Editor’s Note: The views expressed in this post are the author’s, and do reflect an official stance of Covenant Eyes. While recognizing the reality of brokenness caused by pornography, Covenant Eyes celebrates restored relationships whenever possible. We recommend our article 6 Powerful Stories of Marriages that Overcame Porn if you are looking for encouragement!
“I am hurting so much over this…If I believed in divorce I would already have done it, and I am beginning to maybe believe divorce is ok. After all, this seems like a type of adultery to me. Am I wrong?” – Mary Ann
After writing more than 1,200 articles for Covenant Eyes and having replied to too many comments and e-mails to count, undoubtedly the most heart-wrenching stories I hear are from women who are living with a porn-addicted husband.
When a woman has discovered her husband is entrenched in pornography, reactions can vary greatly, but for many women it is nothing short of traumatic. Whether she’s dealing with the initial blow of uncovering a 20-year-long secret addiction, or she’s facing the daily blow of her husband’s coldness, for these women their life feels like a living hell.
In the past, when asked if divorce could ever be a viable option for these women, my typical response has been a reluctant no. As much as my heart went out to these women trapped in horrific marriages, I simply didn’t see any biblical justification for divorce in situations of porn use.
About a year ago I decided I was going to write my Master’s thesis about this topic and had intended to write a robust biblical defense of my position.
I never imaged I would come to the opposite conclusion.
Some Caveats
Before we launch into this issue, let me state a few caveats.
- Divorce is ugly. We must acknowledge, when addressing the subject of grounds for divorce, the situation that even prompts us to ask this question is under divine judgment. It is a question that involves real hearts, real homes, and a real God who really hates divorce. So it is with great sobriety that we take up this study.
- Having grounds for divorce is not the same as actually getting divorced. This article seeks to answer the grounds question as it relates to pornography. But having legitimate grounds for divorce does not necessitate divorce.
- This article is long and heady. This is not a delicate how-to article for couples in crisis. It is a clumsy attempt to summarize a 33,000-word theological Master’s thesis. Reader be warned.
- The opinions expressed here are my own. Divorce is a contentious issue, and I won’t dare to assume a single article forever settles the debates. I only hope it is a significant addition to the discussion.
The Central Text: Matthew 19:9
The locus of the debate about whether pornography use is ground for divorce is Matthew 19:9:
“I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”
Time and space do not permit me to get into every detail of this text, but a few observations are important:
1. This comment comes after a very strong affirmation about the divine intention for marriage. Just a few verses prior, Jesus says, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4-5).
Jesus uses a type of exegesis common early rabbinic Judaism called gezerah shavah, where the activity of God in the first text (making us male and female) is inferred in the second text (the two becoming one flesh). Thus, God is one who joins man and woman together in the covenant bond of marriage. God is the one who unites husband and wife in whole-life oneness. Therefore, what God has joined together, man should not separate (v.6). Marriage is meant to be a lifelong, loving covenant bond.
2. Jesus strikes at the Pharisees’ liberal view of marriage by saying all remarriages after invalid divorces are adulterous. In Jesus’ day, the majority position, promoted by Rabbi Hillel, was “any cause” divorce: any kind of indecency—real or imaginary—was grounds for divorce. As such, divorce was actually quite common among the Pharisees. This view is reflected in the Pharisee’s opening question to Jesus: “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” (19:3, italics added). In other words, they were asking, “Jesus, do you agree with Hillel’s position on divorce?”
Jesus’ answer is ruthlessly conservative: getting remarried to another is adultery after getting an invalid divorce. Jesus uses similar logic in other divorce texts (Matthew 5:32; Mark 10:12; Luke 16:18). Against all the cultural expectations of young men to get married, after hearing Jesus’ brazenly conservative view, even the disciples second-guess whether marriage is worth it (Matthew 19:10). Nonetheless, Jesus is stalwart in his view, assaulting the very attitude behind the Pharisees’ question. Marriage is never to be thought of as a casual union, subject to the cavalier whims of an lordly male. Marriage must be treated with respect and reverence.
3. Jesus nuances His view with an exception clause. Jesus’ conservative approach does not mean all marriages are completely undissolvable. After a marriage is severed, remarriage to another is not adulterous in the case of πορνείᾳ (porneia)—sexual immorality.
The majority Protestant position understands porneia to include any illicit sexual intercourse outside of marriage.*
The critical matter for our consideration is this: Would Jesus include pornography use as a divorcible offense?
Straw-Man Arguments
Generally, when I bump into those who think porn use can be grounds for divorce, I come across three very bad arguments. In the past, the weakness of these arguments kept me firmly convinced that pornography in itself could never be biblical grounds for divorce.
Bad Argument #1: Pornography is detrimental to a marriage, therefore it is grounds for divorce.
I agree pornography can be detrimental to a marriage, but grounds for divorce ought not be determined by how detrimental a sin is.
Some theologians want to stretch the definition of porneia to the breaking point, saying it encompasses all manner of offenses like emotional or physical abuse, blasphemy, or other generally destructive behavior. Quite simply, regardless of what we say about these terrible offenses, there’s nothing about the term porneia that suggests these meanings. Jesus was thinking of sexual sins specifically.
Bad Argument #2: Porn = Lust = Adultery = Grounds for Divorce
Viewing porn generally involves lust. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said the man who looks at a woman lustfully commits adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5:28). Jesus also said adultery is grounds for divorce—if we take porneia to mean adultery (Matthew 5:32; 19:9). Therefore, it is argued, viewing porn must be grounds for divorce.
There are a couple major problems with this argument. First, it misapplies Jesus’ own words. The intention of Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount is to help His disciples understand the heart of the Law (Matthew 5:17). For instance, Jesus said to be innocent of murder is not enough; anger is also sinful and worthy judgment before the court and ultimately hellfire (v.21-22). It would be wrong to take Jesus’ hyperbolic comments about punishing anger and suggest we set up a formal tribunal to dish out penalties to those who speak harsh words to others. Similarly, to suggest spouses have grounds for divorce for moments of lust goes far beyond Jesus’ intention.
Second, to suggest instances of lust provide grounds for divorce is to give nearly any spouse in the world grounds for divorce. This liberalizes Jesus’ position so much it makes Him worse than the Pharisees he was rebuking.
Bad Argument #3: Pornography Comes from the Word Porneia
Some use a linguistic argument showing porneia’s relationship to the modern term “pornography.” The term “pornography,” meaning “writings of/about prostitutes,” stems from the Greek porn– word group.
However, this is an exegetical fallacy. To interpret a Greek term by how that term has impacted modern languages leads to illegitimate conclusions. For instance, when the Bible says, “God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Corinthians 9:8), it uses the term ἱλαρός (hilaros) from which we get the English word “hilarious.” If we tried to use a modern definition of “hilarious” to help us define the meaning of the original Greek term, we would come to erroneous conclusions. This makes a mistake of chronology: the Greek authors of the New Testament are not responsible for the development of another language hundreds of years after they wrote their materials.
Doubt Sets In
In the past when I’ve commented on the subject of porn and divorce, my motivation has been to defend Jesus’ conservative view of marriage against the encroachments of liberalism—all the while, trying to show immense compassion for the person whose spouse is deeply mired in pornography.
I reasoned, “Sure, in instances where porn addiction escalates to physical adultery or when an unbelieving spouse is so mired in porn they utterly abandon the marriage, we can talk about the possibility of divorce. But porn use in an of itself is not a legitimate grounds for divorce.”
Generally, the question tends to be phrased this way: “Can pornography use ever be considered adultery?” If it can, some reason, it could be grounds for divorce. Of course, answers to that question will vary depending on who you talk to.
But I now believe we come to misinformed stances on this issue because we’re simply asking the wrong question.
A couple years ago I watched a short video interview with Pastor Douglas Wilson where he addresses this very question. Wilson’s point is that when Jesus uses the term porneia in Matthew 19:9, it is a broad term for “sexual uncleanness,” including adultery but not limited to adultery.
Not too long after this I read these words by Pastor John MacArthur in his book The Divorce Dilemma: God’s Last Word on Lasting Commitment:
In the Greek text, Jesus employs the word porneia, which is capable of a broad range of meanings. It is a general term for fornication (illicit sexual intercourse), but can also apply to various kinds of lascivious or immoral behavior, ranging from a moral flaw in one’s character (such as an obsessive addiction to pornography) to the act of bestiality—or even worse. It’s not the specific Greek word for adultery, which would be moicheia—but certainly includes adultery. (The Divorce Dilemma, p.23-24)
Here were two conservative theologians saying essentially the same thing: Jesus didn’t say “except for adultery”; He said “except for porneia,” which is a broader term.
I knew further investigation was warranted, so I set out to find answers.
So, What Does Porneia Mean?
Often, lexicons will define porneia as illicit or unsanctioned sexual intercourse or any sexual activity outside of marriage. The word can also have a nuanced meaning determined by context—such as a specific kind of sexual sin like incest or prostitution.
A widespread Protestant position on Matthew 19:9 is that Jesus is speaking primarily of adultery, and there’s good reason to think this. Nearly any kind of porneia you can name, when committed by a married person, is adulterous in effect. Adultery was the commonly assumed ground for divorce in the Near East in Jesus’ day, so undoubtedly, this was the primary manifestation of porneia that would have come to mind for Jesus’ listeners.
But there are many reasons to believe porneia is not merely a synonym for adultery—even though the terms are closely linked.
- Porneia and adultery are often paired as separate sins in the New Testament (Matthew 15:19; Mark 7:22; 1 Corinthians 6:9; Hebrews 13:4).
- In the New Testament, the term porneia sometimes implies not just isolated acts of sexual immorality but habitual immorality and an attitude of lasciviousness (Romans 1:29; Galatians 5:19; Colossians 3:5; Revelation 2:21).
- Other works of Greek literature show porneia is not synonymous with adultery, but is rather the disposition and behavior that leads to adultery (Sirach 23:23; Herm. 1:3-8).
- Sometimes the word is used to describe an attitude and motivation of lust and objectification (Tobit 8:7).
In other words, porneia focuses on the violating attitude and act, where as adultery focuses on a common effect of this act.
With this broader meaning in mind, it is best to not translate porniea as “adultery” (The Message) or “fornication” (KJV, ASV). The terms “unfaithfulness” (NLT, Phillips) or “sexual unfaithfulness” (CEB) could also lead be misleading. Rather “sexual immorality” (ESV, HCSB, NIV, NKJV) or “unchastity” (NRSV) are closer to the actual meaning.
Prostitution in Rome in the Days of Christ
The word porneia is also undeniably linked to the concept of prostitution. In Greek culture, the complexes where prostitution took place were called porneia. It was also a term of derision: people who held licentious parties in their homes were said to turn their houses into porneia. Thus, if we’re going to understand what the term porneia means, we need to understand the profession of prostitution as it was practiced in Jesus’ day.
Prostitution was practiced all throughout the Mediterranean region, including Israel, Egypt, Chaldea, Phoenicia, Syria—and especially Greece and later Rome. In the sixth century B.C., the statesman Salon of Athens was not only the “father of democracy,” he was also the father of state-sponsored sex slavery, establishing houses of prostitution in Athens and filling them with female slaves. Brothels were found throughout Athens, especially near the marketplace and in front of the citadel. Throughout Greece, it was generally accepted that young men and even married men would frequent prostitutes.
Rome essentially followed much of the Athenian model and developed laws to regulate prostitution. The first time Roman administrators established a full registry of Rome’s brothels there were 64 official bordellos containing 35,000 women and 2,000 men. Prostitution in Rome complimented the mixed sexual morals of the culture.
But the sex industry also had a vibrant and visible entertainment wing. In a class of their own were the prostitutes that engaged in formal entertainment: the aulētris (flute player), the psaltria (singer), and the orchēstris (dancer). These entertainers had a generally low sexual and social status, though highly talented entertainers were counted among the upper-class courtesans. These entertainers were common at Athenian banquets and private parties. Ionian and Phrygian woman were widely know and at times well paid for their skills: a performance of flute playing, zither playing, or drumming combined with erotic dancing that amounted to a striptease. Often they had other skills such as juggling, fencing, and acrobatics.
While these entertainers also worked the streets, they frequented Greek symposia (parties for socializing, drinking, intellectual discussion, and entertainment).There are numerous references to erotic dancers in comedic and sympotic literature. The comic playwright Aristophanes called these women “dancing pornai.”
Pornography as the Entertainment Wing of Prostitution
While the erotic dancers, singers, and flute players of ancient Rome were specialized entertainers in their own right, they were, at the heart of their profession, slave-prostitutes. Their erotic performances at banquets and symposia were a manifestation of their trade—the sale of their bodies for the pleasure of freemen.
The parallels between the modern porn industry and the symposia entertainers of Rome show us that the term porneia was not limited merely to behaviors involving sexual intercourse, but all kind of licentious behaviors, embracing both activity and attitude.
- First and foremost is the nature of their professions: the sale of their bodies for sex and their roles as “entertainers” for the lusts and enjoyment of men. For the orchēstris of Rome, the open door symposia was their stage. For prostituted women today, their stage is millions of publicly accessible websites. Thanks to webcam technology, for instance, there is virtually no line between “interactive pornography” and virtual prostitution.
- Like the brothels of ancient Athens and Rome, women in porn industry today are subjected to the same kinds of terrible conditions in their line of work: body-punishing sex, STDs, as well as a toxic and abusive environment.
- Like many of the lowest class of slave-prostitutes in ancient Rome, many of those featured in porn films today are indeed trafficked women and children. Others are in positions of economic desperation—they “consent” to a life of prostitution, but only in the most demented sense of the word.
- Like the few select aulētrides of ancient Rome who climbed ladder of success to be counted among the wealthy and elite, the porn industry too has its superstars. Big money-makers branch out beyond their personal appearances in porn films to build a brand around their name, and like the prostitute-entertainers of old, gain a measure of freedom and wealth.
- Like the socially respectable symposia of ancient Rome, the pornography industry in Western culture has become mainstream. With the proliferation of porn, in many circles casual or even routine engagement with porn is seen as normal and healthy. In addition, mainstream movies, television, theater, music, and advertising have become porn-like—what Brian McNair calls “the pornographication of the mainstream.”
The pornography industry is the entertainment wing of prostitution, just as the dancing girls of the brothels (the porneia) in the Roman Empire were the sources of entertainment for Roman nobility.
An analogy might bring some clarity to the question. At what point in the following series of scenarios does someone cease to be guilty of porneia?
- Scenario #1: A man openly, habitually, and unrepentantly frequents prostitutes to have sex with them (clearly porneia).
- Scenario #2: A man openly, habitually, and unrepentantly visits homes where prostitution is taking place, but instead of having sex with them, he immerses himself in the sex-saturated environment, watching the orgies, so he can masturbate in front of them.
- Scenario #3: A man openly, habitually, and unrepentantly connects to prostitutes online to watch live-stream videos of them having sex with others while he masturbates.
- Scenario #4: A man openly, habitually, and unrepentantly watches recorded videos of prostitutes having sex with others while he masturbates.
- Scenario #5: A man openly, habitually, and unrepentantly watches the same videos as scenario #4, but the women don’t call themselves prostitutes. They call themselves “porn stars.”
Drawing a hard line is no easy task. The change of physical proximity, timing, or labeling of the participants does not change the fact that in each scenario the man is seeking the services of prostituted women to immerse himself in a world of licentiousness.
Jeremiah 3-4: The Key to Application
In my studies about this issue, the million dollar question I kept asking is this: How does a person differentiate between the everyday lusts of the heart and the kind of porneia Jesus says is a divorcible offense?
The answer is found in the rest of Jesus’ comments to the Pharisees.
After stating his position on the matter, the Pharisees ask Jesus, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” (Matthew 19:7). The background to their question is the first century debate about Moses’ divorce legislation in Deuteronomy 24:1-4. If Moses permitted divorce, how does this square with Jesus’ very conservative position?
Jesus replies with this statement: “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so” (Matthew 19:8). God permitted divorce under Moses, and still permits divorce, as a concession for the victims of partners with hard and stubborn hearts.
Behind Jesus’ answer is Jeremiah 3-4, God’s dire warning to Judah that judgment is coming unless she repents of her unfaithfulness. As her covenant husband (Isaiah 54:5; Jeremiah 2:2; Ezekiel 16:8-14), God wants to shower blessings on her, but she is rebellious, prostituting herself before other gods. He threatens to divorce Judah just as He did Israel.
That this is the text in Jesus’ mind is evidenced by three major observations:
- Jeremiah is clearly alluding to Moses’ divorce legislation from Deuteronomy 24 in his prophecy (Jeremiah 3:1,8). In fact, it is the one indisputable text in the whole Old Testament that makes reference to Moses’ divorce law, so it makes perfect sense why Jesus would appeal to it in light of the Pharisee’s question.
- In the Greek translation of this text (the LXX), the term porneia is used to describe Israel’s sin. “Because she took her whoredom [porniea] lightly, she polluted the land, committing adultery with stone and tree” (3:9). Repeatedly, Judah’s sin is likened to prostitution (3:1-2, 6-10, 13), a sin for which God sent Israel away with a decree of divorce (3:8).
- In the Greek translation of this text, the term “hardness of heart” (σκληροκαρδίαν) is used (4:4)—the same term Jesus uses to describe the reason why divorce is permissible in certain instances. Judah was not merely playing the whore. She treated her prostitution lightly (3:9). Judah refused to be ashamed of her sin (3:3). She was rebellious (3:13). Her seeming repentance was nothing but pretense (3:10). In a word, Judah was hardhearted in her unfaithfulness.
In other words, if divorces must happen at all, they should happen according to pattern given to us by God Himself. God divorced Israel because of her porneia and hardness of heart, which amounted to more than just adultery—it was unrepentant rebellion.
On this basis, some Christian denominations have recognized Jesus did not mean that single acts of sexual thoughtlessness are grounds for divorce—not even in case of a physical affair—but rather Jesus was talking about persistent, unrepentant sexual sin.
The same is true of pornography use. Alone, instances of using pornography or even a habit of looking at porn are not the only factors to consider. Rather, it is critical to assess hardness of heart.
Thus, we should not think of grounds for divorce as a solid line one crosses but rather a continuum of heart-hardening sexual rebellion. God did not divorce Israel after a single instance of spiritual adultery—had He done that, He could have divorced her at Mt. Sinai, or in the wilderness, or during the reign of the judges, or during Solomon’s reign. God was patient, but eventually He wrote Israel a bill of divorce and sent her away into exile because of her callousness.
Porn and Hardness of Heart: Practicing Discernment
Even if we’re convinced pornography use can be a manifestation of hardhearted sexual rebellion, how do we assess the state of someone’s heart?
The words of Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17 are particularly helpful in this regard. Here Jesus offers for His followers a model of confrontation in cases of persistent sin.
If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Jesus presents a three-tiered approach:
- In cases of pornography use, assuming the offending partner has not brought the offense to light of his own accord, the first people to discover the offense are often those closest to the situation. This can be spouse, a child, or even an employer. Regardless of the circumstances of the discovery, an individual Christian should approach the offending spouse to discuss the nature of his fault. This should be done with a motivation of restoration: “If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.”
- If this confrontation is not followed by a process of clear repentance and reconciliation, “one or two others” should then become involved. These two or three individuals—ideally those who are spiritually mature and objective—can lovingly confront the offender and, if necessary, provide witness to the confrontation should the case be brought to the church as a whole later on.
- If this conversation or series of conversations are met with a refusal to listen, the church should be made aware of the sin. How one should “tell it to the church,” of course, involves discernment and will depend somewhat on how the church is governed. In this third stage, the goal is still restoration, not unnecessary humiliation.
If this final confrontation is met with stubborn refusal to listen, the result should be excommunication: “let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector,” that is, as an outsider and unrepentant sinner. And yet even this should be done in a spirit that aims at the sinner’s eventual repentance (1 Corinthians 5:5; 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15).
As for the offended spouse, this process of church discipline should serve as a divinely given means to both expose hardness of heart as well as push the erring person in one direction or another.
Vicki Tiede, in her book When Your Husband is Addicted to Pornography, advocates for women to go through these three levels of confrontation prescribed in Matthew 18:15-17. Tiede includes a couple helpful diagrams for wives to consider so they can discern the Lord’s will in their situation. First, she asks women to consider their own hearts: on a scale of 1 to 10, how forgiving they have been with their husbands?
Next, she asks women to examine their husbands’ hearts, evidenced by their behavior: on a scale of 1 to 10, how repentant have their husbands been as they have been confronted by the church?
Tiede writes, “Divorce enters the picture if heart is operating near the high end of the scale, with continuous movement towards ten, while your husband’s heart is operating very near the low end of the scale” (p.246).
Once the third and final level of confrontation is reached, Vicki Tiede recommends a time of mediated separation for the couple in order to “create the crisis necessary for him to seek help and finally work toward restoration,” with the goal still being the restoration of the marriage. She writes:
“Think of it this way: the greatest gift you can give your husband is to love God more than you love your husband. God can redeem your husband; you cannot. Thus you love him more by loving in light of his need to repent” (p.244).
It is important churches and spouses avoid unnecessary extremes when it comes to church discipline. On one hand, it is best to keep the number of people involved deliberately small. The tenor behind Jesus’ words is to keep the matter as narrow as possible when it comes to involving others in the communication. On the other hand, church members should avoid making promises of “confidentiality” in the strict sense of the word. To promise not to gossip or slander is biblical, but to promise confidentiality only closes the door to future biblical discipline.
Churches should not rush the process. Each stage of communication might take several meetings, especially if there are at least hints of cooperation from the offending spouse. Plus, only time will tell just how much the erring spouse has truly listened at any stage. The goal is not only the promise to stop the pornographic behavior, but the rebuilding of trust and intimacy in the marriage through changed behavior. Tiede comments:
“You will choose to trust your husband when you are ready. Don’t worry—trusting and forgiving are not the same thing. Rebuilding trust will probably take much longer than it will take to forgive. You will know it’s time to trust when your heart helps you to choose to believe that he will make the right choices. His behaviors will become your trust barometer” (p.89).
Conclusion
In my opinion, pornography use, when it is hardhearted and unrepentant, can certainly qualify as porneia and therefore grounds for divorce.
The Westminster Confession of Faith wisely urges, in the unfortunate and hopefully rare cases where divorce is being considered, that “a public and orderly course of proceeding is to be observed; and the persons concerned in it not left to their own wills and discretion, in their own case.” As in many highly emotional and life-altering situations, when divorce is being considered, God does not want couples to be left on their own to discern His will and wisdom in the matter.
As the church we have a high calling to stand with couples in crisis and point them to the One whose love for His bride knows no end, whose justice is perfect, and whose grace increases more than all the infidelities in the world.
* For the sake of simplicity and brevity, in this article we do not address some of the other views of how porneia should be translated in this text, such as an unlawful or illicit marriage or as premarital sex before or during betrothal. These views have been championed by many intelligent Catholic and Protestant commentators, and they are dealt with at length in my thesis.
Kay, I read the article you recommended and I’m intellectually drawn to a strong suspicion that the woman who wrote that article is little more than a secular feminist clothed in religious terminology garb, whether she realizes it or not. She makes powerful sweeping justifications for divorce surrounding the issue of a woman’s husband using pornography but her supportive evidence is no where presented. This strikes me as an illustration of a person walking into a theater and not finding a desirable seat so shouts out “There is a terrorist in the theater, get out quickly!” To do so would be selfish at best and dangerous and illegal at worst. Feminism adds very little of value to this subject and the using of pornography all by itself is a HORRIBLE justification for a wholesale recommendation of divorce towards the offending partner.
I’ve already addressed the logical fallacy and lack of evidence you use for suggesting divorce against those who enjoy porn, but I think you go far beyond a godly response to the concern you have for porn use. The whole field of moral struggle is sooo broad, and wholesale recommending divorce for the woman involved in a marriage where a spouse is using it shows clear evidence of your inability to accurately interpret the bible on this subject and a reckless approach to the sanctity of marriage.
You are willing to throw away a morally struggling spouse without clearly addressing that it is possible the bible might not be denying a place for erotic media or that a partner who is struggling with over use of such material may be doing so for deeply serious emotional issues or perhaps that his wife may be so hopelessly conflicted about her sexuality that she is literally driving him into something he would not otherwise be as inclined towards. Each case requires intensive exploration, not quick and easy broad sweeping answers of support for the offended party, as you so often do in this blog.
There are sooo many issues involved in the struggle with pornography, and you are treating many of those issues as if they weren’t as challenging as they are or worthy of far better definition by you and the compassion Christ would bring to such things.
The vast majority of those pontificating on this subject on the internet do so behind glass houses using straw man arguments and manifesting a clear failure to accurately interpret scripture on sexual matters. You caution very intensely about porn’s dangers and evils, and certainly some of those exist, but I caution you in your over zealous approach to helping the offended spouse of a porn user. You will likely one day emerge from the confusion you express and realize you have unwittingly encouraged the dissolution of many marriages that might otherwise have been helped by a more moderate approach to erotic media, encouragement towards therapy and help for the truly porn addicted offender, and therapy for the woman who is either so wounded by past issues or confused by bad bible interpretation on sexual matters, that she is needlessly throwing away her marriage.
I am not saying I don’t believe there is biblical justification for moral violations. I do! But, I do not believe all porn use represents a justification for divorce, and I believe such an over reaction is more due to flawed biblical interpretation and personal emotional wounding that has been unaddressed in the person who is quick to recommend divorcing the porn user.
Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:27 and 28 simply do not support a wholesale rejection of erotic media. To say it does is to inject an emotional over reaction that is foreign to the intent of His words. His words are meant to protect from the damage that adultery and fornication brings to both the offenders and the offended. The bible draws clear boundaries as regards what takes place in the mind and what becomes actual adultery. To say that Jesus was calling for divorce for any spouse married to a person who enjoys some erotic imagery is to compare a non cancerous lump of tissue to a cancerous tumor and calling for radical surgery. Don’t get lost in the failure of that illustration to perfectly make the point I’m making. I’m simply saying you are calling something evil that is not always evil. If you can’t see this as a reality then I’d love to have you privately share with me the titles of all the TV programs, advertisements, the movies you’ve watched over the last 10 years, and the Cosmopolitan magazine covers you’ve scanned in the grocery line and allow me to show you how hopelessly conflicted you are in your position against all erotic media. Feel free to contact me via my email address and I’d be happy to help you with this. You are compromised by the very things you allow and either just don’t want to admit it or you don’t see how it is true. You watch things that if you applied your porn censorship standards towards you’d realize make you as nearly in violation of your moral standards as you indict the porn user for.
Jesus isn’t forbidding the enjoyment of erotic media…He’s forbidding the violence of adultery and fornication. One can lead to the other but in the vast number of cases it doesn’t, any more than that those who drink a glass of wine will become drunken wife beaters. You should know this, and I believe you do, but you’ve allowed your misguided compassion for the victims of addicted porn users to cloud your best interpretational skills and wisdom. I’d love to help…
Yours in Christ
Tom
Women are whole, full, entire human beings who are not required to put up with being the object of male sin, including their husband’s sin.
Women get to have healthy boundaries, including divorcing a husband who refuses to be responsible for his own choices.
I’m happy to continue in my compassion for victims, and I know that Jesus meets me there.
Peace to you,
Kay
Erotic media – doesn’t that involve looking at a person on their nakedness? The whole purpose of erotic media is to FEED lust. That is purposeful intend. Being a nurse, for example, and seeing someone unclothed is not for intend for lust…however, if lust is provoked, we are to make a choice…continue pursuing and invite it or cut it off and turn from it. Sin starts in the mind, and our choice will determine our behavior. …breeding sin or killing it…each one has this temptation.
Is it proper for a person to go into a married couple bedroom and watch them make love?
God has purpose with sex in humans. It has boundaries. It reveals Himself and intimacy with Him. Yes, God does forbid erotic spectating. We are to be separate (holy) from the world and it’s pleasures. And sex is only for marriage and exclusive to each marriage. May we all be challenged to put on the mind of Christ. (Could you imagine Jesus, while on Earth, watching erotic media or watching a couple in their marriage bed?)
Luke, thanks for the careful study you did and presented via this website, however…I suspect you, Kay, and many others who have written here in agreement with your conclusions have made the classic error of “failing to see the forest for the trees.”
Let me begin by saying my back ground of study is very similar to yours. I have studied and taught New Testament Greek for many years and am similarly capable in Hebrew language study as well. I say that to hopefully create at least a little openness to hear some of my concerns with your conclusions. I have given great thought, deep study, serious prayer, and honest reflection upon the things I’m about to write.
I believe you have made a false leap of logic. In other words, you are trying to understand what Jesus is thinking when He condemns adulterous thoughts and does so warning against “Porneia”. You knew absolutely nothing from scripture could be found to directly link the use of pornography with His meaning for Porneia so you looked beyond scripture into the forbidden world of Greek and Roman ribald lifestyles, especially into the world of ancient prostitution and you imported into His meaning what you discovered about men attending what amounts to ancient sex clubs for the purpose of viewing lewd sexual behavior for a masturbating audience. Is such “importing” valid?
First, there is absolutely no way of our knowing it was because Jesus makes no reference to such places of viewing. Second, we don’t even know if He knew of such places (apart from Him being God in the flesh and knowing all things…but would have limited His application of His unlimited knowing to the folks who were listening to Him), since nothing of that kind of thing would have existed in the local Jewish culture He was speaking into. Third, because of this we would be on much more solid ground to assume his background frame of reference would have been the Law of Moses, rather than some far off distant sex club in Rome.
So, if it is unreasonable to “assume” that it is appropriate to interpret Jesus’ words in light of distant sex clubs and it is far more likely to “assume” his historical and cultural context is that of Israel’s past and the Law of Moses, then we are left with concluding that Jesus had this “near” context in mind rather than some strange far off distant one.
Second, you, along with the vast majority of commentators throughout the world wide web of Christian protestors against sexual imagery, have made a pretty significant interpretational error surrounding the word “Lust.” You errantly interpret it as follows : “Lust equals seeing a sexual image and being stimulated by it, or lust equals creating a mental sexual image and being stimulated by it.” When, by comparing Romans 7:7 with Exodus 20:17 it becomes clear as to what Jesus was thinking when he thought about the term “Lust.” Romans 7:7 “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.”
It is extremely clear that to both Paul and Jesus the concept of “lust” that they were concerned with was far more than a mental image in the mind of an individual stimulated by the thought or visual image of some sexual behavior, but rather is to be defined by “an intention to obtain the object of that mental or visual image, no matter who it hurts.” For such “obtaining” to take place one would have to completely disdain both the Lord and the object of his lust and risk all so as to engage in a sexual relationship with them. For this reason, God considered it to be such a “high uplifted hand” against the integrity and will of God that it was worthy of death, and secondarily of course worthy of being divorced for (if and when under the New Covenant the death penalty for such behavior was no longer in force, while divorce would be.)
Why would lust/covetousness be so wrong? Because the obtaining of what is lusted after will ALWAYS or at least almost always lead to the destruction lives – in terms of emotional destruction and marriage destruction, as well as to families, reputations, and personal emotional moral collapse, whereas mental imagery is far less likely to cause such destruction unless one employs overly emotional and irrational thinking towards it, as well as failing to understanding how God made people.
And why would such an interpretation be both reasonable and logical? Because of another set of what should be obvious facts:
1) God has made humans capable of being stimulated by things sexually stimulating. In measure it is how He leads people to marry and procreate. Mental sexual stimulation is a HUGE factor in the normal human mating process.
2) There has never been a person and never will be a person who has not been often stimulated by things sexually stimulating.
3) In literally a split second a person can undress, have a full experience of sexual intercourse, and be dressed and on their way again, all in the context of their mind.
4) There has never been and never will be a person who doesn’t engage in such a mental imagination from time to time.
So, if such mental imagery can happen so quickly, is so part and parcel with being a normal person made in the image of God who gave the capacity for mental imagery, then by your definition of “divorceable behaviors” every single man and woman is worthy of being divorced and indirectly worthy to be stoned. Don’t be too quick to move forward with the rest of what is written here before you have thoroughly digested the honest logic of the above statements. You are human, you experience mental imagery, and you know the difference between an image and an intent to carry out that imagination.
I am not hereby justifying the use or pornography, but I am saying that your conclusions are far more drawn from emotional support of those who have been emotionally wounded by their spouses who have used pornography and those wounded spouses whose negative predisposition against all mental sexual imagery, than you are from the clearest and most obvious biblical meaning.
You also, as do almost all web site teachers, fail to recognize and negatively castigate the use of TV, Music, Social Issue Magazines, and non porn Movies. While I feel great empathy and compassion for the women who have commented here as to the pain they perceive pornography to have inflicted on their lives and families, I submit that I suspect they are also hopelessly conflicted by the positions they have taken due to their watching watered down versions of online pornography that is viewed on virtually all evening time TV, which of course includes exposure to Victoria Secret advertisements. Why have they chosen, as the objects of their angst, just pornography, yet they themselves also watch TV that they should recognize represents a hypocritical at worst and confused approach at best to this whole issue?
Why do those who so vociferously attack pornography fail to make the logical and honest connections to the TV they love and cherish?
Continuing on… Do the women who have voiced such anger towards porn EVER where swimsuits to beaches, or worse yet “bikinis”, or visit beaches where such swim wear is worn? I submit a certainty that they do and they are replete with their internal sets of justifications for doing so, but is this not just hypocrisy and/or confusion on their parts? Because the very moment the normal male sees that much of woman’s anatomy on a beach he is instantly going to experience a rush of mental imagery of her being naked and/or being engaged in sex with her right there on the beach. While this illustration might infuriate the many women who have expressed themselves here there is not one man on this planet who would not agree with me and being honest in doing so. No Men see scantily clad women, or women walking down the street in skin tight leggings or skinny jeans, or blouses that show any breast contouring or cleavage without imaging instantaneously what their bodies might look like naked. Are you prepared to attack your husbands for this normal male experience as intensely as you do their use of porn? If you do then I guarantee you every single women on this planet should begin divorce proceedings immediately because this is normal male response to sexual images.
And, before we conclude this is a distinctively “Male” issue, you need to be honest ladies that the vast majority of you have been walking behind a man on the sidewalk with a sexy figure, or seen a male on TV with a sexy figure, and been sexually stimulated by what you have seen and have imagined what they might look like either partially or fully naked.
I will tell you something you will not agree with or like to hear, but I am convinced that the vast number of marriages that have been torn about due to the use of pornography have experienced much of that tearing due to unreasonable attitudes about human sexuality than by the porn use itself.
Now, I want to be quick to say, that while I think much of the communication on this blog has less than valid supporting evidence or thinking behind them, I do VERY MUCH believe the use of pornography by SOME men and women has been entirely unhealthy, destructive, terrible, and as sinful as anything could possibly be. There are horrible manifestations of human abuse expressed in millions of pornographic images on the web. Sex trafficking is an outrageous practice. Any form of prostitution that is involved in pornography, especially a pornography where the woman is being forced to perform acts of indescribable human degradation should be hated, despised, and banned from all use. Women who are intimated, forced, tricked, or manipulated into performing acts for pornographic purposes should have everyone’s compassion and concern. No question about it. But, this is not what is being rejected on this blog. What is being rejected is EVERY aspect of sexual imagination that doesn’t involve one’s spouse. This is willful blind denial of the way God has made people. People have always and will always have to control the unavoidable instances of sexual imagination and be certain to keep it as an “imagination” only and never allowing it to become the beginning of a commitment to seek out the obtaining of what is imagined.
Please, please, please…before you throw your marriage away ask yourselves some very penetrating questions:
1) Am I about to throw away my spouse because I have been abused in my past and am injecting that abuse into my belief system and marriage as relates to human sexuality?
2) Am I conditioned more by people’s emotions on this subject than the bible and God Himself?
3) Am I inclined towards a non grace orientation to life and towards a legalistic and condemnation approach towards things I don’t personally like or understand?
4) Is some respected teacher’s perspective molding my thinking more than an accurate interpretation of Scripture or God Himself?
5) Am I applying a truly CONSISTENT application of what I say I believe about marriage, divorce, and marital conflict around this subject of mental stimulation as compared to my willingness to watch the TV I watch and dress the way I dress?
These will not be easy things for folks to process. It will be far easier for you to read what I have written here and assume I must be a universal porn supporter, and I will tell you here that such is not the case. I believe porn has ruined many people’s lives (men and women) but I do not believe the porn itself is the cause of that destruction as much as its use, the sexual aberrations it encourages, and the mental condition of those using it.
It is high time for the body of Christ to awaken to the logical fallacy of their reasonings in much of the web discussion on this subject. Far too many support an illogical/emotional approach rather than a truly biblical well reasoned one.
Having said these things…my heart goes out to the many who have experienced deep pain as surrounds this subject and the effects of it on their marriages. Only God can heal such pain and my prayers are with each of you towards that healing.
Here’s another great article entitled, A High View of Marriage Includes Divorce. Women are not required to be subject to sin, and that includes their husband’s sin. Blaming women for their husband’s sin (watching the TV you watch, dressing the way you dress) while expecting them to submit to sin? May it never be.
Thank you, this article has shed so much light on my circumstances. I am married to for the last 10 years, and early on in our marriage I caught my husband watching porn. Actually I caught him before marriage….watching teen pornography. However, I doubt if thoughts girls were older than 10. He told me that it was normal and that I am over reacting. Everyone does it… I was very naïve and believed him. Although we are both Christians. It didn’t bother me as much then. The secrecy behind it hurt a lot more.
However, once we were married our sex live suffered. I couldn’t understand why he had so little desire to be intimate with me. I am above average looking and I had plenty of opportunities to stray but I am totally against that. Once we were married, I caught him a couple of times and the pain was dreadful. I couldn’t understand why I felt so betrayed and sad. When he saw how much main he is causing me, he vowed to never look at porn again. At times our marriage was better, but I struggled to show him affection outside of the bedroom. When we did have sex it was purely physical. And so we carried on with a marriage that was unloving and mostly sexless but we were both against divorce. We are good friends and get along fine other ways. He is not abusive, is a good father, etc.
The few times we made love it was wonderful physically, but I didn’t feel emotionally close to him. We have gotten use to not being emotionally close, and it feels like we both prefer it now. I am so terrible sad and alone in this marriage, but don’t want to disobey God by getting a divorce. I’ve got 3 children and I feel that I should think of them rather than myself.
However this article has explained why I am feeling like I do. Adultery (Porn) has been part of our marriage from the start. I told him that he has been exposed to porn when we are intimate. I don’t feel special, he looks at my body and don’t see me. It is like he is desensitized by a woman’s body. I can never complete with the images in his mind and I am always wondering who else is in bed with us now.
For the last couple of years, I can’t get myself to touch him. He complains about this a lot, but I feel dead inside. It’s like my body knows something that I don’t.
Since we havent been intimate in the last 4 weeks and him not showing any interest, I asked him last night if he has masturbated in the last couple of weeks. He said that he doesn’t think so. What kind of answer is that? Getting suspious about his answer I asked him if he is still watching porn and he just ignored my question.
I am really hurting. He is avoiding time alone in bed with me, by watching tv until I fall asleep. I start to suspect now that he have been watching porn and masturbating all along and become just more clever in hiding it. Always thought he just have a low libido, but maybe just with me…
I don’t know what to do. I am 40, maybe I should get a divorce and try to be happy for what is left of my life. Or do I sacrafice my happiness for the sake of my children?
Throughout our marriage I have been the main bread winner and I thought maybe that is why, it is affecting the dynamics in our marriage. Apart from me being the bread winner, I am also responsible for the household duties and the children. He would help my sometimes but it lies on my shoulders. So then I ask myself, what is really going to change if we get a divorce. We will just have different addresses, but the rest will just carry on as normal. (we only see him weekends as it is anyway)
I would really appreciate advise.
Daisy, it’s time to think about your boundaries. I’m sorry that you didn’t feel empowered to stand up for yourself earlier in life, but midlife is often the time when we realize that if we don’t do something now, we’re stuck in toxic relationships forever. We cannot control the choices of others, but we can be responsible for ourselves. Here, here and here are some articles on boundaries to help you think this through. You might also want to find a therapist to help you choose healthy boundaries, someone who can support you as you maintain them and work your way into healthy new patterns of living. You’re in a unique position as primary breadwinner; many women lose almost their entire way of life when they separate or divorce, and that sounds like it will not be the case for you, which is great. You have the freedom to choose what is healthy for you, and I hope that you will do so! Peace, Kay
My husband was addicted to porn several years ago. Since then he’s repented and turned away from his sin, only after he got caught. However, back then I wanted a divorce but felt I wasn’t allowed to based on the belief it wasn’t real adultery so I didn’t file. I have not been the same ever since. Our marriage has been awful from then on and there’s times when he’s verbally abusive. I have so much anxiety when he’s around that it’s affecting my health. Sadly, I have not been in love with him for years bc of all this. Do I still have biblical grounds to divorce him?
Hey there.
You may appreciate this article called A High View of Marriage Includes Divorce. I do not believe that God calls any woman, anywhere, ever, to be abused in any way. I don’t have a verse for that, but abuse is so antithetical to the character of God that I cannot imagine God condoning such behavior for any reason whatsoever. I think you might benefit from the online resources at Bloom for Women, where they take a trauma-informed approach to healing.
Peace,
Kay
Excellent article and well researched ! I could not find a thing wrong with it. It was balanced and fairly marked out the arguments we make to prove are indignity is biblical and our bibilical logic is sound. After reading this article 3 times I better objectively understand God’s position of hard heart and sexual immorality.
This combination seems to be happening in my relationship with my husband. I was not offended by the straw arguments. I did not feel thrown under the bus when asked to remain married even though my husband has horribly defiled me. You really want to pursue what the bible verses for divorce really imply and I do too! Besides, truth be told, I have already been dealing with long term rejection due to porn and heavy alcohol use by the person whose opinion means the most to me. In fairness to my husband, he has physical pain and stiffness related to psoriactic arthritis but this became the point of deception.
I naively believed our issues were from his arthritis, but instead he was maladaptively coping. Sadly, our marriage has been destroyed in this four year process. God told me to ask him if he was doing porn? The reason God put this on my heart derived from a series of podcasts I had been listening to on being set free. Yes, I do believe God speaks to me and it always coincides with the bible. My husband admitted the truth and we have been separated for 2 months. He is dragging his feet to get help and I have become an erratic person going through the grief cycle.
My question for you is how do I get others to talk with him when he no longer goes to church and believes that reading his bible everyday is how he will meet with God? I have given him ultimatums of quit drinking and go to church or we won’t make it. Nothing has changed. At this point I’ve had enough rejection and passing of responsibility to the point I don’t want to work on my marriage. I want to be without all this pain and drama.
Your article gave me biblical grounds for divorce and that is what I want. Am I wrong to think like this?
Hey Susan,
The tough thing in a situation like this is that you can’t control another person. Your husband has to make healthy choices for himself, while you make healthy choices for yourself. Here, here and here are some articles that might be helpful as you think this through.
You are God’s child, and you deserve to be treated with value and respect. If your husband isn’t able to do that, let him have the consequences of his choices.
Peace to you,
Kay
Hi Luke,
Thank you for your well-researched article. I appreciate all the hard work put into this. I am sure it required countless hours of your time as well as much energy and emotion. I appreciated the read.
I am currently in a situation that is very difficult. My husband of seven years (who has been lust addicted for more than 20 years) is always seemingly repentant when his sin comes to light. However, his behavior does not change. He seems genuine in his desire to do the right thing, but I am beginning to believe that the decades of porn addiction and narcissism have rendered him incabable of anything but lust, selfishness, and submission to impulse. I, meanwhile, am beginning to lose health, both mental and physical. I am becoming concerned for my own survival, as the last episode we walked through caused significant physical issues for me, which made it extremely difficult to care for our children. I have always been loyal, and forgiving, and have continued to hold out hope. However, I am seeing my life now as a long, dark tunnel that will not end. I am finding it next to impossible to discern whether his seemingly sincere repentance is something I should trust. I am asking you, because I am not looking for someone to tell me only what they think I want to hear. I have never shied away from following the Lord’s will, suffering included, but something has shifted inside me this year, and I am concerned that I will not make it through this marriage in a state of mental, emotional or physical wholeness. I’m sure you are busy, but any advice would be appreciated.
P.S. I also feel I should mention that we have gone to church leaders with this issue, and as he always seems genuinely repentant, they have advised to “keep soldiering on”.
Hi Luke,
Thank so much for sharing your research on this. I would love to be able to read your full thesis at some point if that is a possibility because I have some remaining questions/concerns about this proposal. For the moment, I was wondering if you would be willing to interact with me on a few points. My primary “sticking point” so to speak is that it seems to me that the term porneia seems almost always be a physical contact term. Before there is physical contact, the biblical category would seem to me to be epithumia (lust, desire). For example–and this is a genuine question since I am not as familiar with the primary source material on this yet–was the word porneia ever applied in the Greco-Roman world to the Roman nobility who were watching the “dancing pornai”? By being present and watching such entertainment, where they personally considered to have committed porneia? My impression is no. But if that is the case, then we would be hard pressed to apply this term to pornography use.
Some of the Greek literature you cited supports this distinction between porneia and epithumia. In Hermas, the sin that the woman accuses him of is not porneia, but epithumia. The noun or verb form of this word occurs three times in the passage–1.1.4; 1.1.8 (2x). As far as I can see, the Greek word porneia does not occur in this text. The word poneria (evil) does. That may have been the confusion.
Likewise, in the case of the biblical references in this section of the article, none of them actually supports the meaning of porneia being “lasciviousness” (i.e. “unbridled lust” Thayer’s). The word porneia does not occur in Romans 1:29 (there may have been a confusion here again with the noun poneria “evil” which does occur in this verse). In Galatians 5:19, Colossians 3:5, and Revelation 2:21 porneia is frequently translated with the standard expression “sexual immorality.” And in fact, different Greek words are used to describe the lustful aspect in some of these verses. For example, in Galatians 5:19 it is the Greek word “aslegesia” that the KJV renders “lasciviousness” rather than the Greek word “porneia.” In Colossians 3:5 pathos (passion) and epithumian kaken (evil desire) describe the lustful aspects of the flesh rather than the word porneia. Perhaps you meant to suggest that because porneia appears on lists with these kinds of words, it can be taken in a similar sense? But I think that if finding porneia next to moicheia (adultery) in verses like Matthew 15:19 proves that they are different sins (as you rightly argued in your article), then the same logic would seem to apply to finding porneia along with epithumia in Colossians 3:5 or along with aslegesia (“lasciviousness”) in Galatians 5:19. From the verses you cited, lasciviousness appears to be a different sin than porneia. Do you have other examples that I might be able to consider?
Sirach 23:23 does not necessarily support the idea that porneia can describe “the disposition and behavior that leads to adultery.” That verse says that the woman “en porneia emoicheuthe” (“in sexual immorality committed adultery” [my translation]). This does not have to mean that first she committed sexual immorality and then she committed adultery; it could also be that in this case the porneia describes the adultery itself. This is reflected in many translations of this verse: “she hath played the whore in adultery” (KJV); “she has made a whore of herself by committing adultery” (GNT); “she’s committed adultery by her illicit sexual behavior” (CEB); “through her fornication she has committed adultery” (NRSV). It would be a natural understanding of this verse to say that the porneia constituted adultery in this case rather than that the porneia led up to the adultery in some way.
Tobit 8:7 is an interesting case because it does use the word porneia in a context that suggests the idea of lust. Every English translation of the verse that I looked at translates porneia as “lust” in Tobit 8:7. The question I had is whether you knew of other examples in Greek literature where porneia would have this shade of meaning. Otherwise we may have to treat this text as an exceptional usage. Words do have a range of meaning and sometimes overlap with other words that are not technically synonyms. So in this case, if we picture this in terms of a Venn Diagram, epithumia and porneia would be separate circles that overlap just a small amount on one edge.
To sum up, as I looked carefully at the evidence you presented, with the possible exception of Tobit 8:7 and a certain spin on Sirach 23:23, I did not feel that it strongly warranted including pornography usage under the term porneia. But I am open to other evidence if is is available!
So what is repentance? A husband that keeps falling and repents over and over again for years but he’s genuinely sorry (he got caught) and in the process destroying his beautiful marriage and his beautiful wife…? Repentance should be ‘go and sin no more’ when you truly repent of your sin you ‘cut it off’… for those men out there that think it’s ok to fail from time to time and nobody is perfect I’m telling you there are men out there that can do it and don’t struggle with the question ‘what should I put first my marriage or my own gratification’. And these men are not less men than you are or have less ‘testosterone’ they just decided to love and respect their wives and appreciate their marriage. So grow up take full responsibility for your actions and expect there will be consequences for your sins and your wife might loose her patience after a few years and actually leave you and you will loose your ministry and reputation… but don’t worry too much as after a few years you can go back on Christian dating service as a divorcee and tell everyone it was not on ‘biblical grounds’ so really it was not your fault ((ever)) and you will find another church that will be happy to send you as a missionary somewhere… after all you are a MAN… and times haven’t changed that much since (only) the adulterous woman was brought to Jesus to be stoned to death and not the man
And what did Jesus do with the adulterous woman? He rebuked the accusers of that woman, not the woman herself at all, and the woman went free.
One interesting comment was about the church as the bride. Before the wedding, at the betrothal negotiations, the groom gave jewels and a beautiful garment to the bride, which she may wear at the wedding. The wedding guest were given wedding (gamos) garments. The Bridegroom supplied His bride robes of righteousness. Now does this apply to earthly Jewish marriage. What earthly bridegroom could supply righteousness to his bride? None. Only Jesus Christ has that ability. A Jewish man that paid the dowry of virgins expected a virgin on the wedding night. This is where the allegory and literal part. A Jewish man would put away his lying bride who claimed to be a virgin on this one night and for this one cause, fornication, acting like a whore before the wedding. This is the meaning of the exception clause. Except for fornication. After one flesh joining by God, there is not severance of what GOD HATH JOINED TOGETHER. Let no man put asunder. It is not a suggestion, but in the imperative mood.
Luke,
You said this was a summary of the Thesis, so now I’m compelled to read the full version. Maybe your reference to Vicki Tieda’s work COMPELS me to print, read and study her ideas as well. I like the Tieda info for this issue, because (1) a woman speaks mostly to the question that women will have, and (2) it’s very level-headed wisdom in an issue that is otherwise _SO_ easily a decision to divorce based on today’s emotional experience. Vicki speaks some CALMING thoughts about a volitile emotional battle raging inside a betrayed wife. I think secret porn, when exposed would be a deep emotional wound, MOST of the time. So the “open sore, bleeding wound” is confusing a Christian lady’s choices for self protection, in an emotionally charged decision, potentially THE WRONG decision – sometimes.
I value the Greek, Roman perspective, since it helps us see that twisted values today are really a different, and yet a similar world as today’s world.
Maybe your Thesis covers my question. We read many references to hedge worship in the OT, and the word is usually not given as ASTERETH or asterah. However, I’m lead to believe ( maybe erroneously ? ? ) that the goddess was worshipped with pictures and commonly with erotically carved wooden statues. This was a kind of PORN available at the time of David, and had invaded Israel during Jezebel’s height of power grab.
From a recent National Geographic, I see the details of the statues aroused “magical” powers for hormone charged “worshippers “. They think the goddess has power, but logic tells us that it’s simply a pornographic lust. I observe that David’s keeping of so many wives could have met some pornographic lust, similar to a guy who has seen intimate details of 500 porn “prostitutes.” Sin in 1000 BC can’t be THAT much different than it is today.
At the time Jesus spoke to the Jewish leaders, was Asterah worshipped in Israel? Was there a pornographic component to the Baal temple prostitution? You seemed to go that direction, regarding some whores being artistic performers, regarding Greek public nudity.