What's new

To cheat or not to cheat, that is the question

Hmmm.....(scarry ? for AAA).
Been *good* girl in this marriage (almost 18 years). We didnt know each other long before we married and I think he worried I wouldnt be the faithful type. So we made a pack that if one of us was ever going to be unfaithful, we would have enough consideration to get divorced first. Now, think about it. If you have to wait for a divorce, your hormones have time to take a rest and let you think with your head instead. Works here. (I consider cheating sexual *fun*.)

As for cheating on a test - NEVER.

Prox- I think you were wrong when you said it didnt hurt anyone. It hurt the ones that worked hard to pass.
 
lol.gif
supergrin.gif
lol.gif
lol.gif
...on your last few words.

------------------
"When do u no ur ready 4 1 thing or anything?"
 
last few words....before your response to prox

------------------
"When do u no ur ready 4 1 thing or anything?"
 
Regarding the question at hand, no, I would never cheat. While it prolly doesn't come through in my posts, I'm hopelessly romantic, and I have way too much faith in love to even understand how it seems like a legitimate question.

But how about a twist on the question? Say you're single, and the person you have a crush on is dating someone, would you knowlingly persue a relationship hoping that he/she would dump his/her significant other? What if the same person was just looking for a fling and wanted to cheat WITH you?

------------------
"May those who love us love us. And those who don't love us-- may God turn their hearts. And if He cannot turn their hearts, may He turn their ankles, so that we may know them by their limping." -- Keeping the Faith
 
Nootch, whether you are doing the cheating or someone else is, it's still cheating. You would be (hypothetically) allowing the cheating to go on so therefore taking part in it is just as bad as pursuing it. If you did not know that person had another person in their life, that is another story. but if you find out and still allow it to go on, you are cheating even if you think they will dump the other person.

------------------
liltaz: "I'm going to get Nookie for $50 tomorrow."
 
Ok AAA. I kinda agree that cheeting on a test does kinda hurt other people who studyied. I only cheeted on tests in my sophmore year in High school, a year when I did many many dumb things. After that year I looked back and started to feel guilty. So I just stopped doing it and I felt better. And for some odd reason my grades even got better. now can anyone explain that
lol.gif

As for defining Cheeting. I would say that a pasionate kiss is where i would have to draw the line. I think that if you are really good friends with someone it is sometimes ok for a light peck on the lips(although i dont do this i do know some people who do with their really really close friends of the oppisite sex) And reachin for the butt is also wrong. Also a prolonged hug sometimes goes overboard. Well that is what i think . . . I think.

------------------
Mother Should I Trust The Government - Pink Floyd
 
biblical adultry is both cheating outside your own marriage and having... uh... relations with someone who is married

kns> available? yes. free? that's something else. $
lol.gif
$

------------------
"...Another casualty of applied metaphysics." - Hobbes
 
Lys: I completely agree, I was just asking it as a follow up (since I actually know people who would say no to your original question but answer yes to mine).
frown.gif


------------------
"May those who love us love us. And those who don't love us-- may God turn their hearts. And if He cannot turn their hearts, may He turn their ankles, so that we may know them by their limping." -- Keeping the Faith

<FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by nootch on January 03, 2001 at 01:58 AM</font>
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by KNSinatra:
Now, if Poss would just get his a$$ back to the Soup, I could tell him all about the 6 New Years dates I've already passed up...
</font>

Poss' Pet Peeve #24: People who hit on your girl when you're not around. I suppose that's a form of cheating too, isn't it - but not by the two in the relationship, rather by the 3rd party.

Back to the topic: I probably wouldn't cheat. Having been cheated on, tho, it's not that big a deal after a while, you get used to it.

------------------
My knob tastes funny.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by monsieurjohn:
biblical adultry is both cheating outside your own marriage and having... uh... relations with someone who is married
</font>

Actually...

Adultery: Sexual intercourse between a married or betrothed woman and any man other than her husband. The marital status of the woman’s partner is inconsequential since only the married or betrothed woman is bound to fidelity. The infidelity of a married man is not punishable by law but is criticized (Mal 2:14–5; Prov 5:15–20). &lt;exerpted from Freedman, David Noel, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary, (New York: Doubleday) 1997, 1992.&gt;

------------------
My knob tastes funny.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by possum37:
I probably wouldn't cheat. Having been cheated on, tho, it's not that big a deal after a while, you get used to it.
</font>

Well, aren't I the lucky girl, having a boyfriend honest enough to phrase things with the "I-can't-tell-you-until-I'm-actually-faced-with-the-situation" semantic technique.
dorky.gif
But sweetheart, that seems like such a horrible thing to say -- the whole "you get used to it" bit...one should never get used to it, they should rather find someone who makes them comfortable and confident enough to not have to keep a defensive shell toward being cheated on -- methinks that one can never truly love if they are bound to pessimism nor fear.

As for the adultery in a biblical sense, I was under the impression that the "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" commandment in its origional sense, was specifically directed toward males only -- and for the fundamental reason that women were seen as a man's property. Thus the commandment was to guard against infractions of men's property... Has anyone else heard this theory?


------------------
En fuego, bebe.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by KNSinatra:
As for the adultery in a biblical sense, I was under the impression that the "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" commandment in its origional sense, was specifically directed toward males only -- and for the fundamental reason that women were seen as a man's property. Thus the commandment was to guard against infractions of men's property... Has anyone else heard this theory?</font>

Things get screwey because people often tend to combine two separate commandments into a generic, "Don't covet your neighbor's wife cause that's adultery" commandment.

The Seventh Commandment: “You shall not commit adultery” (Exod 20:16; Deut 5:18) is different from the Tenth Commandment and must be understood within contemporary social structures. It was pertinent to a society that was not strictly monogamous, but was clearly patriarchal: women were considered to be virtually the chattel of their husbands.

The commandment forbade male Israelites to have sexual intercourse with the wife of another Israelite, a fellow member of the covenanted community. According to Deut 22:24 and Lev 20:10 both members of an adulterous pair were to be put to death by stoning.

Israelite men were not forbidden to have sexual intercourse with the slaves of their own household. Sexual intercourse between an Israelite man, albeit married, and an unmarried or unbetrothed woman was not considered to be the crime of adultery. The seduction of an unbetrothed daughter of an Israelite was, however, considered to be an offense violating a neighbor’s property rights (Exod 22:15–16).

The Tenth Commandment: The Deuteronomic version of the commandment, “you shall not covet . . .” (Deut 5:21), is different from that of Exod 20:17. Rather than considering the wife among the household properties of an Israelite, Deut 5:21 separates her from among a man’s other possessions. Deuteronomy also specifically forbids the illegal appropriation of a neighbor’s field.
The purview of this commandment is different from that of the Seventh and Eighth Commandments. The Tenth Commandment forbids the protracted appropriation of another’s wife rather than individual acts of adultery. With regard to goods, the commandment forbids not only robbery but all illegal acquisition of another’s property.

&lt;again, taken from Freedman, David Noel, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary, (New York: Doubleday) 1997, 1992.&gt;



------------------
My knob tastes funny.
 
Poss&gt; This is an interesting commentary that you bring forth on adultery. You seem to be basically contradicting every religious leader who states that "sex before marriage is wrong."

Am I right? Could you shed some light on this? What is the biblical definition of "fornication?"

------------------
Does driving a car from Saturn make me an alien?

I'm just a quick pee. - liltaz, fastest pee in the West!

That which does not make me barf, makes me stronger - possum37, fugly.net guru.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by JHowse:
Poss&gt; This is an interesting commentary that you bring forth on adultery. You seem to be basically contradicting every religious leader who states that "sex before marriage is wrong."

Am I right? Could you shed some light on this? What is the biblical definition of "fornication?"
</font>

Aaah, JH...is it *I* who am contradicting what religious leaders say, or is it that the religious leaders are contradicting what the *bible* says? Hmmm...

And while you ponder that thought, let me ask this: when you say "fornication", what specifically are you asking? Is it:

Heterosexual sex outside of marriage
Homosexual sex
Adultery
Rape
Incest (i.e. within family lines, not necessarily parent/child)

Fornication's a big, vague word, and one that's (unfortunately) often used in biblical translations to cover a host of different sexual acts. Narrow it down for ol' Poss, and he'll get you the best scholarship on it.

------------------
My knob tastes funny.
 
JH&gt; not to worry, I knew you weren't trying to discredit me; it was just my smarmy way of trying to get people to ponder something they hadn't thought of before.
smile.gif


Now, on to the nitty-gritty.

"Fornication", as used in JH's quote from Ephesians 5:5 (Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure person, or one who is greedy (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God), is our English translation of the Greek word porneia (a word which was used VERY rarely in secular Greek).

It's gonna get confusing here, folks -- hold on.

The Old Testament was originally an oral tradition, that was eventually written down in Hebrew. It is the Hebrew root "znh" which meant "fornication" (sometimes involving adultery -- it may be used of the prostitute or of the betrothed or married woman who proves unfaithful); figuratively it is a term for apostasy as unfaithfulness to God.

Already we can see that the word is carrying two meanings, depending on the context - a literal (prostitution) and a figurative (idolatry).

Now, in the inter-testamental period (that is, the time between the Old and New Testaments), many other works were written - some books are included in some versions of the Bible, but not in others (some call these books, like Sirach, "Apocryphal" books, whereas other groups like Catholics include them in the canon). In this interim timeframe, the Greek-speeking Jews of the Hellenistic world translated their Hebrew scriptures into Greek. In these versions, they took the Greek root "porne" to stand for the Hebrew root "znh", and expanded upon "porneia" to include not only fornication or adultery but incest, sodomy, unlawful marriage, and sexual intercourse in general.

Now we reach the time of the New Testament, approximately 20 to 70 years after the death of Jesus. Here's what we can figure from what we know of the years these books of the bible were written. I'll list items of interest in chronological order.

Paul's letter to the Corinthians (55AD): Idolatry and licentiousness are linked together in 1 Cor. 6:9, and serious though fornication is, there is forgiveness for it (1 Cor. 6:11).

Acts of the Apostles (60AD): There are three examples of porneia in 15:20, 29; 21:15. The apostolic council requires Gentile believers only to avoid four things, of which porneia is one.

Matthew (63AD): Jesus proclaims grace and forgiveness to all who repent; the true defilement is within (Mt. 15:18-19), and it is a mark of unbelief.

Paul's letter to the Ephesians (80AD): Interestingly enough, this book was probably written by someone who was *not* Paul, but tried to imitate his style & teachings. AS stated above, the quote is "Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure person, or one who is greedy (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God."

John (85AD): In 8:41 the Jews claim that they are not born of fornication (porneia), but their works show that they are children of the devil rather than of Abraham or God (v. 44).

Revelation (90AD): Written as a condemnation of first-century Rome, and not as a look at evil world powers in the 21st century, the writer of Revelation saw ancient Rome as the epicenter of "porne", that is, the center of paganism and a harlot-like apostasy from God.

What can we determine from this progression? That from the Old Testament onwards to the end of the New, the word for fornication is very often linked with the word for idolatry.

Is idolatry sinful behavior? Sure seems to be. And how did the ancients describe idolatry in a way that was clear-cut and concrete? By using the idea of fornication. Idolatry, which is a turning away from God (and thus sinful) is like fornication, especially when you view God/Jesus as a husband, and Israel/Judaism/Christianity as a wife. But is fornication in and of itself sinful? According to the bible, no, not always.

So then, what constitutes "sinful sexual behavior"? Look at it in two ways: what the Bible says, and what mainline churches say.

The Bible really doesn't concern itself about sexual behavior as such: it is instead concerned with right relationships. A sexual behavior is "wrong" or "immoral" if it interferes with the established order of things. One is not to "mix improperly" -- humans shouldn't perform sex acts with animals because that would blur the distinction between the two. Similarly with incest, one cannot blur family lines: a cousin is a cousin, and one should have a different relationship with that person than one would with one's wife. So it goes with marriages also.

So what is Biblical sinful sexual behavior? It is the same as Biblical sinful behavior in general: any behavior that upsets the order of things, the relationship between things, between people, and between people and God.

What is sinful sexual behavior according to many churches today? It depends on the church: certain sexual acts within a marriage; infidelity within a marriage; sex outside marriage; and homosexual sex are just an example of what some churches consider "sinful".

The question then becomes, is it sinful because sexuality is of the body, and the body is "bad" compared to things spiritual? Or do they say it's sinful because they understand fully the Biblical meaning behing sexual admonitions? My professional opinion is because of the former: a pseudo-Gnostic framework has been a part of Christianity since almost the very beginning, which says body bad, spirit good. And because sex is "of the body", it's bad, unless it's somehow "regulated".

I'm gonna stop here for a bit, in the hopes that I'm making sense to everyone.

------------------
My knob tastes funny.
 
So what you are saying, Poss, if I follow you, correctly, is that the Bible says that "sinful" sexual behavior is one that disturbs the natural order of things. E.g. rape, incest, cheating, homosexuality, animism, and prostitution. So let's use this "natural order" theory. Say a couple has sex but is not married. The sex actually is something that is not forced or unnatural. The feeling is felt, naturally. That seems ok as the sex is something that just comes out of the relationship. Now, say, in this same couple, the guy kind of pressures the girl into sex. The sex is unnatural and not mutually enjoyed. That sexual behavior is sinful as it is disrupting the relationship. Thus, so long as those involved mutually desire sex and so long as the act will not damage or destroy other relationships or is not "unnaturally" in any other way, it's ok.

The church sees "sinful" sexual behavior as an act of the "flesh." As the "flesh" is not of God, so is not the act of the "flesh." Thus, all non regulated acts of sex are sinful. One could go so far as to say that ALL sex, except that which is meant to create life (the function of sex that God had intended) within the covenant of marriage is bad.

Geez, Poss, the church's view is rather restrictive while the biblical view is open ended. Hmmmm...

Am I with you or did you lose me, Poss?

------------------
Does driving a car from Saturn make me an alien?

I'm just a quick pee. - liltaz, fastest pee in the West!

That which does not make me barf, makes me stronger - possum37, fugly.net guru.

<FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by JHowse on January 04, 2001 at 03:38 PM</font>
 
Hallelujah, hallelujah! I *did* make sense!

JH, you've summed it all up with that. You have done well, young Padawan...

------------------
My knob tastes funny.
 
My Poss never ceases to wow me. A query though Poss -- as for your commentary concerning the 10th commandment. Isn't one of its primary importances that it is the sole commandment whose sin lies in the realm of thought, rather than that of the physical? That being, the act of covetting in itself the *Real* danger, hinting that one's subconsious often influences his deeds?

You're a genius, Poss
smile.gif


------------------
En fuego, bebe.

<FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by KNSinatra on January 04, 2001 at 05:03 PM</font>
 
You've managed to totally lose me now.

------------------
You may think I'm a loser
That I don't really care
You may think that it's forgotten
But you should be aware
'Cause I've learned to get revenge
And I swear you'll experience that some day.
- Lene Marlin
 
ewwwww dumpster spelunking...ew
lol.gif


------------------
Alien: ...I mean, your **** makes a noise...that's just...disturbing
 
Back
Top