Marriage Adultery Pornography

[1meBERMUDA]

14 people think that he didn't cheat...


Hmm hmm Jesus said that if a man lust after a woman (who isn't his wife) therefore he committed adultery in his mind

 

[Willie-T]

I can't help remembering that when another mob was bringing a similar case before Jesus, and citing the words of the law, He simply told those among them who had no sin, to cast the first stone.

 

[Depleted]

14 people think that he didn't cheat...


Hmm hmm Jesus said that if a man lust after a woman (who isn't his wife) therefore he committed adultery in his mind

Recommendation: Try not to bring up old posts from banned users. You have to be really bad (usually) to get banned off this site.

 

[TheOneMarcus]

I am sorry, but I have to disagree with the majority of this thread. First of all, the man did nothing but watch a video or look at a picture. I would understand if he was talking/flirting with a woman face to face, phone, text, or via the Internet, actually attempting to engage in trying to touch and have sex with the other woman. We all lust at one point in time of our lives and it all depends on who we lust after, the spouse or other than the spouse. Being a man myself, we are visual people and all it really takes is an image or a thought to get aroused. If he was looking at the woman, or women, and tried to search and find how he can meet her, or them, and in an attempt to have sex, then he has crossed the line into "lusting after."

I am a bible reader and I have never found a passage or reference to any SIN referring to a man looking at, in those days, a statue or painting of a nude woman or women. In the days when our LORD walked the earth, the Greeks/Romans had a plethora of nude statues and paintings everywhere, and even prostitutes on the street displaying themselves. I wouldn't even doubt there were public intercourses and/or orgies at that time. Now would it be a SIN for a man to look-at/watch, get aroused, and please himself but not engage or touch another person? The scriptures explains this kind of act is UNCLEAN in Leviticus and UNCLEAN is not a SIN. For example:

Leviticus 15
[SUP][SUP]16 [/SUP]Any man who has a flow of semen must take a bath, but he still remains unclean until evening. [SUP]17 [/SUP]If the semen touches anything made of cloth or leather, these must be washed, but they still remain unclean until evening. [SUP]18 [/SUP]After having sex, both the man and the woman must take a bath, but they still remain unclean until evening.

25 [/SUP]Any woman who has a flow of blood outside her regular monthly period is unclean until it stops, just as she is during her monthly period. [SUP]26 [/SUP]Anything that she rests on or sits on during this time is also unclean, just as it would be during her period. [SUP]27 [/SUP]If you touch either of these, you must wash your clothes and take a bath, but you still remain unclean until evening.

The man and woman in this example from scripture shows uncleanliness is not a SIN and everything is OK once they take a shower and wait for the sun to go down.

We as Christians cannot be so small minded and quick to judge a person for there actions. Doing so, we have SINNED worse than Douglas, if what he did is a SIN. Matthew 7:1: "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." (NIV)

Here is a good blog about the history of the term we are familiar with, and is too broad, sexual immorality: http://mathaytes.blogspot.com/2012/08/is-porn-porneia.html

Here is the comment/response I wrote in relation to this blog but it never posted:

Great insight on this matter. However, I disagree that looking-at and watching porn is a sin. Scripture is quite clear on what is a sin. Too many see these verse as a reason to call it a sin:

"Matthew 5:28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. "

and

" 2 Samuel 11:2 It happened, late one afternoon, when David arose from his couch and was walking on the roof of the king’s house, that he saw from the roof a woman bathing; and the woman was very beautiful."

However, in ancient times there was only one way to lust, to physically act on the lustful desire. If David only viewed the woman from his roof and went back to his couch to masturbate while thinking about the woman or even still looking at her, it probably would not even make into the bible, other than he made himself unclean according to Leviticus 15:16. Yet, he acted on the desire, sent someone to get the woman for him, he then commend the sin of lust with her, and then later broke a commandment of GOD, the father YahWeh, committing murder to cover-up his disgrace.

I believe that viewing pornography is only unclean which can be fixed by bathing and praying for forgiveness now we have Yahshua, Jesus, as our savior and we no longer have the need to make any blood sacrifices.
The list of sexual sins in Leviticus all require physical contact, such as in the days of the Messiah and still today. Moreover, in those days, there were depictions and statues of sexual images that the Messiah and the Apostles never talked about, but only referred to the sexual sins in Leviticus.

The people in pornography can qualify as prostitutes, selling their bodies for sexual desires of others, and we should refrain from having any sexual contact, physical, with these people since it will be the actual act of a sexual sin.



Therefore, in this case, Douglas has not SINNED, but made himself UNCLEAN. Therefore, there is no actual reason or permit for his wife to have a biblically backed divorce for simply looking-at/watching porn. I hope this was insightful for most of you. I look forward to continuing this discussion with all of you, my brothers and sisters in Christ/Messiah.


PS: Yes porn can be addictive just like many other things in this world we live in can become addictive. Once anything becomes #1 in your life other than GOD, then you have SINNED against the #1 commandment of the FATHER.

Wow ... I got nothing back from this?

 

[blue_ladybug]

Apparently not.. lol

But I will say this.. the act of masturbation, and touching yourself is a sin. It's a sin against your own body. God didn't mean for us to have sex with ourselves, or to pleasure ourselves with masturbation or sex toys. Masturbation is caused by lust and lust is a sin. Lust leads to adultery, and adultery is also a sin..

Wow ... I got nothing back from this?

 

[tourist]

Wow ... I got nothing back from this?

You waited 1 1/2 years before checking to see if your post got a response?

 

[blue_ladybug]

LOL...............

You waited 1 1/2 years before checking to see if your post got a response?

 

[JaimeMartinez26]

Setting the scenario:

Chip Douglas is a married man who works for the cable company. He has never physically cheated on his wife, Julia Gulia Douglas, nor has he ever had personal communication with any other woman. They are both Christians and have ups and downs with their walk with the Savior Jesus Christ. During one of the downs, Julia Gulia wakes up in the middle of the night and notices her husband watching porn on their cable television (masturbation included).

Questions for this specific scenario:

1.) Did the cable guy, Chip Douglas, "cheat"/commit adultery? If yes, does this give biblical grounds for his wife to divorce her husband as he has committed adultery? If it's not, please explain why you think he didn't "cheat"/commit adultery.

2.) Matthew 5:28 "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." If Chip Douglas wasn't even watching porn, but lusted after Julia Gulia's best friend, is the adultery (committed in the heart) grounds for his wife to have a biblical divorce? If so, would it make almost 100% (if not 100%) of marriage eligible for biblical divorces? If it does not mean that, what does it mean exactly?

3.) If lusting (in the heart) is not grounds for a biblical divorce, would the ONLY difference between Chip lusting in his heart and watching pornography be that one involved manual physical activity and the other was mental? If so, to be consistent with principles and beliefs (assuming you believe lust is not grounds for a biblical divorce), then watching porn is not eligible for a biblical divorce (even if he refuses to stop watching it), correct?



Please answer any and all questions. I want people to vote, but I value written responses just as I do a quick vote. Thank you.

1. yes thats adultry... grounds for divorce says fornication specifically so i dont think so

2. and 3. are void


because adultry isnt always fornication

 

[JaimeMartinez26]

1. yes thats adultry... grounds for divorce says fornication specifically so i dont think so

2. and 3. are void


because adultry isnt always fornication

in my bible adultry says

unchastity ;unfaithfulness to ones husband or wife

my bible doesnt define fornication but i looked it up via google


and it says sex between two unmarried people



i think theres a difference

but i may be wrong

both definitely unfaithful and outright insulting to God and chips wife

 

[presidente]

I would say the poll has 'bad questions.' It forces the respondent to equate 'cheat' and 'commit adultery.'

Man and wife are one flesh. The Lord looks on the heart. Looking with lust is a sin in the heart against the Lord.

If looking with lust were grounds for divorce, then is hating your brother or calling him 'raca' deserving of the death penalty? Is it appropriate to put someone to death for saying, "I hate you." How about life imprison? He who hates his brother is a murderer.

Again, God looks on the heart. The heart of a man who hates is brother is not right before God. But that doesn't mean we should execute such a man.

Why would we expect that a believer would be willing to stay with a husband who 'be willing to dwell with her' if she is supposed to leave him if he ever looks with lust?

If it is acceptable to divorce a spouse who looks with lust, that would really open the door for more divorce. This, to me, seems like using a teaching on righteousness in such a way as to promote unrighteousness.

Is there a verse in the New Testament that tells women they can divorce their husbands for actually committing the act of adultery? Why not start from that first, before arguing for these other, looser applications.

 

[presidente]

If I went out and bought a new Lamborgini, and you saw it and coveted it, would you be obligated to give me four new Lamborginis?