I wasn't going to blog this, but...

I saw that it was written by a pastor at Park Street Church, Boston's most popular church among college students; a large, mostly evangelical (if that makes any sense) congregational church that's often criticized by people from small evangelical and charismatic churches.

Anyway, his article basically says that there's nothing Biblically wrong with premarital sex. He effectively argues from scripture that in God's eyes sexual intercourse is the wedding ceremony, and when the Bible says "what God has joined let no man separate", it's referring to the joining of intercourse. Reverend Harrell, of course, sees promiscuity as antibiblical, which it clearly is, and interprets even unconsensual and casual sex as "joining" in God's eyes - hence the strong imperatives against rape and casual sex. In fairness, he holds that marital sex is better, but abandons the absolute of marital exclusivity of sex, writing "As long as the couple intend to “sign” their marital love in a marriage contract...then a sexual relationship can be affirmed as good, if not yet ideal."

However, I would argue that the culturally relevant commands that Paul gives the Corinthian church (I Cor 11, I Cor 7, etc) show that some things that may not be spiritual absolutes are still binding on those who want to glorify God with their lives. In our cultural context, marriage is a definitive, public event that changes the legal and cultural nature of the couple. To tolerate premarital sex, even in "committed" relationships is a clear violation of I Peter 2:12, where we are exhorted to act in a way that sets us apart from the world.

Another argument from I Corinthians is set in more explicit Biblical terms, and specifically refutes Harrell's supposition that "it’s debatable whether wedding ceremonies as we know them even occurred in Jesus’ day". From chapter 7:

36If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin--this man also does the right thing. 38So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.

There is no middle ground in this passage. People are classified as "virgin" or "married." The unambiguous language throughout this chapter on marriage in the church is indicative of the unambiguous view of marriage God holds and the church has held through for millenia. Paul says earlier in the chapter that it is better to marry than to burn with passion; clearly that passion is not to be consummated without public marriage.

It's also important to note that cohabitation was not unfamiliar to the Greeks; wealthy Greek men commonly kept mistresses as well as wives, and also frequented brothels. Yet scripture calls for monogamy, a departure from the cultural norms. Thus, Paul's stipulations were not appealing to cultural propriety, as my first argument did, but to an absolute.

Harrell would object that he was principally speaking of those who have sinned and are seeking to make their relationship public. Yes I agree there is room for redemption - in I Cor 7:36 Paul contrasts he who has "acted improperly" and should marry with he who "has control over his own will" and can choose not to marry his fiancee - but it's key to remember that the former have "acted improperly", not just "early". I do understand that sex and marriage should not be disconnected in our minds, as Harrell says has happened. But for that very reason, sex should be reserved among Christians absolutely for marriage - sex outside of a public marital commitment is closely correlated with promiscuity. For a pastor to advocate toleration of this type of irresponsible, no-controls sexual indulgence flies in the face of pastoral wisdom as well as specific Biblical evidence that public marriage is just as God-ordained and consummating as private, sexual union.