Is he committing adultery with his own wife?

[ImaginaryDay]

Notice that definition says, "desire *connected* with adultery".....not that it *is* adultery. Lust breaks down the moral barriers in one's mind that allows one to commit adultery----because the physical pleasure is desired over even pleasing God----just like 2nd Timothy 3 says, (lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God.)......that opens the door to a lot of things.

Let's look at this rationally. Sexual desire has been given to us by God to be exercised within the marital relationship. I don't think anyone would argue with that. There are times that husband and wife want to express their love for one another and express God's love through sexual union. That is one of the most beautiful expressions of love that is available to us as married couples. I don't know anyone who would argue that either.

But you cannot tell me that there are not times in the marital relationship that the pleasure the couple gets from the sexual act has not been done simply for that reason-the pleasure of the act itself. It seems to me that what you are arguing (and correct me if I am wrong) is that sex for pleasure (and only for pleasure) "opens the door to a lot of other things". Well, what other things? Porn? Looking at other women/men? Other sexual sin? What?

And why does it necessarily HAVE to lead to "a lot of other things"? For a couple who is secure in their marriage, this does not have to be a truth for them. Sex for pleasure can (and does) lead to increased intimacy and sense of well-being, not increased sin as you seem to suggest.

 

[mkgal1]

Let's look at this rationally.

I hope you aren't implying that *I* haven't been rational?

 

[ImaginaryDay]

I hope you aren't implying that *I* haven't been rational?

Never entered my mind. I know better than that...

 

[mkgal1]

Let's look at this rationally. Sexual desire has been given to us by God to be exercised within the marital relationship. I don't think anyone would argue with that. There are times that husband and wife want to express their love for one another and express God's love through sexual union. That is one of the most beautiful expressions of love that is available to us as married couples. I don't know anyone who would argue that either.

Completely on track. I agree fully.

But you cannot tell me that there are not times in the marital relationship that the pleasure the couple gets from the sexual act has not been done simply for that reason-the pleasure of the act itself.

I'm *not* trying to tell you that. Nothing wrong (at all) with mutual pleasure......that's part of what makes it a gift from God to married couples. That still doesn't mean it's void of love. For instance.....I love boating......my husband does as well. It's recreational......it's fun.......it's pleasurable.....I feel "at home" on the water......it's uplifting..............but, enjoying it *together* is also a bonding experience......it becomes part of our "history" together. Marital sex is no different, in that aspect.

It seems to me that what you are arguing (and correct me if I am wrong) is that sex for pleasure (and only for pleasure) "opens the door to a lot of other things". Well, what other things? Porn? Looking at other women/men? Other sexual sin? What?

And why does it necessarily HAVE to lead to "a lot of other things"? For a couple who is secure in their marriage, this does not have to be a truth for them. Sex for pleasure can (and does) lead to increased intimacy and sense of well-being, not increased sin as you seem to suggest.

Not quite........it's not only "sex for pleasure" (there needs to be another qualifier)...........it's loving pleasure at the expense of others....and God. It's allowing sin (like selfishness......arrogance......pride.....objectifying people.....using people for selfish gain) to taint the experience.....turning it from love to lust. The verse that I'm bringing up often says, "lovers of pleasure RATHER THAN lovers of God". There's a trade off there. One is willing to sin against God (and others) in order to grab their desires. IOW.....trampling all over God's laws of love.....in exchange for that pleasure.

If it's mutual pleasure (and the marriage is founded in love/respect/honor) & not merely sex as the *only* bond------no harm, no foul. That's the goodness of God.....that in His plan, we don't have to forgo pleasure and joy.....nor does only one person gain pleasure while the other suffers. His ways are typically win/wins.

 

[4Bear]

Cross posting this reference relevant to marital sex:

1 Thes 4:2 Remember the instructions we gave you as followers of the Lord Jesus. 3 God wants you to be holy, so don’t be immoral in matters of sex. 4 Respect and honor your wife.[a] 5 Don’t be a slave of your desires or live like people who don’t know God. 6 You must not cheat any of the Lord’s followers in matters of sex. Remember, we warned you that he punishes everyone who does such things. 7 God didn’t choose you to be filthy, but to be pure. 8 So if you don’t obey these rules, you are not really disobeying us. You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit. (CEV)
​

If either spouse is imagining someone else, they are cheating the other. If the act involves coercion, disrespect, selfishness "You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit"

In the KJV

4 That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel [wife] in sanctification and honour;

5 Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:​

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Recently Mkgal1 has posted a thread in which she argues that it is possible to lust after one's own spouse.

Is it possible if a man looks at his own wife that he is committing adultery with her in his own heart? If what he has is lust, isn't that the conclusion one would draw if they define 'lust' as desire without perfect genuine divine love.

Let's say there is a man who wants to be right with God in every area of his life, including his married and sex life. He abstains from sex before marriage and reads where Paul says that to prevent fornication, let every man have his own wife and every woman her own husband. So he concludes that marriage, and not life-long celibacy, is for him, and prayerfully finds a godly woman with Proverbs 31 characteristics.

He cares about his wife, but he realizes that he has a lot to work on. Sometimes he is not as understanding of his wife's needs as he wants to be. He also beats himself up a bit when he considers his own faults.

Then he reads about love in I Corinthians 13. He's moving in that direction, but he can't say he's got it all down yet.

He's a bit theologically gullible. He hears someone talk about loving his wife with genuine, divine love, and he can't say his love is that pure and complete yet. Then he goes to a seminar where someone defines 'lust' as sexual desire without this kind of genuine love.

Then he remembers this verse.

Matthew 5:28
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

He thinks, "Oh no, I've been committing adultery with my own wife." He feels really guilty. He tried to keep his thought life pure. He waited till marriage. But now, he hears that if he desires his wife without the right kind of love, it's lust, and he feels condemned.

Should he feel condemned? Is there any Biblical reason for someone to think that lust should be defined as sexual desire, even in marriage, without divine love? Or is lust related to coveting what is not yours, like Paul said when he wrote,

"for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." (Romans 7:7b)
?

Dude, you have waaaay too much time on your hands. For reals. I mean, like seriously.

 

[LinkH]

Why do we have to be careful of professional experts .. who nobody has mentioned.

I did.

Why the unnecessary antagonism?

 

[LinkH]

Cross posting this reference relevant to marital sex:

1 Thes 4:2 Remember the instructions we gave you as followers of the Lord Jesus. 3 God wants you to be holy, so don’t be immoral in matters of sex. 4 Respect and honor your wife.[a] 5 Don’t be a slave of your desires or live like people who don’t know God. 6 You must not cheat any of the Lord’s followers in matters of sex. Remember, we warned you that he punishes everyone who does such things. 7 God didn’t choose you to be filthy, but to be pure. 8 So if you don’t obey these rules, you are not really disobeying us. You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit. (CEV)
​

If either spouse is imagining someone else, they are cheating the other. If the act involves coercion, disrespect, selfishness "You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit"

In the KJV

4 That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel [wife] in sanctification and honour;

5 Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:​

It is good that you brought up some scripture here, but the text does not say 'wife.' Honestly, that doesn't seem to make much sense, IMO, in light of how Paul refers to vessels elsewhere. When he talks about withdrawing from Hymeneaus and Philetus and indicates that this type of people are vessels of dishonor, he isn't talk about wives. The individual reader should seek to be a vessel of honor by purging himself from the vessels of dishonor. He writes elsewhere that we have this treasure in earthen vessels. We each have our own individual bodies, made of earth, but I can't think of any usage that would confirm the theory that he is talking about possessing wives here in I Thessalonians.

The verse prior (from the Interlinear at scripture4all) says:

For this is the will of God, [even] your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:


I suppose you could argue that a married man could fornicate rather than calling it adultery, but doesn't it seem more likely that he would say this about unmarried men guarding their own bodies?

If the CEV is the one I'm thinking about, it's barely a translation and sometimes directly contradicts the text (e.g. making David curse himself rather than his enemies in the case of Nabal.) It's along the lines of The Message-- okay if you want to read someone's interpretation of scripture, but not too good as a sole source for serious in-depth Bible study.

 

[mkgal1]

Should he feel condemned?

No.......no one needs to feel condemned......because Christ didn't come to the earth to condemn, but to offer freedom.

Also......there are different ways of handling our failings (with our spouse and with God). We can either recognize them......be remorseful and learn from them.....and turn from them.....OR we can justify.....blame the other person, and continue on in the manner we were---heading further down the path. It's not so much that we fall down......it's more about what we do about it.

 

[mkgal1]

It is good that you brought up some scripture here, but the text does not say 'wife.'

You must be skipping some parts, then. This is one continual thought or idea:

Thes 4:2 Remember the instructions we gave you as followers of the Lord Jesus. 3 God wants you to be holy, so don’t be immoral in matters of sex. 4 Respect and honor your wife.[a] 5 Don’t be a slave of your desires or live like people who don’t know God. 6 You must not cheat any of the Lord’s followers in matters of sex. Remember, we warned you that he punishes everyone who does such things. 7 God didn’t choose you to be filthy, but to be pure. 8 So if you don’t obey these rules, you are not really disobeying us. You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit. (CEV)

 

[LinkH]

Why couldn't you just continue the conversation in the other thread, then?

You basically just reposted what you already had in the other thread.

I think this thread was started in bad-faith. It's basically "hey everyone, don't you agree with me that mkgal's stuff in that other thread is stupid? Hahaha".

Seriously. Real mature.

You can believe what you want. The adultery angle is big enough of a topic for it's own thread.

Btw, I added this to the OP.

"Discussion of the value of this thread or the motives of the OP for posting it shall be considered off-topic for this thread."

 

[LinkH]

You must be skipping some parts, then. This is one continual thought or idea:

I'm talking about the actual text of scripture, not the interpretation the 'translators' of the CEV made up. The translators are doing the job of the reader there in interpreting the text.

Please use a decent translation.

 

[mkgal1]

I'm talking about the actual text of scripture, not the interpretation the 'translators' of the CEV made up. The translators are doing the job of the reader there in interpreting the text.

Please use a decent translation.

You mean one that fits to your understanding? That's what's helpful about branching out and looking at several translations----it allows for a fuller picture.

 

[LinkH]

You mean one that fits to your understanding? That's what's helpful about branching out and looking at several translations----it allows for a fuller picture.

The thing is, I've got a Greek New Testament open in my other window, and I can see that the word there is skeuos, and I've seen what a sloppy job the CEV does on other passages.

If you go with the CEV translation, then you have a man fornicating with his own wife. Which is it, fornication or adultery to sleep with your own wife? Adultery to look at her. Fornication to sleep with her. Something is wrong with that interpretation.

I think it's pretty clear that the CEV is a paraphrase and not a translation-- like The Message though it is called a translation.

 

[Avniel]

Cross posting this reference relevant to marital sex:

1 Thes 4:2 Remember the instructions we gave you as followers of the Lord Jesus. 3 God wants you to be holy, so don’t be immoral in matters of sex. 4 Respect and honor your wife.[a] 5 Don’t be a slave of your desires or live like people who don’t know God. 6 You must not cheat any of the Lord’s followers in matters of sex. Remember, we warned you that he punishes everyone who does such things. 7 God didn’t choose you to be filthy, but to be pure. 8 So if you don’t obey these rules, you are not really disobeying us. You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit. (CEV)
​

If either spouse is imagining someone else, they are cheating the other. If the act involves coercion, disrespect, selfishness "You are disobeying God, who gives you his Holy Spirit"

In the KJV

4 That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel [wife] in sanctification and honour;

5 Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:​

I agree with everything you are saying but I disagree that a husband and wife can lust after each other.


"That everyone of you should know how to possess his vessel,.... By which may be meant, either a man's wife, or his body, and it is not very easy to determine which, for the Jews call both by this name. Sometimes they call (p) a woman which the gloss says is a "vessel" unfinished. It is reported (q), that when R. Eleazar died, Rabbenu Hakkadosh would have married his widow, and she would not, because she was , "a vessel of holiness", greater than he. Moreover, it is said (r), that

"he that forces (a young woman) must drink "in his own vessel" how drink in his own vessel? though she be lame, though she be blind, and though she is stricken with ulcers.''

The commentators (s) on the passage add,

"in the vessel which he has chosen; that is to say, whether he will or not, he must marry her;''

see Proverbs 5:15. And again, they sometimes call a man's wife his tent: hence that saving (t),

"wtva ala wlha Nya "there is no tent but his wife", as it is said, Deuteronomy 5:30, go, say to them, get you into your tents again.''

And certain it is, that the woman is called the "weaker vessel" in 1 Peter 3:7, between which passage and this there seems to be some agreement. The same metaphor of a "vessel" is made use of in both; and as there, honour to be given to the weaker vessel, so here, a man's vessel is to be possessed in honour; and as there, husbands are to dwell with their wives according to knowledge so here, knowledge is required to a man's possessing his vessel aright. Now for a man to possess his vessel in this sense, is to enjoy his wife, and to use that power he has over her in a becoming manner; see 1 Corinthians 7:4, and which is here directed to "in sanctification and honour"; that is, in a chaste and honourable way; for marriage is honourable when the bed is kept undefiled; and which may be defiled, not only by taking another into it, and which is not possessing the wife in sanctification and honour, it is the reverse, for it is a breaking through the rules of chastity and honour; but it may even be defiled with a man's own wife, by using her in an unnatural way, or by any unlawful copulation with her; for so to do is to use her in an unholy, unchaste, wicked, and dishonourable manner; whereas possessing of her according to the order and course of nature, is by the Jews, in agreement with the apostle, called (u), , "a man's sanctifying himself", and is chaste, and honourable. And it may be observed, that the Jews use the same phrase concerning conjugal embraces as the apostle does here. One of their canons runs thus (w):

"though a man's wife is free for him at all times, it is fit and proper for a disciple of a wise man to use himself "in", or "to sanctification".''

When these thing's are observed, this sense of the words will not appear so despicable as it is thought by some. The body is indeed called a "vessel"; see 2 Corinthians 4:7, because in it the soul is contained, and the soul makes use of it, and its members, as instruments, for the performance of various actions; and, with Jewish writers, we read of , "the vessel of his body" (x); so then, for a man to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour, is to keep under his body and bring it into subjection, and preserve it in purity and chastity; as the eyes from unchaste looks, the tongue from unchaste words, and the other members from unchaste actions; and to use it in an honourable way, not in fornication, adultery, and sodomy; for, by fornication, a man sins against his own body; and by adultery he gets a wound, and a dishonour, and a reproach that will not be wiped away; and by sodomy, and such like unnatural lusts, men dishonour their own bodies between themselves: particularly by "his vessel", as Gataker thinks, may be meant the "membrum virile", or the genital parts, which, by an euphemism, may he so called; see 1 Samuel 21:5"



And since I am always accused of not showing my source marry christmas to the complainers 1 Thessalonians 4:4 that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable,

I do that unnatural acts such as sodomy and other sexual deviance are considered lust and can defile the clean married bed....and are selfish acts and not loving acts. But wanting to have sex when the other spouse doesn't isn't lust wanting to have sex with a spouse is natural.


Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

The need for mutual consent is an important thing. I feel this scripture demonstrates how natural wanting sex from one's spouse is. It also shows how separation of those sexual desires should be mutually not individually.

 

[mkgal1]

I'm talking about the actual text of scripture, not the interpretation the 'translators' of the CEV made up. The translators are doing the job of the reader there in interpreting the text.

Please use a decent translation.

The text *also* doesn't say......"until married". It states:

That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:....."

He wasn't speaking to just unmarrieds......and there's more to sanctification and honor than just "waiting until marriage" and "not committing adultery outwardly" (that happened to be Jesus' exact point---that it's in the heart that we need to focus on sanctification and honor.)

"You know the commandments (outward behavior).....but, I say......unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (inwardly)".

 

[LinkH]

But Mkgal1,

If it is not possible for a man to lust after his own wife, then he can't commit adultery by desiring her. That is one of the main issues I am addressing in this thread.

Where is 'lust' used in scripture for having a legitimate desire with an unloving attitude? I want something solid, not a paraphrase that doesn't make sense in context.

 

[mkgal1]

The thing is, I've got a Greek New Testament open in my other window, and I can see that the word there is skeuos, and I've seen what a sloppy job the CEV does on other passages.

If you go with the CEV translation, then you have a man fornicating with his own wife. Which is it, fornication or adultery to sleep with your own wife? Adultery to look at her. Fornication to sleep with her. Something is wrong with that interpretation.

I think it's pretty clear that the CEV is a paraphrase and not a translation-- like The Message though it is called a translation.

The entire premise of that passage is this, "Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more." To me.....that's an exhortation to grow and mature. To be holy, as God is holy.......*all* sin is to be worked out. The whole passage (no matter what version *or* paraphrase) is speaking of "walking in a manner that pleases God." I am just going to go out on a limb and say that I doubt *any* sin "pleases God".....although He is merciful enough to let us be sanctified a step at a time.

TBH......zeroing in and trying to put a label on the sin (when it's *all* detestable to Him) seems like a waste of time. It's sin to consider others instruments for *our* purpose (against God's purpose). Does it really matter so much what specific label is placed on that? I can think of many (pride......arrogance........lust........disobedience...........selfishness.....for starters).

 

[mkgal1]

But Mkgal1,

If it is not possible for a man to lust after his own wife, then he can't commit adultery by desiring her. That is one of the main issues I am addressing in this thread.

Where is 'lust' used in scripture for having a legitimate desire with an unloving attitude? I want something solid, not a paraphrase that doesn't make sense in context.

Adultery isn't the definition of lust.

All adultery *is* lust......not all lust is adultery.

Husbands are to love like Christ......right? Christ doesn't love in a selfish way that's opposed to God's will.

 

[LinkH]

I am just going to go out on a limb and say that I doubt *any* sin "pleases God".....although He is merciful enough to let us be sanctified a step at a time. TBH......zeroing in and trying to put a label on the sin (when it's *all* detestable to Him) seems like a waste of time. It's sin to consider others instruments for *our* purpose. Does it really matter so much what specific label is placed on that? I can think of many (pride......arrogance........lust........disobedience...........selfishness.....for starters).

You've spent a lot of effort writing on how to define lust as opposed to love. I think it does matter how we understand words like lust and even certain words that are used to describe certain sins.

For example, if someone thinks any sexual desire is lust, then that could keep him from fulfilling his 'duty' in the marriage bed and wreak havoc on his marriage. It could also be a motivation to rule out any pleasure in the marriage bed and give a motivation for getting it over with in 30 seconds through a big hole cut in the sheet so no one enjoys it too much, and just make sure to keep the babies coming out. Some people's understanding of sex was very repressed in the middle ages. Monks and priests who'd never had sex, who were forced too choose celibacy if they wanted a religious vocation wrote their ideas about sexual ethics. One man even wrote that the Holy Spirit left the room when a married couple had sex. A misunderstanding of 'lust' can do a lot of damage to marriage.