Using the Word deceiptfully the way "The Way" did messes with truth in two ways.
First, there's the screwy doctrines TWI came up with. In retrospect, many of them are now obvious to us as are the bad fruit of following such doctrines.
Second, and more insidious, are the many losses of the right applications of the truths that TWI twisted to their own destruction.
We readily reject the idea of spiritual adultery as TWI used it as an excuse for physical adultery - and rightfully so. But then, having no right understanding of the concept of spiritual adultery, we reject the whole concept as unbiblical.
As Oakspear pointed out, the concept is there in the bible as any are free to see.
But the reality of spiritual fornication was never used as an excuse for physical fornication in the bible; on the contrary, it was many times associated with it. But it was bigger; it was a matter of the heart.
The same Jesus who said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of your hearts said, "That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven...Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery, but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
That's hardly an excuse to commit physical adultery; it's a call to attention to the arena in which adultery really takes place - the heart.
Isaiah 23:17 And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.
Is it any more moronic to consider that a city can commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world than that the term fornication can have a spiritual definition as well as a physical one? The wickedness and idolatry of this city are frequently denounced by the prophets, adn its final destruction predicted (Isa. 23:1; Jer. 25:22; Ezek. 26;28:1-19; Amos 1:9&10; Zech. 9:2-4. The wickedness and idolatry of this city WAS spiritual fornication.
Revelation 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.
22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.
23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.
24 But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden.
Do you really think that is all about some people who had sex with someone named Jezebel?
And these?
Revelation 14:8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
Revelation 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Revelation 18:9 ¶And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
Revelation 19:2 For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.
Wow, that's one active whore!
Nah, I would think that "Because iniquity shall abound the love of many shall wax cold" is a less moronic explanation for that magnitude of fornication.
I don't want to wax moronically dramatic here, but in the context of this type of fornication, the Word does say, He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. Revelation 2:29 Might be something deeper than zipping your pants up.
Sky, you don't think someone can commit adultery without actually having sex with someone who is not their spouse? What then, do you call it when someone gives more of their heart and love to someone who is not their spouse?
No i do not. Call it, inordinate affection, promiscutiy... Im sure theres other descriptive ajectives describing a wayward heart.
Danny:
I agree
Oak and Thomas:
Without question there some occassions in the old testament which corralate a person playing the harlot bieng somewhat similiar to leaving or forsaking God.
Thomas your comment:
Do you really think that is all about some people who had sex with someone named Jezebel?
No it is not. It is about people who have accepted and live according to "her doctrine that she taught" Furthermore I dont have any problem understanding the term fornication in Revelation as anything other than a society engaged in runaway sex.
"adultery" - or more with the "heart" underlying the same, as you pointed with one example?
Does it necessitate one coming up with a "spiritual" doppelganger of adultery, as if the "physical" version wasn't bad enough?
What is also apparent from the examples you cited is that fornication can be presented literally or metaphorically or even collectively.
I suspect any disagreements we might have has more to do with a question of semantics.
I would be more inclined to consider a "spiritual" angle to adultery than come up with a spiritual version or double for the vice, as was done in the Way.
Did the Way leaders for one minute consider the spiritual "side" of the physical adultery they were committing? (or that their physical fornication stemmed from their spiritual state?) No, to the contrary - to them (as I had often heard) "spiritual fornication" was the act of believing the trinity.
I would be more inclined to consider a "spiritual" angle to adultery than come up with a spiritual version or double for the vice, as was done in the Way.
Once again u summed up my thoughts in a few short words, thank you.
Ah, excellent post yourself, Dan (thanks for the compliment).
Control the vocabulary, and one controls the range of possibilities in the argument. I'll think twice before I use the term spiritual adultery again. Perhaps I'll never use it again. Or perhaps I shall. But I appreciate the opportunity to engage in open-minded discussion about it and think this thing through with you.
I like your viewpoint of considering "a 'spiritual' ANGLE [emphasis added] to adultery" rather than "a 'spiritual' DOPPELGANGER [emphasis added] of adultery, as if the 'physical' version wasn't bad enough." The "angle" angle fits better. But only where the relationship is one to one: spiritual to physical adultery (guess I just used the term already). Actually, I don't think the "physical" version is bad enough to convey the reality many times - but that's an aside.
The thing is that I'm not as all convinced that spiritual adultery is always restricted to the spiritual angle to adultery. I think phrases like "whoring after other gods" fall within the realm of spiritual fornication or adultery but are much broader in scope than the spiritual angle on "physical" adultery. The illicit sexual character of the phrase is apparent, but there is no justification for restricting the physical counterpart to adultery. It includes putting any god before the true God in a manner characterized as whoring.
"Did the Way leaders for one minute consider the spiritual 'side' of the physical adultery they were committing?" I don't know, Danny; I wonder. No such considerations ever made it to the forefront of any "doctrinal" teaching concerning the spiritual 'side' of the physical adultery they were committing - that's for sure. Any possible pangs of conscience deferred to personal security and systemic considerations. The idea that "spiritual fornication" was the act of believing the trinity - you know, by definition - was ludicrous. Any attempt to restrict the concept to that had to have been a ploy of excuse and political advocacy.
Speaking of the heart of this thread - I am still speaking with you, Danny, but more directly with sky here. Abigail said:
quote:
Sky, you don't think someone can commit adultery without actually having sex with someone who is not their spouse? What then, do you call it when someone gives more of their heart and love to someone who is not their spouse?
Sky responded
quote:
No i do not. Call it, inordinate affection, promiscutiy... Im sure theres other descriptive ajectives describing a wayward heart.
Again, Jesus said, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery, but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
It seems to me, Sky, correct me if I'm wrong, that when you say you don't "think someone can commit adultery without actually having sex with someone who is not their spouse," you are taking the position of the Pharisees described by Jesus as something that "was said by them of old time" in contrast to the saying of Jesus "that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart?"
I don't want to be inflammatory here; I just don't see it any other way. Correct me if you have another perspective on it that I don't see.
It seems to me, Sky, correct me if I'm wrong, that when you say you don't "think someone can commit adultery without actually having sex with someone who is not their spouse," you are taking the position of the Pharisees described by Jesus as something that "was said by them of old time" in contrast to the saying of Jesus "that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart?"
I don't want to be inflammatory here; I just don't see it any other way. Correct me if you have another perspective on it that I don't see.
No offense taken Thomas. I think its healthy to have back and forth dialogue. I think its great here at GS that we have that kind of format.
Of course a bad heart would say, "if ive already lusted then why not pick the whole banana too?"
The point bieng by Jesus , u cut off the root of the problem before u find yourself acting out on the lust.
Abby did bring up a good point which i dont think i spoke enough about. Of course its wrong to go out on your spouse and flirt with another, but isnt it also true when people act like that that if they dont cut it off they end up in a bed of adultry? That would be my point. Commiting adultry in ones heart, was a wise statement to us was it not? For if we censure our heart, the problem goes away and u wouldnt committ the act.
I do think its dangerous Thomas, for anyone to bring sexual adultry into the temple of God and call it pure. (I am not saying u or anyone here at GS are doing that) Why? Because people can get sick and die. They would be far better off if they took it outside and said this is the way we want to live. God is holy, and he will never tolerate it. The problem is is that its infectious to those whose motives are pure.
I think I understand what you're saying. Let me see.
quote:
Commiting adultry in ones heart, was a wise statement to us was it not? For if we censure our heart, the problem goes away and u wouldnt committ the act.
Are you saying that committing adultery in one's heart is a figure of speech - not literally true, but said for emphasis to get a point across, the point here being, as you said, "if we censure our heart, the problem goes away and u wouldnt committ the act?" Jesus talks about committing adultery in the heart, but he doesn't really mean that literally?
There just seems to be too much there in the record and elsewhere to indicate that is not the meaning.
For one thing, there is the time element. As you indicated, Jesus is plainly stating that one who looks to lust after has already committed adultery before he ever gets to the bed.
For another, Jesus is going beyond physical adultery considerations, not just for emphasis; but he's saying that even if one was to go without committing adultery in bed, they still couldn't get into the kingdom of heaven without this greater righteousness that he's talking about - that's quite a difference. It's much more than a wise saying to make a point so we don't commit adultery in bed. It's a real difference between a standard of righteousness that was presented by the Pharisees representing Moses and a new standard that Jesus was presenting.
Proverbs 4:23 Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life. The issues of life proceed from the heart, not from between the legs. Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
The heart is not just the place where temptation starts; it's where the decisions of life happen.
If someone steals something, he decides to do so before he ever acts on it.
Jesus is the healer of broken hearts because that's the arena he works in because that's where life happens.
Likewise, if we want our hearts, our lives, our marriages, families, and other relationships to be healed, we have to attend to the "affairs" of our hearts. The loyalties of our hearts determine whether we enter into the kingdom of heaven (God), and I'm not talking about salvation; I'm talking about the heavenly things that we can enjoy in this life - as was Jesus.
That's the righteousness that exceeds the righteousness of the Pharisees without which Jesus said, "Ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven [in the marriage relationship in our discussion]."
No I am not saying its a figure of speech. The statement of the Lords also says, "looketh after a woman to lust after her hath already ......" Doubtless when a beatiful woman passes by she raises a few eyebrows. Is that what he is talking about here? I dont think so. The concept involves lust, and looking after.... the matter. It must therefore reach a little higher level in the brain, wether fantasy, chasing after the person.. u know what I mean. It is also very consistent with what James said in James 1:15 ," then when lust hath concieved it bringeth forth sin..." Is it a sin to have lust? No, it doesnt say that. Its only a sin if u let lust run its course to what its lusting after: if one doesnt, for lack of a better term, bring the lust to the cross and get rid of it.
No, I dont think not committing adultery is the only thing one must do to enter into the kingdom of heaven. I do think however its a prerequisite and would be considered a good start. Consider that the Lord called them a "wicked and adulterous generation."
I certainly agree with you that examining ones heart is a good place to be at in terms of searching God and seeking to know him. I fail to see the need however, to think adultery means anything other than wrongful sex within that context. I suppose one could use the term spiritual adultery or heart adultery to look at ones heart and weed out "lust" or other vices that are entering in; I certainly dont have any problem with that.
Lastly u mentioned that u thought my suggestions where a bit more on the pharacetical side. The Lord was considerably more liberal with the Sabath and rituals then they were. He did however, never once comprismise on issues of adultery or covetousness; in fact he identified covetousness as the ingredient to hypocrasy and lust as the incredient to adultery. Furthermore the issue of adultery was the one he was most quizzed upon by the rulers. From that he said that divorce was adultery with one exception, " saving for the cause of fornication" One can argue his viewpoints were more stingent than the law of Moses.
Thanks for the further explanation, sky - good post!
quote:
No I am not saying its a figure of speech
Okay, agreed.
quote:
Doubtless when a beatiful woman passes by she raises a few eyebrows. Is that what he is talking about here? I dont think so
I don't think so either.
quote:
wether fantasy, chasing after the person.. u know what I mean
I do & I think you are absolutely correct.
quote:
I fail to see the need however, to think adultery means anything other than wrongful sex within that context.
I don't understand this statement, sky, especially in the light of your previous statements. If Jesus' words "hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" are not figurative, then it is possible to commit adultery in the heart. I'm caught between Dan who takes exception to the term "spiritual adultery" and you who will accept "spiritual adultery or heart adultery."
I don't want to get hung up in the semantic rut that Dan spoke of. I'm not fighting here for a term. The term "spiritual adultery" may be okay or it may be a funky TWIism to be avoided - AND to make communication here all the harder.
I'm fine with your understanding of "fantasy" or "chasing after the person." The point is that Jesus calls it adultery and it takes place in the heart. It's not temptation to be cut off. It's a done deal. That "higher level in the brain" that you spoke of is where consummation resides. It (whatever it is - & I think you know what I mean just the way that you said "u know what I mean" has happened in the heart and it is called adultery by Jesus.
Adultery can mean anything from extramarital sex to making something impure by adding extraneous, improper, or inferior ingredients.
Where do we place this usage? Suffice it to say that it really is literally, not figuratively,adultery, that it takes place in the heart, and that it keeps the marriage out of the heavenly state God intended for marriage.
Lastly, you stated:
quote:
One can argue his viewpoints were more stingent than the law of Moses.
Absolutely! Because his viewpoints are a matter of the heart, not just the actions.
But consdider this. Jesus said to come unto him, all of us who labour and are heavy laden, and he will give us rest.
Why? Because he is meek and lowly in heart and we will find rest to our souls if we take his yoke upon us and learn of him. If we are meek and lowly...I figure that this adultery business is on a higher level than that of the Pharisees. The higher, more stringent if you will, level is the level of the loyalties of our hearts.
Be meek and lowly with regard to the loyalties of our hearts, and we will dwell in heavenly places and find rest to our souls.
That yoke is easy. That burden is light.
I'm just trying to say that kind of honesty will save our marriages.
Or not. It takes two.
But that's what this thread is about. And that's the level honesty has to dwell in to bring about resolution and redemtion - with respect to marriage.
I'm presuming that's what is behind this - I know it is not semantics.
Jesus wasn't about either the Pharisees or semantics - he was about what it is.
I really agree with your last post. If one wants to say heart adultry is spiritual adultry, I have no plem with that. The point I was trying to make Thomas is that the word adultery is first and foremost associated with a sexual act. I realize it is used as an adjective in society , to descibe something that is polluted, and the content is not always sexual. However , most of the times when someone descibes something polluted they use other adjectives.
My main point was that to say that adultery in scripture is spiritual and not associated with a sexual act, defies the meaning of the word and hence was an excuse for developing the term by some to engage in sex,,,, or lust if u will.
I never meant to give the impression that the term ever could be completely disassociated from a sexual act no matter what other connotations or denotations be involved.
I also agree completely that TWI used that exact fallacious disassociation as a cover for their sexual practices.
I just don't care about their excuses as much as I care about your excuses and my excuses (not that they are the same as TWI's excuses) and Jesus' approach to us to get us to be honest concerning our heart's loyalties so that our marriages can be healed.
Just my attempt to take the Word personally.
I don't think the horse is without life until he's served his purpose and the healing has been delivered.
But I won't belabor the point (or perhaps I won't belabor the point any more :)-->).
The word adulterate which is the root for the word adultery means as Tom suggested above to introduce something foreign into something that previously was free from such contamination or dilution. Example: A bartender adulterates wine by diluting it with water in order to increase the volume so he can sell more thus depriving his customer of the enjoyment of the purity of the undiluted wine. The effect of this "adultery" is to contaminate the relationship between the bartender and his patron by betraying the trust the patron has placed in the bartender.
If we now take this understanding of the word adultery and apply it to what happens when an extra-marital affair contaminates the purity of the relationship that began when the two pledged a vow of loyalty and then consummated it by having sexual intercourse(which is the most intimate of human experiences). It is an act of betrayal which has the same effect on the relationship as it does on the wine. Like the diluted wine the intimacy and trust between the two partners cannot be made pure again. It is the ultimate breech of loyalty.
Does this shed any light on the subject or am I just stating the obvious?
Recommended Posts
Tom
Using the Word deceiptfully the way "The Way" did messes with truth in two ways.
First, there's the screwy doctrines TWI came up with. In retrospect, many of them are now obvious to us as are the bad fruit of following such doctrines.
Second, and more insidious, are the many losses of the right applications of the truths that TWI twisted to their own destruction.
We readily reject the idea of spiritual adultery as TWI used it as an excuse for physical adultery - and rightfully so. But then, having no right understanding of the concept of spiritual adultery, we reject the whole concept as unbiblical.
As Oakspear pointed out, the concept is there in the bible as any are free to see.
But the reality of spiritual fornication was never used as an excuse for physical fornication in the bible; on the contrary, it was many times associated with it. But it was bigger; it was a matter of the heart.
The same Jesus who said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of your hearts said, "That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven...Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery, but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
That's hardly an excuse to commit physical adultery; it's a call to attention to the arena in which adultery really takes place - the heart.
Isaiah 23:17 And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.
Is it any more moronic to consider that a city can commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world than that the term fornication can have a spiritual definition as well as a physical one? The wickedness and idolatry of this city are frequently denounced by the prophets, adn its final destruction predicted (Isa. 23:1; Jer. 25:22; Ezek. 26;28:1-19; Amos 1:9&10; Zech. 9:2-4. The wickedness and idolatry of this city WAS spiritual fornication.
Revelation 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.
22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.
23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.
24 But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden.
Do you really think that is all about some people who had sex with someone named Jezebel?
And these?
Revelation 14:8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
Revelation 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Revelation 18:9 ¶And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
Revelation 19:2 For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.
Wow, that's one active whore!
Nah, I would think that "Because iniquity shall abound the love of many shall wax cold" is a less moronic explanation for that magnitude of fornication.
I don't want to wax moronically dramatic here, but in the context of this type of fornication, the Word does say, He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. Revelation 2:29 Might be something deeper than zipping your pants up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Abigail:
No i do not. Call it, inordinate affection, promiscutiy... Im sure theres other descriptive ajectives describing a wayward heart.
Danny:
I agree
Oak and Thomas:
Without question there some occassions in the old testament which corralate a person playing the harlot bieng somewhat similiar to leaving or forsaking God.
Thomas your comment:
Do you really think that is all about some people who had sex with someone named Jezebel?
No it is not. It is about people who have accepted and live according to "her doctrine that she taught" Furthermore I dont have any problem understanding the term fornication in Revelation as anything other than a society engaged in runaway sex.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Excellent post, Tom.
But are we concerned with a different kind of
"adultery" - or more with the "heart" underlying the same, as you pointed with one example?
Does it necessitate one coming up with a "spiritual" doppelganger of adultery, as if the "physical" version wasn't bad enough?
What is also apparent from the examples you cited is that fornication can be presented literally or metaphorically or even collectively.
I suspect any disagreements we might have has more to do with a question of semantics.
I would be more inclined to consider a "spiritual" angle to adultery than come up with a spiritual version or double for the vice, as was done in the Way.
Did the Way leaders for one minute consider the spiritual "side" of the physical adultery they were committing? (or that their physical fornication stemmed from their spiritual state?) No, to the contrary - to them (as I had often heard) "spiritual fornication" was the act of believing the trinity.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
danny:
your comment:
I would be more inclined to consider a "spiritual" angle to adultery than come up with a spiritual version or double for the vice, as was done in the Way.
Once again u summed up my thoughts in a few short words, thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Sky -
You're very welcome.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Ah, excellent post yourself, Dan (thanks for the compliment).
Control the vocabulary, and one controls the range of possibilities in the argument. I'll think twice before I use the term spiritual adultery again. Perhaps I'll never use it again. Or perhaps I shall. But I appreciate the opportunity to engage in open-minded discussion about it and think this thing through with you.
I like your viewpoint of considering "a 'spiritual' ANGLE [emphasis added] to adultery" rather than "a 'spiritual' DOPPELGANGER [emphasis added] of adultery, as if the 'physical' version wasn't bad enough." The "angle" angle fits better. But only where the relationship is one to one: spiritual to physical adultery (guess I just used the term already). Actually, I don't think the "physical" version is bad enough to convey the reality many times - but that's an aside.
The thing is that I'm not as all convinced that spiritual adultery is always restricted to the spiritual angle to adultery. I think phrases like "whoring after other gods" fall within the realm of spiritual fornication or adultery but are much broader in scope than the spiritual angle on "physical" adultery. The illicit sexual character of the phrase is apparent, but there is no justification for restricting the physical counterpart to adultery. It includes putting any god before the true God in a manner characterized as whoring.
"Did the Way leaders for one minute consider the spiritual 'side' of the physical adultery they were committing?" I don't know, Danny; I wonder. No such considerations ever made it to the forefront of any "doctrinal" teaching concerning the spiritual 'side' of the physical adultery they were committing - that's for sure. Any possible pangs of conscience deferred to personal security and systemic considerations. The idea that "spiritual fornication" was the act of believing the trinity - you know, by definition - was ludicrous. Any attempt to restrict the concept to that had to have been a ploy of excuse and political advocacy.
Speaking of the heart of this thread - I am still speaking with you, Danny, but more directly with sky here. Abigail said:
Sky responded
Again, Jesus said, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery, but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
It seems to me, Sky, correct me if I'm wrong, that when you say you don't "think someone can commit adultery without actually having sex with someone who is not their spouse," you are taking the position of the Pharisees described by Jesus as something that "was said by them of old time" in contrast to the saying of Jesus "that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart?"
I don't want to be inflammatory here; I just don't see it any other way. Correct me if you have another perspective on it that I don't see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
thomas ur comment:
No offense taken Thomas. I think its healthy to have back and forth dialogue. I think its great here at GS that we have that kind of format.
Of course a bad heart would say, "if ive already lusted then why not pick the whole banana too?"
The point bieng by Jesus , u cut off the root of the problem before u find yourself acting out on the lust.
Abby did bring up a good point which i dont think i spoke enough about. Of course its wrong to go out on your spouse and flirt with another, but isnt it also true when people act like that that if they dont cut it off they end up in a bed of adultry? That would be my point. Commiting adultry in ones heart, was a wise statement to us was it not? For if we censure our heart, the problem goes away and u wouldnt committ the act.
I do think its dangerous Thomas, for anyone to bring sexual adultry into the temple of God and call it pure. (I am not saying u or anyone here at GS are doing that) Why? Because people can get sick and die. They would be far better off if they took it outside and said this is the way we want to live. God is holy, and he will never tolerate it. The problem is is that its infectious to those whose motives are pure.
Edited by sky4itLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Thanks for the explanation, sky.
I think I understand what you're saying. Let me see.
Are you saying that committing adultery in one's heart is a figure of speech - not literally true, but said for emphasis to get a point across, the point here being, as you said, "if we censure our heart, the problem goes away and u wouldnt committ the act?" Jesus talks about committing adultery in the heart, but he doesn't really mean that literally?
There just seems to be too much there in the record and elsewhere to indicate that is not the meaning.
The heart is not just the place where temptation starts; it's where the decisions of life happen.
If someone steals something, he decides to do so before he ever acts on it.
Jesus is the healer of broken hearts because that's the arena he works in because that's where life happens.
Likewise, if we want our hearts, our lives, our marriages, families, and other relationships to be healed, we have to attend to the "affairs" of our hearts. The loyalties of our hearts determine whether we enter into the kingdom of heaven (God), and I'm not talking about salvation; I'm talking about the heavenly things that we can enjoy in this life - as was Jesus.
That's the righteousness that exceeds the righteousness of the Pharisees without which Jesus said, "Ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven [in the marriage relationship in our discussion]."
Tom
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Thomas:
No I am not saying its a figure of speech. The statement of the Lords also says, "looketh after a woman to lust after her hath already ......" Doubtless when a beatiful woman passes by she raises a few eyebrows. Is that what he is talking about here? I dont think so. The concept involves lust, and looking after.... the matter. It must therefore reach a little higher level in the brain, wether fantasy, chasing after the person.. u know what I mean. It is also very consistent with what James said in James 1:15 ," then when lust hath concieved it bringeth forth sin..." Is it a sin to have lust? No, it doesnt say that. Its only a sin if u let lust run its course to what its lusting after: if one doesnt, for lack of a better term, bring the lust to the cross and get rid of it.
No, I dont think not committing adultery is the only thing one must do to enter into the kingdom of heaven. I do think however its a prerequisite and would be considered a good start. Consider that the Lord called them a "wicked and adulterous generation."
I certainly agree with you that examining ones heart is a good place to be at in terms of searching God and seeking to know him. I fail to see the need however, to think adultery means anything other than wrongful sex within that context. I suppose one could use the term spiritual adultery or heart adultery to look at ones heart and weed out "lust" or other vices that are entering in; I certainly dont have any problem with that.
Lastly u mentioned that u thought my suggestions where a bit more on the pharacetical side. The Lord was considerably more liberal with the Sabath and rituals then they were. He did however, never once comprismise on issues of adultery or covetousness; in fact he identified covetousness as the ingredient to hypocrasy and lust as the incredient to adultery. Furthermore the issue of adultery was the one he was most quizzed upon by the rulers. From that he said that divorce was adultery with one exception, " saving for the cause of fornication" One can argue his viewpoints were more stingent than the law of Moses.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Thanks for the further explanation, sky - good post!
Okay, agreed.
I don't think so either.
I do & I think you are absolutely correct.
I don't understand this statement, sky, especially in the light of your previous statements. If Jesus' words "hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" are not figurative, then it is possible to commit adultery in the heart. I'm caught between Dan who takes exception to the term "spiritual adultery" and you who will accept "spiritual adultery or heart adultery."
I don't want to get hung up in the semantic rut that Dan spoke of. I'm not fighting here for a term. The term "spiritual adultery" may be okay or it may be a funky TWIism to be avoided - AND to make communication here all the harder.
I'm fine with your understanding of "fantasy" or "chasing after the person." The point is that Jesus calls it adultery and it takes place in the heart. It's not temptation to be cut off. It's a done deal. That "higher level in the brain" that you spoke of is where consummation resides. It (whatever it is - & I think you know what I mean just the way that you said "u know what I mean" has happened in the heart and it is called adultery by Jesus.
Adultery can mean anything from extramarital sex to making something impure by adding extraneous, improper, or inferior ingredients.
Where do we place this usage? Suffice it to say that it really is literally, not figuratively,adultery, that it takes place in the heart, and that it keeps the marriage out of the heavenly state God intended for marriage.
Lastly, you stated:
Absolutely! Because his viewpoints are a matter of the heart, not just the actions.
But consdider this. Jesus said to come unto him, all of us who labour and are heavy laden, and he will give us rest.
Why? Because he is meek and lowly in heart and we will find rest to our souls if we take his yoke upon us and learn of him. If we are meek and lowly...I figure that this adultery business is on a higher level than that of the Pharisees. The higher, more stringent if you will, level is the level of the loyalties of our hearts.
Be meek and lowly with regard to the loyalties of our hearts, and we will dwell in heavenly places and find rest to our souls.
That yoke is easy. That burden is light.
I'm just trying to say that kind of honesty will save our marriages.
Or not. It takes two.
But that's what this thread is about. And that's the level honesty has to dwell in to bring about resolution and redemtion - with respect to marriage.
I'm presuming that's what is behind this - I know it is not semantics.
Jesus wasn't about either the Pharisees or semantics - he was about what it is.
Learn of him.
Find rest.
It's really a pleasure speaking with you, sky.
God bless your heart down deep where you live.
Tom
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
I believe when Jesus said the part about lusting in one's heart, he meant it.
It's not spiritual, it's literal.
hence all those commands to flee sexual immorality!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Thomas:
I really agree with your last post. If one wants to say heart adultry is spiritual adultry, I have no plem with that. The point I was trying to make Thomas is that the word adultery is first and foremost associated with a sexual act. I realize it is used as an adjective in society , to descibe something that is polluted, and the content is not always sexual. However , most of the times when someone descibes something polluted they use other adjectives.
My main point was that to say that adultery in scripture is spiritual and not associated with a sexual act, defies the meaning of the word and hence was an excuse for developing the term by some to engage in sex,,,, or lust if u will.
I agree that we have beat this point to death.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
No problem with those points, sky.
I never meant to give the impression that the term ever could be completely disassociated from a sexual act no matter what other connotations or denotations be involved.
I also agree completely that TWI used that exact fallacious disassociation as a cover for their sexual practices.
I just don't care about their excuses as much as I care about your excuses and my excuses (not that they are the same as TWI's excuses) and Jesus' approach to us to get us to be honest concerning our heart's loyalties so that our marriages can be healed.
Just my attempt to take the Word personally.
I don't think the horse is without life until he's served his purpose and the healing has been delivered.
But I won't belabor the point (or perhaps I won't belabor the point any more
:)-->).
Best regards, sky,
Tom
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oenophile
The word adulterate which is the root for the word adultery means as Tom suggested above to introduce something foreign into something that previously was free from such contamination or dilution. Example: A bartender adulterates wine by diluting it with water in order to increase the volume so he can sell more thus depriving his customer of the enjoyment of the purity of the undiluted wine. The effect of this "adultery" is to contaminate the relationship between the bartender and his patron by betraying the trust the patron has placed in the bartender.
If we now take this understanding of the word adultery and apply it to what happens when an extra-marital affair contaminates the purity of the relationship that began when the two pledged a vow of loyalty and then consummated it by having sexual intercourse(which is the most intimate of human experiences). It is an act of betrayal which has the same effect on the relationship as it does on the wine. Like the diluted wine the intimacy and trust between the two partners cannot be made pure again. It is the ultimate breech of loyalty.
Does this shed any light on the subject or am I just stating the obvious?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
It bore saying.
It added to the discussion.
Even if it hadn't, it was worth a reminder.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.