Why is premarital sex considered inherently wrong by the Quran?

reel

I don't think people marry just for sex. There is wisdom in keeping it between married couple. This video has got many open pleasure seeking people furious https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO1ifNaNABY

Anyone having trouble keeping it in the marriage, please don't make kids victim of your "pleasure" by kissing them with something you wouldn't think is std
https//medlineplus.gov/ency/article/000606.htm

Pleasure of having innocence in the relationship is much much greater! It is huge. It is worth the time. Its magnificent and I am not sure why I am talking like trump.

Yosemite

I just keep thinking about it in my head and I'm stuck in a loop. I just can't comprehend a just and all-knowing God would consider sex as inherently evil, since sex doesn't cause anyone any harm? In fact sex has been scientifically proven to have positive effects such as reducing stress, provide pain relief, good for the heart etc.

What can be considered evil would be irresponsible people not dealing with the possible consequences of sex, such as unplanned pregnancies, spreading HIV etc. But that wouldn't make the sexual act itself 'evil' or 'harmful/detrimental'. For example if I hit a pedestrian while driving on the road, and drive off without helping the victim (hit and run) that doesn't make the act of 'driving' evil, it would make the act of not taking responsibility 'evil'!

Please can someone provide me a good answer because I'm starting to think that the Quran wasn't divinely inspired. And I admit alot of the verses in the Quran do a make a lot of sense. Maybe the Quran has been tampered with somehow in the past which is why you get things that don't make sense mixed in with things that make a lot of sense.

because premarital sex is inherently wrong

context is everything and just like the typical post modernists, you are focusing on the act of sex itself rather than the context in which sex is practiced

this is disngenuous and i invite you to think about the reasons why context would matter

i will just show you a few links to show you why you cant just focus on sex like you did, your argument is just wrong when you do that

http//www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11874559/Super-gonorrhoea-outbreak-Everything-you-need-to-know.html
http//www.reuters.com/article/us-aids-usa-idUSTRE68M3H220100923
http//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/25/number-of-std-cases-in-the-us-reaches-record-high-as-public-serv/
http//edition.cnn.com/2017/03/01/health/syphilis-newborns-partner/index.html

Yosemite

btw i think op was a troll

Comrox

I just keep thinking about it in my head and I'm stuck in a loop. I just can't comprehend a just and all-knowing God would consider sex as inherently evil, since sex doesn't cause anyone any harm? In fact sex has been scientifically proven to have positive effects such as reducing stress, provide pain relief, good for the heart etc.

It's a good question. I would recommend for you to search the forum on this topic. There's a lot of threads that discuss premarital sex that might be useful to you.

Sex is not inherently evil; you're right. Nowhere in the Qur'an is this stated. But I understand that's the view many take. It's unfortunate that many religious people and cultures paint sex in that light. It's not a healthy mindset.

I agree with huruf on this one. Marriage is a contract/obligation you make with another. (And in the beginning of Qur'an 51, we're told to honor/fulfill all contracts.) It's considering and regulating one's affairs. It's a promise of obedience, or vow of allegiance. You join/pair/unite. A committed, known union.

You can get married legally but not religiously. You can get married religiously but not legally (common law marriages aside). In these cases, it's "just" a ceremony (or "just" a formality with the government). For all intents and purposes you can consider yourselves married, even if the law won't, and vice versa.

To have a covenant with someone is to have a type of bond. That's it. It's someone you rely upon, someone you trust.

Regardless of whatever type of situation or relationship you have, you need a clear bond, trust, etc. People who have non traditional relationships first have to have that strong bond and a lot of trust with their partner in order to make their situation work. They may have/need expectations and guidelines set for both of them to follow as well. Sex is still a huge activity that bonds people together, as per this verse

421 And how can you take it when you have become intimate with each other, and they have taken from you a solemn covenant.

What can be considered evil would be irresponsible people not dealing with the possible consequences of sex, such as unplanned pregnancies, spreading HIV etc. But that wouldn't make the sexual act itself 'evil' or 'harmful/detrimental'. For example if I hit a pedestrian while driving on the road, and drive off without helping the victim (hit and run) that doesn't make the act of 'driving' evil, it would make the act of not taking responsibility 'evil'!

Not everyone's responsible though. Some people can't prevent themselves from feeling certain emotions as a result of sex, either. For example, there are many stories of friends with benefits where one person catches feelings and gets hurt. Maybe someone else can feel pressured into sex by a boyfriend/girlfriend/friends/classmates/etc. before they feel ready. Alternatively, they can feel like they're worth less as a person or a loser if they haven't had sex by a certain age, which isn't a healthy mindset either. And of course sex can be "harmful" if a spouse/partner decides to cheat on their partner with someone else. A lot of people these days seem to try to reduce sex to any other activity. But to me and others, it still means something. It's still something I want to share with only one person. Sex is still a vulnerable, emotional, and powerful experience, to me.

Having said that, sex isn't everything. I don't believe anyone should revolve their lives or identities around sex (or lack thereof). Sex is a very personal/private matter.

I'll admit that I'm not a fan of causal sex. What everyone else does is something they have to concern themselves with, but for me personally, it doesn't feel right. I've seen my college roommates have causal sex with so many guys. One of them was never truly in a real romantic relationship, and she wanted to be, but as far as I knew her, she never got to that point. She had a lot of guys over, or she would go to their place(s). One time she had a guy who wanted/was coming over for sex while I was sleeping (we shared a room). She woke me up and I groggily, stupidly consented to getting up and leaving my bed because I was confused, sleepy, and though there must be some kind of emergency going on. There wasn't - She was just being incredibly selfish because of her primal need to have sex and disregard of others.

I believe some of the guys that came over were older. Some she just met/barely knew. Some wouldn't take or help her get home (when she went over to their places in the late hours of the night). To me, it seemed like a safety concern to invite or privately hang out with some of them. My roommates and their friends would talk about sex, talk about guys easily and causally and compare or gossip about how they were in bed... It was strange to me. It didn't feel right. They also worried about pregnancy scares from time to time. It would have been unfortunate (IMO) if a pregnancy occurred (that they wanted to keep) and their causal partner(s) wanted nothing to do with it.

Of course, this is all from my own point of view, experiences, and biases. Everyone has different experiences. As someone who has seen this side of college life, hookups and such - I just want to look at others and regard them as a person, and have them regard me the same. Not as someone to hook up with.

Looking into supposed history, this article explains sex in pre-Islamic Arabia. Not sure how accurate it is of course, but it mentions behaviors like sending one's wife to another man (and if she fell pregnant, she would go back to her husband). Secret relationships, swapping wives without divorce/contracts, taking multiple husbands, ten man having sex with one woman (and choosing one of them to father the child if/when she became pregnant), and prostitution.

Not having a type of contract (such as in swapping wives, as the article mentioned) isn't good IMO. As I mentioned earlier, even people in non-traditional/open relationships have clear guidelines/boundaries/expectations for regulating their behavior with other people (other than their primary partner). If what the article said was true, we don't know if there was mutual consent involved either. A person involved in sex that didn't take responsibility for a child resulting from an unplanned pregnancy (as a woman would supposedly go back to her husband, or "choosing" the father) would probably be looked down today as well (granted, paternity tests weren't around then). Secret relationships aren't good either. If your relationship is a secret, that usually means the person is hiding something (from you or someone else), this is a relationship they shouldn't be in, they don't care about you enough, they're not proud of you/ashamed of you, there's no longevity or security in the relationship, potentially only heartbreak, etc.

Prostitution is another on this list. It's a dangerous profession, and escorts today have to be careful and smart about their clients and their line of work. It has its risks. Women can get physically assaulted, or be at risk for sexually-transmitted diseases. Simply put, it's not seen as something morally good by society either. It's hard for escorts to open up and be accepted by family and friends in a taboo profession. This may extend to not being able to come forward to the police (if something were to happen) and feel safe/secure in seeking legal protection or help. In addition, a 2012 study found that countries with legalized prostitution have an increased market and increased rates of human trafficking. Fortunately, in the modern era escorts can take great care in screening and protecting themselves with clients, but certainly there are still many risks and many women who can be in danger, either now or throughout history, as long as this practice has existed.

Please can someone provide me a good answer because I'm starting to think that the Quran wasn't divinely inspired. And I admit alot of the verses in the Quran do a make a lot of sense. Maybe the Quran has been tampered with somehow in the past which is why you get things that don't make sense mixed in with things that make a lot of sense.

There are certainly members here/in the past who have held those beliefs, so you wouldn't be alone there.

btw i think op was a troll

Doesn't seem like it. They asked a genuine question. With all due respect, these types of comments could easily discourage people with these kinds of questions from posting here. /

Anoushirvan

3000 years ago, the Hebrews were surely not different from most other people at that time and still today in some developing countries, and probably practiced a fierce code of honor where protecting the bloodline was of utmost importance.
Protecting the bloodline meant that the honor of the family lied "between the legs" of the women.
Therefore, women caught in extra-marital sex or alleged extra-marital sex were killed, possibly by stoning. Occasionally, men could also be killed.
Premarital sex was just a particular case of extra-marital sex.

There is singular difference between men and women especially regarding premarital sex women can become pregnant and this witnesses extra-marital sex, even without witnessing the sexual intercourse itself.

As evidenced by archeology, the Hebrews, before the Exile in Babylon, worshiped a god of storm called yahweh, and whose wife was goddess ashera.
Other deities were also worshiped.

After return from Exile, the sages of Israel wanted to protect Israel identity by establishing monotheism. This monotheism was probably inspired by zoroastrism of Persia and Cyrus and Darius.
This is because usually a tutelary deity protects the city or the state through an Alliance, in which the people must perform some rituals or follow some laws. When the people turn away from these rituals or laws, the deity removes its protection.
That's how the Sages of Israel explained the Exile in the Bible.

In order to convince the people to worship exclusively the tutelary deity of Israel, i.e. yahweh, the Sages and the Prophets have used a metaphor. Alliance with God is like marriage, and idolatry is like extra-marital sex.
As extra-marital sex is an extremely serious matter, so is idolatry, they taught.

So in short, when in the Bible, premarital sex or extra-marital sex is forbidden, this is a metaphor to forbid idolatry. But for the Sages and the Prophets the fierce code of honor of their people still held, otherwise the metaphor was senseless.

Centuries later, the key understanding of the metaphor was lost, therefore Theologians were left with two prohibitions in sacred books extra-marital sex and idolatry.
That's why in the Gospels and in Qur'an both prohibitions still hold, and in Qur'an they stand almost on the same foot.

Now in developed and democratic countries we made substantial progress in human rights and this is not extra-marital sex that is considered (legally) wrong but sex without consent. This includes

rape, including in the context of marriage or marital relationship.
sex with children under 15. Children under 15 are never assumed to consent to sex. And with restrictions between 15 and 18. Possibly some countries put even stricter rules.
sexual harassment
sex with animals. This is equated with cruelty because animals are assumed not be able to express consent. Even if the human is a woman and the animal is a male.
in some countries, removing condom even in a consenting sex is considered as sex without consent.

Sadly enough, some developing countries, mostly in Middle East, still lag far away in term of human progress.

good_logic

Peace Anoushirvan.
You say,quote
Now in developed and democratic countries we made substantial progress in human rights and this is not extra-marital sex that is considered (legally) wrong but sex without consent. This includes

rape, including in the context of marriage or marital relationship.
sex with children under 15. Children under 15 are never assumed to consent to sex. And with restrictions between 15 and 18. Possibly some countries put even stricter rules.
sexual harassment
sex with animals. This is equated with cruelty because animals are assumed not be able to express consent. Even if the human is a woman and the animal is a male.
in some countries, removing condom even in a consenting sex is considered as sex without consent.

What about married couples who cheat on their partners? What about those who spread diseases having sex with different partners? what about those who pay their way with whomever pleases the eye(oppressing the naive and poor!)?...etc Or is your list complete?

You also say,quote
Sadly enough, some developing countries, mostly in Middle East, still lag far away in term of human progress.

I do not see permissible sex with whoever pleases you,regardless of the status of people and their contracts of marriage as progress?!!!!
Does your human right as an adult means you can have sex with anyone who consents/agrees ?
Are there no limits/rules (social and moral) to abide by?
Surely there are limits?
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Amra94

Now in developed and democratic countries we made substantial progress in human rights and

Sadly enough, some developing countries, mostly in Middle East, still lag far away in term of human progress.

Rofl, human progress = it's ok to behave like animals

Anoushirvan

Peace Anoushirvan.
You say,quote
Now in developed and democratic countries we made substantial progress in human rights and this is not extra-marital sex that is considered (legally) wrong but sex without consent. This includes

rape, including in the context of marriage or marital relationship.
sex with children under 15. Children under 15 are never assumed to consent to sex. And with restrictions between 15 and 18. Possibly some countries put even stricter rules.
sexual harassment
sex with animals. This is equated with cruelty because animals are assumed not be able to express consent. Even if the human is a woman and the animal is a male.
in some countries, removing condom even in a consenting sex is considered as sex without consent.

What about married couples who cheat on their partners? What about those who spread diseases having sex with different partners? what about those who pay their way with whomever pleases the eye(oppressing the naive and poor!)?...etc Or is your list complete?

Peace GL,

from legal point of view, though I'm not a lawyer, I reasonably believe my list is complete.
In developed countries, the boundary between what is legally permissible and what is not legally permissible is consent, not religion.

Cheating one's partner within marriage is not a legal case anymore. This is considered as a private issue that is to be discussed privately, and I believe this evolution is a good thing.

Regarding sexually transmissible diseases, some of them, like HIV and hepatitis can be transmitted by other means than sex.
In any case, safe sex is ensured by using condoms, and not by trusting one's partner, even in marriage.

I believe that some US states tried to promote an abstinence program towards young people based on religious consideration, instead of educating them to use contraceptive means. Results were disastrous with a high increase of young mothers.

You also say,quote
Sadly enough, some developing countries, mostly in Middle East, still lag far away in term of human progress.

I do not see permissible sex with whoever pleases you,regardless of the status of people and their contracts of marriage as progress?!!!!
Does your human right as an adult means you can have sex with anyone who consents/agrees ?
Are there no limits/rules (social and moral) to abide by?

I see as a considerable progress that the legal system or a code of honor does not try to look anymore what is happening inside my bed when it involves consenting people.
But surely other considerations should apply besides the law such as no incest, love (consent doesn't mean love) and so on.

Cerberus

Though I have only addressed my take on sex (premarital or not), this is my take on marriage.
The right marriage imo is the like of a platonic relationship, in which the two opposite genders, or should I say the two persons that complement each other will work on helping each other to better themselves.

A male and a female have different tests because of their different nature. There are certain flaws in men that women consider juvenile and futile, and likewise for men regarding certain flaws in women.
The two can and should (if they can, i.e to get married) work with each other.

Marriage is somehow a cage where you put two flawed person and they decide to work with each other to better themselves, in a spiritual way. You help me and I help you. This bond makes it that I can see your true self and you can see my true self. I see the naked part of you and you see mine (not the physical one, that one is irrelevant). So we can be each others mirrors and you can point out my flaws and I can point out yours. We cannot run away from each other, and if we do not work with each other it's because one of us or both of us are not determined to better ourselves. And then the whole marriage crumbles.

Are we good and mature enough, and we're thinking of bringing a life to this life ? Sure, we can do that, that's why we have our reproductive organs. However, adding that person to life means we'll have to work with that new born toward making it a good person too. It's a sacrifice.

(compare that to those people breeding like crazy and throwing their abomination of children into society and causing harm and stealing and raping....)

You get my point, here is a video relating to what I said, the author is a psychiatrist.
The relevant part is marked in this link here (~4min in the video)

A_Submitter

noshield30

3000 years ago, the Hebrews were surely not different from most other people at that time and still today in some developing countries, and probably practiced a fierce code of honor where protecting the bloodline was of utmost importance.
Protecting the bloodline meant that the honor of the family lied "between the legs" of the women.
Therefore, women caught in extra-marital sex or alleged extra-marital sex were killed, possibly by stoning. Occasionally, men could also be killed.
Premarital sex was just a particular case of extra-marital sex.

There is singular difference between men and women especially regarding premarital sex women can become pregnant and this witnesses extra-marital sex, even without witnessing the sexual intercourse itself.

As evidenced by archeology, the Hebrews, before the Exile in Babylon, worshiped a god of storm called yahweh, and whose wife was goddess ashera.
Other deities were also worshiped.

After return from Exile, the sages of Israel wanted to protect Israel identity by establishing monotheism. This monotheism was probably inspired by zoroastrism of Persia and Cyrus and Darius.
This is because usually a tutelary deity protects the city or the state through an Alliance, in which the people must perform some rituals or follow some laws. When the people turn away from these rituals or laws, the deity removes its protection.
That's how the Sages of Israel explained the Exile in the Bible.

In order to convince the people to worship exclusively the tutelary deity of Israel, i.e. yahweh, the Sages and the Prophets have used a metaphor. Alliance with God is like marriage, and idolatry is like extra-marital sex.
As extra-marital sex is an extremely serious matter, so is idolatry, they taught.

So in short, when in the Bible, premarital sex or extra-marital sex is forbidden, this is a metaphor to forbid idolatry. But for the Sages and the Prophets the fierce code of honor of their people still held, otherwise the metaphor was senseless.

Centuries later, the key understanding of the metaphor was lost, therefore Theologians were left with two prohibitions in sacred books extra-marital sex and idolatry.
That's why in the Gospels and in Qur'an both prohibitions still hold, and in Qur'an they stand almost on the same foot.

Interesting info Anourshirvan. Although what you've said basically implies that the Quran is not the divine word of God but is just a result of human development throughout history. Not arguing with you, just an observation.