TOTALLY GEEKED!

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

RE: Ashley Madison Leak-Josh Duggar

chef · Guru

I saw that, NJN. I thought it was beautifully written and very well put.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Me too. Of course, that's why I put it here!

chef · Guru

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
I can't believe the press hasn't found out who she is yet.

Right?

The press is all too happy to spread the news about Josh. But what about the woman? She helped him cheat.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Apparently I am writing in some foreign language. I have said several times I don't agree with it. I just said it happens.
Why can't we discuss this without it being about disagreeing with you?
Because every time I say some churches teach that someone says that's wrong. I'm not saying it's right! I'm just saying that churches exist like that. Here's what it sounds like...
Me: Some churches teach that.
General You: That's not right.
Me: I know but they teach it anyway.
You: But it's not right.
Me: I understand but I know people are told that...

But that's just it - we didn't say those churches didn't exist, we said they were wrong about what they were doing. So NO ONE was disagreeing with you that they exist.

NAOW · Vette's SS

One woman did come forward. I'm on my phone but if you Google Josh duggar porn star it will probably come up. She was a porn star or stripper and he paid her $1500 ('gifted' her the money, is how she put it).

She also made it sound like there were more women.

The story says she took a lie detector, but I'm still wondering if she's real or looking for her 15 minutes.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Why do people assume Anna is being told by anyone she can't divorce Josh? Has she said that? Has her church said that? Has anyone come out and said that? Because adultery IS a basis for divorce in the Bible. I swear, the people who are saying she is a brainwashed little wimp with no mind are treating her just as badly as they are accusing the church and Josh and her family of - you are giving her absolutely no credit whatsoever for having a mind of her own and assuming she is an uneducated idiot.

chef · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
Why do people assume Anna is being told by anyone she can't divorce Josh? Has she said that? Has her church said that? Has anyone come out and said that? Because adultery IS a basis for divorce in the Bible. I swear, the people who are saying she is a brainwashed little wimp with no mind are treating her just as badly as they are accusing the church and Josh and her family of - you are giving her absolutely no credit whatsoever for having a mind of her own and assuming she is an uneducated idiot.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

It is my own personal opinion that she will not leave him no matter what comes out or who he sleeps with. JMO! I am entitled to speculate like others are entitled to call Josh a pervert. I think he's a cheater. An affair doesn't make you a pervert. Nor does looking at porn or half the men on this planet would be pervs.

chef · Guru

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
It is my own personal opinion that she will not leave him no matter what comes out or who he sleeps with. JMO! I am entitled to speculate like others are entitled to call Josh a pervert. I think he's a cheater. An affair doesn't make you a pervert. Nor does looking at porn or half the men on this planet would be pervs.

From what I've read, she's not planning on leaving him.

I don't think Josh is pervert. Guys looking at porn isn't a new thing nor does it make them a pervert.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

I'm thinking this all just happened, and the woman is probably still absorbing the shock - she probably doesn't even know what she wants to do.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Her brother has made statements to the effect that their parents are telling her not to divorce. No idea how true that is.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Her brother has made statements to the effect that their parents are telling her not to divorce. No idea how true that is.

He has also said he will pay for her to leave him and help her with the kids . So, it's not like she doesn't have options if that is what she wants to do. She has her brother supporting her decision to get a divorce if that is what she wants. But whether to divorce him or not is her choice.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Although that lady is right about the fact that Josh SHOULD be cowering at Anna's feet, in fear of losing his marriage. Maybe he is. I'm not there so I can't say. But I think if I were him when the abuse scandal came out I would have poured out every sin to my wife so this didn't happen again. He waited till he got caught. Which makes me think he's not that sorry. But again, JMO on it.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Her brother has made statements to the effect that their parents are telling her not to divorce. No idea how true that is.
He has also said he will pay for her to leave him and help her with the kids . So, it's not like she doesn't have options if that is what she wants to do. She has her brother supporting her decision to get a divorce if that is what she wants. But whether to divorce him or not is her choice.

That's true. He has offered to pay. But I think the pull to please our parents is something that's innate in all of us. Not comparing this to abuse but that's why kids stay true to their parents for so long after they've been abused. They mom and dad's approval and to please them. I think it's just a hard thing for someone, ANYONE, to break out of.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Ya'll ask, you receive. Here is a name!

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/porn-star-details-terrifying-rough-sex-josh-duggar-article-1.2337691

duggar27n-5-web.jpg?enlarged

Porn star Danica Dillon, 28, revealed to In Touch magazine that she had "terrifying" rough sex with Josh Duggar.

Josh Duggar allegedly had two "terrifying" rough sex romps with a porn star while his wife was pregnant with their fourth child, the traumatized X-rated entertainer claims.

Stripper and adult film star Danica Dillon has revealed details of how sex with Duggar quickly turned violent after the disgraced reality TV star lured her into bed with promises of cash gifts.

"He was manhandling me, basically tossing me around like I was a rag doll," she told "In Touch" magazine in an exclusive interview conducted under a lie detector.

"It was very traumatic,” she added. “I've had rough sex before, but this was terrifying."

The 28-year-old adult film star, whose real name is Ashley Lewis, said Duggar first approached her in March while she was performing at Gold Club in Philadelphia.

"He walked into the Gold Club like a normal patron and said he'd been a fan for a long time and has watched my career grow — he even said from before my boob job until recently — and that he loved watching my very first scene on [an adult website]," Dillon said. "Then it got creepy."

Josh Duggar via Instagram

Josh Duggar is pictured here with his wife Anna in an Instagram photo posted July 19, 2015 that announces the arrival of their daughter, Meredith

Duggar, 27, kept "eyeballing" her during the show, buying $600 in private dances, and then proposed the two "spend the evening" together at her hotel room.

Dillon agreed, saying she "took the opportunity because Josh offered to gift (her) $1,500."

But the evening turned into a nightmare when the embattled "19 Kids and Counting" star was too violent in the sheets and didn't use protection, the porn star claims.

View Gallery The squeaky clean side of Josh Duggar's double life

"I think that after I come out, there will probably be plenty more girls after me," Danica said, admitting the sex was consensual.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Honestly, I think the Ashley Madison site is much ado about nothing. I would bet that the vast majority of people on that site never even had an affair or hooked up. People are curious and google all kinds of schit online. So is thinking about an affair the same thing as having one? Men see a pretty woman walk by and what do they think? Is that the same thing? I don't know. Would you react the same to that as you would if he meets her and actually sleeps with her? Not saying either is right but I don't think you would view those the same. Obviously Duggar did cross the lines and is a serial cheater. But, for all these other men who just plopped a few bucks down to chat online but never crossed that line, is that really the same thing?

NAOW · Vette's SS

Lawyerlady wrote:
Why do people assume Anna is being told by anyone she can't divorce Josh? Has she said that? Has her church said that? Has anyone come out and said that? Because adultery IS a basis for divorce in the Bible. I swear, the people who are saying she is a brainwashed little wimp with no mind are treating her just as badly as they are accusing the church and Josh and her family of - you are giving her absolutely no credit whatsoever for having a mind of her own and assuming she is an uneducated idiot.

There have been several sources who have said that. Including her own brother

ETA: disregard, I should have finished the thread :)

-- Edited by NAOW on Thursday 27th of August 2015 10:40:29 AM

NAOW · Vette's SS

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Honestly, I think the Ashley Madison site is much ado about nothing. I would bet that the vast majority of people on that site never even had an affair or hooked up. People are curious and google all kinds of schit online. So is thinking about an affair the same thing as having one? Men see a pretty woman walk by and what do they think? Is that the same thing? I don't know. Would you react the same to that as you would if he meets her and actually sleeps with her? Not saying either is right but I don't think you would view those the same. Obviously Duggar did cross the lines and is a serial cheater. But, for all these other men who just plopped a few bucks down to chat online but never crossed that line, is that really the same thing?

Also, it was said that the majority of Ashley Madison is men, so how many hookups were really going on.

If my husband went to AM out of curiosity, I would understand that, but if he actually paid AND started talking to women, I would feel betrayed, that is looking to have an affair even if you haven't done it yet.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

I'm getting a kick out of those who are speculating that Josh's wife SHOULD divorce him. ROTF

Yes, she can, if she wants to, she does have justifiable grounds for a biblical divorce. But, so did Hilary and we all know how that worked out. LOL

She's not a stupid twit, unless you label Hilary as a stupid twit as well.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

just Czech wrote:
I'm getting a kick out of those who are speculating that Josh's wife SHOULD divorce him. ROTF

Yes, she can, if she wants to, she does have justifiable grounds for a biblical divorce. But, so did Hilary and we all know how that worked out. LOL

She's not a stupid twit, unless you label Hilary as a stupid twit as well.

I know. Why does anyone else have a stake in whether she divorces him? Shouldn't that be her decision? If she loves him and is willing to forgive him, why is that horrible? They have 4 kids together, which might be more important to her than his infidelity.

I have a friend whose husband I CANNOT stand. He's such a tool. And several years ago, her family was fed up with him, too, and kept encouraging her to divorce him (and her father is a retired minister). I mean, like pressure all the time. I finally had to step in and say something - it's HER husband. Only she can answer whether she loves him and whether his issues were worth putting up with (He doesn't abuse her - so it's not that). So I told her to stop listening to everyone else, including me, and simply listen to her heart and decide what to do. They are still together and he has gotten better.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Hillary is a stupid twit also. But she stayed because she needed Bill outside of the bedroom.

FNW · Guru

Lots of people live in glass houses.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Hillary is a stupid twit also. But she stayed because she needed Bill outside of the bedroom.

That makes Hillary a user. Just like Bill.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

just Czech wrote:
Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Hillary is a stupid twit also. But she stayed because she needed Bill outside of the bedroom.
That makes Hillary a user. Just like Bill.

I agree. Totally. And I used to love the Clintons way back when. Not anymore.

NAOW · Vette's SS

Almost None of the Women in the Ashley Madison Database Ever Used the Site

The pattern was reflected in another data field, too. This one, called chat_last_time contained the timestamp for the last time a member had struck up a conversation using the Ashley Madison chat system. Roughly 11 million men had engaged in chat, but only 2400 women had.

Almost None of the Women in the Ashley Madison Database Ever Used the Site

Overall, the picture is grim indeed. Out of 5.5 million female accounts, roughly zero percent had ever shown any kind of activity at all, after the day they were created.

The men’s accounts tell a story of lively engagement with the site, with over 20 million men hopefully looking at their inboxes, and over 10 million of them initiating chats. The women’s accounts show so little activity that they might as well not be there.

Sure, some of these inactive accounts were probably created by real, live women (or men pretending to be women) who were curious to see what the site was about. Some probably wanted to find their cheating husbands. Others were no doubt curious journalists like me. But they were still overwhelmingly inactive. They were not created by women wanting to hook up with married men. They were static profiles full of dead data, whose sole purpose was to make men think that millions of women were active on Ashley Madison.

Either way, we’re left with data that suggests Ashley Madison is a site where tens of millions of men write mail, chat, and spend money for women who aren’t there.

I wasn't sure if I should start a new thread or not, but I figured we are all a little burned out on AM, but I still thought this was interesting,so I just put it here.

Here's the link for the full article: http://gizmodo.com/almost-none-of-the-women-in-the-ashley-madison-database-1725558944

After reading this, it's hard to imagine that Josh Duggar found anyone to cheat with on this site. I almost feel bad for all the men duped into paying for an account to cheat when there is so few number of women to cheat with that there might as well not be any.. but I guess they got what they deserved.

Lexxy · My dog name is Sasha, too!

LMAO - who were they chatting with if there are no women on the site?

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Each other.

NAOW · Vette's SS

Apparently.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

NAOW wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Honestly, I think the Ashley Madison site is much ado about nothing. I would bet that the vast majority of people on that site never even had an affair or hooked up. People are curious and google all kinds of schit online. So is thinking about an affair the same thing as having one? Men see a pretty woman walk by and what do they think? Is that the same thing? I don't know. Would you react the same to that as you would if he meets her and actually sleeps with her? Not saying either is right but I don't think you would view those the same. Obviously Duggar did cross the lines and is a serial cheater. But, for all these other men who just plopped a few bucks down to chat online but never crossed that line, is that really the same thing?
Also, it was said that the majority of Ashley Madison is men, so how many hookups were really going on.

If my husband went to AM out of curiosity, I would understand that, but if he actually paid AND started talking to women, I would feel betrayed, that is looking to have an affair even if you haven't done it yet.

Yes. And, that is wrong. However, I think there is a difference between looking and lusting and actually doing the deed.

WYSIWYG · Guru

However, I think there is a difference between looking and lusting and actually doing the deed.
- Lady gaga Snerd

______________________

I agree with you. Matthew 5:28 is one of those passages where I believe that the word of man was mixed in with the word of God.

But, the question arises: Did he ever consummate an affair, and if not, was it because he wasn't talking to real women, or was it because he wasn't actually looking for one? His intent makes all the difference in the world.

Janies Friend · Newbie

just Czech wrote:
Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
And just like there are women who play it off there are plenty of churches that teach women are second class to men.
Those church's do not follow the true Word of God. Yup, I said that.
In our church the man is to love his wife the same way Jesus loves His bride, the church.
See the difference?

Nope and never will. Any institution that preaches that women have to submit to men is fostering the subjugation and ultimately the abuse of women. These teachings lead to burkhas, honor killings, and all of the excesses of fundamentalists like the Duggars. I have too much respect for myself and for all women to "submit" myself to any man, including my wonderful husband of 42 years.

-- Edited by Janies Friend on Saturday 29th of August 2015 01:56:33 AM

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
NAOW wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Honestly, I think the Ashley Madison site is much ado about nothing. I would bet that the vast majority of people on that site never even had an affair or hooked up. People are curious and google all kinds of schit online. So is thinking about an affair the same thing as having one? Men see a pretty woman walk by and what do they think? Is that the same thing? I don't know. Would you react the same to that as you would if he meets her and actually sleeps with her? Not saying either is right but I don't think you would view those the same. Obviously Duggar did cross the lines and is a serial cheater. But, for all these other men who just plopped a few bucks down to chat online but never crossed that line, is that really the same thing?
Also, it was said that the majority of Ashley Madison is men, so how many hookups were really going on.

If my husband went to AM out of curiosity, I would understand that, but if he actually paid AND started talking to women, I would feel betrayed, that is looking to have an affair even if you haven't done it yet.
Yes. And, that is wrong. However, I think there is a difference between looking and lusting and actually doing the deed.

But God doesn't. Matthew 5:28

Parallel Verses

New International Version
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

New Living Translation
But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

English Standard Version
But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Berean Study Bible
But I tell you that everyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Berean Literal Bible
But I say to you that everyone looking upon a woman in order to lust after her already has committed adultery with her in his heart.

New American Standard Bible
but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

King James Bible
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
But I tell you, everyone who looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

International Standard Version
But I say to you, anyone who stares at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

NET Bible
But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
But I am saying to you, everyone who looks at a woman so as to lust for her, immediately commits adultery with her in his heart.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
But I can guarantee that whoever looks with lust at a woman has already committed adultery in his heart.

New American Standard 1977
but I say to you, that everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Jubilee Bible 2000
but I say unto you, That whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

King James 2000 Bible
But I say unto you, That whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

American King James Version
But I say to you, That whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

American Standard Version
but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Douay-Rheims Bible
But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Darby Bible Translation
But *I* say unto you, that every one who looks upon a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

English Revised Version
but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Webster's Bible Translation
But I say to you, That whoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Weymouth New Testament
But I tell you that whoever looks at a woman and cherishes lustful thoughts has already in his heart become guilty with regard to her.

World English Bible
but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Young's Literal Translation
but I -- I say to you, that every one who is looking on a woman to desire her, did already commit adultery with her in his heart.

Parallel Commentaries

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

5:27-32 Victory over the desires of the heart, must be attended with painful exertions. But it must be done. Every thing is bestowed to save us from our sins, not in them. All our senses and powers must be kept from those things which lead to transgression. Those who lead others into temptation to sin, by dress or in other ways, or leave them in it, or expose them to it, make themselves guilty of their sin, and will be accountable for it. If painful operations are submitted to, that our lives may be saved, what ought our minds to shrink from, when the salvation of our souls is concerned? There is tender mercy under all the Divine requirements, and the grace and consolations of the Spirit will enable us to attend to them.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 28. - But I say (ver. 22, note). The bare command forbidding an external action is insufficient. It must extend to the thought. Contrast Josephus ('Ant.,' 12:09. 1), "The purposing to do a thing, without actually doing it, is not worthy of punishment." Generally, however, the sinfulness of wrong thoughts must have been acknowledged (cf. Psalm 51:10, and the tenth commandment; cf. late examples in Schott-gen). Hammond ('Pr. Cat.,' in Ford) says, "In the Law, the fastening of the eyes on an idol, considering the beauty of it, saith Maimonides, is forbidden (Leviticus 19:4), and not only the worship of it" (vide Maimonides, 'Hilk. Ab. Zar.,' 2:2, by whom, however, the thought is, perhaps, rather condemned for what it leads to than per se; and similarly with Job 31:1; Proverbs 6:25). Whosoever; Revised Version, every one who (ver. 22, note). Looketh... to lust after (πρὸς τὸ ἐπιθυμῆσαι). As πρὸς τό with the infinitive (e.g. Matthew 6:1), primarily denotes purpose; this may be equivalent to "looketh in order that he may lust, looketh to stimulate his lust" (cf. Meyer, Trench); but, as Weiss points out, this surely belongs to the refinement, not to the beginning of sin. Hence Nosgen suggests "looketh... lustfully" (cf. James 4:5). Probably this is one of those cases where, as Ellicott says on 1 Corinthians 9:18, πρὸς τό with the infinitive has "a shade of meaning that seems to lie between purpose and result, and even sometimes to approximate to the latter." At all events, it does not express, as εἰς τό would have expressed, the immediate purpose of the look (vide Ellicott, loc. cit.); cf. Matthew 6:1. Her (αὐτήν, B, D, etc.); accusative with ἐπιθυμεῖν, here only in the New Testament. Perhaps the pronoun should be omitted, with א.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman,.... Many and severe are the prohibitions of the Jews, concerning looking upon a woman, which they aggravate as a very great sin: they say (k), it is not lawful to look upon a beautiful woman, though unmarried; nor upon another man's wife, though deformed; nor upon a woman's coloured garments: they forbid (l) looking on a woman's little finger, and say (m), that he that tells money to a woman, out of his hand into her's, that he may look upon her, though he is possessed of the law and good works, even as Moses, he shall not escape the damnation of hell: they affirm (n), that he that looks upon a woman's heel, his children shall not be virtuous; and that a man may not go after a woman in the way, no, not after his wife: should he meet her on a bridge, he must take her to the side of him; and whoever goes through a river after a woman, shall have no part in the world to (o) come: nay, they forbid (p) a man looking on the beauty of his own wife. Now these things were said by them, chiefly to cover themselves, and because they would be thought to be very chaste; when they were, as Christ calls them, an "adulterous generation" in a literal sense: they usually did what our Lord observes, "strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel". We read in the Talmud (q), of , a "foolish saint" and it is asked, who is he? and it is answered, one that sees a woman drowning in a river, and says it is not lawful for me , "to look" upon her, and deliver her. It was not any looking upon a woman, that is forbid by Christ as criminal; but so to look, as "to lust after her"; for such an one

hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. But these men, who forbad external looking upon a woman, generally speaking, had no notion of heart sins; and which was the prevailing opinion of the Pharisees, in Christ's time.

"A good thought, they (r) allow, is reckoned as if done; as it is said, Malachi 3:16. Upon which it is asked, what is the meaning of that, and "that thought" upon "his name?" Says R. Ase, if a man thinks to do a good work, and is hindered, and does it not, the Scripture reckons it to him, as if he did it; but an evil thought, the holy blessed God does not account of it as if done, as is said, Psalm 66:18.''

Upon which words, a noted commentator (s) of their's has this remark:

"Though I regard iniquity in my heart to do it, even in thought, yea, against God himself, as if I had expressed it with my lips, he does not hear it; that is, , "he does not reckon it to me for sin"; because the holy blessed God does not account an evil thought for an action, to them that are in the faith of God, or of the true religion.''

For it seems, this is only true of the Israelites; it is just the reverse with the Gentiles, in whom God does not reckon of a good thought, as if it was done, but does of an evil one, as if it was in act (t). It must be owned, that this is not the sense of them all; for some of them have gone so far as to say (u), that

"the thoughts of sin are greater, or harder, than sin itself:''

by which they mean, that it is more difficult to subdue sinful lusts, than to refrain from the act of sin itself; and particularly, some of them say things which agree with, and come very near to what our Lord here says; as when they affirm (w), that

"everyone that looks upon a woman with intention, it is all one as if he lay with her.''

And that , "he that committeth adultery with his eyes, is called an adulterer" (x). Yea, they also observe (y), that a woman may commit adultery in her heart, as well as a man; but the Pharisees of Christ's time were of another mind.

(k) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 1, 2.((l) T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 24. 1. Sabbat. fol. 64. 2.((m) T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 61. 1. Eruvin, fol. 18. 2.((n) T. Bab. Nedarim, fol. 20. 1. T. Hieros. Challa, fol. 58. 3. Derech Eretz. c. 1. fol. 17. 3.((o) T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 61. 1. Eruvin, fol. 18. 2.((p) Zohar in Lev. fol. 34. 4. (q) T. Bab Sota, fol. 21. 2.((r) T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 40. 1.((s) R. David Kimchi, in Psal. lxvi. 18. (t) T. Hieros. Peah, fol. 16. 2.((u) T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 29. 1.((w) T. Hieros. Challa, fol. 58. 3. Massechet Calah, fol. 16. 4. Vid. Maimon. Issure Bia, c. 21. sect. 2. & Moses Kotsensis Mitzvot Tora precept. neg. 126. (x) Vajikra Rabba, sect. 23. fol. 265. 1.((y) Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 9. fol. 196. 1.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

28. But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her—with the intent to do so, as the same expression is used in Mt 6:1; or, with the full consent of his will, to feed thereby his unholy desires.

hath committed adultery with her already in his heart—We are not to suppose, from the word here used—"adultery"—that our Lord means to restrict the breach of this commandment to married persons, or to criminal intercourse with such. The expressions, "whosoever looketh," and "looketh upon a woman," seem clearly to extend the range of this commandment to all forms of impurity, and the counsels which follow—as they most certainly were intended for all, whether married or unmarried—seem to confirm this. As in dealing with the sixth commandment our Lord first expounds it, and then in the four following verses applies His exposition (Mt 5:21-25), so here He first expounds the seventh commandment, and then in the four following verses applies His exposition (Mt 5:28-32).

Matthew 5:28 Additional Commentaries

Context

Adultery
27"You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; 28but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I know what the Biblical definition is. And, yes, God's standards are so high that even lusting in your heart is a sin unto God. However, I am asking if you or any other would respond in the same way if you over heard your husband saying to a friend "I'd like to boink her" as a pretty woman walks by versus actually having a physical affair?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
I know what the Biblical definition is. And, yes, God's standards are so high that even lusting in your heart is a sin unto God. However, I am asking if you or any other would respond in the same way if you over heard your husband saying to a friend "I'd like to boink her" as a pretty woman walks by versus actually having a physical affair?

Nah. What's good for the goose.....you should hear me talk about David Tennant.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I am just saying that I don't believe most people are going to respond the same way to someone looking or thinking about something as they do with a real, physical affair.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

There is that whole "forsaking all others" thing.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I agree but I think that this was little more than an internet fantasy.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
I know what the Biblical definition is. And, yes, God's standards are so high that even lusting in your heart is a sin unto God. However, I am asking if you or any other would respond in the same way if you over heard your husband saying to a friend "I'd like to boink her" as a pretty woman walks by versus actually having a physical affair?

Sometimes I will ask my husband, "Do you think so and so is pretty?" Everything with him is defined in two categories. Doable or not doable. He thinks Megyn Kelly is one of the hottest women on tv. He will always call her his g/f or say she is doable. It's gotten now to where even the kids will say, "Hey dad, your g/f is coming on." I don't have a problem with it because it's joking. He doesn't really want to get in her pants.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
I know what the Biblical definition is. And, yes, God's standards are so high that even lusting in your heart is a sin unto God. However, I am asking if you or any other would respond in the same way if you over heard your husband saying to a friend "I'd like to boink her" as a pretty woman walks by versus actually having a physical affair?
Sometimes I will ask my husband, "Do you think so and so is pretty?" Everything with him is defined in two categories. Doable or not doable. He thinks Megyn Kelly is one of the hottest women on tv. He will always call her his g/f or say she is doable. It's gotten now to where even the kids will say, "Hey dad, your g/f is coming on." I don't have a problem with it because it's joking. He doesn't really want to get in her pants.

Exactly!

I know the actresses that DH likes & he knows how I feel about Nathan Fillion!!!

It's all good fun.

flan

FNW · Guru

My DH is smarter than to acknowledge another woman's attractiveness. LOL Seriously, as long as his tongue wasn't hanging out, I wouldn't care, but he is more sensitive to my insecurities than to "go there". He does know I find Rod Stewart sexy and would love to dance with John Travolta. He took me to see Rod Stewart and his mother used to buy me all his latest CDs, but I just smile and keep all swooning to myself.

Lindley · Guru

My husband knows how I feel about Harrison Ford.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lindley wrote:
My husband knows how I feel about Harrison Ford.

Good choice!

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Harlots!

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Another Duggar in-law is making his distaste for Josh Duggar known.

After the 27-year-old former reality star's brother-in-law, Daniel Keller, publicly slammed him on Facebook last week following his admission that he was "unfaithful" to his wife, Anna Duggar, another of his in-laws is similarly not so quick to forgive. Michael Seewald -- the father-in-law of Josh's 22-year-old sister Jessa Seewald -- calls the former lobbyist both a "pretender" and a "hypocrite" when it comes to his Christian faith, in a blog post titled "Grief, Shame, And Taking the LORD's Name in Vain."

"He claimed to be a Christian, but by his deeds he has suggested otherwise," Michael writes in the lengthy essay posted on Monday. "It distresses me to say that Josh Duggar's greatest sin is a byproduct of the sum total of his secretly sinful lifestyle. That is, that by his hypocrisy, he blasphemed the name of God."

WATCH: Inside Josh Duggar's Possible Christian Rehab Center, Reformers Unanimous

He goes on to slam Josh's "lifestyle of evil," while at the same time publicly professing Christian values.

"With the name of God on his lips he lived a covert and extensive lifestyle of evil," Michael continues. "While proudly saying things like, 'Our family is like the epitome of conservative values,' he was looking at porn and soliciting affairs. He took a job at the Family Research Council that exists to promote the traditional family, all the while undermining his own family by violating his marriage covenant. He flourished in the fame of his family and the success of their television show, all the while betraying their trust and Christian values."

Josh has since resigned from his position at the Family Research Council following his molestation scandal, and "19 Kids and Counting" was canceled in July.

Still, Michael says Josh "brought shame" upon the Christian faith.

"The thing that is so hurtful is that he was a loud voice endorsing Christian ethics and he has been shown to be a fraud," he explains. "I am profoundly grieved that he attained such a platform only to bring shame on God's holy name and the Christian faith."

"Josh was a pretender," he writes bluntly. "True Christians fail often, but their lives are truly being conformed to the image of Christ. Do not look at Josh and justify your own sins by dismissing the reality of genuine faith and a holy God."

Ben Seewald's father notes he feels "deceived" by Josh, after standing by him following his admission in May that he molested five girls as a teenager -- four of whom were his younger sisters. Clearly, he is no longer supporting him.

"Sadly, he had deceived us all," Michael writes. "The name of God has been blasphemed and God is jealous for his name."

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Can they forgive 70 x 7?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Can they forgive 70 x 7?

He has to be sorry. When you keep doing something over and over you know you shouldn't - you are not sorry.

And you do realize how judgmental you when you constantly say people have to forgive, right?

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

If you have to forgive someone 70x7, isn't that implying that they are probably making the same mistake more than once? I didn't say forgive. It isn't me who said that, it's in the Bible.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
If you have to forgive someone 70x7, isn't that implying that they are probably making the same mistake more than once? I didn't say forgive. It isn't me who said that, it's in the Bible.

So is the part about removing the sinner from the church who will not repent and stop.

You can't pick and choose what verses you wag at people.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

It seems there is little room in the modern Christian church for grace and forgiveness. Lots of Christians who dont' recognize the blackness of their own sin and soul but somehow their slate is wiped clean but will not extend the same grace to others.

New International Version
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9
New International Version
For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." Hebrews 8:12

Seems that Christians do a whole lot of "remembering" of the sins of others.