Dear Editor,

While I have made favorable comments about the PUP report in the past, and I stand by those comments, I must now point out the problems I find with the report.

It appears that a large portion of the Task Force had to be reading their Bibles with blinders on. I’m sure that some did not, and that those who did not, did their best to be heard. All I can comment on is the final product.

I just completed a speed-read through the entire Greek New Testament. As I was cruising through 1 Corinthians, chapter 5 grabbed my attention, where the sexual sin porneia first appears in that letter. Paul warns here that tolerating sexual sin is like yeast that contaminates the whole batch of matzoh. But more importantly, he directs the Corinthians not even to associate with someone who claims to be a believer who is openly practicing porneia, idolatry, or other comparable behaviors.

Is dialogue in the church even possible between those who are openly practicing (or advocating) porneia and those who are not?

The Layman has already correctly pointed out how the Task Force presents a study of the book of Ephesians as a book on unity, but totally passes over Ephesians 5:3-13, which states that porneia must not even be named in the church as an acceptable Christian form of behavior. Passing over that passage is to rip the call for unity out of its context. Unity in Christ, yes, but “be sure of this”, that no one who practices porneia will share in God’s kingdom. “Let no one deceive you with empty words, for it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the children of disobedience. Therefore do not associate with them.” “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness.”

Go to Paul’s earliest letter, and porneia is at the top of his sin list in Galatians 5. Or go to his next earliest letter, 1 Thessalonians (4:3-8). “This is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from porneia… Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not humans but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.” (Yes, please do read the whole passage in context.)

Porneia turns out to be far from a side issue or non-essential of the faith; it is ruled out of bounds by every NT writer but James (including Jesus and the 4 Gospel writers). It’s not an issue we can bargain over for the sake of unity. It’s not a matter of conscience, like the issues Paul identifies in Romans 14. Having such a conversation about porneia as a Christian lifestyle is apparently not even a legitimate option within the genuine body of Christ.

Staying together is not the ultimate good, on a road that leads to death.

Yes, the Task Force tries to build its case on orthodox theology (if words mean what they appear to mean, which is not certain). But let’s not forget that false teaching can be not just theology, but also ethics. Jesus has blistering warnings about those who would lead His children into sin, and those who relax the least of God’s commands and teach others likewise. Jesus blasts Thyatira for tolerating porneia. And Jesus’ brother Jude warns not only about those who “deny our only Master and Lord”, but also those who “twist the grace of God into licentiousness.”

And yes, the Task Force voices its objection to promiscuity. But porneia encompasses all sexual activity outside of marriage, including non-married “committed” couples, including homosexual intimacy (also covered by the term aselgeia, which recurs numerous times, including once on the lips of Jesus). The proof that porneia does not simply mean “prostitution” is right in 1 Corinthians 5. I presume that the Christian’s stepmother was not a prostitute in this relationship!

If one does not read the NT with blinders on, one finds sex outside of marriage to be far more of a moral issue there than “welcoming the stranger”. It rivals issues of wealth and possessions. If the church as a whole were truly guided by Scripture, we wouldn’t even be having this debate.