Book Review - Sex and the Believer
Fornication
NOW READ THIS CAREFULLY! Sexual activity between single people who are not married is NOT CONSIDERED FORNICATION, unless it involves intercourse.
I challenge anyone to show me from the WORD OF YHWH alone, where a couple not engaged, betrothed, or committed to marriage, are considered to be in fornication, if the 2 people engage in sex, other than intercourse!
Well, Mr. Koniuchowsky, I am up for the challenge. I can do just that and I will use the very set of verses that were used in the last section: Ezekiel 23. But first we need to back up a bit and lay some groundwork.
A quick search of the Scriptures shows that the Hebrew word for fornication is most often translated as harlotry in the writings most commonly referred to as the Old Testament. The Hebrew word for adultery is also often translated as harlotry. With that in mind, let us go back to those two sisters, Oholah (Samaria) and Oholibah (Jerusalem).
“Now her sister Oholibah saw this, yet she was more corrupt in her lust than she, and her harlotries were more than the harlotries of her sister.” (Ezekiel 23:11)
Here is a perfect example of what I was just writing about. This verse contains the word harlotries twice, yet the Hebrew words are not the same. The first one is the word taznuth (Strong’s number 8457) and it means fornication, while the second one is zanun (Strong’s number 2183) and it means adultery. So, what the verse above says is, “Oholibah’s (Jerusalem’s) fornication was more than the adultery of her sister.” So, if Moshe K. is right and fornication only involves intercourse, we should be able to go back to Ezekiel and see Oholibah’s crime was having intercourse, right?
“She uncovered her harlotries and uncovered her nakedness; then I became disgusted with her, as I had become disgusted with her sister. Yet she multiplied her harlotries, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the harlot in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their paramours, whose flesh is like the flesh of donkeys and whose issue is like the issue of horses. Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians handled your bosom because of the breasts of your youth. (Ezekiel 23:18-21)
The “harlotries of your youth” were “when the Egyptian handled your bosom” doesn’t sound like intercourse to me. To me this sounds like fondling. In fact Ezekiel speaks of the handling of their virgin bosoms three times in this chapter. So I just don’t understand how Mr. K. can boldly state:
That also means that a boy and girl living together as roommates, NOT having intercourse is NOT SINFUL. They can have limited sexual contact (sex without intercourse), or none at all. I have been wrong about that and so have you!!!!! So mom and dad; don’t get uptight if your child is in that situation.
As long as they do not have intercourse Torah allows this. Prove me wrong from the WORD. Shocking? YES!! But that’s how we have been painfully brainwashed by Victorian and Puritanical societies that have no concept of Torah and have no concept of what YHWH does and does not allow!
So, fornication does not include fondling, according to MK, regardless of what we have seen in Ezekiel. According to him, we can allow our children to do anything they want, as long as no penetration is involved, and we can still call them spotless virgins. He actually goes on to say, “If they are having sexual pleasure galore without the actual act of consummation (hard to imagine) they have not sinned.” It is hard to imagine how anyone can come up with such a cockamamie idea!
I have stood up to his challenge; now I would like to challenge him back. I challenge you, Mr. Koniuchowsky to prove your statement that fornication only involves intercourse, and I would like you to do that using the Word alone.