• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

And he was unfaithful to his wife...

S

Shadowjak's Dancer

Member
Male
So I was talking with the wife earlier about the dynamic between male sexual drive in society and how it manifests in ways which are disrespectful and faith breaking towards women.

Cutting to the chase: Does non-monogamy constitute lack of respect of one's wife? Does it equal being unfaithful?

I would hazard a guess that most people on this forum do not believe so. However, when it is said that a man was unfaithful to his wife, the given meaning is that he has slept with another woman.

So, regardless of whether that makes sense biblically, many people equate poly-inclination with infidelity.

I was speculating on whether many young men, when faced with an either-or choice between their strong polygamous inclination and society's version of fidelity and respect, naturally intuit an implied disconnect between their sexuality and respect for women.

Does that disconnect then manifest as sexual expression devoid of concepts of fidelity and respect?

Would it be profitable to help restore concepts of true marital fidelity and sexuality respect which isn't inextricably linked to exclusively monogamous relationships?

Would it be better to instill in our young men a fidelity which encourages protection and provision for the women in our lives rather than temporary exclusivity until they move on to the next exclusive relationship?

Would it be best to teach the young women in our broader society these concepts as the primary arenas of respect and fidelity?

For the polygamous community, it may ease some of the tension. For the non-polygamous community, it may help re-balance respectful relationship interaction and help people to not be as hostile towards the Polygamous community...

Anyway, these are just some thoughts and questions that I wanted to put out to y'all for your insights.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's interesting that you ask about the concept of fidelity. It's long been a pet peeve of mine that the word "faith" is often thrown around (by unbelievers especially) as some kind of intrinsic personality trait; you'll hear things like: "You just need to have faith". But what does that even mean? It's just meaningless fluff designed to make you feel good. True faith is directional towards that in which you place faith. Faith in oneself? Faith in luck, or in karma? Faith in family, or friends, or government...? Faith in God? Also, faith needs a goal: Do you mean faith that things will turn out better for you? Faith that society will improve? Faith that your sins are forgiven, etc...?

With that in mind, when I started researching marriage, and grappling with the idea of poly, I started to notice the term fidelity (being faithful) was similarly vague. Anytime I would use that word, I found it would lead to sloppy thinking. It's an overloaded term, that leads to a subtle form of bait-and-switch. As I hammered it out, I realized there were different components to fidelity -- essentially, different ways to be faithful -- and that I had to carefully distinguish between them. A faithful woman is not to go after other men, but a faithful man has other restrictions, for example to not abandon her (i.e. to provide & protect). I'm working through Dr. Luck's book right now, which is helping to solidify some of the details, but basically, the idea is that both are being faithful to God's covenant, but the terms of faithfulness to the covenant are different for each side.

Marital Fidelity for wife = Exclusivity for husband, without forsaking
Marital Fidelity for husband = Provision for wife, without forsaking

The bait-and-switch comes when you use the word "fidelity" with the first meaning (exclusivity), but reciprocally apply it to the husband (I'll be yours exclusively, if you're mine exclusively). Note that you rarely see this go the other way around (I'll provide for you if you provide for me) -- although with modern feminism, more women in the workplace, etc... they seem determined to change that. I think there's actually a bit of projection going on in both cases. Men want women who are exclusive to them (I almost said "faithful" there, but I caught myself), so they offer exclusivity to make themselves more attractive. Women want men to provide for them (I assume?), so they try to get good careers to make themselves more attractive. (side note: You could apply this idea of projection to other aspects as well, for example if you want a submissive wife [or dominant husband], you might become overly submissive to women [or dominant towards men]).

As for the word respect, that's another word that society has changed the meaning of, and watered down, from the fear or reverence due to an authority, to the mutual admiration of equals. I could say more, but it's getting late, so I'll link the blog post where I first discovered that concept (with an admittedly click-baity title): Why I Don't Respect Women.
 
Interesting articles.

So how do we encourage the distribution of a more Biblical perspective on fidelity, etc.?

It seems most people get their ideas dished to them by pop culture, whereas we have direct Church community influence, but only with those who bother going to our specific churches...

Would it be beneficial to start producing media such as stories which begin to introduce accurate concepts of fidelity, respect, etc.?

Perhaps if we craft narratives which people can relate to, whilst demonstrating the Biblical thought-forms, it will help to plant Biblical seeds in the conscience of people who wouldn't otherwise be so exposed.

Anyone up for introducing soft romance novels which end up espousing polygamist relationships?

8^)

My one concern is planting seeds which do not accurately reproduce the fruit of God. We see a lot of that in our society already. On the other hand, much of our lives are filled with storied examples of how we, as believers, have practically walked out the Word of God in our daily lives, trying to be a living witness of our King. We do not do so perfectly, but have to constantly realign with His Word and Spirit... so we already plant imperfect notions about God into the world around us, ever pointing back to Him as the perfect example. How different to do that in media form as well?
 
Interesting idea, but good luck. Apparently, the pinnacle of the church's idea of demonstrating Biblical models of fidelity in media is Fireproof, which, from what I've read (and I haven't seen it, so I can't speak first hand), rationalizes wives using the threat of divorce as a means of controlling their husband.

In terms of producing media, the way to go would be the internet. Mainstream publishers are unlikely to touch these kinds of topics with a 10' pole, but anyone can independently publish anything on the internet: e-books, serialized fiction via blogs, youtube videos, audio dramas, webcomics, etc... But then you're just one small drop in a huge ocean, and you'd need to promote it like crazy across various social media platforms, and hope something goes viral. And even then, you have to reach your intended target audience of Christians, and do so in a way that they won't just immediately mentally shut it out upon hearing of it. One possibility: missionary biographies. Another option: Muslim conversion stories. Third option: historical fiction set in the time of the patriarchs, judges, or kings of Israel.

I've recently been toying with the idea of recording myself reading some of the older now-pubic-domain polygamy apologetics (Mainly "The History and Philosophy of Marraige" and possibly "Thelyphthora"), and uploading them as an audio-book to YouTube.
 
Shibboleth said:
Fireproof, which, from what I've read (and I haven't seen it, so I can't speak first hand), rationalizes wives using the threat of divorce as a means of controlling their husband.
Click to expand...
Seen it. We were given the movie and the 30-day Love Dare book by her pastor a couple years ago. Yeah, it's your basic, "You're not doing enough for your wife and that's why you guys have problems" movie. The book does have good ideas, it's not completely without it's use. But the movie completely ignores, or reroutes, the faults of the wife.
 
Perhaps it would have to be a series that starts out normal according to societal standards and introduces the concepts later in the series after people have become invested in the characters and the story outcome.
Introduce romantic tension early on, perhaps between the lead female and the guy in question, and build the strong friendship between the two (or more) women...
 
God does not deceive his loved ones. His loved ones don't get jealous of each other, they encurage and love each other.
 
I'm assuming the second of these quotes was in response to the first.
jacobhaivri said:
...a series that starts out normal according to societal standards and introduces the concepts later in the series after people have become invested in the characters and the story outcome.
Click to expand...
cubanito said:
God does not deceive his loved ones.
Click to expand...
True, but he does reveal Himself progressively. He told Adam and Eve that Eve's seed would crush the serpent's head -- He didn't say it would happen in approximately 4,000+ years, through a man named Jesus, born of a virgin in a city called Bethlehem, who was a descendant of a King named David, and who would live a sinless life, be put to death upon a cross, and rise from the dead 3 days later so that all who believe and repent might have redemption and eternal life in a new Heaven and Earth where [insert here things that no human mind has ever imagined].

Point being: I'm not sure its fair to characterize a drama that reveals things over its course as being deceptive, at least not in a way that is sinful.
 
Shibboleth said:
I'm assuming the second of these quotes was in response to the first.


True, but he does reveal Himself progressively. He told Adam and Eve that Eve's seed would crush the serpent's head -- He didn't say it would happen in approximately 4,000+ years, through a man named Jesus, born of a virgin in a city called Bethlehem, who was a descendant of a King named David, and who would live a sinless life, be put to death upon a cross, and rise from the dead 3 days later so that all who believe and repent might have redemption and eternal life in a new Heaven and Earth where [insert here things that no human mind has ever imagined].

Point being: I'm not sure its fair to characterize a drama that reveals things over its course as being deceptive, at least not in a way that is sinful.
Click to expand...
Yes, he gives us what we are able to handle. He is perfect, we aren't.
Sometimes companions have to take little bites too. Too bad wisdome often comes with age. Lol
 
So are you all saying that a man cannot ever commit infidelity except in the provision of material things?

So if he chooses to lie with a hooker..that is not infidelity?

Of course I do not believe polygamy is infidelity on a man;s part..but surely going to a harlot or looking for easy non-committal sex is not approved of or applauded?

Confused.
 
Good question! I am going to avoud the word "infidelity" because it is a bit broad and not clearly relevant to scriptural terminology, I will stick to talking about "adultery". I need to make it very clear that adultery is just one of many things a person may do that is wrong. Theft for instance is not adultery - yet it is wrong. Saying "stealing is not adultery" does not mean "stealing is ok".

Adultery is sleeping with a married woman who is not your wife. If a man has non-commital sex with a single woman, or a prostitute, provided we consider that woman truly unmarried (debatable in the case of a prostitute, but I won't go there) - he is not committing adultery.

But that doesn't mean what he is doing is ok.

Sex with a harlot is forbidden in 1 Corinthians 6:15. Sex with a virgin obliges him to marry her. Any casual sex risks catching diseases and spreading these to his wife, which goes against his obligation to love and protect his wife. We are specifically instructed not to be promiscuous (e.g Romans 13:13). There are plenty of reasons why a man should not sleep around. Such behavior is neither approved of nor applauded here.
 
Davids1stwife said:
So are you all saying that a man cannot ever commit infidelity except in the provision of material things?
Click to expand...

FollowingHim said:
Adultery is sleeping with a married woman who is not your wife.
Click to expand...

While I agree with Samuel, I want to restate something he said, and add a bit of other dialog. If a man sleeps with a married woman, he is committing adultery. Furthermore, there is some debate in older threads on this forum about what constitutes marriage. If you are interested, visit the thread "0: When Does Marriage Begin? - Structured Discussion". I bring that up because that means there is lot of adulterous casual sex that wouldn't be labeled as such by this world. Just a reminder to everyone, discussion on that topic should remain in that set of threads, not here.
 
Depends. The answers so far have been based on a biblical understanding of marriage. But many of us married according to an unbiblical vow--to forsake all others. So "infidelity" (faithlessness), is potentially a legit charge in those cases.

Again, though, it's better to stick with the biblical terminology. An adulterer is a man who sleeps with another man's wife, or a married woman who sleeps with someone other than her husband. A guy who breaks his vow to his bride is an oathbreaker. The word "infidelity" is a confusing mashup of concepts that is probably best avoided.
 
andrew said:
Depends. The answers so far have been based on a biblical understanding of marriage. But many of us married according to an unbiblical vow--to forsake all others. So "infidelity" (faithlessness), is potentially a legit charge in those cases.

Again, though, it's better to stick with the biblical terminology. An adulterer is a man who sleeps with another man's wife, or a married woman who sleeps with someone other than her husband. A guy who breaks his vow to his bride is an oathbreaker. The word "infidelity" is a confusing mashup of concepts that is probably best avoided.
Click to expand...
How's that for a succinct definition? Nice!
 
jacobhaivri said:
Cutting to the chase: Does non-monogamy constitute lack of respect of one's wife? Does it equal being unfaithful?
Click to expand...
In this instance the principle of headship also needs to be considered (1 Corinthians 11:3). In the instance of Joseph and Potiphar,s wife, Joseph's concern was that to do such a thing would be to sin against God. Likewise when David took Bathsheba he sinned against God but his actions did not extinguish the marriages to his other wives for he had not sinned against them. However to divorce a faithful wife and marry another (practice serial monogamy) is to sin against the faithful wife (Mark 10: 11). Now some contend that the adultery is in relation to the new wife, however the matter is made clear with regard to which wife is spoken of (the faithful first wife or the new wife) in the next verse for it states that if she divorces "her husband" and marries another man, she commits adultery (NIV).
If we consider Matthew 19:9 we have a corresponding account but verse 10 again shows the matter of the adultery in this instance was against the first or faithful wife and the apostles said that if such is the case it is better not to marry. They did not say that it better not take a second wife but that it is better not to marry in the first instance for now they understood that a man could commit adultery or be unfaithful to his faithful wife if he divorced her without scriptural grounds.
According to the principle of headship a man is not under the law of his wife but she is under his law (Romans 7:1-3)

Davids1stwife said:
So are you all saying that a man cannot ever commit infidelity except in the provision of material things?

So if he chooses to lie with a hooker..that is not infidelity?

Of course I do not believe polygamy is infidelity on a man;s part..but surely going to a harlot or looking for easy non-committal sex is not approved of or applauded?

Confused.
Click to expand...
For a man to go to a harlot is an abhorrent thing and a thing hated by God (Proverbs 23:27) and no God fearing man would do such a thing, however the error or the sin in such a case would be against God as it is his standards that are broken and not against the wife as he is not under her law. She could (out of disgust) walkaway from the marriage but only the husband would have the right to divorce her and thus set her free to marry another (Mark 10:12).please correct me if I am wrong but I have never found one text in the scriptures that would allow a wife to divorce her husband. In many cases that would seem to be unreasonable such as in the above mentioned scenario, or in the case of some other abhorrent sexual conduct, however it should be noted that back at that time a man would be put to death for rape, homosexuality or child molestation etc and thus a wife would be freed from the marriage. The mess we have today is due to trying to combine the standards of men (modern society) with the standards of God. The fact is due to this some things just become messy and unclear , even unfair to the wife.

Under Gods standards a man would love his wife just as Christ did the congregation and thus any loving husband would lay down his life to protect his wife and a man with that kind of heart would not do any of the abhorrent things that would defile himself before God and thus sully his marriage to one or more wives.

As a man I am the first to admit that we are imperfect and can make massive mistakes as did David. For a woman who is considering marriage, it is a sobering thought to place yourself under the law of another, thus such a decision should be taken only once the qualities of the man are known. That I would imagine would make it much easier for a second or third wife than for the first wife as the husbands true colors would already be exposed.

.
 
Thank you Aussies. The overwhelming percentage of modern, evangelical women see their marriages as an equal prospect under the laws of man. It is totally politically incorrect to see themselves as under their husbands. Society and law makes them expect coequal status. When it comes to fidelity, even churched women see "emotional affairs" as cause for divorce even if the husband has fulfilled 99.9% of his obligations according to scripture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top