Prostitution vs adultery

[FollowingHim]

Proverbs 6:26 is very interesting. It is translated in various ways in different translations, some of which don't seem to make much logical sense. But the NRSV renders it extremely interestingly:

Proverbs 6:23-35
For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life, to preserve you from the wife of another,
from the smooth tongue of the adulteress. Do not desire her beauty in your heart, and do not let her capture you with her eyelashes;
26) for a prostitute's fee is only a loaf of bread, but the wife of another stalks a man's very life.
Can fire be carried in the bosom without burning one's clothes? Or can one walk on hot coals without scorching the feet? So is he who sleeps with his neighbour's wife; no one who touches her will go unpunished. Thieves are not despised who steal only to satisfy their appetite when they are hungry. Yet if they are caught, they will pay sevenfold; they will forfeit all the goods of their house. But he who commits adultery has no sense; he who does it destroys himself. He will get wounds and dishonour, and his disgrace will not be wiped away. For jealousy arouses a husband's fury, and he shows no restraint when he takes revenge. He will accept no compensation, and refuses a bribe no matter how great.

To paraphrase what I see as I read it:
"God's commands keep you away from another man's wife. You could have a prostitute for a small payment, but sleeping with another man's wife could cost you your life. Similarly, theft of goods is understandable in some circumstances, but only an idiot would steal a wife. Her husband will track you down and have his revenge."

This passage does not justify using a prostitute, any more than it justifies theft. But it does show a massive relative difference in seriousness between prostitutes and married women. It's just one example of a message going through the whole book of Proverbs, which over and over warns about the dangers of loose married women.

It's a small detail, but if we are to truly see situations from God's perspective, it is good to understand these sorts of differences in how He looks at different situations.

 

[OttoM]

One is a deadly sin, and the other is lessor.

1 John 5:17
All unrighteousness is sin, yet there is sin that does not lead to death.

Hosea 4:14
I will not punish your daughters when they prostitute themselves, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery. For the men themselves go off with prostitutes and offer sacrifices with shrine prostitutes. So a people without understanding will come to ruin.

When whoredom is in the land - wickedness follows. Prostitution leads to sex trafficking and other sins associated with it.

A return to patriarchy, dowry for virgins, and polygyny as a righteous form of marriage would be like fire trucks coming to the rescue against a blazing inferno taking out an entire city. Much of today’s church is way too worldly to accept YAH’s ways as perfect and righteous. They think they are reborn conservative but they are woke - walking in the ways of the world - according to the prince of the darkness and not the Prince of Shalom.

Jeremiah 6:16
Thus says the LORD: “Stand in the ways and see, And ask for the old paths, where the good way is, And walk in it; Then you will find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’

Ecclesiastes 1:9
What has been will be again, and what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

 

[frederick]

Proverbs 6:26 is very interesting. It is translated in various ways in different translations, some of which don't seem to make much logical sense. But the NRSV renders it extremely interestingly:

Proverbs 6:23-35
For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life, to preserve you from the wife of another,
from the smooth tongue of the adulteress. Do not desire her beauty in your heart, and do not let her capture you with her eyelashes;
26) for a prostitute's fee is only a loaf of bread, but the wife of another stalks a man's very life.
Can fire be carried in the bosom without burning one's clothes? Or can one walk on hot coals without scorching the feet? So is he who sleeps with his neighbour's wife; no one who touches her will go unpunished. Thieves are not despised who steal only to satisfy their appetite when they are hungry. Yet if they are caught, they will pay sevenfold; they will forfeit all the goods of their house. But he who commits adultery has no sense; he who does it destroys himself. He will get wounds and dishonour, and his disgrace will not be wiped away. For jealousy arouses a husband's fury, and he shows no restraint when he takes revenge. He will accept no compensation, and refuses a bribe no matter how great.

To paraphrase what I see as I read it:
"God's commands keep you away from another man's wife. You could have a prostitute for a small payment, but sleeping with another man's wife could cost you your life. Similarly, theft of goods is understandable in some circumstances, but only an idiot would steal a wife. Her husband will track you down and have his revenge."

This passage does not justify using a prostitute, any more than it justifies theft. But it does show a massive relative difference in seriousness between prostitutes and married women. It's just one example of a message going through the whole book of Proverbs, which over and over warns about the dangers of loose married women.

It's a small detail, but if we are to truly see situations from God's perspective, it is good to understand these sorts of differences in how He looks at different situations.

Thanks for the insights.

 

[Transformator Reformator]

Interesting distinction, it makes sense. But am I wrong to think that it is acceptable and perhaps honorable to convert a prostitute to be a wife, for oneself or for others. Meaning approaching a prostitute and telling her, "you do not have to do this anymore be my woman". Also, there is question about prostitutes that attached themselves to pimps. Do they belong to a pimp?

 

[FollowingHim]

Interesting distinction. But am I wrong to think that it is acceptable and perhaps honorable to convert a prostitute to be a wife, for oneself or for others. Meaning approaching a prostitute and telling her, "you do not have to do this anymore be my woman".

We have clear scriptural examples of that, it's certainly permissible and could be God's solution for some unique women in rare circumstances. However as a general rule a prostitute would not be good marriage material, so I wouldn't have this as your plan to get another wife!

 

[Transformator Reformator]

However as a general rule a prostitute would not be good marriage material, so I wouldn't have this as your plan to get another wife!

It may be safer than marrying a woman who have unjustly divorced her husband. This may be true because in God's eyes she still belongs to her alive husband.

 

[steve]

It may be safer than marrying a woman who have unjustly divorced her husband. This may be true because in God's eyes she still belongs to her alive husband.

It’s hard to judge, in this day and age, just exactly what “justly” is.
I would just check with her ex and see if he wants her back. If he doesn’t, especially if it’s in an email, I’d consider her acceptably divorced.

 

[frederick]

We have clear scriptural examples of that, it's certainly permissible and could be God's solution for some unique women in rare circumstances. However as a general rule a prostitute would not be good marriage material, so I wouldn't have this as your plan to get another wife!

It may be safer than marrying a woman who have unjustly divorced her husband. This may be true because in God's eyes she still belongs to her alive husband.

The situation of each woman, whether an ex-prostitute or divorcee, is going to be as unique as it is for every other woman. Just as every man is in a different set of circumstances, so his ability to take on such responsibility will differ. Personally, I'd rather take a woman who had struggled through hard economic circumstances in a poor country, maybe having to offer sex for money to survive after being divorced, than some of the entitled arrogant upstarts that come out of so-called educated first-world countries. Having travelled to some poor regions of the world, I have seen first-hand the enormity of the difficulties some women struggle with. For any who might come to saving faith in Jesus Christ, she might well be an excellent wife, as Rahab and Ruth proved to be.

 

[Mojo]

We have clear scriptural examples of that, it's certainly permissible and could be God's solution for some unique women in rare circumstances. However as a general rule a prostitute would not be good marriage material, so I wouldn't have this as your plan to get another wife!

Agreed. If the circumstances present themselves, even then, be cautious.

True story, but details are deliberately vague. The person involved didn’t tell me to indulge online.

I know a man who was working in a church oversees. As is my custom, I somehow managed to steer the conversation ever so slightly to the topic of biblical marriage.

He told me of the story of a young lady that was led to Christ. He said she was perhaps the most beautiful woman he’d ever met. Gorgeous. The kind of woman any man would want to have. Unfortunately, many, many men did have her. She had been a sex slave. She somehow managed to be freed from it, but had ZERO prospects for marriage. Her story was known, and in their traditional culture, no young man would dare take her home to mama. She was an outcast. She was distraught.

But, the good news was that a wealthy and respected man of the area took her in. She became his woman, even though he had a wife already. She was twice redeemed. He said the leaders of the church knew it, but didn’t do anything to change it. Even if it wasn’t ideal for them, I believe they understood the better path for her. I don’t know if the entire family was converted, we were interrupted. But just that part of the story was beautiful.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Proverbs 6:26 is very interesting. It is translated in various ways in different translations, some of which don't seem to make much logical sense. But the NRSV renders it extremely interestingly:

Proverbs 6:23-35
For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life, to preserve you from the wife of another,
from the smooth tongue of the adulteress. Do not desire her beauty in your heart, and do not let her capture you with her eyelashes;
26) for a prostitute's fee is only a loaf of bread, but the wife of another stalks a man's very life.
Can fire be carried in the bosom without burning one's clothes? Or can one walk on hot coals without scorching the feet? So is he who sleeps with his neighbour's wife; no one who touches her will go unpunished. Thieves are not despised who steal only to satisfy their appetite when they are hungry. Yet if they are caught, they will pay sevenfold; they will forfeit all the goods of their house. But he who commits adultery has no sense; he who does it destroys himself. He will get wounds and dishonour, and his disgrace will not be wiped away. For jealousy arouses a husband's fury, and he shows no restraint when he takes revenge. He will accept no compensation, and refuses a bribe no matter how great.

To paraphrase what I see as I read it:
"God's commands keep you away from another man's wife. You could have a prostitute for a small payment, but sleeping with another man's wife could cost you your life. Similarly, theft of goods is understandable in some circumstances, but only an idiot would steal a wife. Her husband will track you down and have his revenge."

This passage does not justify using a prostitute, any more than it justifies theft. But it does show a massive relative difference in seriousness between prostitutes and married women. It's just one example of a message going through the whole book of Proverbs, which over and over warns about the dangers of loose married women.

It's a small detail, but if we are to truly see situations from God's perspective, it is good to understand these sorts of differences in how He looks at different situations.

This is actually a very big deal to me, as a proponent of “sex equals one flesh” it in my opinion is the biggest argument against my position.

From a practical standpoint it isn’t. Obviously a married woman is far different than a harlot (I don’t think the exchange of money is all that relevant to the case). From a legal standpoint though it is. Whats the definitional difference between the two? I have an idea, a thesis if you will but I can’t back it up with scripture.

And in a way it doesn’t matter both are forbidden by some standard or another. Proverbs isn’t saying “Prostitution is so much better than adultery.” It’s saying “as bad as prostitution is, adultery is even worse”.

Still, this is an important conversation and I need to shore up this weak link in my argument.

 

[The Revolting Man]

It may be safer than marrying a woman who have unjustly divorced her husband. This may be true because in God's eyes she still belongs to her alive husband.

I agree. An honest prostitute (retired of course) is far preferable to a dishonest whore.

 

[FollowingHim]

Yes, this is a good summary:

Proverbs isn’t saying “Prostitution is so much better than adultery.” It’s saying “as bad as prostitution is, adultery is even worse”.

and I need to shore up this weak link in my argument.

Or accept that this may mean you are mistaken, and what you need is not a better argument but a slightly improved understanding that actually accommodates this rather than manages to argue it away. According to your thesis, prostitution is adultery repeated over and over again, so would have to be worse than informal adultery. Yet scripturally adultery is worse than prostitution. You can't counter something so opposite with a better argument, you need to incorporate it into your understanding.

 

[Mark C]

Presented without comment:

“A whore should be judged by the same criteria as other professionals offering services for pay — such as dentists, lawyers, hairdressers, physicians, plumbers, etc. Is she professionally competent? Does she give good measure? Is she honest with her clients?​

It is possible that the percentage of honest and competent whores is higher than that of plumbers and much higher than that of lawyers. And enormously higher than that of professors.” ​

― Robert Heinlein

 

[Man_in_the_Middle]

This is actually a very big deal to me, as a proponent of “sex equals one flesh” it in my opinion is the biggest argument against my position.

From a practical standpoint it isn’t. Obviously a married woman is far different than a harlot (I don’t think the exchange of money is all that relevant to the case). From a legal standpoint though it is. Whats the definitional difference between the two? I have an idea, a thesis if you will but I can’t back it up with scripture.

And in a way it doesn’t matter both are forbidden by some standard or another. Proverbs isn’t saying “Prostitution is so much better than adultery.” It’s saying “as bad as prostitution is, adultery is even worse”.

Still, this is an important conversation and I need to shore up this weak link in my argument.

or, perhaps, rethink it. Consider all angles and see if perhaps another conclusion is valid.

We all must be at peace with our understanding and I am not trying to tell you what to believe. Just be open...

 

[The Revolting Man]

Or accept that this may mean you are mistaken

lol, I love your droll old world Anglo sense of humor! It’s so quaint.

 

[The Revolting Man]

According to your thesis, prostitution is adultery repeated over and over again, so would have to be worse than informal adultery. Yet scripturally adultery is worse than prostitution

So what I think I’m going to find is that there does come a point where a woman shifts over into a different status. I don’t know where and how yet, and maybe that part is left intentionally vague. Maybe it’s supposed to be easy to know the right way and difficult to know where the edges are so that everyone doesn’t turn into lawyers trying to figure out exactly what they can get away with.

The first principles type of reasoning I engage in has some downsides but it’s proven very effective over all.

 

[The Revolting Man]

or, perhaps, rethink it. Consider all angles and see if perhaps another conclusion is valid.

We all must be at peace with our understanding and I am not trying to tell you what to believe. Just be open...

A quick (I’m kidding that would be impossible) look over the debates surrounding this topic will reveal that we have examined it from every angle. I am confident in my stance in normal circumstances. It’s the margins where I’m having to dig.

 

[FollowingHim]

It is the very fact that your thesis works only in ideal / normal situations but falls over "on the margins" that shows you don't fully understand it yet, and your understanding is too simplistic @The Revolting Man.

But one thought you may find helpful. If you have sex with a prostitute, she's still a prostitute. What has really changed? She had slept with 538 men, now she's slept with 539. What's the difference? And her man (pimp) doesn't care, he's glad for the money. But if you take a man's wife she completely changes status from good wife to adulteress, and her man (husband) changes from being amiable to murderous.

 

[Transformator Reformator]

Whats the definitional difference between the two?

Maybe it’s supposed to be easy to know the right way and difficult to know where the edges are so that everyone doesn’t turn into lawyers trying to figure out exactly what they can get away with.

I think it may be helpful to keep in mind a woman always belongs to a patriarch (a father or a man). Intercourse equals one flesh union but it has to be confirmed by a patriarch. in case of adultery, patriarch vetoes this union because his woman has been illegally possessed (David repossessed his wives who were violated). Adultery is a crime against another patriarch not necessary against a woman. I am thinking of the king who took Sarah in "innocence of his heart". Dialogue there between God and Abimelech was regarding another man's woman and not necessary violation of woman's personal preference (Genesis 20).

In case of union with a prostitute, there is no patriarch to void the union or approve the union. A prostitute does not belong to any man. He who joins with a prostitute has formed one flesh union. But there is no patriarch to enforce this union, as a result unfortunately she is left to be treated treacherously either by her own choice and/or choice of her client who fails to commit.

I think your position is valid to maintain the view on one flesh union. The Proverbs passage discussed does not have to disprove consistency of intercourse equals one flesh union. We just have to be mindful of patriarchy as well (ownership of a woman).

 

[Man_in_the_Middle]

I think your position is valid to maintain the view on one flesh union. The Proverbs passage discussed does not have to disprove consistency of intercourse equals one flesh union.

That is not exactly what is being argued. We can agree that sex equals a one flesh union...... Cool. The question argued is whether a one flesh union equals marriage...

I argue that sex by itself does not equal marriage.

We have discussed this before and the idea that sex alone can equal marriage has even led some to believe that the last man to have slept with a woman is her husband. This means that the a man could steal another man's wife by committing adultery against him. This cannot be true.

It has led others to believe that the first man to have sex with a woman is her husband even if it was a sexual event done in secret and was never spoken of again. Which would make her husband she later marries officially to be guilty of adultery for the rest of his life without the knowledge of his sin. Again, this cannot be true.

I believe that marriage is the process of legally taking a woman publicly as your wife and confirming this agreement with sex.
The legal part means that you have to be doing this in accordance with God's word and with the approval of the legal guardianship of the woman in question, her headship. or if she does not have any then by her herself. The public part means that you are claiming her and taking ownership of her and not just using her. Publicly means that she is afforded the protection due her by your covering. She is granted your protection by virtue of her relationship as your wife. Other men will know that she is not available and that they will be committing adultery if they mess with her.

I do NOT argue that publicly means that you have to have a wedding ceremony but a wedding does provide a ceremony that sticks in peoples minds. So it can be a good thing!