What is the context?
Paul qualifies the claim that everything is permissible: not everything is beneficial, and he will not be mastered by anything. Freedom cannot simply mean giving every appetite control. The comparison between food and the stomach does not turn sexual behavior into a matter of indifference.
The body belongs to the Lord, and God’s raising of Jesus points toward believers’ own resurrection. What happens in bodily life therefore matters to Him. The body is not a disposable part of a person whose choices have no bearing on belonging to Christ.
Paul applies that belonging to sex with a prostitute. He draws on Genesis 2:24 to describe bodily union, then contrasts it with union with the Lord. Taking members of Christ into such a relationship contradicts the relationship they already have with Him. The text says prostitute without identifying a particular temple or religious ceremony.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Christians commonly read these verses as rejecting the use of freedom to excuse sexual immorality and affirming the body’s importance to the Lord. Calvin’s comment on verse 12 recognizes an appeal to liberty being misused, while Wesley’s note on verse 13 connects the body’s purpose with the Lord who will raise it.
Where does this fit in God's plan?
Ephesians 5:25–32 also draws on Genesis 2:24, there connecting the love and care of husband and wife with Christ’s love for the church. It explicitly relates the one-flesh picture to Christ and His people.
That connection adds a positive purpose beyond the warning against prostitution. Bodily relationships can express faithful love and care; they are not merely outlets for appetite. The church belongs to the Christ who gave Himself for her and works for her holiness.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.