nikolai_42
Well-known member
Based on reading Romans 1, can it be said that sexual immorality is a (semi-) direct consequence of (persistent) idolatry? If so, does it have to be idolatry writ large or can it be less obvious idolatry?
Assuming the positive, is it a fair leap to make that this was the reason that the apostles (Paul, mainly) made such a big deal about sexual immorality to the churches (aside from the fact that it was rampant around them)? That if one was not an idolater, then it was likely that there would be no sexual immorality - certainly no gross immorality.
Having read this chapter in the very specific for so long, I wondered lately if it could be made a generalization since idolatry and sexual immorality in the OT seem so commonly linked. Ezekiel 8, for example, seems to me to imply that the abominations that the prophet was being shown were often of a hidden sort (thus, the need for the vision and also the progression deeper into the temple). So idolatry need not be open and obvious to all (as idolatry). But sexual immorality is.
Assuming the positive, is it a fair leap to make that this was the reason that the apostles (Paul, mainly) made such a big deal about sexual immorality to the churches (aside from the fact that it was rampant around them)? That if one was not an idolater, then it was likely that there would be no sexual immorality - certainly no gross immorality.
Having read this chapter in the very specific for so long, I wondered lately if it could be made a generalization since idolatry and sexual immorality in the OT seem so commonly linked. Ezekiel 8, for example, seems to me to imply that the abominations that the prophet was being shown were often of a hidden sort (thus, the need for the vision and also the progression deeper into the temple). So idolatry need not be open and obvious to all (as idolatry). But sexual immorality is.