Is there ever a justified case for adultery?

[ssnapier]

This is a question that I am sure will get some people fired up so please remain calm. I just want to know if you can see any scenario in which adultery would be justified.

[Beto]

I have a very pragmatic approach to this. If one doesn't wish to be accountable to anyone, one doesn't commit to anything. A marriage is a serious commitment, and it makes one accountable to one's partner. Just like any other contract. It assures both partners an active (or at the very least, passive) involvement in the other's life.

Even dating (boyfriend/girlfriend stage) is a commitment that makes you accountable.

[cnorman18]

The Jewish view:

No. Never.

According to Jewish law, any Commandment, save three only, may be violated to save or avoid endangering a human life; and those three are the prohibitions against murder, blasphemy, and adultery.

It is worth bearing in mind, as always, that in Judaism there is no talk of being condemned to Hell. We have no warrant to anticipate God's judgment in any individual case, or even in general.

[Darren]

The Jewish view:

No. Never.

According to Jewish law, any Commandment, save three only, may be violated to save or avoid endangering a human life; and those three are the prohibitions against murder, blasphemy, and adultery.

It is worth bearing in mind, as always, that in Judaism there is no talk of being condemned to Hell. We have no warrant to anticipate God's judgment in any individual case, or even in general.

I will never understand this 'blasphemy' nonsense. If all about your god is true, then much worse is done to him than blasphemy. Why would he notice this particular type of transgression. Would it not be more important to condemn rapists, perhaps?
Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

[cnorman18]

I will never understand this 'blasphemy' nonsense. If all about your god is true, then much worse is done to him than blasphemy. Why would he notice this particular type of transgression. Would it not be more important to condemn rapists, perhaps?
Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

I'm not sure if "blasphemy" in the Jewish understanding is possible any more. It would have involved using the Name of God, YHWH, in vain, and no one today knows how it was pronounced ("Yahweh" ain't it). That, or some violation of the Holiness laws that no longer apply, since there is no longer a Temple to desecrate (and we don't really understand what those laws meant today, anyway). I don't think merely cursing God or the like is what was being forbidden here.

Just for the record, rape is forbidden, too.

[Darren]

Just for the record, rape is forbidden, too.

Yes, of course, but you said "any Commandment, save three only, may be violated to save or avoid endangering a human life". I just think if blasphemy ( a vague and impossible sin) makes the top three, then rape certainly should.
Unless the guy who wrote down these rules had morals that were really skewed...
Think of it - blasphemy means taking your gods name in vain. So saying 'holy crap' is never to be done, yet rape can (to save or avoid endagering a human life).
Your words don't quite match contemporary moral standards.

[Goat]

Just for the record, rape is forbidden, too.

Yes, of course, but you said "any Commandment, save three only, may be violated to save or avoid endangering a human life". I just think if blasphemy ( a vague and impossible sin) makes the top three, then rape certainly should.
Unless the guy who wrote down these rules had morals that were really skewed...
Think of it - blasphemy means taking your gods name in vain. So saying 'holy crap' is never to be done, yet rape can (to save or avoid endagering a human life).
Your words don't quite match contemporary moral standards.

Can you think of any case where raping someone would save a human life??


I can't.

[cnorman18]

Just for the record, rape is forbidden, too.

Yes, of course, but you said "any Commandment, save three only, may be violated to save or avoid endangering a human life". I just think if blasphemy ( a vague and impossible sin) makes the top three, then rape certainly should.
Unless the guy who wrote down these rules had morals that were really skewed...
Think of it - blasphemy means taking your gods name in vain. So saying 'holy crap' is never to be done, yet rape can (to save or avoid endagering a human life).
Your words don't quite match contemporary moral standards.

Can you think of any case where raping someone would save a human life??


I can't.

Uh, me neither.

It's a moot point anyway. Rape would fall under the adultery prohibition; it forbids all illicit sexual activity, not just banging another guy's wife. I'm pretty sure rape would be classified as "illicit."

Holy crap, what some people will do to find a complaint...

[Darren]

Can you think of any case where raping someone would save a human life??


I can't.

Have you ever seen the movie 'Seven' with Morgan Freeman? One of the victims of the killer in that movie was given the choice to rape a woman (to death) or die himself. He killed her (by rape) to save his own life.

I can't believe that you really thought hard about it...just about anything is possible with regards to human behavior.

[cnorman18]

Can you think of any case where raping someone would save a human life??


I can't.

Have you ever seen the movie 'Seven' with Morgan Freeman? One of the victims of the killer in that movie was given the choice to rape a woman (to death) or die himself. He killed her (by rape) to save his own life.

I can't believe that you really thought hard about it...just about anything is possible with regards to human behavior.

Sorry, that example won't work. If you look back on this thread, you'll see that there are three Commandments that cannot be broken even to save a life, and one of them is murder.

If one is given the choice of murdering another or being murdered oneself, the only moral decision is to choose to die. In Judaism, this view of that situation (which has happened to Jews rather often in real life, and not in movies) is explained by the question, "Is your blood redder than his?"

Committing one murder to prevent another is not "saving a life." It is merely trading another's life for your own, and that right belongs to no one.

If you kill another who is about to kill you, that is quite another matter. In the situation described above, it is an /i]innocent[/i] life that is to be traded for your own.

[Dragon]

Committing one murder to prevent another is not "saving a life." It is merely trading another's life for your own, and that right belongs to no one.

If you kill another who is about to kill you, that is quite another matter.

Isn't the second action also a murder?