Hello one and all.  I am baffled by Pauls attitude and teaching in 1 Cor 6:16.

Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.”

There are two points which are not at all clear.(to me)
First of all; why would Paul expect the Corinthians to ‘know’ what follows and secondly, where in Gen 2:24 does he expect them to have gained such an understanding?
I can find no scripture in the Old Testament that would link prostitution with the ‘One Flesh’ understanding given in Gen 2:24.  My understanding of Gen 2:24 is that of marriage, the Lord’s perfect design for a couple.  So if this is so, when a man and woman leave their parents home and commence to live together in a marriage relationship; they become one body or flesh.  In the case of prostitution there is no life long commitment and (hopefuly) no ongoing (business) relationship.
The only points that I can see in common are 1. the physical act of union and 2. an agreement between the two, be it short or long term.
Although the physical is involved in Gen 2:24 I can’t see it as the primary cause of the oneness, just a natural and important consequence.  And in the case of 2. they are self exclusive of each other anyway.
Mal 2:15 I have considered as well but that seems to validate Gen 2:24 and discount 1Cor 6:16.  Paul seems to have really ‘gone out on a limb’ with this one.

I would really appreciate some thoughtfull input on this one please.

Doug

First of all; why would Paul expect the Corinthians to ‘know’ what follows and secondly, where in Gen 2:24 does he expect them to have gained such an understanding?

Hi Doug,

Thanks for your question. Here is my 2 cents for what they are worth.

I think we see in the Bible that God created sex for marriage and that as such part of it’s purpose is to help create and build upon the union/bond/intimacy of the relationship. As such, a natural ‘by product’ (if you will) of sexual intercouse is that it does create a sense of union or bond because that is what it was designed to do (along with the conception of children).

When a man and a woman leave their parents and come together under the sight of God as husband and wife they do indeed become one flesh. Sex is part of that coming together and contributes to the union and intimacy. As such sex outside of marriage also builds a bond of intimacy (although 21st Century society likes to pretend it doesn’t) because God designed the very act to do so. In other words sex outside of marriage does not suddenly stop having the same consenquences as sex inside of marriage. In the same way that babies can be conceived through sex outside of wedlock so does sex continue to form a bond between people who are engaging in it outside of wedlock.

So to me it makes sense that whether a man sleeps with a prostitute or with a woman who is his wife a bond (or intimate union of some description) is formed through their physical coming together.  However, I’m not in a position to know exactly how that union is brought about or what it engenders in the man and woman so I’ll just have to trust the Bible on that one ;)

In terms of the “Do you not know...”. Well, I think Paul uses rhetoric fairly often (just finished studying 2 Corinthians where he is a master of irony and rhetoric!) and whilst he may expect that they should know (since he would expect them to be reading the scriptures) it sounds like he is saying it as a rebuke. In other words “Don’t you guys realise that when you sleep with a prostitute you are uniting yourself with her?”. It seems the Corinthian church really had a fair amount of debauchery and sexual sin going around (being the ‘party city’ it was).

That’s just my thoughts though and other more learned friends here might choose to disagree.

Here is my 2 cents for what they are worth.

Interesting mix of cliches, Dani!

I try my best :)

Another female would probably be able to read between the lines on it :)

A curious position 1 Cor 6:16

Another female would probably be able to read between the lines on it :)

You must bring out my feminine side, because I agreed with your understanding of the meaning. (no I’m not, if you are wondering)

I understand “Becoming one flesh” means a sexual relationship, which is designed to produce offspring. (In the course of a marriage in God’s eyes.)

Ken

Another female would probably be able to read between the lines on it :)

Sorry, I should have been a bit clearer. I meant another female could read between the lines of my cliches :)

So much for Ken’s feminine side, then. ;-)

A curious position 1 Cor 6:16

Dooh!!!

That’s just my thoughts though and other more learned friends here might choose to disagree.

Thanks for your reply Dani.  I am looking for some indepth discussion on the similarities and differences between ‘heis soma’, (’one body’) and ‘mia sarx’, (’one flesh’); at least that is how I think the Greek runs.  I find it very interesting when I come across phrases and words which in English are much the same, but when the original language is consulted there seems to be a rather big difference inplied; else why the use of different words/phrases within the one lungfull of air?

But again thankyou for taking time to reply.

Doug

Doug,
1. I think we can reflect on Paul’s notion that we are united with Christ through his Spirit. As our body is the dwelling place of the Spirit, we can see why Paul would not want our body to be physically united with a prostitute.
2. In terms of the Greek, check out Robert H. Gundry, Soma in Biblical Theology with an emphasis on Pauline Anthropology (1976), pg 62 for his explanation of the eis sarka mian in reference to physical union through sexual intercourse.
Hope this gives you somewhere else to check out.
Gary