Siteadmin, Check users, Administrators
12,071
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 127:
Line 127: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Toward avoiding double standards
::I could be wrong in mis-reading the article, but I felt, based on 50something's statements vs RSchlafly's, that the article as it stood was leaning toward the man being "not guilty" in adultery. When I quoted the Bible account of Jesus above, some authorities, as well as pastors (and myself) cite the possibility that Jesus knew they were also being one-sided with the woman ''only'' being the one guilty of adultery (and Jesus would have known everything!). And since Jesus boiled adultery down to even thinking about it, it stands to reason that every sexual act outside of the marriage bond between husband and wife constitutes adultery. So, my suggestion would be to arrange the article as to Old Testament/New Testament descriptions of what constitutes adultery, modern laws in force, and anything else...which what I think 50something was trying to do in the first place.
::I could be wrong in mis-reading the article, but I felt, based on 50something's statements vs RSchlafly's, that the article as it stood was leaning toward the man being "not guilty" in adultery. When I quoted the Bible account of Jesus above, some authorities, as well as pastors (and myself) cite the possibility that Jesus knew they were also being one-sided with the woman ''only'' being the one guilty of adultery (and Jesus would have known everything!). And since Jesus boiled adultery down to even thinking about it, it stands to reason that every sexual act outside of the marriage bond between husband and wife constitutes adultery. So, my suggestion would be to arrange the article as to Old Testament/New Testament descriptions of what constitutes adultery, modern laws in force, and anything else...which what I think 50something was trying to do in the first place.
== Toward avoiding double standards ==
Gentlemen: What seems unclear is what Roger Schlafly meant by "Biblical adultery."
From the Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, adultery is an intimate relation between two people, ''either one of whom'' is married to someone else.
The HIBD goes on to say that in the [[Old Testament]], adultery was understood in the context of a man having an intimate relationship with another man's wife, and the man involved had committed an offense against the woman's husband.
In the [[New Testament]], three things changed:
# Adultery was a matter of lustful intent and did not require an actual act. See {{Bible ref|book=Matthew|chap=5|verses=28-30|version=NASB}}.
# Very clearly, adultery is definable as unfaithfulness on the part of ''either the husband or the wife.'' [[Paul]], for example, states that a man ought to have one wife only, and even that a man having gone through more than one wife (for reasons other than bereavement) disqualifies himself from serving in the clergy.
# [[Divorce]] was now an offense just as grave as adultery.
I suggest that the article address OT and NT law on the subject, in addition to citing legal precedents in American and British family law.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 18:48, 22 April 2007 (EDT)