D O E S PORN EI A M E A N F O R N I C A T I O N ?

BY

DR. BRUCE MALINA

Omaha,

Nebraska

In contemporary English usage, fornication means " i : human

sexual intercourse other than between a man and his wife : sexual
intercourse between a spouse and an unmarried person; sexual
intercourse between unmarried peopleused in some translations
(as AV, DV) of the Bible (as in Mt. V 32) for unchastity (as in the
RSV) or immorality (as in NCE) to cover all sexual intercourse
except between husband and wife or concubine
2 : sexual intercourse on the part of an unmarried person accomplished with
consent and not deemed adultery" *). This definition is clearly
bound up with biblical exegesis and mirrors the opinion of most,
if not all, exegetes who take up the task of describing what the
N.T. authors call pomeia. Thus, for example, BAUER-ARNDTGINGRICH hold that pomeia
means "prostitution, unchastity,
fornication, of every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse* ' 2 ). ALLO,
like most commentators 3 ), points out that "pomeia, chez Paul,
*) Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary

(Springfield, Mass., 1967) 329.

GINGRICH,

) W.

BAUER,

W.

F.

ARNDT,

and

F. W .

Greek-English

Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago, 1957) 699-700.

3
) E . P. ALLO, Premire pitre aux Corinthiens (tudes Bibliques, Paris,
1934) 117; note also, e.g., C. . BARRETT, A Commentary on the First Epistle
to the Corinthians (New York, 1968) 121 : " . . . in the New Testament however
it (/wrftita-fornication) is regularly used for unchastity and sexual irregularity
of almost a n y kind"; O. J. BAAB, "Fornication," I DB II, 321 : " I n the N.T.
the words for 'fornication', 'to practice fornication' etc. refer t o every kind
of sexual intercourse outside of marriage"; K. GRAYSTN, "Adultery,
Fornication, Harlot, Whore, etc.", in A. RICHARDSON (ed.), A Theological
Word Book of the Bible (New York, 1950) 16: "Fornication (znh, porneia) is
sexual intercourse outside marriage or even sensuality in general"; F. W.
H A L L , "Adultery (Christian)," in J. HASTINGS (ed.), Encyclopaedia
of
Religion and Ethics I (Edinburgh, 1908) 132: "This (the word
porneiafornication) serves to include all those 'lusts of the flesh which war against
the soul' (1 P. ii, 11) . . . ." In HALL'S description of "fornication", the word
refers to all extramarital sexual relations without distinction; cf. also M. S.
KNSLIN, The Ethics of Paul (Nashville, 1957) 154-156; H. LESTRE, "Fornication", DB II, 2314-2317; etc. Naturally this list could be extended indefinitely.

DOKS MEAN FORNICATION?

II

moins que le contexte n'indique la fornication au sense propre,

signifie toute espce de drglement charnel". And in their article
dealing with the word group "pome kll." in TDNT VI, HAUCK and
SCHULZ write: ' T h e N.T. is characterized by an unconditional
repudiation of all extra-marital and unnatural intercourse. In this
respect it follows to a large degree the judgment of O.T. and
Israelite preaching and transcends the legalistic practice of later
Judaism, which is shown to be inadequate by the Word of Jesus" 1 ).
Now the question I wish to pose here is the following: does the
N.T. usage of the pomeia word group in fact cover all the meanings
generally given the word group by the lxica and commentaries, or
do the meanings ascribed to the word group rather derive from
later usage and later moral judgment deriving from a historically
and culturally conditioned version of N.T. morality ? In other words,
is the description of pomeia offered by the lxica and commentaries
and subsequent versions the result of exegesis or eisegesis? And
specifically, does pomeia mean fornication ?
The N.T. evidence is not at all clear 2 ). The pomeia word group
occurs in the following types of texts: i) apocalypticwith general
reference to idolatry in an apocalyptic mood: Apoc. ii 14, 20, 2 1 ;
ix 2 1 ; xiv 8; xvii 1, 2, 4, 5, 15, 16; xviii 3, 9; xix 2; xxi 8; xxii 15;
2) the sin catalogues: Mk. vii 2 1 ; Mt. xv 9; Gal. 16; 1 Cor. i i ;
vi 9; 1 Tm. i 10; 3) passages aimed at Christian proselytizing or
instruction: Acts xv 20, 29; xxi 25; 1 Cor. 8; 1 Thes. iv 3; Heb.
xiii 4 ; and perhaps also here : Mt. 32 ; xix 9 ; 4) development of an
earlier instructional form similar to the Qumran triad of "worst of
*) p. 590
) The O.T. is much clearer; cf. GHAYSTON, art. cit., 16-17: " I n the O.T.
there is no condemnation of sexual relations that do not violate the marriage
bond . . . Opposition to fornication arises entirely from its connexion with
religious prostitution (cf. Lev. xxi 7.9)"; and especially L. M. EPSTEIN,
Sex Laws and Customs in Judaism (New York, 1967, reprint of 1948) 167:
"The Bible does not seem to consider non-commercial and unpremeditated
sexual contact between a man and an unmarried woman as harlotry. In fact
the Bible has no prohibition against it, either for the man or for the woman.
I t takes up this subject only in connection with the rape or seduction of a
virgin, and there is is treated not as a moral crime, but as a civil case against
the man for theft of virginity. That the family was outraged by such an act,
there is no doubt, and in the older law the case was left to the family to
square it with the offender, upon whom was visited the full horror of the
ancient blood revenge. B u t from the time of the earliest formulation of
biblical law, the family could do nothing but demand payment for the stolen
virginity or give the giri in marriage to the ravisher. This done, the girl was
not a harlot and the man was not a criminal."
2

12

KUCK MALINA

all sins": Eph. 3; Col. iii 5;

5) solutions to concrete problems:
1 Cor. v-vii [1 Cor. ; vi 13, 18; vii 2]; 2 Cor. xii 21; 6) simple
reference to prostitutes: Mt. xxi 31, 32; Lk. xv 30; Jn. viii 41. If
the above groups of texts be perused with a view to the contextual
clarity that might be shed on the meaning of the pomeia word
group, then only the first and last two groups prove to be somewhat
self-explanatory. As a matter of fact, the only clear meanings
deriving from even these three groups is that pomeia refers to
idolatry and the cultic sexual practices bound up with it (in Ap) ;
that pomeia means incest (1 Cor. v-vi) ; and that a pome is a com
mercial harlot (Mt. xxi 31, 32; Lk. xv 30). This fact means that for
the other meanings ascribed to the pomeia word group, recourse
must be had to traditional or contemporary literature and usage,
and that it is from this literature and usage that the meaning of the
word group in all its ramifications is derived. How then have the
aforementioned texts been explained ? A survey of current views on
the matter would yield the following:
1) Ap. is clarified in terms of Hos. vi 10; Jcr. iii 39; 2 Kgs. ix
22 *) ; hence the general meaning of idolatry and/or cultic prostitu
tion.
2) The sin catalogues are viewed in the light of contemporary
Hellenistic vice lists used both within and without Jewish circles
but the items listed are clearly non-self-explanatory. Pomeia, in
ordinary Greek usage, meant commercial and/or cultic prostitu
tion 2 ).
3) The proselytizing texts, especially the so-called Apostolic
decree, use the word pomeia to cover the deviant lines of conduct
listed in Lv. xviii 6-23; this listing comprises one of the six in
junctions of the Law of Moses binding the sojourner in Israel,
*) See, e.g. A. MAHONEY, "A New Look at the Divorce' Clauses in Matt
32 and x i x / 9 " , CBQ 30 (1968) 3 1 ; HAUCK/SCHULZ, art. cit., 594-595 and
the commentaries. The sin-lists in Ap. would naturally derive from the
following category.
2
) For the ordinary Greek usage, see HAUCK/SCHULZ, art. cit., 580-581;
and on the sin-lists H. M. H U G H E S , "The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch:
Introduction", in R. H. CHARLES (ed.), The Apocrypha and
Pseudepigrapha
of the O.T. IT (Oxford, 1913) 528-529; G. VON R A D , "The Early History of
the Form-Category of 1 Corinthians xiii 4-7", in The Problem of the Hexateuch
and Other Essays (New York, 1966) 301-317; and the discussion and literature
cited by H. CONZELMANN, An Outline of the Theology of the New
Testament,
trans. J. B O W D E N (New York, 1968) 91-93.

DOKS FORNICATION ?

13

hence Gentile Christians living among Jewish Christians *). In this

case pomeia would include : incest (Lv. xviii 6-18) ; sexual relations
during the menstrual period of one's wife (v. 19); adultery (v. 20);
sacrifice to Moloch [perhaps interpreted of mixed marriages, as in
T.J. I Lv. 18, 21] (v. 21) ; homosexuality (v. 22) ; and bestiality
(v. 23). To this listing, commercial prostitution ought be added as
well; this pomeia is expressly prohibited in Dt. xxiii 18 (cf T.J. I
and LXX) and was the sin of the desert generation referred to by
Paul in 1 Cor. 8 2 ).
4) As for Eph. 3 and Col. iii 5, H. G. KUHN has rightly inter
preted Eph. 3 in the light of Qumran usage 3 ) . And since Col. iii 5
is more or less parallel to Eph. 3, it would seem that Qumran
usage ought be used to clarify it as well. What meaning, then, do
the Qumran circles give to zenuth-pomeia ? The texts available
include: iQS 1, 6; 4, 10; CD 2, 16; 4, 17, 20; 7, 1; 8, 5; 19, 7 4 ).
1

) See K. L A K E , " T h e Apostolic Council of J e r u s a l e m " , in F . J . F O A K K S

JACKSON a n d lv. L A K E (cds.), The Beginnings of Christianity

V (reprints
G r a n d Rapids, 196G) o6-2o<); K. HAKNCIIKN, Die Awstclgcschichtc ( ' :
Kritisch-exegetischer K o m m e n t a r , Gtlingcn,| 1961, 4 1 _ 4 3 ' C l *dso E .
S E L W Y N , The First Epistle of St. Peter (New York, 1946) 365-466.
2
) F o r a list of t e x t s in translation which p r e s e n t t h e traditional exegesis
of t h i s incident, see G. V E R M E S , Scripture and Tradition in Judaism (Studia
Post-Biblica IV, Leiden, 1961) 162-164.
3
) K. G. K U H N , " T h e Epistle t o t h e E p h e s i a n s in t h e Light of t h e Q u m r a n
T e x t s " , in J . M U R P H Y - O ' C O N N O R (ed.), Paul and Qumran (London, 1968),
121-122.
4
) i Q S 1, 6 : zenth m e a n s " a l l m a n n e r of evil" (cf. CD 2, 16). i Q S 4, 10:
" d e e d s of a b o m i n a t i o n c o m m i t t e d in a spirit of zenth" is contrasted in 4, 3
w i t h " a spirit of a d m i r a b l e p u r i t y which detests all unclean idols", i.e. either
i d o l a t r y or t h e practices of t h e nations in Lv. xviii.
CD 2, 16: zenth means to forsake t h e c o v e n a n t of God a n d chose one's
own will (cf. CD 3, 11-12).
CD 4,20: zenth refers either t o p o l y g a m y or re-marriage; see A. ISAKSSON,
Marriage and Ministry in the New Temple : A Study with Special Reference to
Mt ig,3-i2 and 1 Cor 11,3-16 (Acta Seminarli Neotestamentici Upsaliensis 24,
L u n d , 1969) 57-63; on t h e t h r e e things listed in CD 4, 15-16, cf. t h e three
listed in Test. Levi 14, 5-8 a n d t h e three things of J u b 7, 20. R. H . CHARLES,
The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
etc., op. cit., 312-313 interprets Test.
Levi 14, 5-8 in t h e light of t h e Psalms of Solomon, esp. 8, 7-15 where pomeia
refers t o : a d u l t e r y , incest, prostitution, mixed marriages, unlawful intercourse d u r i n g m e n s t r u a t i o n .
CD 7, 1 : " t o refrain from zenth", cf. C. R A B I N , The Zadokile
Documents
(Oxford, 1958) 26, w h o holds zenth here means sexual relations or marriage
w i t h women who h a d before been married incestuously (cf. CD 4, 20such a
w o m a n is a zonah, a n d cf. t h e R a b b i n i c notion of a zonah, described below).
CD 8, 5 // 19, 7 : see R A B I N , op. cit., 3 3 : t h e w a y s of zenth refers to incest
or sexual c o n t a c t w i t h those once guilty of incest as in CD 7, 1.

*4

MALINA

And these bear thematic relationships to the sphere of ideas devel

oped in Jubilees 7, 20-21; 20, 2-6; 30, 7; 33, 13-20; 39, 6; 41, 25; cf.
also 25, 1-7 x ). In the Qumran texts the word zenuth bears the fol
lowing meanings, so far as the context allows one to gather them :
polygamy (perhaps in the sense of second marriages in one's life
time 2) ) ; non-observance of the laws of Lv. xviii ; doing what is
right in one's own eyes and following a stubborn heart i.e., dis
regarding God's commands in general; idolatry (or following the
practices of the nations listed in Lv. xviii).
In Jubilees, por neta means: adultery, incest, mixed marriages,
transgressing orders (the "watchers" or "sons of God" of Gn. vi),
perhaps like homosexuality.
5) In 1 Cor. v-vi pomeia refers to incest throughout 3 ), or to the
other deviant lines of conduct listed in Lv. xviii. 2 Cor. xii 21
would refer to something similar because of the explicit mention of
ritual mourning" 4 ).
6) Mt. xxi 31, 32; Lk. xv 30; J n . viii 41; these usages refer to a
professional harlot, i.e. a paid prostituteunless the texts be inter
preted in the light of the Rabbinic meaning of zonah - pome, cf.
below.
From all of the above instances, it would seem quite clear that
pomeia means: 1) unlawful sexual intercourse; 2) specifically,
*) Jub 7, 20-21: pomeia refers t o the " w a t c h e r s ' " intercourse with the
daughters of men, against the law of their (the watchers') ordinances.
Jub 20, 3-5 : the pomeia mentioned here includes that punishable with fire,
hence incest (see Jub 41, 25 where the crime thus punishable is incest);
mixed marriages (see Jub 30, 7 where mixed marriages too are punishable
b y fire); the crime of the "watchers" (see Jub 7, 20-21) and sodomy.
Jub 33, 2 0 : in the context of Jul) 33, 13-20, the statement: "There is no
greater sin than the pomeia which they c o m m i t " refers to incest.
Jub 39, 6: refers t o the pomeia warned against b y Abraham in Jub 20, 3 ;
this pomeia then is " t h a t no man should commit 'fornication' with a woman
who has a husband", hence adultery. Considering the aboVe texts along
with those cited b y HAUCK/SCHULZ, op. cit., 587-589 for "later Judaism",
the conclusion offered by these authors, 5 8 7 : "pomeia can then come
to mean 'sexual intercourse' in gen. without more precise definition," is
simply misleading, if not altogether false. I t would rather seem t h a t the
word had a fairly concrete meaning, i.e. unlawful sexual intercourse in the
sense of prohibited by Torah.
a
) See the study of ISAKRSON, cited above, p. 13, note 4.
a
) See U. KBMPTIIOKNH, "Incest and the Body of Christ: A Study of 1
Corinthians VI. 12-20", NTS 14 (1967/68) 568-574.
4
) See Jean H E R I N G , The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, trans.
A. W.

H E A T H C O T E and

P. J. ALLCOCK (London, 1962)

35.

J)()KS MEAN FORNICATION?

15

sexual intercourse with a cultic or commercial prostitute; 3)

unlawful conduct in general. What makes a given line of conduct
pomeia, hence unlawful, is that it is expressly prohibited by
Torahboth oral and written x). Now it would appear that in no
case is pre-betrothal, non-commercial, non-cultic heterosexual
intercourse (what is commonly called "fornication" today) pro
hibited! The obvious reason for this is that there is no injunction in
2
the Torah prohibiting such "fornication" ).
Yet in Rabbinic tradition there is one voice that seems to op
pose this viewand with BILLERBECK 3) much is made of this
isolated opinion 4 ). The view is that of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus
(ca. 90), the well known, stalwarth traditionalist 5 ) . His statement
seems originally to have been a commentary on Lv. xxi 7: "They
(priests) shall not marry a woman degraded by harlotry, nor shall
they marry one divorced from her husband" (JPSA version; RSV
somewhat different). The halakic-exegetical problem this verse
posed was: who is to be considered a zonah ("woman degraded by
harlotry"). The classical Rabbinic commentary on the passage is to
be found in M. Yeb. VI,, 5: "A common priest may not m a n y a
1
) I n o t h e r words, t o belabor t h e obvious, t h e N T , as t h e Bible in general,
does n o t forbid " u n n a t u r a l " sexual intercourse; it forbids unlawful (hence
" u n c l e a n " ) sexual intercourse. T h a t unlawful sexual intercourse might also
be " u n n a t u r a l " is beside t h e p o i n t a n d p e r h a p s incomprehensible in i s t
c e n t u r y c u l t u r e ; cf. H . K O E S T E R , "Nomos Physeos: T h e Concept of N a t u r a l
L a w in Greek T h o u g h t " , in J . N E U S N E R (ed.), Religions in Antiquity (Supple
m e n t s t o N u m e n X I V , Leiden, 1968) 521-541. T h e p o i n t is t h a t it is unlawful,
p r o h i b i t e d b y t h e T o r a h , hence b y God. I n t h e i s t c e n t u r y perspective,
p r o s t i t u t i o n , a d u l t e r y a n d incest are j u s t as " u n n a t u r a l " as homosexuality.
2
) Cf. p . 11, n o t e 2 above a n d p . 16, n o t e 1 below. See also t h e interesting
series of exempta in The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan, trans. J. GOLDIN
(New H a v e n , 1955), c h a p 16, 83-85, specifically t h e reasons why t h e Uabbis in
question avoid sexual intercourse in t h e situations in which t h e y find t h e m
selves.
3
) H. STRACK and P. BILLERBECK, Kommentar zum N.T. aus Talmud und
Midrasch I I I (Munich, 1926) 342-343.
4
) Thus, e.g., H A U C K / S C H U L Z , art. cit., 589: " I t is forbidden for a J e w t o
m a r r y a proselyte prior t o conversion, a freed woman, or a woman guilty of
cohabitation outside marriage or illegitimately" (italics mine). T h e proof for
t h e foregoing s t a t e m e n t cited in n o t e 55 is: " J e b 6, 5 (61b); S T R . - B . , I l l ,
342 f." T h u s t h e a u t h o r s would h a v e us believe t h a t " a woman guilty of
c o h a b i t a t i o n outside m a r r i a g e " is t h e zonah spoken of in Yeb. VI, 5 ( 6 1 b )
which is only t h e opinion of R. Eliezer, see below. It certainly is not t h e
general R a b b i n i c opinion, a n d hence should n o t be cited as characteristic of
R a b b i n i c usage.
5
) On R. Eliezer, see S. M E N D E L S O H N , "Eliezer (Liezer) ben H y r c a n u s " ,
Jewish Encyclopedia V, 113-115.

BRUCE MALINA

sterile woman unless he already had a wife and children. R. Judah

says : Although he already had a wife or children he may not marry
a sterile woman, for such is the harlot spoken of in the Law. But the
Sages say : the harlot refers only to a female proselyte, or to a freed
bondwoman, or to one that suffered connexion of the nature of
fornication* ' *). Siphra on 21, 7 (ed. WEISS-SCHOSBERG, 94b) cites
the above opinions and adds in conclusion: " R . Eliezer says: Also
if an unmarried male (pany) has sexual intercourse with an
unbetrothed, unmarried female (penyah) without the intention of
marriage." Talmudic tradition rounds off R. Eliezer's statement
with a final clause to make it more relevant as commentary on the
M. Yeb. VI, 5 opinion of the Sages: " . . . h e makes her a zonah'*
(Yeb. 76a); or more commonly: " . . . this is precisely connection
of the nature of fornication" (Shab. 51a; j . Shab. XIV, 14a; Yeb.
61b; j . Yeb. VI, 7b; VII, 8b; et passim).
To my knowledge, this statement of R. Eliezer's has received two
general and deviant interpretations in Rabbinic tradition, that of
Rashi and that of R. Amram. Rashi knew it, yet reads it as not
referring to pre-betrothal, pre-marital intercourse at all 2 ), perhaps
because "Scripture prescribes no punishment for a woman who
was unchaste before betrothal" 3 ). Rather he defines a zonah
(hence also a woman who "suffered connection of the nature of
fornication") as "a woman who had sexual intercourse with an
Israelite who is forbidden to her as a husband, for instance, with
those whom she may not marry under the penalty of excision, or a
Gibeonite, or a bastard (i.e. a man born from the union of a couple
who are liable to excision for such a union) " 4 ). Hence Rashi takes
R. Eliezer's phrase, "without the intention of marriage," to mean
"because he cannot legally have the intention of marriage*' since
the union is forbidden by the Torah under penalty of excisionas
in the case of 1 Cor. v.
*) Cited from H. D A N B Y , The Mishnah (Oxford, 1933) 227; see also the
text and notes in K. H. RENGSTORF, "Jebamot (Von der Schwagerehe)",
in G. B E E R , O. HOLTZMANN, and S. K R A U S S (eds.), Die Mischna l l l / i (Giessen,
1929) 81-82.
2
) Concerning R. Eliezer, Rashi notes: " . . . because for R. Eliezer, zonah
refers to a married woman" (cited from BILLERBECK, op. cit., 343.)
8
) Note of M. ROSENBAUM and A. M. SILBERMANN, Pentateuch
with
Targum Onkelos, Haphtaroth and Rashi's Commentary : Deuteronomy (New York,
n.d. reprint of 1934) 217, explaining Rashi's commentary on D t 22, xxii, i n .
4
) Rashi on Lv xxi 6, cited from ROSENBAUM and SILBERMANN, op. cit. :
Leviticus, 96.

nOJiS 1 FORNICATION ?

17

An earlier commentator on the words of R. Eliezer is R. Amram

(ca. 260). He simply states that " t h e Halaka is not the way R.
Eliezer statps i t " (Yeb. 62b). Perhaps the same holds for our lxica
and commentators; the meaning of pomeia is not the way they
describe it.
To sum up : pomeia means unlawful sexual conduct, or unlawful
conduct in general. What makes a particular line of conduct
unlawful is that it is prohibited by the Torah, written and/or oral.
Pre-betrothal, pre-marital, non-commercial sexual intercourse between man and woman is nowhere considered a moral crime in the
Torah. Aside from the instance of R. Eliezer, there is no evidence in
traditional or coptemporary usage of the word pomeia that takes it
to mean pre-betrothal, pre-marital, heterosexual intercourse of a
non-cultic or non-commercial nature, i.e. what we call "fornication"
today x ).
x
) A further question, beyond the scope of this short article, would be: to
what extent was non-commercial, pre-betrothal, pre-marital heterosexual
intercourse possible in the various cultural groupings of the ist century.
Would the general marriage age of girls preclude such a possibility ? Does
the fact that the Totali docs not prohibit nou-commercial, pre-betrothal,
pie-marital heterosexual intercourse serve to explain, to some extent, why
early Christian Churchmen basically oppose the idea of non-marriage, cf.
J. M. F O R D , "St. Paul the Philogamist : I Cor VII in Early Patristic Exegesis",
NTS 11 (1964/65) 326-348. Does the fact relate to the advice set forth in I
T m 9, 11 ?

^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.