Can there be ADULTERY without sexual intercourse?

[Douglas Hendrickson]

How does one know for sure that one is not transgressing the important Commandment against adultery? <Staff Edit>

But what are we to make of Matthew 5:28? (Jesus said): "whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

How is "lust" to be defined here? Surely one would have to actually WANT TO, nay, INTEND TO commit actual adultery for the "lust" to even begin to rise to the level of the actual act? (In parallel with the warning just prior that hating one's brother may lead to murder, so one should avoid it.)
One might do a lot of kissing and touching without any such intent - not only not to ever transgress the Commandment but to avoid any concerns about pregnancy and diseases.
And one could certainly "play around" without coveting, without wanting to make another person's spouse one's own.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

God talking about lust illustrates that our thoughts can indeed pass from just temptations to sin - even before we act on our thoughts. I suppose you could talk about degrees - and say the thought is better than completing the thought - but the thought is still wrong. Certainly probably easier to stop ourselves when we are just thinking about it than when we begin to act on it. The line is crossed when we allow the temptation to linger in our head and actually start considering doing it.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

God talking about lust illustrates that our thoughts can indeed pass from just temptations to sin - even before we act on our thoughts. I suppose you could talk about degrees - and say the thought is better than completing the thought - but the thought is still wrong. Certainly probably easier to stop ourselves when we are just thinking about it than when we begin to act on it. The line is crossed when we allow the temptation to linger in our head and actually start considering doing it.

But what is the "thought" or "temptation"? If it is NOT to ACTUALLY commit adultery it must be something else that is not relevant to this prohibition.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

If you have to ask, you've already answered your own question.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

If you have to ask, you've already answered your own question.

Ok, I may be a bit obtuse as to what I am saying to myself, WHAT IS MY ANSWER?
(I think I have indicated my answer, and I think you probably don't agree with it.)

What I really wanna know is WHY one answer is better than another.

 

[MerriestHouse]

There is the Biblical word laciveousness - excessive lusts of the flesh. We have no instructions about any levels of fornication or adultery. I would say that we should use temperance and follow our conscience. "To the pure, all things are pure." We cannot answer for each other.

"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28 But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell."

Jesus had just said, verse 17 in that same chapter "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. 18 For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven........."

So he was not adding to, taking away, or changing the Law of Moses in verse 27. Some say that he was giving the Jews a new law (his law)........ inducing guilt where Jesus did not attend it, but that is not what he was doing. Jesus was speaking to Jews, reminding them what was in the Law of Moses.

Lust and covet are translated from the same word. It means a strong desire of any kind, either good or bad. It means to want something that belongs to another. Something that we have no lawful right to have.

Jesus was actually reinforcing the 10th commandment, "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife." It had nothing to do with a man looking at women in admiration, or maybe looking for a wife.

The total commandment reads

Exodus 10:17 "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor's."

A person can admire their neighbor's car; his neighbor's wife, or anything else that belongs to his neighbor without wanting to possess it.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

[It doesn't seem to want to attribute the quote of MerriestHouse]

Can the admiration include TOUCHING - with the approval of the "owner"?
Not wanting to take her to be his own wife of course!

 

[katholischen_miliz]

Looking at a women with lust is adultery and a mortal sin (if you don't know what that is I would be happy to explain), however looking at women and thinking wow she is beautiful isn't looking at a woman with lust. Thinking a woman is beautiful is a natural concept and she is a creation of God and like all of God's creations, it is good to notice their beauty even if you take a another look. Now when you get on the lines of looking at the woman and thinking of what you would do to her and starting to imagine having sex or sexual activities with her is when you fall into the sin of adultery.

 

[Goatee]

Adultery is very real in the mind even without the flesh agreeing! I know as i have been there and done it to my shame! Mentally and physically. Dont go there. Turn to God. Love God. Turn away from sin.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

Adultery is very real in the mind even without the flesh agreeing! I know as i have been there and done it to my shame! Mentally and physically. Dont go there. Turn to God. Love God. Turn away from sin.

Are you saying "mentally AND PHYSICALLY in the mind ?

 

[MerriestHouse]

I didn't answer your question. I was just putting the passage in question in context.

Kissing and/or touching a person that's married to another for fifteen minutes?

Read Genesis 39 about Joseph and Potiphar's wife.

 

[RDKirk]

So apparently the consensus so far in this thread is that adultery is necessarily predicated on sexual activity. A woman can leave her husband for, let's say a man who is physically unable to have sex, and that is not adultery?

 

[RDKirk]

<Staff Edit>

Why would any "sexual activity" with someone married to another spouse not be adultery?

Let's define something: A non-sexual kiss such as a normal person would normally give to his grandmother is not "sexual activity"--even the bible makes mention of "holy kisses."

 

[ewq1938]

Israel and Judah committed Adultery without sexual intercourse.

Adultery is basically a traitorous act against the one you are married to. It damages or destroys the marriage covenant.

How does one know for sure that one is not transgressing the important Commandment against adultery? <Staff Edit>

But what are we to make of Matthew 5:28? (Jesus said): "whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

How is "lust" to be defined here? Surely one would have to actually WANT TO, nay, INTEND TO commit actual adultery for the "lust" to even begin to rise to the level of the actual act? (In parallel with the warning just prior that hating one's brother may lead to murder, so one should avoid it.)
One might do a lot of kissing and touching without any such intent - not only not to ever transgress the Commandment but to avoid any concerns about pregnancy and diseases.
And one could certainly "play around" without coveting, without wanting to make another person's spouse one's own.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

So apparently the consensus so far in this thread is that adultery is necessarily predicated on sexual activity. A woman can leave her husband for, let's say a man who is physically unable to have sex, and that is not adultery?

Sounds like DIVORCE. But not adultery, and if there was an official divorce I doubt adultery could be given as a factor.

 

[AvilaSurfer]

Sounds like DIVORCE. But not adultery, and if there was an official divorce I doubt adultery could be given as a factor.

Uh yeah, that's not biblical at all.
SMH

 

[Tiny Bible]

What is adultery?
When you look at someone not your wife and feel the same first blossoming attraction emotions that you remember feeling for your wife when your relationship was fresh.

When we commit adultery physically we're telling ourselves while keeping it a secret from our spouse that we don't want to be with them anymore.

That's why we're physically and emotionally with someone else.

 

[Tiny Bible]

Sounds like DIVORCE. But not adultery, and if there was an official divorce I doubt adultery could be given as a factor.

May wish to read the new testament a bit.

[url=http://www.biblestudytools.com/encyclopedias/isbe/divorce-in-the-new-testament.html]Mark 10:2-12,Luke 16:18, Matthew 19[/URL]

 

[Radrook]

There are people who are married because the papers they signed say so but there is absolutely NOTHING between them beyond that. In such a case, I really doubt that a just creator would view them as legitimately married in the full sense of the word.

 

[Tiny Bible]

Personally, if I were in a dead relationship and nothing was there anymore, and he didn't want to work on us, I'd leave.
Divorce is sometimes our own means of insuring our salvation. I've seen women who live in dead marriages for whatever reasons they give. The kids, security, whatever it may be.
Losing ones sense of self because they have died with that end of the marriage that was dead long ago is a kind of suicide. Giving up, waiting to die, losing that memory of who you were before him or her.

God didn't give us life so we could die in a marriage.