Mainstream Christianity is wrong about Matthew 5:27-28 (the famous “lust” passage)

Lifelong_sinner said:

i never said i couldnt be saved, but my repentance hasnt been sincere. I like porn, it doesnt bother me. And as 1st john says, true christians dont practice sin. I do. Porn is a daily occurrence for me. Has been for almost 30 something years.

Click to expand...

Well, the not repenting of it is the only real issue, a lot of Christians struggle with pornography, it's simply too available and too tempting and it's not like we no longer have a sex drive.
So it is a struggle.
I fall into it too. Though a lot less as time goes on.
I hate it when I do.
Understand that.. porn is destructive, it ruins lives in its production (look up the story of John C Holmes sometime, his road in pornography destroyed his marriage, got him involved in sodomy, drugs, an accessory to a murder, and he contracted HIV and died of AIDS), it glorifies fornication and adultery and abuse, and treats the imagebearers of God as an object. It's not loving.
It sounds like that's the roadblock though, they you need to want to be rid of that sin before you can turn to God to forgive you for it.

But, struggling with porn and other sins doesn't make a person not a Christian, I don't know if I go a day without getting angry or frustrated at something and I know it's sinful (although as Paul says, I don't let the sun set on my anger, i do let it go as easily as it comes), and I hate when I do it but.. I thank God my justification is not based on my sinlessness, but on Jesus Christ's sinlessness and Him taking my punishment for sin on Himself.
1 John 1:8 also says if we claim not to have any sin in us then we're lying.

Fervent said:

I can understand the frustration, people are often quick to judge based on optics. Keep pursuing truth, but remember Jeremiah 17:9 while you're at it. In a situation like this it seems the important question is not "is Jesus teaching fantasy is sin?" so much as it is "What is Jesus getting at?" which is heightening what sin is. The Jews thought that so long as they did the right thing their motives were irrelevant. Here Jesus says not only must you avoid engaging in the act, but you must also keep yourself from entertaining the desire that leads to the act. The point is to heighten and expand what is thought of sin so to question whether we have gone too far in our puritanism is counter to the emphasis.

Click to expand...

part of it is also demonstrating that living sinlessly is impossible and that we need Him as a savior because we cannot do what our father commands under our own power.

Billy93 said:

By lust, do you mean justifying fantasizing? Absolutely I’m justifying that, because I believe the Bible doesn’t address it in Matthew 5:27-28 even though preachers act like it does. The verses used to condemn that, are being wrongly interpreted. Where did I say I watch porn…? I don’t, and I think it’s unhealthy. Why is my point so difficult to understand?

Click to expand...

It would probably help to create some distinctions in this conversation. (I agree with the intention of your post and many of the points raised, but I think that you'll need to get more distinctions sorted to make the argument better)

1. Fantasizing about the sex act vs fantasizing about the act with someone in particular.
- People seem to conflate these when they are not really the same thing
- Are wet dreams sinful? This is always an interesting discussion.

2. Nakedness does not equal sex
- We've been brought up to believe that nakedness (seeing someone naked) is essentially the same as having sex - as if seeing someone naked is sinful, and as if body parts or certain parts of the body carry some inherent sinfulness or lustfulness

3. Beauty and desire
- The bible seems to encourage an appreciation of beauty
- "Objectification" is a very modern, vague concept that has some elements of truth to it but needs to be balanced out by some understanding of beauty. To find a woman beautiful and attractive and even sexually desirable is not really the same as "objectifying" them. "Objectifying" however is generally not usually defined in a way that it carries much meaning - it's usually treated as if all of the erotic and any appreciation for human beauty is somehow evil.

4. Pornographic intent
The intent of most pornography is to alter natural desires, which is probably why most people feel guilty about it

A lot of modern porn has other ethical and moral issues too - trafficking, drug use, manipulation etc.

Billy93 said:

Wrong; not in these Bible passages. Try reading my OP again. Matthew 5 uses the word “epithumeó” for lust. Well, Romans 7:7 says that “epithumeó” also refers to the OT 10th commandment. Thus, Scripture itself reveals that in order to find out what Jesus meant in Matthew, we must find out what the 10th commandment meant.

The modern word “lust” means something different than in the Bible; that’s why there’s the confusion. People nowadays hear “lust” in that passage and think “Oh, that means fantasizing,” because that’s our modern definition of the word. In the Bible though, it is explicit beyond a shadow of a doubt that the word epithumeó in Matthew 5 (the word our English Bibles translate to “lust”) actually meant the same thing as the 10th commandment covetousness.

Click to expand...

A note of caution on looking at words, there is no 1:1 equivalence of any given word. The range of meanings for "epithumeo" is not the same as either lust or covet but is appropriate for both since it is modified by the object. The word primarily refers to desire in general and context informs its closest English analog. In Matthew 5:28 the closest meaning is lust because it is being used of desire towards a woman. Semantic range, grammar, and context all must be taken into consideration before we assign a word an English meaning rather than simply looking to replace words and simply because a word covers both English words doesn't mean it maintains that ambiguity when it is placed in a specific context.

Billy93 said:

Fair enough, but I did look to Scripture in this case. The verse that everyone uses to condemn “fantasizing,” refers to 10th commandment covetousness. Which I find to have a different meaning than fantasizing.



I honestly believe that fantasy/masturbation are permitted/intended to help out the single believer. And I honestly believe that the God who gave some of His godliest people multiple wives, concubines, etc. for them to enjoy, doesn’t have a problem with His creation experiencing and enjoying sexual desire as He designed us to.



You claimed I was feeling guilty because of my conscience. I wasn’t…



Sorry, not sure what you mean by this.



I appreciate the warning. If I am in error I hope I see it. I have asked the Holy Spirit to show me, but I ended up coming upon the discovery about the true meaning of Matthew 5:27-28…



The thing is, I think mainstream Christianity has artificially made sexual desire “filthy.” Side-note, but I’m reading in the OT now and there is zero indication that God has any problem with people thinking about sex; in fact, godly people are having sex all over the place!



But see, my whole argument is that Matthew 5 doesn’t just refer to “fantasizing”; it refers to someone who is thinking “Man, she’s hot… I hope to seduce her.”



Why do I resist?? What do you mean? I have prayed extensively about this. Have gotten no conviction; in fact since praying about it all that’s happened is I’ve gotten more and more certain I’m right, because I’ve found more and more articles and people pointing out the misinterpretation. And what’s more, these are conservative Christians writing these articles! It’s not like it’s just some super-Progressive person trying to reeeally stretch the Bible by blatantly twisting Scripture; rather, these are well-thought-out arguments using Scripture itself as evidence. Thus, I don’t understand why it’s all being disregarded… Most of the comments here don’t even address the point, which is that we find out what Matthew 5 means by looking at the 10th commandment. Why?



Again, if covetousness is more intense than mere fantasy (and btw, I don’t even fantasize about people I know…), then that logic would never lead down a dangerous path.

Also, is enjoying food a sin? Is enjoying a back massage a sin? Is enjoying listening to music a sin? Taste, touch, hearing, etc.… These are all senses of “the flesh.” Why do people act like spending a few minutes every so often and thinking about sex, is so much worse than doing virtually anything else for many minutes/hours per day? I don’t get it. I believe it’s good to occasionally fast and take a break from anything, but I just don’t see why this one thing in particular is seen to be so bad.

Click to expand...

Its late so I will answer this the best I can.

The problem is when WE decide what is good and bad when God has defined what is good and what is bad.

We are to do His will above our own. While it is NATURAL to desire and have lusts.... WHAT we do by nature is to do what is wrong. Because in the OT there was external rewards. One could NOT have the Holy Spirit INSIDE them, they could only have the Holy Spirit REST upon them. In the OT, humans had no choice in to sin or not to sin so there was a greater lenience as to what they could "get away with". They were in general obedient through physical means and were thus rewarded (or punished) by physical means.

I give X amount of my crop, livestock.... whatever to God. In my obedience, I receive physical abundance/wealth/health/etc.

When we moved into the NT Jesus gave us victory OVER sin.... but it is not a victory that we simply stumble into, it is a battle that as long as we fight, no matter if we get knocked down once... or one billion times...we will receive that victory, it is that we seek victory over the sin that God has called sin.... it is not what WE see it as but what HE sees it as. We are to judge ourselves honestly.....by the example He has provided for us..... not to use our logic to justify ourselves. Yes, fantasies are not in themselves wicked or evil, but the subject matter of that fantasy CAN be.... depending on the place it holds in our heart. Our hearts are wicked, mine, yours... all of our hearts seek to deceive us, for it is in their (our) nature to do so.

I do not claim you guilty or innocent, I simply see error.... again, you do not need to agree with me, but it is important that we all make sure that where we stand is not out of our conscience being seared and our heart being hardened in that particular area. For all of us have areas we are blind and others see clearly.

It could be that God has not spoken to you on this issue after your prayer, to test, do you follow after your heart, seeking the ways of the world, or do you use this to seek truth and ask Him to reveal the condition of your heart to you. You say you pray that IF you are in error that you will come to see it and in that I am thankful and pray you have revealed to you that which needs to be revealed. NOT that you will see ME as right, but see error in fantasizing that even IF it is accceptable, it has a far greater likelihood to cause trouble and pain than anything of true benefit.

For example, there are husbands and wives out there that spent their entire lives fantasizing about who they would end up marrying. Then they meet their husband or wife and they are nothing like that and to some extent, they resent them for not living up to their ideal fantasy.

As a man, I understand, as do many what it is to fantasize and lust after women. The problem ISN'T so much that we enjoy it, its our flesh, it is what it does, constantly battling our spirit. The problem comes when we deceive ourselves and in doing so, find ourselves in disagreement with God.

God says "X" is wrong. If I do "X", but I say its not what God calls it,.... I find myself opposing God.

If God says "X" is wrong and I do "X" but instead I call it as it is, wrong, but I seek Gods face in removing that from my life, it's place in my heart. Then I do not see what I do when I do "X" as "okay" I have then repented and TURNED from my ways and agree His ways are best not my own.

I can not offer God perfection, none of us can..... HOWEVER, I can offer honesty to God, He knows anyway. Me licking my wounds and saying "Im not as bad as another" is meaningless and is done to puff up my own ego rather than humble myself and see how desperately helpless I am on my own to do that which is right.

I said before that I highly disagree with mainstream Christianity and this is one reason why, many want to use Christ as and excuse to sin.... that no matter how many sins they willfully run to.... they are forgiven. While I do believe that God is INDEED merciful, He is both a Father AND a Judge.... if ALL we rest on is one side of Him we hold a false image of God and who Christ is. To focus on only Matthew or any verse of scripture alone is another dangerous trap, for the Bible in its entire context is vital to understanding not only who God is, but who we are IN Him.

I am not one that believes typical Christianity is to not be questioned..... in fact I believe it SHOULD be questioned and challenged...often.. especially mainstream, but it can be a slippery slope when we lean on logic too heavily. Yes, intellect is a gift, to be used, but to be used in the proper context and in the right way. Like the example of Jesus turning stones to bread..... a useful and great gift to have certainly, like intellect, logic and reason.... but it is IF those things could become a hindrance that we need step back, pray (as you say you have) check it against scripture and still seek in prayer some more, always with an open heart and ALWAYS judging the condition of our hearts..... and as I said I am glad that you are at least willing to be shown if you are in error THAT is truly all any of us can do.... for NONE of us have all the answers and none ever will, most certainly not while we are at war between our spirit and our flesh, always divided and pulled heavily towards the will of flesh.

We are all just trying to go in the direction we believe is right........ some of us are trying to figure out the bigger picture, while some are led astray by well meaning misguided individuals.... and then there are those that intentionally cherry pick scriptures to fit their narrative to lead others astray for personal gain.

I do believe I was wrong in stating you twist scripture to fit your narrative and for that I am sorry as I do not believe you to be one intentionally trying to lead people astray but rather, trying to work out your own walk with Christ, which is NOT a bad thing.... for ALL will not be led in the same way. Not all will be taught in the same manner, but ALL will be led to the same body. For a foot need not agree with a hand in how it is to operate... but left to the hand to follow the head and ONLY the head in how it is to go to achieve their purpose. In this case, the head is of course Christ. Though hands are not to tell a foot how they should be.... they can certainly warn of dangers that concern them both.... such as a hand reaching out to snatch a from a camp fire if the foot could not move itself or sense the danger it could be in. For we all have the same enemy.... and it is not eachother.

As for are movies, music, massages, food..... etc wrong/sinful?

That depends on the person and the place it holds in their life/heart.

For example: I love 80s music (I hated it in the 80s)

Is there anything wrong to me listening to 80s music? Well aside from some arguing bad taste...... no.

However, IF I abide in Christ and I in Him...... IF He dwells in me and He tells me "do not listen to this" but I ignore Him..... either my conscience can be seared to the point I do not feel guilt any longer when I listen to the music...... or... He will get tired of my disobedience and no longer dwell with me.

Entertainment, food and all the rest can be GOOD things, but IF they control and direct our lives...... or love them at an extreme where we hold ANY of these things above our desire of God.... they DO become wrong...... NOT because the object in itself is wrong and evil...... but because NOTHING or NO ONE should take first place in our heart...... IF they do, while to one person it is simply.... music, food etc.... to the one putting it before God..... has made it an idol.

What is good/acceptable for one, may be destruction for the other. We should hold all that we have, with gratitude, with love, but be willing to accept that some times the good Lord giveth, but also taketh away, especially if we cling too tightly to what it is we have,do, think, feel..... etc......instead of simply clinging to Him.

We need to be very careful where we are, is our conscience seared as to make us numb or is it really acceptable to Christ and that is why we feel no guilt is the question we must be sure of the answer. Not because we have no security in our salvation... but that we see to it that we do not NEGLECT our salvation.

I nor anyone else can truly answer this for you, it is an issue between you and God.... the best ANY of us can do is speculative at best.... in your theory I see far more potential for harm than good.... and as such, I just wanted to warn of such danger.... not as a man that sees all, but as a man that sees the speck in your eye, but finds it of far more value to deal with the plank in his own eye before judging the speck in yours....... but..... I would be risking my own conscience to see error and not try to get the person to seek their answer from God rather than logic..... again, not against logic, intellect or the rest.... just that the more we have..... or think we have.,... no matter the case, we need to be careful that we use the gift as a blessing, not let it run without a leash, out of control leading us to every whim of logic, making the gift a curse.

We need to be and seek to be changed into a likeness of Christ, which is hard, impossibly so in this life...... but we even in our failures should ALWAYS seek to be more like Christ, doing the will of the Father, to be made like Christ.... as man was BEFORE the fall of man, BEFORE Adam justified his actions.

IF we seek to be as Adam, we seek to follow that which is pleasing to the flesh..... and in doing we justify or redefine sin. (All of us by nature)

IF we seek to be like Christ..... we seek to follow the Holy Spirit, which..... more often than not......means suffering of the flesh by way of denial. We will absolutely fail......but it we must remain calling it as God sees it not as we see it.

Ask yourself IF you truly believe that Jesus would spend His time fantasizing about women..... He, as our example and our goal..... IF He wouldn't, then we too shouldn't. While that doesn't mean we wont, it doesn't mean we should be okay with falling short of His standard either, for it is because we CAN'T live up to His standard that we will ALWAYS need Him.... but we can deal with our failings honestly... for it is only when it is when we are honest with ourselves about our failings, that we can take those failings, lay them at His feet, repent and ask forgiveness humbly.

For it is only in our humility, that we can truly see our error and in humility truly know how pathetically hopeless and desperate we are without Him and our need for His mercy.

Sorry if this is rambling and hope it makes sense and helps in some way.

Usually, I have to go to Facebook to read something like this...

Billy93 said:

Annnd there it is. Wondered how long it would take to get one of these comments. “Justify the sin of lust”? Which “lust”? The lust that Matthew 5 refers to… which is 10th commandment covetousness? Or some other lust?

How am I “twisting scripture”? Dude, if you haven’t noticed, my whole argument is rooted in Scripture - in trying to interpret the passage as it actually means. You act like I’m just sitting here trying to justify sin; why then have I prayed numerous times about this issue over the last half-year? I’ve asked God repeatedly to convict me of this, if it is sin. Nothing. I’ve asked Him to lead me to the truth. Guess what? What I came to find, was that the passage has been misinterpreted. If I’m so wrong about this, then why isn’t the Holy Spirit showing me how? I’ve been led away from multiple other sins; why not this one? It’s not that I’m not willing.

Are you going to tell me how the articles I posted are all wrong? Are you going to tell me how Matthew 5 does not refer to covetousness? Comments like yours come across as emotional and stubborn, rooted in what you already think; you’re not even willing to address the argument I made. Do you not realize that I was raised to think the exact same way as you (and did for a while), and the only reason I’m thinking differently now is because of my research into the true meaning…?

How dare you act like I’m just trying to justify sin; the only people twisting Scripture are the ones acting like Matthew 5 refers to any and every sexual thought, rather than a specific admonition against coveting and adultery (which by the way involves a married woman).

Click to expand...

Noticing a member of the opposite sex is attractive is normal. Thinking about going to bed with her before the wedding ceremony is the lust that got people in trouble. Prostitutes and the porn industry profited from people indulging in fantasies of recreational sex.

One church does not allow birth control, another is silent on the issue. Fornication produced single mother families. Even the thought of doing the act of short term pleasure of fornication is lewd, lustful and irreverent. A man intended to marry his lover, but abandoned her instead.

Billy93 said:

That’s a more reasonable interpretation, but it still goes along with the idea that “lust” refers to even basic fantasizing, which I don’t believe it does. But yes, Jesus was deliberately speaking of a specific scenario in that passage.

Click to expand...

We tend to look at lust in a sexual way, but lust usually means desire.

Lust/desire is only a problem when we are following the lust/desires of the flesh, and lusting/desiring things that belong to other people.

If you are lusting/desiring another man’s wife, you are also guilty of coveting, because God commands us not to desire what belongs to our neighbor, whether his wife, animals or house etc.

You have a pretty good grasp on this. Kudos.

Billy93 said:

Wrong. There are plenty of people I’ve fantasized about that I would have zero desire to actually commit acts with, even if given the chance… Plus, you do realize it is possible to think up an imaginary person in one’s mind, right? Let me guess, you think that is wrong too?

Click to expand...

Of course, it's wrong. It's still lust. I understand the difference between temptation and fantasizing. I've seen many a woman that I was attracted to but didn't let myself go to fantasizing. And I've done my share of actual lusting, too, but not about other guys' wives, generally. If you had no desire to commit acts with them, you wouldn't think about it. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Billy93 said:

This isn't just some guy who's thinking “Wow, she's hot; it's fun to imagine what she'd be like in bed”; no, this is a guy who is thinking “My neighbor's wife is hot and he'll be out of town next week. I must have her; I'm going to try and seduce her.”

Click to expand...

Having a carnal mind is the issue. It's an indicator that we haven't truly let go of our sin. Paul says it best in Romans 8.

Billy93 said:

This is the go-to passage for people to condemn “lust,” which our modern ears automatically equate to mean “sexual fantasy.” However, I think taking a closer look at the words reveals that this passage has been long-misinterpreted, used to shame people (especially young men) for any and all sexual thoughts. And as we should know well by now, just because mainstream Christianity says something, doesn't mean they're right; we ultimately need to look to Scripture and make sure we're properly understanding the meaning of the words.

I will invariably be accused by some of “trying to justify sin.” But as Paul said in Romans 7:7, “I had not known sin, but by the law.” We have to know what God's Word actually condemns. So, how do we find out? The answer is actually in the same verse:

"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Romans 7:7 KJV

First off, it is worth noting that many modern translations actually use “covet” for the first word instead of “lust,” so that the verse appears to refer only to covetousness. (This is an example where the KJV really shines.)

For example:

“For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, ‘You shall not covet.’” NIV

“I would never have known that coveting is wrong if the law had not said, ‘You must not covet.’” NLT

“For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, ‘You shall not covet.’” ESV

“For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, ‘You shall not covet.’” NKJV

The reason these modern versions do this is because both instances are actually the same word in Greek: epithumeó. However, this misses the essential point worth being aware of, which is that epithumeó is also the exact same “lust” word used by Jesus in the Matthew passage.

So, the Bible is very clear on this: The Bible tells us that epithumeó lusting is the same thing as the coveting of the OT. Therefore in order to understand what Jesus meant in Matthew 5:27-28, we need to go back to the context of the OT and discover what exactly coveting meant. In other words, when Paul tells us in Romans 7:7 to look at the 10th commandment to understand what Matthew 5 lust is, that is where we need to look.

The context in which desire is used in the 10th commandment, helps us understand exactly what kind of desire God is condemning. When condemning covetousness in the 10th commandment (Exodus 20:17), God mentions things like a man's house and his cattle, alongside things like his wife and his servants. Well, if God was simply saying it was wrong to find a man's house desirable, then that would mean that no person could ever sell another person their house, and real estate transactions would be sinful. If God was saying a man could not find another man's cattle desirable, then farmers would go out of business because they could not buy or sell cattle. So, we know God is not condemning a person finding things that belong to another, desirable.

Instead, what God is condemning is the strong desire (to the point of planning) to wrongly use or possess something that does not belong to us. He is condemning thoughts of plotting theft, not mere thoughts of desire. And in the context of sex, he not condemning a man finding a woman sexually desirable, but rather he is condemning a man desiring to seduce/entice a woman into sex outside of marriage. This would apply both to premarital sex and adultery.

Here is a great video to help show you exactly what covetousness is.

So basically, it seems Matthew 5:27-28 isn't just about some guy who is simply fantasizing about a woman, while not having any intent to ever actually seduce her/commit adultery with her. The reason adultery is already a sin in his heart in this passage, is because he's already on the path to adultery; he is coveting her, planning/intending to actually have sex with her. Think David & Bathsheba:

When did David first sin in the Bathsheba story? Was it when he first merely fantasized about her? Or was it when he allowed the fantasies to get out of control and progress to the point that he was actually planning on getting her husband killed, so that he could commit the act of adultery with her? There are three steps to this, not two: 1. The fantasizing 2. The intent/planning to take/possess (coveting) 3. The act of following through with it and seducing her.

#3 is obviously actual adultery. So which one is “committing adultery in his heart”? I would argue that it is clearly #2. #1 was okay, but #2 was where he first ran into trouble with actual sin. Of course you could argue that #2 would have been less likely to happen if he hadn't even done #1. And I suppose that's a possibility, but there are plenty of people out there who engage in #1 on a daily basis and never let it progress to #2. What is a problem for one person, isn't always a problem for another.

So in the Matthew passage, this isn't just some guy having a fantasy; rather, this is a guy who is thinking “My neighbor's wife is hot, and he'll be out of town next week. I must have her; I'm going to seduce her.” Whether or not he goes through with it or succeeds, he has still committed adultery in his heart by starting to set that plan to commit the sin, into motion. But looking at her and having sexual thoughts pop in his head, or even consciously imagining acts with her? It's just not the same thing. Same deal goes for masturbation and fantasy at home; sitting at home imagining sexual acts with a person is nowhere near the level of actually thinking “Ok, I need to go out and actually have premarital/extramarital sex.” (In fact, there are plenty of people who credit fantasy/masturbation with helping prevent them from going out and actually committing fornication/adultery!)

Mainstream Christianity sees Matthew 5:27-28 and rightly hones in on the heart-sin of “committing adultery in one's heart.” But the problem I think is that they mistakenly think the heart-sin is simply “fantasizing,” just because that's what goes through their mind when their modern ears hear the word “lust.” But that just doesn't seem to be the biblical meaning of what Jesus was actually talking about.

Don’t get me wrong, I do think they're right to hone in on the fact that there is a heart-sin, but they're just wrong about what it is: The heart-sin is that the hypothetical guy in this passage is already intending/planning to seduce the woman - not that he is simply having a fantasy about her. The sin of adultery is already in his heart before he even carries out the act. The intent/planning to physically sin, is the heart-sin. The point Jesus was making was that a sin like adultery doesn't just happen spontaneously; you actually plan and intend to do it, in your heart beforehand. And doing so, is wrong. But simply imagining/thinking about an attractive woman, doesn't necessarily lead to you standing at her door to have extramarital sex with her. Lol.

But here's another example: Me thinking about how a cheeseburger would taste really good right now, doesn't mean I'm actually going to even plan to go get one right now—let alone actually go. It just means I'm thinking a cheeseburger would taste good... We can have desires for enjoyable things in life, but we must have self-control and not let the desires progress to the point of planning to/intending to commit the actual sin. (Obviously eating a cheeseburger isn’t a sin, but I hope you get my point.)

Believe me, I'm as conservative of a Christian as they come (I believe the Bible is 100% the Word of God) and used to think all this stuff was sin too... but I've come to the conclusion that Christian culture has artificially made something into a sin, that actually isn't one. Following the Bible is what we are called to do, but there's a problem when the church misinterprets/mistranslates words and then creates false doctrines that lead to Christians feeling guilty and suffering and thinking they can't live up to an ideal that even God never expected us to live up to… And by the way, the Bible even warns against this! Groups of believers in the early church were already starting to twist things to make life even harder on believers - and they were chastised for doing so!

It's all a shame, because if I'm right (I increasingly think I am), then that means many Christians are sadly battling something that isn't even a sin. I went years thinking it was a sin, just bc that is what was taught at church/at my Christian school and because of the common modern understanding of the word “lust”... but when you dig deeper into the biblical meaning of words, it's a whole other story.

In conclusion, this (unfortunately mainstream) idea of repressing sexual fantasies is not biblical, and just leads to plenty of young Christians (especially men) needlessly suffering. Your sex drive is how God designed you; it is not a defect or something that only came about because of the Fall & sin. You were made to have sexual thoughts and fantasies, to help drive you to marriage. Men were made to have a sexual hunger for women and vice versa.

Tl;dr The Bible is not saying that it's a sin to fantasize about a woman; it's saying that it's a sin to think about a woman (particularly a married woman) with the intent to/having a plan to actually seduce her and have extramarital sex with her. That's the reason for the whole “already committed adultery in his heart” thing; the guy is already planning to commit the sin. This isn't just some guy who's thinking “Wow, she's hot; it's fun to imagine what she'd be like in bed”; no, this is a guy who is thinking “My neighbor's wife is hot and he'll be out of town next week. I must have her; I'm going to try and seduce her.”

Here are some links which go much more in-depth, and undoubtedly do a better job of explaining it than me:

Why "Lusting" in Matthew 5:27-28 Doesn't Make All Men Adulterers - Berean Patriot

"Whoever Looks at a Woman With Lust": Misinterpreted Bible Passages #1 | Jason Staples

Sexual Arousal And Fantasy Are Not Sin

Bible Topic Study: Matthew 5:28 Lust and Adultery

Do Not Covet: Is It a Feeling or an Action? - TheTorah.com

Click to expand...

I belive on a higher level Jesus Christ of Nazareth is basically pointing out, in this particular example of adultry, that the law has a yoke of bondage far beyond the physical act and that those who claim to keep the law are hypocrites because their heart is full of evil on the inside while portraying righteousness on the outside. He, in other words, reset the bar specifically to expose the heart and its hypocrisy. Blessings

Lust is not necessarily a sexual term. There is also such a thing as a "lust for power" or a "lust for money". Similar to the Greek word, it also meant (historically) strong (and morally acceptable) or excessive (morally unacceptable, which is its more common usage now) desire of different kinds for many different things.

lust | Origin and meaning of lust by Online Etymology Dictionary
Strong's Greek: 1937. ἐπιθυμέω (epithumeó) -- desire, lust after

I wonder what word Jesus used originally. Was he speaking in Aramaic or in Greek in the passage we are discussing? I wouldn't put too much emphasis on one word versus another, because it's possible that even the "original Greek" word in the manuscripts is a translation of an Aramaic word that Jesus used, or part of a paraphrase or summary of his message.

Billy93 said:

Instead, what God is condemning is the strong desire (to the point of planning) to wrongly use or possess something that does not belong to us. He is condemning thoughts of plotting theft, not mere thoughts of desire. And in the context of sex, he not condemning a man finding a woman sexually desirable, but rather he is condemning a man desiring to seduce/entice a woman into sex outside of marriage. This would apply both to premarital sex and adultery.

Click to expand...

I think we need to interpret it consistently with the context. In the the same text Jesus reduces murder to not plotting to murder but all the way to anger. So it would seem consistent that adultery is reduced to not plotting to engage in sexual relations but all the way to the fantasy. Because murder starts from anger and adultery, or a strong desire to commit, starts from a look. Jesus is not telling us the loop holes he's telling us the sin is committed in the heart first. Christ tells us to love our neighbour as ourself. It tends to be easy for guys to say that they have no problem with girls "lusting" over them but try and change that to your daughter or wife. Do you wish other men to fantasize about these women in your life? If the answer is no, neither should you fantasize about other women.

Taking the ENTIRE Sermon on the Mount, found in Matthew chapters five through seven, it consistently teaches the person's motive mattering more than the deed itself. Basically, we are judged for word, deed, AND THOUGHT. God knows we will be more than happy to act on our fantasies, especially if there are no consequences for doing so (Luke 16:1-15, Psalm 14:1-7, 53:1-6, Romans 3:9-20). Otherwise, why would we need laws in the first place, let alone with consequences? (Exodus 20:1-17, Leviticus 18:1-30)[1][2][3]

Every movement begins with an action. Every action begins with an idea. In the case of sex-related crime, what is the idea, and where does it come from? Again, taking the entire Sermon on the Mount, why is this sex-related part of the sermon an exception to everything else preached about? Is an [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] worth hurting others over? Why or why not?

I remember having a conversation with my mentor about psychopaths. On the outside, many seem like intelligent, charming people. However, are they actually right in the head? Why or why not?

1. 76 Things Banned in Leviticus (and their penalties) - ***Dave Does the Blog
2. Justice Laws Website
3. Federal Laws and Regulations | USAGov

Billy93 said:

See, that’s just not what it says though, sorry. From your response, it appears you missed the point of my post. The NT doesn’t teach that; it teaches that when you covet another man’s wife (10th commandment), you are committing adultery with her (7th commandment) in your heart. It is not just talking about “fantasizing” in general. The 10th commandment tells explicitly what Matthew 5:27-28 is referring to - so why don’t people go back to the 10th to find out what it means? Why do they instead lump on this “fantasizing” doctrine that is nowhere to be found...?

Click to expand...

There's a lot of nuance to this discussion, and it makes sense to understand the surrounding context of Matthew 5:27-30 as well, for example, vv. 21-26. What thought(s) below would you say fall(s) under what Matthew 5:21-26 condemns?

1. "Ugh, he's angering!"
2. "Ugh, he's angering! Imagine how good it'd feel to just pound the life outta this fool right now!"
3. "Ugh, he's angering! I know he goes to location A at 8:00 PM. I'll go there tonight and kill him."

Similarly, what thought(s) below would you say fall(s) under what Matthew 5:27-30 condemns?

1. "Wow, she's attractive!"
2. "Wow, she's attractive! Imagine if she were in my bedroom, and..."
3. "Wow, she's attractive! I know her husband's traveling. I'll go to her house tonight and..."

In both examples, 1. is the raw emotion, 2. is fantasizing, and 3. is planning to act. Which do you say fall(s) under Jesus' condemnation in the Sermon on the Mount?