Wednesday, January 2, 2008

Trying to define the word "fornication" accurately and precisely is almost like trying to lasso a bolt of greased lightning. Even the experts disagree.

Some define fornication as sexual intercourse between a man and a woman who are not married to each other. If that's the case, then what differentiates fornication from adultery? Evidently nothing, because some Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias simply say "See ADULTERY" when we look up the word. According to 1 Corinthians 6:9-10:


Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God (KJV).

Yet if there is no difference between a fornicator and an adulterer, then why mention both fornicators and adulterers within the same context, and even in the same sentence, as being among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God? Why even have two different words if both words mean the exact same thing?

Others say that if one of the two parties engaging in sexual intercourse is married, then that makes it adultery, but not fornication. Others say the exact opposite. Or perhaps, if a single man has sexual intercourse with another man's wife, he is committing fornication while she is committing adultery.


Still others say that both people engaging in sexual intercourse have to be single in order for it to be classified as fornication.

And what if the two people who are not married to each other engage in some form of sexual activity other than intercourse? We all remember President Clinton's famous line: "I did not have sex with that woman." As far as we know, the only sexual activity that Monica had with Bill was fellatio . Later, Clinton said he did not consider fellatio "having sex." Perhaps he had a point. After all, there is nothing in the Bible that says anything about fellatio. And since no woman has ever become pregnant as a result of fellatio, and since there are no known harmful effects from fellatio - in fact, it may even be beneficial - then it's difficult enough to try and prove that fellatio is even a sin, let alone trying to prove that fellatio is an act of fornication.


Consider all the many sexual activities that a single man and woman can engage in with each other that do not include intercourse. Are those activities sinful? If so, why? The Bible is silent on all of them.


Nevertheless, some try to put all of these sexual activities into a box labeled "fornication," even though the Bible has nothing whatsoever to say about such things. Consider the words of R.C. Sproul:


We know, of course, that the Bible does not give us a clear list and directions, a manual of sexual behavior that gives us direct, explicit instructions on what we can and cannot do. There is not a section of the Bible that you can open and it's going to say in there, "Do not place hand upon breast." We will not find a list that says, "No petting above the waist." "No petting below the waist." "No petting over the clothes." "No petting under the clothes," and all that kind of thing. What we do have is an explicit prohibition against fornication (Sproul, R.C. Sex and the Single Christian, "How far is too far?" Sound recording, Ligonier Tape Series, Orlando, Florida: Ligonier Ministries, 1996).

Sproul goes on to say that imposing moral restrictions where God leaves us free is a form of legalism:


Legalism involves imposing moral obligations upon people from a human tradition perspective, which are not in fact the laws of God. That is making it mandatory to conform to a certain behavioral pattern where God leaves you free. We see a lot of that in the Christian community. We see all kinds of lists of dos and don'ts that we read that a Christian simply cannot be involved in. A Christian is one who can't dance, a Christian is not allowed to go to movies, a Christian cannot wear lipstick, and all that sort of thing that we've been through at different periods of Christian history. In other words, artificial standards of spirituality and godliness have replaced biblical standards of Christian principles and ethics and sanctity. That's legalism, where we legislate people's behavior where God has left them free (Ibid).

So far, I agree with everything Sproul said. I applaud Sproul in his condemnation of legalism. However, Sproul does not consider it legalistic to condemn sexual activities prior to marriage that do not include intercourse, such as necking, petting, etc. Even if the couple is engaged, and even if the sexual activity is completely responsible, Sproul claims these activities are treading into the forbidden zone. How does he reach those conclusions? I'll let Sproul answer for himself:

Jesus explicitly mentions two things as being sinful with respect to sex in the Sermon on the Mount: One is lust. The other is adultery. Do you see a pattern there? Lust is the first step. Adultery is the consummation. Now if the first step and the last step are regarded as sinful, what does that say to you about the steps in between? The simple answer to the question, "How far can I go?" is "Not as far as lust (Ibid.)."


Sproul's answer sounds logical at first. Is lust wrong? Of course. The first question that needs to be answered is, What is lust and why is it wrong? For a detailed explanation, CLICK HERE. The short answer, however, is that lusting is the same thing as coveting. We know that committing adultery is wrong. Therefore, thinking about committing adultery is also wrong. Looking at a woman with lust is the same thing as coveting another man's wife in such a way that you are committing adultery with her in your mind. This is a whole lot different than two single people petting or necking.

Some people say that fornication is an umbrella term that covers every single sexual activity under the sun other than sex within marriage. Therefore, everything from adultery to bestiality to homosexuality and even heterosexual petting among singles are all acts of fornication.

Some Bible translations have substituted the term "sexual immorality" for the word "fornication." That seems like a cop-out to me. After all, everybody agrees that sexual immorality is, well, um... sexually immoral. My gripe with such an over-simplistic approach is, it begins with the assumption that everybody already knows precisely what sexual immorality is. Nothing could be further from the truth.

So what is fornication and why is it wrong? The logical place to begin is with the word itself.

History Of The Word "Fornication"
The word "fornication" was first recorded in Middle English around 1303. It comes from the Latin word "fornix," which literally means "a vault" or "an arch." So what does a vault or an arch have to do with committing fornication? At that particular time in Rome, prostitutes solicited customers in archways. It was like a red light district is today.

Of course, the Bible was not originally written in Latin; it was originally written in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. The first hand-written English language Bible was produced in the 1380's by John Wycliffe. Then came the Gutenberg Bible, the Oxford Bible, Luther's German Bible, the Tyndale New Testament, the Coverdale Bible, the Matthew-Tyndale Bible, the Geneva Bible, and the King James Bible, which was originally published in 1611. Since the word fornication was first used in the early 1300's and continued to be used in the King James Version of the Bible, which is still being used today, it seems logical that these translators spanning over 200 years must have believed that the word fornication had something to do with prostitution; otherwise, they surely would have used a different word. The word fornication occurs 36 times in the King James Version; fornicator occurs 2 times, and fornicators occurs 3 times.

Furthermore, it's not just a coincidence that the Latin word "fornix" and the Greek word "porneia" both refer to prostitution. Whenever we see the word fornication in the New Testament, it came from the Greek word "porneia. The word "pornography" literally means "stories about prostitutes." It comes from the Greek root porneia. By that definition, the XXX-rated film Deep Throat was not pornography, while the Disney film Pretty Woman was.

Consider Revelation 21:8:

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death (KJV).

The word "whoremongers" comes from the Greek word "pornos," which can also be translated "fornicators." So a fornicator and a whoremonger is the same thing. A whoremonger is someone who consorts with whores. It can refer to either a prostitute's customer, also known as a John, or a pimp who procures whores.

So there's no question that there is a close connection between fornication and prostitution. The question is: Should the term fornication be expanded, like the opening of an umbrella, to cover every king of extramarital and premarital sexual activity under the sun?

19 comments:

Christians Set Free said...

Most people have never taken the time to search for the meaning of the word fornication.

As I have attempted to discuss it with others I have hit some brick walls.

As we move into the pornos and pornea discussions, people generally dig in their heels...and refuse to look at the meaning of the words (or better yet the debate among scholars regarding the meaning).

Keep up the good work!

JamaicanMusic Offbeat said...

It is because I have issues with the term fornication why I found your blog. I have traced the history of the word and opined that when Paul says Flee fornication he was not addressing sex between unmarried, I cannot believe it was prevalent in the context of the Jewish way of life. What of Ruth & Boaz what was the idea of her slipping into his bed, what about the scripture that says inter alia that if a man have sexual contact with a virgin (unmarried) it is best for them to marry. So as you say not all unmarried sex is tabooed.
From: jaclaudew@yahoo.com

sawyerhg said...

good job on this as humans tend to want to play god in expanding or diverting what we've been given into their particular persuasion. Adultery is also figuratively "idolatry". Idolatry is akin to what Jesus said as one could only have two masters, God or Mammon. Mammon is one's treasure which includes wealth but also includes working for self - looking to humans and human intelligence, etc in place of God, which we see rampantly in today's society. Adultery is also related to the breaking of one's committment/oath, which can be seen as "not becoming an adult" as to mature in God's eyes means taking responsabilty for one's committments. See my video's on Youtube channel "3spm" and on blogtalkradio.com/sawyer thursday nights 11pm-1am est.

dookiesbigbro said...

The Bible is the word of God directly inspired by the Holy Spirit. With this in mind, Fornication implies any type of sexual act for many reasons. Like you said, fornication is sexual intercourse between an unmarried couple. This, in fact, is a mortal sin. These acts are strictly meant for the married couple, keeping the sanctity of marriage (generally allowing for a healthy family, no abortions, std's, etc.) and also allowing God's divine will for our lives supersede our own wants or physical desires. Remember, this life on earth is only temporary and we must all be ready for the next.
Also, if you're looking for another answer. You can find it in Matthew 5:28 "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman TO lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Before you have sex, there is an amount of lust you have before hand. Thus, it is as serious as engaging in the act itself.
We see here in 1 Peter 1:15-16 "But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy." this is how we must act. And about heaven, in Revelation 21:27 "Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life."

If this hasn't fully answered your question, I suggest speaking with a priest. They'll be able to answer any of your questions in more detail.
I hope to see you all in heaven.
God Bless

preacher said...

Strictly from a word definition I agree with you. However, I am not saying it's ok to have sex with as many people as you want and not be married to them. Common sense has to be used. The main purpose of sex is to produce children. God holds parents responsible for properly raising children. This is much more difficult in a broken home. A father and a mother can better raise children in a marriage. Children produced outside of a marriage are getting a sub standard rearing.

preacher said...

Strictly from a word definition I agree with you. However, I am not saying it's ok to have sex with as many people as you want and not be married to them. Common sense has to be used. The main purpose of sex is to produce children. God holds parents responsible for properly raising children. This is much more difficult in a broken home. A father and a mother can better raise children in a marriage. Children produced outside of a marriage are getting a sub standard rearing.

DA said...

A "monger" is someone who
- promotes or peddles, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/monger

- deals or trades in a commodity http://www.thefreedictionary.com/monger

So, a "monger" promotes, peddles, deals.

As such, when you write

"The word "whoremongers" comes from the Greek word "pornos," which can also be translated "fornicators." So a fornicator and a whoremonger is the same thing", I think you're on the right track.

But then you conclude

"It can refer to either a prostitute's customer, also known as a John, or a pimp who procures whores"

and I'm not sure you're still on track here.

Insofar as dictionary definitions are concerned, if a "monger" promotes, peddles or deals, then a monger is clearly on the SUPPLY SIDE of prostitution - a pimp or madam.

The DEMAND side, where a customer would be, is not the context of the term, linguistically speaking.

Thus, adultery and fornication should not be treated synonymously at all.

Understanding fornication as referring to professional suppliers of prostitution does not open up floodgates for people to be immoral - we still have a definition of "adultery" and "lust" with which to contend.

Thank you for putting me on track to better understand this oft misunderstood concept.

AlphaDave said...

Could there be multiple meanings for fornication? How could other Biblical scholars including those who know Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic all be wrong?

Sedulous313 said...

I see that everyone has talked about prostitution, and adultery, but I have heard nothing about being lewd, or lasciviousness in the article, or in the previous comments.

Do not forget that it is wrong to be sexually immoral also. Having anal sex, oral sex, grinding, dirty dancing, sexually touching someone else who is not your spouse, and things that are similar, probably count as being sexually immoral.

There were instructions that if a man laid with a maiden, and the two were not married, that they should get married. Deuteronomy 22:28-29; 28"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;" 29"Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days."

If sex were something that could be allowed before marriage, or without the need of marriage, there would not have been a need for people to commit to each other. There would not have been an issue for Joseph and Mary to have gotten married.

It seems that many of your definitions of fornication is suppose to direct it towards prostitution, but you remain unclear on the common definition of it today. Based on the many supporting details you guys give, it seems that aside from the definition of fornication, we want to know whether or not, promiscuous sex is okay.

In marriage, that would be considered adultery, and we know that it is wrong. If it wasn't, then what David did with Bathsheba wouldn't have been considered a sin.

Outside of marriage, it is not good for people to fornicate, or to have sexual intercourse, or be sexually immoral with each other. Remember what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7:9; "But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."

Let's not defraud ourselves, or other people. Sex is physically pleasurable, but we must do it in a holy manner, not in a sinful manner. We should put our trust in GOD, more than anything on earth. He will provide anything we want, in HIS will, but also, if we truly love HIM, we should be obedient, and confident in HIM, even if we see no immediate result. We must be persistent, and faithful. It's in being persistent and faithful that we prove that we trust in HIM. Tested by fire, but never giving in to temptation, or doubt, implementing patience, and faith. We should remember that faith without works is dead, so we should prepare ourselves to have eternal life, prepare ourselves to find a wife, and when there is opportunity presented, we should not be afraid, but confident, that GOD has provided.

Our standards should be in line with the Bible. So even if we see a woman that we admire, we should make sure that she is what a man of GOD should desire. (That could be a Proverbs 31 woman.)

Camille said...

Too often, traditional Christianity dictates our spiritual beliefs in error, leading to alot of guilt and accusations from the enemy, and binding us instead of freeing us. One would rather err on the side of right than wrong; however, in searching for the ACTUAL meaning of the word, I have found nothing that indicates that sex between two adults who are single and in a monogamous relationship is fornication. Rather in each instance it describes a perversion of the act i.e. cheating on a spouse, beastiality, homosexuality, prostitution, etc. It is frustrating that there are no instances that directly speak to consentual sex between two people who love each other but happen to not be married - to each other or anyone else. Of course it is better to marry if there will be children involved, but that is just common sense. What if there never will be children involved? From what I can gather, the original meaning does not include a natural loving intimacy between two people in a commited, even tho unmarried, relationship.

Reprise said...

I've been reading a lot into this topic and going back to the scriptures. Ultimately, it's difficult to believe in what a person has to say about any topic because most of the time they will put their own desires, beliefs, traditions, and upbringing into what they decide. So, I'm trying to look as this from an unbiased perspective and trying to hear only the voice of God in this matter. Who better to ask than God himself who created the word?

So far, I've found that they BIBLE describes fornication in terms of promiscuity and prostitution. It also, at some points, uses it in terms of describing adultery and divorce...You always need to go back to who said what, who they were, and what context/environment they were living in that influenced what they said. Yes, the definition of fornication is essentially sex between two unmarried individuals. Sure. If you take this definition at face value it is what it is...but who deemed this the definition of fornication? Where did they get that definition from? Because surely the Bible does not say that exact definition. And again, remember I am using the Bible as my guide. That definition can imply numerous things as the person in this article mentioned...Also, what strikes and disturbs me is the words "the word fornication implies"...at what point in the Bible did you see that God needed to imply something? God is direct in his manner of speaking...he does not leave things open to the interpretation of people who have several different perspectives of life, religions, beliefs, etc. God simply doesn't use words that imply things...this is a difficult topic..in my mind, we'd really have to go back to those who originally wrote the Bible as being told by God; because remember, when we are told something we generally don't tell it to others the same way. So what if the person who wrote this word thought hey everyone will get what I mean by writing fornication. But, perhaps God meant for a more detailed explanation. And even today, versions of the Bible are paraphrased so they can be more easily understood and we lose the true meaning of the word in doing so.

So, as of right now I still have not found the solid answer. I am asking God to reveal to me what is the truth and to be able to back this up with his scripture.

Victoria Mayer said...

My oh my! This topic is widely debated amongst scholars, theologians, pastors, churches in itself, etc. Within all my research I still have not found a solid answer in which I could base my theory upon and have my biblical backup.

God gave us (if we are his children, born again, true believers) a holly spirit to direct us, be with us guide us, etc. He also gave us a conscious, that tells us right from wrong. When we do something wrong, we feel wrong, we feel a felling of guilt, emptiness sometimes sorrow and great regret for what we have done! So it is very simple if having sexual intercourse before marriage wouldn't bring such a heavy feeling or bring such "guilt" so to say. Why are we wasting our time researching justifications for our actions? Or searching a hand out printed from God telling us its ok ...so then we can have some peace of mind.

Well the topic seems to be unclear, but it is up to you to decide whether doing so brings you a feeling of guilt or heavy consciousness, or if you feel its ok to sleep with whomever you like and profess Christianity? Be salt and light to world is a commandment, differ from the ungodly and their actions! May people look upon you and be envious because they want what you have, and that is purity, and love, and cleanliness, godliness, humility, the fruits of the spirit...

1 Corinthians 10:23
All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify.
All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify.

jansley4 said...

1 John 2:16, "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."
Lust of the flesh is sexual intercourse as well as all other sexual activities done in the flesh. Hence the phrase "lust of the flesh."
Ephesians 2:2-5, "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved).
This scripture says that those who satisfied the lusts of the flesh are the children of wrath. It also says that when we were the children of wrath we were dead in sin.

Jonathan Moedt said...

The old testament is very clear, a woman is to be a virgin on the wedding night. Regardless of what a word can mean, or does not mean, we can not justify pre-marital sex based on one or two parts of the WORD. There are not many verses that we can pick and chose to follow, but we must see the whole bible as one coherent message. We are also told to ' keep the marriage bed holy'. How can this be done if the marriage bed had been shared by many, or any, before marriage? We are told clearly that those who are sexually immoral will not inherit the kingdom of God, I my will err on the side of caution!

JaredMithrandir said...

The word does indeed mean Prostitution.

The idea that all Sex that isn't for the express purpose of Reproduction is an inherently Catholic heresy that we need to rid of.

The Song of Solomon explicitly condones no Reproductive Sex between people who aren't married yet (The Marriage happens at a specific point in the narrative).

Sex needs to be handled with moderation, but it's not inherently sinful.

Guy Seeking Truth said...

I held to the "traditonal" understanding until recently, almost five long decades of sad unwanted singleness, but for a while now I have been doubting it is really true. I'm a person who is really keen on finding the truth and not afraid to embrace truth when it is not popular. Churches can be wrong for centuries or even millenia about various things, so why not this? The denomination I am associated with and of which I go to a church believes in infanct baptism, for example, and they believe they are absolutely right. I believe that is absolutely wrong, however, as in unscriptural and demonstrably wrong from the Bible. After many years, though, I have come to believe some of them could be sincere about it instead of deliberately suppressing what they really know to be true and what some of us regard to be so blatant.

Anyway, back on the topic here. This guy did a very interesting video which may shed light on why the term "fornication" or "sexual immorality" came to be defined as it has been to this day for I guess many centuries now. I recommend checking out this video as it is very relevant:

"What does fornication mean in the Bible; Latin Greek and Hebrew origin" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVAI2TTOcgM&feature=youtu.be

I'm still not 100% sure either way here. I'm supposed to be pretty smart, too - (lapsed) member of Mensa, average IQ higher than Einstein, yada yada. Not trying to brag or be immodest there, and normally I don't talk that way, but on rare occasions there's a reason to mention such things. There's nothing to brag about anyway, by the way, because despite that and doing pretty well in school (no grad school, graudated from one of the most well regarded Christian colleges) I have not had a successful life either, in addition to not being "marriageable" or having been able to get married, although I was considered very cute and good looking by a lot of girls when I was young. AS you can see I sometimes write super long sentences, too. :) Since most of us have probably lived with and had the standard understanding of this whole issue given to us as if it is unquestionable truth all our lives, it is understandable that it is very hard to deal with any evidence that may refute the centuries-old "tradition." None of us wants to be mistaken either way, but this "tradition" may have been causing us a great deal of needless suffering all of our lives, especially those of us who have been unable to get married and feel as if we are required to live without any physical intimacy or sex at all while the Bible simply instructs us to go get married even though many of us can't, and others have everything because they can. If any of you can relate to that type of life experience, even into your 40's, 50's, and beyond, you know what I'm talking about. In fact, I don't even want to go into the huge sum of it here right now as illustratively as I could, but those who have lived this way know what I mean.

Andrea Schmidt said...

My question or comment is this: Is it wrong to be committed to someone whom you are married to although he is sick and there has been no sexual activity or pettiness between them for over 18 years........is it wrong to join into a natural sexual
relationship with someone else? And even be commited to them for marriage at a later time maybe after that spose has passed? How long can a woman emotionally survive like this? Where's the scripture for this situation?
A

Scribed_Ox said...

Response to Andrea Schmidt,

Biblically speaking, it is not wrong to be committed to someone who is sick whom there has been no sexual activity for 18 years. The reason for such a sexual absence however, can be unhealthy for a marriage, if sickness is not the reason for it. God did intend for sex to be enjoyed between a couple who has made vows to Him in marriage to each other.

Your question as to joining a natural sexual relationship with someone else whom you are not married to is not what God had in mind through marriage. That is the definition of adultery and even civil laws of America recognize it as well. "http://info.legalzoom.com/legal-actions-adultery-20721.html" Even in wine, the definition of adultery is to mix different drinks from a pure mixture, and being with someone else while you are married, is not being true to an honest LIFELONG commitment with them. The purpose for marriage is to display the love of God, through affection and commitment between each other. The husband displays a metaphor of God, while the wife displays a metaphor for the body of saints also known as the church. The two are suppose to show the world what love is and the power of it. Doing so unveils to the world the love that God has for us, correcting people's false ideas of who God is and what His love is for us. God's love for us is never ending and is unconditional, if there was a separation between us and Him, it is never supposed to be from Him because He is always extending his love to us even until we die. It is us who have the choice to accept or reject that love during our lifetime. You as a wife have a responsibility to display that never-ending love. A love so strong that only death can break it.

As for a situation in scripture about this, I would point you to the time David was old and had a wife named Abishag who cared for him until he died. This is found in (1 Kings 1:1-4.)
How would it have looked if Job's wife left him during his affliction?
Even Hosea? whose wife whored herself to others, stayed committed to her because it prophesied the love of God to Israel, who were unfaithful to God by having a relationship with idols and other gods.

As for considering someone else before the spouse has passed, the person who you hope to do that with should respect God, respect your marriage, and respect many of us who are looking on because an example is being played. The two of you should not be sexual or romantic, while you are already married. His sights are already set on the wrong person, and God did not send you two to each other to be romantically involved. God would never falter his own will. God would never provide a wife to a man that is already the wife of another man. I would recommend waiting in a godly manner, focusing on the work that God has called you to do. Whether you like it or not, if you are married, you are in an exclusive commitment. Please understand that marriage has a definition and purpose, and to love someone else as a wife to a man other than your own husband is adultery. (1 Corinthians 7:10, 39, and even the whole chapter) & (Romans 7:1-3).

Emotionally, I could imagine that such a situation is tough, but God sees it and it is not God's will for you to suffer. That is what it means to carry your cross, and you will not be unrewarded if you obey Him. Be patient, be faithful, and be loving to your husband. In the meantime, are there children that can benefit from your nurturing care? Is there work in your community or church that you're best fit for? Do you have a single friend, church sister, neighbor, or coworker that needs a husband? it may be that the person you mentioned earlier is to be relayed to them instead. Anything you could ever want in this world is already available in quantities more than you can bare, so you are not losing anything that you need by letting the other person go. (Psalms 34:9-10, Psalms 84:11-13, Philippians 4:19). God Bless You!

We the people said...

Actually, there is a large list of sexual prohibitions in the Old Testament. They are located in the 18th chapter of Leviticus.