Why is their conviction for some things agreed on as sin but not others?

Jamdoc · Tuesday at 1:59 PM

So.. you do something wrong, something that most people would agree is sin, either it's explicitly in the bible , or just held as the majority opinion despite it not being in scripture as wrong.
For example: If you tell a lie, and you know it's a lie, there's a feeling of guilt, shame, in other words conviction, you sinned.
But, you tell a joke, the joke contains non factual statements, it is therefore technically a lie, but there is no guilt, no shame, no conviction, just laughter over the joke from all parties.
Why is there conviction for one but not the other, despite both boiling down to the same thing, lying, just the intent is different and you know when you tell a joke that contains untruthful things, IE a scenario that never actually happened, that there's no real deception.

Another example: You stub your toe alone in the dark and utter profanity because it hurt, or something startling happens like you get rear ended at a stoplight while you were stopped. You let out some choice words because you're worried about damage done to your car and whether the other vehicle's occupants are okay, nobody's hurt, etc. No conviction, guilt, or shame.
Now you let out profanity in front of other people.... NOW there is conviction "you shouldn't have done that".
You did the same thing but the only difference is witnesses.
It's generally agreed on that using profanity at all is sin, so it should always convict, but why doesn't it always, but is context dependent?

Final example: You see real, sexual context nudity on say a TV show or Movie, or you stumble upon pornography, and you don't instantly turn away from it, but.. watch it.
Shame, guilt, conviction. Whether you're alone, or with other people, there's conviction to it..... when it's real human beings.
Now, one changed variable.... the pornography or nudity is not a real human, but drawn/painted/sculpted/rendered on a computer, a cartoon human for instance. Why's there no shame, guilt and conviction then? You might find it funny if the art style is funny, nudity in classic art that's a painting or a sculpture is not considered pornographic at all in fact. But even if it is considered pornography, like a CGI video, or drawings, or in a video game where it's rendered and not a real person, even if it's photorealistic in nature, no real person is shown. Why doesn't that have the same crushing guilt and shame as viewing live action pornography? Isn't it all porn and should have the same involuntary conviction on seeing it?

Richard T · Tuesday at 3:25 PM

Jamdoc said:
So.. you do something wrong, something that most people would agree is sin, either it's explicitly in the bible , or just held as the majority opinion despite it not being in scripture as wrong.
For example: If you tell a lie, and you know it's a lie, there's a feeling of guilt, shame, in other words conviction, you sinned.
But, you tell a joke, the joke contains non factual statements, it is therefore technically a lie, but there is no guilt, no shame, no conviction, just laughter over the joke from all parties.
Why is there conviction for one but not the other, despite both boiling down to the same thing, lying, just the intent is different and you know when you tell a joke that contains untruthful things, IE a scenario that never actually happened, that there's no real deception.

Another example: You stub your toe alone in the dark and utter profanity because it hurt, or something startling happens like you get rear ended at a stoplight while you were stopped. You let out some choice words because you're worried about damage done to your car and whether the other vehicle's occupants are okay, nobody's hurt, etc. No conviction, guilt, or shame.
Now you let out profanity in front of other people.... NOW there is conviction "you shouldn't have done that".
You did the same thing but the only difference is witnesses.
It's generally agreed on that using profanity at all is sin, so it should always convict, but why doesn't it always, but is context dependent?

Final example: You see real, sexual context nudity on say a TV show or Movie, or you stumble upon pornography, and you don't instantly turn away from it, but.. watch it.
Shame, guilt, conviction. Whether you're alone, or with other people, there's conviction to it..... when it's real human beings.
Now, one changed variable.... the pornography or nudity is not a real human, but drawn/painted/sculpted/rendered on a computer, a cartoon human for instance. Why's there no shame, guilt and conviction then? You might find it funny if the art style is funny, nudity in classic art that's a painting or a sculpture is not considered pornographic at all in fact. But even if it is considered pornography, like a CGI video, or drawings, or in a video game where it's rendered and not a real person, even if it's photorealistic in nature, no real person is shown. Why doesn't that have the same crushing guilt and shame as viewing live action pornography? Isn't it all porn and should have the same involuntary conviction on seeing it?

You pose some good questions on how conviction works in a believer's life. There are lots of moving parts but I will attempt to unpack some of the things that would cause variation in the outcome from conviction.
First, the term conviction by the Holy Spirit, is likely not exactly the same as shame given by a conscience. A conscience can be seared, and not even in tune any more. It also can be overly sensitive and I think even that the accuser, Satan can use it to condemn a believer at times. The Holy Spirit's conviction is more pronounced and may even bring someone to violent tears. There have been church and even public meetings where the Holy Spirit really convicted people, bringing them public confession, tears of repentance etc. Those are powerful meetings with the presence of the Holy Spirit. I think too that the Holy Spirit's conviction brings about more change, and ignoring it brings about more discipline or in some cases abandonment to a Christian that continually ignores the call to repentance.

Secondly, every believer has God deal with them at their own level. Some gain their freedom faster than others. Some too have bigger fish to fry than to deal with more of the minor points within the Christian walk. This does not excuse them from the sin, but God is long-suffering and understands that certain believers can't handle everything at once. I can recall a famous minister of the past admitting that the closer he comes to Christ the more naked and ashamed he feels because he is coming to the point where his discernment is sensitive and can feel those things that grieve God. In other words, the closer one gets to God the more unholy some might feel. This thought is somewhat consistent with Heb 5:14.
Hebrews 5:13-14 (KJV)
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Another variable to add to the mix concerns whether a believer may have a weak conscience. This concept is recorded here in regards to meat sacrificed to idols. The principle though applies to other things.
1 Corinthians 8:7-9 (KJV)
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.

This notion of faith in following one's conscience is important. To quote an AI source:
Romans 14:23 states, "For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." "This verse highlights that actions done without faith, or against one's conscience, are considered sinful. It emphasizes that true virtue stems from reliance on God's love, forgiveness, and power, not just external conformity to rules."

Lastly, Romans 2:14-16 describes how the conscience bears witness, with thoughts either accusing or excusing individuals, showing that the law is written on their hearts. However, to balance the thought out, the heart can still be deceitful. We may not always have a clear picture and our moral compass may be off, we may try to justify certain sins and some people frankly are moved differently when they are confronted by sin. Jesus with the woman at the well and the adulterous woman and even Peter's future denials was quite gentle and loving. Some i think are too hard on themselves. Some ministers suggest that believers sometimes shoot their own wounded rather than care and bring them up in love.

So lots of things to consider. I always liked this from Proverbs
Proverbs 4:23-27 (KJV)
23 Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.
24 Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.
25 Let thine eyes look right on, and let thine eyelids look straight before thee.
26 Ponder the path of thy feet, and let all thy ways be established.
27 Turn not to the right hand nor to the left: remove thy foot from evil.

I should point out that we all fail at times, we just have to get back up. It is the washing of the water of the word too that is going to ultimately going to make many of those needed changes. I'm not sure exactly what kind of response you were expecting but hopefully something here can be helpful in this topic.

NBB · Tuesday at 4:14 PM

You are not passing the jokes as truth, that is lying trying to cheat someone into thinking something is true when is not, with jokes is not like that.

Jamdoc · Tuesday at 11:25 PM

Richard T said:
You pose some good questions on how conviction works in a believer's life. There are lots of moving parts but I will attempt to unpack some of the things that would cause variation in the outcome from conviction.
First, the term conviction by the Holy Spirit, is likely not exactly the same as shame given by a conscience. A conscience can be seared, and not even in tune any more. It also can be overly sensitive and I think even that the accuser, Satan can use it to condemn a believer at times. The Holy Spirit's conviction is more pronounced and may even bring someone to violent tears. There have been church and even public meetings where the Holy Spirit really convicted people, bringing them public confession, tears of repentance etc. Those are powerful meetings with the presence of the Holy Spirit. I think too that the Holy Spirit's conviction brings about more change, and ignoring it brings about more discipline or in some cases abandonment to a Christian that continually ignores the call to repentance.

Secondly, every believer has God deal with them at their own level. Some gain their freedom faster than others. Some too have bigger fish to fry than to deal with more of the minor points within the Christian walk. This does not excuse them from the sin, but God is long-suffering and understands that certain believers can't handle everything at once. I can recall a famous minister of the past admitting that the closer he comes to Christ the more naked and ashamed he feels because he is coming to the point where his discernment is sensitive and can feel those things that grieve God. In other words, the closer one gets to God the more unholy some might feel. This thought is somewhat consistent with Heb 5:14.
Hebrews 5:13-14 (KJV)
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Another variable to add to the mix concerns whether a believer may have a weak conscience. This concept is recorded here in regards to meat sacrificed to idols. The principle though applies to other things.
1 Corinthians 8:7-9 (KJV)
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.

This notion of faith in following one's conscience is important. To quote an AI source:
Romans 14:23 states, "For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." "This verse highlights that actions done without faith, or against one's conscience, are considered sinful. It emphasizes that true virtue stems from reliance on God's love, forgiveness, and power, not just external conformity to rules."

Lastly, Romans 2:14-16 describes how the conscience bears witness, with thoughts either accusing or excusing individuals, showing that the law is written on their hearts. However, to balance the thought out, the heart can still be deceitful. We may not always have a clear picture and our moral compass may be off, we may try to justify certain sins and some people frankly are moved differently when they are confronted by sin. Jesus with the woman at the well and the adulterous woman and even Peter's future denials was quite gentle and loving. Some i think are too hard on themselves. Some ministers suggest that believers sometimes shoot their own wounded rather than care and bring them up in love.

So lots of things to consider. I always liked this from Proverbs
Proverbs 4:23-27 (KJV)
23 Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.
24 Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.
25 Let thine eyes look right on, and let thine eyelids look straight before thee.
26 Ponder the path of thy feet, and let all thy ways be established.
27 Turn not to the right hand nor to the left: remove thy foot from evil.

I should point out that we all fail at times, we just have to get back up. It is the washing of the water of the word too that is going to ultimately going to make many of those needed changes. I'm not sure exactly what kind of response you were expecting but hopefully something here can be helpful in this topic.

Romans 14 is a good point.
I think in some ways we tack on extra rules that God has not given us. IE, God never made a list of no no words we can't say in English.... but men have made some words taboo to use. Are they taboo to God? No, not really. However, because some believers BELIEVE in their conscience that these words are off limits, if you use those words in their presence, it's a stumbling block to them. It is a point of liberty to me that no, if I stub my toe in the dark and let out an S bomb in response to pain when not in the presence of anyone else.. I don't feel conviction from it, but I wouldn't use such language in front of others because it can cause them to stumble, and it can make Christ look bad (bearing the Lord's name in vain), which then crosses over into sin, and that becomes conviction.

I did in fact get rear ended the other day, and surprisingly against what I usually do, which is get angry at the other party, and in my mind want something bad to happen to them (which results in conviction, committing murder in the heart). Every time this happens I get conviction not only in the sin but in "that was a test, you failed it". This time however I was concerned with the party in the other vehicle, I was wearing my seatbelt, i was unharmed, but I didn't know if someone else was hurt, there were 3 kids in the car, they and their mother were okay, and I was relieved, we pulled into a parking lot to sort out details and make sure we got the highway patrol for the report for insurance and all that, everyone was cooperative, and I forgave her, I understood the mitigating circumstance (some kid riding his bike recklessly weaving in and out of parking lot entrances, she took her eyes off the road briefly to not hit him, and didn't see the light turn red until too late).
Afterwards "that was a test, you passed this time".. and profanity in the car under my breath before getting out... didn't fail it.

But back to Romans 14, Paul discussed not following kosher dietary laws in 1 Timothy 4, in Europe and Asia Minor where Paul was evangelizing and planting Churches, they probably ate a lot of pork. Paul was at liberty to eat pork in those contexts (I don't know if he did), but probably for sure wouldn't eat pork when he went back to Jerusalem where it'd be a stumbling block to a Jewish Christian brother. Would Paul have sinned eating pork among gentiles? Probably not. Would Paul have sinned eating Pork among Jewish Christians? Probably, if any had weak conscience to it
Stumbling blocks is a nuanced thing, and isn't clearly defined.

Aaron112 · Wednesday at 1:02 AM

Guess What ?

The Judge is the One Who Righteously Judges Everything - no matter how you or I or anyone feels about it.

Jamdoc · Wednesday at 1:20 AM

Aaron112 said:
Guess What ?

The Judge is the One Who Righteously Judges Everything - no matter how you or I or anyone feels about it.

and, we've as men, decided some things are "sin" that are not explicitly stated as sin in scripture.
there are also laws that applied to Israel as a nation, that do not apply to gentiles, lots of them in fact, and yet some Christians will profess that we're beholden to those laws, in the early Church they debated over gentiles needing to be circumcised.

Aaron112 · Wednesday at 2:48 AM

Jamdoc said:
and, we've as men, decided some things are "sin" that are not explicitly stated as sin in scripture.

No. Traditions that are sinful and allow sin exist, yes, but hopefully we ignore those.

pastorwaris · Wednesday at 3:08 AM

Jamdoc said:
So.. you do something wrong, something that most people would agree is sin, either it's explicitly in the bible , or just held as the majority opinion despite it not being in scripture as wrong.
For example: If you tell a lie, and you know it's a lie, there's a feeling of guilt, shame, in other words conviction, you sinned.
But, you tell a joke, the joke contains non factual statements, it is therefore technically a lie, but there is no guilt, no shame, no conviction, just laughter over the joke from all parties.
Why is there conviction for one but not the other, despite both boiling down to the same thing, lying, just the intent is different and you know when you tell a joke that contains untruthful things, IE a scenario that never actually happened, that there's no real deception.

Another example: You stub your toe alone in the dark and utter profanity because it hurt, or something startling happens like you get rear ended at a stoplight while you were stopped. You let out some choice words because you're worried about damage done to your car and whether the other vehicle's occupants are okay, nobody's hurt, etc. No conviction, guilt, or shame.
Now you let out profanity in front of other people.... NOW there is conviction "you shouldn't have done that".
You did the same thing but the only difference is witnesses.
It's generally agreed on that using profanity at all is sin, so it should always convict, but why doesn't it always, but is context dependent?

Final example: You see real, sexual context nudity on say a TV show or Movie, or you stumble upon pornography, and you don't instantly turn away from it, but.. watch it.
Shame, guilt, conviction. Whether you're alone, or with other people, there's conviction to it..... when it's real human beings.
Now, one changed variable.... the pornography or nudity is not a real human, but drawn/painted/sculpted/rendered on a computer, a cartoon human for instance. Why's there no shame, guilt and conviction then? You might find it funny if the art style is funny, nudity in classic art that's a painting or a sculpture is not considered pornographic at all in fact. But even if it is considered pornography, like a CGI video, or drawings, or in a video game where it's rendered and not a real person, even if it's photorealistic in nature, no real person is shown. Why doesn't that have the same crushing guilt and shame as viewing live action pornography? Isn't it all porn and should have the same involuntary conviction on seeing it?

Dear Brother,

You’ve raised a deep and honest question. Why does conviction seem stronger in some situations than others, even when the action looks similar on the surface?

The Bible shows us that conviction is the work of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8), and He deals not just with the act but with the heart behind the act. God doesn’t simply measure sin by outward action. He looks at intent, motive, and the effect on our relationship with Him and others (1 Samuel 16:7).
That’s why telling a deliberate lie to deceive brings conviction, while telling a fictional joke doesn’t the heart motive is different. Likewise, profanity uttered in anger toward someone carries a different heart posture than muttering words in pain when you stub your toe. Context matters because sin isn’t only about the word or deed, but the spirit behind it (Matthew 15:18–19).

As for your example on lust and pornography, Jesus made it clear in Matthew 5:28 that lust is a matter of the heart, whether the image is real or imagined. Sometimes we feel less conviction because our conscience has been desensitized in certain areas (1 Timothy 4:2). That doesn’t mean God’s standard changes. It means our sensitivity to the Spirit may need renewing.

In short, conviction isn’t just a “moral alarm system” it’s God’s personal way of drawing us closer, shaping our hearts to match His. If there are areas where conviction feels weaker, it’s an invitation to ask Him to “search me… and lead me in the way everlasting” (Psalm 139:23–24).

Jamdoc · Wednesday at 3:24 AM

pastorwaris said:
Dear Brother,

You’ve raised a deep and honest question. Why does conviction seem stronger in some situations than others, even when the action looks similar on the surface?

The Bible shows us that conviction is the work of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8), and He deals not just with the act but with the heart behind the act. God doesn’t simply measure sin by outward action. He looks at intent, motive, and the effect on our relationship with Him and others (1 Samuel 16:7).
That’s why telling a deliberate lie to deceive brings conviction, while telling a fictional joke doesn’t the heart motive is different. Likewise, profanity uttered in anger toward someone carries a different heart posture than muttering words in pain when you stub your toe. Context matters because sin isn’t only about the word or deed, but the spirit behind it (Matthew 15:18–19).

This makes sense

pastorwaris said:
As for your example on lust and pornography, Jesus made it clear in Matthew 5:28 that lust is a matter of the heart, whether the image is real or imagined. Sometimes we feel less conviction because our conscience has been desensitized in certain areas (1 Timothy 4:2). That doesn’t mean God’s standard changes. It means our sensitivity to the Spirit may need renewing.

However this does not. If it was a seared conscience then it wouldn't be context sensitive, it'd be universal. It'd be 0 conviction looking at nudity period, rather than "well this absolutely crushes me in conviction, but this does not"

pastorwaris said:
In short, conviction isn’t just a “moral alarm system” it’s God’s personal way of drawing us closer, shaping our hearts to match His. If there are areas where conviction feels weaker, it’s an invitation to ask Him to “search me… and lead me in the way everlasting” (Psalm 139:23–24).

after some prayer I did find I have a seared conscience in an area, but it's not lust/pornography/nudity... but rather, violence. Now I've always been a fan of action movies and horror movies that have violence and games and such, where it was again, it's not real, I know the violence is fake either totally rendered/animated by a computer, or it's makeup/special effects/cgi. Real violence, however repulsed me.
However a few things in modern media happened in the last about 15-20 years that have desensitized me to real violence and it no longer holds shock value to me. ISIS and other terrorist videos got posted all around the internet, and while at first it was shocking, it became less so, the emotion I connected to them was not grief over having seen a video of someone being murdered, but rather anger at the perpetrators of the murders, which has led me to hate Islam. A lot of the content would get sourced from a site that used to exist (probably for the best that it no longer exists) called Liveleak, which not only had the terrorist videos (posted as news) but also a lot of CCTV footage, showing armed robberies (sometimes the robber killing clerks and customers which still caused grief over seeing, but sometimes... showing the clerk, or an armed customer taking out the robber, which... didn't cause grief), gang/cartel violence from central and south america.. and because China has a gazillion cameras everywhere, a lot of accidents, some quite grisly, there's shock but.. when those videos get spammed on the internet (in particular someone I used to game with was fascinated with them, he said "it shows the fragility of life" and he'd post videos in discord and the like), eventually you get numbed to the content. The final thing where I'd say I really do have a seared conscience to it.. the Russia/Ukraine war. The AFU of Ukraine posts a lot of videos showing their use of drones against Russians. Being that I dislike Russia for having caused this war, and threatening to nuke everyone constantly over it, I actually.. am not at all bothered by seeing a Russian blown up for real in a video anymore, in fact, I cheer it on, if I'm totally honest. In warfare, you learn to dehumanize the enemy, in order to suppress the grief over a lost life, and I can realize that I do this when it comes to Islamists, and Russians.

There's portions of the bible that shock a lot of people, and they get really uncomfortable with the idea that Jesus will be slaughtering people in the end of the age when He comes not just as the Lamb of God but as the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the first coming to save the world, the second to judge it. I'm more than comfortable with a Jesus who's clothes are soaked in the blood of His enemies.
Perhaps too comfortable with it.

pastorwaris · Wednesday at 5:50 AM

Jamdoc said:
However this does not. If it was a seared conscience then it wouldn't be context sensitive, it'd be universal. It'd be 0 conviction looking at nudity period, rather than "well this absolutely crushes me in conviction, but this does not"

Dear Brother,

I see what you’re saying, a truly seared conscience (1 Timothy 4:2) would show no conviction at all, across the board. But what you’re describing sounds less like a fully hardened conscience and more like a selectively dulled sensitivity.

The Holy Spirit convicts us based on truth, but our perception of that conviction can be shaped by culture, upbringing, past experiences, and even how often we’ve been exposed to something. That’s why one kind of lust might “crush” you immediately, while another form even if it’s still sin in God’s eyes, doesn’t stir the same emotional response.

That’s not because God’s standard changes, but because our heart can grow calloused in specific areas while still sensitive in others. Psalm 139:23–24 invites us to let God search all those areas, so His Spirit can align our hearts fully with His.

Conviction is God’s mercy at work. If He’s still stirring your heart in any area, it means He’s still shaping you and that’s a sign of His love, not His absence.

Blessings

Jamdoc · Wednesday at 3:40 PM

Aaron112 said:
No. Traditions that are sinful and allow sin exist, yes, but hopefully we ignore those.

Well I mean like I said initially. The bible has no list of forbidden words, the closest was Jesus in the sermon on the mount said you shouldn't call someone a fool or "raca", in both cases it was how the word was used not simply saying the word itself (using it to put down someone was wrong but using the word itself was not)
MAN has made certain words "no no" God did not.

Jamdoc · Wednesday at 4:14 PM

pastorwaris said:
Dear Brother,

I see what you’re saying, a truly seared conscience (1 Timothy 4:2) would show no conviction at all, across the board. But what you’re describing sounds less like a fully hardened conscience and more like a selectively dulled sensitivity.

The Holy Spirit convicts us based on truth, but our perception of that conviction can be shaped by culture, upbringing, past experiences, and even how often we’ve been exposed to something. That’s why one kind of lust might “crush” you immediately, while another form even if it’s still sin in God’s eyes, doesn’t stir the same emotional response.

That’s not because God’s standard changes, but because our heart can grow calloused in specific areas while still sensitive in others. Psalm 139:23–24 invites us to let God search all those areas, so His Spirit can align our hearts fully with His.

Conviction is God’s mercy at work. If He’s still stirring your heart in any area, it means He’s still shaping you and that’s a sign of His love, not His absence.

Blessings

Well what I mean is that God has obviously put lusting after a person is sin because of it leading to adultery, the sin Jesus connected to it was not fornication, but adultery. IE, that woman you lusted after, whether a pornographic actress, or an actress in a non pornographic movie (or just on the street) that you see and like and lust after... might be someone's wife, and if you're married, obviously that's looking away from your wife, also adultery.

A picture of a non real person, a figment of someone's imagination, is not anyone's wife, can't be someone's wife (not a real person), and being single, there is no adultery involved. That is the closest I can think of to the lack of conviction, is that the sin linked to looking at a woman with lust by Jesus was adultery specifically.
God's punishment for Adultery, that is, at least one of the partners was married, was death, both offending parties killed. That is where the crushing weight of conviction comes from, lusting after someone who is, by God's eyes, married to someone else, and that sin is so serious that it is a death penalty sin.

Deuteronomy 22:

22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.
23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

Fornication however, is punished differently:

Deuteronomy 22:

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

God doesn't punish that with death, He just sees them as married now and the punishment is well, they're married, formally.

So in an live action pornographic film, that "actress", whether officially married or not, was married according to God by the first man she fornicated with, and so every time a man, even a single man, looks upon her with lust, he has committed Adultery with her because to God that is a married woman.

So now I might wonder, is it just a lesser degree sin when it's, something in your own imaginations/dreams that does not exist, or is a drawing/art/rendering, where it's impossible for it to be someone's wife (unless that's part of the fantasy, fantasizing about it being someone's wife as in the "kink" is cheating/adultery, which unfortunately is a thing for some people) or, is it sin at all?
Is it a desensitization of a lesser "degree" of sin, that is fornication rather than adultery, where adultery is punished by death and fornication punished by a dowry payment to a.... non existent father, and being married to a... non existent person? Or, not sin at all
because it's a non existent person. Does the bible define having a fantasy of your own making without involving real people as sin?

I guess to put it in context, it's dreams. If I have a dream involving a real person, I feel weirdly uneasy about it, but if it's a person who is.. well as far as I know, they don't exist, there isn't that conviction, even if the dream is sexual in nature.

Search

Search

Why is their conviction for some things agreed on as sin but not others?

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always

More options

Richard T

Well-Known Member

More options

NBB

Well-Known Member

More options

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always

More options

Aaron112

Well-Known Member

More options

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always

More options

Aaron112

Well-Known Member

More options

pastorwaris

The Smallest Servant of God

More options

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always

More options

pastorwaris

The Smallest Servant of God

More options

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always

More options

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always

More options

Similar threads