Why aren't Christians defeating the pornographers?

[Wheat Field]

According to a report by Dame Rachel de Souza (the UK's Children's Commissioner), 10% of 9 year olds have seen pornography. She also says there is evidence that shows a link between young people watching porn and incidents of child on child sexual abuse. In her words: "I am categorically clear: no child should be able to access or watch pornography." A study by Bernardo's found that more than half of child sexual abuse cases in the UK are perpetrated by children (2022 - up from a third in 2013).

Over a dozen states in the US have declared porn a public health crises.

According to Fight the New Drug:
Decades of studies from respected institutions have demonstrated significant impacts of porn consumption for individuals, relationships, and society. 73% of teens have seen porn. At least 1 in 3 porn videos show sexual violence of aggression. 53% of boys and 39% of girls believe pornography is a realistic depiction of sex. Porn consumers tend to be less satisfied in relationships, less committed, and more permissive of cheating. There is virtually no way to guarantee that pornographic content is consensual. Exploitation and trafficking are common experiences in the porn industry.

Why has there not been a concerted push back by Christians (who number some 2.38 billion people according to PEW research) against the pornographic industry? NCOSE (National Centre on Sexual Exploitation) began as a Christian movement and have had some limited success.

At the sermon on the mount Jesus said:
“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot. You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven."

Ellicott's commentary on this use of 'salt of the earth' states:
The words are spoken to the disciples in their ideal character, as the germ of a new Israel, called to a prophetic work, preserving the earth from moral putrescence and decay. The general reference to this antiseptic action of salt is enough to give an adequate meaning to the words...

At the very least, adults are failing to protect children from seeing this material - surely a damning indictment? We are failing because we could have made sure children were protected from seeing it BEFORE we allowed porn to be as accessible as it is. Anyone accessing porn (whether they are Christian or not) is fuelling the industry and may end up actually watching someone being raped.

Porn is damaging the whole of society - not just our children.

I will add that I am not pointing the finger at everyone but myself - on the contrary, I point at all of us.

 

[Wheat Field]

I would define "adultery" as taking someone else's spouse as your own sexually.
The same applies to giving yourself to another, if you are married.

This would make King David an adulterer the moment he took more concubines and wives (2 Samuel 5:13):
After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him.

1 Kings 15:5
because David did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, and had not turned aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of [the betrayal of] Uriah the Hittite.

 

[Hopeful 2]

This would make King David an adulterer the moment he took more concubines and wives (2 Samuel 5:13):
After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him.

It would indeed, if those women had already been someone else' wife.

1 Kings 15:5
because David did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, and had not turned aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of [the betrayal of] Uriah the Hittite.

 

[Wheat Field]

It would indeed, if those women had already been someone else' wife.

You don't consider polygamy as wrong?

The additional concubines and wives were women sleeping with another woman's husband.

 

[Hopeful 2]

You don't consider polygamy as wrong?

No, I don't.
If the husband has the wherewithal and love for two or more wives, I see nothing against it.

The additional concubines and wives were women sleeping with another woman's husband.

The other wives may be sleeping with the other wives' husband, but not to the detriment or risk to any of the other wives'.
All the wives know what is going on.

 

[Wheat Field]

No, I don't.
If the husband has the wherewithal and love for two or more wives, I see nothing against it.

You think Jesus squared such a view with his assertion that just looking at a woman with lust was adultery of the heart?

Matthew 5:27,28
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

The other wives may be sleeping with the other wives' husband, but not to the detriment or risk to any of the other wives'.
All the wives know what is going on.

I am astonished that you think Jesus Christ would condone this. The only hope for Christianity, imho, is that polygamy was permitted - just as Jesus said that Moses permitted divorce:

Matthew 19:8,9
"Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Why would Jesus say that such a person was committing adultery? Isn't it obvious that it's because God considers them still married? The divorce isn't valid, Jesus is saying - you are still married. This clearly and unambiguously proscribes polygamy.

Where that leaves Jesus with regard to King David, Abraham and Jacob etc is profoundly unclear.

 

[Hopeful 2]

You think Jesus squared such a view with his assertion that just looking at a woman with lust was adultery of the heart?

I have no doubt that He did.
Seeing and realizing a woman is beautiful, doesn't have to go on to lustful thoughts.

I am astonished that you think Jesus Christ would condone this.

You seem to think that realizing some woman is pretty automatically means you will lust after her.
I don't.

The only hope for Christianity, imho, is that polygamy was permitted

I can't agree.
How many of the men written of in the epistles had more than one wife ?
Zero !
Christianity was doing nicely without polygamy, thank you.

- just as Jesus said that Moses permitted divorce:
Matthew 19:8,9
"Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

I don't see how that ties into polygamy.

Why would Jesus say that such a person was committing adultery? Isn't it obvious that it's because God considers them still married?

Obviously.
They were one flesh, so still married, in God's eyes.

The divorce isn't valid, Jesus is saying - you are still married. This clearly and unambiguously proscribes polygamy.

This clearly prohibits divorce, except for adultery.
If you think it proscribes anything, you should recalibrate your basis for that thought.

Where that leaves Jesus with regard to King David, Abraham and Jacob etc is profoundly unclear.

Where in the Law, or anywhere else, is it written that a man can ONLY have one wife ?
If something isn't banned by Law, it isn't a sin.
You are just anti-polygamy, but without a clear reason to be so.

 

[citrus]

I was following on social media a woman who was trying to get out of being a porn star. How they push being a porn star as something great. She got out had a family and 3 children. She was very vocal about how in reality it is not glamorous. Women would get ripped down there, go to the doctor and before they could ever heal they throw men on her and it burst again. She has to do more than 10 men a day and all the permission of things like 3 sums ect. She said she had so many stds and she was trying to escape the place. It's disturbing. Then now their is child porn. People start child for play. Asian girls are hard to guess their age sense a lot of them look so young. Even grown up Asians will do for play. The world is disturbing. Eating sushi off a person, raping children, sex trafficking, people going to the restroom. It's maddening. I'm so furious at it. Now a days it is much more perverted especially with children. They beat children and women, rape them, tey to kill them. Do all kinds of evil things. It breaks up the family structure and every things else. It is not intimacy. The world has become so Demonic and comes after children. They come after the seed. We gotta do better. That lady was trying to get her life together and sin over took her, something bad happened and she ended up she killed herself. Reminds me of Lots wife. Noone can fix another person. Life is their choice of what we make of it and it's a terrible world where people can't find their identity. It seems like the last thing they will do is find their identity in christ and not this world. Children cannot be children anymore. This is an entire new generation and we got to be the voice of those who have no voice. I knew a guy who I went to high school with who was in Christian scene at school. He did not go to church with me. I knew him by school. He ended up going to jail for child porn. Don't let it slip in. It will not help your bedroom life. It will not bring true intimacy. You let a little slip in here and there and before you know it your consumed with it. Those bondages (not for play bondage) all bondages need to be broken and people need to get free from it. But noone can fix a person. We can warn them, but can't fix them. We can pray for them and those trying to get out and for healing of trauma to the children that God protects their minds. One day all will have to face God and be judged weither somone goes to prison or gets away from those consequences. Light needs to shine in that darkness and we have to go to war in prayer. One day everything will conevto light and be revealed abd unfold in front of everyone and God is either going to say we'll done or leave I never knew you. If someone is into porn please get help and get rid of it. It's robbing you. It is the counterfeit of intimacy. Please seek help!

 

[citrus]

Pray about these teens being raised on pop stars and the idea that being a porn star is glamorous and desirable. Buying porn bunny perfume and thinking this is a great achievement. Same with boys. Babies having babies. Babies abortioning babies.

 

[Wheat Field]

Hi Wheat Field


I mean, this is your post where you claim that polygamy was codified in the law. Immediately after that statement you posted a reference to Matthew 5:27-28. What did I miss?

Deuteronomy 21:10 says nothing, in my translation of the Scriptures in reference to polygamy: When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives,... Then God's word explains what you are to do to marry a woman taken captive in some battle.

Apologies miamited - it's Deuteronomy 21:15,16
If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love.

Exodus 21:10 does not codify polygamy, but it does mention what a husband is to do if he has more than one wife.

It's still allowing polygamy.

I'm curious. In your understanding, does the fact that David had an illicit affair with Bethsheba mean that God approves of adultery? As I mentioned earlier, we're all sinners and that started with Eve. According to God's word there is no one righteous... no, not one. The Scriptures never make polygamy a part of the law. Polygamy was a cultural issue and that is always going to be a problem in juxtaposition to God's word. But it did happen! Just as David had an affair. Cain slew Abel. Aaron's sons sinned. The Scriptures are full of people striving to live as God has asked us, but fall to temptation and sin. That's why Jesus had to die.

God explicitly condemns David for his affair with Bathsheba and his treatment of Uriah - 2 Samuel 12:1-10 and 1 Kings 15:5. I am not aware of any OT scripture that condemns his or anyone else's polygamy. Instead, we have laws that appear to condone it. However, in the NT Jesus does push back against such permissiveness it would seem:

Matthew 5:27,28
You have heard it said thou shalt not commit adultery - but anyone who looks at a woman with lust has committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 19:9
Any one who divorces his wife except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.

If God could have just made men be faithful to Him in all of their living, then Jesus wouldn't have had to die. People would have been saved by keeping the law... but no one can keep the law.

Indeed.

However, you're young, and I remember my days of youth. I was all into evolution and multiple trillions of years old universe. But for me, I took God up on His challenge and in doing so, that settled things in my mind. Perhaps one day you will also come to the realization of God's truth. As believers, we plant seeds. We encourage others to seek for the truth. But not all do. The Scriptures are pretty clear on that.

God bless,
Ted

I'm not young

Plenty of Christians believe in evolution.

 

[Wheat Field]

Hi Wheat Field

Anyway, bringing this back to the OP discussion. What I can tell you is that Ellicot was wrong.

There is nowhere in the Scriptures where we are ever encouraged or shown some example whereby we should think that christians are to preserve the earth from the moral putrescence and decay. The world has always been going to get worse and worse as time marches inexorably to the last day of this created realm. Just as God told Abraham that he wasn't going to go into the land of promise in his lifetime because the sin of the Amorites had not reached its fullness. We presently live in the days of God's patience for as many who will hear, to come to understand and accept His truth and trust that He really wants the best for us. But the sin of man has not reached its fullness yet.

What the Scriptures teach is that we are to rid such putrescence and decay from our own lives. We are to live in the world and understand that the sin of the world is going to grow and grow and become ever more pervasive with each generation, as it has been doing since time on this earth began. We are to understand that such is the known and foretold future from God of 'how exactly' life on this planet is going to go. But for those who have heard the message and turned to Jesus for forgiveness of their sin and repented of their sin, they then strive to rid their lives of the putrescence and decay that now they know infests their lives here on the earth.

But since Jesus' death, followers have never been given any orders or shown any examples that they are in any way responsible for the putrescence and decay that is out there in the world. That's going to come and it's going to get a whole lot worse. You can take that promise to heart whether you believe in God or not. The only way it gets better is that Jesus returns to rule and reign for 1,000 years upon the earth. That ushers in the final judgment when the fate of each person is sealed.

God bless,
Ted

I do see what you are saying. However, if a Christian has the chance to do as William Wilberforce did in 1833 (but now with pornography), then I am sure you would agree that it would be in line with Jesus' teaching on the parable of the talents where each are given according to their ability.

 

[Wheat Field]

I have no doubt that He did.
Seeing and realizing a woman is beautiful, doesn't have to go on to lustful thoughts.

My actual point was that in Mathew 5:27-28, Jesus is talking about men who are married looking lustfully at other women. He affirms that it is essentially adultery.

What difference is there between this and a married man intending to become a polygamist? He already has a wife and then decides to take on another. Jesus proscribes it.

You seem to think that realizing some woman is pretty automatically means you will lust after her.
I don't.

I have no idea why you are saying this.

I can't agree.
How many of the men written of in the epistles had more than one wife ?
Zero !
Christianity was doing nicely without polygamy, thank you.

Again, I don't understand why you have written this. You are the one that thinks polygamy isn't wrong.

I don't see how that ties into polygamy.

Obviously.
They were one flesh, so still married, in God's eyes.

And therefore marrying an additional wife is wrong.

This clearly prohibits divorce, except for adultery.
If you think it proscribes anything, you should recalibrate your basis for that thought.

Where in the Law, or anywhere else, is it written that a man can ONLY have one wife ?
If something isn't banned by Law, it isn't a sin.
You are just anti-polygamy, but without a clear reason to be so.

If you proved that Jesus approved of polygamy then I am sure that Christians would leave the faith in droves.

Matthew 12:25b
“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand."

If Jesus considered polygamy lawful then there wouldn't be any reason to rebuke married men looking at other women with lust; looking so at another woman could just be the prelude to marrying her.

Saying Jesus approved of polygamy makes a mockery of thou shalt not commit adultery.

Romans 7:1-3
Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man.

 

[miamited]

I do see what you are saying. However, if a Christian has the chance to do as William Wilberforce did in 1833 (but now with pornography), then I am sure you would agree that it would be in line with Jesus' teaching on the parable of the talents where each are given according to their ability.

Hi Wheat Field

Yes, I would agree that anytime we do things that alleviate pain in the lives of others, that we are practicing values that Jesus taught. However, just because someone does something that seems good on a human scale, doesn't get them any closer to following Jesus, and may, in fact, have nothing to do with following Jesus.

But there is no command from the Scriptures that working to rid the world of sinful activity is a believer's responsibility under God. As far as I understand the Scriptures, and Jesus' words to us, we are to strive to rid our personal lives of sin and to example that to others in our lives.

God bless,
Ted

 

[citrus]

Apologies miamited - it's Deuteronomy 21:15,16
If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love.

It's still allowing polygamy.

God explicitly condemns David for his affair with Bathsheba and his treatment of Uriah - 2 Samuel 12:1-10 and 1 Kings 15:5. I am not aware of any OT scripture that condemns his or anyone else's polygamy. Instead, we have laws that appear to condone it. However, in the NT Jesus does push back against such permissiveness it would seem:

Matthew 5:27,28
You have heard it said thou shalt not commit adultery - but anyone who looks at a woman with lust has committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 19:9
Any one who divorces his wife except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.

Indeed.

I'm not young

Plenty of Christians believe in evolution.

That's interesting and all, but off subject I believe

 

[citrus]

That's interesting and all, but off subject I believe

I'm referring to evolution being a different topic than this topic

 

[citrus]

I'm referring to evolution being a different topic than this topic

Sorry didn't mean to quote myself. I don't know how not to. Or maybe I'm figuring it out

 

[Hopeful 2]

My actual point was that in Mathew 5:27-28, Jesus is talking about men who are married looking lustfully at other women. He affirms that it is essentially adultery.

I agree.

What difference is there between this and a married man intending to become a polygamist? He already has a wife and then decides to take on another. Jesus proscribes it.

The difference is "looking lustfully".
A righteous man wanting to take a second woman to be his wife need not involve lust.

I have no idea why you are saying this.

Just trying to see your point.

Again, I don't understand why you have written this. You are the one that thinks polygamy isn't wrong.

I don't think it must be wrong.
It can be good.
You wrote..."The only hope for Christianity, imho, is that polygamy was permitted".
You make it look like that without polygamy, the church wouldn't have survived.

And therefore marrying an additional wife is wrong.

If it is wrong for you...don't do it.

If you proved that Jesus approved of polygamy then I am sure that Christians would leave the faith in droves.

If some folks can't, or wont, understand things presented by their pastors, including polygamy, let them leave.

If Jesus considered polygamy lawful then there wouldn't be any reason to rebuke married men looking at other women with lust; looking so at another woman could just be the prelude to marrying her.

It seems obvious that that married man wasn't interested in marriage.
Only in sex.

Saying Jesus approved of polygamy makes a mockery of thou shalt not commit adultery.

It surprises me that the only allure marriage has with you, is sex.

Romans 7:1-3
Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man.

Paul is addressing women, not men.
How many women ever had more than one husband ?

 

[Christ_empowered]

Maybe it’s not God’s will for us to defeat the porn industry? Prostitution was openly practiced into the 20th century all over America. Some of the females involved were 12 years old some younger I think . Maybe a more constructive approach is to be light unto a dark and dying generation just like generations of Christians before us were to those on the broad road around them. And…
I do think a more livable world will involve economic changes and regulations that at least soften capitalism’s effects on people. Worker’s rights unions universal basic income etc.

 

[Wheat Field]

I agree.

The difference is "looking lustfully".
A righteous man wanting to take a second woman to be his wife need not involve lust.

Just trying to see your point.

I don't think it must be wrong.
It can be good.
You wrote..."The only hope for Christianity, imho, is that polygamy was permitted".
You make it look like that without polygamy, the church wouldn't have survived.

If it is wrong for you...don't do it.

If some folks can't, or wont, understand things presented by their pastors, including polygamy, let them leave.

It seems obvious that that married man wasn't interested in marriage.
Only in sex.

It surprises me that the only allure marriage has with you, is sex.

Paul is addressing women, not men.
How many women ever had more than one husband ?

Before I answer in full, please would you tell me if God approves of men having concubines? According to www.christianity.com a concubine is defined as:

'A woman acquired by a man as a secondary wife. Her purpose was to provide a male heir in the case of a barren wife, to provide more children in general to enhance the family’s workforce and wealth, and to satisfy the man’s sexual desires. A concubine was endowed with rights and protections by Hebrew law but was not equal in status to a wife'.

Abraham and David had concubines (Genesis 25:6, 2 Samuel 5:13).

 

[Hopeful 2]

Before I answer in full, please would you tell me if God approves of men having concubines? According to www.christianity.com a concubine is defined as:

'A woman acquired by a man as a secondary wife. Her purpose was to provide a male heir in the case of a barren wife, to provide more children in general to enhance the family’s workforce and wealth, and to satisfy the man’s sexual desires. A concubine was endowed with rights and protections by Hebrew law but was not equal in status to a wife'.

Abraham and David had concubines (Genesis 25:6, 2 Samuel 5:13).

In those days of agricultural living, the more kids you had the more likely you were to be successful.
Whether or not God ever approved of concubines, I know not.
Just as I can't say if He ever disapproved of them.

 

[Wheat Field]

In those days of agricultural living, the more kids you had the more likely you were to be successful.
Whether or not God ever approved of concubines, I know not.
Just as I can't say if He ever disapproved of them.

You are aware that concubines served to sexually satisfy a man who's wife couldn't or wouldn't and yet you cannot say if God approved of it or not?

We know that Moses permitted divorce for all sorts of reasons - reasons other than the only one Jesus said justified a divorce. We also know He boldly asserted, 'it was not like this in the beginning'. It perhaps wouldn't be leap to infer the same about polygamy.

Do you dispute the translation from the Greek of 1 Timothy 3:2 - a 'one woman man'? Even if we take the more liberal interpretation of 'faithful to his wife', it is clear that having more than one is not considered above reproach and is equated with other 'sins' like drunkenness and violence.

How is it possible to be faithful to one's wife if you have more than one? Paul does NOT say faithful to one's wives.

1 Timothy 3:1-7
Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full[a] respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.