Do you believe the innocent party in a situation

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I believe that if you are angry, you are defrauding/depriving - on purpose. I don't want to present myself as an innocent party as I have been a "defrauder" at various times and actually made him pay me for my services just because he was annoying me. It was all in fun, but I did keep the money. That possibly could be classified as a sin. I'm not sure if I ever repented over that or not.

Really? We've had disagreements that were so severe, neither of us wanted to be in the vicinity of the other. LOL!!! We are complete opposites, and when we butt heads, it's a serious thunderstorm. In the interim, while we both calm down, it would be inconceivably violating (to me) for him to suddenly demand sex before I've had a chance to calm myself.

I really have to disagree with you on this point. When the relationship is upset by hurt or anger, sex takes a sideline until the emotional intimacy is restored. Not purposefully on anyone's part, as a means to force an apology or resolution!!!! But simply because how can you have sex when you're mad at each other? I really don't understand that.

What man would want to force himself on his wife when she's upset anyway? How selfish. He should be trying to resolve the differences first, so they can both enjoy the experience.

Yes, IMO, part of the blame would be to your husband. Notice I said, "part of the blame". BUT, I don't think an isolated incident is a good example. I believe the scripture is speaking more on the lines of a pattern in the marriage as I don't think Paul would have focused on that if he didn't hear or see a continuous problem he was trying to get the hearers to avoid. He does speak of a virgin getting married who will certainly have "trouble in the flesh".

I did speak about this to my husband and referenced something you said in an earlier post - "some women just do not like sex." He agreed, but I'm laughing inside because I was thinking, "How would you know?" LOL! I won't elaborate on that point, but really! LOL!

Oh, now that is a silly question, PO. I have numerous specific examples, (which I refuse to share) and I've been in the company of women since I was a child--some who talked about sex in a positive way, and some who didn't. Some who shared details that let me know they KNOW what fun sex can be, and some who shared other details that showed their inhibitions and/or ignorance.

As I said earlier, there are numerous possible REASONS for women not liking sex, including an inadequate partner, abuse, ignorance, a perception of it being dirty, etc.

If you're trying to ask about the state of my bedroom, I can tell you that it's very, very good, so I am NOT speaking from personal experience. In fact, shortly after we were married, I embarrassed myself (and my father), because he was teasing me about the bedroom. I can't remember what he said exactly, but it really irritated me, and I turned to him and shouted [something along the lines of], "I'll have you to know, I enjoy sex--a LOT--and it's none of your business!" Followed by me turning beet red, he laughed, and I stalked out of the room trying to retain my dignity.

Thinking back, he was probably trying to check on my well being, and I'm sure I gave him the answer he needed.

That's never been an issue for me, and I can honestly say I have NEVER defrauded my husband. However, there have been times when neither of us were interested, because there was something between us that needed to be resolved. Should that be given attention immediately? Of course. It's wrong to hold a grudge, and wrong to deliberately remain unreachable in the face of a possible resolution. I view anger as an emotion, though--not a deliberate state. Once it's passed, it's passed. You don't really control your feelings, but you can control whether you punish your husband for causing those negative feelings. To me, that involves appearing angry and remaining cold after the emotion has passed, in an effort to teach him a lesson or something. I do think that's wrong, and that's where you enter into the defrauding arena.

...As I stated above, I don't believe Paul would have addressed an "isolated" incident, but rather a pattern of defrauding. That would be a grievous sin, IMO. That is much like setting a cookie jar on the counter, with the lid off, and telling a child who is really hungry - DO NOT even think about touching it!

I agree with you - the marital relationship is, at best, a bit complicated. That is the reason I am focusing on the "defrauding/depriving". My question still remains - Is there a deeper admonition or meaning here to focus on, such as, true submission and humility? True and deeper love and forgiveness in all things? True forgiving 7 x 70? Do you see where I am going with this? I am seeing a disconnect in the Christian world, for the most part, and I wonder if it could be in not reaching back to the subject of "defraud you not one another".

As Cindy stated earlier - does it cover more than intimacy? Can it include conversation, etc. ? Sometimes my mind is somewhere else and my husband says, "You are not even listening to me!" It is so important to him that I pay attention to him in every way! I am so different from him as being alone is very important to me. That caused a lot of problems for us when we first started out. I think it took him 10 years to realize it didn't mean that I didn't love him. I just need to go inside myself and be alone. It's just my way. So, yes, I think that "defrauding" entails more than just physical intimacy.

It could, since the primary meaning of "benevolence" is kindness, followed by the meaning conjugal duty.

I agree with your scripture, but will also point out that the "defrauder" will also give account of himself/herself.

True.