What Does the Bible Really Say About Porn?
The following is predicated on the understanding that my thoughts presented here pertain to married adults and adult singles!
I recently read the thought-provoking article “What Does the Bible Say About Pornography?” by Megan Bailey via the website Beliefnet.com Ms. Bailey said, in part, “Pornography is extremely prevalent in the world today. It’s more popular and accessible than ever before. Just because it’s available, however, does not make it right. Many Christians struggle with the morality of pornography.”
She continues: “What does the Bible say about it? The truth is if you want to please God, you should know that He views pornography negatively. … [I]t is very clear about how God feels about actions that promote sex outside of marriage and distorted views on sex. It conflicts with many of God’s core principles for Christianity.”
Ms. Bailey believes “If you want to live the Christian life, pornography should be avoided because it is a sin in God’s eyes. It is not a harmless act, like so many in society may claim it to be. It can ruin your marriage and hurt your relationship with God. … Rather than an act of married love, sex is reduced to an act of lust.”
It’s clear that Ms. Bailey’s heart is in the right place. She sees that watching, reading or hearing about sex outside marriage can be detrimental to our relationships with each other and our Lord. But I have a few questions related to the role of “pornography” depicting and used by married couples.
Is it “lust”?
First of all, I believe Megan Bailey’s definition of lust is invalid. How does a person lust after a picture? What are they going to do, have sex with the picture? (Masturbation is not the same as having sex with the image.)
I maintain that my God is all-knowing and all-seeing; since that is true, HE knew what humans would be doing or HE is not God. He would have warned us against it. Therefore, the taboo on Christians viewing nudity and reading about marital sex—and if we could find it, watching Christian porn—is made up by well-meaning folks. They just repeat what some other human pastors or priests have said for centuries without really reading and rightly interpreting scripture. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy that they create. As Ms. Bailey says, “The Bible does not directly mention pornography, cybersex or related activities.” Therefore, we cannot say with absolute certainty what God feels about all porn.
We see examples of this error all over the Bible where the Jewish scholars added to the Word regularly to elevate themselves and then caused a burden of sin to be upon their congregation—that is false sin. Does watching sex between a mature married couple performed in a video really promote sex outside of marriage? I argue it may well stimulate more intimate and exciting sex inside of marriage. Some marriages need a little kickstart to help make sex fun. It can create new experiences.
Really, porn is no different than watching anything else unless you’ve been conditioned to believe it is sinful and that you are going to hell for viewing it. If that precondition is instilled by someone in authority whom we respect, it is hard for the layman to counteract this wrong teaching. I say wrong teaching because we, the Church, are making sin what God has not declared sin. To add to the Word of God says, “God’s Word is not enough; I must reprimand God by adding what He did not say.” In this case, we have elevated ourselves above God and added legalism to God’s Word. (Legalism is when people in authority—preachers, teachers, etc.—make a rule that people struggle to follow that is not from the Lord himself. Those rules are an attempt by MAN to be god.)
Be Careful Little Eyes
I think the movies we watch and the video games we play are more dangerous than videos and pictures of consensual married sex. I personally find movies and games that portray killing other humans leave a lasting bad impression on my mind. I find myself, days and sometimes weeks later (and even years, in some cases), still thinking of whom I would have killed if it was me in the movie situation.
Violence of any kind is much more lasting and dangerous in the subconscious than our media would tell us. It desensitizes us dangerously, more so than sex. However, we don’t see the churches giving the same cautions about it as they do sex. For a married couple, the worst that can happen from viewing a sex movie is that they may try some crazy new position or some different kind of married sex, i.e., oral, anal, swallow cum, masturbation, etc. None of the aforementioned sex acts are prohibited for a married couple to do! But if they act out with real violence or fail to assist people in distress, someone could die.
God’s View of Visually-Depicted Sex
Ms. Bailey believes that God views pornography negatively. But how are we to suppose such a thing if He inspired the Song of Songs, which
is explicit sex in text and becomes explicit sex in audio when read aloud? (Granted, he didn’t make a video as there were no DVD or video tape machines back then.)
I agree with the author that porn that portrays sex between someone other than a couple (preferably known to be married to each other) and porn that portrays multiple people other than a married couple is questionable or bad porn for Christians to view. But, can we justify using bad video behavior by the people filmed as condemning us all to hell for watching it? Wouldn’t it be possible for a couple to restrict their viewing to pictures and video that portrays sex between only two people and assume the best scenario—that they are married to each other? Sure some people may fail to censor themselves, but do we prohibit all because of the few? I know the scripture says not to cause my brother to stumble, but, my brother has his own viewing choices to make, and my choice doesn’t affect his.
Still, to never see such a thing is virtually impossible in today’s world. So rather than condemning the viewer, wouldn’t it be better to teach what God has said about sex in Scripture without our personal extrapolation—without elevating ourselves to gods by defining things as sin that He never said were sin?
As to her claim that porn desensitizes the couple to the point of not being able to have sex: if that were true, then all those developing countries where the girls and women are topless and/or naked and the men run around nude too would have few or no children. Besides,
people who visit nude beaches have told me that, after a few minutes, the sight of naked people stops causing them to become excited and their penis erect. So if they have become desensitized, is that always a bad thing? What about the male/female with an overactive libido? Wouldn’t that take some of the pressure off of the low-libido spouse?
I know there are those who will absolutely and vehemently disagree with me. That is fine. But if you comment, please show me how your view supports what the Bible says in context, not by grabbing a quote out of context and trying to make it fit a preconceived definition of sin.
Ms. Bailey says, “Satan has taken sex, which is a gift from God, and replaced it with lust, adultery, rape and porn.” To these four (lust, adultery, rape, and deviant porn, and I’d add fornication to make five), I agree. But the true definition of unlawful lust was shown in
scripture by the example of King David. He first stood on his balcony watching another man’s wife bathing in the nude. He then decided he had to have her. We might even consider it, since she had no choice but to comply, a form of rape; however, that is a whole lot of speculation on my part. We could even imagine that she knew David was watching and enjoyed his gaze. That is too only speculation. The
only thing we do know is that this is a great picture of lust in action.
So is simply watching video recordings of people that you will probably never meet and who are happily married really lust? How does one, I again ask, commit lust with video or audio or text, remembering that masturbation is not a sin in scripture? These, while representations of real people, are not possible to lust after. If it were possible, then we could lust after the man or woman in Song of Songs even though they have been dead for centuries. We can read the Song and create a picture in our minds of other men/women. Would that be porn since the picture was only a picture, with no intent to have the person for our own? This question is pertinent to singles too: can one have or create a sexual mental picture without the actual planning of taking someone that does not belong to them by marriage without it being sinful? Wrongful lust requires a real person as the object and a plot to defraud their spouse.
Could Christian Porn Be Good for the Church and Its People?
I think Non-Christian porn with the correct understanding that it is only a show, like a fiction movie, could also benefit married couples as long as the couples set high standards. This would be a necessity since there is very little sexual content that is created by Christians for Christians. Perhaps someday Christians could even re-enact the Song of Songs as an explicit video production. Until then, typical porn does the following:
1. Teach experimental sex.
2. Teach normal sex in many positions (if one ignores the BS groaning and moaning.)
3. Teach oral sex.
4. Teach anal sex.
5. Teach mutual oral sex (69) in many positions.
6. Teach female pleasure (if one restricts oneself to female-friendly stuff.)
7. Teach male pleasure.
8. Teach body positivity, if depicting people with natural bodies. It could show that every sexy person does not look like a
hulk or model honey, and every penis and vagina is normal.
13. Teach roleplay.
14. Teach how to talk sexy/dirty.
15. Teach how to entice one’s spouse by touch and word.
Some of us are not gifted writers or composers, so we benefit from demonstrations of how to talk sexy, do sexy things, and exude sexiness. I think Christian porn and even some secular porn could help with that. And I again postulate that porn also is a stand-in for relationships with differing libidos. It is also a substitute in sexless marriages. It is also a stopgap for a wish-my-spouse-would-do list for either or both spouses. Does the husband or wife divorce their spouse for lack of sex? I don’t think that is Biblical! Can one just pray away your sex drive when it is not something that God calls sin? Why would God be obligated to answer that prayer?
I know of someone who was taught as a child that he was an evil sinner for masturbation and porn use. He was and is still single, never being able to rid himself of the shame of false teaching. (He also had an absent father, which compounded his lack of self-esteem.) In another Church couple I know, the wife caught her husband watching porn and was so upset she divorced him. Was that a Biblicly-based divorce? Based on what scripture? It wasn’t real adultery or fornication. It was only adultery in her mind, but God’s word has no prohibition against the p-word. She had been programmed by the Church to see as sin what God never said was sin.
What about:
a marriage where one spouse is physically unable to have sex?
a person whose spouse has died?
the couple where one spouse refuses both to have sex and to go to counseling?
those whose spouse has had bad experiences that have nothing to do them?
the wife whose husband has erectile dysfunction?
the man whose wife finds sex very painful?
the husband who doesn’t have any idea how to perform oral sex on his wife to orgasm?
the man who has no idea what to do if his wife orgasms on his face?
the woman who has no idea how to perform oral sex (BJ) on her husband?
the wife who thinks swallowing is nasty or just doesn’t know how to do it?
There are probably many other situations that could benefit from porn that I did not mention here. But while most men are more aroused by visual sex and more women by audio sex, we could all learn better by real human demonstration. If a couple learns to swallow or discovers new positions, then how is what they watched together destructive? They both learned how to make sex with their spouse more exciting and pleasurable.
I maintain that what a couple learns to do together takes away the stigma of sin! When things that God has not condemned are hidden, guilt and shame enter in. That is the real Devil’s playground. That is when the wife or husband is shamed so badly that it is hard to recover.
A wife can be legalized into thinking her husband is a pervert or that he is dirty or that he thinks she is not enough—all false beliefs for a Christian. All of us should remember that our husband/wife married us for love and sex, not because we looked like a porn star. We are his/her porn star! (The funny thing about men is that most of us would not want a porn star, but we would like to have a spouse that was truly as enthusiastic about making love with us as the porn star sometimes is or pretends to be with their co-star.)
The reverse can be true, too; a husband might think his wife is an evil person. He might see a large penis and think she wishes she had one of those to play with. If we learned what is natural and good, perhaps that stigma could be destroyed. A normal size or even an abnormal size of either body part does not take away the ability to pleasure one’s spouse. If only we could and would internalize that fact. Both the
giver and receiver of both sexes need to internalize it.
God gave us a toy attached to the other spouse that belongs to us alone. It is ours to touch, massage, suck, lick, taste, and swallow. It is ours to enjoy and to play with. They are toys of equal importance and pleasure attached to both spouses: a vulva and a penis. To neglect them is to neglect God’s gift to us. He provided that live toy for both spouses’ enjoyment. HE never made it a requirement that only the husband has to
initiate playtime. HE never put a quota on how many times he/she had to be the one initiating.
I admit that my deceased wife and I and several other couples watched porn together back in the days of old-type projectors and DVRs. None of us lusted after the other’s spouse. None of us had sex or got naked while we were all together. None of us normal-sized males/females felt threatened by the men that had 12-inch penises, and none of us lost desire for our wives. It even increased our desire for the one God gave
us. Now, what we did after the other couples went home is a different story. None of us were enticed to have sex with anyone outside of our marriages. So, what does that say about what the church has been teaching about video sex?
Churches have taught for centuries that any sex outside of penis-in-vagina in the missionary position is porn and sin. Oral sex was sodomy and wrong too. It’s about control by Church authority. It is not about the love of God and His love for marriage. It is not the first or the last time that well-meaning men and women have taught the wrong things, things that God did not say. They have taught this to the Church body and to their own children. They think that piling stigma on people will keep them from sin. Instead, it has had the reverse effect. It harms those to whom they have preached untruth, making sinners where no sin existed. Will it be the last time the Church does this? Probably not!
What if a married couple makes their own explicit videotape? By the above wrong definition, that is porn too. Is it porn if it is for their own enjoyment and memories? Is it a sin if someone finds or publishes their tape? Why? They were doing what God allowed a married couple to do! Why should they be ashamed? Why should they be ashamed if they are doing what God had written in His Word? Why should they be ashamed if they made their video public for the purpose of teaching others? Suppose the first spouse dies and the new spouse discovers the movies of the first marriage? Should the new spouse be jealous or shame their new partner? The original spouse is dead and buried and cannot come back to have sex with the person they loved. Does the old spouse need to destroy all the memories they made together? Why not just make new memories with the new spouse?
The Song of Songs was and is a pornographic marriage sex manual. It is, in context, how Solomon described sex between a betrothed and then married couple. It even talks about arousal when by one’s self. It is not a book of Christ’s love for the Church as many preachers try to tell us. The Book was written long before the birth of our Savior, and the church did not exist then. Solomon and his wife had oral and penis-in-vagina sex. She and he state that the other’s genitals were sweet to their taste, and they enjoyed the pleasure they both gave and received. She enticed him to give her oral sex until she came, and he swallowed. Likewise, she did the same for him and swallowed his ejaculate. How else could they both describe the sex was sweet to their taste? They didn’t spit or gag. So is swallowing dirty porn or demonstrated good and ideal by the Song of Songs? Is the Bible porn?
Pray about it!
Hubbie here:
Catlover, thanks for this cover of the porn issue. I think you raise some good ideas and challenges for the church, for Christians looking to “up their married sexual game”, and for singles/widowed/divorced looking to stay sexual somehow. And yes, all the watch outs and self-control “safety-rails” apply.
With the caveat that I am strongly “pro-church”, I do think it has failed to defend sex as God-created, given, and blessed. A long history of “sex is risky so let’s demonize it” should have been “sex is God-given and glorious so let’s celebrate it as He prescribed.” And so I think the “sex war” with the world is mostly lost.
If Christians in the church are fish in a large fish tank, set in the ocean (the world), they are often looking out to what the “fish” in the world are up to sexually. Christian sex should be so good that the fish in the ocean are looking into the fish tank wishing their sex was as hot. Yes, a weird metaphor, but I think it works.
One bit of unsolicited, fellow-author advice … this piece is way too long, and a meandering trail. It needed several author-edits (by you) to cut it in half, and section headings to direct the flow from proposition through supporting points to conclusion. Your good points are often obscured by mental flotsam and jetsam.
I know you didn’t ask for that, and I’ll probably get slammed for it, but what the heck. In all, a challenging post, and good mental grist for the mill. If we here in MH are going to be pro-sex, we need to think well and clearly about it and be able to defend it.
Blessings and passion to you.
I am old and never was an English major or even a tiny minor. I can barely remember college english. I hated it! My first paper had more red on it than black ink.
I learned in the corporate world to write in bullet points as executives had no time to read long dissertations. It is hard to write on MH in bullet points though. So, please forgive me.
catlover, your discussion on pornography is more detailed than I can adequately respond to. Therefore, this response to your post is probably inadequate. I can only say scripture states that sexual intercourse outside of marriage (both adultery and fornication) is wrong and in God’s eyes a sin. Anything that induces a Christian to violate these prohibitions is at least unwise and could also reasonably be considered as sinning. Based on this position, if pornography tempts me to commit sin, it is sin for me. Conscience is a wonderful gift of the Holy Spirit in that it pretty much defines right and wrong in grey areas. Although it is in a different context, James 4:17 can apply, “If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.”
Conscience is a wonderful gift of the Holy Spirit, I agree whole heartedly! However conscience guilt must be tested not just with feeling but with Scripture. There is a difference in knowing the good and not doing it and classifying something as bad that God never said was bad and then destroying one's self with guilt.
This was really good, catlover! I agree 100%. Actually I have written my own paper on why we as believers need to reject these legalistic teachings and reclaim sex as God designed it. I, too, always thought porn was evil. Yes, lust is wrong, but one can enjoy porn and masturbate to it without lust. It is better if it's real couples, not pornstars, with real, flawed bodies. It's taught me a lot. I knew zero about sex until I was 19, and after struggling with guilt over masturbating, I decided to study the subject in depth from a Biblical standpoint. Watching videos of couples engage in real sex educated me amazingly. I am now over my stigma about sex and eager to someday try all kinds of things with my future husband. My problem now is sharing these views with others, including my own parents and siblings. They may not agree. For now, it is something I keep to myself.
I would love to read your paper on the topic! I'm trying to read more about these types of views myself as I am challenging past assumptions.
(30 y/o male here, who's wife edits our stories). Pornea, sexual immorality. What some may classify as 'porn', I feel is not sexually immoral, therefore just erotic art, which my wife and I enjoy to an extent in moderation.
As far as too many pictures or video, this can cause me personally to be desensitized to my wife and OUR experience.
We've tested the waters with all kinds of 'porn', because we don't feel everything is black and white, but God gives each couple liberty. We found that watching/looking at certain things leads us down a road we don't wanna go down. We also enjoy doing things we saw in 'porn'.
Thank you, for your post, and I'm glad you began a good discussion, one in which there will be many varying views and opinions, weaknesses, liberty, restraint, etc.
I forget who said it, but in regards to the faith:
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself.
I want to do what's best for my marriage, and it doesn't look like watching 90% of 'porn' (like pHub, and Hamster, etc.), yet I won't push MY convictions on others, but talk to others about it from our experiential relevance.
Hey LingreOnn!
Was wondering about your screen name… when I read it I automatically think, “Lingerie On!” Which of course I love! But maybe it’s nothing to do with that. Do you and your wife enjoy lingerie play? If so I’d love to read about it! See my comment on the story called “Kink”.
I don't know if I'm quite where you're at. I think that if you and your wife both approve of watching it together or separately, that's your own business and none of mine. What matters there is having the same values as your spouse so as to not cause issues. That said, porn has destroyed plenty of marriages for whatever reason (and whatever your definition is–I'm going kind of broad here). I would also argue that porn does indeed have adverse effects, if you've read any of the accounts posted by places like NoFap or Fight the New Drug. I know from firsthand experience that it can be habit-forming and stay away from it as much as I can, but I'm also not perfect.
Now maybe if we were all nudists, then seeing body parts wouldn't be a problem–I can't say that I find a woman's ankles or hair to be all that arousing. Attractive, yes…
So seeing what I would consider to be titillating images even on this site, I'm not sure how I ultimately feel about that. I seem to remember reading on one of the discussions that MarriageHeat was working on an option to turn off images, and I think that I would do that given an option: some of them go far beyond what I'd consider good taste. But until I came here, I don't think I ever read a definition of "porn" to mean depictions of only ungodly sex acts. I guess with the way I was raised, I'd call that some pretty obvious mental gymnastics. Of course, I've been really examining and discarding a lot of my early training recently; I don't know how much of it was just my mom's neuroses that she felt compelled to drill into the next generation, meaning my siblings and me.
Whether or not God considers porn a sin, I would have said "Yes" because of Matthew 5:28, until a few days ago. Now I'm not so sure because of reading a few of the comments on this posting here from 2020: https://marriageheat.com/2020/12/07/is-it-ok-that-i-fantasize-about-her/#comment-58768
I'm not a Greek scholar and don't know that everything Waggs1 (and others) say is true, but it did give me pause and has me reassessing what I've been taught, but also how much condemnation I've heaped on myself due to what after all, is a pretty natural reaction from a man. That and an article called "How to Quit Porn for Good" on The Art of Manliness which argues that it's a lot easier to combat if you come from the perspective of treating it like junk food, not some kind of great soul-destroying evil. Maybe it ISN'T such a big deal; I'm not really ready to come down conclusively here. I do like that attitude though because I've become pretty health-conscious over the last few years, and I'd rather skip a meal than hit the drive-through at a fast food place.
Now I'm more sympathetic with some of your comments regarding technology even if I don't agree completely. That said, if I have a "porn" vice, it would be erotic audio, which I've always been interested in. There's something incredibly arousing to me about hearing a woman moan with pleasure and orgasm, but it's in a grey area for my morals. What will my future wife say? There's what's stated as sin and then there's the intention behind it, and with audio recording technology being only a little over a century old, it's hard to say what category that falls into, if any, but I don't feel particularly convicted against it. And also where would things like drawings/anime/etc. fall into?
As an aside, I've seen a few stories here and there that mention something called the "Ignite Audio Playlist" and I've wondered what that's all about, since I can't access it. Can anyone give me more info?
You can indeed turn off images for any site you visit *on a computer* by changing the site options—just click the little lock symbol in the URL bar. Mobile technology doesn't give such an option, at least not one I've been able to ferret out.
Ignite was a membership plan we offered a few years ago that didn't work out. The audio playlist was made up of narrated versions of some of the stories. Eventually, we hope to create collections to offer for sale that will include an audio version.
Thanks for the further info!
Rather than argue, I would just share my personal experience. I have attempted many times to go with Catlover's narrow interpretation of porn and lust and view explicit sexual imagery. Every time, my conscience is wounded afterwards and I need to ask God for forgiveness. Even the educational sites which portray naked sexual images and videos have not worked for me, so after years of trying to convince myself otherwise, I have accepted that viewing such material cannot have a place in my life, as a child of God.
I would also remind any young folks who are on MH and are trying to find their way on this issue, that although MH is and can be a blessing in Christian monogamous relationships, it would still be considered fringe or even unacceptable to many Christians.
In other words, I suggest that you also take in other Christian sources, blogs, etc., that may round out your view.
With that being said, I do appreciate the MH commitment to hot holy monogamy in the perverted, fallen world we live in.
Blessings!
I respect your difficulties. There are many things in this life that can be a personal stumbling block. I do not know your life story. Your guilt could be coming from things that we have no idea you are dealing with besides nude images. All I can do is to pray that you are released from what ever hold it has on you. Our Savior knows and has already forgiven u. But even so, there are things some of us can never return too. Like alcohol, some of us can never take a drink again and some of us can have a glass at dinner and leave it alone after that. However porn has never been shown on MRI to have the same addiction effects as alcohol or drugs. That doesn't mean though that it cannot have a strictly mental effect. There is an affect on children that is different than married or even single adults. The affect on children if not taught that sex is natural between married couples can be detrimental. It can leave a warped idea of sex that will last. It is why the Song was not supposed to be read by unmarried people or people under a certain age. The rabbi's believed it to have a bad affect on children just like porn today.
There's a lot to unpack here! First off, I appreciate this discussion, and I have some sympathies for your case overall. I haven't been able to nail down exactly what I believe and why on this topic, and I'm comfortable admitting that. I personally avoid intentionally viewing any kind of nudity or sexually provocative content, whether the people in question are married or not. (I even avoid staring at the more revealing pictures here on MarriageHeat.) I'm convinced that it's at the very least unhealthy and a poor use of my time, energy and desires. I strongly suspect it's worse than that, but I need to spend more time digging into the reasons why.
Though I don't intent to set out to debunk your case, I am concerned about many sections of your case where I see faulty logic being used, and I'd like to address some of them.
"HOW CAN YOU LUST AFTER A PICTURE?"
The same way you lust after someone when you see them in-person. Whether you're seeing someone with the naked eye, or seeing them through a lens or window, or seeing a captured image of them, it's still ultimately a person you're looking at. Although that brings us to a related point you bring up later on, so I'll skip ahead a bit to the following quote:
"WRONGFUL LUST REQUIRES A REAL PERSON AS AN OBJECT, AND A PLOT TO DEFRAUD THEIR SPOUSE."
First things first, the part about a "real person" needing to be involved. I'm convinced there can be sinful lust and betrayal even when there's not a real person involved. As a biblical example, God routinely described Israel's unfaithfulness to him in the Old Testament with language of adultery and whoring. Who was Israel being unfaithful with? False gods, idols that were mere human creations of clay, wood, stone and metal. Inanimate objects, not living beings. Yet God described that as adultery. (Jeremiah 7:9 really illustrates this. See also Jeremiah 3:8-9, 13:27, Ezekiel 6:9, and many more. Jesus described lust in similar adulterous terms.) I'd say that's a good indicator that the definition of unfaithfulness, adultery and similar sins are quite a bit broader than you suggest.
As for the second part about plots, the whole point of what Jesus said about lust in Matthew 5:28 is that what happens IN YOUR HEART can be sinful, even if you take no outward action. Inward actions and thoughts of the heart are still actions. An outward "plot" is not required for sinful things to be going on in your heart.
And even if you're convinced something only qualifies as sinful lust if you're intending to pursue illegitimate sex with someone, I hope you'd agree there are things that can be very unhealthy long before reaching that point. If someone's actively plotting to pursue illicit sex, they've already gone wrong somewhere LONG before that point.
"HE WOULD HAVE WARNED US AGAINST IT."
Expecting an explicit warning against every possible permutation of evil is not only unrealistic, it is dangerous. The Bible would have to be hundreds of millions of pages long if it were to warn against every possible kind of sin a human being could commit. God knew this, and gave us enough information in the Bible to make sound judgements based on the principles of his ways. There are things Christians hold to be wrong not because the Bible says explicitly that they're wrong, but because these biblical principles lead us to that conclusion. For example, the Bible never says "Thou shalt not chop off your neighbor's left arm at the elbow with a rusty machete between 1 and 2.5 cubits long." But it IS quite clear from pulling together all passages and principles about loving your neighbor, doing unto others as you would want them to do to you, considering others as more significant than yourselves, etc. that this would be a terrible sin against your neighbor. And even if it DID say that, are we then to conclude that it would be okay as long as the machete wasn't rusty? Or if it was more than 2.5 cubits long? Now of course, we must be careful not to go beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4:6), but clearly, we are meant to apply principles to situations where there is no situation-specific biblical guidance, and we are NOT meant to expect explicit commands against every possible sin. So, this doesn't necessarily invalidate your entire case, but it does mean that you can't use this particular argument to support that case.
"TO NEVER SEE SUCH A THING IS VITTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE IN TODAY'S WORLD."
While this is true, this logic cannot justify porn use. There's a world of difference between "seeing" something and intentionally viewing it, fixing your attention on it, and consuming it. It's the difference between seeing a drug deal go down in a city alley on one hand, and on the other, trying to buy some for yourself.
PORN AS A SOLUTION TO RELATIONSHIP PROBLEMS
I also really have a problem with some of your concluding statements about porn being a good alternative when in a sexless marriage, when your spouse won't engage in a sex act you want, etc. I think that is highly problematic. That conditions a person to turn somewhere other than their spouse for sexual fulfillment and intimacy. Not only does that sound hurtful to me (admittedly, subjectively), it leads to disengagement in the relationship, which decreases the chances of the relational root problem ever being fixed.
"IF A COUPLE LEARNS TO SWALLOW OR DISCOVERS NEW POSITIONS, THEN HOW IS WHAT THEY WATCHED TOGETHER DESTRUCTIVE?"
The simple fact that some method may have some benefits and upsides does not automatically make it right. This completely ignores the possibility of potential downsides. (The addictive and destructive properties of porn are well-documented at this point, as referenced in some other comments.) Nor does the presence of some benefits mean that a given method is the only way (or even the best way) to gain those benefits! If we pretend porn is the only way, or even the best way to gain the benefits you speak of, that sounds a LOT more like rationalizing porn use for pleasure rather than an actual analytical reason to use it. I say this as someone who used to watch porn for "educational reasons," until I woke up to the fact that it was really doing nothing to teach me anything that I couldn't have learned far better from Christian sources like MarriageHeat, and only came with ever-present dangers.
If we see porn as a coping mechanism or Band-Aid for some relationship issue, or as a source of education, the titillation of this "solution" can very easily discourage us from pursuing real solutions for growth and problem-solving that don't come with heaps of potential baggage. (The addictive and destructive properties of porn are well-documented at this point, as referenced in some other comments.)
And finally:
"THE SONG OF SONGS… IS NOT A BOOK OF CHRIST'S LOVE FOR THE CHURCH…"
Two things can be true at once. It IS about Christ's love for the church, and it IS also about married sexuality, both at the same time. This is because marriage and sex together were designed by God to be a picture of his love for us—a picture of Christ's love for the church. And sexuality is the crown jewel of the living picture of marriage, representing the profound joy, pleasure and intimacy of covenantal love with Christ! Notice how in Ephesians 5:31-32, Paul describes not only marriage ("a man shall… hold fast [or cleave] to his wife"), but also sex ("and the two shall become one flesh"), in reference to Christ and the church. These two inseparable things together represent the spiritual reality of Christ and the church.
When a spouse won't engage in a 'sex act you want' is much different than no sex at all. No sex at all could be either physical or mental. It could be fixable or not. The question then is what does either spouse do. In some things even Christians refuse to follow Scripture. In some things physical conditions prevent fixing.
For those who believe that it is porn that destroyed so many marriages I ask was it the porn or the guilt that the society attaches to it that destroyed the marriages? Was the person viewing it doing so in secret, hidden and alone? Was the spouse upset when he/she caught their other half watching it? Why were they viewing it alone? Was it church taught guilt and shame that was never taught in Scripture. As to every sin not being specifically mentioned in the Bible, sexual sin is particularly detailed in Scripture. It is not left to speculation in the WORD.
Remember also that in Biblical times everyone did not live in multi-room houses and tents so it would not have been uncommon for folks old and young to have seen sex between married couples when you were thought to be asleep.
As far as the Song being a description of Christ's love for the church, it was not written for that purpose. It has been , in some people's opinion, interpreted that way so preachers could justify the book. I would agree and do agree to some extent. However I could come closer to complete agreement if the churches actually taught the real descriptions of the sex acts portrayed at the same time. However that might become awkward. My reasoning on that not actually being the real reason for the Song and the real reason being a sex manual came from a rabbi.
Quote: “The Song of Songs was and is a pornographic marriage sex manual.”
Dear catlover:
After reading the logic you carefully developed to substantiate “pornography,” my heart is racing and my fingers are trembling as I attempt to type this because I recognize that your logic closely parallels how I defended ostensibly “allowing” my bride to bring pornography into our marriage bed soon after we were married. I made mention of that part of our history in my story here (https://marriageheat.com/2023/08/22/the-longing/ ).
Therefore, may I ask you what your thoughts are on this: as you may know, Our word “pornography” comes from two Greek words: 'porneia' (Strong’s #G4202 https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4202/kjv/tr/0-1/ ) and the Greek suffix ‘-ography' (https://www.thefreedictionary.com/-ography ) which simply means “to create a writing – a record – about something.” I’m sure you recognize that suffix because we use it a lot. For example: “photography" is “a writing of light” and “choreography” is a "writing of dance.”
In these two examples, the prefixes come from the Greek words for light “photos” and dance “coreia.” This pattern of the English language borrowing from the Greek repeats itself in most of the words English speakers use to describe the arts and sciences.
Porneia is the Greek word that defines immoral sex, as in “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality (porneia), and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.” Matt 19:9 NKJV. Enough said.
So, is it really accurate to say that “The Song of Songs was and is a pornographic marriage sex manual?” If so, where is the porneia, the sexual immorality, in it?
Now, as to exactly what Jehovah considers sexual immorality, one need only read Leviticus 18.
Now, recall what Paul wrote about the purpose of the law (Romans 7:7-12). Enough said.
~
My wife and her ex used pornography, extensively, before she was born again, which event happened after her divorce. Enough said.
I did not use pornography after I was born again simply because my conscience would not let me. I felt it was Sin. More on that in a bit.
Unfortunately, though, as an adolescent, I became fascinated by my visceral reaction to sapphic sex when I routed through dumpsters looking for “cool stuff” and discovered discarded pornographic magazines. Enough said.
After we were married, I soon discovered that my bride was having a very hard time responding to me naturally. She was as frustrated by her lack of physical response to me as I was frustrated to have a bride who I knew loved me and wanted desperately to demonstrate her love for me through sex, just as I thought she would do before I married because of the freedom she seemed to have from sexual hang-ups.
Now, of course, I knew before I married her, that she, too, had become as fascinated with sapphic sex as I, and so I also came to know what I already knew from my conscience, that this inability to respond naturally to my sexual advances was because pornography had infected her soul.
But I wanted desperately to have sex with her and so, in similar fashion as Adam, who knew that he was about to lose Eve after she ate from the fruit of the Tree of The Knowledge of (The Difference Between) Good and Evil (What’s in a name?) and took the fruit from her and ate, I also, took the “fruit” and ostensibly "allowed" pornography into our marriage bed… even though my conscience was screaming at me like a banshee.
At least Adam didn’t have that knowledge of good and evil – yet – and therefore could not know what the outcome was to be when God said to him, “In the day you eat of it, in dying you will die.” But I was without excuse… especially for my being born again (John 3:3-7) and receiving a cleansed conscience from Jehovah (Hebrews 9:13-14) for His Spirit, The Spirit of Jesus, His Holy Spirit, re-siring me (I John 3:3-9), not unlike what happens when sperm impregnates an ovum. It’s no wonder, to me, that my conscience was mad as hell.
The sex was great, of course, but it was only sin for a season. And, because pornography separates “eros” from “agape,” sex from love, it has nothing at all to do with married love, as I was to discover, soon enough.
For, soon enough, like the proverbial pebble rolling down a snow-covered mountain side, the free and privately available records of sapphic porn became insufficient to arouse us anymore. We began watching some of the records of the other kinds of sexual acts that Jehovah declared immoral. Additionally, we no longer cared to watch records of “normal” sex… too boring. Enough said.
We soon entered a nearly six year long dry spell in our marriage during which time we wrecked our health with drunkenness and gluttony because of this… pornography… before we repented. Only within the past three years are we beginning to recover physically and emotionally, and sexually, from our defiled conscience, defiled because of this sin. It’s been a lot of very hard, and often frustrating, work.
~
I thank you, Jehovah, my God, for giving us an Advocate that is able to identify with what it’s like to be a human being in this age, and for Your forgiveness, through Him, which cleansed her and I – once more – from all unrighteousness. And I thank You, also, for Viagra, L-Arginine, and Vitamin E because all good things come from You. A-men.
~
So, let me ask you: what is the “conscience” if it is not “The Knowledge of (The Difference Between) Good and Evil?” If this is a satisfying and proper “Biblical” definition, could we not, then, rename that particular tree as the “The Tree of Conscience?”
If not, why not?
Now, the Greek word for “conscience” is syneidēsis (Strong’s #G4893 https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4893/kjv/tr/0-1/ ). It appears 31 times in 28 verses of the KJV.
Therefore, I ask – given so many scriptures that use this word – if you’ve ever heard a sermon on the role the conscience plays to keep the life of a Christian – aka a, “Little Christ” – undefiled?
I’ll bet dollars to peanuts that the answer is “None.”
Why is that?
~
One more thing to say about this from my conscience. The thing about pornography that bothered me the most came in realizing that I was accepting into my soul – and thus supporting – something that I knew was destroying the lives of so very many, even the souls of those married “amateur” couples who were also using pornography to arouse themselves into sex, no matter how consensual and legal it might be. For the human beings engaging in porneia in these records were also human beings for whom Jesus died and rose again that he might “…annul (destroy) the work of The Adversary (I John 3:8) and save the World (John 3:16)." That was what eventually led to my repentance.
After I declared to her, finally, that I was no longer going to allow pornography in my life, she soon followed me when she realized that her own conscience was convicting her, even though she once said from her former spiritual immaturity, as justification: “I thought everybody watched porn.”
~
In this reply, catlover, I have only presented facts, asked questions, and given more details from my story. Therefore, be pleased to know that I – a nobody in the World and in Christendom – am, for you, someone who recognizes and understands your logic for having used it myself: I am not judging you. Indeed, I feel only empathy for you with what I believe you are wanting to accomplish with this post, a challenge to consider if, like those of this age who create records of sexual immorality, we as Little Christs can also create visual records of the sanctified marital sex between us… 'to share with other Christians.'
Strictly by definition, such would not be a visual record of sexual immorality. However, consider this: the marriage bed is private. That is why we instinctively search out privacy when We, whether born again or not, want to engage Our sexuality. Indeed, is it not the very violation of that privacy that makes pornography such an attractive and powerful “bait” exactly because it is a kind of voyeurism, a sin, promulgated on a scale never before attainable in human history?
So, if you agree that this powerful need for privacy when engaging in sex is a proper thing in all human beings, even for those whose souls are being wrecked for allowing themselves to be filmed engaging in porneia for either profit or pleasure, then let me ask you one more question from my understanding: Wouldn’t the fact of our evocative reaction to films – discussed by others in their replies – violate what is inherently an inviolate privacy in a way that talking about our sex lives among ourselves and anonymously writing stories about our encounters to inform others of the struggles and pleasures to be had, and overcome, for engaging our sanctified sexuality, does not?
If not, why not?
Be good, catlover!
P.S. I spent the daytime of this day, today, composing this reply because I felt it was important. Please accept my apologies for all the URL’s incorporated into this text. For being used to posting elsewhere where replies can include hyperlinks, italics, and bolding, I had to rewrite this to eliminate as many of these tools of communication as possible for their not being allowed in the replies here. Not a problem. Now I know and will adjust my writing accordingly.
And now, my bride has promised me an evening of marital bliss… and so, it is posted.
Strictly by definition, such would not be a visual record of sexual immorality.
Then how can one justify making such into a sin? If one was making a movie using outside photographers maybe. But if the video was being made by the couple or a photographer that had the values of a therapist or doctor for the use of that couple or the education of others, how does that become porn. The marriage bed is still undefiled. There is no one else having physical sex with the couple. We could say that the addition of the third person live in the room is a violation of privacy. Crazy note: there is always a 3rd person in the room in a Christian or a non-Christian act.
Conscience is informed by the Holy Spirit, is it not? Then how is it that we differentiate from what God tells us and what our own feelings tells us. Our go-to is Scripture.
I am not trying to justify porn. I am only asking how much of how we view sex is informed by scripture and how much comes from propaganda propagated by well meaning churches.
I have heard sermons on the role of conscience in the life of a Christian. But, I also have been taught to be cautious about what I think the Spirit is telling me and what the WORD says. There are many cases where people have claimed the Holy Spirit or conscience told them to do something like divorce their spouse or steal someone's else's spouse. We know God would never tell anyone today to do that. Or they may feel that they were guilty of something that God never said was a sin, like masturbation, which the Catholic church labeled as a sin. Look at how many centuries it has taken and we still haven't overcome that bad teaching.
If some people who are grossly overweight are guilty of gluttony, that doesn't mean to look at food is a sin or to watch others eat too much is a sin. Yes perhaps we should advise limiting food intake, but it doesn't become our sin if they don't take our advice. Perhaps their addiction has other underlying causes. The same may be true for those who watch un-Christian, radical, real, pornographic sex depictions. (Pornographic definition would be that which the scripture has described as sinful. Pornographic is never a married couple in sex with only their spouse.)
So, is it really accurate to say that “The Song of Songs was and is a pornographic marriage sex manual?”
That was meant as satire because of the way that society, informed by the Victiorian age, has labeled any sex depicted in any way as pornography. There are probably many that would label MH as porn, while we who are informed by Scripture know it is not porn! It is marital mutual aid!
Let me say that I appreciate your struggles. It is a struggle that all of us have in some form or other. The very last thing I want to do is to say something that might go against your recovery. There are points I agree with you and areas I disagree. I disagree in your definition of porn being the reason for divorce in scripture. Immoral sex in scripture meant having sex outside of your marriage. It did not mean peeking through a window watching others making love was reason for divorce.
Now as I mentioned before, we must know our limits and our circumstances. In a sexless marriage for health, physical, mental reasons, it is different than those young healthy bodies that are newly married.
It is possible to over do anything, and anything can become an addiction. If one is unable to set limits, then one must abstain forever. Once one has become addicted, one can never allow anyone's reasoning to justify returning to the addiction. Example: An alcoholic has to understand that while others can take a drink, he/she cannot. I once saw a PHD claim that an alcoholic can get to the point of an occasional drink without the danger of becoming addicted again. That was a lie!! I don't know why he said it. I saw someone try it, and before long they were fully addicted again. So, do not attempt to return to old habits using new found 'internal strength.
First, I think I qualified the things I wrote with married Christian couples in the acts if we could find them. Second the couples must set limits on what they watch. No acts outside of what is proper for a Christian couple to do. No orgies or groups used as a means to arouse each other. Apply the same rules that we use in having sex with our partners. No threesomes or foursomes etc.
Remember; for those who cannot have sex for whatever valid reason a whole set of different circumstances come into being. For mismatched libidos another set of circumstances are also prevalent. For elderly singles or those who have lost a spouse late in life another set come into being. Because there are no prospects for marriage again does not mean that the libido is dead. Because folks are older does not mean they have experienced every possible married sex act and are too old to learn new tricks or that they are satisfied with their present sex life. Sometimes writing about something normal between married couples does not have the same teaching effect as a visual presentation.
You have to know your limits. You have to base your limits on scripture in context if you are in doubt. And you must adhere to your own conscience whether it is seared by the Holy Spirit or your own guilt from past incorrect teaching. I hope I didn't change your mind as this discussion is not aimed at those who feel guilty. It is only aimed to question whether the guilt is based on the WORD and if there are circumstances that are different than what we have been taught.
Besides, how many Christians know the real meaning in the Song of Songs?
I've never like watching hardcore pornography. I don't like seeing male genitals, the violent nature of much of it, and the extreme close ups. The beauty of a woman is her completely naked body for my eyes to soak in. A woman's pose is equally important. A woman completely relaxed and enjoying being naked is extremely erotic. Hardcore porn is rarely about that. It's exploitive and creepy for the most part.
If married couples are making videos of themselves, I see no harm in it.
Overall, I do not encourage or support the proliferation of hardcore pornography. There is something different about softcore pornography or simulated sex. If an older widowed person needs this as an aid to take care of themselves, then so be it.
I was a teenage boy once. I only had access to softcore images and movies. Some of it may have negatively affected me in ways, but I would say I am far better off than my peers who cut their teeth on some of that horrible evil hardcore porn.
Dear MHers.
After I read the replies that followed my first post, I took some time away to pray with my wife about my second response.
This is what I wish to say: Pornography destroys. That is a fact. A well-documented and therefore provable fact.
It destroys marriages. And all marriage stands for.
It makes a ruin of our ability to respond naturally to each other and thus enjoy the sanctified sex God created Us for. It also makes a ruin of the souls of those profiteers who record, produce, and distribute these records, as well as the exploited souls of those who perform the immoral acts being filmed for the camera’s eye. Souls for whom Our Redeemer also died and rose so that He could annul the work of The Adversary in Us (I John 3:7-9), an Adversary who, for now, is quite alive and quite active on Planet Earth, roaming about like an insatiable, marrow-sucking lion finding new and more delicious prey to devour, day by day, day in and day out.
There is no such thing, then, as an innocuous porn site, no matter what “normal” sex they may present “for your simple pleasure" and "for free.” It is a trap; a subtle and therefore gradual trap that will eventually entwine your soul in poisonous vines that will choke the life and love out of you. I remember when I thought I controlled it, only to look back and realize, upon that remembrance, that I now needed it in ever increasingly levels of immorality to experience arousal. It scared the shit out of me when I realized this. But I was still a very long way from being able to repent of it.
Please MHers, stay far, far away from pornography web sites, for your conscience’s sake, if nothing else. For the camera’s eye is there to make a profit for someone, one way or another, in trafficking sexual immorality through voyeurism. Performance is what you get with pornography, sex without love, not the soul-satisfying unity that the mingling of Eros and Agape brings to the soul and spirit of the man and woman who keep their marriage bed, or just themselves, pure, that is to say, free from sexual immorality.
Please don’t contribute your soul’s health to the distribution of this conscience-defiling “arousal-drug” by allowing voyeurism into your soul. For the eyes of Jehovah do not close in sleep and so He knows, and makes a record of, everything we do, to be used against us when we stand before Him – that is if we stubbornly refuse the direction of His Spirit, the Holy Spirit, which guides you into righteousness through your conscience, leading you to repentance, when necessary, and eventually restoration – if you do not remain a stubborn sheep thus frustrating the work of The Good Shepard both in your life and in the lives of His other sheep (“A Shepard Looks at The 23rd Psalm” Chapter 2, Phillip Keller).
I leave you with this scripture:
“Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test? And I trust that you will discover that we have not failed the test."
"Now we pray to God that you will not do anything wrong—not so that people will see that we have stood the test but so that you will do what is right even though we may seem to have failed. For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth. We are glad whenever we are weak but you are strong; and our prayer is that you may be fully restored." 2 Cor 15:5-9 NIV.
I love you my brothers and sisters in Christ; I love you.
The never ending debate. And still no one can agree on what is porn. Is Solomon in Songs giving oral to his latest recruit for his harem? Apparently not. The Bible is against enjoying the sight of bodies, and/or having sex, other than your spouse if you choose to believe that. But is it clearly stated? No. The only logical path forward is will these visual or written sensual pictures be harmful? Not can they be—because wine, food, money, children, visiting in-laws and a hundred other things can harm a marriage. There is no evidence that sexually stimulating material is more likely to than any of the others I listed. So why are we so fearful of enjoying erotic material? Not because God told us to be.
As someone who's researched this topic a lot but has never voiced it in such eloquent terms, I thank you for this post. More people need to know that porn does not equal "adultery/lust/fornication" and whatever else is used to condemn it. Sure there's bad porn, like bad movies or bad music, or bad food, but that doesn't make it bad as a whole
I am 45 and single – in fact, I have never been married, and my only personal sexual relationship ended badly 20 years ago. I spent most of those years after locked in a vicious cycle – begging God to bring her back or help me forget her, jacking off to porn as a desperate distraction, reading stories on places like this site and elsewhere, and trying desperately to repent even though I hated being held to an impossible standard. I still feel that way a lot of the time, with God and a lot of other people – it drives me beyond insane mentally, emotionally, and spiritually.
When I was a young man, my thoughts about sex were not Godly in the least. During every masturbation session, my mind raced with thoughts like, "I want her to be the craziest, most wild woman who's ever lived. I want her jugs to make Jessica Rabbit jealous, and her pussy to squeeze and milk my cock like a vice. I want her vocabulary to be the most blunt stuff in the book, only stopping short of vulgarity from her love for me." Fast forward three decades of regret, and my thoughts are usually a desperate plea for God to fix me, so my desires don't send me to hell by causing me to renounce Him. I still have most of the same physical desires from my youth, but I often tell God that I truly want whoever I end up with to love Him first, even while I'm going crazy with my throbbing manhood! Feeling like I'll never get out of this is a truly crippling source of fear in my life. I don't say anything that often, because most responses vary on "get over it" and "just give it to God", both of which enrage me like nothing else. If the comic-book character of Ghost Rider was real, this struggle would turn me into him every day.