Before I answer this question, I would like to say that I designed this website to only include certain types of erotic materials. The reason why I did this is to make a consistant argument that certain types of erotic materials are not sinful.
Why did I put erotic photos, videos and other content on my website?
Because virtually all pornographic and erotic websites on the internet could care less about morals and include all manner of offensive pornography and materials. I wanted to create a "clean" erotic website, where a Christian could actually come and not be offended 3/4's of the time. One where you don't have to avoid 2/3's or more of the content, because of its immoral attributes.
And, why are not all erotic materials sinful?
As I mention in many of my articles, there is one passage in scripture that is often used to claim all erotic materials are sinful. Almost always, this single passage is taken out of context and incorrectly applied. The passage I am refering to is Matthew 5:27-28.
From my experiences of being a conservative Christian for nearly 20 years and attending several different Christian denominations (Baptist, Assemblies of God, Nazerene, etc.), I have noticed that almost all the Christians I have known personally have made this one scripture here, their core from which they understand sexual sin. The problem with this, is, I have discovered from several years of research, that the common viewpoint on this scripture within the conservative church is incorrect.
Let me elaborate:
It starts with the definitions of words within scripture. I have discovered, over the years, that one way to spread false doctrine is through the changing of terminology. For instance, Mormons use the same terms as Christians, however, they have totally different meanings on various words they use. In other words, the Devil uses wrong definitions of words to promote false doctrine, heresy, etc.
This also true for secondary doctrines within the church as well. There are people within the church, who, whether intentionally or unintentionally, spread their doctrine by changing the meanings of words. For instance, it is very possible that your understanding of the term "fornication", along with many others is slightly incorrect.
Lets first look at the term, "adultery". Webster's dictionary says adultery is: "voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse." Now, that is the world's definition of adultery. What is the Bible's definition of adultery? Well, according to Strong's Concordance (along with virtually all others): "have unlawful intercourse with another's wife."
Do you see the slight difference in definitions? Now, taking the Bible's definition of adultery and applying it to Jesus' quote, we find this: "Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery (unlawful intercourse w/ another man's wife): 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery (unlawful intercourse w/ another man's wife) with her already in his heart."
Back in about 2002, I started to notice this pattern when studying scripture and the exact definition of greek and hebrew terms from the original manuscripts. It may sound conspiratorial, however, as you can see, I am using very common "trustworthy" sources for my definitions (Strongs Concordance). So, it is all in front of us, with reliable sources, for understanding what terms in scripture mean exactly. I am not doing anything strange here, as you can see.
Using simple logic, I thought to myself it would logically have to mean "wife" or atleast have the ability to mean "wife" on the term "woman" within the passage, assuming Strongs is correct on the definition of "adultery". So, I did some investigating and not long after, I realized that the term as understood in greek, applies as either "young wife", "woman" or "wife" as you can see within Strong's Concordance again: King James Word Usage - Total: 221 women 129, wife 92. So, it is saying that almost 50% of the time, the greek term is denoted as "wife" instead of "woman". And, logically, the verse would only make sense if it meant "wife", seeing that the term adultery means: "stealing another man's wife, be it through sex or some other means". You see, adultery doesn't just mean sex, it can mean also stealing someone else's wife. Could be you think she is ideal in many other ways other than sexually and you 'covet' her and bring forth the sin by taking her (something not rightfully yours).
I am guessing this is starting to make a lot more sense, isn't it? Well, we are just starting, and there is much more. And it all follows very logically with reputable resources.
Now, lets look at yet another term within the passage. What is "lusting"? Most of you have this definition coming to mind "any sexual thought for the opposite sex". And yes, I used to have the same definition, until, again, I actually studied scripture and greek to decipher what the term actually meant fully.
The term means to "covet" or "desire with intent to steal" plain and simple. Do you remember which of the Ten Commandments mentions this? Yes, it is the 10th commandment. So, Jesus was quoting the "thou shalt not covet .. thy neighbor's wife". Why haven't you ever heard that before? Really, ask yourself this question. Doesn't it bother you that you have been taught all these very common definitions and that when, we look at the actual definitions of words according to scripture and very sound resources (the Strong's Concordance), that we discover we have been duped?
"Does this not make more logical sense?", seeing God is the same, yesterday, today and forever? So, quite literally, Jesus first stated the 7th commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery", then he explained the theology behind the 7th commandment with the 10th commandment, "Thou shalt not covet .. thy neighbor's wife". He was showing how the people of the day were not looking at the intent behind the 7th commandment.
So, revisiting Jesus' statement, we see that woman is "wife", lust is "covet" and adultery is "unlawful intercourse with another man's wife". It makes it very clear, he is quoting the 7th and 10th commandment and if you think about it, it makes a great deal of sense. Jesus did not just make things up. He quoted the only scripture of his time, namely, the Old Testament. We seem to forget such things:
"Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery (unlawful intercourse w/ another man's wife): 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh(sets mind upon) on a woman(wife) to lust(desire or covet) after her hath committed adultery (unlawful intercourse w/ another man's wife) with her already in his heart."
Now, consider, all I did was merely goto the Strong's Concordance and scripture here. I did not pull some rabbit out of my hat or do anything strange or make up some "new" doctrine here. Quite literally, all I did was a very simple study in scripture here.
Then, why is it, we are told the opposite of what we studied above? It is because, certain conservative Christians, over the years, have changed certain terminology within scripture, to "fit" their viewpoint. What better way to make your message iron-clad? I am guessing it may not have been intentional. Likely, you do not read greek and hebrew, do you? So, you and I just accept what we have been told is true, instead of fully checking it out for ourselves. So, you and I are suppose to assume that the definitions are correct and continue to believe what we are taught without verifying its accuracy.
If that does not scare you, it should. Because there are approximately 32,000 verses or 1189 chapters within the Bible. And, imagine, how many terms you do not fully understand correctly. And look at how much this passage changed with the slight correction in definitions. Of course, we are still able to understand many basics just reading in english, but as you can see, slight differences in definitions can make a huge difference in understanding a passage. Remember, when Jesus came to mankind back 2000 years ago? What was the problem back then? The religious leaders were teaching man made doctrines and rejected Jesus. Now, I am not saying that is what is occuring here, but isn't it strange that Jesus had to always correct religious leaders for adding burdens to the backs of people and would not lift one finger to follow their own rules? Yet, we hear, everyone, including pastors watch pornography. Do you see any parallels?
What about all those nude paintings on the walls of ancient catholic churches? How about the fact that priests, prior to the ban on marriages, were married and some were actually polgamists? What about the fact that St. Augustine infected Christianity with false doctrine that has prevailed to this very day within the church? I discuss St. Augustine's influence on doctrines regarding sexuality, at this link here.
- Is all pornography a sin to watch?
- Guidelines for Christians Regarding Pornography
- Why do I have a "Restricted" & "Liberty" Erotic Content Level?
- The Erotic Nature of the Song of Solomon
