Lust: Is it possible to control all your thoughts?

[brightmorningstar]

Jaws13,

Off topic. This is about lust, not sex.

Wrong!
Lust definitions mostly refer to desire/craving for something in general and sexual desire/craving. So not only is sex included in the general but specifically.
The OP made a specific reference to the sexual
Almost all the NT references include the specific reference to the sexual.

Matthew 5:28 “But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Romans 1:26 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
Colossians 3:5 “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.”
1 Thessalonians 4:5 “not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God;”
1 Peter 4:3 “For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry.”
2 Peter 2:18 “For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error.”
John 2:16 “For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world.”

So my points were specifically on topic, would you like to kindly address them?

So prove that the NT countenances any lust or sex outside faithful man/woman marriage. If you cant then we are sure of what lust is and can move back to the OP question, is it possible to control the thoughts.

Prove that lust is sexual thoughts outside of marriage. Heck, show that lust has anything to do with thoughts.

The Bible texts as shown prove it.

The NT describes very well how all are tempted with such thoughts but that by focussing on Christ and being guided by the Holy Spirit one can avoid wrong sexual thoughts. The battle therefore is to focus on Christ and live by the Spirit rather than focussing on the desires.

 

[brightmorningstar]

There are many who like to attach their own definition to terms and passages in the bible, and then demand that all accept their own personal translation as it were, as authoritative as scripture itself.

Aint that the case. The test is who quotes the Bible text in their posts, and who merely give their own opinions.

 

[Armistead14]

Jaws13,
Wrong!
Lust definitions mostly refer to desire/craving for something in general and sexual desire/craving. So not only is sex included in the general but specifically.
The OP made a specific reference to the sexual
Almost all the NT references include the specific reference to the sexual.

Matthew 5:28 “But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Romans 1:26 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
Colossians 3:5 “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.”
1 Thessalonians 4:5 “not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God;”
1 Peter 4:3 “For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry.”
2 Peter 2:18 “For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error.”
John 2:16 “For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world.”

So my points were specifically on topic, would you like to kindly address them?

So prove that the NT countenances any lust or sex outside faithful man/woman marriage. If you cant then we are sure of what lust is and can move back to the OP question, is it possible to control the thoughts.

The Bible texts as shown prove it.

The NT describes very well how all are tempted with such thoughts but that by focussing on Christ and being guided by the Holy Spirit one can avoid wrong sexual thoughts. The battle therefore is to focus on Christ and live by the Spirit rather than focussing on the desires.

A correct study of lust based on the greek and the culture would explain that these verses have nothing to do with sexual thought outside of marriage. The word lust itself has nothing to do with an act, but the intent of the act. One may lust for material things, power, etc...or another persons property. Lust is how and why you go about something. Many seek wealth the wrong way...they lusted for it. It certainly doesn't mean all wealth was gained by lust, some went about gaining it through normal hard work.

Take Matt 5:28. Christ is comparing lust to adultery, because adultery then was the stealing/taking of another man's property. Simply lust equals to covet, to take what doesn't belong to you. Biblically, only married folks commit adultery, not single. Every person that is single has had at least one sexual thought, if we take the verse at that value, then we're all guilty of adultery. The chapter in context explains it. If you seek to steal another persons wife, then you've comitted adultery already. The same with murder, you plan to kill, you've murdered already...the theme of the chapter. Lust biblically is to covet, has nothing to do with sexual thought.

If you want to take the verse out of context, then any married person has the right to divorce their spouse over a single sexual thought... See how it doesn't work with scripture? The bible states adultery is the physical act of an unfaithful marriage and the church acted on such.

God made puberty. We are asexual before puberty. Puberty is a known genetic hormonal process that makes us have sexual desires and connects them to out body parts. Without these desires people wouldn't seek a mate in the first place. It happens at about age 12. Did God make a mistake in making us have sexual thoughts and desires at this age? Puberty, thus sexual thought and desire are part of our genetic makeup. It's laughable to try to defeat it. That's why we have all these silly threads where all the christians post about sexual desires, masturbation, etc...and how they can't defeat it........Seems dealing with sex is the main theme among christian concerns. they weren't meant to defeat it, just to not do harm with their actions. The fact is only a few can physically ignore their sexuality, I don't know that any person can humanly cut the sex switch off until they reach older age and the body changes once again.

If the church would correctly deal with sexuality, instead of making sexual thought evil, it might could correctly connect with people on a level they could work with, to keep people from using sex harmfully to hurt others, instead they drive most into silence and often perverted behavior, because they have no recourse to deal with that which is natural. If I was told eating was evil, I would eventually go hide in a closet....

Your other verses are tied to some form of pagan worship. Back then many sexual acts were common with pagan worship, even many christians continued in it and Paul rebuked that connection.

 

[ghendricks63]

Aint that the case. The test is who quotes the Bible text in their posts, and who merely give their own opinions.

LOL - Not exactly. Satan quoted the bible but that did not make him right.

The "test" is whether one seeks to understand the bible wherever it may lead them as opposed to one who simply uses the bible to further their pre-determined agenda.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Armistead14,
Study of greek and culture will not give the revelation of God through His word. Your point fails at the first point. Take ‘love’, of the common use in ancient Greek only agape and philio are used and agape is given a specific meaning in the NT that doesn’t exist in Greek culture.
The NT passages define lust with sexual immorality as given, so the Bible explains lust includes sexual thought outside of marriage, despite your claim to the contrary.

The word lust itself has nothing to do with an act, but the intent of the act. One may lust for material things, power, etc...or another persons property.

Obviously Matthew 5:28 says the opposite “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Lust is how you go about something, not just what you're after.

Not according to Jesus NT teaching in Matt 5:28. Your remark directly contradicts Jesus teaching that looking lustfully/desirably at the woman is also committing adultery in the heart.

Take Matt 5:28. Christ is comparing lust to adultery, because adultery then was the stealing/taking of another man's property.

Sorry but whilst that may also be the case one cant compare something that isn’t comparable. Adultery can include lustful thoughts.

Biblically, only married folks commit adultery, not single.

Agreed, single commit fornication.

Every person that is single has had at least one sexual thought, if we take the verse at that value, then we're all guilty of adultery.

Correct. All fall short.

The chapter in context explains it. If you seek to steal another persons wife, then you've comitted adultery already. The same with murder, you plan to kill, you've murdered already...the theme of the chapter. Lust biblically is to covet, has nothing to do with sexual thought.

Assume then it is only concerned with sexual thought and doesn’t include thoughts of coveting, murder. Romans 1:26-28 is the same.

If you want to take the verse literal out of context, then any married person has the right to divorce their spouse over a single sexual thought...

No mention of anything like that in the text, nor can I see any implication. who is taking the verse literally out of context?

Did God make a mistake in making us have sexual thoughts and desires at this age?

Sorry, you dnt know enough scripture, it was only when Adam and Eve chose to disobey God and eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil did they realise they were naked. God didn’t make any mistake, humans did.

Seems dealing with sex is the main theme among christian concerns.

Sex is a major theme among Christians, there are many warnings about sexual immorality as a barrier to the Kingdom in Jesus Christ’s NT teaching, even in Revelation 22 it says outside are the dogs, the sexually immoral.. Of course it is a major issue for Christians with God’s heart that none should perish. The problem is sex is very important to the world so it looks to justify and excuse it.
The NT is clear in many places, flee from sexual immorality by living by the Spirit and not the flesh, and recognising we all fall short.
2 Corinthians 10:5 “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.”
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.”

If the church would correctly deal with sexuality, instead of making sexual thought evil, it might could correctly connect with people on a level they could work with, to keep people from using sex harmfully to hurt others, instead they drive most into silence and often perverted behavior, because they have no recourse to deal with that which is natural. If I was told eating was evil, I would eventually go hide in a closet....

Sexuality? that’s the evil that the church has to deal with. There is no concept of sexuality in the Bible.

 

[brightmorningstar]

ghendricks63,

LOL - Not exactly. Satan quoted the bible but that did not make him right.

So did Jesus, and He is the truth.

The "test" is whether one seeks to understand the bible wherever it may lead them as opposed to one who simply uses the bible to further their pre-determined agenda.

The Bible says what is says, the predetermined agenda is identified by those not giving any scripture to support their own ideas and claiming the Bible doesnt say what it says.

 

[Zebra1552]

Jaws13,
Wrong!
Lust definitions mostly refer to desire/craving for something in general and sexual desire/craving. So not only is sex included in the general but specifically.
The OP made a specific reference to the sexual
Almost all the NT references include the specific reference to the sexual.

Sexual lust is not the same as sexual activity or sexual preference. You are again committing the fallacy of equivocation- making one word have the meaning of two in the same discussion. Therefore, I am not wrong.

Matthew 5:28 “But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Look at the Greek for lust. What does it say? Or does the Bible 'say what it says' and it's up to us to figure that out?

Romans 1:26 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”

This has nothing to do with lust. This is a homosexuality clobber passage and has no place in this discussion. Stop trying to lure us into an off topic conversation.

Colossians 3:5 “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.”
1 Thessalonians 4:5 “not in passionate lust like the pagans, who do not know God;”
1 Peter 4:3 “For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry.”
2 Peter 2:18 “For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error.”
John 2:16 “For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world.”

Once again, define lust.

So my points were specifically on topic, would you like to kindly address them?

One of them isn't. This isn't about sexual activity or sexuality, it is about lust.

So prove that the NT countenances any lust or sex outside faithful man/woman marriage. If you cant then we are sure of what lust is and can move back to the OP question, is it possible to control the thoughts.

Again, equivocation and on top of that a straw man argument and a red herring. Man woman marriage has nothing to do with the topic, so red herring. Straw man argument, you assume I'm saying lust or sex outside marriage is okay, which I'm not, and then you attack your own assumption. Equivocation, you assume lust are thoughts and desires at the same time once again by your use of the word without defining the word.

The Bible texts as shown prove it.

Your Bible texts only show that lust is wrong. They don't define what lust is in their present form. What are you trying to prove by beating around the bush like this?

The NT describes very well how all are tempted with such thoughts but that by focussing on Christ and being guided by the Holy Spirit one can avoid wrong sexual thoughts. The battle therefore is to focus on Christ and live by the Spirit rather than focussing on the desires.

Again, equivocation, assuming lust is both a desire and a thought. You cannot use one word with multiple meanings in a discussion, no one will know what you mean. You've yet to even define lust. The above paragraph is therefore meaningless.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Jaws13,

Sexual lust is not the same as sexual activity or sexual preference.

Sexual preference is irrelevant. Lust is the desire to sexual activity, it isn’t the same but the Matthew scripture describes it being sin as well. There is no mention in the NT of lusting after ones wife as far as I am aware.

Look at the Greek for lust. What does it say? Or does the Bible 'say what it says' and it's up to us to figure that out?

Look at the Greek word for lust epithymeō, desire or coveting. Look at what the verse says.

This has nothing to do with lust. This is a homosexuality clobber passage and has no place in this discussion. Stop trying to lure us into an off topic conversation.

Well the passage contains the word lust which is the topic. Yes it is also a verse that clobbers homosexuality as well but ist not going to be left out of a discussion on lust because people dont like homosexual clobber passages.

Once again, define lust.

What apart from the Bible descriptions and the dictionary? Nah. I don’t do liberal.

Again, equivocation and on top of that a straw man argument and a red herring.

When all said an done, at the end of the day, you cant beat a good cliché. So you cant prove it. That’s what I thought.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Jaws13,

Sexual lust is not the same as sexual activity or sexual preference.

Sexual preference is irrelevant. Lust is the desire to sexual activity, it isn’t the same but the Matthew scripture describes it being sin as well. There is no mention in the NT of lusting after ones wife as far as I am aware.

Look at the Greek for lust. What does it say? Or does the Bible 'say what it says' and it's up to us to figure that out?

Look at the Greek word for lust epithymeō, desire or coveting. Look at what the verse says.

This has nothing to do with lust. This is a homosexuality clobber passage and has no place in this discussion. Stop trying to lure us into an off topic conversation.

Well the passage contains the word lust which is the topic. Yes it is also a verse that clobbers homosexuality as well but ist not going to be left out of a discussion on lust because people dont like homosexual clobber passages.

Once again, define lust.

What apart from the Bible descriptions and the dictionary? Nah. I don’t do liberal.

Again, equivocation and on top of that a straw man argument and a red herring.

When all said an done, at the end of the day, you cant beat a good cliché. So you cant prove it. That’s what I thought.

 

[Zebra1552]

Jaws13,
Sexual preference is irrelevant. Lust is the desire to sexual activity, it isn’t the same but the Matthew scripture describes it being sin as well. There is no mention in the NT of lusting after ones wife as far as I am aware.

Which would mean that lusting cannot be mere sexual thought as was claimed.

Look at the Greek word for lust epithymeō, desire or coveting. Look at what the verse says.

Then it is not, as was claimed, sexual thought.

Well the passage contains the word lust which is the topic.

So what? That doesn't matter if it isn't the same Greek word. Which it isn't, if you bother to look.

Yes it is also a verse that clobbers homosexuality as well but ist not going to be left out of a discussion on lust because people dont like homosexual clobber passages.

It will be left out because it's off topic. This isn't about homosexuality and homosexual lust, it's about lust as a broad topic. The word used in your passage isn't the same lust that's addressed in Matthew 5. If you don't believe me, look it up.

What apart from the Bible descriptions and the dictionary? Nah. I don’t do liberal.

Doing a Greek word study isn't liberal. Your veiled insult is noted.

When all said an done, at the end of the day, you cant beat a good cliché. So you cant prove it. That’s what I thought.

I just did prove it.

 

[ghendricks63]

Jaws13,
This is the thread I was thinking of when I mentioned that I agreed with most everything you had said. Forgot for a moment which thread I was posting in.

 

[Armistead14]

BightMStar.

You say that the greek and the culture will not give us revelation into God's word. I spent 3 years in a Baptist Bible College, those two course are what most pastors take.

We cannot use any other culture but the culture they lived in and that's where your problems start. You can pray all you want, but the bible says to "study to show thyself approved."

Without the knowledge of the language they used, you would have no understanding of the bible.

Do you have a problem with God creating puberty? It's a fact, puberty creates sexuality. After that period sexual thoughts come, like it or not.

Matt 5: 28 is about adultery, that's why the verse is started with

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.

The part "Ye have heard it said" is referring to the OT law about adultery.

You seem to apply that anyone that has a sexual thought has lusted and then comitted adultery, then state only married people can partake of adultery, can't have it both ways. A single female can't even commit adultery biblically. To covet, the desire to take begins in the mind. Christ was saying that's where adultery starts, as with all sin. This has nothing to do with sexual desire. If that's the case, then all the OT Saints partook of adultery because they almost always took more wives, concubines or slave women based on looks.


Often the hebrew and greek words for lust is used in a good way. They're are several hebrew and greek words that define overwhelming desire. One can use it wrongly or correctly.

Married men lust " strongly desire" their wives, this is good and normal.
When we covet, desire another mans wife, then we have sinned.

Your values stem more from puritan doctrine when the church deemed sexuality evil in every form, even within marriage for a period.

 

[brightmorningstar]

ghendricks63,

Prove it.

Ok, you have read the Bible texts, now here is a dictionary definition:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lust
lust [lʌst]
n
1. a strong desire for sexual gratification
2. a strong desire or drive

Now prove it isn’t.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Jaws13,

Which would mean that lusting cannot be mere sexual thought as was claimed.

On the contrary that’s exactly what the Bible and dictionary is saying.

Look at the Greek word for lust epithymeō, desire or coveting. Look at what the verse says.

Then it is not, as was claimed, sexual thought.

So it is thoughts of a sexual nature.


Well the passage contains the word lust which is the topic.

So what? That doesn't matter if it isn't the same Greek word. Which it isn't, if you bother to look.

So it does contain the word lust and I have mentioned it, whether you think it is irrelevant is irrelevant. Address it.

It will be left out because it's off topic. This isn't about homosexuality and homosexual lust, it's about lust as a broad topic.

Well obviously for you it is about your obsession with homosexuality or you wouldn’t have mentioned it, I didn’t. The Greek word is not the same, the translation is. The two words in context are the same meaning.

Doing a Greek word study isn't liberal. Your veiled insult is noted.

Sorry it is not my fault you think liberal is an insult.

I just did prove it.

Show me where.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Armistead14,

You say that the greek and the culture will not give us revelation into God's word. I spent 3 years in a Baptist Bible College, those two course are what most pastors take.

The Greek culture cannot alone give us revelation into God’s word as shown with the example of the word agape.

The knowledge of the cultures that the Bible scriptures were written in can and does help us understand God’s revelation.

Without the knowledge of the language they used, you would have no understanding of the bible.

well yes but as shown one wont find the meaning of agape in ancient Greek outside the Bible as God’s sacrificial atonement for sin. Thus when reading the Bible holistically the context of the word love when it is ‘agape’ is what the Bible describes and not what it meant in ancient Greece.

Do you have a problem with God creating puberty? It's a fact, puberty creates sexuality. After that period sexual thoughts come, like it or not.

No, not quite. Sexuality is one of these new words designed to make sexual perversions sound normal.
The definition of puberty: (again the freeonlinedictionary)
pu·ber·ty (pybr-t)
n.
The stage of adolescence in which an individual becomes physiologically capable of sexual reproduction.

The definition of sexuality:
sex·u·al·i·ty (sksh-l-t)
n.
1. The condition of being characterized and distinguished by sex.
2. Concern with or interest in sexual activity.
3. Sexual character or potency.

The definition of sexuality merely describes interest in sexual activity, that could be bestiality, paedophilia or homosexuality, none of which reproduce.

As to Matthew 5:28 beginning about adultery, yes of course, adultery is something that breaks the faithful man/woman union.

The part "Ye have heard it said" is referring to the OT law about adultery.

No, its not just OT law, its God’s creation purpose for man and woman to be faithfully united, Jesus NT teaching affirms this (Gen 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5, Heb 13, 1 Cor 6-7)

To covet, the desire to take begins in the mind. Christ was saying that's where adultery starts, as with all sin. This has nothing to do with sexual desire. If that's the case, then all the OT Saints partook of adultery because they almost always took more wives, concubines or slave women based on looks.

As we see with passages such as 1 Cor 7 and Mark 7, out of the heart comes evil thoughts, including adultery and sexual immorality.

Your values stem more from puritan doctrine when the church deemed sexuality evil in every form, even within marriage for a period.

Except that it comes from what the Bible says as I have shown and not from any church period which I have not claimed and you have incorrectly assumed.

 

[ghendricks63]

ghendricks63,

Ok, you have read the Bible texts, now here is a dictionary definition:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lust
lust [lʌst]
n
1. a strong desire for sexual gratification
2. a strong desire or drive

Now prove it isn’t.

Once again it should not be necessary to remind you of this but I will repeat it. We are talking about lust as used and understood in greek in the 1st century and it's hebrew sources in the centuries before that...not english in the 21st century.

 

[brightmorningstar]

ghendricks63,
Prove it.

 

[D'Ann]

MOD HAT ON

Interesting thread. I read the whole thing... wow... not sure what to say other than...

Thank you all for explaining your faith and trying to bring hope and comfort to one another.

That being said, I did have to do a little thread clean up. Some of the posts have been removed and please do not re-post them.

Also a reminder about the rules on some specific issues, which I hope will help keep this thread on-topic and continue to be educational and helpful, but within the rules.

Please re-read your posts and double check to make sure that they are not violating the rules. Just in case I missed some thing. (I hope that I didn't).

Do not promote homosexuality on Christian Forums. Homosexuality can only be discussed, without promotion, in Christian Communities and Faith Groups. Homosexuality may also be discussed in the Recovery and Ask a Chaplain forums solely for the purpose of seeking support with struggles overcoming same-sex attractions, and homosexual issues.

Flaming

● Do not insult, belittle, mock, goad

Address the context of the post, not the poster.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[Zebra1552]

Jaws13,

On the contrary that’s exactly what the Bible and dictionary is saying.

Look at the Greek word for lust epithymeō, desire or coveting. Look at what the verse says.

Desire comes before or during thought, and Jesus is condemning the desire, not the thought, and specifying what the desire is. It cannot, therefore, be thought lest a husband be lusting after his wife.

So it is thoughts of a sexual nature.

You haven't shown this.

Well the passage contains the word lust which is the topic.
So it does contain the word lust and I have mentioned it, whether you think it is irrelevant is irrelevant. Address it.

It is not about lust.

G3806
πάθος
pathos
Thayer Definition:
1) whatever befalls one, whether it be sad or joyous
1a) spec. a calamity, mishap, evil, affliction
2) a feeling which the mind suffers
2a) an affliction of the mind, emotion, passion
2b) passionate deed
2c) used by the Greeks in either a good or bad sense
2d) in the NT in a bad sense, depraved passion, vile passions
Part of Speech: noun neuter

That's the word. It has nothing to do with lust. It's far, far beyond lust. Therefore it is irrelevant to this discussion. As the mod hat just said and as I've said multiple times and as Jase pointed out once, the verse has nothing to do with the topic and is against the rules to discuss. Drop it.

Well obviously for you it is about your obsession with homosexuality or you wouldn’t have mentioned it, I didn’t. The Greek word is not the same, the translation is. The two words in context are the same meaning.

As I just illustrated above, you're wrong, the word has a completely different meaning. As the mod hat indicated, it's off topic. I'm not going to discuss anything with you at the rate you're dropping disrespect and insults. Drop it.

Sorry it is not my fault you think liberal is an insult.

You used it as one. It's not my fault for reading your post in the manner you presented it.

Show me where.

I did, in your misquote of me. You quoted the first sentence, then said it was a cliche, prove it, ignoring the rest of it:

Again, equivocation and on top of that a straw man argument and a red herring. Man woman marriage has nothing to do with the topic, so red herring. Straw man argument, you assume I'm saying lust or sex outside marriage is okay, which I'm not, and then you attack your own assumption. Equivocation, you assume lust are thoughts and desires at the same time once again by your use of the word without defining the word.

 

[Zebra1552]

ghendricks63,
Prove it.

Time out. You're asking him to prove that the passages you're referencing were written in the 1st century, in Greek, and not in the 21st century, in English? That's common knowledge. He doesn't need to prove it. If you don't know that the Bible was written 2000 years ago in another language and then interpreted into English, it's not our responsibility to prove it to you. It's your fault for being around the forums this long and not picking up that fact. Or maybe you're denying it, I don't know and I don't really care. I do care that you're telling him to prove something that he doesn't need to.