What do you understand by the word - Adultery ?

[sonettegarbin]

Let’s not avoid the question. Sin is a sin, regardless of whether it was committed back then or now.

I asked…if you are living in those times. Not whether this sin can be committed now.

Hoping for a better answer.

Answer taken off the Web:

Abraham had an illegitimate son by Hagar. The purpose was to produce a child for the barren Sarah.
I was an adulterous SIN. In spite of there being extenuating circumstances, it still was a sin.Sarah was barren. For a wife in ancient times to go childless was felt to be a disgrace. It was Sarah, Abraham’s own wife, who brought to Abraham her servant handmaid, asking him to produce a child for Sarah by this servant woman. We can imagine Hagar to have been attractive, and not necessarily lacking in voluptuous charms simply because she was a servant. That temptation, under these circumstances, at Sarah’s instigation, might have been great. Certainly the very invitation coming from Sarah would have made it harder to resist.
Abraham was a strong man. But this temptation appears to have been stronger. All humans have sinned. Abraham was human. Abraham lied when he twice claimed Sarah was his sister, fearing for his own life.
Abraham was not without sin. But neither this adultery, nor the two lies, were sins of the nature that springs from a wrong attitude of mind or heart. Abraham, in his heart, was always OBEDIENT to GOD. There was no spirit of hostility or rebellion. These sins were of the FLESH, under temptation – not malicious or rebellious sins of the heart. But they were SINS! God forgave Abraham’s sins of spiritual weakness, committed under heavy temptation.
Nevertheless, we all must REAP what we sow – even though God forgives our sins upon repentance. God refused to approve this adulterous act of Abraham. He rejected the illegitimate son, Ishmael, from the birthright. This transgression produced jealousy between the women. It resulted in trouble, controversy, suffering.

 

[sonettegarbin]

So, to you, having a desire to have child with a woman who is not your wife is not adultery ?

That is not what he is saying and you should know that???

Not only lusting after woman: Homosexual relationships are adulterous.

There is a Difference: Adultery and Polygamy is not the same thing.

Plural mariages a Matter of Tradition :- Polygamy is recognized and practised in many Christian African families in Africa.

Adultary is not a laughing matter. It causes pain and suffering and negatively impacts on the larger social group where it occurs.

 

[sonettegarbin]

A view on Adultary and Polygamy by:←

de facto Polygamy exposed by Megan Love of vheadline.com

So you mean to tell me if a man takes care of more than one woman he is shunned by society and is morally wrong? However, if a man was to sleep around with many women and leave them the next day he is considered a player, and is praised by society? Or if a man divorces his wife to marry another woman he is considered by American society to be ‘normal’. But don’t you dare take care and support more than one woman as your wife! Instead fill your mind with all of the lust you can find on MTV and sleep around and create as many fatherless children as you can, and then leave them at the first opportunity for another sexual encounter. We want to lock up polygamous husbands, but let those who have HIV and AIDS spread their damn diseases in the streets freely. Those who create fatherless children tear down the threads of society, but a man that takes care of his wives and family they want to put in prison!

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

If I may rephrase, I would suggest that having a desire to take a woman to wife with a view towards an eventual family is not necessarily adultery.

As a (mostly) happily married man I can recognise that other women are attractive, both in their physical appearance, and in their natures as people. Further I can recognise that the possibility of sharing a life and a family with some of these women is not entirely distasteful, Indeed for many years I harbored a desire to see polygamy introduced into the Catholic Church, reasoning (poorly) from St Paul that if love is truly not jealous, then my 1st wife shouldn’t have a problem with it. After all the only scripture I could find against polygamy was ‘man shall not serve two masters’ - and I’m not sure that was meant to be applied to two wives, and ‘the two shall become one’ - and then that composite one and another one shall become what? 1.5?

What convinced me that polygamy was inappropriate for any true follower of Christ, was Humane Vitae, and it’s description of the nature of marital love. This is not something distasteful, or something dirty, but something beautiful, a gift from above, a gift that once received should be held so dearly ‘forsaking all others’ not deeming all others to be somehow unworthy, but recognising that the road before you is so special that one chooses not to follow any other not because there is anything intrinsically wrong with each of those roads not taken, but because changing mid journey would be disrespectful to the gift already received.

Similarly for the priesthood, celibacy is not an assertion that women or marriage are somehow dirty or distasteful, rather that they are a good that one freely gives up in service of the Christ.

I realise I mashed up a few metaphors there but I hope you grasp my meaning.

Regards Doc

Okay, you said “I would suggest that having a desire to take a woman to wife with a view towards an eventual family is not necessarily adultery.”

Let me get this right… in other words if you wish to have a physical relationship with a woman who is not your wife it would not be considered adultery if you have the intention to thereafter establish a family with her? Hmm…

But I’m sure there are MANY very beautiful women out there whom you would gladly want to take as wife. So, while you’re ogling and hoping (intention) to make them your wife, your desires do not amount to adultery because your final intent is marriage.

In other words, the words of Jesus (If a man looks lustfully at a woman, he has already committed adultery in his heart) do not apply.

.

 

[Tietjen]

Because?

Because he doesn’t like it.

 

[DrDave]

Okay, you said “I would suggest that having a desire to take a woman to wife with a view towards an eventual family is not necessarily adultery.”

Let me get this right… in other words if you wish to have a physical relationship with a woman who is not your wife it would not be considered adultery if you have the intention to thereafter establish a family with her? Hmm…

But I’m sure there are MANY very beautiful women out there whom you would gladly want to take as wife. So, while you’re ogling and hoping (intention) to make them your wife, your desires do not amount to adultery because your final intent is marriage.

In other words, the words of Jesus (If a man looks lustfully at a woman, he has already committed adultery in his heart) do not apply.

Again you miss the entire point I’m trying to make.

Let me be as clear as I can be.

I fully accept what Jesus said equating looking lustfully at a woman with commiting adultery in ones heart.

What I don’t accept is where you (apparently) are equating the word ‘lustfully’ with any kind of attraction of a man for a woman.

My contention is that the term applies specifically to disordered attraction, and not at all to normal healthy attraction of a man for a woman, which by its nature is ordered towards the whole of the female person, and not just her ‘girlie bits’.

Regards Doc

 

[swariffin]

Let’s say you live in the times of the old testament, where some men take more than 1 wife. Eg. Abraham, Isaac etc.

Before you take the 2nd wife, I am sure that you would have found her desirable enough to be a wife. BUT…according to many interpretations, a married man who desires a woman who is not his wife (at least not yet the 2nd wife) would be committing an act of adultery, in his heart. So, the man actually SINs before he gets married.

What do you understand by the word ‘Adultery’ ?

.

The word adultery means unlawful desires to a woman who is not the wife. Even a bachelor who look at a girl in lust, has committed adultery. It is because such bachelor let his brain to be occupied by such lust.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Again you miss the entire point I’m trying to make.

Let me be as clear as I can be.

I fully accept what Jesus said equating looking lustfully at a woman with commiting adultery in ones heart.

What I don’t accept is where you (apparently) are equating the word ‘lustfully’ with any kind of attraction of a man for a woman.

My contention is that the term applies specifically to disordered attraction, and not at all to normal healthy attraction of a man for a woman, which by its nature is ordered towards the whole of the female person, and not just her ‘girlie bits’.

Regards Doc

Dave, you see the post above mine? Swariffin, too feels that the attraction is lust. It is not quite fair to say that your attraction is not lust when the desire to establish a family with the person would inevitably involve having a desire to mate.

So, attraction which is ordered is not lust…but attraction that is distorted is lust.

Can we then tell Jesus “erm…I’m looking at the woman with physical attraction towards her, but its not lust…my body just feels that attraction…and our mating will result in a family”

.

 

[DrDave]

Dave, you see the post above mine? Swariffin, too feels that the attraction is lust. It is not quite fair to say that your attraction is not lust when the desire to establish a family with the person would inevitably involve having a desire to mate.

So, attraction which is ordered is not lust…but attraction that is distorted is lust.

Can we then tell Jesus “erm…I’m looking at the woman with physical attraction towards her, but its not lust…my body just feels that attraction…and our mating will result in a family”

Have you ever had a desire to be one day sitting on a porch in a set of matching rocking chairs with a woman you have spent your entire life with whilst watching your grandchildren playing in the yard? by your definition (as I understand it) this is lust, by mine it isn’t

Regards Doc

 

[swariffin]

So, attraction which is ordered is not lust…but attraction that is distorted is lust.

.

Still, the question is there: How many times such “ordered attraction” occur? As Jesus, i.e God never intended to allow polygamy, the one so-called “ordered attraction” must be toward a single woman only, whom can be legally addressed as wife. There should be no second ordered attraction toward the second woman, etc.

 

[LilyM]

Rumpelstiltskin:

the desire to establish a family with the person would inevitably involve having a desire to mate.

The desire to mate isn’t wrong in the context of marriage - one can’t in fact mate with one’s God-given spouse (which is necessary to producing children) without that element of desire on at least the part of the man. Humans are the only beings in all creation that I’m aware of that have parts of their anatomy whose function is wholly and solely for sexual pleasure and which serve no other purpose. Pleasure is part and parcel of God’s design for human sexual relations, which is why it’s inscribed into our very anatomy.

Lust is DISORDERED desire, not all desire is disordered.

Adam and Eve couldn’t have (non-sinfully) consummated their marriage and conceived their children without the desire to mate. Neither could Abraham and Sarah. Remember Sarah laughing and saying ‘shall I have pleasure (sexual desire and congress) with my husband at my age’? Her doubt that God could make her fruitful may’ve been sinful, the desire for her husband wasn’t.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

The desire to mate isn’t wrong in the context of marriage - one can’t in fact mate with one’s God-given spouse (which is necessary to producing children) without that element of desire on at least the part of the man. Humans are the only beings in all creation that I’m aware of that have parts of their anatomy whose function is wholly and solely for sexual pleasure and which serve no other purpose. Pleasure is part and parcel of God’s design for human sexual relations, which is why it’s inscribed into our very anatomy.

And if you realise (hopefully soon), we are NOT talking about being married with the person.

Adam and Eve couldn’t have (non-sinfully) consummated their marriage and conceived their children without the desire to mate. Neither could Abraham and Sarah. Remember Sarah laughing and saying ‘shall I have pleasure (sexual desire and congress) with my husband at my age’? Her doubt that God could make her fruitful may’ve been sinful, the desire for her husband wasn’t.

Again, we are not talking about desiring the spouse. Please read the question before answering.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

the one so-called “ordered attraction” must be toward a single woman only, whom can be legally addressed as wife. There should be no second ordered attraction toward the second woman, etc.

And you have just repeated my question. IN other words a 2nd attraction (albeit even if she becomes a 2nd wife) is SIN.

So to you, all these great men sinned in their marriages - Abraham sinned, Moses sinned, Jacob sinned etc etc.

But how come God never said “You have sinned by marrying a 2nd wife” ? Not even Jesus.

.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Have you ever had a desire to be one day sitting on a porch in a set of matching rocking chairs with a woman you have spent your entire life with whilst watching your grandchildren playing in the yard? by your definition (as I understand it) this is lust, by mine it isn’t

Regards Doc

No, I’m not referring to the 1st woman you marry.

 

[DrDave]

Still, the question is there: How many times such “ordered attraction” occur? As Jesus, i.e God never intended to allow polygamy, the one so-called “ordered attraction” must be toward a single woman only, whom can be legally addressed as wife. There should be no second ordered attraction toward the second woman, etc.

If I might offer an analogy to hunger and eating, Eating is necessary for survival, yet deliberate pleasure seeking overeating is described by the Fathers as one of the seven deadly sins, gluttony. Hunger, the sensation we experience as a desire for food can be triggered by our bodies internal systems making us aware that we need more sustenance, but it can also be stimulated by other sources, smells, images, even memories.

So what do you call it when, upon leaving a resaurant, having consumed an ‘elegant sufficiency’ as my great aunt used to call it, you then see an advertisement for a block of chocolate on the side of a passing bus, and think to yourself ‘I could really go for one of those!’?

Having a desire to eat chocolate is not in and of itself sinful, but when one has just finished eating ‘enough’ or sometimes ‘more than enough’, choosing to dwell on this desire, or choosing to act on this desire, is what I would term ‘disordered’ and hence sinful (either avarice or gluttony).

The fault here doesn’t lie with the bus, the advert, the bus driver, or anyone at the advertising agency, nor does it lie with your initial subconscious reaction to the advert, that initial attraction, the fault (if it occurs) lies in the decision to dwell upon that desire, having recognised it for what it is (disordered) whether that dwelling resides purely in the mind or is later manifested in action.

Likewise with another human we find attractive, the fault doesn’t lie in the attraction, nor does it lie in recognising the attraction, the fault lies with the mental processes (and sometimes actions) that we might willfully engage in from that point on.

To me, to suggest that the fault lies in the very act of finding another attractive, is to suggest that only those rare individuals who (usually as a result of a mental disorder) find every other individual on the planet unattractive, are the only ones free of ‘adultery in their heart’. Under this schema, it would seem that the two year old who says ‘mummy looks nice’ is judged by Jesus to have commited this ‘adultery in his heart’. Sorry I just cant go there.

Regards Doc

 

[DCNBILL]

And you have just repeated my question. IN other words a 2nd attraction (albeit even if she becomes a 2nd wife) is SIN.

So to you, all these great men sinned in their marriages - Abraham sinned, Moses sinned, Jacob sinned etc etc.

But how come God never said “You have sinned by marrying a 2nd wife” ? Not even Jesus.

.

Other than Jesus what great or “holy” man has not sinned?
And note that Jesus was in the business of forgiveness and redemption rather than condemnation.

 

[larkin31]

Adultery is sex with a partner other than one’s living spouse. In your scenario, it is not adulterous to have been attracted to a a second wife.

my opinion

 

[swariffin]

And you have just repeated my question. IN other words a 2nd attraction (albeit even if she becomes a 2nd wife) is SIN.

So to you, all these great men sinned in their marriages - Abraham sinned, Moses sinned, Jacob sinned etc etc.

But how come God never said “You have sinned by marrying a 2nd wife” ? Not even Jesus.

.

Can you refer me to any verse in the bible that it was the will of God that Abraham, Jacob etc to take the second woman?

Jesus did not say “You have sinned by marrying a 2nd wife”. But, Jesus did say that “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Mat 19:4-6. Since the beginning God created One Man and One Woman to become One Flesh.

Those mentioned to have more than one wife were all not in accordance to God’s will. Was it sin or not? By definition, it was. Why God let Abraham, Jacob etc to have more than one wives? Certainly it is the right of God to decide. For instance, look at the case when Abraham got his second wife. Things were designed by human, not by God. Look at the impact. There is a great difference between Isaac’s descendants and Ismail’s descendant until today. Had Abraham obey God perfectly, there would not be any Hamas nor Osama bin Ladin. today

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Can you refer me to any verse in the bible that it was the will of God that Abraham, Jacob etc to take the second woman?

Jesus did not say “You have sinned by marrying a 2nd wife”. But, Jesus did say that “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Mat 19:4-6. Since the beginning God created One Man and One Woman to become One Flesh.

Having 2 wives doesn’t mean you’re pulling asunder the 1st wife.

Those mentioned to have more than one wife were all not in accordance to God’s will. Was it sin or not? By definition, it was. Why God let Abraham, Jacob etc to have more than one wives? Certainly it is the right of God to decide. For instance, look at the case when Abraham got his second wife. Things were designed by human, not by God. Look at the impact. There is a great difference between Isaac’s descendants and Ismail’s descendant until today. Had Abraham obey God perfectly, there would not be any Hamas nor Osama bin Ladin. today

If it was a sin, why was Solomon GIVEN so many wives? God even SAID that He will give even MORE if Solomon had wanted. So to you, God had encouraged sin?

Anyway, I’m not asking about Polygamy. I’m asking about Adultery, so let’s not digress.

 

[Carlan]

Believe it or not, I’m not trying to make any point. I put this question merely to prompt readers to put on their thinking hats. I do of course have a certain idea of what constitutes adultery here, but I may be wrong

For crying out loud, some of this stuff that gets started on Answers is so stupid!!!
If your 1st wife is dead and you remarry , there is no adultery.If you divorce wife # one, and remarry you are living in sin.ADULTERY, That is Church teaching like it or not! Carlan