# Does the Bible specifically prohibit any of these things?: **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 26, 2004, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007 "2004-04-26T02:55:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Abbie\_Carmichael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/49beb7/32.png) [@Abbie\_Carmichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abbie_Carmichael)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/21 "2004-04-26T06:17:52Z")
**And what makes you think the couple in Song of Solomon were married?** Gee, I dunno. Maybe the whole “you’ve stolen my heart, my sister, my **bride** ” part. **But I don’t see how you relate it to prostitution at all.** Because the people in porno videos oh, are prostitutes? You think they get on camera and go at it for free? They’re paid to screw, dear. You buy porn, you’re supporting prostitution. The discussion in this thread has been about what the Bible does and doesn’t allow, and given that porn is nothing but prostitution on camera, I’d say that it’s a no-no for those who profess to be Christians. ---
**Author:** ![ricksummon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ricksummon/32/3333_2.png) [@ricksummon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ricksummon)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/22 "2004-04-26T06:30:11Z")
Just to play devil’s advocate, what about Japanese animated porn? No one actually has sex in order to make an animated film. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/23 "2004-04-26T06:30:40Z")
> [@Abbie Carmichael](#): > > **And what makes you think the couple in Song of Solomon were married?** > > Gee, I dunno. Maybe the whole “you’ve stolen my heart, my sister, my **bride** ” part. Interesting that you chose that phrase because it also has “sister” in it. Are they really siblings? The general interpretation of this phrase (and I knew you would cite it) is that both therms “bride” and “sister” are symbolic, not literal. > [@](#): > > **But I don’t see how you relate it to prostitution at all.** > > Because the people in porno videos oh, are prostitutes? > > You think they get on camera and go at it for free? They’re paid to screw, dear. You buy porn, you’re supporting prostitution. The discussion in this thread has been about what the Bible does and doesn’t allow, and given that porn is nothing but prostitution on camera, I’d say that it’s a no-no for those who profess to be Christians. No, they _aren’t_ prostitutes, by law, nor really by behavor. A prostitute is someone who will have sex with _me_ for money…not just let me watch a video of her and someone else. No one is paying to _get_ sex in porn, so it isn’t prostitution. But let’s go with this anyway. What if the performers do it for free. Is it pk to watch it in that case. And what about porn which does not use real performers, i.e. written stories, drawings or computer generated images? Is that ok? ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/24 "2004-04-26T06:31:22Z")
> [@Abbie Carmichael](#): > > Because the people in porno videos oh, are prostitutes? > > You think they get on camera and go at it for free? They’re paid to screw, dear. You buy porn, you’re supporting prostitution. The discussion in this thread has been about what the Bible does and doesn’t allow, and given that porn is nothing but prostitution on camera, I’d say that it’s a no-no for those who profess to be Christians. There is a difference, which is why all those porn stars aren’t arrested based on the easy evidence of their videos. If I pay you to have sex with me it is prostitution. If I pay you and **Diogenes** to have sex with each other and film it it is a business transaction. As to them not being married, you can buy pornos specifically made with married couples. Granted, they are the vast minority. So, what then would the biblical argument against a couple, say, making an obviously pornographic video of themselves having some nasty sex and using it to get into the mood? ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/25 "2004-04-26T06:33:18Z")
Wow, not just a simulpost, a triple simulpost. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/26 "2004-04-26T09:59:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Good point in your last sentence, though I do not totally agree. Of course, I think we can say that printed pornography wouldn’t fall under that in any case. Of course there is no specific prohibition against written pornography, phone sex or even pornographic illustrations of fictitious women. And even I don’t entirely agree with what I said. I’m not sure that the injunction is intended to cover completely unobtainable women who may only exist as computer enhanced images. There’ wiggle room IMO. > [@](#): > > Supporting pornography is supporting prostitution Rubbish. Many women pose for pornographic photos or even act in videos without ever actually getting paid for sex. Maybe you could argue that hard core pornos of people being paid for sex is prostiuttion, but that’s it. Soft core porn is quite unrelated to prostitution. Amteur vidoes are also unrelated since no on eis being paid to have sex. Animated porn is clearly not pornography and so forth. > [@](#): > > Prostitution exploits women, destroys families, spreads disease, ruins men and many times harms children. Straight out of a Victorian leaflet by the sound of it. The idea that prostitution exploits women is just pure GD material. It is certainl not factually true as many prostitutes will tell you. In the sense that any of the rest of that is factually correct it is also true of air travel. So are you suggesting that someone who professes the name of Christ wouldn’t fly? That the bible doesn’t condemn gambling but it does condemn flight? ---
**Author:** ![Mollie\_Magill](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mollie_magill/32/20882_2.png) [@Mollie\_Magill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mollie_Magill)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/27 "2004-04-26T12:41:30Z")
> [@Trillionaire](#): > > So if I can make an addition to my OP, what are some other practices, not mentioned in the Bible, which Christian faiths tend to disprove of? Good question. What is the basis for prohibitions on drinking and dancing? ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/28 "2004-04-26T13:58:10Z")
flight: > [@](#): > > I can’t see why in the old testament times anyone would not have their daughter marry their lover (or rapist, the same law applies) Well, what if the guy’s a scumbag and the father thinks he’s likely to mistreat the daughter? Father did still love their daughters, even in those un-enlightened times. > [@](#): > > as the woman could not otherwise marry and would then be a burden on the family. That’s not true. As per the verses you quoted, the issue is with deception, not virginity. Any woman who’s presently unmarried may marry, as long as she’s up-front about whether she’s a virgin or not. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/29 "2004-04-26T14:08:48Z")
Look, let’s simplify–Ghod doesn’t want anybody having any fun! OK?!? GOOD! Glad we got _that_ straight. Back to the usual blasphemy, heresey, & simonism now, people. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/30 "2004-04-26T14:46:30Z")
> [@flight](#): > > Protestantism believes in damn, what is that phrase? Sole Scetorae or something like that. **Sola Scriptura** The thing is – even the “literalist” Fundamentalists are, when you get down to it, doing an _interpretation_, based on their cultural and historic experience, of what the Scripture “really means”. Sometimes, there is a situation where there may be a prefectly good _social, human_ reason to abstain from some conduct – e.g. gambling, which can potentially be ruinous to a family. (Catholicism says gambling’s not a problem if conducted honestly, limitedly, and prudently, but it’s a vice if done to the detriment of your solvency. But they can do that because they have extra-scriptural bases for doctrine.) But if you’re Sola Scriptura you’d better have a biblical justification, even if only inferential. Some denominations’ opposition to gambling is based “Biblically” is that it represents acquiring wealth by means other than honest work. The Bible, for instance, does not outlaw alcohol, it quite sensibly censures _drunkenness_ and th associated behavior. Yet, even though in the Bible people become obviously drunk in various passages, many Fund’ists will go on at length to expain how when the Bible says “Jesus made wine” or Paul writes to Timothy “for health’s sake, avoid the water there, stick to wine” it really means unfermented must or grape jelly or what have you, based on research about food-preparation techniques of the time and the root of the Hebrew word for “vine”, so there must be no drinking at all. Yet these are the same people who will say that the prohibition against man/man sex is just that and not any reference to pagan temple practices. The Bible, further, says clearly “praise the Lord with harps and cymbals, with trumpets and bells”. Yet various old denominations of strict Protestantism were against the use of instrumental music in church. To this day I can’t understand, though, where the prohibition against _dancing_ comes from. Righteous people are bustin’ grooves all across the Bible. Speaking of other denominations with prohibitions that have alleged scriptural origins: Jehovah’s Witnesses do not celebrate Christmas nor their personal Birthdays, because they claim there are only two example of birthday revels in the Bible (Balthazar’s Feast in the Book of Daniel, and Herod Antipas’ in the Gospels) and both ended up very, very badly (kingdom destroyed by Medes; John’s head traded for a lapdance). JW’s also interpret the prohibition on consuming a creature’s lifeblood as extending to outlawing blood transfusions, and IIRC that they also interpreted that plus the Noachic prohibition on taking members off a still-living creature as outlawing live-donor organ or tissue transplants (anyway, pretty hard to do a major transplant w/o transfusions, y’know). ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2004, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/31 "2004-04-26T23:51:38Z")
You’re a little out of date there JRDelerious. JWs did initially hold that belief on organ transplants 30 or so years back. After some soul searching and consultation with the medical community ( and the cynic in me suggests consideration of what the prohibition would do to membership), that was overturned. Organ donation is now a matter of conscience for JWs and has been for many years. JWs don’t celebrate Christmas but it’s got next to nothing to do with the reasons you state, which only applies to birthdays. They don’t celebrate Christmas because it is a direct incorporation of Pagan Saturnalia/Yule celebrations and not even remotely of Christian origin. JWs refuse to participate in worship of Pagan Gods, which does have a Biblical basis. Many other Christian faiths accept that Christmas is just Saturnalia/Yule and doesn’t correspond to the time of Jesus’ birth but they believe that it has been Christian for so long it’s no longer Pagan. Fair enough interpretation IMO, after all no one these days actively worships Saturn at Christmas but that doesn’t diminish the scriptural basis of JW belief on the issue. It wouldn’t matter if Christmas weren’t supposedly the anniversary of Jesus’ birth JWs still wouldn’t indulge, just as they refuse to indulge those Easter celebrations which also have pagan roots. JWs don’t refuse transfusions on the basis of the Mosaic prohibition against consuming the lifeblood. JWs don’t feel obliged to follow any Jewish law. JWs refuse transfusions based on the command form the Christian council in Acts to abstain from blood. Nothing to do with lifeblood and since the same sentence also mentions fornication it clearly doesn’t refer to just consuming. Yes it can be interpreted as only prohibiting eating blood but it can be also more directly interpreted as a command to abstinence. So once again there is a sound scriptural basis to the belief but like all scripture it is open to interpretation. You’re pretty much right on the birthday thing though. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/32 "2004-04-27T00:42:00Z")
> [@Abbie Carmichael](#): > > Because the people in porno videos oh, are prostitutes? > > You think they get on camera and go at it for free? They’re paid to screw, dear. That’s rather a broad definition of prostitution; why don’t we go a little broader and say that tax breaks for married couples are effectively _the government paying people to screw_? - all legal marriage is prostitution now. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/33 "2004-04-27T01:22:38Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > You’re a little out of date there JRDelerious. JWs did initially hold that belief on organ transplants 30 or so years back. After some soul searching and consultation with the medical community ( and the cynic in me suggests consideration of what the prohibition would do to membership), that was overturned. > \<…snip-a-rooni…\> Thanks, **Blake**. Good to have someone catch me up on these subjects. And glad that I got the birthdays thing right. ---
**Author:** ![emekthian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ecae2f/32.png) [@emekthian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emekthian)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/34 "2004-04-27T02:39:02Z")
> [@](#): > > To this day I can’t understand, though, where the prohibition against dancing comes from. Righteous people are bustin’ grooves all across the Bible. Well, it started when four teenagers from Bomont crashed their car off the Powtawny Bridge while on their way back home from a dance in Baylor County. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/35 "2004-04-27T03:31:46Z")
From what I’ve heard, dancing can lead to “lustful thoughts” because you’re up close and touching members of the opposite sex, and the music is often “sinful.” ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/36 "2004-04-27T03:57:10Z")
What! Nothing about MARIJUANA?!? ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/37 "2004-04-27T06:35:30Z")
Interestingly, even [Humane Vitae](http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html), the 1968 papal encyclical against artificial contraception, does not find direct scriptural authority for this prohibition. But, as others have pointed out, the Catholic church does not rely on scripture alone, but also on continuing revelation of the _magisterium_ (authority) of the church. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/38 "2004-04-27T06:36:35Z")
Darn, that should be _Humanae_ Vitae. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/39 "2004-04-27T12:52:32Z")
> [@flight](#): > > Deuteronomy > 22:28 > If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, _ **and they be found;** _ Good heavens, I didn’t know the Eleventh Commandment was actually _in_ the _Bible_! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2004, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007/40 "2004-04-27T16:05:24Z")
> [@flight](#): > > I can’t see why in the old testament times anyone would not have their daughter marry their lover (or rapist, the same law applies) as the woman could not otherwise marry and would then be a burden on the family. > > 22:13 > If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, > 22:14 > And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then the father shall bring forth the tokens of his daughter’s virginity to the elders of the city. > … > > So, any future husband she may have could have her executed whenever he wanted. Just to note- a man who just wanted a wife & could not afford to pay a virgin’s dowry might well go for such a woman. If she was honest about her past experience, he would probably pay a reduced or no dowry but he would have no recourse to use it against her later. The execution was not for being non-virginal as much as it was for deception. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-bible-specifically-prohibit-any-of-these-things/242007.md?page=3)