http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=4778
What is “Sexual Immorality” in Matthew 19:9?
From
Genesis to Revelation, the Bible repeatedly stresses the fact that God
designed the institution of marriage (Genesis 2:22-25). He has, from the
beginning of human history, given very specific ideas about what
composes a divinely approved marriage (Matthew 19:1-4), consisting of
one man and one woman. We learn from the Scriptures, however, that not
every man or woman is qualified to enter into certain marital
relationships. In the New Testament, we read of three, and only three,
categories of people whom God approves to enter into marriage. The first
category is those who have never been married (Hebrews 13:4). The
second category of people who are eligible to marry is those who have
been married but whose spouses have died (Romans 7:1-3). The third
category of God-approved marriage candidates is those whose spouses have
committed “sexual immorality” (Matthew 19:9). It is to this last
category and to the term “sexual immorality” that we will direct our
attention.
In Matthew 19:1-10, Jesus was tested by the Pharisees with the
following question: “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any
reason?” Jesus responded by directing their attention to God’s original
creation of Adam and Eve. They then queried why Moses allowed
certificates of divorce if marriage was supposed to be such a permanent
institution. Jesus responded:
Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to
divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to
you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and
marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is
divorced commits adultery (Matthew 19:8-9).
Notice, from this verse, that any person who gets a divorce for any
reason other than sexual immorality, and marries another, commits
adultery. But a person who divorces his/her spouse for sexual immorality
and marries another person does not commit adultery. Thus, Jesus gives
the criterion for those who are in the third category of God-approved
marriage candidates. Also notice those who are not eligible to enter
into a marriage: anyone who has gotten a divorce for any reason other
than sexual immorality. [NOTE: The parallel passage found in Matthew
5:32 quotes Jesus as saying: “But I say to you that whoever divorces his
wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit
adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits
adultery.”]
With Jesus’ statement in mind, it becomes imperative to learn what the
term “sexual immorality” means, since this is the only infraction on
behalf of a spouse that would allow for the remarriage of the innocent
party (the spouse who does not commit sexual immorality) after a
divorce. As you can imagine, in our culture of rampant divorce and
remarriage, and secularized Christianity, this word has been given all
sorts of meanings in an attempt to allow virtually every divorced person
to be considered a God-approved candidate for remarriage. Many of these
definitions are nothing more than attempts to alter the Word of God. So
then, what does “sexual immorality” mean?
In order to understand what Jesus was saying, we must go back to the
original language and identify what the word meant in the first century.
The word translated “sexual immorality” in this verse is the Greek word
porneia. The respected Greek lexicon of Arndt, Gingrich, and
Danker states that the word refers to “prostitution, unchastity,
fornication, of every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse.” In their
primary definition, they mention that it refers to “the sexual
unfaithfulness of a married woman” (1979, p. 693).
The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words has an extensive section on
porneia
and related words: “This word group describes various extramarital
sexual modes of behavior insofar as they deviate from accepted social
and religious norms (e.g., homosexuality, promiscuity, pedophilia, and
esp. prostitution)” (Verbrugge, 2000, 6:1077). This dictionary further
notes: “Rab. Jud. (Rabbinical Judaism—KB) frowned on any kind of
prostitution of extramarital sexual intercourse. Incest and all kinds of
unnatural sexual intercourse were viewed as
porneia (6:1078). In the discussion of the word’s use in the New Testament, the volume states:
It is not clear whether porneia in the so-called ‘exceptive
clause’ (Matt 5:32; 19:9) is to be understood simply as extramarital
sexual intercourse in the sense of moicheia or as including prostitution. Most interpreters tend to favor the former interpretation…. The porne word group denotes any kind of illegitimate sexual intercourse in Paul’s letters (6:1078, emp. added).
The
Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words says
concerning this word group that the “NT is characterized by an
unconditional repudiation of all extra-marital and unnatural
intercourse” (Hauck and Schultz, 1968, 6:590). In discussing the word as
it is used in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9, this source states: “In
both verses
porneia refers to extra-marital intercourse on the
part of the wife, which in practice is adultery” (6:592). From a survey
of the lexical information regarding the word, the almost universally
understood meaning of the word
porneia is illicit physical
sexual intercourse with someone who is not the person’s God-approved
spouse (this would include homosexuality and beastiality). In modern
terminology, then, the text is simply saying that the only time a person
can divorce his or her spouse and marry another is if that spouse has
been involved in a sexual affair with someone else. With knowledge of
this word’s actual meaning, let us examine how some have attempted to
redefine the term. [NOTE: Mark 10:11-12 is evidence of the fact that the
Scripture applies both to a man who divorces his wife and to a woman
who divorces her husband. The divine regulations apply equally to both
genders. See Lenski, 1998, p. 734.]
Any Type of Lewd or Licentious Behavior
In our modern culture the term “pornography” has a host of meanings. It
includes pictures of scantily clad men and women, videos of people
engaged in illicit sexual situations, posters of women or men “baring it
all,” etc. The word “pornography”derives from the word
porneia. One can see the obvious connection. Due to the fact that “pornography”seems so similar to
porneia, many have come to believe that any actions or behavior that modern people would term
pornography would also fall under the definition of
porneia. Thus, they suggest that if a person were to look at a pornographic movie, he would be guilty of
porneia. If
a wife were to send a man who is not her husband text messages with
photos of herself in her underwear, or with messages that talk about
sexual situations, she would be guilty of
porneia. If a spouse were to call a phone-sex line and listen to a sexual situation described to him, he would be guilty of
porneia. And the list could go on and on.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that it projects a definition of the word
porneia
onto the first-century Greek term that the word in the first century
did not have. Notice that in the definition provided from the lexical
resources, there is near universal consensus that the term meant “sexual
intercourse.” Due to the way the term “sex” has been overly applied to
modern activities such as “phone sex,” or “sexting,” and “sexy,” the
modern understanding is that anything that would be “sexually arousing”
would be included in the term “sex.” But the term
porneia would not have been understood to have such a loose, broad meaning.
It should be noted, of course, that many of the activities that have
been described such as “sexting” or phone sex would be sinful and would
be included in numerous lists of thoughts and actions that Christians
should avoid. The terms for such activities include licentiousness,
lusts (1 Peter 4:3), or lewdness (Romans 13:13). These terms have a much
broader definition than
porneia. Since that is the case, if
Jesus had wanted to use one of these terms with a broader definition
than “sexual intercourse” He could have, but He chose not to. As Wayne
Jackson correctly stated: “Bible translations that render
porneia
more generically (e.g., ‘sexual immorality’) are misleading. There are
various forms of sexual immorality (e.g., exposing one’s body in
seductive clothing) that do not fall under the definition of
fornication, though clearly they are sinful” (n.d.).
We get a definite understanding of how first-century Jews understood
the term in John 8. In that passage Jesus accused the Jews of being the
children of the devil, because they were behaving in the same way the
devil would behave. They responded to His accusation by saying, “We were
not born of fornication, we have one Father—God” (John 8:41). The word
translated “fornication” in this verse is
porneias. Notice their understanding of the term
porneias included the idea that a person could be born of
porneias.
That would imply that the term must mean more than looking at
pornographic pictures or explicit conversations about sex. In this
context, it would be narrowly defined as sexual intercourse that has the
biological ability to produce offspring. [NOTE: While the Jews had
“spiritualized” the term and applied it to their spiritual relationship
with God, that does not change the meaning of the word as they
understood it. They certainly meant that they were not “illegitimate”
spiritual children born as the result of an extra-marital sexual
encounter. The fact that the term was figuratively applied to a
spiritual relationship does not alter its literal meaning. See the
section of this article titled “Sexual Immorality Used to Describe
Idolatry.”]
The response to this statement from those who desire to view
porneia as
having a broader meaning is that “sexual intercourse” is such a
difficult concept to define. Obviously, they say, homosexual behavior
cannot produce offspring. Bestiality cannot produce offspring. So,
according to them, any attempt to put limits on the nature of such
“sexual” activity is doomed to failure. Such reasoning has at least two
glaring flaws. First, it misses the point that the word
porneia
had a first-century meaning that was understood in the context as
extra-marital sexual intercourse. Second, such reasoning fails to take
into account the fact that in order to accept a broader definition for
the term
porneia, positive evidence must be presented that
shows the word was understood in the first century to have the looser
meaning. It is not enough to say, “I really feel like the term would
include looking at pornography, sexting, or phone sex.”
Any
person who believes such activities would be included in the definition
must present lexical information and first-century usages of the word
that show such activities could be a part of the word’s meaning.
Without this type of positive proof, we must stick with the definition
that can be shown from the Bible and lexical sources to have been in use
in the first-century.
Practically speaking, then, suppose a wife were to confide in a
preacher that her husband is viewing pornography and masturbating. She
asks the preacher if these transgressions would allow her to
scripturally divorce her husband and be a candidate to remarry. The
preacher then explains that
porneia is the only divinely sanctioned cause for divorce and subsequent remarriage. The woman wants to know if
porneia
would include what she has described. The preacher shows her the
lexical information and biblical usage and explains that “sexual
intercourse” is the key component of the word. The woman argues that
masturbation could be included in the term “sexual intercourse.” The
preacher then goes to John 8:41, explains how the word was used there,
and asks the woman to do some study and try to find any instance in or
around the time of the first century where we know for a fact the word
was used for masturbation or viewing pornography. If such a usage is not
forthcoming, the only proper course of interpretation is to exclude
masturbation and viewing pornography from the definition of
porneia.
What About Matthew 5:27-28?
Once it has been clearly established that
porneia is the only
exception given for a spouse to scripturally divorce and contract a
subsequent marriage, some then turn to Matthew 5:27-28 to broaden the
meaning of
porneia. Those verses record Jesus saying: “You have
heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit
adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for
her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” The reasoning
is, if a man lusts for a woman other than his spouse, Jesus says he has
committed adultery with her “in his heart.” Since he commits
mental/heart adultery, the argument goes, that must mean his wife could
divorce him for “adultery” based on his lustful thoughts, and she could
contract another scriptural marriage. This argument is flawed on several
levels.
First, notice where Jesus said the “adultery” takes place: “in his
heart.” In Matthew 5:27-28, however, Jesus makes a distinction between
what He is saying in Matthew 5:32 and Matthew 19:9. In neither of the
latter two instances does Jesus allow for the adultery to be in any
other realm but physical. The word
porneia carries no inherent
meaning that would cause the reader to interpret it to mean anything
other than physical sexual intercourse. Since “in his heart” or other
such phrases are not included in Matthew 5:32 or 19:9, correct
interpretation rules would require us to define the word
porneia
in physical terms, not mental or spiritual ones. As Wayne Jackson
correctly stated: “A fundamental principle of Bible interpretation is
that words must be interpreted literally unless there is compelling
reason for assigning them a figurative meaning. The term ‘adultery’ is
not employed in a metaphorical sense in Matthew 19:9” (n.d.).
Second, we must recognize that while certain sins may carry the same
spiritual weight, they do not have the same physical consequences. In
Matthew 5:21, Jesus explained that the Old Testament prohibited murder.
He elaborated on this concept when He insisted that any person who hates
his brother enough to say, “You fool,” will “be in danger of hell fire”
(Matthew 5:22). The inspired writer John said: “Whoever hates his
brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life
abiding in him” (1 John 3:15). From these passages it is clear that the
sins of hatred and murder carry the same spiritual weight, but they do
not carry the same physical consequences. In the Old Testament, murder
was a capital offense punishable by death, but hatred was not. Again,
physical adultery was a crime punishable in the Old Testament by
stoning, but lust was not. In Matthew 19:9, the sin of
porneia
may carry the same spiritual weight as lust “in the heart,” but the
verses never hint at the idea that the terms carry the same physical
consequences. The physical consequences of a spouse committing
porneia are
that the innocent spouse can divorce that person and contract a new
scriptural marriage, while the guilty party must remain unmarried for
the rest of his or her life. The same physical consequences are not
enumerated for “adultery in the heart” in Matthew 5:28.
Sexual Immorality Used to Describe Idolatry
In a similar way, some have contended that because God used the terms
“adultery,” or “sexual immorality,” or equivalent ideas to describe the
Israelites’ apostasy into idolatry (Hosea 4:11-13), then the terms can
have a broader meaning. They argue that if God’s people can commit
“adultery” against Him by worshipping idols, then the word “adultery”
must have a meaning broad enough to include activities other than
actual, physical intercourse.
Again, this type of argument fails for at least two primary reasons. First, it is clear from the
context of
Matthew 19:1-9 that the physical relationship between a husband and
wife is under discussion. Respected linguists Vine (1985) and Thayer
(1962, p. 532) concur that when not used metaphorically (in reference
to idolatry)
porneia is used of “illicit sexual intercourse.”
There is no discussion in this context of idolatry or spiritualized
unfaithfulness. The text could not be clearer in regard to the physical
marriage relationship.
Second, the spiritualized, figurative sense of the word makes no sense
if the Jews did not understand the physical sense as the primary,
literal meaning. For instance, in Hosea 4:12, in regard to Israelite
idolatry, the prophet said: “Therefore your daughters commit harlotry
and your brides commit adultery.” In a physical sense, what do the terms
“adultery” and “harlotry” mean?—illicit sexual intercourse. Without the
understanding of the
physical meanings, the
illustration that God used makes no sense—that in a figurative sense,
Israel is married to God, and idolatry is a spiritual act of
unfaithfulness. Unless adultery really does mean committing sexual sin
against one’s spouse, God’s illustration breaks down.
For instance, consider the statement: “The debater blew his opponent’s
argument out of the water.” This figurative use of the phrase only makes
sense if we understand the physical picture of literal water and some
type of blasting explosion. The figurative use of the word is always
dependent on the physical meaning of the term. The physical meanings of
the terms are necessarily logically prior to the figurative or
spiritualized meanings. Thus, spiritual “adultery” can only be
understood if we comprehend the physical use of the term “adultery.” And
we have sufficiently established that the physical use of
porneia means illicit sexual intercourse.
Finally, and worthy of serious consideration, is this fact: even if it could be shown that
porneia might have a spiritualized, figurative meaning in Matthew 19:1-9 (which it cannot), that fact would only indicate a
possible
use of the word. The one contending that a person could contract a God
approved divorce and subsequent remarriage would have to
prove that this spiritualized usage is being applied,
not just that it is a possibility.If
that usage cannot be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, then a person
would be risking his or her soul on a mere possibility. What kind of
ground would a person be standing on in the Day of Judgment contending
with God, “But I thought the word possibly could have meant…,” when we
have a very clear meaning of “physical sexual intercourse” that we know
the word carries.
Conclusion
Marriage is permanent. The only two situations in the New Testament in
which a person can get married more than once with God’s approval are
when a spouse dies, or when an innocent spouse divorces a spouse for
porneia. The term
porneia means
unlawful, physical sexual intercourse. In an attempt to broaden the
category of those who can scripturally remarry, some have attempted to
define the term
porneia with concepts such as viewing pornography or “phone sex.” While those activities are sinful, they are not
porneia
as the word was used in the first century. Others have contended that
lust results in “adultery in the heart” and would be grounds for a
scriptural divorce and remarriage. But they fail to differentiate
between sins that have the same spiritual weight but have different
physical consequences. Jesus’ sole exception for divorcing a living
spouse and marrying another is if that spouse has committed physical
sexual intercourse with another biological being.
REFERENCES
Arndt, William, F.W. Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker (1979),
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press), second revised edition.
Hauck, F. and Siegfried Schultz (1968),
porneia,
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Jackson, Wayne (No Date), “Is ‘Lust’ the Equivalent of ‘Fornication’”,
Christian Courier, http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1371-is-lust-the-equivalent-of-fornication.
Lenski, R.C.H. (1998),
The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).
Thayer, Joseph (1962),
Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan).
Verbrugge, Verlyn (2000),
The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words(Grand Rapids: Zondervan).
Vine, W.E. (1985),
Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Electronic PC Study Bible Version).
