The first century Roman Empire included taxable, non-exploitive forms of prostitution. If you are referring to this particular form of prostitution then you are correct that this doesn’t violate the “Love your neighbor” commands. This much is true. But the conclusion you draw from this presumes that Jesus was a highly self-contradictory person. Allow me to demonstrate:
Your conclusion doesn’t resolve Jesus’ teachings. On the contrary! It makes Jesus appear to be self-contradictory. Many atheists perceive Jesus this way because of Christianity’s own inconsistent view of Jesus’ message. Too many Christians mentally latch onto one erroneous idea (such as sexual imorality), and then use it to sweep large swathes of scripture under the rug (such as all the teachings above)! This selective form of Bible interpretation overturns Jesus’ core message in it’s entirety. In fact, it makes Jesus appear to repudiate his own teachings on salvation and judgment!
But did Jesus really repudiate his own salvation and judgment teachings? Or is it possible that you are making the same mistake that Gagnon does when he uses a teaching on divorce to undo the rest of Jesus’ teachings? (Dr. Robert Gagnon is one of the leading anti-homosexual voices in conservative Christianity today.)
Fortunately, there is a very straightforward answer to all of this.
Jesus delivered his message in Greek, not English. In Greek, Jesus condemned porneia. So let’s test your theory that porneia must include premarital sex with prostitutes. It’s a very easy test to conduct:
In 1 Thessalonians, Paul used porneia as a specific reference to “sex with another man’s woman.” (That’s why it “cheats and defrauds a brother in the process.”) And isn’t this an injustice? Of course it is! This particular meaning of porneia is a direct violation of the Justices.
Now consider Justin Martyr’s writings. While prostitution was legal, an unwed man who had sex with another man’s wife was guilty of a punishable crime. Why? Because he cheated and defrauded a brother in the process.
This specific meaning of porneia is further documented by the New Testament’s use of the word pornos. The Greek word pornos referred to ”a man who commits porneia.” In the New Testament Epistles, every contextualized use of pornos refers to someone who has sex with another man’s woman. I’ll repeat, because this is very important:
In the New Testament Epistles, every contextualized use of pornos refers to someone who has sex with another man’s woman.
For example:
In both of these instances, pornos solely refers to sex with another man’s woman, which is a direct violation of the Justices!
So what about porneia itself? In the Gospels and Epistles, every contextualized use of porneia refers to either “sex with another man’s woman” or “prostitution” but never both at the same time! In 1 Thessalonians 4, porneia involves cheating and defrauding a brother in the process. This excludes sex with prostitutes. In other passages, porneia is specified as sex with prostitutes, which excludes sex with another man’s woman. In the Gospels and Epistles, porneia refers to one or the other, but not both at the same time.
Is it possible that some other writings outside the Bible used porneia as a broad basket term? Possibly. But did any contextualized reference in the Gospels or Epistles use porneia as a broad basket term? No, not a single contextualized reference in the Gospels or Epistles used porneia to represent a whole range of sexual indiscretions. Thus, we must always remember this very important rule in translation:
Use the specific to clarify the ambiguous. Never use the ambiguous to repudiate the specific!
Let’s apply this self-evident rule to the issue at hand. The Gospels and Epistles use porneia to specifically refer to either “sex with another man’s woman” or “sex with prostitutes” but never both at the same time. They also use pornos to specifically refer to “a man who has sex with another man’s woman.” Therefore, in every ambiguous reference to porneia, we must translate it either as a reference to sex with another man’s woman, or as a reference to prostitution, but not as a reference to both. (We must use the specific to clarify the ambiguous.) Thus, the term ‘sexual immorality’ is a wrong translation of this word, regardless of its popularity.
Moreover, we must never use the ambiguous to repudiate the specific! If we translate Jesus’ ambiguous reference to porneia as ‘sex with prostitutes,’ then we repudiate all of his teachings on salvation and judgment! But, if we translate Jesus’ teaching as a reference to “sex with another man’s woman,” then we uphold all of his teachings on salvation and judgment.
“sex with prostitutes” |
“sex with another man’s woman” |
|
19:16-19 |
||
7:12-14 |
||
25:31-46 |
||
13:8-9 |
||
5:14 |
||
6:2 |
||
9:13 |
||
12:7 |
||
3:9-14 |
How many Biblical teachings must be repudiated to hold onto the mistaken tradition of the “morality/ritual” division? All the important teachings on salvation and judgment are thrown under the bus just to uphold this tradition. Christianity is long overdue to embrace the full message of Jesus of Nazareth. Any sexual activity that abuses another person is a violation of Jesus’ law. Sexual taboos are not. This is why the Bible supports the entire range of LGBT members. Each of these letters represents cultural sexual taboos that are independent of Jesus’ Law!
Yet, as a grasp at straws, some will still try to turn your attention away from all of Jesus’ teachings on salvation and judgment. They will point out that Jesus used porneia side-by-side with adultery. Then, they will use sleight of hand to claim that this invalidates porneia as a reference to “sex with another man’s woman.” This is a deceitful tactic if it is coming from someone knowledgeable in ancient texts. Justin Martyr’s writing places porneia side-by-side with adultery in his list of crimes punishable by the Roman magistrate. Yet, as a reminder, sex with prostitutes wasn’t even a crime. So what then did porneia refer to when it was placed side-by-side with adultery? An unwed man who had sex with another man’s woman was guilty of porneia. An unfaithful spouse was guilty of adultery.
People will try all sorts of things to convince you that Jesus didn’t mean what he said in all of his salvation and judgment teachings. Jesus promised this would happen. After defining the Golden Rule as the narrow road to life, Jesus prophesied that very few people would be able to accept this. (Matthew 7:12-14 NASB)
In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets. Enter through the narrow gate… For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Jesus taught that the Golden Rule is the Law and the Prophets and there are few who find it. Very few people can accept that the Golden Rule is the entirety of Jesus’ requirements. He said so himself.
The Apostle Paul deals with the issue of prostitution in a remarkable way. He first acknowledges that it doesn’t violate Jesus’ law, and then tells his converts to flee from it for other reasons. When addressing premarital prostitution he wrote:
All things are lawful for me, but not all things are useful.—Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:12Paul’s passage documents how strongly the original Christians toed the line when it came to the Justices and Jobs. The phrase "all things are lawful" is translated from the Greek slogan panta moi exestin. As Raymond F. Collins notes, this slogan had a legal ring to it:
The slogan has a legal ring to it. The impersonal verb exestin, “it is lawful,” is a technical term used of conduct that is sanctioned by a legal system.—Raymond F. Collins
Paul’s passage simultaneously confirms that prostitution was not part of Jesus’ Law while also condemning it at the same time. As eminent New Testament scholar Heikki Raisanen notes:
Paul knows that fornication is incompatible with the life in Christ, but he has no code to which he could appeal to the Corinthians about this, so that all he can do is to show how the slogan is correctly interpreted. Everything is lawful, to be sure, but everything is not ‘useful.’—Heikki Raisanen
Paul had no legal code to appeal to because Jesus’ Law didn’t include it. While Paul had no code to appeal to in the case of prostitution, he did appeal to Jesus’ Law when it came to adultery:
He who loves others has fulfilled the Law because “don’t commit adultery,” “don’t murder,” “don’t steal,” “don’t covet,” and if there is any other commandment it is summed up in these words: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”— Paul in Romans 13:8-9
Jesus’ Law solely contains the commandments based on “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Jesus’ Law solely had a code against violating the Justices. It’s simply a historical fact.