Reconciling Hotwifing with Biblical Faith

[TomKatz]

I posted this nineteen years ago, and some found it helpful, so I am reposting it. I realize this is not everyone's cup of tea, but it is helpful information for those in the lifestyle who feel a need to reconcile the lifestyle with their faith.

Scripture clearly forbids us from adding to or taking from the laws of God (Deut. 4:2; 12:32) and Scripture also tells us that the marriage bed is undefiled (Heb. 13:4). These two statements taken together tell us clearly that all sexual practices not otherwise forbidden in the Bible are permitted in the marriage bed. Your wife probably has had a false guilt placed on her, having been made to feel guilty for her own God given desires. Sex and sexual desires are a gift from God to her, a gift meant to unite us and make us one. She needs to understand that your marriage can be improved when the weight of false sexual guilt is lifted and she experience sexual freedom, possibly for the first time in her life. God wants her to have sex without guilt, but the traditions of men have given her guilt without sex.

But there is so much misinformation about what the Bible does and does not say about sex that much of what your wife may believe the Bible says about sex is actually the traditions of men and not Biblical precepts at all. You will need to bring her to and understanding that sex is by no means evil and that biblical sex is a beautiful thing.

She must come to understand that as a believer she should not be ashamed of her sexuality. When the false idea that sex is dirty, sinful and of no spiritual value is discarded, she can actually begin to think of sex as much more than just pleasure, but a unifying spiritual force that can empower her with freedom rather than bondage.

You might begin by showing her that the Bible has a whole book about sexuality! The Song of Songs (also called Song of Solomon) is extremely erotic, but it's written in symbolism and so many people miss the full scope of its eroticism. In fact one might even call the Song of Songs “pornographic”… it is ancient pornography… and it is also the word of God.

God wants women to enjoy sex. The Mosaic Law required that a man not withhold "conjugal rights" from his wife even if he took other wives (Ex. 21:10). Moreover the Law exempts a new husband from military service for a full year so he may "bring joy to his wife" (Deut. 24:5). In the Song of Songs Solomon writes of his lover "How fair and how pleasant are you, o love, for delights!" to which his lover responds "I am my beloved's and his desire is toward me." (SoS 7:7, 11) The Hebrew word for "desire" here is T'SHUKAH (Strong's 8669) and comes from the root word SHUK (Strong's 7783) meaning "to overflow; to be wet". This is the same word in Gen. 3:16 where woman is told that her "desire" would be for her husband.

Your wife will need to understand that there is more freedom than restrictions when it comes to sex, especially for married couples. If God doesn't prohibit something and it's acceptable to both people, then God gives a green light and says, "Enjoy yourselves!"

Your wife may be confused about what you can do or not do sexually. This is unfortunate sexual bondage. The Bible is clear in saying:

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled:
but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
(Hebrews 13:4)

This means anything that is done in the context of the marriage bed, which is not otherwise forbidden, is permitted. Show your wife that she need not be put into bondage by the traditions of men, by those who would add their own rules to the commandments of God.

A “tradition of men” which has almost certainly been heaped upon your wife is the false teaching that she may never have sex with anyone but her husband. This is also a total falsehood. The the Scriptures do absolutely forbid “adultery” (Ex 20:14, Mt 5:27) but the question remains as to just what is “adultery”.

Married persons hold rights over each other's bodies. The Scripture says:

The wife hath not power over her own body,
but the husband:
and likewise also
the husband hath not power of his own body,
but the wife.
(1Cor. 7:4).

A person commits adultery if they violate their partner's rights over their body. Extramarital sex is not "adultery" unless one of the parties is married and acting without permission from their spouse. There are situations where a married person may have sex with another party without having committed adultery.

First of all in biblical cases of polygamy it would appear that the husband did not commit adultery against one wife when engaging in sex with another wife.

This leads to another issue, that of the "concubine". What was a concubine? The Hebrew word for a "concubine" is "pelegesh" which means comes from a root meaning “to split apart, to penetrate or pierce” and is related to the word for an archery target. A concubine is a "penetration target" for a man's sex organ. He pierces her, penetrates her, and splits her open with his manhood. A “concubine” was a penetration target. King David had many concubines (2Sam. 5:13) and it would also appear that King David did not commit adultery when he engaged in sex with his concubines.

Finally there are cases in the Bible by which a person have their spouse permission to have sex with another person. In these cases it does not appear that the sex act was adultery. For example Sarah gave Abraham permission to have sex with Hagar:

And Sarai said unto Abram, behold now,
the Lord hath restrained me from bearing:
I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be
That I may obtain children by her. And
Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.
(Gen. 16:2)

But Abraham did not commit adultery in doing so. In another example Rachel gave Jacob permission to have sex wit Bilhah:

And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah,
go in unto her; and she shall bear upon
upon my knees that I may also have children
by her.
(Gen. 30:3)

In Lev. 18:20 we read of a situation where, conversely, a man gives his wife permission to have sex with another man:

Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife,
to defile yourself with her.

A more literal translation is:

Moreover you shall not lie giving seed with your neighbour's wife, to be made unclean by her.

Now this verse should already have alarms going off over this statement. One does not simply become unclean from committing adultery. Adultery in the Mosaic Law is punishable by death. The man in this passage becomes "unclean" because this is a follow up to the previous verse which forbids one from having sex with their wife "as long as she is set apart for her uncleanness" (Lev. 18:19) that is, during her menstruation period:

19: Also you shall not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
20: Moreover you shall not lie giving seed with your neighbour's wife, to be made unclean by her.
(Lev. 18:19-20)

This follow up verse in Lev, 18:20 is saying that one would also become unclean from having sex with one's neighbour's wife so as to make it clear that one should not have sex with your wife, or anyone else’s wife that is menstruating, but wait... why would anyone be having sex with his neighbour's wife? Wouldn't that be adultery? Why have a passage in the Bible warning a man that he would become ritually unclean from having sex with his neighbour's wife (in her uncleaness)? Wouldn't he be guilty onto death anyway, not just unclean? This passage makes it clear that there are situations in which a man can have sex with "his neighbour's wife" without having committed adultery. Just as a wife can give her husband permission to have sex with another woman, so may a husband give his wife permission to have sex with another man.

I hope this was helpful to some.

[AdamGunn]

We were both active in our Lutheran parish when we first began thinking of opening up our marriage. After much discussion, we concentrated on the commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself."

We take this to mean, be nice to everyone, don't harm anyone. And we decided that having sex with other people really didn't harm anyone (we were very careful not to play with cheating people) and so we weren't violating that commandment.

Simplistic? Yeah, maybe. But it worked for us.

[Buitenman]

I am so glad I'm not a Christian. But I did attend many religious schools so I am very familiar with the many wonderful teachings from the Bible.

But I have also the privilege of looking at things as an outsider. To be clear, I really have nothings against religion in general and if someone is happy having a faith, it is all good to me. Live and Let live. I also have not the intention of insulting anyone.

But why I ask are religious people always cherry picking the bible. The OP mentions a few things about marriage and fidelity from the Bible.
But what about all the others ? Does your wife sleep outside during her monthly period of being unclean ? I doubt it.
The Bible states clearly life comes from God. Children are his gift. There are a large number of topics involving pregnancy. If God disagrees with the coupling, why does he bless it with children.
Read the book of Lot. His two daughters get him drunk to have relations with him to further the family line. Pure incest but God seems to agree as he blessed them with children.
The list goes on forever. Slaves are integrated and God doesn't mind.

Why would he then have a problem with this lifestyle?

Again I am not trying to insult or upset anyone. But if you follow the teachings of a faith, should you not look at all of them ?

[Buitenman]

I am so glad I'm not a Christian. But I did attend many religious schools so I am very familiar with the many wonderful teachings from the Bible.

But I have also the privilege of looking at things as an outsider. To be clear, I really have nothings against religion in general and if someone is happy having a faith, it is all good to me. Live and Let live. I also have not the intention of insulting anyone.

But why I ask are religious people always cherry picking the bible. The OP mentions a few things about marriage and fidelity from the Bible.
But what about all the others ? Does your wife sleep outside during her monthly period of being unclean ? I doubt it.
The Bible states clearly life comes from God. Children are his gift. There are a large number of topics involving pregnancy. If God disagrees with the coupling, why does he bless it with children.
Read the book of Lot. His two daughters get him drunk to have relations with him to further the family line. Pure incest but God seems to agree as he blessed them with children.
The list goes on forever. Slaves are impregrated and God doesn't mind.

Why would he then have a problem with this lifestyle?

Again I am not trying to insult or upset anyone. But if you follow the teachings of a faith, should you not look at all of them ?

[TomKatz]

I am so glad I'm not a Christian. But I did attend many religious schools so I am very familiar with the many wonderful teachings from the Bible.

But I have also the privilege of looking at things as an outsider. To be clear, I really have nothings against religion in general and if someone is happy having a faith, it is all good to me. Live and Let live. I also have not the intention of insulting anyone.

But why I ask are religious people always cherry picking the bible. The OP mentions a few things about marriage and fidelity from the Bible.
But what about all the others ? Does your wife sleep outside during her monthly period of being unclean ? I doubt it.
The Bible states clearly life comes from God. Children are his gift. There are a large number of topics involving pregnancy. If God disagrees with the coupling, why does he bless it with children.
Read the book of Lot. His two daughters get him drunk to have relations with him to further the family line. Pure incest but God seems to agree as he blessed them with children.
The list goes on forever. Slaves are impregrated and God doesn't mind.

Why would he then have a problem with this lifestyle?

Again I am not trying to insult or upset anyone. But if you follow the teachings of a faith, should you not look at all of them ?

Don't assume things. Orthodox Jews do indeed keep the rules of separation during a woman's menstruation period. And it does not require sleeping "outside".

As I said, if this is not your cup of tea, so be it, then it wasn't addressed to you.

[Buitenman]

Don't assume things. Orthodox Jews do indeed keep the rules of separation during a woman's menstruation period. And it does not require sleeping "outside".

As I said, if this is not your cup of tea, so be it, then it wasn't addressed to you.
[/quote]

My point exactly. Orthodox Jews follow those rules, The non orthodox ones apparently not. So unless you are orthodox, it should not be to hard to ignore a few rules more. It's just something i have always failed to grasp about religions in general.
I'm just truly curious as I have lived in very religious communities and have a broad interest in the topic. I have read the Bible, Koran, Dharma and various Hindu texts so I have given these matters some thought.

I can recommend Oscar Wildes philosophy as an alternative.
"A man wants to be happy, but society wants him to be good, and when he's good, man is rarely happy"

[Buitenman]

I am so glad I'm not a Christian. But I did attend many religious schools so I am very familiar with the many wonderful teachings from the Bible.

But I have also the privilege of looking at things as an outsider. To be clear, I really have nothings against religion in general and if someone is happy having a faith, it is all good to me. Live and Let live. I also have not the intention of insulting anyone.

But why I ask are religious people always cherry picking the bible. The OP mentions a few things about marriage and fidelity from the Bible.
But what about all the others ? Does your wife sleep outside during her monthly period of being unclean ? I doubt it.
The Bible states clearly life comes from God. Children are his gift. There are a large number of topics involving pregnancy. If God disagrees with the coupling, why does he bless it with children.
Read the book of Lot. His two daughters get him drunk to have relations with him to further the family line. Pure incest but God seems to agree as he blessed them with children.
The list goes on forever. Slaves are impregrated and God doesn't mind.

Why would he then have a problem with this lifestyle?

Again I am not trying to insult or upset anyone. But if you follow the teachings of a faith, should you not look at all of them ?

Don't assume things. Orthodox Jews do indeed keep the rules of separation during a woman's menstruation period. And it does not require sleeping "outside".

As I said, if this is not your cup of tea, so be it, then it wasn't addressed to you.

[Greg_N_Shelley]

We were both active in our Lutheran parish when we first began thinking of opening up our marriage. After much discussion, we concentrated on the commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself."...

I love this. That's the crux of Jesus' teaching and probably what most distinguishes the New Covenant from old.

I hope I don't spark a theological debate, but I propose the difference between the Old Testament and New Testament is significant enough that they may as well be printed as separate books. The Old Testament is filled with patriarchal ideas and moralistic rules that often conflict with the core of Jesus's teaching. The Old Testament makes a lot of sense if you think of it as collection of tribal literature aimed at explaining the tribe's origin and establishing guardrails for social order. But that's vastly different than the message of Jesus, the apostles, and other Christian authors of that period (e.g., Gnostics, etc.).

Ever since the early Roman church made the Old Testament books part of canon, people have been twisting themselves into knots trying to reconcile those two very different teachings.

[TomKatz]

We were both active in our Lutheran parish when we first began thinking of opening up our marriage. After much discussion, we concentrated on the commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself."...

I love this. That's the crux of Jesus' teaching and probably what most distinguishes the New Covenant from old.

I hope I don't spark a theological debate, but I propose the difference between the Old Testament and New Testament is significant enough that they may as well be printed as separate books. The Old Testament is filled with patriarchal ideas and moralistic rules that often conflict with the core of Jesus's teaching. The Old Testament makes a lot of sense if you think of it as collection of tribal literature aimed at explaining the tribe's origin and establishing guardrails for social order. But that's vastly different than the message of Jesus, the apostles, and other Christian authors of that period (e.g., Gnostics, etc.).

Ever since the early Roman church made the Old Testament books part of canon, people have been twisting themselves into knots trying to reconcile those two very different teachings.

You might be surprised by the continuity. When Jesus (his real name was Yeshua) said "love thy neighbor " he was actually quoting Lev. 19:18. When Paul said "the just shall live by faith" he was actually quoting Hab. 2:4.

[Parsifal]

Reconciling biblical faith and hotwifing is yet another legalistic endeavor that assumes people have free will only to sin or please God and, therefore, need textual support from a source they deem authoritative in order to feel comfortable or at peace with what they're doing. For me the legalistic endeavor is more akin to doing a suduko puzzle in the morning, so let's make those necessary assumptions and play!

Once upon a time, there was no time and yet God, though all knowing, all powerful, a perfect, got bored and created something out of nothing, including time. And on the 7th day, God's creation became complete with the creation of a single man out of which a woman was fashioned from that one man's rib. It's not clear whether the Garden in which He placed this primal couple was transcendent or early, but the point of all of this was that God's nature isn't static, that God was once completely self-sufficient and then felt a desire to create something external to Himself. It's also a mystery of infinite depth how an omniscient God would be entertained by doings of subordinate beings whose most miniscule behaviors, from scratching every itch or drawing every breath, from first to last, was and has been eternally foreseen. God of the Bible made all men sinners and knows how this story will end. He designed us to feel sexual lust as part of His plan for us to be fruitful and multiply, because it is His WIll for us, as part of some cosmic punishment, to live and die as individual souls but in doing so to continue to replenish the supply of new souls to bring God's creation to the end He has in mind for us.

Viewed in this context, hotwifing, therefore, is a perk of the expulsion from Eden. Adam and Eve had no need to reproduce. Like God, in whose likeness and image they were cast, became bored or dissatisfied with their essential paradisial harmony and tasted the apple of knowledge, and with carnal knowledge of each other they were expelled from the vegetative life to live in horror of conscious, predatory life, with man as apex predator. Life feeds on life until the planet dies.

So much for the Old Testament. How do we reconcile that with that with the New?

Remember that God's nature isn't constant, otherwise God would have had no reason to create this World and Cosmos out of nothing with which to occupy Himself. So eventually, God became compassionate, merciful, and loving. God came to weary of strife, and the process of God bringing all of the bits of His Eternal Light back into His Blissful, Self-Suffient Self is under way. Time and Space will become Nothingness and all will return to the God's Dream.

God needed to live as Man to feel the pain he'd cursed us with but also to lead us out of the Hell into which He'd once cast us in His wrath. The Nativity of Matthew tells the story of how the Holy Spirit revealed to Mary and Joseph, a married couple, of how God in the Person of The Holy Spirit would impregnate Mary and that while she submitted to God breeding her, her husband, Joseph, would abstain. Matthew teaches that Joseph only "knew" his wife - literally in the biblical sense - after God did.

In short, the immaculate conception was an act of divine hotwifery. Weirdly, if you need biblical support for this basic biological urge to be fruitful and multiple, there's your scripture. Also consider Jesus's own relationship with his favorite disciple, Mary Magdeline, proclaimed by Pope Gregory to be a saved harlot, who stood beside Him at the foot of the Cross when his male disciples fled.

God knows we are sinners and yet it is through our Faith in God's will and our compassion for the suffering of all living things in this cruel world of life that must kill to live that God's grace is secured.

[SammySigns]

Joseph was cucked by a superior being

[Parsifal]

Joseph was cucked by a superior being

Not just cuckolding but impregnation. Matthew does imply Joseph came to "know" Mary after the immaculate conception, and on interpretation of the biblical reference to James as the "brother" of Jesus supports the view that Mary didn't remain virginal after her encounter with the Holy Spirit.

We see hotwife wedding stories - which I take to be total fiction - in which the bull gets the bride first. Interestingly, the mythological roots of this dynamic can be seen in the medieval "right of the first night," or jus primae noctis, according to which feudal lords wielded a privilege to have sex with a vassal's bride on her wedding night. You may recall the scene in Braveheart of how well William Wallace (Mel Gibson) or Scotland in general went along with being cucked by the English in such manner. The offense is in the forceable submission to power. Not all submission to power, however, is forceable or unwelcome. Indeed, in Christian lore, submission to God's jus primae noctis is quite properly the highest grace ever bestowed on a mortal woman. The Bible, in other words, doesn't treat oneness of flesh within marriage as unconditional physical exclusivity. Spirit and body exist in separate realms.

[Geev]

Wow what an amazing thread this is. My g/f and potential wife Kelley has been a Christian all her life (I follow Jesus also), and has had no mention of any religious issues as she sleeps with her friend w benefits. But if something were to come up along these lines if we do get married, I will surely be saving this post to my backup drive.

[Greg_N_Shelley]

..Also consider Jesus's own relationship with his favorite disciple, Mary Magdeline, proclaimed by Pope Gregory to be a saved harlot, who stood beside Him at the foot of the Cross when his male disciples fled...

At risk of sounding like a heretic, the Gnostic Gospel of Philip also suggests Jesus's favoritism of Mary Magdeline was maybe rooted in..."special preference"?

BTW, I love your analysis!

[Greg_N_Shelley]

You might be surprised by the continuity. When Jesus (his real name was Yeshua) said "love thy neighbor " he was actually quoting Lev. 19:18. When Paul said "the just shall live by faith" he was actually quoting Hab. 2:4.

Agreed. There are fragments of wisdom in the Old Testament in alignment with Jesus's teaching. And probably the most significant example is in Genesis, The Fall of Man.

One of the core teachings of Jesus is summarized by the expression: "Judge Not." In Genesis, archetypal man (Adam and Eve) fell from grace when they ate from "the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil." Not the "Tree of Evil"...But The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

For anyone questioning the teachings of the Bible, really dive into that concept!

The first time that point became clear to me, I spent an entire weekend researching it further. Sure enough, the very oldest fragments of the Torah - oldest fragments of Genesis - are very exact in their Hebrew verbiage: THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.

It's us humans (then and now), who think we know "good" and "bad", "right" and "wrong", "should be" and "shouldn't be", and all that judgement jazz that "ate from the Tree of Knowledge" (thanks to Mom and Dad, society, teachers in school, book authors, pastors, etc.) and found ourselves exiled from the Garden of (perceptual) Perfection and perhaps, The Perceptual Infinite (Godhead, or the immortal "I" before there was a mortal "Me").