I think the reference people are thinking of is the one in 1 Corinthians 6 (bolding mine):
This is the reason that many FC’s justify attacking those with “other” sexual moralities with special vigour and vitriol - they see sexual sins as in a whole new category altogether…
It is worth remembering that it wasn’t too long ago that the “missionary position” gained its name as being the only sexual position that was approved of (by missionaries to the “ignorant native peoples”).
Grim
I don’t know.
I’m truly puzzled.
You’re idea of adultery isn’t what I beleive in or believe the Bible teaches. It doesn’t say that it’s not adultery if both parties are aware and agreeable. Adultery is adultery, period, which is having sex with someone other than your spouse. Am I understanding you in that you’re saying that it was necessary for a certain couple to commit adultery in order to save the marriage? I find this whole thing mind boggling. Committing sin to save a marriage??? Come on!
Romans 6:1-2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
I just don’t get it. How can you advocate adultery in any form, being a Christian? There aren’t any conditions put on it in the Bible. “Thou shalt not committ adultery”, period. I just don’t understand you.
And just where are the conditions about divorce and remarriage that state that it’s o.k. to continue to sin after you’ve prayed for forgiveness? Did you ever think to apply Romans 6:1-2 to your own situation?
Could you expand on the Biblical definition of adultery - how you come to the conclusion that ‘Adultery is adultery, period, which is having sex with someone other than your spouse’ - i.e. regardless of consent/awareness of spouse?
It needs no clarification, in my opinion. They knew what it was back then and people know what it is now.
American College Dictionary:
Adultery - Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and any other than the lawful spouse.
This whole thing is ridiculous to me. People just want to muddy the waters as to what adultery is so they can engage in it freely evidently. :smack: I find it very hard to believe that you don’t know what adultery is. And it was carrried even further in the new testament to include looking on a woman with lust.
So, pulleeez, stop trying to convince me that you don’t know what adulter is. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
His4ever wrote:
Evidently. At least for one people.
I knew someone was going to say something like that.
though you mean one person
I’ll see your American College Dictionary and raise you an Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary:
And a Wordnet reference too:
Once again, I find your world of black and white, on close examination, to be composed of myriad shades of grey.
I’ll never agree with you that open marriage is not a sin, I don’t care if all parties accept the activity.
illicit - not permitted or authorized; unlicensed; unlawful. Forbidden
I don’t understand any of you, especially those who say they’re Christians and then advocate open adulterous marrriage. It’s simply mind boggling. That’s about all I can say.
All things are permissable, anything goes, God accepts it as long as it makes you happy and no one is hurt and nothing is done behind other’s backs, etc etc etc. Ad nauseum, infinitum… Riiiiiggggghhhhhhhtttttttt!!!
NOT! That’s not what I see in His word. Yikes!!!
:smack: :eek: :smack: :eek: :smack: :eek: :smack: :eek: :smack::eek: :smack: :eek: :smack: :eek: :smack: :eek: :smack:
His4ever wrote:
No one is advocating open adulterous marriage, dear. Your mind is easily boggled.
I believe there is rules to be followed.
I believe the adultery was brought up when a homosexual turned straight wanted a dildio shoved up his rectum for old time sake. He was thinking of someone else so adultery, that is how I percieve it.:smack: for GOODNESS SAKE.
Hmm. I find the concept of open marriages very discomforting, myself, but let’s think this through. From the perspective of God as the Great Lawgiver (the one His and a few others, theist or not, espouse as their working hypothesis in religious discussions), then adultery has to be a sin because God said so. Note that Mangetout’s definitions create certain exemptions, many of which are Scriptural. For example, the married Jewish man whose brother dies childless is honorbound to sleep with his brother’s widow until she conceives, to “raise up a son for his brother.” I suspect strongly that the rabbis did not consider it sinful for him to derive sexual pleasure from this admittedly-adulterous but required by Torah act. Or the man who wakes fuzzy-headed in the middle of the night and is roused to sexual activity by what he conceives to be his wife but is actually another woman who has climbed into his bed (or the other way around, a woman thinking she’s making love to her husband) – this is non-willful and hence not a violation of the commandment.
At rock bottom, though, if you look at sin not as a violation of black-and-white Bible commandments but as acting against love of God and fellow man, the reason against adultery is that it represents a violation of a vow made to the spouse at marriage for lifelong chastity, having sex only with one’s spouse. Presumably a couple in an open marriage would write their own promises and refrain from promising this exclusivity of sex – and would not be guilty of violating that vow. Further, I can conceive of situations in which husband and wife might agree that one of them having sex with a third person is an act of compassionate love needed for the mental and spiritual health of that third person – think, if you will, of the Tea and Sympathy scenario with a husband equally concerned for the boy lurking on the sidelines of the book’s plot.
I think people like Libertarian, Homebrew, CJ and myself have spelled out what our stances are and how they differ from what you have said in that quoted passage enough times that I would consider this a blatant insult if you intended it to apply to any of us. I’ll expect to see a clarification or retraction of it at some point in the near future, if you please.
You can come up with any conceived scenario that you wish, it doesn’t matter if the spouses agree or not. And committing adultery is an act of compassionate love? Sorry but I don’t think God’s gonna say that “ohh go ahead and help that person’s mental and spiritual health by committing an act that I’ve condemned.” Give me a break, please! I’m sorry but listening to stuff like this baloney has got my dander up. And what in the world do you mean by couples not violating a vow if they decide not be have sex exclusively with eath other???
Excuse me, but I don’t care how many agreements people make with each other, it’s still wrong. Man oh man. What’s next around here?
Yes it is never knowing what is next.
Just because it works for a time don’t make it right.
As Solomon said be satisified with the wife of thy youth. I believe we are supposed to be faithful to our spouses and no fair changing Gods rules. 0887
Thank you for your answer. I believe that God understands human situations and does not demand adherence to one-size-fits-all rules – you obviously took what you wanted to be mad at out of my post, and ignored the rest.
But, with the measure you judge by, you shall be judged – if you intend that others stop sinning by your reading of God’s word, when will you be getting your divorce? Soon, I hope – God obviously doesn’t want you to be happy with a man whom you love and who loves you, if it’s in violation of His Commandments. And, as people have pointed out to you repeatedly, a literalist reading of Jesus’s words makes you an ongoing adulteress.
The fact that I don’t believe you are, and that I think you’re entitled to marital happiness, doesn’t matter – if you’re insistent on applying Scripture in what you take as the literal meaning, you’re honorbound to see a lawyer ASAP and start proceedings to ditch him, or continue in sin – by your standards, because if the Law applies literally, that means it applies to you too! As for the last paragraph of my post, which you chose to ignore, we will discuss this later, in the appropriate forum.
Personal info removed at poster’s req. --Gaudere
His4ever wrote:
…said Peter to John when Jesus went to Levi’s house. 
Yes, that’s right 0887.
Polycarp, so anything goes, right? Homosexuality, now adultery. That’s what I’m hearing from you, anything goes in certain situations as long as people are happy. Sounds a lot like situation ethics to me and not Biblical truth. That’s my opinion. And I’m not disgussing my marriage anymore period. I’ve given my opinion on that and the differences involved in these other things. I’m done talking about it. You’re not getting it.
Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
I need a break. I should stop even coming here to read anything for awhile because I always come across something I feel I have to answer. I’m letting myself get too upset over what people are saying here, especially what I’m hearing coming out of the mouths of those who say they’re Christians. I will never understand it, just as you will never understand me.
JerseyDiamond, Joe_Cool, and I are not about to trade what we know to be true for your gospel of situtation ethics. Joe and Jersey, if I misrepresent you in anyway, please correct me. My stance for the most part, is the same as theirs.
I don’t know why I’ve let myself get so upset because I know there’s people who think like you do. And I’m sorry that I’ve let my anger come out so much but if I"m hearing what I think I’m hearing hear, something is very wrong. Good day
His4Ever is leaving for a bit?
throws streamers and confetti
I’ll believe it when I see it.
His4ever wrote:
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices — mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law — justice, mercy and faithfulness… You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?” — Jesus (Matthew 23:23, 33)