St. Paul on LOOKING (Mt. 5:28)

JoeP222w · Oct 4, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
UNTRUE.

Your post #18:

"IRRELEVANT.

We should not look to some culture's norm, either now or then."

You wrote we "should not look to some culture's norm, either now or then". So how is my post "UNTRUE"? I responded to your statement.

Douglas Hendrickson said:
St. Paul did not call for "go out and stone all homosexuals and adulterers;"

I did not say he did, but the Bible does say that homosexuals and adulterers to be stoned in the Old Testament. If you demand to ignore the cultural context, as you specifically did in post #18, then if you follow the Bible, you must go out and stone homosexuals and adulterers, following your rule of ignoring cultural context.

I say that the Bible must be read in cultural context, if you are honestly and truthfully reading the Bible, you cannot remove the cultural context in which it was written nor can you remove the authorial intent. The reason why Christians are not to go out and stone homosexuals and adulterers, is because God, through Jesus Christ, has brought us a new covenant, a covenant of grace. Christians are not ancient Israelites under the covenant of Law. That is not to say that the Law is to be ignored, but rather that the fulfillment of the Law was completed in the work of Jesus Christ. Homosexuals, adulterers and all who remain in sin and refuse to repent remain condemned for their sins before the holy God, but Christians were never given the right to take the Law into their own hands, but rather to call the lawless ones to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. That is not say that Christians are morally superior or that Christians never sin, but that Christians know the only one that can save people from sin: His name is Jesus Christ.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 4, 2017

Can any loving manifestation (sign +) be considered HOLY
if it is not male-female?

What is sanctified and holy?
Certainly not perversion, nothing with even a whiff of perversion.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 4, 2017

JoeP222w said:
Your post #18:

"IRRELEVANT.

We should not look to some culture's norm, either now or then."

You wrote we "should not look to some culture's norm, either now or then". So how is my post "UNTRUE"? I responded to your statement.

I did not say he did, but the Bible does say that homosexuals and adulterers to be stoned in the Old Testament. If you demand to ignore the cultural context, as you specifically did in post #18, then if you follow the Bible, you must go out and stone homosexuals and adulterers, following your rule of ignoring cultural context.

I say that the Bible must be read in cultural context, if you are honestly and truthfully reading the Bible, you cannot remove the cultural context in which it was written nor can you remove the authorial intent. The reason why Christians are not to go out and stone homosexuals and adulterers, is because God, through Jesus Christ, has brought us a new covenant, a covenant of grace. Christians are not ancient Israelites under the covenant of Law. That is not to say that the Law is to be ignored, but rather that the fulfillment of the Law was completed in the work of Jesus Christ. Homosexuals, adulterers and all who remain in sin and refuse to repent remain condemned for their sins before the holy God, but Christians were never given the right to take the Law into their own hands, but rather to call the lawless ones to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. That is not say that Christians are morally superior or that Christians never sin, but that Christians know the only one that can save people from sin: His name is Jesus Christ.

Like you quote, I said "IRRELEVANT" in post #18, not "untrue."

Jesus Christ was NOT "cultural context."
Like you point out, it is a NEW COVENANT. Not about any cultural context.

MonstersvsMartyrs · Oct 4, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
So you think in his time everybody was concerned to be holy and therefor they all holy kissed?

If Scripture just referred to, "greet everyone with a kiss," then you might be correct. If it was a mere greeting.
Maybe it was, maybe not.

Wikipedia:
The kiss of peace is an ancient traditionalChristian greeting, also called the "Holy kiss", "Brother kiss" (among men), or "Sister kiss" (among women). Some congregations do not perform inter-gender holy-kissing.

It was the widespread custom in the ancient western Mediterranean for men to greet each other with a kiss.[1] That was also the custom in ancient Judea and practiced also by Christians.

The practice remains a part of the worship in traditional churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Catholic Churches,Eastern Orthodox churches, Oriental Orthodox churches; some liturgical mainline Protestant denominations; and Spiritual Christian, where it is often called the kiss of peace, sign of peace, Holy kiss or simply peace or pax; It is practiced as a part of worship in many Anabaptist heritage groups including Old German Baptist Brethren, and Apostolic Christian.

I go to an Orthodox church. Depending on their culture, some people there do indeed greet with a light kiss on the cheek. It is also customary to greet the priest with a kiss on the hand. There is absolutely nothing sexual or lust provoking in this, just as there is no lust involved when you kiss your mother or children.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 4, 2017

MonstersvsMartyrs said:
Wikipedia:
The kiss of peace is an ancient traditionalChristian greeting, also called the "Holy kiss", "Brother kiss" (among men), or "Sister kiss" (among women). Some congregations do not perform inter-gender holy-kissing.

It was the widespread custom in the ancient western Mediterranean for men to greet each other with a kiss.[1] That was also the custom in ancient Judea and practiced also by Christians.

The practice remains a part of the worship in traditional churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Catholic Churches,Eastern Orthodox churches, Oriental Orthodox churches; some liturgical mainline Protestant denominations; and Spiritual Christian, where it is often called the kiss of peace, sign of peace, Holy kiss or simply peace or pax; It is practiced as a part of worship in many Anabaptist heritage groups including Old German Baptist Brethren, and Apostolic Christian.

I go to an Orthodox church. Depending on their culture, some people there do indeed greet with a light kiss on the cheek. It is also customary to greet the priest with a kiss on the hand. There is absolutely nothing sexual or lust provoking in this, just as there is no lust involved when you kiss your mother or children.

Yah, "The Kiss of Peace" is sometimes called the holy kiss.

Doth not mean it IS THEE HOLY KISS Holy Spirit Kiss

Note new concept: Holy Spirit kiss

Phantasman · Oct 4, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
THEE touch:

Would not the touch of real kissing be more enticing than only seeing from a distance?

So how do we explain that St. Paul recommended kissing and did not say anything about not looking at anybody?

I.e., what does I Thess. 5:26 mean for Mt. 5:28 ?

I believe where some scriptures say Jesus kissed Mary M on the mouth often. I don't think he had an adulterous intent.

The flesh profits nothing. Love is shown in the works. Affection and lust are two different things. Did Jesus have a foot fetish by kissing the Apostles feet?

Really.

PloverWing · Oct 4, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
So you think so, you think St. Paul was simply calling for what the culture he happened to be living in, would do?

Yes.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 4, 2017

Phantasman said:
I believe where some scriptures say Jesus kissed Mary M on the mouth often. I don't think he had an adulterous intent.

The flesh profits nothing. Love is shown in the works. Affection and lust are two different things. Did Jesus have a foot fetish by kissing the Apostles feet?

Really.

IF he had a foot fetish, probably got it from the woman who came up behind him and started kissing his feet, and didn't seem to stop.
Don't you think?

BTW, did she have lust, or only affection?
She definitely seemed to have affection for the man.

MonstersvsMartyrs · Oct 4, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
IF he had a foot fetish, probably got it from the woman who came up behind him and started kissing his feet, and didn't seem to stop.
Don't you think?

BTW, did she have lust, or only affection?
She definitely seemed to have affection for the man.

I'm really confused. What point are you trying to make?

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 5, 2017

MonstersvsMartyrs said:
I'm really confused. What point are you trying to make?

I was "answering" what I consider a silly question,

Phantasman said:
Did Jesus have a foot fetish by kissing the Apostles feet?

with a silly answer, "IF he had a foot fetish ..."

Btw, is that "foot feetish"?

(I think Jesus washed the feet, not kissed them. What do you think?)

In case you didn't understand my #45 in response to your #44, I do appreciate your historical points, but don't think the "kiss or handshake" of peace is the "holy kiss" St. Paul was requesting.

I suggest "Holy Spirit kiss" might be the beginning of a better understanding.
A KISS OF TRUE GOD LOVE, nothing like a peck on the cheek or formal handshake.
God's very presence, far beyond a fleeting smile.

MonstersvsMartyrs · Oct 5, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
I was "answering" what I consider a silly question,

with a silly answer, "IF he had a foot fetish ..."

Btw, is that "foot feetish"?

(I think Jesus washed the feet, not kissed them. What do you think?)

In case you didn't understand my #45 in response to your #44, I do appreciate your historical points, but don't think the "kiss or handshake" of peace is the "holy kiss" St. Paul was requesting.

I suggest "Holy Spirit kiss" might be the beginning of a better understanding.
A KISS OF TRUE GOD LOVE, nothing like a peck on the cheek or formal handshake.
God's very presence, far beyond a fleeting smile.

Well, explain what you think this is. And how it relates to your original post about looking at a woman lustfully. And what evidence you have to support that this is what Paul is talking about instead of the common way of greeting somebody in his time.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 5, 2017

MonstersvsMartyrs said:
Well, explain what you think this is. And how it relates to your original post about looking at a woman lustfully. And what evidence you have to support that this is what Paul is talking about instead of the common way of greeting somebody in his time.

Well it would be very EROTIC, of real loving touch, holy body of Christ bride coming together. Holy, not something mundane or peripheral, of Holy Spirit presence.

It quite possibly would have had little relation to, "the common way of greeting somebody in his time," as I have already discussed on this thread. I don't think St. Paul was about trying to fit into the culture of his time, or any other time.

IF St. Paul had thought Jesus had preached there could be thousands of instances of actual adultey (by even only one person), without there being any coitus, an offense that in the culture before that time had been punishable by death, surely he would have mentioned it somewhere in all his letters?
And would he not have likely felt it necessary to attach a cautionary note to his admonition to "holy kiss," at least one of the five times he mentions such?

btw, I think agape was used by N.T. writers in much the same way we use "love," not for the most part as something to contrast with eros or philia as is the habit of much Christian understanding. A very extensively (and broadly) used term for "love; any others very little.

MonstersvsMartyrs · Oct 5, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
Well it would be very EROTIC, of real loving touch, holy body of Christ bride coming together. Holy, not something mundane or peripheral, of Holy Spirit presence.

It quite possibly would have had little relation to, "the common way of greeting somebody in his time," as I have already discussed on this thread. I don't think St. Paul was about trying to fit into the culture of his time, or any other time.

IF St. Paul had thought Jesus had preached there could be thousands of instances of actual adultey (by even only one person), without there being any coitus, an offense that in the culture before that time had been punishable by death, surely he would have mentioned it somewhere in all his letters?
And would he not have likely felt it necessary to attach a cautionary note to his admonition to "holy kiss," at least one of the five times he mentions such?

btw, I think agape was used by N.T. writers in much the same way we use "love," not for the most part as something to contrast with eros or philia as is the habit of much Christian understanding. A very extensively (and broadly) used term for "love; any others very little.

What evidence do you have to support this idea other than your own imagination?

He wouldnt have to warn people about the dangers of exchanging a kiss of peace, because it was a customary greeting that absolutely everyone was practicing at that time, and was not considered erotic by anyone-except to us, because weve eroticized kissing in our culture. This is like comparing holding hands to a handshake.

Dont you think, however, that if he DID mean to greet eachother with something other than the kiss of peace that everybody had been practicing since forever, he would have explained this and said, "greet everyone with a holy kiss of peace-and not, by the way, the kind of customary kiss of peace you have been greeting everyone with that everyone knows about, but this new kind of kiss of peace I thought would be pretty awesome between men and women thats highly erotic." Otherwise, how are they to know what on earth he is talking about?

Regardless of whether Paul felt it necessary to endorse Christ's teaching, dont you think the words of Jesus Himself are more important?

But since we are focusing on Paul, lets see what he has to say on the subject.

lust
/ləst/
nounnoun: lust, plural noun: lusts

1.very strong sexual desire:"he knew that his lust for her had returned"
▪a passionate desire for something:"a lust for power"
▪a sensual appetite regarded as sinful:"lusts of the flesh"

1 Thess 4
2For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. 3For this is the will of God, your sanctification:b that you abstain from sexual immorality; 4that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, 5not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God

1 Corinthians 7:9
But if they can't control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It's better to marry than to burn with lust.

Romans 8:5
Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.

Galatians 5
16This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.17For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which arethese; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

lascivious
[luh-siv-ee-uh s]
adjective

inclined to lustfulness; wanton; lewd:a lascivious, girl-chasing old man.
arousing sexual desire:lascivious photographs.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 5, 2017

MonstersvsMartyrs said:
What evidence do you have to support this idea other than your own imagination?

He wouldnt have to warn people about the dangers of exchanging a kiss of peace, because it was a customary greeting that absolutely everyone was practicing at that time, and was not considered erotic by anyone-except to us, because weve eroticized kissing in our culture. This is like comparing holding hands to a handshake.

Dont you think, however, that if he DID mean to greet eachother with something other than the kiss of peace that everybody had been practicing since forever, he would have explained this and said, "greet everyone with a holy kiss of peace-and not, by the way, the kind of customary kiss of peace you have been greeting everyone with that everyone knows about, but this new kind of kiss of peace I thought would be pretty awesome between men and women thats highly erotic." Otherwise, how are they to know what on earth he is talking about?

Regardless of whether Paul felt it necessary to endorse Christ's teaching, dont you think the words of Jesus Himself are more important?

But since we are focusing on Paul, lets see what he has to say on the subject.

lust
/ləst/
nounnoun: lust, plural noun: lusts

1.very strong sexual desire:"he knew that his lust for her had returned"

▪a passionate desire for something:"a lust for power"

▪a sensual appetite regarded as sinful:"lusts of the flesh"

1 Thess 4
2For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. 3For this is the will of God, your sanctification:b that you abstain from sexual immorality; 4that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, 5not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God

1 Corinthians 7:9
But if they can't control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It's better to marry than to burn with lust.

Romans 8:5
Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.

Galatians 5
16This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.17For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which arethese; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

lascivious
[luh-siv-ee-uh s]
adjective

inclined to lustfulness; wanton; lewd:a lascivious, girl-chasing old man.

arousing sexual desire:lascivious photographs.

Thanks, I do appreciate what you have pointed out!
You say, "Regardless of whether Paul felt it necessary to endorse Christ's teaching, don't you think the words of Jesus Himself are more important?"

The words of Jesus Himself are more important - that is why it matters even more that we understand them correctly.
I'd ask you to comment on an earlier post of mine:

Douglas Hendrickson said:
"JESUS MEANT WHAT HE SAID," that heart is so much a part of it, if it is in the heart then it is like it already happened. The same thing, adultery already I tell yah.

(Of course anyone who interprets that to mean, "there is no adultery when there is 'adultery'," has to be wrong - when the adultery happens there is actual adultery.)

If Mt. 5:28 is understood to say that in only looking there is the sin of adultery, then Jesus must have been saying that there sure was a whole lot of breaking of the law of God in day to day activities. But was there then or any time thereafter anyone ever seriously punished for only looking, or if there were were such punishment, does anyone think that was or would be just?

Does it not make more sense to think Jesus was proclaiming that if the heart is much involved then one is into the act itself, and there is no such "lust" or total heart involvement (in the direction of adultery), that does not involve the act of coitus?

Radagast · Oct 5, 2017

redleghunter said:
Can you add a survey answer which says "Jesus meant what He said."

Amen.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 5, 2017

Radagast said:
Amen.

And what do you think "adultery in his heart" means, that there is not any adultery, any adulterous act?

Are there two kinds of adultery? One that is identified by an act of coitus, and one that is not?
So adultery is not necessarily adultery as it was always understood? It may be a mere thought in the mind, (called "heart")?

Is that what Jesus meant, that adultery isn't adultery? Adultery is something else?

edit: Does "already committed" mean, "is tantamount to the act itself"?

Is it not rather clear that the "lust" is not the coital act itself? Do all agree on that?

So is "adultery" a compound thing, that is in fact much more than coitus?
Is that pretty much what Jesus is saying?
NOT to be saying the defining act of adultery is not coitus?

Is he saying more than: the thought that accompanies, is part of, the coitus act of adultery is VERY IMPORTANT, perhaps as important to point to as the coital act itself?
Maybe even more important than the act, but that does not mean there is ever adultery without the coital act.

MonstersvsMartyrs · Oct 6, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
And what do you think "adultery in his heart" means, that there is not any adultery, any adulterous act?

Are there two kinds of adultery? One that is identified by an act of coitus, and one that is not?
So adultery is not necessarily adultery as it was always understood? It may be a mere thought in the mind, (called "heart")?

Is that what Jesus meant, that adultery isn't adultery? Adultery is something else?

edit: Does "already committed" mean, "is tantamount to the act itself"?

Is it not rather clear that the "lust" is not the coital act itself? Do all agree on that?

So is "adultery" a compound thing, that is in fact much more than coitus?
Is that pretty much what Jesus is saying?
NOT to be saying the defining act of adultery is not coitus?

Is he saying more than: the thought that accompanies, is part of, the coitus act of adultery is VERY IMPORTANT, perhaps as important to point to as the coital act itself?
Maybe even more important than the act, but that does not mean there is ever adultery without the coital act.

Im a little bit confused by what you mean. But here is that verse in context, and I think we should be looking at the rest of the statements Jesus made with it to see what He means:

Matthew 5
17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Murder

21“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,a and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sisterb c will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’d is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

23“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.

25“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Adultery

27“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’e 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Divorce

31“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’f 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Oaths

33“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.g

Eye for Eye

38“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’h 39But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.40And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

1 John 3
15Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 6, 2017

MonstersvsMartyrs said:
Im a little bit confused by what you mean. But here is that verse in context, and I think we should be looking at the rest of the statements Jesus made with it to see what He means:

Matthew 5
17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Murder

21“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,a and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sisterb c will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’d is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

23“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.

25“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Adultery

27“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’e 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Divorce

31“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’f 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Oaths

33“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.g

Eye for Eye

38“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’h 39But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.40And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

1 John 3
15Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

I presume in your intro, you say we should look at these CONTEXT verses to understand "what he means" in Matthew 5;28...
So, what do you think he means, and which of these other verses in what way make that clear?

MonstersvsMartyrs · Oct 6, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
I presume in your intro, you say we should look at these CONTEXT verses to understand "what he means" in Matthew 5;28...
So, what do you think he means, and which of these other verses in what way make that clear?

What do you think He means? What is the common thread through all these verses?

Douglas Hendrickson · Oct 7, 2017

MonstersvsMartyrs said:
What do you think He means? What is the common thread through all these verses?

We should watch that we do not go in the direction of breaking the Commandments.

Be reconciled that we commit no murder. (And pay our debts!)

Not even consider committing adultery. (Including not divorce faithful wife!)

Not swear at all, simply communicate truth.

Even though others may offend against you, do not offend against them.

Treat others perfectly, in the manner of God.

Heaven requires complete and true righteousness.

St. Paul on LOOKING (Mt. 5:28)

St. Paul knew Jesus never said there could be adultery without coitus.?

Because adultery without coitus is a ridiculous idea.

Because all his letters would have to be rewritten if this ('saying)' were true.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Episcopalian

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

comes and goes

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads