by Wayne Jackson<\/p>\n
The word “fornication” derives from the Greek term\u00a0porneia<\/em>, one of a cognate group of five words that together occur fifty-five times in the New Testament.<\/p>\n The noun form is found twenty-five times, predominately in the letters of Paul. The word is generic in scope in that it refers to a variety of physical sexual acts between persons who are not married legitimately.<\/p>\n It will be the goal of this article to establish that when fornication, and a related term, “adultery” (moicheia<\/em>), are used\u00a0literally, they are\u00a0physical\u00a0acts that constitute the exclusive rationale for divorce and possible remarriage.<\/p>\n In the Greek version of the Old Testament (LXX), a form of\u00a0porneia<\/em>\u00a0is used of Tamar, with whom Judah had engaged in intercourse, having assumed that she was a “harlot”\u00a0(Genesis 38:15, 24).<\/p>\n In ancient Babylon, it was believed that sexual intercourse ensured crop fertility. Herodotus, the Greek historian, tells of the yearly requirement of all women to sacrifice their bodies in “fornication” to a stranger in the temple of the goddess Mylitta (Rawlinson 1952, 1.199).<\/p>\n Mostly in the Old Testament, however, the terms “fornication” and “adultery” are employed symbolically for the actions of the Israelite people, who broke their “marriage covenant” with Jehovah by worshiping idols (cf. Ezekiel 16:26, 29; Hosea 1:2).<\/p>\n Sexual union with a married person (with whom one has no right to intimacy) is both fornication and adultery\u00a0(cf. I Corinthians 5:1). All adultery is also fornication. Not all fornication is adultery\u00a0(cf. I Corinthians 7:2).<\/p>\n The technical difference between fornication and adultery is implied in sin lists, in which both terms are included\u00a0(cf. I Corinthians 6:9).<\/p>\n Specifically, then, fornication is any “unlawful sexual intercourse” (Danker and Bauer 2000, 854), whether such is a man-woman liaison, a homosexual action (cf. Jude 7), pedophilia, or sex-for-hire, as in prostitution (Brown 1975, 497).<\/p>\n The plural form, “fornications” (I Corinthians 7:2), hints at the various venues by which this horrible sin may be committed.<\/p>\n I must add this point. Bible translations that render\u00a0porneia<\/em> more generically (e.g., “sexual immorality”) are misleading. There are various forms of sexual immorality (e.g., exposing one’s body in seductive clothing) that do not fall under the definition of fornication, though clearly, they are sinful.<\/p>\n Rather recently, some have alleged that “lust” falls into the category of fornication and adultery.<\/p>\n If a married person should discover that a spouse has read a book or viewed pictures or films containing explicit sexual activity, the assumption is that the offender has lusted, hence has committed adultery – even if there has been\u00a0no physical contact\u00a0with another person.<\/p>\n Therefore, it is reasoned, the transgressor may be justly divorced according to\u00a0Matthew 5:27-28. The innocent victim would then have the option to remarry.<\/p>\n Matthew’s record reads as follows:<\/p>\n “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’: but I say unto you, that every one who looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart<\/em>”\u00a0(Matthew 5:27-28).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n A brief analysis of the passage is in order.<\/p>\n Christ quoted from the Ten Commandments, “You shall not commit adultery<\/em>”\u00a0(Exodus 20:14). Clearly this refers to a physical sex act by which one violates a marriage relationship. But the Savior expands the moral lapse by addressing the mental disposition that lends itself to the overt physical act.<\/p>\n He speaks of the man who\u00a0longingly looks\u00a0(the verb is a present tense form) at someone other than his spouse – with a sustained desire for intercourse.<\/p>\n This is no passing glance. The lusting person is doing mentally what he (or she) almost certainly would do physically if given the opportunity. One scholar notes:<\/p>\n “Christians must recognize those thoughts and actions which,\u00a0long before any overt sexual sin, make the possibility of giving in to temptation more likely, and they must take dramatic action to avoid them” (Blomberg 1992, 109; emphasis added).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n A “heart” sin is serious, but it does not have the equivalent temporal consequence as the physical act does. Professor Robert Mounce observed that “the act of adultery” has “far more serious social consequences” (e.g., death under the Mosaic system – Leviticus 20:10) than lust, though both the desire and the act are sinful (1991, 46).<\/p>\n Lust is of “the same nature” as the act, but it is not the act itself (Nixon 1970, 823). F. F. Bruce expressed the obvious, when he noted that “unchaste thought” is “enforceable by no earthly code or court” (1977, 25).<\/p>\n One additional note is worthy of consideration.<\/p>\n Some scholars contend that it is grammatically possible that the phrase usually rendered “to lust after her” might carry the sense of “so as to get her to lust” (Carson 1984, 151; Blomberg 1992, 108-109). This would place a heavy responsibility upon one who provokes lust, as well as the person who indulges in such.<\/p>\n Where does this leave the woman who seeks a divorce on the ground of lust, yet she herself flaunts her semi-nude body on the beach? Certainly without credibility, to say nothing of a flawed exegesis.<\/p>\n In view of the foregoing factors, we raise the crucial question again. Is the “lust” of Matthew 5:28 the\u00a0consequential\u00a0equivalent of the physical act of adultery, thus a cause for divorce and remarriage on the part of an innocent victim?<\/p>\n We believe the answer is a firm “No.” The fallacy of this position can be demonstrated rather persuasively.<\/p>\n An argument applied carries logical consequences. Consider several of these as applied with the “lust equals fornication” argument.<\/p>\n In the immediate context, Christ made a comparison between anger and murder (Matthew 5:21-22), just as he did with lust and adultery. J. A. Alexander noted that the principles involved in the two situations are “identical” (1861, 141).<\/p>\n If the reasoning reflected in the theory sketched above were valid, would it not be the case that both the murderer and the one merely angry with his brother should be subjected to the same temporal penalty (e.g., execution or imprisonment) by the legal authorities?<\/p>\n Elsewhere the New Testament also declares that “hate” of one’s brother, in some sense, is the equivalent of “murder”\u00a0(I John 3:15), but no one contends that hate has the same legal ramification.<\/p>\n If the term “adultery” is to be pressed\u00a0literally\u00a0in\u00a0Matthew 5:28, should the remedy that is subsequently imposed (i.e., the plucking out of the eye and the amputation of one’s hand) likewise be pressed literally?<\/p>\n Clearly, Christ is dealing with mental acts that, as evil as they are, do not yet rise to the level of physical murder or adultery, but are, in principle, serious sins. There is a nexus between what goes on in the heart and what becomes manifest in physical actions (cf. Mark 7:21-23). Lust, when it “conceives,” bears sin (James 1:15), i.e., sin of a greater consequential nature.<\/p>\n If one of the persons in this lust-adultery scenario entertains impure thoughts, and the object of that lust acted in such a way as to\u00a0cause\u00a0the lust, would not logic suggest that the mates of\u00a0both\u00a0parties – the one lusting and the accessory to the act – would have the right of divorce and remarriage?<\/p>\n Can the serious Bible student not see that this throws the divorce-marriage controversy into a maze of confusion as folks attempt to decipher the mental states and levels of culpability of the alleged transgressors?<\/p>\n The use of salacious literature or films, etc., within any context, is evil. But this type of perversion most likely falls under the category of lasciviousness, a “comprehensive term” that can embrace various sexual aberrations (see Thayer 1958, 79-80; Balz and Schneider 1990, 169).<\/p>\n The use of pornography certainly can constitute “adultery” in the heart. However, that is not what Jesus had in view as a basis for divorce in\u00a0Matthew 19:9. In that context Christ unquestionably had in mind the physical act of sexual intercourse as evidenced by the fact:<\/p>\n A fundamental principle of Bible interpretation is that words must be interpreted\u00a0literally\u00a0unless there is a compelling reason for assigning to them a\u00a0figurative\u00a0meaning. The term “adultery” is not employed in a metaphorical sense in Matthew 19:9. In Matthew 5:28, however, “heart” adultery is a metaphor for evil desire (Danker et al. 2000, 509; cf. Romans 1:24).<\/p>\n Here is another example. “Friendship” with the world, in one sense, can be viewed as “adultery”\u00a0(cf. James 4:4), but mere worldliness is not a cause for divorce and remarriage.<\/p>\n Suppose a woman should claim: “My husband is a very worldly man. He gets drunk and gambles away his money. Friendship with the world is ‘adultery.’ Therefore, I have just grounds for a divorce and remarriage.”<\/p>\n Can we not see that the lady has pressed “adultery” into a mold never intended by the sacred writer? It is a mistake to take a figurative use of the word “adultery,” and import it into a text that discusses a literal relationship.<\/p>\n If one were to frame the\u00a0type\u00a0of argument as that just under review with reference to\u00a0Matthew 5:28\u00a0and press metaphorical language into literalism, he would be forced to contend that the person who fornicates with a prostitute and thus has become “one” with her in that act\u00a0(I Corinthians 6:16)\u00a0is “married to” the immoral person, and must remain in that union.<\/p>\n Incredibly, a few inept students have attempted to sustain this ludicrous position! But such is absolutely untenable.<\/p>\n It is a serious interpretative mistake to force a literal meaning upon an expression that obviously is used figuratively. I have discussed and demonstrated this fallacy extensively in my book,\u00a0Biblical Figures of Speech<\/em>.<\/p>\n by Wayne Jackson The word “fornication” derives from the Greek term\u00a0porneia, one of a cognate group of five words that together occur fifty-five times in the New Testament. The noun form is found twenty-five times, predominately in the letters of Paul. The word is generic in scope in that it refers to a variety of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[1572,156],"class_list":["post-49735","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-article","tag-fornication","tag-lust"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":22301,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/does-sexual-immorality-porneia-include-masturbation\/","url_meta":{"origin":49735,"position":0},"title":"Does “sexual immorality” (porneia) include masturbation?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"March 28, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: I would like to just say in\u00a0some previous answers\u00a0you have said that masturbation is not mentioned as a sin, but it is. We are told in Acts 15:20 to flee from sexual immorality. Today, most of the world sees masturbation as sexual immorality, and it has always been considered\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":26107,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/what-is-included-in-porneia\/","url_meta":{"origin":49735,"position":1},"title":"What is included in porneia?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"September 11, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: Hi! I have been studying sex and the Bible. What I am really confused about is that the Bible does not mention oral sex or mutual masturbation. It only mentions anal sex and vaginal sex. Thus, how are oral sex and mutual masturbation a sin? How is it sexual\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":13530,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/what-is-the-difference-between-fornication-and-adultery\/","url_meta":{"origin":49735,"position":2},"title":"What is the difference between fornication and adultery?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"May 20, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: Please enlighten me as to what the difference is between fornication and adultery.\u00a0 A few of us had quite a discussion about it after our midweek services this evening. Answer: The Greek word translated as fornication, or sexual immorality, is\u00a0porneia. The Greek word translated as adultery is\u00a0moicheia. In classical\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":41438,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/what-is-sexual-immorality-in-matthew-199\/","url_meta":{"origin":49735,"position":3},"title":"What is “Sexual Immorality” in Matthew 19:9?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"January 2, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"by\u00a0Kyle Butt, M.A. via\u00a0Apologetics Press Copied by permission. From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible repeatedly stresses the fact that God designed the institution of marriage (Genesis 2:22-25). He has, from the beginning of human history, given very specific ideas about what composes a divinely approved marriage (Matthew 19:1-4), consisting of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Article"","block_context":{"text":"Article","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/article\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/01\/What-Is-Sexual-Immorality-300x158.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":27877,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/if-a-husband-abuses-his-wife-during-sex-is-that-fornication\/","url_meta":{"origin":49735,"position":4},"title":"If a husband abuses his wife during sex, is that fornication?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"June 30, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: If a man abuses his wife during sex, or takes her in a way that is unloving and clearly destructive, can this be considered fornication? This would be sinning against one's own body as fornication is described as being in I Corinthians 6:18, considering the wife's body is his\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":36784,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/what-intimacies-are-allowed-or-not-allowed-to-engaged-couples\/","url_meta":{"origin":49735,"position":5},"title":"What intimacies are allowed or not allowed to engaged couples?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"January 27, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: My girlfriend and I are very grateful to the Lord for the love and gift we are to each other. We love the Lord and want to honor Him and His law for us as an unmarried but betrothed couple. We are committed to saving sex for marriage. I\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49735","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49735"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49735\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49735"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49735"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49735"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}The Old Testament<\/h2>\n
Fornication and Adultery<\/h2>\n
Is “Lust” Fornication?<\/h2>\n
The Consequences of the “Lust Equals Fornication” Argument<\/h2>\n
What about anger?<\/h3>\n
Consistency of interpretation<\/h3>\n
Luster and Lustee<\/h3>\n
Matthew 19:9<\/h3>\n
References<\/h2>\n
\n