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

[Jamdoc]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Guess What ?

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

 

[Jamdoc]

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]

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]

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]

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

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"

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Aaron112]

Bible Hub
biblehub.com› genesis › 6-5.htm

Genesis 6:5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time.

Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time.

 

[pastorwaris]

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:


Fornication however, is punished differently:

Deuteronomy 22:

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.

Dear Brother, thank you for sharing your heart so honestly. These kinds of questions are important, because they deal with not only what the Bible says, but how we experience conviction in our daily walk with God. Let's unpack something;

Sin is not only about the act, but about the heart.​

Jesus made this clear in Matthew 5:27–28:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust (Greek: epithymeō a strong craving, desire, coveting) has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Here, Jesus shifts the focus from just the outward action (as laid out in Deuteronomy) to the inner heart posture. In Hebrew thought, the “lev” (לֵב heart) is not just emotions but the seat of will, intentions, and desires. God is concerned not only with whether you physically commit adultery, but whether your inner desires are cultivating sin.

That’s why you may feel conviction more strongly when it involves something that resembles “real” adultery (a married woman, for example). Your conscience, informed by Scripture, is recognizing the weight of the sin. But the heart issue feeding lust remains the same whether the image, fantasy, or dream involves a real person or an imagined one.

The difference between adultery and fornication in the Law.​

You rightly pointed out that the Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 22) made a distinction between adultery (a death penalty offense) and fornication (leading to forced marriage/payment). This shows the seriousness of covenant-breaking adultery violates an existing marriage covenant, which God highly esteems.

However, in the New Testament, fornication (Greek: porneia) is consistently condemned alongside adultery:

• 1 Thessalonians 4:3–5: “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from porneia; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor.”
• Hebrews 13:4: “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral (pornos) and adulterous.”

So, even though the Old Testament law gave different earthly punishments, the New Testament reveals that both adultery and fornication are sins of the heart that distance us from God.

Why conviction feels different?​

The Bible teaches that conviction comes from the Holy Spirit (John 16:8), and the Spirit convicts “concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.” Sometimes conviction is sharper when sin involves something tangible or covenantal (like adultery with someone’s spouse). But when conviction feels “less” in other areas like fantasies or dreams that doesn’t mean sin disappears. It may reflect:

• A conscience not yet fully trained (Hebrews 5:14 mature believers “have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil”).
• Or, a heart that has become desensitized (1 Timothy 4:2 – “seared conscience”).

Dreams themselves aren’t sin (since you don’t always choose them), but feeding lust in imagination can still corrupt the heart, because it nurtures epithymeō (desire). As James 1:14–15 says:

“Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.”

​

Walking in freedom.​

So the real question is not just, “Is this technically adultery or fornication?” but rather, “Is this drawing me closer to holiness, or feeding desires that lead me away from God?”

Paul’s principle in 1 Corinthians 6:12 fits well here:

“All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be dominated by anything.”

Even if someone argues that an “imagined person” cannot technically be adultery, the heart question remains: Does it enslave you? Does it feed lust instead of purity? If so, then the Spirit convicts not because of a law code, but because of love, God wants your heart to be free.

My dear Brother,​

Don’t see conviction as condemnation, see it as God’s mercy. When you feel it, it means your heart is still tender to the Spirit. Paul reminds us in Romans 8:1:

“There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”

Conviction is not God pushing you away, it’s Him pulling you closer. He wants to purify even the unseen places of the heart, so your love for Him and for others shines without mixture.

Blessings

 

[com7fy8]

Hi, Jamdoc > Possibly, I see something here > > >

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.

So, you did not on purpose get yourself stubbed or bumped. However, you were not ready to handle it with a sensitive reaction honoring God. Plus, of course, you might have done something to help the stubbed toe to happen, plus may be you were not as good as you could have been with defensive driving . . . even if the other was wrong to not stay back more.

In any case, you could be more with God so you are ready to stay kind and personal and caring and sensitive to God and strong in being satisfied so you are ready to stay this way and not get into cursing or whatever.

you stumble upon pornography,

Right . . . you stubbed your toe while walking in the dark, and "stumble" while maybe doing some other thing which you did not need to be doing, plus which got you where you could be ambushed by the porn.

One time, I was on the beach with my family. And I was not looking for a prostitute, but I was looking around at women instead of staying attentive to my family. Then one woman moved out to get my attention and started doing some things which I would expect a stripper to do in order to invite me somewhere private for more of what she might do.

Well . . . that was an ambush, but I got myself into those "bushes" ! ! ! !

 

[Jamdoc]

Hi, Jamdoc > Possibly, I see something here > > >

So, you did not on purpose get yourself stubbed or bumped. However, you were not ready to handle it with a sensitive reaction honoring God. Plus, of course, you might have done something to help the stubbed toe to happen, plus may be you were not as good as you could have been with defensive driving . . . even if the other was wrong to not stay back more.

Well the stubbed toe is just a thing that happens to most people, going to the bathroom at night etc, the other one that parents deal with in particular.. stepping on a lego.

as for the car accident.. how could I be better at defensive driving? I was stopped at a stoplight. 0mph.

In any case, you could be more with God so you are ready to stay kind and personal and caring and sensitive to God and strong in being satisfied so you are ready to stay this way and not get into cursing or whatever.

Right . . . you stubbed your toe while walking in the dark, and "stumble" while maybe doing some other thing which you did not need to be doing, plus which got you where you could be ambushed by the porn.

One time, I was on the beach with my family. And I was not looking for a prostitute, but I was looking around at women instead of staying attentive to my family. Then one woman moved out to get my attention and started doing some things which I would expect a stripper to do in order to invite me somewhere private for more of what she might do.

Well . . . that was an ambush, but I got myself into those "bushes" ! ! ! !

Pornographic advertisement is all over the place, or it can be thrown around on social media.

 

[Jamdoc]

Dear Brother, thank you for sharing your heart so honestly. These kinds of questions are important, because they deal with not only what the Bible says, but how we experience conviction in our daily walk with God. Let's unpack something;

Sin is not only about the act, but about the heart.​

Jesus made this clear in Matthew 5:27–28:


Here, Jesus shifts the focus from just the outward action (as laid out in Deuteronomy) to the inner heart posture. In Hebrew thought, the “lev” (לֵב heart) is not just emotions but the seat of will, intentions, and desires. God is concerned not only with whether you physically commit adultery, but whether your inner desires are cultivating sin.

That’s why you may feel conviction more strongly when it involves something that resembles “real” adultery (a married woman, for example). Your conscience, informed by Scripture, is recognizing the weight of the sin. But the heart issue feeding lust remains the same whether the image, fantasy, or dream involves a real person or an imagined one.

The difference between adultery and fornication in the Law.​

You rightly pointed out that the Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 22) made a distinction between adultery (a death penalty offense) and fornication (leading to forced marriage/payment). This shows the seriousness of covenant-breaking adultery violates an existing marriage covenant, which God highly esteems.

However, in the New Testament, fornication (Greek: porneia) is consistently condemned alongside adultery:

• 1 Thessalonians 4:3–5: “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from porneia; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor.”
• Hebrews 13:4: “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral (pornos) and adulterous.”

So, even though the Old Testament law gave different earthly punishments, the New Testament reveals that both adultery and fornication are sins of the heart that distance us from God.

Why conviction feels different?​

The Bible teaches that conviction comes from the Holy Spirit (John 16:8), and the Spirit convicts “concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.” Sometimes conviction is sharper when sin involves something tangible or covenantal (like adultery with someone’s spouse). But when conviction feels “less” in other areas like fantasies or dreams that doesn’t mean sin disappears. It may reflect:

• A conscience not yet fully trained (Hebrews 5:14 mature believers “have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil”).
• Or, a heart that has become desensitized (1 Timothy 4:2 – “seared conscience”).

Dreams themselves aren’t sin (since you don’t always choose them), but feeding lust in imagination can still corrupt the heart, because it nurtures epithymeō (desire). As James 1:14–15 says:

​

Walking in freedom.​

So the real question is not just, “Is this technically adultery or fornication?” but rather, “Is this drawing me closer to holiness, or feeding desires that lead me away from God?”

Paul’s principle in 1 Corinthians 6:12 fits well here:

Even if someone argues that an “imagined person” cannot technically be adultery, the heart question remains: Does it enslave you? Does it feed lust instead of purity? If so, then the Spirit convicts not because of a law code, but because of love, God wants your heart to be free.

My dear Brother,​

Don’t see conviction as condemnation, see it as God’s mercy. When you feel it, it means your heart is still tender to the Spirit. Paul reminds us in Romans 8:1:

Conviction is not God pushing you away, it’s Him pulling you closer. He wants to purify even the unseen places of the heart, so your love for Him and for others shines without mixture.

Blessings

So again I'm confused as to the apparently unequal application of the Holy Spirit's conviction then. If it were seared conscience, then there'd not be conviction for things like viewing live action pornography, using profanity in front of a child, using profanity in anger *at* someone, or blatantly lying, not just telling an untrue story as a joke for a laugh, and not even just kinda smiling and nodding at a child and not telling them the truth about Santa Claus (it's not my place, it's up to the parents) when they talk about it, but just outright lying.
I'd feel conviction for none of that across the board if it were quenching the spirit/seared conscience rather than there being a more thing where if it's explicitly sin in the bible, then there's definitely conviction and some actions carry conviction and when you think about what it was you did then the conviction makes sense and brings you back to scripture (IE the bible doesn't have anything about finding a dirty magazine at someone's house when you go to sit down and thumbing through it, but the conviction is there none the less, and you realize okay this still counts as committing adultery in the heart).

When we come to Romans 14, and Paul talks about Christian liberty, and how with 1 person something may be regarded as sin and another person is not, so they're at liberty to partake in it, unless it's in front of a "weaker" brother, if it were as you've been saying, then the brother who feels no conviction at eating certain meats, would have a seared conscience and eating the meat was sin for both, but Paul doesn't term it like that. Paul treated it just as not being a stumbling block to your brother, but that the other was not sinning. That is how profanity comes across to me, that it is not sin just to use those words by itself, but depending on the audience it can become sin, if their conscience has it defined as sin, and it can also become sin depending on the heart's intent in using them.

Furthermore if we go to the catchall of "if it's not bringing you closer to God, then it's sin", it really does become a catchall, only a handful of activities are then not sin, praying, singing praise songs, going to Church, reading the Bible, charity (as long as you're not doing it for your own "holier than thou" act, where it again becomes sin), Evangelizing and Preaching. That's basically it. Nobody can come and say that going to the bathroom is a holy act that's bringing them closer to God, and yet, nobody would outright say that defecating was sin (unless in public, again, nuanced thing). The other kinda ridiculous one is "well would you want Jesus to come back and see you doing it?" which #1, God already knows you did something even before you did, and #2, there are things that are not sin, explicitly not sin in the Bible, as you mentioned Hebrews 13:4, it's not sin to have sex with your wife.. and yet.... you wouldn't want Jesus, nor anyone else walking in on your in the bedroom doing that would you? You wouldn't want Jesus or anyone else walking in on you on the toilet, or in the shower (well except your spouse or maybe your really small child before they're old enough to shower on their own kind of thing), but these activities.. nobody says they're sin, yet we'd be embarrassed if someone walked in on us doing them.
So those kinds of standards never really work well.
Scripture works best, and conscience/conviction is really the only other thing we got working. To some degree we can go by community standards, but we do tend to make things illegal even when God has not. A community will go ahead and make watching a football game illegal (which it can be if it becomes an idol, but just watching a game itself is not stated to be sin in the Bible), congregations HAVE made drinking even so much as 1 glass of wine with food illegal (teetotaler congregations and as a Baptist, there's a lot of them, for me, it's drunkenness that is sin, but not wine itself).
Now.. there's another one. if I have 1 glass of wine with food with family, or a beer or something.. my conscience is clean, if I... have more, and get drunk, NOW I know I've done something wrong and sinned against God. I might drink a glass of wine or some other alcoholic beverage 1-3 times a year or something like that, I have not been drunk in.... 15-16 years?
But some congregations would call me a drunkard for that 1 drink of white wine with thanksgiving dinner.