Christians, Anal Sex and Anal Play

Jay Dee

Christians, Anal Sex and Anal Play

Jun 12, 2014

I’ve been getting questions about anal sex and Christian marriage almost since we launched the blog.  Every week, we get unfulfilled searches on our blog, emails from readers, and survey respondent comments asking about this topic.  I’ll be honest, I’ve shied away from it a

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Christians Anal Sex Anal PlayI’ve been getting questions about anal sex and Christian marriage almost since we launched the blog.  Every week, we get unfulfilled searches on our blog, emails from readers, and survey respondent comments asking about this topic.  I’ll be honest, I’ve shied away from it a bit, because, well, it’s still considered a fairly taboo thing to discuss.  I finally decided to build a survey around the question of anal sex and Christianity last week.  Note: if you missed it, you can still fill it out here, we’ll continue to use the data when we post on similar topics.  Imagine my surprise when we got over 200 respondents in the first 24 hours!  A week later, we had 260 respondents on a topic I thought almost no one would touch!  I said that if you wanted a post, you’d have to answer the questions, and so you did.  Time for me to live up to my end of the bargain.  For this post, we’ll just go through the survey results.  I have had a few readers ask me to write a post on what the Bible says about anal sex, and I will write that post (I did, it’s here), but I think it would be too long to handle both in a sitting (both for me to write, and for you to read).

Anal Sex/Play survey results

Single Question Answers

Age

  • 20-24 – 4.4%
  • 25-29 – 8.4%
  • 30-34 – 13.2%
  • 35-39 – 19.6%
  • 40-44 – 16.8%
  • 45-49 – 13.2%
  • 50-54 – 14.0%
  • 55-59 – 6.0%
  • 60-64 – 2.4%
  • 65-69 – 1.6%
  • 75-79 – 0.4%

Spouse’s Age

  • 20-24 – 2.4%
  • 25-29 – 7.3%
  • 30-34 – 15.4%
  • 35-39 – 18.2%
  • 40-44 – 19.0%
  • 45-49 – 13.0%
  • 50-54 – 13.4%
  • 55-59 – 5.7%
  • 60-64 – 4.5%
  • 65-69 – 0.8%
  • 70-74 – 0.4%

Length of Marriage (so far)

  • 0-4 – 13.1%
  • 5-9 – 16.4%
  • 10-14 – 20.1%
  • 15-19 – 14.3%
  • 20-24 – 12.3%
  • 25-29 – 8.2%
  • 30-34 – 9.8%
  • 35-39 – 3.3%
  • 40-44 – 1.2%
  • 45-49 – 0.4%
  • 50-54 – 0.4%
  • 65-69 – 0.4%

Gender

  • Female – 38.4%
  • Male – 61.6%

Not quite our normal split, but given the topic, I understand why.

What church are you a part of?

To be honest, this question was a disaster.  There are so many factions, splits, sects, sub-denominations, acronyms and ways of saying you are non-denominational, that the data was useless.  I will try to find a better way of asking this in the future.

What is the structure within your marriage?

  • Egalitarian – 39.4%
  • Husband Leads – 57.1%
  • Wife Leads – 3.5%

I think I should have clarified this.  Some people answered in regards to their marriage in totality, some in regards to their bedroom.  We’ve asked these separately before in a previous survey, if you are interested in knowing more.

How often do you have sex?

  • We don’t have sex anymore – 1.9%
  • Less than once a year – 0.8%
  • Twice a year – 0.8%
  • Once a quarter / Once every 3 months- 2%
  • Once every two months – 0.4%
  • Once a month – 5.1%
  • Once every three weeks – 0.8%
  • Once every two weeks – 5.4%
  • Once a week – 18.7%
  • Twice a week – 28.4%
  • Three times a week – 17.5%
  • Four times a week – 9.7%
  • Five times a week – 4.7%
  • Six times a week – 1.9%
  • Once a day – 0.8%
  • Twice a day – 0.8%
  • More than twice a day – 0.4%

For those spouses who say “well everyone else does it more/less often!”  There is no consensus in “everyone else”, it’s all over the map.  But, if you are curious, the “average” is between 2 and 3 times per week.

I consider myself to be the _______ spouse in the bedroom

  • Dominant – 39.2%
  • Submissive – 17.7%
  • We switch – 26.2%
  • None of the above – 16.9%

What is your history of porn use?

  • I have never watched porn – 13.5%
  • I have watched porn in the past a handful of times or less – 40%
  • I have watched porn regularly in the past – 25.4%
  • I have been addicted to porn in the past – 11.9%
  • I currently watch porn regularly – 6.5%
  • I am currently addicted to porn – 0.8%
  • I am currently struggling to free myself from porn use – 9.6%

Note: People could select multiple options, so it won’t add up to 100%

Do you practice anal play in your marriage?

  • Yes – 47.7%
  • No – 52.3%

I really wasn’t expecting so close to a 50/50 split.

Note: The following questions were only answered by those who answered “No” to the above question.

Whose decision is it not to have this activity in the bedroom?

  • Mutual decision – 49.6%
  • My choice – 9.8%
  • Spouses’ choice – 40.6%

Have you ever tried anal play or anal sex?

  • I haven’t tried either – 49.6%
  • I’ve tried anal play – 23.0%
  • I’ve tried anal sex – 27.4%

If you have tried anal play or anal sex before, did you enjoy the experience?

  • No – 42.1%
  • Yes – 57.9%

The following questions are for those marriage who do employ anal play or anal sex

Which activities do you receive (are done to you) in your marriage?

  • Analingus (oral-anal sex) – 13.7%
  • Rubbing, but no penetration – 55.6%
  • Penetration with a finger – 50.8%
  • Penetration with a toy – 24.2%
  • Anal sex (with penis or strap-on) – 24.2%

Which activities does your spouse receive (are done to them) in your marriage?

  • Analingus (oral-anal sex) – 25.8%
  • Rubbing, but no penetration – 52.4%
  • Penetration with a finger – 52.4%
  • Penetration with a toy – 17.7%
  • Anal sex (with penis or strap-on) -17.7 %

How often is anal penetration a part of your love-making?

  • 0/10 – 13%
  • 1/10 – 27.6%
  • 2/10 – 23.6%
  • 3/10 – 13.8%
  • 4/10 – 6.5%
  • 5/10 – 7.3%
  • 6/10 – 1.6%
  • 7/10 – 4.1%
  • 8/10 – 0.8%
  • 9/10 – 1.6%

How often is anal sex a part of your love-making?

  • 0/10 – 32.2%
  • 1/10 – 30.6%
  • 2/10 – 16.5%
  • 3/10 – 7.3%
  • 4/10 – 9.1%
  • 5/10 – 2.5%
  • 6/10 – 0.0%
  • 7/10 – 1.7%
  • 8/10 – 0.0%
  • 9/10 – 0.0%

If you participate in giving anal play or anal sex, do you enjoy it?

  • Yes – 57.6%
  • No – 11.9%
  • I like seeing my spouse enjoy it – 30.5%

If you participate in receiving anal play or anal sex, do you enjoy it?

  • Yes – 85.7%
  • No – 14.3%

If you participate in anal sex, do you orgasm from this activity?

  • 0/10 – 43.0%
  • 1/10 – 8.4%
  • 2/10 – 3.7%
  • 3/10 – 3.7%
  • 4/10 – 0.9%
  • 5/10 – 7.5%
  • 6/10 – 1.9%
  • 7/10 – 5.6%
  • 8/10 – 2.8%
  • 9/10 – 6.5%
  • 10/10 – 15.9%

Separated by Gender

I’m going to choose a few that I find are interesting and do the split based on gender.  If I miss a comparison or stat that you want to see, let me know and I’ll add it.

What is the structure within your marriage?

  • 31.3% of wives say they are in a egalitarian marriage, and 64.6% say they are led by their husband.
  • 44.3% of husbands say they are in an egalitarian marriage, and 52.5% say that they lead their household.

This 13% difference is intriguing.  Here’s my guess:  I think marriages, in our culture, are by default controlled by the wife, and in most cases, the husband can only lead if the wife decides to submit.  It also shows that a larger percentage of my readers fall on the side of husband-led marriages in their philosophy/theology.  So, if my reader is a wife, and she agrees that the husband should lead, then it is more likely the husband will in fact lead (though not a given, some never pick up the role), whereas if my reader is a husband, and he agrees that the husband should lead…well, the wife still has to agree, going against our culture.

Sexual Frequency

  • Husbands – 2.1 times per week
  • Wives – 2.6 times per week

Not a large difference, but I think a similar rationale as the previous question occurs with this one.  Wives are generally the defacto gatekeeper of sex.

The mentality is just so different between men and women, it’s hard for women not to be the gatekeeper since (generally) men seem to always be ready for it anytime or anywhere. (At least in our case).  Exhaustion, headaches, babies crying in the night, doesn’t seem to stop them.  It takes A LOT for them not to be able.

I consider myself to be the _________ spouse in the bedroom

  • 56.0% of husbands say they are the dominant one in the bedroom with only 4.4% saying they are the submissive one, and about 20.1% and 19.5% respectively for “none of the above” and “we switch”.
  • 13.1% of wives say they are the dominant one in the bedroom with 39.4% saying they are submissive.  Another 35.3% say they switch and 12% say no one is.

These are fairly large differences.  I wonder how much of this can be attributed to my readers tending to be more pro-sex (and thus more likely to be the initiator or aggressor in the bedroom), and how much is attributed to differences in perceiving reality.

What is your history with porn use?

Husbands:

  • 4% have never watched porn
  • 30% have only watched porn a handful of times
  • 35% have watched porn regularly in the past
  • 19% have been addicted to porn in the past
  • 9% currently watch porn regularly
  • 14% are currently struggling to free themselves from porn use
  • and 1% admit to being addicted to porn

I find it amazing that 14% are struggling to free themselves, but only 1% admit they are addicted.  Can you still struggle if you aren’t addicted?  All told, 65% of men in this survey either have watched porn regularly, or do so now.  That is a sad statistic.  I say that as one who has struggled with this in the past as well.

The internet is such a blessing and a curse. Porn use is at an all time high, and more and more people are becoming OK with the fact that their spouse is using it.

Wives:

  • 29% have never watched porn
  • 56% have only watched porn a handful of times
  • 11% have watched porn regularly in the past
  • 0% have been addicted to porn in the past
  • 3% currently watch porn regularly
  • 3% are currently struggling to free themselves from porn use
  • and 0% admit to being addicted to porn

I’ll be honest, I don’t trust these ones.  I think the numbers are much higher.  This means only 15% currently watch porn, or have in the past, but I know statistically that number is higher.  I also know that, statistically, women are more likely to lie to themselves about this as well… 0% addiction, past or present, in a survey with around 100 wives…that would be a statistically anomaly.

I think we can safely say that the 3% currently watching regularly and are struggling to free themselves are addicted. 

MEN: Get yourselves a book called, “Every Man’s Battle“.

Women: I’m sure there is a book for you too, but I can’t think of it at the moment, I will find out the title though. I would suggest Pulling Back the Shades, which I hope to be reviewing soon, having just read it a couple of weeks ago.

Whose decision is it not to have this activity (anal sex or anal play) in the bedroom?

  • 41.5% of husbands say it is a mutual decision which 71.0% of wives say it is.
  • 3.2% of husbands say it is their decision and 26% of wives say it is their decision.
  • 55.3% of husbands say it is their wife’s decision, while 2.6% of wives say it is their husband’s decision not to.

We’ve seen this phenomenon before, where women tend to think decisions are mutual far more often than the men do.  And again, as with many things, the wives seem to generally be the gatekeepers of sex.  If they don’t want it, it’s not happening.  This isn’t a judgment, just a reality.

Plus men don’t want to force things on their wife, so if they have a discussion about it, and the women is hesitant to continue, men are going to say that it was her choice, but women are going to say it was mutual, cause in her mind they talked about it and they both agreed not to continue even though he wants to.

Have you tried anal play or anal sex?

  • 47.9% of husbands haven’t tried either, 55% of wives
  • 23.4% of husbands have tried anal play, 20% of wives
  • 28.7% of husbands have tried anal sex, 25% of wives

It seems the husbands are more experienced in this field somehow…

I’m confused if by tried, do they mean doing it their spouse or receiving it from their spouse?  Good point, I didn’t differentiate.

If you have tried anal play or anal sex before, did you enjoy the experience?

  • 71.7% of husbands say yes while 77.3% of wives say no.

Wow.  I can see why it’s not happening in these marriages.  What I am curious about is the 22.7% of wives who enjoyed the experience, but it is not a part of their bedroom activities.  9.5% of these women said it was their choice not to have this in their marriage, and another 9.5% said it was a mutual decision.  That means that 19% said they enjoyed the experience and then opted out.  For those who were curious as I was, their stated reasons were pain, discomfort, or health/cleanliness issues.  Question answered.

Which activities are spouses receiving in their marriages??

Note: this is a composite of what husbands and wives reported about themselves receiving, and what they provide to their spouses.

Husbands:

  • 21% rubbing, but no penetration
  • 33% penetration with a finger
  • 8% penetration with a toy
  • 8% anal sex
  • 4% analingus (oral-anal sex)

Wives:

  • 31% rubbing, but no penetration
  • 17% penetration with a finger
  • 12% penetration with a toy
  • 12% anal sex
  • 15% analingus (oral-anal sex)

You know, there’s an old sort of joke in of wives saying “you first” when it comes to anal sex/anal play.  Looks like a lot of husbands have taken that to heart, they aren’t lagging far behind, and when it comes to fingers, they’re way ahead.

What’s also interesting is that wives report much higher “anal play” involvement on their spouses”.  Is this a case of our female readers being more pro-sex again, or that the men are shy?  Turns it it’s the former, because the wives are reporting higher frequencies for the activities they receive as well.

How often is anal penetration a part of your love-making?

  • Husbands say 19.4% of the time, wives say 28.8% of the time.

I wish I had split this into two questions, one for giving and one for receiving, but oh well.

How often is anal sex a part of your love-making.

  • Husbands say 11.1% of the time, wives say 18.4% of the time.

I’ve got to admit, that’s higher than I thought.

If you participate in giving anal play or anal sex, do you enjoy it?

  • 20% of husbands say they enjoy seeing their wife enjoy it, while 42% of wives say the same about their husbands.
  • 1.5% of husbands say no, while 25% of wives say no.
  • 78.5% of husbands and 32.7% of wives say they enjoy doing this to their spouse.

If you participate in receiving anal play or anal sex, do you enjoy it?

  • 14.9% of husbands and 14% of wives say no.
  • 85% of husbands and 86% of wives say they enjoy receiving anal play/anal sex.

So, seems like people like receiving more than giving…I know this defies some theories out there…

If you participate in anal sex, do you orgasm from this activity?

  • 33.4% of husbands say yes
  • 38.1% of wives say yes

Again, I wish I had split this into two questions…or maybe four…

The anal sex – porn correlation

Okay, I have to admit, one of the big reasons I did this survey was to test this one out.  One of the largest arguments against anal sex is that “it’s only because of porn!”, which as a rule, I hate that argument, whether it’s about anal sex, oral sex, doggy style, bondage, or whatever.  So, we’ve got a fair bit of data here, let’s see what comes out.

Let’s check those who have watched or currently do watch porn regularly against those who practice anal sex or anal play in their marriage.  What do we get?

  • Of those who have a history of regular porn use, 54.2% don’t participate in any anal play in their marriage.
  • Of those who have no or little exposure to porn, 49.3% do participate in anal play in their marriage bed
  • 90.3% of wives who have anal sex have had zero exposure to porn
  • Those who have little to no exposure to porn tend to have anal sex more often

I think this theory might be busted. Especially for those 90% of women who have it and never been exposed to porn, wow, that is shocking!

Frequency of sex vs. anal play

I’m always curious what the correlation between different activities and sexual frequency.  There seems to be a rule that the more activities you participate in, the more sex you have (on average, statistically, of course there are couples who live outside of the statistic norm).  This one is no different.

  • Couples who practice anal play or anal sex in their marriage on average have sex 0.6 times more per week (2.6 compared to 2.0)
  • Couples (even if they don’t practice anal play or anal sex in their marriage) who have tried it in the past see a 0.2 times per week increase over those who haven’t

In fact, there is an interesting escalation of sexual frequency according to what activities couples partake of:

  • Oral-anal sex on wife – 2.4 times per week
  • Finger penetration on husband – 2.6 times per week
  • Rubbing wife (no penetration) – 2.6 times per week
  • Rubbing husband (no penetration) – 3.2 times per week
  • Finger penetration on wife – 2.8 times per week
  • Oral-anal sex on husband – 2.8 times per week
  • Toy penetration on wife – 3.4 times per week
  • Toy penetration on husband – 3.4 times per week
  • Wife receiving anal sex – 3.4 times per week
  • Husband receiving anal sex – 3.4 times per week

It seems as soon as you move to something larger than a finger penetrating either spouse, the sex starts to ramp up.  A jump of 2.8 times per week up to 3.4 times per week.  Oh, and the more of these activities a couple incorporates, the more sex they seem to have (2 times per week for no activities, up to 3.7 times for 9 activities, no one is doing all 10 it seems).  Note: I’m not saying this is causative, I’m just sharing what the data says.

Your Turn

So, that’s the data and what I saw in it.  If I missed a comparison you’d like to see, let me know in the comments below, or you can email us if you prefer.  What did you think?  Did anything in the data surprise you?

37 Questions for spouses to ask each other about sex

37 sex questions for spouses to ask each other

Subscribe to get the 2 page PDF full of questions to help you and your spouse start to talk about your sex life.

We won't send you spam. Unsubscribe at any time.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

49 thoughts on “Christians, Anal Sex and Anal Play”

  1. Dan says:

    It is possible (likely?) those engaging in penetration with something larger than a finger are more adventurous and more sensual in nature and thus are more inclined to more frequent sex and more experimentation as they look for a more stimulating experience. Sensualist always looking for more. I couldn’t put to together from the over-whelming stats, but did you find more “bigger than a finger” penetration to the men in that population and more orgasmic response in both sexes in the same. Nothing quite as stimulating as feeling “naughty” and breaking a taboo for a lot of people.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Could you clarify what stat you are looking for? I’m not exactly sure what you want pulled.

      1. Dan says:

        To tell you the truth Jay Dee, after reading that comment, even I’m not sure what “population” I am talking about.

        I think what I was looking to postulate and find proof for was that those who enjoy being penetrated my something bigger than a finger are more inclined to orgasm during anal play or sex because they may be more sensualistic in their nature. I.E. If you are actively seeking a heightened sexual experience beyond the “norm” (penetration by a dildo or penis) you are likely more inclined to be open to and and actively seeking an orgasm during anal play.

        Below are the stats and comments that led me to that postulation:

        It seems as soon as you move to something larger than a finger penetrating either spouse, the sex starts to ramp up. A jump of 2.8 times per week up to 3.4 times per week. Oh, and the more of these activities a couple incorporates, the more sex they seem to have…[This is the sensualist (my term and description) population I believe I was talking about.

        Note: this is a composite of what husbands and wives reported about themselves receiving, and what they provide to their spouses.

        Husbands:

        21% rubbing, but no penetration
        33% penetration with a finger
        8% penetration with a toy
        8% anal sex
        4% analingus (oral-anal sex)

        If you participate in anal sex, do you orgasm from this activity?

        33.4% of husbands say yes
        38.1% of wives say yes

  2. Chand says:

    Interesting. Thanks

    1. Jay Dee says:

      You’re welcome

  3. Chad says:

    I let my wife know that I was curious about trying anal sex, she said no. I feel that it is ok between a husband and wife and my wife seems to be warming up to the idea over time. I told her that being willing to try it for me is not enough, she would have to be interested or courious too. I have done a lot of research on the topic, to much to be honest. Stats and what other people are doing really do not matter. What is ok by God and what YOUR spouse is comfortable with is what is important. This is really somthing the the *wife* has to want to do. If she does not you have to let it go. I don’t believe that it is what God intended and we have to be especially carefull with this practice. Just my thoughts on the subject…

    1. Jay Dee says:

      No argument there.

  4. Robyn Gibson says:

    “It seems as soon as you move to something larger than a finger penetrating either spouse, the sex starts to ramp up. A jump of 2.8 times per week up to 3.4 times per week. Oh, and the more of these activities a couple incorporates, the more sex they seem to have …”

    Could it be that by breaking through a barrier of inhibition, desire is truly realized and experimentation is more freely welcomed? — thus leading to more sex. Not that is about anal sex; but rather that it’s the catalyst?

    1. Jay Dee says:

      I think that’s very plausible.

    2. Dan says:

      I agree Robyn. That and my feeling that those who go beyond intercourse have a less inhibited, more sensual nature and are willing to experiment in the quest to feed their desire for a more intense experience, particularly an intense, prolonged and global orgasm—stronger contractions, more and longer contractions, and involving as many body parts as possible. I also feel, the further they will deviate from the “norm”, the greater their degree of sensuality and reduced inhibitions. (I hate using “normal” when referring to sexuality. I’m with Marty Klein to a point when it comes to “normal” sex.

  5. Papa says:

    Jay I respect your posts alot because you’re usually bible based. But I must say in this your survey it is a flop. The frequency or the statistically values DOES NOT make it acceptable before God. Does the high statistics of porn users make pron acceptable to God. There will ALWAYS be a foolish majority. I think the statistics of SINNERS in the world told far out numbers those living in obedience to the Holy Spirit. What other animal created by God practices anal play or sex? Isn’t nature a good enough teacher? So your statistics and survey does NOT hold water. Anal sex and play is and still REMAINS sinful.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Hi Papa,

      I agree that statistics do not equate to validity of the act. But, you’re going to have to back up your statement with scripture if you intend for it to “hold water”.
      And, I wouldn’t generally use the animal kingdom’s practices as validity for sex, marriage, or any other human behaviour, but that said…giraffes have been known to engage in anal sex.

  6. FarAboveRubies says:

    It’s interesting that the entire pelvic floor responds with contractions during orgasm. This includes the anal area. It’s hard to department out one part of the body when it’s the whole body that responds. It’s kind of hard to get away from that. My understanding is that the bible tells us what is NOT allowed (sex outside of marriage, sex with animals, same sex). It says very little about what IS allowed. I’m looking forward to seeing what you find in scriptures about this stuff. The proof is in His word. Perhaps Part 2, Jay?

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Oh, definitely. I see now that I probably should have done that post first…

  7. Bonnie @ Love, Marriage and Sex says:

    These results don’t really surprise me but I am glad that people were so honest (at least amount most items, I think). I think this subject is becoming less and less taboo but there are still those who want to hang on to the whole “it’s a sin” thing. But then again people really like to decide themselves that everything they don’t like or that makes them uncomfortable to think about is a “sin”. But I agree with Robyn and Dan that willingness to participate in and enjoy anal sex is a good indicator that a couple is seeking a higher and greater sexual experience, and that is what is important to sustained and satisfying sexual intimacy in marriage. I am excited to read part 2!

  8. Anon says:

    I think you should have totally differentiated between anal play and anal sex throughout the survey. Play is much different from full sex/penetration (or whatever you want to call it). Penetration was excruciatingly painful for me however play and rubbing can be enjoyable. It made the survey very difficult to answer. You also didn’t mention anything about porn being a factor when a spouse has had or has an addiction and that’s the reason the other doesn’t t want to participate – it’s not their own use that’s a factor it’s their spouses!

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Thanks for the feedback, I will try to address these issues in the future.

  9. [email protected] says:

    I’m in the middle of reading this post but thought I could share some experience. As one who struggles with pornography I’m finding slowly recovery through sexaholics anonymous and working the 12 steps. Just passing it along to those that may not realize there are 12 step programs for those who struggle with lust because SA eals with lust not sex actions only.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Thanks for sharing that there is help out there.

  10. Adam C says:

    I know this is almost a year after the last post but I wonder something. If anal sex is wrong why can we men be so attracted to our wife’s butts. I know it may sound like a stupid question but i wonder. I love my wife’s butt. I love her whole body but her butt is so amazing. And I want to have anal sex but I doubt when I see that many says it is a sin but I wonder why then. Why is the butt attractive to me. Is it wrong to be attracted to my wife’s butt. Is that a feeling that came with the fall? I really hate that I don’t know. Maybe i should kill my desire and my longing for my wife’s butt. Maybe I shouldn’t think it’s beautiful.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Personally I think that it’s been considered taboo because you can’t procreate as a result of anal sex, and according to The Church, for centuries, sex without the ability to procreate was considered sin. I think that’s the underlying cause. Now, many people will give many reasons and rationalizations otherwise, but as so often happens, the root cause gets buried in antiquity, and then we build theologies to justify tradition.

  11. David says:

    This was very interesting. My only problem was this comment: “The mentality is just so different between men and women, it’s hard for women not to be the gatekeeper since (generally) men seem to always be ready for it anytime or anywhere. (At least in our case).” This person has experience with ONE man. How can this person post such a generalized comment? I can’t keep up with my wife’s sexual appetite.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Well, she said “generally”…and “in our case”, and I linked to a post that talks about higher-drive wives. I’m not sure how much more of a disclaimer you want…

  12. Math teacher says:

    Very interesting. Just want to point out from a statistical perspective that these statistics are very likely to be screwed from true averages. This is because it was a volutary survey about a particular topic. Thus, the people who would voluntarily take the time to take this survey about anal sex do not necessarily truly represent the full population of even the readership of this blog much less the entire Christian community. Its impossible to say, for example, that half of couples actually do participate in anal play. It’s still very interesting and helpful but we don’t want to assume too much from the numbers.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Well yeah. It’s also not enough people to count a true statistical average. Plus, we’re also only surveying those who have computers and access to internet as well as my readers are generally more sex-positive than the average Christian. No volunteer survey done over the internet is ever going to be perfect. Someone makes a comment about that in every one I run and often I mention it in the survey results myself. Still, I think it’s enough to note plausible correlations and trends.

      So, yes, we can’t say half of Christian do, only that half of those who filled out the survey do. But we can assume some things:
      Porn is not always the cause.
      You’re not abnormal if you engage in this type of play.
      Nothing is wrong with you because you enjoy these sensations.

      I think that has some value.

  13. John says:

    That is an interesting article, but in the process I find two issues. One, I find it interesting that in the quest to be more sensual and uninhibited sexually, it seems like it becomes easier to push the envelope as to what is acceptable or not in the sight of God. Being led by what is sensual and what we desire sensually can be very dangerous spiritually speaking. The second issue I find is the apparent oversight of a Scripture passage that would seem to address the issue of anal sex, Romans 1:27-29. It would seem obvious to me that this passage indirectly refers to anal sex, and if that is true then we have our answer as to what is or is not acceptable to God. In the current state of our culture and societal attitudes I can understand why that passage would be avoided, which then opens the door to accept conclusions based on what we find sensually appealing apart from what God actually tells us in His Word. So, I would like to give a word of caution as to the trap of pushing the envelope of what is and is not acceptable in the sight of God, and to discount or disregard passages that may speak to the issues and subject matter being addressed.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Hi John,

      Looks like you’re entire argument hinges on that passage:

      and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

      And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,
      – Romans 1:27-29 (ESV)

      And I think you’ve thrown a lot of pre-interpretation into it. This passage as no direct mention of anal sex, or heterosexual sex (except to say they gave it up). While you may say that this passage indirectly refers to anal sex, then you also have to assume that it might indirectly refer to kissing, oral sex, manual sex, all of which homosexual couples do. This passage is very clear that the “unnatural relations” are that it was with someone of the same sex. In fact, just a version above this, it has the same warning against female-female relationship, during which (without some extra apparatus), anal sex can’t be indicated, nor would it be immediately considered.

      Personally, I don’t possibly see how this passage could be talking about anal sex, anal play or anything else anal without going through some hoops or making some prejudgments. But, I’d love to know your thoughts, since you didn’t really explain your thoughts there, you just took it as fact that that passage is about anal sex.

      That said, I do agree that we have to be careful about what boundaries we push and explore. That’s why I write a lot of these posts, because in the heat of the moment, it’s easy to just ignore good, healthy, moral boundaries. But, in this case, I can’t see one given in scripture, and I’ve yet to hear anyone give a scriptural argument for it that’s stood basic scrutiny.

      1. John says:

        Hi, Jay.

        While you may disagree, I don’t think I’ve thrown any pre-interpretation into that passage, but I also think that some pretty logical conclusions within that passage are being overlooked. You said, ” While you may say that this passage indirectly refers to anal sex, then you also have to assume that it might indirectly refer to kissing, oral sex, manual sex, all of which homosexual couples do.”, and I do not agree with that assumption. I do not take the “all or nothing” mindset you are suggesting, and to do so would clearly conflict with other passages.

        You also mentioned that the previous verse relates to female-female relationships, but I believe the stronger argument is that it is referring to bestiality, something that was practiced in Paul’s day, especially since it does not mention women with women, but instead that women exchanged natural relations for those that were contrary to or opposite to nature. To infer that passage as referring to female-female relationships is an assumption, a pre-interpretation as you would say, and is in my opinion an inconsistent interpretation of Scripture, especially when you discount my assertion that anal sex is indirectly mentioned in verse 27 simply because it does not specifically mention anal.

        I believe the context of these passages pertains directly to intercourse, whether it is between male and female, female and animal (or male with animal), or male with male. Whether or not you choose to agree with that position, I believe that is the most logical conclusion based on what is being said. Furthermore, the passage does not infer that what was being done between two men was wrong because it was between two men, but rather that the act was wrong to begin with, and that they had no shame or sense of remorse, in other words their conscience was seared, to engage in such behavior between themselves. So, what could that one thing be that was so wrong and shameful that two men could engage in? We know that Scripture speaks in the positive to intercourse between a man and a woman, kissing, and even oral sex, so where does that leave us? We also know that the Apostle Paul is not referring to male with animal relations since he clearly indicates men with men. So, the logical conclusion would be, since they gave up the natural use of a vagina for which only a female can provide, that they were then engaging in anal sex, the primary activity for which homosexual men are commonly known to participate in.

        It is on that basis that I believe Scripture is clearly referring to anal sex in these passages, as well as other passages relating to sexual relations between two men. After all, I believe that approach more closely resembles the approach you use to support oral sex, of which I do agree with, but which you discount when looking at the above passage. One can say the passages in Song of Solomon refer to something other than oral sex, and many do say that, but while those passages don’t specifically say or indicate oral sex does not negate that they could as you suggest, and as I believe it does.

        Just some things to consider, and I hope that gives you a better understanding of where I’m coming from on this subject.

        1. John says:

          Any thoughts regarding what I shared, Jay?

          1. Jay Dee says:

            Sorry, I’ve been off sick the last few days with a fever.

            But, I don’t see your viewpoint here. If we look again at the passage it says “the women exchange natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way, also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women were consumed with passion for one another.”

            Now, if the women and men were sinning “in the same way”, and the men were having sex with men then, to me, the simplest explanation would be that the women were having sex with women. Seems cut and dry.

            1. John says:

              Okay. I disagree, but that’s okay. I just find it interesting that while Paul makes a point of specifically mentioning men with men, he doesn’t do that when speaking about women, some of whom at that time were also experiencing a form of intercourse with animals, among other sexual activity. I would suggest that anal sex is just as unnatural as bestiality. Oh, well.

              1. Jay Dee says:

                Do you have a credible source that says that the Romans engaged in bestiality? I know they had a reputation for play-acting bestiality (ex: a women would dress up as a leopard), and writing stories about it, but not engaging in the actual acts themselves.

                1. John says:

                  Besides the Bible that mentions bestiality directly, which means it was a practicing activity among the gentiles outside of theatre? How about a book called “Bestiality and Zoophilia”? In it the history of such activity is given, including the Egyptians, Romans, and the Greeks during the first century. It does mention the theatrical as you indicated, but it also refers to the actual acts being performed and some of the specific individuals who were involved.

                  1. Jay Dee says:

                    Thanks, I’ll check it out.

                    1. John says:

                      No problem. Curious what you’ll think after checking it out, too.

                      BTW, glad you’re feeling better, too.

  14. HigherQuest says:

    While I respect your negativity towards pornography I don’t see any clear or implied indication in Scripture that erotic imagery is necessarily sinful. Certainly we believe that the obsessive use of it, or allowing it to lead one towards sex with someone other than their spouse would be unhealthy and/or sinful, but just the simple enjoyment of viewing sex between two people of the opposite sex seems rather obvious as an indication of divine design.

    We are programmed to appreciate the image of those of the opposite sex. It is not even possible to avoid being stimulated by sexual images. TV and movies are full of it, and Christians watch millions of hours of tame sexuality, go to the beach and view women in small bikinis, see Victoria Secret commercials and think little of it. To say that pornography is a sad thing for Christians to be involved with is to speak far beyond the dictates of scripture. Even in the case of anal sex, where the learning process for such a sexual practice is so important, pornography can provide truly helpful insights into the how of performing it, including safety, integrity, and practice. Of course pornography teaches some horrid things about sex too, but as in anything discriminating viewing is essential.

    Christians have taken the Matthew 5:27,28 passage and caused it to say something it in no way says. Only when we connect this passage with Romans 7:7 do we see that what Jesus was warning about was a mental imagery with the intent to achieve a sexual relationship with the object of sexual stimulation. To say that viewing erotic imagery is, in and of itself, sinful, is to completely miss the clear communication of the Song of Solomon. The Song was obviously designed to describe the normality of seeing someone who stirred sexual desires and imagining the sexual nature of their body. It is this natural sexual attraction that God uses to perpetuate the human race. The danger only resides in the lack of boundaries one sets up in enjoying the sexual imagery. If one cannot avoid wasteful obsessive behavior or seeking actual sexual connections with someone other than their spouse, as a result of viewing erotic materials, then of course they need to stay away from it, but the VAST majority of men and women have solid internal boundaries in this area and certainly we should anticipate Christians to maintain such boundaries.

    The Bible never forbids erotic literature, erotic imagery, or erotic self stimulation. When Christians create doctrines of sin that exceed the Bible’s clear teaching they are guilty of speaking for God where God obviously purposed to not speak. Certainly we have to believe He knew the desires of people for sexual eroticism, and had He believed that eroticism was inherently sinful surely He would have addressed it. It is only sinful for those who force others to perform in it, for those who actively engage in sex with those outside their marriage, or those who demean and physically or emotionally damage those who engage in it. My wife and I regularly watch pornography together and separately. We have found it to be a wonderful tool in the development of our love and sexuality with each other. We have prayed deeply, studied the scripture carefully, and looked at all sides of this issue, and we are confident God does not approach the subject of erotic imagery in the way most Christians do.

    The Church is far more programmed by the negative sexual thinking of historical teachers, whose teachings later became formed theologies, than from scripture itself. Augustine is a highly revered historical religious figure in Christianity, and while I appreciate much that he wrote on many biblical subjects, his thinking on marriage sexuality was far more framed by ascetic teachers than the bible and was an appalling failure to appreciate the beauty and joy of erotic expression and experience in the context of monogamous marriage. Well, enough said for now… I’ve only scratched the surface of the errors of the rejection of erotic imagery, but for now this will suffice to at least provoke some here to think a bit more deeply than perhaps they’ve been conditioned to think.

    Many are starting to come forth and expose the errors of negativity towards erotic imagery, and more will follow. In every generation God exposes error in biblical theology and practical Christian living and He is doing so in this area. You watch and you will see…He will correct this area too in time. 30 years ago Christians who enjoyed a glass of wine were condemned. 20 years ago Christians who enjoyed the rock and roll tempo in music were condemned. 15 years ago Christians who enjoyed oral sex or masturbation with their spouses were condemned. 10 years ago Christians who enjoyed an occasional visit to a Casino were considered sinful. 5 years go anal sex came onto the cultural screen in a big way and was resoundingly rejected by Christians and continues to come forward as an issue they are now wrestling with, with many Christians enjoying it immensely. Pornography will take longer to sort out, but it will happen and is happening.

    While I am not the writer on a site I will refer you to, I highly recommend you and your readers give a careful and prayerful read to the following article: [redacted]. It will initially shock you but it will also challenge your thinking on this subject in ways you may never have been challenged before. May God be our Guide into all Truth as it is in Jesus…

    1. Jay Dee says:

      I’ve been holding this in moderation until I could respond, because, frankly, I’m worried about the massive damage you could potentially do. People are so easily decieved, especially when sex is involved. Human life so easily grabs at short-term pleasure at the sacrifice of long-term joy.

      And that’s basically at the core of the argument for porn. Christians who haven’t learned self-control and discernment saying “but I want to feel good whenever I want” and sacrificing their long-term relationships as a result just like a child who would rather eat cookies than a meal when they’re hungry.

      It comes out clearly in the legalistic defense of “well, the Bible doesn’t explicitly state you can’t”. That’s an argument my kids use to get around a rule of mine when they know the intent, but want what they want anyways. They will say something like “well, you didn’t say I couldn’t eat THOSE cookies”. When the Bible casts a wide net of “flee sexual immorality” and “sex is meant only between a husband and wife”, we invariably will have some “children” say “Well, you didn’t say I couldn’t sext with someone else” or “You didn’t say I couldn’t do mutual masturbation with someone else” or “you didn’t say I couldn’t have sex in front of other people” or “you didn’t say I couldn’t watch other people having sex” or “you didn’t say I couldn’t pay for phone sex”.

      And just like any adult would say to the child “Come on, you know better” I say to you “Come on, you know better”.

      Now, you say you have prayed deeply, studied the scripture carefully and look at all side of the issue. But of course, anyone who comes to the Bible looking for a way to justify their sinful desires will find a way to do so. Even Satan used the Bible to try and tempt Jesus. Unfortunately, Satan has experience as an angel. He knows how to appear as one of God’s messengers. He knows how to make you believe you are hearing from God. He knows how to show you just the pieces you want to see so you can have all the sin you want.

      And I agree, this is a growing trend. It’s growing along with “Christian open marriages” and “Christian threesomes”. And yes, I know that porn use exists in churches, in fact, the more conservative a church the more likely the members are to use more porn. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay. It’s a symptom of a sickness in our churches that is growing. And we know from Revelation those in the church who truly follow God will become less and less. More and more will be deceived. Those that make it through will be a remnant of a remnant. So, anything that looks like it’s a growing trend in churches should be seen with suspicion, not as proof of a good thing.

      And I decided to remove the link to the article you posted, because, well, I won’t promote Satan’s lies, but I did read it. It was sad and disturbing, because all I can think of is all the well-meaning Christians who are being deceived daily by it. Satan is truly attacking Christianity from the inside, destroying marriages in the hopes of a cascade effect.

      1. HigherQuest says:

        Jay Dee. That was an elaborate approach to saying “Well…I really can’t support my position and I can’t provide any support for refuting your position, so I’ll resort to using a demeaning (as if I were nothing more than a sneaky child) reply to your honest comments”

        Over the years, no matter what the subject is being dealt with, those who argue more from “I feel, or in my opinion, or God told me, or …” instead of providing solid biblical support for their positions, do so because in reality they have no biblical support. This is never helpful to truly inquiring hearts.

        While I admit I don’t know you personally, I find myself wondering if the reason you fail to actually discuss and biblically refute the things I’ve said is because you know you can’t do it from historical context, biblical exegesis, and accurate etymological studies of the words that define immorality in the Bible. I also find myself suspicious you may be hiding an embarrassing personal reality that if you were to actually apply the definition you give to immorality you yourself will fail your own definitions in terms of what you personally enjoy on TV, and Movies you watch, etc., that are just short of actual pornography but are still a violation of your personal working definition, which definition is more “assumptive based” than true exegetical study based. I find this in the vast number of those I read and converse with online. They know they don’t approve pornography, but the biblical definition they use to disapprove of it, if honestly employed towards the TV and Movies they do watch, would condemn themselves as thoroughly as if they actually watched pornography.

        The body of Christ is and always has been more inclined to follow the emotional appeals of self proclaimed bible teachers, rather than relying upon solid study, using the best tools of interpretation…those that accurately use Greek and Hebrew study methods, historical context, etymology, and solid biblical exegesis. When such tools are used honestly they do not support the position you, and others of the same persuasion arrive at.

        I very much believe immorality is clearly defined in the Old and New Testaments, they are very clearly in its opposition to fornication and adultery (which, to use your examples, would include sexting with those other than one’s spouse, masturbation with someone other than one’s spouse, sex in front of other people, watching live performances of others having sex with one another, open marriages, threesomes, and orgies), as well as sex with children, sex with animals, and sex with personal relatives. The biblical line for the definition of lust is when a person purposes to obtain a personal sexual relationship with other than one’s spouse if they can affect such a relationship. It is not crossed by those who are sexually stimulated by erotic images, seeing those who are sexually stimulating in the normal discourse of life, seeing someone partially clad on a beach, even pornography. When there is no intent to engage sexually, in a personal relationship, with someone other than one’s spouse, then there is no violation. Those who watch virtually most TV programs and Movies, or visit beaches, shopping malls, etc., would fail your definition of Lust and I’m confident you know that. In all likelihood you fail your definition frequently but tell yourself that at least you don’t yet give yourself permission to watch pornography…

        Until the body of Christ learns to stop inventing definitions they think will be popular with other Christians, or which side with a condemning form of legalism, there is little hope Christians will ever meaningfully relate to or bring about significant evangelistic results. Even the most ignorant unbeliever can see through the crass hypocrisy and condemnation inherent in most Christians. They reject Jesus, not because of what He teaches, nor His holiness, but because they aren’t about to let ignorant legalistic Christians define for them what He defines as immorality, or proper political stances, or proper sociological norms, or justification for unbiblical hierarchical Church leadership who set rules and standards for those who are pressed to become members of “their” Church. Many of them grew up in Christian Sunday schools and Churches that rammed unbiblical definitions of morality down their throats, while they discovered their Pastor was having sex with his secretary, meeting privately with prostitutes, or stealing from the Church treasury, yet bellowed from the pulpit how unacceptable pornography is. Such hypocrisy as I’ve outlined in this reply will stand as a very telling story of the failed impact of the Church for the last 1900 years. We aren’t fooling anyone, and we certainly aren’t fooling God. Because of His long suffering grace He continues to work with and through a failed Church, but this is no indication He is in agreement with it. Believe me…He sees right through our legalistic hypocrisy.

        When will you and others of your weak interpretive framework awaken to the damage you are doing to the entire world. The book of Revelation solidly warns about adding to the words of His Revelation, yet it is being done every day, and condemnation of erotic imagery is just one of many ways it is being done. The Bible neither in implied ways or in direct interpretive ways opposes erotic response to sexual images. For it to do that it would have to condemn the Song of Solomon and many other passages of Scripture. God made mankind to respond the sexual images. There is an acceptable form of response (being turned on…) and there is an unacceptable response (seeking to obtain outside marriage…) to the object of sexual stimulation.

        Thank you Jay Dee for your reply, but unless you are prepared to address actual word meanings and clear biblical teaching I can only conclude you don’t because you can’t, because in that approach it can’t be done, and that is the ONLY truly valid approach. Everything hinges on proper hermeneutics and your hermeneutic is just too weak to stand the test it requires.

        1. Jay Dee says:

          I do not believe the Bible was intended to be an explicit list of do’s and don’ts. Rather, it’s a book designed to lead one to a changed character that would understand the underlying principles contained therein (Galatians 3:24-26 stating this). Anything else is legalism.

          But, very well you want original definitions.

          Let’s look at the word for adultery in the Old Testament. Now, if you go back to ancient Hebrew, the word used for adultery in Exodus 20:14 is Nun-Alef-Pey (more on this later).
          As you may already know, Hebrew is a language based in concrete concepts. I’d argue it was the first language, because it does seem very constructed based first on physical, easily observable things, then on more complex concepts. Things like a father is “ab”, or alef-bet, alef meaning “strength” and bet meaning “tent”, so father is literally the strength of the tent, or the strong one in the house, or even more subtly the leader of the house. Another example: if one is angry, you can’t say they’re angry so much as you say their face is red. Why? Because anger is not concrete. But a red face is easily to see and describe.
          So, expressing concepts like adultery are difficult.

          So, back to our Nun-Alef-Pey (adultery).
          Nun was originally drawn as a seed and is used to represent continuation, generation, perpetuation, offspring, heir, etc..
          Alef was drawn as an ox as I mentioned and is generally used to represent strength, or strong, heated, etc..
          Pey was drawn as a mouth and in this case it’s a representative of passion because, well, you kiss with your mouth.

          So, put them together, and you get a continuation of heated passion. Of course, the 31 uses of this word in the old testament make it very clear that this “heated passion” is being continued outside of your marriage.

          Strictly speaking, the old testament commandment against adultery doesn’t actually mention sex, rather any sort of “heated passion” that you choose to continue outside of your marriage. So, a temptation of someone walking by, is not continued, that’s a temptation, but the moment you give it a foothold and allow it to have a place in your mind, then it’s a sin.

          Now, interestingly enough, this seems to line up with what Jesus says about adultery, that anyone who looks at another women with lust has already broken that commandment.

          So, let’s take a look at the Greek word He uses for adultery in Matthew 5:28, which you brought up: “epithumeo”
          This comes from a combination of two words:
          “epi” being a preposition meaning “on, in, upon, unto, to, etc.”
          and “thumeo” being a lot of strong emotions really. It can be passion, or anger. The point is, strong desire for something with them.
          So, if you look at a women “in passion”, then you’ve committed lust.

          To me, that’s pretty cool that the Greek etymology lines up perfectly with the Hebrew etymology.

  15. HigherQuest says:

    Jay Dee, thanks for the short study you have presented. Let’s begin with your statement of conclusion “Strictly speaking, the old testament commandment against adultery doesn’t actually mention sex, rather any sort of “heated passion” that you choose to continue outside of your marriage. So, a temptation of someone walking by, is not continued, that’s a temptation, but the moment you give it a foothold and allow it to have a place in your mind, then it’s a sin.”

    Hebrew is indeed a very pictographic language and word meanings are usually connected to visual images that communicate visual concepts in a word. However, the general use of the word “Adultery/Naaph” in the OT relates to the act of sex outside the context of marriage, and as such violated the blood covenant of marriage. But, when you say “a temptation of someone walking by, (that) is not continued, that’s a temptation, but the moment you give it a foothold and allow it to have a place in your mind, then it’s a sin.” This is speaking far beyond the meaning of the word and fails to accurately define Jesus’ meaning in Matthew 5:28.

    When Jesus uses the word Epithumeo He does not define His meaning of it…He just uses it and knows those in His audience have a clear understanding of its meaning. So, this being the case, Matthew 5:28 doesn’t tell us very much about its meaning accept that adultery begins in the mind and ends up in a physical act of sex outside of the context of marriage. But, what is in His mind in the use of the word Lust? Is its meaning “To look upon a woman and be sexually stimulated by what is seen?” If this were the case then all men for all time would be guilty. This, by just logical sense, cannot be His meaning. So what is it? Where do we find a use that accurately defines what He was thinking when He used this word Epithumeo?

    The very clearest meaning, giving to Paul by divine revelation (and Parenthetically, it is Paul’s style of teaching to take many of Jesus’ statements and bring additional revelation of their meanings for Greeks who didn’t know the Hebrew language and Old Testament understandings) can be found in Romans 7:7 “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. No, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” For the “Lust” Paul uses Jesus’ word Epithumeo and to aid in defining what lust was, for the sake of his Gentile readers, he tells them it is equivalent to the Old Testament word “Covet” that we find in Exodus 20:17 “You shalt not covet your neighbour’s house, you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor any thing that is your neighbour’s.” The clear meaning of this verse is that “Covet = a determination to obtain unlawfully.”

    Now, let’s compare your take on the word Lust with the word Covet. Was God saying to Israel “If you look over the fence of your neighbor and see his brand new Ferrari and think to yourself “Wow, now that is some car. I’d really really really love to own one of those.” And then he turns back to his yard, and goes to his computer and looks up the stats on a Ferrari, several pictures of it, and thinks to himself “Man, that is a sexy car. It would be fun to slip into one of those and take it for a ride?” He continued thinking about the Ferrari…is he thereby coveting it? If you think the answer is yes then you should not expect even one male to be found in the Kingdom of Heaven, per ” Ephesians_5:5  “For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.” There is now and never has been a man who didn’t look at a sexy woman and think “Now that is a sexy woman. It would sure be fun to have sex with her…”, but he turns away, reminds himself of God’s holy ways and his love for his wife, and concludes…”She isn’t mine and to do anything to obtain her would be sin. (Would to God King David had thought this way…) The same would be for the man who looked at his neighbors Ferrari. If he were to plot, and scheme, how to slip into that car and put it in his garage and ride in it anytime he desired he would be clearly coveting it in his determination to obtain it no matter the cost or who he hurt in the process.

    So, by Paul’s use and the contextual connection to Exodus 20 it is obvious that his and Jesus’ meaning for the word Lust goes waaay beyond simply acknowledge the sexual stimulation experienced by observing an erotic woman. For it to be sin it must lean into a plan, a scheme, a determination, to sexually engage in intercourse with that woman when he is already married. Thus, you fail the distinguish between being stimulated by something and determining to possess or obtain something or someone no matter who it hurts.

    Therefore, your definition completely lacks historical, linguistic, cultural, and hermeneutic support. It is a false definition and one that would leave every man going to straight to hell at death. If you hold to such a view then you are far beyond just legalistic…you are bordering on complete irrationality. I trust that is not the case…

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Ahh, I see your perspective now.

      You are saying a woman is merely an object, like a car or a donkey. One women is no different than another except in how it pleases you.
      But a woman is not a car. I cannot go to the store and order another of my wife, or my neighbour’s wife. She is a living soul. If I desire his wife, there is no way for me to have her without depriving him of her. I cannot work hard to attain her. And even if I could, the very thought that I’d want to sleep with his wife is … disgusting. Even entertaining the thought of having her outside of marriage is sinful. It’s glorifying a sinful act (fornication and/or adultery). The Bible is clear we should not entertain sinful thoughts. That we should flee sexual immorality.

      1. HigherQuest says:

        I absolutely agree with you that to “actually” desire obtaining her outside of marriage is sinful. It is not something I believe in or would ever practice. But…finding her sexually desirable is completely different. I may find my neighbor’s wife to be sexually desirable but I would NEVER do anything to actually engage sexually with her because she is my neighbor’s wife, so I am not in any way suggesting that.

        But I COMPLETELY disagree with your feminist “objectification” implication. You are an object, I am an object, my neighbor’s car is an object. Desire doesn’t know anything about human worth or personality, it only knows what it sees is desirable, sexy, or beautiful. Where objectification goes wrong is where another human being is either taken by force, used in ways that demean her, treats her disrespectfully, or denies her humanity, seeks to obtain her no matter how much it damages her or her self worth. If someone said to me “Your wife is sure a sexy babe,” I’d say “thanks…I totally agree.” If he went on to say I’m going to do everything I can to steal her from you or entice her or force her to have sex with me I’d do everything in my power to stop him. One comment would please me, the other would horrify me. Surely you can see the difference. Objectification goes horribly wrong when intent to obtain is involved in that objectification. This is one of the reasons God forbids covetousness, but it goes waaay beyond objectification and into intention to obtain.

        Finally, it is NOT sinful to be honest, real, and normal, to say “within my own heart, or perhaps to my wife” that I find a another woman sexy or erotic or sensuous, or to acknowledge that a given woman is sexually attractive. My wife and I often, while watching a given TV show or movies, comment back and forth to each other that a given man is sure eye candy (like Jason Mamoa in Aquaman) or a given woman sure has beautiful boobs or a sexy body (like Nicole Kidman). I wouldn’t have sex with Nicole Kidman even if she took the time and money to fly out to where we live and offered herself to me (which obviously she’d never do), but that doesn’t mean I’m not stirred by her sexual beauty. If you think otherwise then I don’t know what to say to you…that’s just weird.

        This whole “objectification” issue has gone waay off course into something only a strange feminist or ascetic would buy into. I’m sure not either of those and find absolutely nothing holy, spiritual, or godly in it. It is some intricate form of denial and weirdness. I thank God for every person on the planet, and I ascribe infinite worth and value to everyone, but that doesn’t stop me from noting that some people are more physically beautiful than others or sexier looking. Come on Jay Dee…that’s not so hard for you to acknowledge is it?

        1. Jay Dee says:

          I don’t think the objectification issue is off course, and I don’t believe it’s a feminist issue. Whether you’re doing it to a man or a woman, it’s wrong. It’s wrong to treat people as objects. If you don’t, that’s when you get things like slavery and sex trafficing.

          And yes, we are all objects, but the point is we aren’t only objects. There’s more to us than a rock or a car.

          Now, as for your “your wife is a sexy babe”, I wonder if you’d be so happy if they said “Hey, I’m going to masturbate to thoughts of you wife later. Thanks for bringing her around!” or “I’m going to use that image of her bent over the picnic table as I have sex with my wife tonight.”

          And it seems that you believe that sin doesn’t exist so long as it’s in your mind, which I believe is the same trap the Jews fell into. They spent so much time regulating behaviour rather than character. But we know from the Bible that our character drives our behaviour. Not only that, but our character is what God is interested in, not in the things we do, but the way our mind works.

          He went on: “What comes out of a person is what defiles them. For it is from within, out of a person’s heart, that evil thoughts come—sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. – Mark 7:20-22

          For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the faith God has distributed to each of you. – Romans 12:2

          And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. – 2 Corinthians 3:18

          Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal. – 2 Corinthians 4:16-18

          Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. – Philippians 4:8

          Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. – Colossians 3:1-3

          You have broken down sex into merely a physical act, and lust into merely a physical reaction. Your argument seems to be discounting the mental and spiritual aspects of both sex and lust. It’s a dualistic mindset to see the mind and the body as detached from each other that what happens in the mind doesn’t count so long as it never reaches the body. This “new” idea in Christianity that you are trying to push has it’s roots in Greek paganism, and even further back in Jewish legalism.

          And Nicole Kidman does nothing for me (no offense to her) unless I choose to let it. I am far more interested in an physical connection with my wife that involves an emotional relationship as well. So much so that everything else pales in comparison. Offering me some random person to lust over is akin to offering me grass to eat when I have a feast before me. Could I eat it? Sure, and it might even fill me for a time. But in comparison to what I can have regularly with my wife … why on earth would I want to? And that’s before I factor in the pain and suffering it would cause, the damage to my relationship with her and to God, and the degradation of my character and will.

          No thank you. I mean, the sinful part of me sees the appeal, the part that knows I could just go and find anything right now to satisfy my physical desires, but something stronger in me yells “run away!, and I know, from experience, that watching porn will leave nothing but guilt, emptiness, sadness. It’s like eating an entire box of donuts. Yeah, that sounds amazing, but I know it’s going to make me sick.

          What you offer has nothing but death and destruction in it, and I will give it no quarter in my life. I advise those who will read this to do the same.

        2. Matt says:

          Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love. And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger? For the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord , and he pondereth all his goings.
          Proverbs 5:18‭-‬21 KJV Why would you want to give your desire to another?

  16. HigherQuest says:

    Jay Dee, I’ll begin at the top of your post. No, I do not agree with your assessment of my concept of objectification. God made women objects of sensual desire. If you disagree with that it is only because you have an ax to grind, are in massive denial, or have been conditioned by other misled people. There isn’t a man on the planet who doesn’t look at a given woman and see her sexual desirability. This is just how God made men. It is one thing to treat her like an object to be used or abused and it is quite another to appreciate the sensuality, beauty, and magnificence as a unique creature made by God to bring sexual pleasure to a man, as well has for many other reasons other than sex. So, yes, I do appreciate what God has made, and no, I do not depreciate them as “merely” sexual objects to be used. Your argument is a straw one at best and a very dishonest one at worst. I’ll let you decide which fits you best between the two, but I won’t let you put on me a detestable mentality as regards women. Since you are big on quoting Scriptures in this post, consider the following “objectifying” Scriptures and tell me what you think of them:

    Song of Solomon 1:5  I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. 

    Since you didn’t like my comparison of the Ferrari with a woman (Objectifying?), how say you on all of these:

    Song 1:9  I have compared thee, O my love, to a company of horses in Pharaoh’s chariots. 
    Song 1:14  My beloved is unto me as a cluster of camphire in the vineyards of Engedi. 
    Song 1:15  Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou art fair; thou hast doves’ eyes. 
    Song 4:5  Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies. 
    Song 7:7  This thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes.
    Song 8:8  We have a little sister, and she hath no breasts: what shall we do for our sister in the day when she shall be spoken for? (Sounds like her brothers were looking at her breasts and objectifying her. In a wrong way? Nothing here indicates so.)
    Song 8:10  I am a wall, and my breasts like towers: then was I in his eyes as one that found favour.
    Song 1:10 Thy cheeks are comely with rows of jewels, thy neck with chains of gold.

    Obviously I could quote far more from the Song, but you get the idea. Objects were used to describe her beauty. God has made women incredible in their sensuality, their beauty, and their nobility. I would never take away from that. A woman IS an object, as are men, Ferraris, chariots, camphire, vineyards, deer, lilies, palm trees, grapes, towers, jewels and chains of gold. What awesome descriptions for the beauty of a woman. There is a huge difference between objectifying/dehumanizing a person and recognizing they are truly objects of affection, sensuality, and joy.

    Does some (even a lot of) pornography portray women in horribly abusive states? For sure. Does some use women as nothing more than objects to use, abuse, and toss away? For sure. But does all? Absolutely NOT! Some…the forms I am inclined towards, portray women as creatures of God to be loved, enjoyed, and treasured, in both relational and sexual ways. Nothing wrong with those…! If they choose to share their joy for their sexuality and love for each other then so be it. May it be that such honest and honorable forms of eroticism take over in the place of all the horrible forms of eroticism.

    As to whether my sexy babe of a wife is currently or has ever been an object of some man’s masturbation? I have no idea. Since she doesn’t present herself in any forums where she is inviting men to masturbate to her it would be pretty crass of some stranger to walk up to her and say that to her. If he said it in front of me I’d probably tell him, “You are welcome to masturbate to the sexiness of my wife so long as you make no overtures of desire to have sex with her in reality. If you attempt to approach her for fornicating purposes be warned you will find me a tiger ready to rip your head off.” It would not surprise me if men have masturbated to an image they retain in their minds of my wife. My wife has been enjoyably flattered by men on occasions, but she is always careful to not return the flattery or give any impression she would be available to them for fornication. Your illustration is far more crass than anything we’ve ever experienced, which tells me you are reaching for straws to build a straw man argument. My wife is my treasure, her beauty is a gift from God. If others appreciate her God given beauty so be it…

    You are also wrong in your evaluation of my concept of mental sin. I very much believe mental sin exists, otherwise what would I do with Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:27,28? Adultery and fornication always begin in the heart/mind of person. But…just because a man looks at another woman and finds her erotic, sensual, sexy, and beautiful does not in any way mean he is planning or scheming in his mind on how to obtain and use her. Jesus knows men appreciate the beauty of women, so He’s not addressing the obvious. What He is saying is that when a man looks at the beauty of another woman and doesn’t control his mind he could find himself leaning towards a plan to obtain her in sinful ways. Such is always sinful. I don’t think you are at all being honest in these matters Jay Dee. You know very well that you, and every man on the planet, view the sexual beauty of women around them or in various venues and appreciate what they see without ever intending to let their minds move forward with a plan to fornicate with them. You are building one straw man argument after another because you fail to see things from the Lord’s perspective. Mary Magdalene followed Him. Do you imagine He couldn’t see her sexual beauty that attracted so many men before she was one of His followers? I’m not saying He masturbated to her. This would have been entirely outside of His life calling and ministry. He was entirely focused on revealing His eternal purposes for people, and was in no way thinking about marriage and having sex with any woman.

    The approach I am taking is VERY dualistic in some ways. All men partake of such dualism. I see women as being sexually erotic on one level and untouchable on another. In my mind I may ponder their beauty, but in my life choices I NEVER pursue a sexual relationship with them. On one level they turn me on, but on another, because they aren’t mine, it goes no further. All men partake of such dualism. We do the same with houses we admire, cars we desire, guns we desire, jobs we desire, etc., but we don’t steal those things, we don’t destroy others to obtain them, we don’t cheat or swindle people into providing them for us. We have internal spiritual boundaries that we respect because of the dignity of those who possess them. I don’t want anyone to seek to possess anything I have, but I’m just fine with them admiring what I have. I am amazingly blessed of God with significant wealth and possessions, yet they don’t possess me. We give to missions, to our children, and to acquaintances at God’s leading. This is just normal Christian living.

    As for your reference to Nicole Kidman…I’m with you on that one…FOR SURE. She and her body and beauty can’t hold a candle to my wife. I may find her sexually stimulating, but I would never pursue anything with her more than just appreciating her sexuality, gifted acting, and the movies she might act in. My wife is my entire love focus. I have no room in my heart for another woman. That doesn’t mean I don’t derive sexual stimulation from the images of other women, and yes, in fantasy type ways they often factor into my love making with my wife, but only for stimulation purposes…not intent, love, or determination to obtain. Most often I’m far more focused on pleasuring my wife during sex than thinking about other women, but there are times when it is helpful to both of us to fantasize a bit to get things going. If you don’t do this that’s fine, but your wholesale condemnation of it is baseless.

    You write “I mean, the sinful part of me sees the appeal, the part that knows I could just go and find anything right now to satisfy my physical desires, but something stronger in me yells “run away!, and I know, from experience, that watching porn will leave nothing but guilt, emptiness, sadness.” It’s not the sinful part of you that sees the appeal. It is your being made in the image of God who made you to appreciate and be stimulated by the sexual appeal of a woman (see the Song of Solomon again…). Sure, run away from adultery and fornication but you can’t run away from God’s image in you. He made you in His image to appreciate beauty. And, as for it leading to nothing but guilt, emptiness, and sadness… nothing could be further from the truth brother. I have never had more of the joy of the Lord in my life than in this season of my life. I’m not at all sad. My wife and I are wildly in love with each other and have been happily married for decades. Our sex life is amazing, as is our prayer life. We start every day reading our bibles, we witness continually, we see miracles through our ministries, we are passionate about the Kingdom of God, and we love Jesus more than any time in past. Sooo, my guess is that you are all those negative things when you look at erotic images because you have a mixed up concept of biblical morality. You are loaded up with guilt, condemnation, fear, anxiety and doubts of the power of Jesus to save the soul. The Church has always run towards condemnation and legalism when it failed to comprehend truth. Most Christians are sheeple rather than truly knowing God and His Word. They are just what Jesus said:

    Mark 7:7  in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

    Of course you are all those negative things. Once you are freed up to look Him in the face, talk through your issues of condemnation, and the false concepts of guilt ridden Christians, you will discover that your God given nature to appreciate the sexual beauty of women is a gift, rather than a curse. May it be that God sets you free from the historical conditioning of confused Church leaders. Remember brother, they’ve also taught celibacy of the priesthood, that sex was only for the purpose of procreation, that the Pope was the equivalent of Jesus on earth, the inquisition, the crusades, the buying of indulgences, confession of sin in little boxes to men who claimed they could clear you with God…need I go on? Craziness…all of it. My encouragement to you is to stop listening to the voices of others…including my own here…and spend some deep time in the presence of Jesus. He will sort these issues out for you. I would never support you or anyone else watching erotic imagery that hurts women, abuses their hearts, wounds their bodies, treats them like animals, encourages prostitution, fornication, adultery, sex traffiking, etc.. But, there are many positive sexual images to be enjoyed and those need not cause anyone guilt unless they become obsessed with it, watch it without the knowledge and agreement of one’s spouse, or use it as an impetus to obtain sexual liaisons with other people. We are visually stimulated by sunsets, a beautiful picture, a flower, sun glistening on the newly fallen snow, and sexually stimulated by sexual images. All normal aspects of living.

    Your arguments are as straw filled as they are because they lack true divine substance. Somebody has convinced you to believe lies and the struggle you have beneath the guise of spiritual/sexual superiority of virtue is what torments you…not erotic imagery itself. You have my prayers, and I hope those who visit this blog will be helped out of the hopeless confusion and condemnation they have called their lives.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      You’re trying to label porn as “just seeing beauty”. That’s your rationalization. Everyone who is addicted to porn makes up one. I know, because I’ve talked to many people about it. For some, it’s that that they won’t bother their spouse anymore. Or that they’re learning about sex. It’s all the same. We think we know better than God. We want to have what we want. And then we rationalize a means to get it or keep it.

      Frankly, you will not be able to convince me that it’s not sin, because I’ve experienced it. And I get emails all the time from husbands and wives in the same boat. They know, deep down, it’s wrong. They see the damage to their marriages, to themselves. You’re effectively trying to tell me that something I’ve seen and have hundreds of witness account of doesn’t exist.

      The Song of Solomon’s verses are about his wife, so I see them as supporting my stance, not yours. Frankly, I’m surprised you brought them up. I would count it as proof of my argument.

      You think just because you’re lusting after them but never intend to go through with it, it’s okay. That’s like being okay with wanting to murder someone so long as you never actually kill them. It’s not. Even if you never intend to act on it, it will change you character.

      And you’re arguments are devolving into insults, which tells me that you’re viewpoint is being challenged. You feel the conviction, and you’re mind is rebelling against having to examine it. You’re getting angry so you don’t have to think clearly. It’s a defense mechanism of sin that we see often.

      I believe all my sexual energy, be it physical or mental, should be directed at my spouse. Everything I read in the Bible shows me this. Marriage is a metaphor for the relationship between God and the Church. Using something else to get aroused would be like saying you practice Wicca because it enhances your Christian walk. To me, it makes no sense.

      And no one has convinced me of these arguments. I wasn’t taught them by my church or anyone else. In fact, I once had the same rationalizations you do. I grew up believing masturbation was okay. I convinced myself that porn wasn’t bad. I saw it destroying my marriage and myself. Holding us back. Satan has already fooled me once. I won’t let him do it again. I learned from my mistakes and lament how long it took me to realize.

      Now, as for the being upstanding citizens in your church, reading your bible, etc.. We have many wolves in sheep’s clothing in our churches. Actually, I’ve found that those who appear more “righteous” tend to have the scariest skeletons in their closet. I’m sure you meant it as proof that doing all these things must make you right, but to me it works against you. It’s often the pastors and elders who have the biggest issues, especially sexual ones.

      But I appreciate your prayers and I’m sure all my readers do 🙂

  17. HigherQuest says:

    Jay Dee, your definition of biblical lust is wrong so of course your applications are wrong.

    There are many reasons why marriages are damaged in connection with porn, but none of them are based on the gentle and loving forms of porn itself – things like condemnation, hiding the use of porn, adultery resulting, fornication resulting, shame, depression, and stress all due to inaccurate reasonings as to why erotic imagery has no place in a Christian marriage. These and other things like them damage marriages. Enjoying a sexy image doesn’t do this. You only reference porn, but if you will be honest with the definition you ascribe to the word “Lust” your own TV and Movie watching fails the test of your definition. It’s just easier for you to deny it by choosing to attack the extreme end of the spectrum of which you partake of the other end, which by your definition is just as wrong.

    The Song of Solomon makes it clear that metaphors and objectification aren’t wrong in sexual areas. Only when it is used to form a demeaning approach to women is it wrong.

    I find it somewhat humorous that you think I’m angry. Nothing could be further from the truth. I feel a mix of humor for the struggle you are having supporting your position, and concern for you and others who hold such positions that can’t be supported biblically. Not even slightly angry… If I was uncertain of my beliefs or defensive I might feel anger, but because I am as confident in the accuracy of my position as I am there is no room for anger.

    I’m sorry porn was destroying your marriage. We find it a great enhancement, and our marriage has never been stronger. Go figure…

    Ah yes… now who is being defensive and falling back on negative aspersions on my character…a wolf in sheeps clothing. Ok, if you need to take that position to buttress your lack of biblical support for your position then go for it. I’m fine with my character and confident in the integrity of my heart. I’ve known me for a very long time and I’m pretty certain I know when I’m fooling myself into believing something that does little more than justify my flesh. But, if you need to call me names to support your lack of evidence then that’s between you and Jesus…not between you and me. I love how Paul addressed the Judaisers of his day, and I leave you with his words:

    1Corinthians 4:3  But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. 4  For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. 5  Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God. 

    As for me…I don’t judge the motives of your heart Jay Dee. I think you truly believe you have it right, and you believe your walk with God has so convinced you. That’s why I defer you to Him for confirmation of all you teach, rather than impune your character. He alone is the Way, the Truth, and the Life…not me and not you.

    1. Jay Dee says:

      Of course, you haven’t been able to show me that my view of biblical lust is wrong. And neither have I been able to convince you that yours is.

      You see my side having no biblical support and I see yours as having none. We are in a stale mate.

      So, in situations like this we must simply resolve to let the Holy Spirit do the convicting and one day we shall know the truth.

      In the meantime, you are welcome to continue reading, debating, or leave and dismiss this site. That’s up to you.

  18. HigherQuest says:

    Jay Dee,

    I will offer a few passing thoughts and then leave it up to you to end our dialogue if you like.

    I’ll set the scene for the scriptures I will share with an imaginary story:

    It was a warm Spring afternoon in the city of Corinth Greece, and three men all relating to their experience of the sex goddess Aphrodite and the Temple of Aphrodite on the AcroCorinthis of Corinth, in which 1000 temple prostitutes served at her altar, offering their bodies in spiritual/sexual service to the devotees of Aphrodite.

    Adolf, Aegus, and Aapo are our characters.

    Adolf was a current follower of Aphrodite and thoroughly enjoyed the sexual repertoire of the skilled temple prostitutes. As he left the temple he stopped by the temple meat market and chose a fine steak from the meats that had been offered at the temple earlier in the day, likely because the meat was sold at a bargain price before it went bad. He had thoroughly enjoyed himself with the prostitutes, and saw no wrong in it…after all it was spiritual worship as far as he was concerned.

    Aegus was a former follower of Aphrodite but had recently converted to Christ and had been admonished strongly by Paul to give up all involvement with the temple and its prostitutes, but he too needed some meat for his family and reasoned the meat was “just meat” and could be purchased at a bargain price so purchased some for his family, though he was well aware that some in the Corinthian Church fellowship would look down on him for doing so, because of its connection to the temple.

    Aapo was of a more fragile conscience, and he too was a recent convert to Christ, and felt it would be entirely inconsistent with his new faith to have anything to do with the temple and its meat offerings, so he purchased his evening meal’s meat from another market that had nothing to do with the temple and paid a higher price for it.

    Three men, three perspectives, and all acting on the basis of their belief systems. Very different approaches to life, but all in harmony with their own consciences. Into this setting Paul speaks.

    1Corinthians 8:4  Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” 5  For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— 6  yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. 7  However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8  Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do. 9  But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10  For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? 11  And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. 12  Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13  Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble. 

    And in a very similar vein he addresses the Romans who undoubtedly wrestled with the very same issues in Rome:

    Rom 13:13  Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. 14  But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires. 
    Romans 14:1  As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2  One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3  Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4  Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. 5  One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6  The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7  For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8  For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. 9  For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. 10  Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11  for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” 12  So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. 13  Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. 14  I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. 15  For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. 16  So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. 17  For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18  Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. 19  So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding. 
    Rom 14:20  Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. 21  It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. 22  The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 23  But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. 

    Two cities, two believer’s perspectives, and Paul respects both. So do I. I want everyone who visits Jay Dees blog site to know that I respect him and everyone who sees the Christian life and morality from his perspective. I have to. To do otherwise would fly in direct opposition to Paul’s very clear teaching.

    I don’t agree with Jay Dee and he doesn’t agree with me, but I do agree VERY much with his firm and resolute rejection of all forms of pornography and erotic imagery of all kinds. He believes what he believes based on his study of Scripture and his own conscience and experience, and I salute him for that. In fact, I would go a step further and say to him and to everyone of his persuasion…if you were to partake of anything erotic in nature, while holding the beliefs that Jay Dee holds you would be in direct violation of the Word of God and the Lord Himself, and I would encourage you to quickly desist, repent, and stay away from all of it.

    But, to those who see things from a different perspective, based on your study, your prayer, and your reflection on this issue, and you desire to enjoy the gentler and more loving forms of pornography…that is between you and God, and not first and foremost between you and Jay Dee.

    You know where I stand, and I stand there in as humble a place as I know how to do. I enjoy some of the gentler forms of pornography, expressed between a man and woman who are enjoying their sexuality and sharing their enjoyment with others. I grant you it is outside the spectrum of what most of us would consider acceptable entertainment, but for many believers like myself we see it as acceptable before the Lord and our relationship with Him remains intact and deep.

    Let each one make his own decision, as Paul encourages in these two passages, and live your lives before God in peace about it. My faith in Christ, as regards this matter, is intact and not compromised. I’ve given a great deal of time to study, prayer, and reflection, and I’m at peace with what I allow. If this doesn’t work for you then I encourage you to avoid it all entirely.

    Jay Dee, I fully expect you to disagree with me for applying these two passages to this subject…of course you would. But, the issue of meats was a gray area to some of our brethren in Rome and Greece, and it was a black and white issue to others believers in those cities. They argued, struggled, and railed on one another for their convictions. Into this situation Paul speaks great wisdom. I have settled on applying his wisdom to the areas we are addressing here. Some of you will not. That is fine. Let each one be convinced in his own mind before God and let charity guide our communications with one another. Jay Dee believes I am angry with him, but nothing could be further from the facts. I disagree with his conclusions but I’d fight to the death for his right to believe and express them, and I believe his integrity is solid.

    In my areas of influence I choose very carefully who I express my beliefs in this area with. It is delicate and fraught with strong emotion. But in environments like this, where we are debating perspectives, I feel fine with expressing myself just so long as we end with respecting each other and the final perspectives we hold. Perhaps Jay Dee will not be able to accord this grace towards me, and I will let that be between him and God. As for me…I thoroughly respect Jay Dee and I too previously held the very same beliefs he now holds. Things have changed my perspective and I’m happy they did, but if this has not happened for you then you must avoid it all together until your beliefs are solidly based in study and prayer.

    May God guide each of us into the truth as it is in Jesus, and walk it out privately and honorably before Him.

Share your thoughts