Matthew 5:27-28 describes lustful thoughts as sinful, which certainly are a precursor for many who bring their lusts to fruition by committing adultery. “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:27-28). Jesus Christ clarified Old Testament interpretation (of Exodus 20:14; Deuteronomy 5:18) by the Jewish religious leaders respecting adultery, to include in the sin of adultery the thoughts that often precede the physical activity of adultery. Similarly, the apostle Peter described brethren, “Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin” (2 Peter 2:14). Lust usually precedes adultery. “Here, as in reference to murder, Jesus legislates against the thought which lies back of the act. He cuts off sin at its lowest root. The essence of all vice is intention. Those who indulge in unchaste imaginations, desires and intentions are guilty before God” (McGarvey and Pendleton). Elsewhere, Jesus also defines sin as originating in the heart or from within a person; “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” (Matthew 15:19).
That being said, I am not aware of any commentator, preacher or other student of the Bible, among the churches of Christ or not, who is on record as supposing that lust by itself constitutes biblical grounds for divorce because of fornication or adultery (and possible subsequent remarriage) per Matthew 5:32 or 19:9.
While one’s spouse viewing pornography and chatting on the Internet with members of the opposite sex may well be sinful, as well as a source of contention between marriage partners when discovered, the sin at that point is not public beyond the marriage partners. Repentance by the offending spouse and the willingness of the offended spouse to forgive the other ought to begin mending the wounded marriage as well as satisfy the offending spouse’s responsibility to God; irrespective of the sin, repentance and prayer constitute what one might call the second law of pardon for a Christian who sins (Acts 8:22; 1 John 1:9).
If the publicity of the marriage partner’s sin was to family members or other supposed confidants by the other marriage partner, why could not the guilty one’s repentance be made known to the same confidants also by the other marriage partner? However, if through the impropriety of one’s spouse and confidants or otherwise one’s sins are generally known, then, a sinning Christian ought to acknowledge sin in his or her life before the congregation against which one’s sins may bring shame and reproach, or adversely affect a congregation’s confidence in a fellow Christian. Neither Scripture nor common application of Scripture about repentance require one to specify the specifics of the sins for which a brother or sister is repenting (James 5:16 notwithstanding); those who know what the sin is don’t need to be apprised of what it is, and those who don’t know what the sin is don’t need to know. Brethren only need to know that a brother or sister repents of sin that may bring shame and reproach on the Lord’s church.
Marriage is to be continued unless it is not possible to do so (e.g., death, Romans 7:2; adultery, Matthew 5:32; 19:9; desertion, 1 Corinthians 7:10-11; preservation of self or other family members, Psalm 119:121; Acts 22:25; 24:9-11; 28:19). “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:4-6).
Works Cited
McGarvey, J.W. and Philip Y. Pendleton. Four-Fold Gospel. Cincinnati: Standard, 1914. CD-ROM. Austin: WordSearch, 2004.
