Is he committing adultery with his own wife?

[mkgal1]

How am I bias if my wife needs anything I am always willing to give it to her. She is really my best friend and pretty much the only person I consider a friend. If I want to sleep and she want's to go to the movies I sacrifice myself my body and even my rest time when I am sick.

I believe that being a man is placing your family way above yourself. I believe that men are called to have a sacrificial love towards their wives. Anything other then that causes dysfunction in the marriage.

Why are you posting all this? Who said anything contrary? Who even said anything personal?

However the sin that causes that dysfunction is not lust. To call it lust is not having a clear understanding of the term. You are just resulting in personal attacks because you have no scripture to stand on. When you decide to personally attack someone you really are furthering my viewpoint that you are wrong, to me it's evidence of a flawed irrational viewpoint. So if you can't come up with a valid scriptural argument no need to take it out on me.

Especially when my wife gets whatever I have to give.

Personally attack? Where? "Take it out on you"?

 

[Avniel]

Why are you posting all this? Who said anything contrary? Who even said anything personal?


Personally attack? Where? "Take it out on you"?

based on our past history when you say certain things that may have a little negativity I automatically take it as malicious so if you weren't trying to be rude I apologies.

 

[mkgal1]

based on our past history when you say certain things that may have a little negativity I automatically take it as malicious so if you weren't trying to be rude I apologies.

That's the bias I was speaking of.

No.....I wasn't trying to be rude. Apology accepted.

 

[LinkH]

So, let's imagine your wife is carrying on an emotional affair and her genitals have never ever connected with his. She has not engaged in physical adultery with him at all.

Her sex drive upticks significantly, she gets really hot for you and you have frequent hot passionate sex and the whole time she is imagining the other man...
She sees his face, thinks of his loving words, imagines his p**** entering her...
and she just can't get enough, oh she wants you/him.......

Are you denying this is lust? Are you saying this would be fine marital sex because her genitals connected with yours in normal intercourse (nothing kinky)? ie it was not "something unnatural" which is "the only way to lust" according to your above statement?

I say, it's lust and defiles the marriage bed and is not unlike the pattern of men impacted by porn.

That would be a bad situation to be in, to be with a spouse who is imagining someone else.

But the problem is with entertaining sin in his/her heart. Having sex with the spouse is not a sin.

 

[mkgal1]

That would be a bad situation to be in, to be with a spouse who is imagining someone else.

But the problem is with entertaining sin in his/her heart. Having sex with the spouse is not a sin.

The point was whether or not the marriage bed is pure or defiled by this. Is that marital sex as God intended......naked and unashamed? I believe that to be one......that includes mind, body, and soul. We aren't keeping hidden thoughts......and our minds are able to be just as exposed as our bodies. That's not so, in this case. The marriage bed *is* defiled.

 

[LinkH]

Appreciate the Jewish view of sex :

We need to keep in mind the fact that there is rarely a true 'the Jewish view' about anything. Jews have a saying "Ask four Jews, and you'll get five opinions."

Judaism relies not only on the Old Testament, but also on the Talmud, commentaries by men who referred to as 'rabbi' (a title the New Testament teaches us is for the Messiah), Torah-lawyers who gave their legal opinions. In many cases, these opinions conflict. Though this is written down, the Talmud is treated as though it is the oral Torah which Orthodox Judaism believes was given to Moses along with the written Torah. Jews may also believe in the Mishna, and various other writings as a part of their belief system. Some Jews, Kariate Jews, rely only on the Old Testament, but this isn't the larger group. There are also Reformed Jews, which take a lot of the traditions and scriptures a lot more loosely and liberally. This article is someone's opinion about the opinions in the Talmud and other writings, or opinions on writings about the Talmud.

The primary purpose of sex is to reinforce the loving marital bond between husband and wife... Sex should only be experienced in a time of joy. Sex for selfish personal satisfaction, without regard for the partner's pleasure, is wrong and evil. A man may never force his wife to have sex. A couple may not have sexual relations while drunk or quarreling. Sex may never be used as a weapon against a spouse, either by depriving the spouse of sex or by compelling it. It is a serious offense to use sex (or lack thereof) to punish or manipulate a spouse.

​

We have to keep in mind that Christ said, '..the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to another nation, bringing forth the fruits of it.' He also considered some traditions of the elders to 'make the word of God of none effect' (Matthew 15) and disagreed with some of the Jewish believes about swearing oaths (Matthew 23.)

My own concerns about sex during menstruation is that I am inclined to interpret 'fornication' in Acts 15 as referring to the sexual purity required of Gentiles according to the Old Testament. It seems to fit in the historical context comparing the apostle's decision with the Noahide principles and the fact that James argued for the existence of God's name being called on Gentile nations based on Old Testament prophecy. I do not accept 'all things Jewish.' Jewish people do not accept 'all things Jewish' either or there wouldn't be different groups among them.

Many of these opinions are things many Christians would agree with, like not forcing the other person, or not getting drunk in the first place. But you can't have sex while grieving? What about Isaac being comforted at the death of his mother? Jewish literature has covered in depth so many ethical issues, just like Christian theology, that I would be highly surprised if there weren't some Jewish scholar who argued that sex during a time of grieving is okay.

Sex is the woman's right, not the man's. A man has a duty to give his wife sex regularly and to ensure that sex is pleasurable for her. He is also obligated to watch for signs that his wife wants sex, and to offer it to her without her asking for it.

Judaism does view sex primarily as a woman's right. But I know this is not exclusively the case, because I've read some bits and pieces of the Talmud that indicate that treated it as a man's right, too. But Torah does mention food, clothing and sex as a woman's right. The context is a man taking a second wife after having a concubine (former slave) as his first wife. He can't deprive her of these things, and he couldn't take her back as a slave. From that we see food, clothing, and sex as women's rights in marriage.

The woman's right to sexual intercourse is referred to as onah, and it is one of a wife's three basic rights (the others are food and clothing), which a husband may not reduce. The Talmud specifies both the quantity and quality of sex that a man must give his wife. It specifies the frequency of sexual obligation based on the husband's occupation, although this obligation can be modified in the ketubah (marriage contract).

Sex every night for most women. Fishermen's wives only had rights to it occasionally when their husbands were home. But women are considered off limits to touch for about half the month, too, the way modern Orthodox Judaism interprets it. My guess is a Kariate interpretation could limit that to 7 days total instead of tagging it on to the end of the period.

For Christians, Paul shows that neither husband nor wife are to deprive the other of 'due benevolence.'
​

 

[LinkH]

Based on Titus 2 and 1 Peter 3- wife is gatekeeper of "chastity" in the marriage husband needs to respect her discernment/reservations regarding sexual activities.

The word translated 'chaste' is a word that means 'pure.' It can be used to refer to a pure virgin, but it can be applied to anyone, and it isn't about sex per se.

I did a little reading in an online etymology dictionary. Even in English, it meant pure and came from the Latin. "Chastity" came into the language from French where it had a sexual connotation. "Chaste" started to pick up the meaning of chastity, apparently. The first time chase had a sexual purity connotation in the literature was about 1560.

Be that as it may, neither of these passages imply that the wife and not the husband has some kind of specific role as a 'sexual purity gatekeeper.' What is the gate in this analogy?

I don't think discernment about a partner's sexual purity is something necessarily innate in the female gender. Women do have intuition, but men do, too. And some men can sense if something is off with a wayward wife who outwardly covers her tracks too. There are also spiritual gifts. If a wife has a gift and picks stuff up about her husband being in sin, she might think all wives have that, when it's really her gift.

There are also some people, men or women, who are just jealous and will think they have some kind of special intuition when they are just jealous.

I don't see all wives as having some kind of special unique role in discerning their husbands sins.

 

[Romanseight2005]

That would be a bad situation to be in, to be with a spouse who is imagining someone else.

But the problem is with entertaining sin in his/her heart. Having sex with the spouse is not a sin.

Well, think of it this way. If he is fantasizing about someone else, then he is committing adultery in his heart. Furthermore, he is bringing his wife into it, by acting out the fantasy with her. Iow, he is using his wife to be his way of living out his fantasy in the sense that he gets the full outcome of the fantasy. ([bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]) So he makes her a part of his adulterous fantasy.

 

[mkgal1]

You know that saying, "you can have your cake and eat it, too"?

Maybe if I make this analogy about that----literally cake---it won't incite such an emotional response.

CW talks about there being 3 different "gospels" preached in churches as related to sex (cake). Typically, this is taught prior to marriage:

The starvation diet ("you can't have *that*.........NOooooo! That's bad! Evil.")

The fast food diet ("sure.......you only live once......we're all going to die anyway---enjoy.")

The banquet of love ("God created you and understands your cravings. He's created all kinds of foods on this earth so that you shouldn't feel deprived..............and you can even have cake made with agave nectar.....and other wholesome ingredients. You can eat cake AND be healthy.")

 

[LinkH]

Mkgal1 wrote

Women don't simply want their husbands to direct their lusts exclusively towards them, as ifthis made a man faithful. As our late Pope John Paul II once pointed out, a husband can commit adultery in his heart with his own wife if he treats her as nothing but an object for his selfish pleasure.

So the title of the thread is not as far-fetched as some would make it out to be. It is the conclusion that must be drawn from the arguments you presented.

I'm not in the RCC. Are you? If you are, why do you ignore RCC teaching on homosexuality?

I don't see where John Paul's ideas about marriage are based on scripture. Does he claim it's a revelation from heaven? I'm not against the idea of a celibate man recieving revelation on marriage and sharing it with the church. Paul did that. But if he doesn't claim to be receiving a revelation, then what is he basing it on? If you are Roman Catholic, popes are only considered to be infallible if they speak ex cathedra. I she claiming that?

Of course a man should not be selfish with his wife. But it is his own wife, not someone else's. So he is not coveting his neighbor's wife if he sleeps with his own wife. Consider what Jesus said in Matthew 5. He quotes do not murder, then warns against speaking angry words to people. He warns against adultery, but then warns you can commit adultery by looking at a woman with lust. If a man has sex with another man's wife, that's adultery. Now, we know that if he looks after her to lust after her, he has committed adultery with her in his heart. If his wife is his own, he can't covet her, so why would his desire for her be lust?

I'd also like to ask you, how likely is it it John Paul II ever had sex? I assume he was a life-long celibate, and not a widower. I've never read that he was a widower. So I'd hope he never had sex. How much is he going to know about sex? If he's not getting revelation from God, that's something to consider.

The apostle Paul wrote that the bishop should be 'the husband of one wife.' If an older man who rules his house well, has obedient faithful children, and lives a good godly life gives marital advice, that has some weight to it. If you have a bunch of priests, some who may have an inclination or a gift toward celibacy, and others who are struggling with urges but went into the priesthood in spite of the restriction the pope put on priests in the 500's to be celibate, what kind of teaching are they going to give on this sort of thing.

Is 'using' ones spouse to fulfill one's urgest out of intense passion sinful? Is it wrong if a married couple just has hot, wild sex without meditating on the unitive and reproductive purposes of sex? If I accepted these quotes, I might think that way? Couples who think like this could end up with less fulfilling sex lives as they are careful to make sure they are thinking of these doctrinal issues before having sex. Or they may feel condemned.

The homosexuality issue is pretty straightforward in scripture. This stuff is going out on a limb. Why are you so enthusiastic about it? Are you anti-birth control, too, btw?

I know itís a clichÈ, but why do so many wives claim ìheadacheî when their husbands want
sex? Could it be because they feel used rather than loved? Marriage does not justify lust; it is not a ticket to treat a spouse as a means of selfish pleasure. A woman who is the object of lust soon realizes, ìYou donít love me; you donít need me. Youíre only interested in a means to your own gratification, and you can get that anywhere.î

Selfishness is a bad thing. Not loving one's spouse is a bad thing. But this sort of reasoning can be used as an excuse for someone who likes to quickly throw out a headache excuse whenever the partner with the greater sex drive reasonably wants some 'attention.' If we go with the scriptures, it says not to defraud one another without consent for a time, to give yourselves in prayer and fasting, and to come together again.

 

[LinkH]

Second.......another person enters the scenario (opportunity for lust to manifest itself). Jesus *didn't* say....."you married men.....if you look upon a woman to lust after her"......He said, "That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

The issue here is the definition of 'lust.' Proverbs 5 instructs men to desire their wives sexually.

If something is yours and you have rights to the use of it, the use of it is not coveting. (Sounds awful in this context, I know, but you get the point.) Paul wrote for I had not know lust except the law had said 'Thou shalt not covet'. That commandment is to not covet your neighbor's wife. You don't covet your own wife or husband.

 

[If Not For Grace]

I don't understand why "adultery" is being used to describe desires *with* a spouse. That's absurd.

Consider the source-some do not seek to discuss, but to mock and to create controversy..Absurd is a kind word for this mess

 

[Avniel]

The issue here is the definition of 'lust.' Proverbs 5 instructs men to desire their wives sexually.

If something is yours and you have rights to the use of it, the use of it is not coveting. (Sounds awful in this context, I know, but you get the point.) Paul wrote for I had not know lust except the law had said 'Thou shalt not covet'. That commandment is to not covet your neighbor's wife. You don't covet your own wife or husband.

I think that what we have both said and I was thinking that the only exception is unnatural sexual desires with ones spouse. But I think a poster made a valid point even that isn't lusting after your spouse that is lusting after a particular unclean act it has nothing to do with the spouse the need to do something sexually deviant with a spouse isn't about the spouse at all.

I think we all agree that lust is a sin. I think we all agree that having a sexual desire for a spouse at an inappropriate time when one should be sensitive and kind isn't loving and is a sin equal to lusting however it is not lust.

I think the reason people are fighting so hard against the obvious is because it is about control links. In a society that is so individualized to give up that power and say "I'm married means I belong first to God then to my spouse" isn't popular even among Christians. When we look at western society we see certain aspects of the culture breed separation genders, classes and races. This is a perfect demonstration of that this idea is basically saying "if you don't want to have sex with your husband because your tired and he still wants to have sex he's lusting after you and that's a sin." But the fact is some of these women should thank God their husbands still want to have sex with them, when the could by all means go out and have sex with someone else maybe even more attractive. See that's why I am so strongly against this idea and those that spread this type of theology not only is it unbiblical but it also is damaging to marriages.

If I am beat and tired and my wife wants to have sex and I don't we have sex sometimes we don't. If she is beat and tired and I want to have sex but she doesn't sometimes we do sometimes we don't. If she is arguing with me and I'm mad at her does that mean I can't admire my wife's body, I can't look at her when she picks something up because we are mad at each other? That's not lust its selfish sometimes for the person that isn't tired but that's life. Sometimes you give a little sometimes you get a little.

But like I said you can't lust after your spouse, its yours that who God gave to you. A man is his wife's possession and woman is her husband's possession that is why they can not lust after each other. They can lust after others, they can lust after porn, they can lust after unclean sexual acts but you can't lust after what you already have.

There have been 0 scriptures stating a man can lust after his wife, there have been scriptures that prove that he can not. I have seen no biblical proof what so ever 0. All I have seen is man made articles, man made ideas and man made beliefs I am not a fan of religion I am a believer and follower of Christ not man made laws and man made ideas.

And to all the women that think their husbands lust after them don't complain if your husband starts lusting after someone or something else.

 

[Avniel]

Consider the source-some do not seek to discuss, but to mock and to create controversy..Absurd is a kind word for this mess

I don't think it's being used to mock and create controversy. I think it was partially used to show how absurd the idea that someone can lust after their spouse. That's like me having a car and I'm coveting after my own car. It's like looking in my bank account and saying "boy I wish I had my money right now" and someone say "don't covet your own money."

Can sexual desires for a spouse at the wrong time be misguided and unloving.....Yes, but the name of that sin is not called lust.

I think me and link both agree that sexual desires for a spouse is a good thing, now allowing those sexual desires to make you inconsiderate of your spouses feelings and current situation is sinful...........as sinful as lust but it's not lust.

 

[Avniel]

Well, think of it this way. If he is fantasizing about someone else, then he is committing adultery in his heart. Furthermore, he is bringing his wife into it, by acting out the fantasy with her. Iow, he is using his wife to be his way of living out his fantasy in the sense that he gets the full outcome of the fantasy. ([bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]) So he makes her a part of his adulterous fantasy.

But he's not committing adultery with his wife he is committing adultery with a fantasy not her. He's not lusting after his wife he is lusting after the fantasy he has. He committed adultery with his mind before they laid together.

 

[Romanseight2005]

But he's not committing adultery with his wife he is committing adultery with a fantasy not her. He's not lusting after his wife he is lusting after the fantasy he has. He committed adultery with his mind before they laid together.

He is acting out what is in his mind though, and using his wife to do it. Does that ,ake sense? I am not saying that he is committing adultery with his wife, but he is bringing her into his adulterous act by acting out the fantasy, and using her body to do it.

 

[Avniel]

He is acting out what is in his mind though, and using his wife to do it. Does that ,ake sense? I am not saying that he is committing adultery with his wife, but he is bringing her into his adulterous act by acting out the fantasy, and using her body to do it.

OOOOh ok I see what your saying now that makes sense.

 

[Ascendo]

I think that it will be uncomfortable committing adultery with his wife on the head of this pin...

 

[mkgal1]

But the fact is some of these women should thank God their husbands still want to have sex with them, when the could by all means go out and have sex with someone else maybe even more attractive. See that's why I am so strongly against this idea and those that spread this type of theology not only is it unbiblical but it also is damaging to marriages.

Interesting bit of irony there.

 

[Hetta]

But the fact is some of these women should thank God their husbands still want to have sex with them, when the could by all means go out and have sex with someone else maybe even more attractive.

Which women are these? I could easily make the reverse true.

The fact is some of these men should thank God their wives still want to have sex with them, when they could by all means go out and have sex with someone else maybe even more attractive - younger, less gray, a 6-pack instead of a 2 pack, richer, taller ...