What is the difference between fornication and adultery?

The whole of Scripture is full of the errors of fornication (Acts 15 v 29) and adultery (Exodus 20 v 14). The first is sexual relationship outside of marriage and the second sexual relationship with a married person. We must clearly state that physical affection is only intended by God for one man and one woman and that within the confines of marriage and to a very limited extent by a couple committed to marriage (see previous chapter).

In God's sight immoral behaviour is so abominable that Paul had to write to Ephesus: “But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints” (Eph. 5:3). This means that we should not mention these things frivolously and so make little of them. The Bible speaks very clearly as to God's judgment about these sins. Holy Scripture not only calls prostitution fornication, but all extramarital intercourse, even where there may be the intention to get married, and even if it is done only once (cf. Gen. 34 and 38). In the world today the word fornication is only used in connection with the first meaning. In the New Testament, however, extramarital intercourse in general is called fornication, that of married persons is called adultery, and both are condemned as abominable sin (Matt. 15:19; 1 Cor. 6:9; Heb. 13:4).

In the Old Testament, adultery, unfaithfulness towards the spouse for the satisfaction of lust, was to be dealt with most severely. According to the law of Sinai this sin had to be punished with death (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22-24). In the first place the law contained God's regulations for the outward and social life of His earthly people, and for this reason only the accomplished offence was to be punished, even though the tenth commandment forbad the coveting of the neighbour's wife (as well as all his possessions. Ex. 20:17). If a Jew kept the commandment not to commit adultery, he was acting according to God's will and contributed towards the maintenance of the people's community according to God's order. Fear of the punishment threatened certainly contributed to this. However, the mere outward observance of this and all the other commandments could not justify him before God.

So far we have left out of our consideration the fact that the Lord Jesus here gives room for one exception, which clearly excludes any other exception: "Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication..." Yet this one and only exception is missing in Mark 10:11-12 and Luke 16:18. Paul in 1 Corinthians 7 does not mention it either. We only find it again in Matthew 19:9, albeit in a slightly different wording ("except it be for fornication"). The Lord does not say that divorce is unavoidable in the case of one partner committing fornication, but only that in such a case the remarriage of the other partner after a divorce is not adultery.

According to Scripture, the sin of fornication not only refers to prostitution, but to any pre- or extramarital intercourse. We saw this earlier when we considered verses 27-30. Fornication is also adultery when at least one of the persons involved is married. Here the general term, "fornication," is used, although the verse deals especially with adultery. It seems rather far-fetched to interpret "fornication" here as implying immoral behaviour before the marriage, of which the husband learns only after the wedding.

This was forbidden in the ten commandments; but neither there nor anywhere else is the sin defined. It seems clear, that as far as the man was concerned, if he had intercourse with a woman unless it was with a married woman, he would not be charged with adultery, though he himself might be married; indeed how could he be when he was allowed more wives than one, as well as concubines and slaves? If he committed adultery with a married woman or with one betrothed, both were to be put to death. Deut. 22:22-24. With the woman it was stricter, she must have no intercourse with any man but her husband. If a man was jealous of his wife there was the ordeal of the bitter waters provided to test her innocence. Num. 5:11-31. But we do not read that any man or woman was stoned for adultery, nor that any woman drank the bitter waters. We know from the New Testament that Moses had, because of the hardness of their hearts, allowed a certain looseness, and a man could divorce his wife for any cause, which was easier than bringing a suspected wife to trial. It may be that the men themselves had not good consciences, like those who brought the adulterous woman to the Lord in John 8:3. We have a dreadful picture of guiltiness in Judges 19: and Jeremiah charges Israel with being "as fed horses in the morning, every one neighed after his neighbour's wife," which loudly called for judgement. Jer. 5:8; Jer. 13:27. The Lord declared that a man morally committed adultery (or fornication) in his heart if he lusted after a woman. Adultery had also a typical meaning. Israel had been espoused to Jehovah, but instead of being a faithful wife she had sought other lovers. "With their idols have they committed adultery." Ezek. 23:37. So the false church, who has Jezebel in her midst, the Lord will cast her "and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds." Rev. 2:22.

It is not the sin of adultery which is charged upon Babylon, but fornication. Israel was addressed by the prophet Jeremiah as married to Jehovah (ch. 3:14) and Ezekiel says, "Thou hast not been an harlot, in that thou scornest hire; but as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband." (Chap. 16:31-32.) But the Church is only espoused, having the marriage in anticipation; therefore the sin of those professing to be betrothed to the Son of God, who depart in heart and ways from Him for the hire of the seducer, is fornication, or harlotry. To confess Christ with the lip, while the affections and desires of the soul are going out after other objects, such as the pride, lust, and gain of this world, is the special sin here marked out. Happy those whose affections are so set upon Jesus as to be able to say in truth "He is all my salvation, and all my desire."

The Bishop of Meaux again and again reasons on "the harlot" as a decisive proof that Babylon is not an ecclesiastical body but a mere profane city of the world. He insists that "adulteress" must have been the designation of guilt in that case rather than "whore." (Oeuvres de Messire Jacques-Benigne Bossuet, (e., tome second, pp. 60-63, 310-312, 4to. Paris, 1743.) This is not fairly met by the allegation that the Spirit sometimes interchanges the terms "fornication" and "adultery" in the Revelation as elsewhere, though such an interchange does occur. For here, as Bossuet argues, the usage is too constant to be unintentional. The fact is however that, while Israel in the Old Testament stood in the relation of the married wife to Jehovah, it is not so with the church of God in the New Testament. There she is represented as in a certain sense the bride, but in truth espoused as a chaste virgin to Christ rather than as yet wedded. And this is necessarily and undeniably the image in this Apocalyptic prophecy, where beyond a doubt the marriage supper of the Lamb does not take place till after the destruction of Babylon, when the blessed bridal of the church is celebrated in heaven. The consummation is most fitting when all are complete who go to make up the church. It is after the Lord shall have translated to heaven all who have been baptized by the Spirit into that one body, some fallen asleep, others alive and remaining till He come to change both into the likeness of His own glory. Thus the reasoning of the clever prelate rests on a premise which is the exact reverse of the truth; and all that is sound in it tells powerfully against his own aim. For when it is seen that the church while on earth is supposed to be espoused but not yet married, her corrupt counterpart, to be accurate, ought to be set forth as a harlot, not as an adulteress. The reference therefore in the great whore is precisely to a spurious church, and cannot but be fixed on Rome not pagan but ecclesiastical, on Rome professedly Christian.

On the other hand, it is undeniable that the Jews, or Zion if you will, had the place of nearness to Jehovah which is represented under the figure of the marriage-tie, that she had been faithless and played the whore with many lovers (even the idols of the Gentiles), and that in consequence she was divorced, becoming a widow and desolate under the righteous dealing of God. Adultery was her sin, rather than fornication. No one in the least familiar with the prophets can have failed to notice this and more said of Israel. Then it was she became barren and did not bear. Praise is still silent for God in Zion; but the vow shall yet be performed to Him (Ps. 65:1); and the barren one shall sing and be no more barren but bear, astonished to find during those days of literal barrenness such an abundant offspring in the saints glorified on high, whom grace has been the while actively bringing in.

SPIRITUAL FORNICATION.

Adultery, or idolatry — “with their idols have they committed adultery” (Ezek. 23:37) — is the special sin charged upon Israel of old as being the married wife of Jehovah (Jer. 3:14; Isa. 54:1). For this she was divorced. But in the purpose and grace of Jehovah Israel will be reinstated in her former blessed relation, one never again to be forfeited so long as sun and moon endure. Fornication, or illicit intercourse and connection with the guilty and apostate world, is the solemn indictment against Babylon — the corrupt and licentious woman who ensnares and captivates with her short-lived pleasures all within her influence — kings and people, high and low. The seductive glitter and meretricious display of this abandoned woman affect all classes, and morally ruin those over whom she casts her golden chains and who drink of her cup. Every right and true thought of Christ perishes where the woman’s blandishments are received and her smile courted.

This was very common among the Gentiles, which accounts for its being mentioned in the message sent from the conference at Jerusalem to the Gentiles, Acts 15:20, 29; and its being so often prohibited in the epistles. The word is sometimes used where 'adultery' is the sense. Matt. 5:32; Matt. 19:9. It often has in the O.T. a symbolical reference to the turning from God to idols. 2 Chr. 21:11, 13; Isa. 23:17; Ezek. 16:15, 26, 29; and in the N.T. to unfaithful intercourse with Babylon, the mother of harlots. Rev. 14:8; Rev. 17:2, 4; Rev. 18:3, 9.

The subject of moral defilement is taken up in 1 Cor. 5. A case of fornication had arisen in the Corinthian assembly. Fornication seems to be a term used in the Scriptures to encompass all kinds of sexual sins. In this case it was adultery-made worse as he was sinning against his own father-incest. Such a person must be excluded by the assembly from all fellowship. A list of similar serious sins is given in verse 11 and again in chapter 6 verses 9-10. These do not seem to be comprehensive, but in 2 Tim 3:2-4 we have another list of those persons from which a Christian must turn away, which seems to fill up any that are lacking.