians who continue to persist in the archaic belief that fornication is a sin. This is where National Public Radio (NPR) gets involved.
NPR is partially funded by taxpayer dollars. Anytime taxpayer dollars are involved we know two things for certain. First, whatever is being funded would not exist in a free market. In other words, the citizens of this country would not be willing to pay for the service being offered and the company offering the service would go bankrupt without taxpayer support. Without taxpayer dollars NPR would not exist. Second, NPR will spout a liberal, pro-government stream of propaganda. He who pays the piper calls the tune. What comes from NPR will be designed to solidify the post-Christian ethical standards of the SDA and NPR reporters will glory in stories that prove how the SDA is no longer a society based upon some form of Christian ethics but, instead, is now based upon the immoral beliefs of the majority. Since the vast majority of the people in this country are serial fornicators and adulterers we should expect reports designed to cast fornication in a favorable light while, at the same time, showing Evangelicals to be grossly out of touch with modern times.
NPR recently featured a story about Joshua Harris. That story can be found here. The story is entitled "Evangelical Pastor Rethinks His Approach to Courtship." The reporter tells the story of the moral outrage and emotional backlash Harris has received as the years have gone by since he wrote his book about dating. Enough time has gone by for Evangelicals to have practiced the principle of no erotic touch and man are they angry. According to the article, "He's heard from people who felt his writing taught them to be ashamed of
their bodies and to feel guilty for having any sexual desires. The
criticism came out recently on Twitter. One woman reached out and said
the book was used against her like a weapon.... 'And so I'm hearing these different voices saying, here's how your book
was used against me, here's how it was forced on me, or here's how I
tried to - no one forced it on me, but I tried to apply it and it had
this negative consequence in different ways.'"
So let me get this straight. Harris teaches the biblical principle that unmarried people should abstain from fornication and people who practiced that principle are now angry with him because "it taught them to be ashamed of their bodies" and "to feel guilty for having sexual desires?" Ahemmm......whose fault is that? Did Harris teach those things? (Answer: No) So why are you holding Harris accountable for something he did not teach? (Answer: Because that is the Evangelical and post-Christian way) I am especially amused by the poor victims who claim that Harris' book was "used against them like a weapon." Isn't that interesting? A book telling people to not follow their sinful feelings and to not practice fornication is a "weapon" because it is demanding they suppress their sinful desires. Then, rather than blaming their own sinful nature for how bad they feel, they shoot the messenger and blame Harris for teaching the truth.
I am also fascinated by those who are now telling Harris that applying the principle of non-fornication ended up having "negative consequences in different ways." I wonder what those negative consequences are? None were described in the story. I also wonder how they can justify their personal moral system when they believe that following the biblical principle to abstain from fornication results in negative consequences in their lives? How does the practice of fornication usually work out for them? The story did not say. The idea that practicing God's law brings about negative consequences is certainly contrary to God's view on the matter. God says that following His law brings life and peace. Little do they realize that the truth is a weapon. It is designed to guide Christians to moral behavior and it is also designed to judge those who reject the biblical standard of moral propriety. They also seem to be oblivious to the fact that obedience to the law of God never has negative consequences. Only the God-hating law of man continually and perpetually delivers negative consequences in our lives as each citizen of this envy filled land seeks to use the power of government to pick the pocket of his neighbor.
The main emphasis of the article is not the fact that people are angry with Harris because he believes fornication is a sin. The main emphasis of the article is the fact that Harris has apparently rethought his position on the matter and is now apologizing to those people who claim to be victims of biblical truth. This gets to the heart of the matter and it explains why NPR wanted to tell the story. The headline of the story could have been more accurate if it had said, "Evangelical Pastor Recants Inconvenient Biblical Truth So We All Can Continue To Fornicate Without Guilt." Good for them.