Emotional affair

[A_PoMo]

Since I'm a friend of Dizzy, thus automatically uber-narcissistic, I decided to start a thread about what I want to talk about.

I read a book recently that discussed, in part, emotional affairs in marriage. This book claims that an emotional affair is adultery, thus grounds for divorce according to the Bible.

According to this book an emotional affair occurs when a married person transfers their emotional allegiance from their spouse to another person and invests themselves on an emotional/romantic/intimate level with that person instead of with their spouse. No sexual relations occur in this type of 'affair', it's purely emotional. The author claims that at the moment this emotional connection occurs the affair/adultery begins and if it continues will probably result in sexual relations, which obviously is the classic definition of adultery. The book claims that an emotional affair is a bona fide illicit affair on the same par with a physical affair and, as I mentioned already, is adultery.

I confess, I'd never HEARD of an emotional affair, as defined, before I read this chapter of the book, which is why it stuck with me because I thought it was such a peculiar stance. Since I want to be a pastor when I grow up I've asked around about this and have received a variety of responses.

What do you think? Is there such a thing as an emotional affair? Is it really an affair? Is it adultery or something less?

Whether adultery is grounds for divorce is for another thread. I'm just curious what you think about the notion of an emotional 'affair'.

[StillStanding]

*Slowly backs out of thread!*

[A_PoMo]

LOL!!

Awww, come on! It's an honest question and deals with real life stuff!! Nobody wants to take a poke at it?

[Tina]

Originally Posted by A_PoMo

Since I'm a friend of Dizzy, thus automatically uber-narcissistic, I decided to start a thread about what I want to talk about.

I read a book recently that discussed, in part, emotional affairs in marriage. This book claims that an emotional affair is adultery, thus grounds for divorce according to the Bible.

According to this book an emotional affair occurs when a married person transfers their emotional allegiance from their spouse to another person and invests themselves on an emotional/romantic/intimate level with that person instead of with their spouse. No sexual relations occur in this type of 'affair', it's purely emotional. The author claims that at the moment this emotional connection occurs the affair/adultery begins and if it continues will probably result in sexual relations, which obviously is the classic definition of adultery. The book claims that an emotional affair is a bona fide illicit affair on the same par with a physical affair and, as I mentioned already, is adultery.

I confess, I'd never HEARD of an emotional affair, as defined, before I read this chapter of the book, which is why it stuck with me because I thought it was such a peculiar stance. Since I want to be a pastor when I grow up I've asked around about this and have received a variety of responses.

What do you think? Is there such a thing as an emotional affair? Is it really an affair? Is it adultery or something less?

Whether adultery is grounds for divorce is for another thread. I'm just curious what you think about the notion of an emotional 'affair'.

I haven't read the book, but if it happened in MY marriage, I'd have to say that I'd consider it the same as adultry. The trust in the marriage would be completely destroyed.

[gloryseeker]

Originally Posted by Tina

I haven't read the book, but if it happened in MY marriage, I'd have to say that I'd consider it the same as adultry. The trust in the marriage would be completely destroyed.

I read an article one time on pornography and the emotion attachment that people make in viewing it. It also talked about how it is a violation to the marriage even though no physical sex took place with another person. The results of watching is a detachment from the marriage partner.

[gloryseeker]

Originally Posted by A_PoMo

Since I'm a friend of Dizzy, thus automatically uber-narcissistic, I decided to start a thread about what I want to talk about.

I read a book recently that discussed, in part, emotional affairs in marriage. This book claims that an emotional affair is adultery, thus grounds for divorce according to the Bible.

According to this book an emotional affair occurs when a married person transfers their emotional allegiance from their spouse to another person and invests themselves on an emotional/romantic/intimate level with that person instead of with their spouse. No sexual relations occur in this type of 'affair', it's purely emotional. The author claims that at the moment this emotional connection occurs the affair/adultery begins and if it continues will probably result in sexual relations, which obviously is the classic definition of adultery. The book claims that an emotional affair is a bona fide illicit affair on the same par with a physical affair and, as I mentioned already, is adultery.

I confess, I'd never HEARD of an emotional affair, as defined, before I read this chapter of the book, which is why it stuck with me because I thought it was such a peculiar stance. Since I want to be a pastor when I grow up I've asked around about this and have received a variety of responses.

What do you think? Is there such a thing as an emotional affair? Is it really an affair? Is it adultery or something less?

Whether adultery is grounds for divorce is for another thread. I'm just curious what you think about the notion of an emotional 'affair'.

I didn't take time to look up the actual scripture, but it is in the gospels where Jesus is comparing life under the law to life under grace.

In my paraphrase He states that under the law and person had to have sex with the person to have adultery, but "I (Jesus) say unto you..." if a person lusts after a woman he is guilty of adultery.

According to Jesus, what is conceived in the heart is equivalent to the actual act.

[A_PoMo]

Originally Posted by gloryseeker

I didn't take time to look up the actual scripture, but it is in the gospels where Jesus is comparing life under the law to life under grace.

In my paraphrase He states that under the law and person had to have sex with the person to have adultery, but "I (Jesus) say unto you..." if a person lusts after a woman he is guilty of adultery.

According to Jesus, what is conceived in the heart is equivalent to the actual act.

Then aren't all husbands guilty of adultery at some point in their marriage? And wives too?

That reminds me, according to the book, the relationship doesn't need to be sexual at all. According to those who study this sort of thing it is not uncommon for sex to not be a part of the relationship. What I mean by that is the connection is emotional and sexual fantasy and sex talk isn't a part of the relationship and is often times assidiously avoided as much as any other relationship with the opposite sex. It seems hard to imagine that this could be so, but they claim it's true and since I can accept the possiblity of this actually happening I take their word for it. It's much the same as two Christian adults dating. They connect emotionally but (hopefully) avoid thinking about sexual things and don't have sex. It's purely emotional until they get married (in a perfect world...and church. )

What do you think? Is that adultery?

[gloryseeker]

Originally Posted by A_PoMo

Then aren't all husbands guilty of adultery at some point in their marriage? And wives too?

I think that is a very good point, which then brings us to the definition of the thought.

First of all, not all thoughts are our thoughts. Several times in Matthew 6 Jesus says, "Take no thought" therefore we have the ability to receive the thought or reject it.

I being a man can see a pretty girl walking down the street. A thought may rise up within me so the question will then be, "what do I do with that thought."

Which in the context of what you have posted, I could entertain the thought to the point that I acted on it in some way...pursued an action to get to know the person, pursued a physical encounter, or just entertained to the point of self gratification. In these scenarios I would be guilty of Jesus' words.

However, if when the thought rose up I casted it down, rejected it, or did not entertain it then how could I be guilty?

That reminds me, according to the book, the relationship doesn't need to be sexual at all. According to those who study this sort of thing it is not uncommon for sex to not be a part of the relationship.

I would agree with this. Two people could emotionally attach in a way where they are connect more to each other than to their spouses. This is just as much of a betrayal as a physical encounter. In all reality, allowed to continue in most cases would lead to a physical encounter of some type.

What do you think? Is that adultery?

I think the definition of adultery is going to come back to my answer above. What I do how I pursue the relationship. I believe adultery in a sin definition (not necessarily a dictionary definition) starts in the thought realm.

[jaxfam6]

Originally Posted by gloryseeker

I didn't take time to look up the actual scripture, but it is in the gospels where Jesus is comparing life under the law to life under grace.

In my paraphrase He states that under the law and person had to have sex with the person to have adultery, but "I (Jesus) say unto you..." if a person lusts after a woman he is guilty of adultery.

According to Jesus, what is conceived in the heart is equivalent to the actual act.

But is lusting after someone the same as becoming emotionally involved?
Lets say you have a friend that you become very close to and your affection for that person deepens. You are becoming more emotionally involved but you may not necessarily lust after that person.

[gloryseeker]

Originally Posted by jaxfam6

But is lusting after someone the same as becoming emotionally involved?
Lets say you have a friend that you become very close to and your affection for that person deepens. You are becoming more emotionally involved but you may not necessarily lust after that person.

Do you define lust as only a sexual desire? Isn't lust just "desire"? If that is the case then the development of "affection" is birthed after a desire, right?