Is he committing adultery with his own wife?

[Avniel]

I'm talking about specific sin.....not *all* sin. To make a distinction between proper....(even holy) desire.....and sexual desire that's lustful makes it to where marital sex can be discussed and understood in proper context. Instead of the "oh.....sex....NOOooooo....don't do THAT!".......it can be discussed within the parameters that God's given us (and more than just "wait until you're married"). That's not enough information (IMO). It's being able to distinguish between what's good.....and what taints the marriage.

Often, when this topic comes up......there's an underlying presumption that it's being believed that a man's desire for his wife is "bad". It's not......unless directed in a way that involves sin.

Kind of like......."be angry......but do not sin". Anger isn't sinful......it's often HOW we express it that makes it that way. But.....because most people perceive anger as a "negative"......most aren't championing for it to be protected from being called "wrong".

I agree it is about knowing what is good and what taints marriage. However if someone is selfish and demands sex and does other things to damage their marriage they are acting outside of God's will. Those actions outside of God's will for sex are sinful however it is not lust, that is what we are trying to tell you.

I don't think anyone is making that presumption that it is wrong for a man to desire his wife. I think what people are saying is when the directed involves sin does not make it lust.


No one is disagreeing with you that it's wrong we are trying to tell you that it is not lust. You have repeated several time that it is lust. When asked for scripture you have given us quotes from the Pope, who also believes it's sinful to use contraception.

 

[Avniel]

In Exodus 20:17 there is a good explanation of lust. It is essentially coveting. Coveting means wanting something that belongs to someone else. So it is not possible if you see it that way to lust after your own wife. It is possible to be inconsiderate, but it is not possible to lust after or covet something that is yours. It would be like stealing your own car or breaking into your own house.

I don't no MK I didn't believe that is what you were stating. I thought the basis of your argument was.

MK post from link she provided in the OP
"I am of the belief that a man (or woman) can "lust" after their spouse (purely a physical/selfish desire---which isn't love). That's misusing the gift that God gave us.....distorting it....corrupting it. That would still be "no right" (at the time)..........because it's sex out of the intended context (love)."

The bolded is different from what Mc has wrote. I thought you believed that a man and a woman could lust after their spouse. I am sorry if you changed that opinion during the course of this thread.

 

[mkgal1]

That's exactly why a distinction needs to be made between merely a "strong desire" and a desire that's corrupt. The distinction isn't between "married" or "unmarried".......because not *all* marital sex falls into the category of loving and unselfish..... without corruption.

 

[Created2Write]

I'm talking about specific sin.....not *all* sin.....not even the general sin of "selfishness". I'm specifically talking about sexual desire that's self-referenced----out of *self*-gratification. To make a distinction between proper....(even holy) desire.....and sexual desire that's lustful makes it to where marital sex can be discussed and understood in proper context. Instead of the "oh.....sex....NOOooooo....don't do THAT!".......it can be discussed within the parameters that God's given us (and more than just "wait until you're married"). That's not enough information (IMO). It's being able to distinguish between what's good.....and what taints the marriage.

Often, when this topic comes up......there's an underlying presumption that it's being believed that a man's desire for his wife is "bad". It's not......unless directed in a way that involves sin.

Kind of like......."be angry......but do not sin". Anger isn't sinful......it's often HOW we express it that makes it that way. But.....because most people perceive anger as a "negative"......most aren't championing for it to be protected from being called "wrong".

I agree with all of this.

 

[Created2Write]

Yeah.....that's all been said before.



People aren't objects or things. God *does* have parameters for how we conduct ourselves in our relationships. We were created for HIS purpose.

Begin here: http://www.christianforums.com/t7706721/

True, but even Paul says that a man should have his own wife, and wives their own husband. We all belong to God, and within marriage, we belong to each other.

That doesn't mean we should view our spouse as an object, but I don't think that's what McScribe was suggesting anyway.

 

[mkgal1]

I don't no MK I didn't believe that is what you were stating. I thought the basis of your argument was.

MK post from link she provided in the OP
"I am of the belief that a man (or woman) can "lust" after their spouse (purely a physical/selfish desire---which isn't love). That's misusing the gift that God gave us.....distorting it....corrupting it. That would still be "no right" (at the time)..........because it's sex out of the intended context (love)."

I thought you believed that a man and a woman could lust after their spouse. I am sorry if you changed that opinion during the course of this thread.

I haven't changed my opinion on this. The above has been my stance all along. I'm not sure where you are seeing any contradiction.

 

[Created2Write]

That's exactly why a distinction needs to be made between merely a "strong desire" and a desire that's corrupt. The distinction isn't between "married" or "unmarried".......because not *all* marital sex falls into the category of loving and unselfish..... without corruption.

Of course not. Being married doesn't, by default, make every sexual action between a husband and wife pure and sanctified. The intentions behind those actions are incredibly important. Having sex out of spite, or not having sex out of spite, are both sinful. The actions themselves aren't, it's the intent behind them.

 

[mkgal1]

True, but even Paul says that a man should have his own wife, and wives their own husband. We all belong to God, and within marriage, we belong to each other.

Right.....and in another previous post.....what I had said is....that when that marriage is placed into (spiritually speaking) God's Kingdom....and both spouses are relying on His sort of love (committing to abide in His love).............the marriage goes from just a physical union into an eternal union (surrendering to His purpose). Christopher West (based on the Pope's TOB)....use the phrase...."our bodies proclaim the mystery" and "words become flesh". Our "marital embrace" is our vows (words) becoming flesh (being lived out.....not *just* in the actual union....but, the union is to be a full expression of the marriage----not just an empty ritual). IOW......the actions ought to line up with the attitudes.

 

[mkgal1]

Of course not. Being married doesn't, by default, make every sexual action between a husband and wife pure and sanctified.

Well.....that's how these two threads all began. I just made a side remark (not even sure where the original quote came from)....that it's possible for marital sex to be impure and corrupt (IOW....for it to *not* be without sin). That's all.

 

[Created2Write]

Right.....and in another previous post.....what I had said is....that when that marriage is placed into (spiritually speaking) God's Kingdom....and both spouses are relying on His sort of love (committing to abide in His love).............the marriage goes from just a physical union into an eternal union (surrendering to His purpose). Christopher West (based on the Pope's TOB)....use the phrase...."our bodies proclaim the mystery" and "words become flesh". Our "marital embrace" is our vows (words) becoming flesh (being lived out.....not *just* in the actual union....but, the union is to be a full expression of the marriage----not just an empty ritual). IOW......the actions ought to line up with the attitudes.

Definitely. That's why love is the most important spiritual fruit; it guides our actions and our intentions, it encourages self-control, it helps us resist temptations. We want to be obedient to Christ because we love him, and we put our spouses before ourselves because we love them and we want to be obedient to Christ.

I'd like to add that that doesn't negate the very real instinctual urges we have as humans; urges that God created within us. Sex, the desire for emotional fulfillment, the desire for companionship and exclusivity in marriage...all are instinctual desires that are meant to be expressed in marriage. However, those urges can lead us astray if we focus on ours more than our spouses. Our wedding vows were about what we promise to do for/with our spouse and vice versa.

 

[Avniel]

Of course not. Being married doesn't, by default, make every sexual action between a husband and wife pure and sanctified. The intentions behind those actions are incredibly important. Having sex out of spite, or not having sex out of spite, are both sinful. The actions themselves aren't, it's the intent behind them.

YYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSS!!!

As I have said if a man has a sexual perverse request of his wife sexually, he isn't lusting after his wife but he is lusting after a sexual act.

I believe in a spiritual linking I believe it is becoming one flesh. The longer I have been married the more often I think and act more and more like my wife and vice versa. I always found it interesting why the average of sex per week get lower as couples get older. I have my theory and its a spiritual one with no biblical backing but maybe one day I will get that answer.

 

[Avniel]

Well.....that's how these two threads all began. I just made a side remark (not even sure where the original quote came from)....that it's possible for marital sex to be impure and corrupt (IOW....for it to *not* be without sin). That's all.

See that's not what I understood. What I have been arguing is that sex or a desire for sex between a man and a woman that are married is not lust. That is why link made this thread and the title is adultery. No one was disagreeing that people can't be selfish or impure in sexual desires, I used the example sodomy, but if a spouse can lust after another spouse.


So let's clear this up do you believe a spouse can lust after another spouse? Yes I believe a spouse can lust after another spouse or no I do not believe a spouse can lust after another spouse?

 

[mkgal1]

See that's not what I understood. What I have been arguing is that sex or a desire for sex between a man and a woman that are married is not lust. That is why link made this thread and the title is adultery. No one was disagreeing that people can't be selfish or impure in sexual desires, I used the example sodomy, but if a spouse can lust after another spouse.


So let's clear this up do you believe a spouse can lust after another spouse? Yes I believe a spouse can lust after another spouse or no I do not believe a spouse can lust after another spouse?

I was pretty clear that I'm making a distinction......sexual desire on it's own is not lust. Lust is sexual desire that's about self-gratification (not caring about the other spouse----just wanting the release). That's *using* a person for selfish means......which is the opposite of loving someone. So....lust = distorted sexual desire that's based on sin (greed.....selfishness) void of love.

This is something I had said early in the first thread....then repeated it a few times again, in this thread: "That's exactly why a distinction needs to be made between merely a "strong desire" and a desire that's corrupt. The distinction isn't between "married" or "unmarried".......because not *all* marital sex falls into the category of loving and unselfish..... without corruption."

With that definition (lust = sexual desire that's void of genuine love---just about self-gratification)....then, yes......a spouse *can* be selfish and unloving (thus, lusting after their spouse).

 

[Created2Write]

Well.....that's how these two threads all began. I just made a side remark (not even sure where the original quote came from)....that it's possible for marital sex to be impure and corrupt (IOW....for it to *not* be without sin). That's all.

I don't disagree with that statement at all. Our intentions are what make certain actions either righteous or unrighteous. If done with a selfish intention without regard for the other person, it absolutely is impure and corrupt.

The need for sexual intimacy can seem selfish at times, and can lead us to be selfish, but isn't selfish on its own.

 

[Avniel]

I was pretty clear that I'm making a distinction......sexual desire on it's own is not lust. Lust is sexual desire that's about self-gratification (not caring about the other spouse----just wanting the release). That's *using* a person for selfish means......which is the opposite of loving someone. So....lust = distorted sexual desire that's based on sin (greed.....selfishness) void of love.

With that definition (lust = sexual desire that's void of genuine love---just about self-gratification)....then, yes......a spouse *can* be selfish and unloving (thus, lusting after their spouse).

Let's respond to the bolded because I think your dancing around what others are disagreeing with you on. The fact is the sin in itself is not lust you are using the word incorrectly. As I have stated before culturally the church speaks on lust so much and rarely speaks on the sins of how a spouse should love the other. So you use the term that you associate with being more sinful as a means of describing the hurt and pain felt when a spouse is that unloving.

While I do agree with you it is very sinful and I believe hateful to use something as special as spiritually connecting and personal as sex in a corrupt and unloving way. It's like when Jesus tore up the temple because they were abusing it they didn't treat the house of God the way it should be treated. It is understood that it is sinful nooooooo one is arguing that, but it isn't lust.

 

[mkgal1]

Let's respond to the bolded because I think your dancing around what others are disagreeing with you on. The fact is the sin in itself is not lust you are using the word incorrectly. As I have stated before culturally the church speaks on lust so much and rarely speaks on the sins of how a spouse should love the other. So you use the term that you associate with being more sinful as a means of describing the hurt and pain felt when a spouse is that unloving.

While I do agree with you it is very sinful and I believe hateful to use something as special as spiritually connecting and personal as sex in a corrupt and unloving way. It's like when Jesus tore up the temple because they were abusing it they didn't treat the house of God the way it should be treated. It is understood that it is sinful nooooooo one is arguing that, but it isn't lust.

That's your opinion. I defined the way I'm using it.....and I am not alone on this........it's not my own made-up word. I'm not going to continue on in this. I've said my opinion (repeatedly)......you don't have to agree. From this post......it sounds as if you have made a presumption about *why* I'm using a specific word. FTR.....there's no agenda behind it........it's just a way to make things more clear (good desire/corrupt desire). It applies across the board. Same standard for everyone. Anything short of genuine love taints the marital union. When a marriage isn't up to its full potential.......BOTH spouses miss out (not just one---which is what it sounds like you're implying).

BTW.....that is an excellent example of what I was trying to say (Jesus being angered by His temple being used for corruption). God doesn't put parameters around things that are holy just to be mean........it's because they are valuable to Him.....worthy of guarding and protecting. He wants us to be able to enjoy His gifts to us in their fullness (which can only happen when sin doesn't destroy and ruin them).

Who suggested to you that's my agenda, BTW (that I chose "lust" because that's a "man's sin" and hurts the woman the most)? I was wondering why you were so adamant about *not* wanting to use the word "lust". Thanks for finally making sense of all that

Everyone (both spouses) lose(s) when we miss God's perfect will.....but, the good news is.......everyone (both spouses) win(s), when we *do* remain in His will.

 

[Created2Write]

I was pretty clear that I'm making a distinction......sexual desire on it's own is not lust. Lust is sexual desire that's about self-gratification (not caring about the other spouse----just wanting the release). That's *using* a person for selfish means......which is the opposite of loving someone. So....lust = distorted sexual desire that's based on sin (greed.....selfishness) void of love.

This is something I had said early in the first thread....then repeated it a few times again, in this thread: "That's exactly why a distinction needs to be made between merely a "strong desire" and a desire that's corrupt. The distinction isn't between "married" or "unmarried".......because not *all* marital sex falls into the category of loving and unselfish..... without corruption."

With that definition (lust = sexual desire that's void of genuine love---just about self-gratification)....then, yes......a spouse *can* be selfish and unloving (thus, lusting after their spouse).

I agree with all but the bold. Just because the sex is being pursued out of a selfish desire doesn't necessarily make us lust. Lust, as McScribe said earlier, isn't about the actual desire, it's about the desire for something that isn't yours. That's why looking on a woman with lust is equal to committing adultery with her in a man's heart; the sexual desire isn't the lust, it's the desire to have something that isn't his.

Selfish sex and unloving sex can be lustful, but I don't believe it can be lustful with one's spouse. Selfish? Yes. Unloving? Yes. Unrighteous? Yes. Sinful? Absolutely. Lustful? Not in my opinion.

 

[mkgal1]

I agree with all but the bold. Just because the sex is being pursued out of a selfish desire doesn't necessarily make us lust. Lust, as McScribe said earlier, isn't about the actual desire, it's about the desire for something that isn't yours. That's why looking on a woman with lust is equal to committing adultery with her in a man's heart; the sexual desire isn't the lust, it's the desire to have something that isn't his.

Selfish sex and unloving sex can be lustful, but I don't believe it can be lustful with one's spouse. Selfish? Yes. Unloving? Yes. Unrighteous? Yes. Sinful? Absolutely. Lustful? Not in my opinion.

You can call it whatever you like.......my point was (is) there's wrongful desire....corrupt desire.....desire out of God's will & there's natural/healthy desire that's a gift from God. I was clear where I was drawing the line. You don't even have to agree with *that*. I merely stated *my* opinion.

 

[Created2Write]

That's your opinion. I defined the way I'm using it.....and I am not alone on this........it's not my own made-up word. I'm not going to continue on in this. I've said my opinion (repeatedly)......you don't have to agree. From this post......it sounds as if you have made a presumption about *why* I'm using a specific word. FTR.....there's no agenda behind it........it's just a way to make things more clear (good desire/corrupt desire). It applies across the board. Same standard for everyone. Anything short of genuine love taints the marital union. When a marriage isn't up to its full potential.......BOTH spouses miss out (not just one---which is what it sounds like you're implying).

BTW.....that is an excellent example of what I was trying to say (Jesus being angered by His temple being used for corruption). God doesn't put parameters around things that are holy just to be mean........it's because they are valuable to Him.....worthy of guarding and protecting. He wants us to be able to enjoy His gifts to us in their fullness (which can only happen when sin doesn't destroy and ruin them).

Who suggested to you that's my agenda, BTW (that I chose "lust" because that's a "man's sin" and hurts the woman the most)? I was wondering why you were so adamant about *not* wanting to use the word "lust". Thanks for finally making sense of all that

Everyone loses when we miss God's perfect will.....but, the good news is.......everyone wins, when we *do* remain in His will.

I don't think anyone here disagrees on any of this, except for the fact that you use the word lust when others don't see lust the same way.

Personally, I think that the only "agenda" you, or anyone has, is to be honest about our opinions on the matter. And you're right, we don't have to agree.

The important thing is to remember that Christ desires us to follow his word and his commands. His commands were love centered, so as long as we remain focused on love and resist our selfish nature(I don't believe people are inherently good or bad...I believe we're inherently selfish), all of our relationships will align with God's Word. Well, on our end at least. We can't control the other half of the relationship, merely our own.

 

[Created2Write]

You can call it whatever you like.......my point was there's wrongful desire....corrupt desire.....desire out of God's will, and I was clear where I was drawing the line. You don't even have to agree with *that*. I merely stated *my* opinion.

I do agree with that. I was merely stating my opinion about where I thought lust factored in. I'm not trying to convince you or change your mind.