1 Corinthians 8:9-11

Generally, there is one passage that seems to keep all Christians from ever considering any form of nudity or pornography as "OK". That passage is Matthew 5:28. See either of these two articles below as to why the common viewpoint on this scripture is in error:

1. Is all pornography a sin to watch?
2. Are not all erotic materials sinful?

My goal is not to offend any Christian, cause them to loose faith, or put any stumbling block in front of them. I believe Paul's example of eating food offered to idols relates somewhat to this pornography dilema.. When you pray over your food, whether it was previously offered to an idol or not, God blesses the food (as God is greater than an any idol). However, there are situations where our liberty can become a stumbling block for others.

God created food, just as he created sex. And, often, in scripture they are discussed together, particularly, when it comes to liberties. This can be evidently seen in the following passage:

1 TIMOTHY 4:1 - 5

4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

4:3 Forbidding to marry, [and commanding] to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

4:4 For every creature of God [is] good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Notice, in the passage, that it mentions "marrying" and "meats".. This signifies, sex and food, as you can see. God created sex. However, if you looked at our culture and the churches position, you would think the Devil created sex.

Also, consider 1 Corinthians 5 - 8. The history and outline of these chapters of scripture are as follows:

1. The religion of Corinth had gods of Egypt, Rome and Greece. The temple of Aphrodite, the goddess of love, stood atop the Acrocorinth and housed 1000 cultic/temple prostitutes. These prostitutes had sex as a form of worship to the goddess Aphrodite. Knowing these facts about the city of corinth is vital to understanding the wording and situation for the church of Corinth.
2. 1 Corinthians 5 - Sexual immorality of a man with his father's wife (incest). Put him out of church, as he is leaven/yeast, which will ruin the church.
3. 1 Corinthians 6 - Meats are for the belly. Should the members of Christ be joined to the members of an harlot (temple prostitute). It is discussing here "meats" and "sex", as I mentioned above. It illudes pretty clearly to these temple prositutes of Aphrodite, as Paul says "know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost". Indicating that the "harlot" he is refering to are temple harlots.
4. 1 Corinthians 7 - Paul's solution to man's desire for affection, sex, is to marry a Christian woman. Rather than visiting temples and defiling oneself in idolatry and sexual immorality. Mentions that if a non-believer departs from a Christian, you are not in bondage to stay married to them. Indicates that you are able to do more for the Lord single, rather than married.
5. 1 Corinthians 8 - Do not use our liberty in Christ as a stumblingblock (regarding meats here and overall meats(food) and marrying(sex, affection)).

If you read through 1 Corinthians chapter 5 through 8, you will notice, a pattern. Paul is talking to a church within a city that is steeped in idolatry. He mentions, we have liberty with "meats" and "marriage". But, we are not to use our liberty in Christ as a stumbling block or to sin, HENCE, avoid eating meat in the idol's temple, avoid sex with temple prostitutes..

Now, when you read these chapters in the past, without knowledge of Corinth's history as a city, without noticing the "meats" and "marrying" portion, you may have just ran over it, thinking it said something totally different.. For instance, you may have not previously known that the word "fornication" has virtually nothing to do with sex before marriage and is defined by the Strong's Concordance as refering to "harlotry, incest, idolatry or in general sexual immorality". So, if you read it in the past, assuming Corinth was like an American city and assumed fornication meant sex before marriage, you would have believed it said something WAY different..

This topic is clarified even more so with a judgement on the Church of Thyatira in Revelation, when Jesus condemns a false prophetess, who is luring Christians into committing idolatry, by eating food sacrificed to idols and committing sexual immorality(maybe refering again to temple prostitution or maybe more than this). Seeing scripture does not contradict itself, we realize that this woman was delibrately teaching Christians to do this (perhaps a form of idolatry). The name Jezebel, given to her, indicates her being against God, as the woman Jezebel in the Old Testament.

Yet, notice, Paul said it was not a sin to eat food that was offered to an idol (as an idol is not real and the food can be sanctified by the Word and prayer). The sin, in other words, is not the food, but rather not considering your witness and also whether your intentions are good or bad. If, for instance, you are doing it, because you believe there is more than one god, you are committing idolatry. If you are doing it, because you bought the food at the market, and your goal is merely to eat it unto the one true God, you can pray over it and it is sanctified.. Yet, it would be a sin, to your brother and your witness, to go eat this food that was offered to an idol in an idol's temple. So, it is a contextual sin, not a sin in all circumstances.

See how context and the definition of the words is vital? It is very relevant, if you are looking for the exact meaning of scripture.

Now, many assume "fornication" means having sex before marriage. However, often, it means such things as temple prostitution, incest or even adultery. Yet, it is rarely, if ever, used to refer to sex before marriage, according to the Strong's Concordance. You have to wonder about such things as the "harlot Rahab" and Samson sleeping with a harlot, along with other stories in the Old Testament including harlots..

Well, long story short, here is basically the rundown on harlots:

1. Sex with a non-married temple prostitute = Sexual Idolatry
2. Sex with a married temple prostitute = Adultery & Idolatry (form of cheating)
3. Sex with a non-married prostitute = Something God does not desire, yet is not a sin.
4. Sex with a married prostitute = Adultery

Here is a detailed study on harlotry proving the above statements.

As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7, God solution is for men to marry. So, sex was designed strictly for marriage. However, sex before marriage, is not actually a sin, due to the fact that in the Old Testament, no sacrifice was required for sex before marriage. Rather, if the girl was a virgin in her father's house, God instructed them to marry, if they had sex. YET, the father of the bride-to-be had a right to refuse the man. Further, there is no passage stating you need to marry a girl if she is not living with her father or is a non-virgin.

My viewpoint here is pretty complex, but is about the only viewpoint I have ever seen that can reconcile and untwist many strange situations, dilemas and doctrines in scripture:

1. It can explain why the Harlot Rahab was still called a harlot and revered as a woman of God in the "Hall of Faith"(Hebrews 11:31). Because she was a non-married prostitute, she did not commit adultery(strong's defintion, not world's definition). So, she technically would not sin by having sex before marriage, although, God's ideal is for sex to be in marriage. Something to consider also is Jesus' lineage, as it has a harlot in it. It is said in scripture that Jesus was of a pure lineage.
2. It can explain why Samson did not loose his power when sleeping with a harlot multiple times. She was unmarried, so Samson was not committing adultery. If it was a sin for Samson to do this, he would have defiled himself and lost his strength immediately when having sex with her. Rather, instead, he lost his strength when his hair was cut, which he vowed to God not to cut. So, his covenant with God was broken in cutting his hair. His having sex with a harlot did not break his covenant with God. Yet, there were many ways he could have broken his covenant with God, other than his hair being cut.
3. It can also show how to reconcile the polygamy dilema in the Old Testament and how God is actually consistant on this topic (see article here).
4. It can reconcile the relevant dilema in the church regarding pornography and sex. As the church often treats sex as if it was spawned off by the Devil himself. However, God created sex, not the Devil. Further, it can reconcile God's design of men being drawn to nudity and sex, while not violating Matthew 5:28.

My goal has always been the actual truth in scripture.. My whole goal was and is to harmonize all the scripture on the topics of marriage, divorce, sex, pornography, polygamy and related topics (whether for or against). I had never come across any viewpoint that could harmonize all these topics without ignoring certain "dilema" scriptures. I believe God led me to search this out and to write all these articles, as it truly is the only viewpoint that seemingly is able to harmonize all these strange situations, ideas, etc in scripture.

Back to the Topic of Sex and Food (1 Timothy 4:1-5)

Sex and food are both items your body desires regularly. The only problem is, in most all churches, any type of food is fine, but sex is quite the opposite.. Matter of fact, often, the more rules you have, the better. Less sex equals more holiness. This is a really just a show of wisdom and is really just false holiness. It is from a heresy introduced into the church pretty early on and it is discussed in the above scripture. For more on sex in church history, see this article below:

1. The History Behind How Sex Became a Sin

So, Paul says in 1 Timothy 4, that it is "sanctified by the word of God and prayer". And he is refering to "marriage" and "meats" when he states this. As I indicated above, marriage includes sex, meats refers to food in general. So, he is saying, that such things can be "sanctified by the word of God and prayer".

Since having food offered to an idol is a sin, it is similar to how many pornographic videos are created in sin. So, it follows that both can be "sanctified by the word of God and prayer". Meaning, the food was created in sin, as it was offered to an idol. However, God created the substance, as "every creature of God is good" as the scripture above says. God also created the physical substance of our bodies, so the sex act itself does not encompass the totality of the sin, but rather why and in what circumstances the sex act was performed more accurately makes it a sin.

Of course, certain sex acts, would no matter what, be sinful, not only in deed, but in thought. Such things would be beastiality, temple prostitution, incest and potentially men having anal sex with men (not directly implying that all gay desire is a sin though). These acts, would not be sanctified by the word of God and prayer, as there is no circumstance where they would ever not be sinful.

However, acts such as one man and one woman having sex together, this could easily be a non-sinful event. But, say, the woman is married to another man, then, it would be adultery, correct? If it is an act of cheating, it would be a sin. However, we do not know if the woman is married often. And, theoretically, the act could have been representative of something not sinful as it is one man and one woman.

Another example would be two women having sex with one man. Since polygamy is not a sin, as I prove here, it would follow that such a situation could occur in a marriage. Consider King David, King Solomon and a host of other biblical figures who had multiple wives. And considering that "woman lying with woman" was never condemned in Leviticus 18:7 - 23, it seems to flow with how the Bible never condemns polgamy, leaving the opportunity for this type of sex act to occur within a marriage and making it not sinful to fantasize about or view on video.

I hope this is making sense.

Some could try to argue that I am tempting believers to "eat food offered to idols", or in other words, tempt them to "watch pornography", and make some tie like this. However, this is ignoring what the scripture says. The people who were doing this sin (Gnostics, or Nicholaitans) basically were saying it was ok to go eat food offered to idols in the public festivals to false gods or an idols temple or whenever (they said anything done in the body was ok, as we are enlightened in the spirit). However, I am not saying it is ok to go eat food that was offered unto an idol in an idolatrous situation or to compromise your testimony. Rather, I am, like the Apostle Paul, saying if you goto the market, to buy food, and happen to buy some food and do not know what occurred to the food (maybe somebody offered it to an idol and you did not even know), you do not need to worry whether or not the food is evil to eat, because God can sanctify it with the Word of God and prayer (as idols have no power and the Earth is the Lords). So, I am not encouraging you to go sin or violate your conscience or go do something idolatrous or sexually sinful (like cheat on your wife). Rather, I am saying, if you happen to watch a porn video, and you don't know if the woman is sinning in the video or you don't know what happened in the making of the video, its not the same as you going and sinning with a woman or watching a video you know is evil. Rather, because all physical substance is created by God, all can be sanctified (sex or food) with the Word of God and prayer. All you need to consider is if you are sinning or if your witness is compromised. If you went to some event and you knew it was sinful to God, this is where the sin is, like when in the early church, they would goto a pagan festival and eat food offered unto an idol. So, I am definitely not telling you to do something sinful, but rather, as in the case of food offered to an idol that you were not aware of, so also a porn video you are not aware of being made in sin, is permissible to consume, as God can cleanse it with the Word of God and prayer.

Some of you will think the above is just some grand rationalization. However, consider if Paul would have never written you could actually eat food offered to an idol. Would you assume it is not a sin to eat such a thing, if he did not ever mention it?

I suspect, that if I was Paul, writing for the first time, that eating food offered to an idol was not a sin, you would assume I am just making things up, and would not consider it even a valid viewpoint. What is the difference between Paul saying it then and Paul saying it now? The only difference is it is in the Bible and you assume anything in the Bible is correct, so you do not need to verify if the statement makes sense or not.

Which means, this statement and rationalization I mentioned above could be just as credible. As sex is also something God created and worshipping an idol is worse than adultery. Adultery is sinning against man. Idolatry is sinning against God. A sin against an infinite being is far more costly than a sin against your neighbor. Consider Jesus parable of the man who would not forgive debts owed to him, when the ruler forgave him. So, when God forgives us for sinning against him, it is far more being forgiven than when you forgive your neighbor, who sinned against you.

When you watch a movie from Hollywood, with people dying left and right, how do you justify that in your mind? I am guessing, you do not even think about it. It is because the church accepts this, indirectly, and as a result, you do not even ask yourself, "Is this a sin?"

What if God hates some of those violent movies you watch? For me, I consider all materials you see, whether we are talking about movies, tv shows, music, or you name it, something you need to be careful regarding. Some kids shows teach your kids wicca. How is that not worse than some bad pornographic movie? Some kids games are so violent, showing heads split open, blood flying everywhere. Do you see what I am saying here? Why not have the same standard everywhere? Some movies are bad, some music is bad, some kid's shows are bad, some pornography is bad. Actually, I would say probably 50% or more of any of those things I mentioned are bad. So, why not have such a standard as this?

However, what about God's ideal? Wouldn't God's ideal be for a man to not watch pornography and to have sex with his wife? God has many ideal desires for us in this life, however, he permits or allows for certain ideas, and situations that are not ideal. For instance, God's ideal would be for there never to be divorce. However, if say, you are a good person, trying to save your marriage, and your spouse is trying to ruin your life and destroys the marriage, God permits divorce. In other words, sometimes, the ideal can not be achieved.. Another example would be God's desire for there to be no war. In the end, once all is said and done, there will be no more war. However, since the Devil still exists and evil men still exist, there is war and it is permitted to kill other men in war.. So, God's ideal would be for there to be no death, however, we are not in a situation where that can be acheived. Same also with the topic of sex. Not every man has a wife and not every woman has a husband. Further, not every wife has a husband who cares for her sexual and emotional needs, just as not every husband has a wife who cares for his sexual needs. So, in some cases, the ideal can not be acheived. Also, consider that in some cases, maybe erotic materials can stimulate two who are married to bring back their sex life. So, even in such a situation as this, it can be used to bring two people closer together..

What about "fleeing youthful lusts"? The word "lust" is desire or covet in the Greek and refers to both good and bad desires according to scripture. So, when it says "flee youthful lusts" it is not refering to sex, but any youthful desire. Sex is not a youthful desire, as old men, such as Hugh Hefner, love sex. It is definitely not a "youthful lust". However, some may characterize pornography as a youthful lust. Yet, old men use pornography as well. So, pornography is not something that is identified specifically as a youthful lust and likely, it is refering to something other than this.