I do have a cognitive dissonance of sorts. (…) Maybe there are other SPs or maybe even clients who feel the same way -- if yes, I would love to hear your perspective.
Milana, I am a client who has been paying for sex for decades. I am also a non-denominational Christian. (I was raised as a protestant, not a Catholic). I believe there is a God and I pray every day. (Well, maybe I accidentally miss the occasional day.) Your church attendance is better than mine — I show up once in a while (always because a friend or family member is going and I’m tagging along).
I’ve read enough of the Bible to know that one can find harsh condemnations of prostitution in it, particularly in the Christian New Testament.
I resolve the seeming contradiction this way: I take the Bible seriously, but I don’t believe that it is the “word of God”. Reading the Bible, I’ve spotted too many contradictions to think that that makes sense. The Bible was written by men, flawed men who, even if they were frequently inspired by God, nevertheless were able to make mistakes.
I find the words in the New Testament of writers like Paul and John of Patmos to be interesting, but I also take them with a grain of salt. (I mention those two because they’re probably the most harsh in relation to “harlots”.) I consider them to be mistaken on this point.
I pay much more attention to the words of Jesus. I’m a Christian, not a Paulian or a Johnian. And the words of Jesus, as recorded in the Bible, never condemn prostitution.
Indeed, a detail that complicates the discussion of Jesus and prostitution is rarely discussed.
“Messiah” and “christ” are the Hebrew and Greek words for the same concept: the anointed one. Jesus was “The Anointed One”. That meant that someone had to anoint Him. In “Old Testament” anointings, the anointer was always a
man. A man who was either a prophet or a priest — in other words, a man with religious authority.
That’s not the case for Jesus. The four biblical gospels give four very
similar accounts of the anointing of Jesus (in Matthew chapter 26, Mark chapter 14, Luke chapter 7, and John chapter 12). They are accounts of the same event, an event in which Jesus was anointed,
not by a man, but by a
woman.
In Luke’s gospel, she's described as “a woman who was a sinner”. In John’s gospel, she's named — her name was Mary. And because this Mary was walking around with her hair publicly exposed, we know that she was a prostitute. (In the ancient world, it was seen as sexually provocative for a woman to expose her hair publicly — only prostitutes did so.) I note that Mary’s hair was publicly displayed
during the anointing, indicating that she was still a prostitute at the time of the anointing. (This wasn’t something that she had repented of and left in the past.)
The only other significant person with the name Mary in John’s gospel is Mary Magdalene. (The name of the mother of Jesus is
not given in that gospel.) So it’s sensible to conclude that the anointer of Jesus was Mary Magdalene.
This is the reason why Mary Magdalene was traditionally considered to be a prostitute. Only recently have various Christian denominations and biblical scholars been attempting to “rehabilitate” the image of Mary Magdalene by vehemently denying that she was a prostitute. I suspect that these MM image-rehabilitators are motivated by whorephobia, but they’re ignoring the solid scriptural reasons for the traditional view.
So why did Jesus arrange for a prostitute to anoint him? I have no idea, but it’s not what one would do if one had a negative impression of prostitution. It was a provocative and bold thing to do, even if we’re not exactly sure of the message that Jesus intended to convey.
Milana, there’s my reply to your request for the perspective of people like me.
/////////////////
I imagine that the atheists who’ve already responded to Milana will have a field day with my answer.
“If you admit that there are contradictions in the Bible, why pay any attention to it?”
“You’re just cherry-picking the stuff from the Bible that serves your bias and your lifestyle!”
Atheism makes no sense to me. I can not relate at all to a materialistic world-view that posits that life has no spiritual meaning and that we and our world were created through random chance. It is obvious to me that intelligent design is on display all around us. Those of you who are atheists will disagree, and that’s fine. I’m not trying to convince you or argue with you. I’m not writing this post for you. I’m writing it because a fellow Christian asked for my opinion (or, at least, for the opinions of Christians who sell sexual services or pay for them).