Biblical Support For Soliciting Prostitutes

[Lambano]

Again, Paul also admits what he writes is NOT a commandment from God. 1 COR 7:6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this.[a] 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.

8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry.

I'm not sure about including a "should" in the translation; the Greek just has an Aorist Active Imperative there, i.e. a command.

Contextually, "should" indicates one implementation is preferable over others. In the 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 case, marriage is the preferred implementation for those without sexual self-control; burning is the alternative. Now what the hell did Paul mean by that?

 

[Lambano]

So I think the more precise question is whether Scripture considers sexual union with a prostitute to be morally permissible.

On that particular question, 1 Corinthians 6:15–18 seems quite direct.

To be more blunt, while the Old Testament seem to accept patronizing prostitutes as acceptable, porneia is universally condemned as sinful in the New Testament. There should be no debate about that.

Whether the term porneia should be extended beyond the classical Greek understanding of prostitution to include other expressions of sexuality such as masturbation, premarital sex, oral sex, kink, or whatever else the depraved human mind can come up with, that is a different (though related) discussion. What is clear is that self-control of our sexual desires is a Christian virtue and is considered one of the fruits of the Spirit in Galatians 5.

 

[Wrangler]

@Wrangler, your argument is that Scripture does not morally condemn prostitution or consensual sex with a prostitute, rather than simply arguing that adultery is the only sexual sin.

1 Corinthians 6:15–18, appears to be the clearest New Testament passage addressing the question directly.

“Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body?” 1 Corinthians 6:16
Paul then says, "Flee from sexual immorality.” 1 Corinthians 6:18

There is no adultery involved in Paul's example

Agreed that there is no adultery in Paul’s example. For some reason, you’re ignoring his confession that he is talking about his personal preference of what is ideal and NOT stating a commandment from God.

 

[Wrangler]

To be more blunt, while the Old Testament seem to accept patronizing prostitutes as acceptable, porneia is universally condemned as sinful in the New Testament. There should be no debate about that.

What verse in the NT universally condemns soliciting a prostitute? And how do you reconcile that with it NOT being called a new law when, as you say, was allowed in the OT?

 

[Wrangler]

I'm not sure about including a "should" in the translation; the Greek just has an Aorist Active Imperative there, i.e. a command.

Hmmm. In the translation I cited, there is a NOT to the imperative, it is NOT command, Paul clarified. This is why I categorized it as should, a personal preference.

What time will dinner be ready? One hour after you come home. Should you be late, I’ll:

A. Still feed you?​

B. Call it a sin, a lack of self-control, showing you cannot control arrive at the ideal time?​

​

Obviously not the same but it shows the distinction between a sin and merely not achieving an ideal.

 

[Wrangler]

It seems difficult to reconcile with the conclusion that Scripture does not condemn sex with a prostitute.

I noticed you disregarded the verses in the OP that supports engaging with a prostitute as the morally superior option.

 

[Angelina]

@Wrangler,
I haven't disregarded Proverbs 6:26. I don't believe it says what you are claiming it says.

The verse compares the consequences of sexual involvement with a prostitute and adultery with another man's wife. It says:
“For a prostitute can be had for a loaf of bread, but another man’s wife preys on your very life.”
Proverbs 6:26

The fact that one sin is described as having less severe consequences than another does not make it the morally superior option. The chapter is warning against sexual sin and its consequences; it isn't giving permission to choose prostitution as the acceptable alternative to adultery.

In fact, the very next verses continue the warning: “Can a man scoop fire into his lap without his clothes being burned?” Proverbs 6:27
And later:

“But a man who commits adultery has no sense; whoever does so destroys himself.” Proverbs 6:32

So I think Proverbs 6:26 can legitimately be discussed in terms of how prostitution and adultery were viewed in that society, but it cannot establish the proposition that Scripture considers sex with a prostitute morally permissible.

And that still leaves 1 Corinthians 6:15–18, where Paul specifically addresses sex with a prostitute and tells believers to “Flee from sexual immorality.” That is the direct New Testament passage that needs to be reconciled with your interpretation of Proverbs 6.

 

[Behold]

Jesus is silent on the matter.

Jesus isn't """Silent on the Matter."", regarding Hooking up with a Hooker.

What Jesus did was send Paul with all the Chruch Doctrine including some crystal clear rules regarding having sexual relations with anyone who is not your marriage partner.

Here is what you do with "Hookers".., as Jesus taught Paul to tell you @Wrangler .

A.) Flee Fornication.
-
New Revised Standard Version
Shun fornication! Every sin that a person commits is outside the body; but the fornicator sins against the body itself.

Translations from Aramaic
Lamsa Bible
Keep away from fornication. Every sin that a man commits, is outside his body; but he who commits adultery sins against his own body.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Flee from fornication. Every sin that a man will do is apart from his body, but whoever fornicates sins with his body.

New Living Translation
Run from sexual sin! No other sin so clearly affects the body as this one does. For sexual immorality is a sin against your own body.

English Standard Version
Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.

Berean Standard Bible
Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a man can commit is outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.

Berean Literal Bible
Flee the sexual immorality. Every sin, whatever a man might do, is outside the body, but the one committing sexual immorality sins against his own body.

King James Bible
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

New King James Version
Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.

New American Standard Bible
Flee sexual immorality. Every other sin that a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.

NASB 1995
Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body.

NASB 1977
Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body.

Legacy Standard Bible
Flee sexual immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral man sins against his own body.

Amplified Bible
Run away from sexual immorality [in any form, whether thought or behavior, whether visual or written]. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the one who is sexually immoral sins against his own body.

Berean Annotated Bible
Flee from sexual immorality {porneian}. Every other sin a man can commit is outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.

Christian Standard Bible
Flee sexual immorality! Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the person who is sexually immoral sins against his own body.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Run from sexual immorality! “Every sin a person can commit is outside the body.” On the contrary, the person who is sexually immoral sins against his own body.

American Standard Version
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

Contemporary English Version
Don't be immoral in matters of sex. That is a sin against your own body in a way no other sin is.

English Revised Version
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
Stay away from sexual sins. Other sins that people commit don't affect their bodies the same way sexual sins do. People who sin sexually sin against their own bodies.

Good News Translation
Avoid immorality. Any other sin a man commits does not affect his body; but the man who is guilty of sexual immorality sins against his own body.

International Standard Version
Keep on running away from sexual immorality. Any other sin that a person commits is outside his body, but the person who sins sexually sins against his own body.

NET Bible
Flee sexual immorality! "Every sin a person commits is outside of the body"--but the immoral person sins against his own body.

New Heart English Bible
Flee sexual immorality. "Every sin that a person does is outside the body," but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.

Webster's Bible Translation
Flee lewdness. Every sin that a man doeth, is without the body; but he that committeth lewdness, sinneth against his own body.

Weymouth New Testament
Flee from fornication. Any other sin that a human being commits lies outside the body; but he who commits fornication sins against his own body.
Majority Text Translations
Majority Standard Bible
Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a man can commit is outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.

World English Bible
Flee sexual immorality! “Every sin that a man does is outside the body,” but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
Literal Translations
Literal Standard Version
flee the whoredom; every sin—whatever a man may commit—is outside the body, and he who is committing whoredom sins against his own body.

Berean Literal Bible
Flee the sexual immorality. Every sin, whatever a man might do, is outside the body, but the one committing sexual immorality sins against his own body.

Young's Literal Translation
flee the whoredom; every sin -- whatever a man may commit -- is without the body, and he who is committing whoredom, against his own body doth sin.

Smith's Literal Translation
Flee fornication. Every sin which if a man do is without the body; but he committing fornication sins against his own body.
Catholic Translations
Douay-Rheims Bible
Fly fornication. Every sin that a man doth, is without the body; but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his own body.

Catholic Public Domain Version
Flee from fornication. Every sin whatsoever that a man commits is outside of the body, but whoever fornicates, sins against his own body.

New American Bible
Avoid immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the immoral person sins against his own body.

 

[Wrangler]

@Wrangler,
I haven't disregarded Proverbs 6:26. I don't believe it says what you are claiming it says.

The fact that one sin is described as having less severe consequences than another does not make it the morally superior option.

First, I reject the claim that it is a sin as that is Circular Reasoning of the point of this thread. Second, if one action having less severe actions than another does not make it superior, what would?

 

[Wrangler]

Jesus isn't """Silent on the Matter."" ... Jesus taught Paul to tell you

Lack discernment eh?

What verse did you past all kids of translations of? @Lambano already went to the original language, where it was exclusively used to apply to prostitutes.

 

[Wrangler]

So I think the more precise question is whether Scripture considers sexual union with a prostitute to be morally permissible.

Agreed. This has already been presented 3 times where Scripture considers sexual union with a prostitute to be morally permissible. (See post with Jericho about tacit approval.)

Let's examine 3 verses:

1. Genesis 38:11-30. Judah having with Tamar, his daughter-in-law, dressed as a prostitute
2. Judges 16:1 Samson has sex in Gaza with a prostitute.
3. Proverbs 6:26 (NOG) A prostitute’s price is only a loaf of bread, but a married woman hunts for your life itself.

Cancel culture today prevents us from recognizing the pros and cons of a proposition. Instead of recognizing the evidence may follow a 60-40 split, there tends to be a black and white, total denial of any support or validity for the losing side of an issue.

When I came up with the title of this thread, I did not mean to imply there are no verses that seem to be against soliciting a prostitute. People like @Mancunian see these types of discussions and are turned off by the lack of discernment among Christians to acknowledge the ambivalence present in Scripture. How many threads debate OSAS? Tribulation, pre and post? Faith or works? KJVO? If Scripture lacked ambivalence all these threads would not be necessary. But where would the fun be in that?

 

[Lambano]

I noticed you disregarded the verses in the OP that supports engaging with a prostitute as the morally superior option.

Proverbs 6:26 doesn't say patronizing a prostitute is morally superior to marriage; it just says it has a lower downside risk. Based on my stepson's disastrous experience with his ex, my brother and his wife's ugly split, and a couple of friends' divorces, I'd say once again the Bible demonstrates its truthfulness. Choose wisely when marrying.

 

[ScottA]

Jesus is silent on the matter. The prohibition is adultery, having sex with a married person, which is different from the evolution condemning "extra marital sex." Let's examine 3 verses:

1. Genesis 38:11-30. Judah having with Tamar, his daughter-in-law, dressed as a prostitute
2. Judges 16:1 Samson has sex in Gaza with a prostitute.
3. Proverbs 6:26 (NOG) A prostitute’s price is only a loaf of bread, but a married woman hunts for your life itself.

NOTE: What these 3 verses have in common is there is no moral condemnation against prostitution. (Some translations of Proverbs uses the term "whore" rather than prostitute.) The point of the chapter is cautioning against adultery and suggesting it is far cheaper to get sexual satisfaction by a whore or prostitute.

According to the NSRV study notes on the Commandment prohibiting coveting your neighbor's wife was considered a property crime, as the offspring in marriage was presumed to be from the husband and adultery violates this social contract.

And let's not forget Biblical wives Sara (The wife of Abraham), Leah and Rachel (wives of Jacob) had their servants have sex with their husbands. Yes, it was not for sexual satisfaction but procreation. Still the point is no Biblical condemnation for "extra marital sex." This article explains Dinah may not have been raped but "debased" by Shechem, and her brothers were enraged that her bride price would drop. And it explains why he wanted to marry her, overcome with passion not guilt over a sex crime. Let's examine passages in the NT:

• 1 COR 7. Allows marriage to prevent vague "sexual immorality." v 6, Paul admits his words are not God’s command.
• Other verses also speak vaguely about "sexual immorality" that some translations impose church doctrine prohibiting "fornication," which is not the same thing. (Acts 15:20; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 6:13, 18; 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 7) Speaking of property crimes, "sexual immorality" must include rape and under age sex, which again is not the same thing as fornication.

IF "sexual immorality" includes consensual sex of unmarried adults, which fornication is, how do you reconcile that with the 3 verses originally cited?
IF you claim the NT set a higher standard, then that is the equivalent of yet another new law but Christ did not give us this higher standard. The only new law Jesus gave is in John 13, about love as he loved. Therefore, claiming the NT set a higher standard on this topic is eisegesis. We may conclude sex in marriage is preferred, as Paul wrote in 1 Cor 7, but not commanded by God. Thoughts?

Three things named does not make them good, but revealed.

 

[Angelina]

@Wrangler, I agree that we shouldn't assume the disputed conclusion in advance, and I wasn't intending to do that.
My point about Proverbs 6:26 is that a comparison of consequences does not by itself establish moral approval.

You ask what would make one action morally superior. I would say that Scripture itself would need to establish that the action is morally permissible. Having fewer consequences, or being less damaging than another action, doesn't establish that by itself.

I also think we need to distinguish between narrative silence and positive approval.

Genesis 38 tells us what Judah did with Tamar, who was disguised as a prostitute. Judges 16:1 tells us what Samson did with a prostitute. Neither passage says that God approved of the sexual activity. In Genesis 38, Judah later says, “She is more righteous than I” Genesis 38:26. So I don't think either narrative can reasonably be presented as Scripture declaring prostitution morally permissible.

Proverbs 6:26 is different because it does make a comparison. But again, it compares the consequences associated with the two situations. It doesn't actually say that prostitution is morally acceptable.

This is why I keep coming back to 1 Corinthians 6:15–18. Here we have an explicit New Testament discussion of sexual union with a prostitute:

“Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body?” 1 Corinthians 6:16 NIV

Paul then says: “Flee from sexual immorality.” 1 Corinthians 6:18 That isn't narrative silence. It is an explicit apostolic instruction in the context of sex with a prostitute.

So I agree that the question should be examined without circular reasoning. But I don't think we can treat the absence of an explicit condemnation in Genesis 38 and Judges 16 as equivalent to Scripture positively declaring prostitution permissible. Nor do I think Proverbs 6:26 establishes that conclusion.

The real question, I believe, is how the explicit teaching of 1 Corinthians 6 should be reconciled with the three passages you have presented.

 

[Wrangler]

Proverbs 6:26 doesn't say patronizing a prostitute is morally superior to marriage; it just says it has a lower downside risk.

Really? “Lower downside risk” is not superior?

 

[Wrangler]

The real question, I believe, is how the explicit teaching of 1 Corinthians 6 should be reconciled with the three passages you have presented.

Repeatedly addressed. Paul said this was not the command of God.

 

[Lambano]

Really? “Lower downside risk” is not superior?

The phrase in question was "morally superior". We're not talking cost/benefit ratio.

 

[Angelina]

@Wrangler, I think there is an important distinction here. The statement that Paul is giving his own instruction rather than a command from the Lord occurs in 1 Corinthians 7:12, not in 1 Corinthians 6.

In 1 Corinthians 6:15–18, Paul is specifically discussing sexual union with a prostitute, and he says:

“Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body?” 1 Corinthians 6:16 NIV

He then gives the instruction: “Flee from sexual immorality.” 1 Corinthians 6:18

There is no statement in this passage saying, “This is not the command of God.”

The “I, not the Lord” statement comes later in 1 Corinthians 7:12: “To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)…”

And the subject there is a believer who is married to an unbeliever. Paul is distinguishing between something Jesus had explicitly taught during his earthly ministry and a situation about which there is no recorded saying of Jesus.

So I don't believe that we can take Paul's qualification in 1 Corinthians 7:12 and apply it retrospectively to his teaching in chapter 6.

That still leaves the question we have been discussing: how do the three OT passages establish that prostitution is morally permissible when 1 Corinthians 6 explicitly tells believers to flee sexual immorality in the context of sex with a prostitute?

 

[Lambano]

Repeatedly addressed. Paul said this was not the command of God.

That disclaimer (1 Corinthians 7:6, 7:12, specifically excluding 7:10-11) was "concerning certain matters you wrote about" starting with chapter 7 verse 1. The verses specifically addressing porneia occurred prior to this contextual dividing line and must be considered outside the scope of the disclaimer.

 

[ScottA]

Looks like some need to look closer at Psalm 6:26:

Pro 6:26
For H3588 by means of H1157 a H802➔ whorish H2181 woman ➔H802 a man is brought to H5704 a piece H3603 of bread: H3899 and the adulteress H802 H376 will hunt H6679 for the precious H3368 life. H5315

In particular, look at the combined (two-part) definition of "adulteress"...in that setting, it defines her search as good, even as the church becomes One with Christ, the two as one flesh.

And look at that passage's placement within the chapter, it's all about the greater choice of choosing life or death (eternal)--not about whether or not prostitution is okay with God, at all.

In contrast, notice what Paul says of the harlot:

What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 1 Corinthians 6:16​

And if anyone doesn't think sex biblically is synonymous with marriage...well...you have missed a lot about the birds and the bees, and also what is written in the scriptures. But mainly, it is all a metaphor by example of Christ coming into you. XXX or †††