Is Lust Sinful? (--> split) - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-03-2011, 08:10 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Just to clarify, what are we taking "lust" to mean here? A sexual thought about someone lasting over X number of seconds? Any sexual thought about her/him no matter how fleeting? Plotting to seduce someone? ...etc. ...?

yes, it is maddening

I don't believe in thought crimes
So awhile ago I decided the concept of 'sin' was totally useless, unless you wanted to control people and have power oven them for being human,

Stealing is a not a sin. Murder is not a sin. They are both crimes and should be judged and punished by society. Not judged and forgiven by a group that operates outside of the law, pays no taxes and gets all the benefits as those that do pay the taxes and obey the laws.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2011, 08:15 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 09:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I don't believe in thought crimes
Oh, why not...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that when Jesus said that "if you look with lust on someone, you've already committed adultery with them in your heart," he was speaking against a worldview that sees people as tools for personal gratification. Objectifying people by reducing them to the body parts that only give you pleasure goes against the notion of loving others before yourself.

But this is really a topic for a different thread.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2011, 08:27 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:37 AM
to have sexual thoughts is normal and healthy, a part of being human

to label all sexual thoughts as sin and to shame young people is the real 'sin'.

of course being obsessed with sex is not healthy and I am not saying anything goes. I also think it should be a crime to let children have pornography.

The most pious person is going to have sexual thoughts, people have sex dreams.
I don't believe Satan is responsible for sex dreams.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2011, 08:39 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 09:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
to have sexual thoughts is normal and healthy, a part of being human
I agree, but Jesus isn't talking about abstract sexual thoughts. He talks very specifically about lust -- which, in this context, can be understood as the craving to sexually possess someone else.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2011, 08:58 PM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sU2isBest

Why do you say that? It's not possible to date without fantasizing about having sex with that person?
if you're over a certain age and are not having those thoughts, you're either repressing them, no doubt to the detriment of your well being, or are lying to yourself and probably feeling a great deal of unreasonable guilt
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2011, 10:48 PM   #21
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,498
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I agree, but Jesus isn't talking about abstract sexual thoughts. He talks very specifically about lust -- which, in this context, can be understood as the craving to sexually possess someone else.


so how did Scorcese do on this part? i can barely remember the film ...

speaking only for myself, i find it impossible to believe that Jesus, the man, never had sexual thoughts and never had thoughts that would be akin to having sex with someone else. if God became man, it would seem to me that he did all things men (and people) do: laugh, cry, vomit, fart, sweat, chew his nails, have wet dreams, etc.

it's this idea that Jesus was a man who was able to live without the basic functions of being a human being that is where Christianity pounds dysfunction into it's adherents. your very natural thoughts and functions are not of God, they are gross, etc. self hate is not of God.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2011, 11:30 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 09:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
so how did Scorcese do on this part? i can barely remember the film ...
All I really remember of this movie is Harvey Keitel as the worst possible Judas, with a Brooklyn accent and an orange wig. "'Ey, Jesus, where we goin' next? You know what? Fugeddaboudit." Yikes.

Quote:
speaking only for myself, i find it impossible to believe that Jesus, the man, never had sexual thoughts and never had thoughts that would be akin to having sex with someone else. if God became man, it would seem to me that he did all things men (and people) do: laugh, cry, vomit, fart, sweat, chew his nails, have wet dreams, etc.
I really like the idea of Jesus laughing at a dirty joke. And, given the nature of the people he hung out with, I'm willing to bet he did.

This is again a discussion for a different thread -- but I think lust is different than sexual thoughts. Lust has to with control, particularly of that which does not belong to you.

In response to JiveTurkey's post, I'd like to think that self-control is a healthy aspect of sexuality as well.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 12:41 AM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977

In response to JiveTurkey's post, I'd like to think that self-control is a healthy aspect of sexuality as well.
Oh, no doubt about that, Nathan, I just think a line like "can you not be in a relationship without fantasizing about having sex with that person" reeks of repression and bottled up emotions; emotions that are perfectly natural and nothing to be ashamed of. I think it's in these pressures that religion can really stifle a person
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 10:30 AM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post
if you're over a certain age and are not having those thoughts, you're either repressing them, no doubt to the detriment of your well being, or are lying to yourself and probably feeling a great deal of unreasonable guilt
Ah, so you are my head shrink now? Must be nice work, for someone who doesn't even know me. Where do I send the check for your useful diagnosis?

Here's the real scoop from someone who actually knows me (myself). I'm 43 years old and single. Those thoughts do come into my head but frankly, not much, because I don't focus on that aspect of life at all. But those are not lusts unless I dwell on them and make them mine. I do not want to lust, therefore when those thoughts pop up in my mind, I try to turn them away. This is not "to the detriment of my well being", as I have no desire or need to focus on that part of my life. If i were a married person, of course I would want to have sexual feelings about my wife, but I'm not married.

As for guilt, oh gee whiz, that shows you how little you do know me at all. I don't invest in unreasonable guilt at all. I believe that Christ has forgiven me for all sins past and present. If I do mess up and sin, I confess it and move on. I am not stuck in guilt, I can assure you.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 10:34 AM   #25
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
it's this idea that Jesus was a man who was able to live without the basic functions of being a human being that is where Christianity pounds dysfunction into it's adherents. your very natural thoughts and functions are not of God, they are gross, etc. self hate is not of God.
Who said wet dreams was a sin? Not me, and not the Bible. I would say it's nature's way of doing something that celibate people don't do.

Having sex, however is not a "basic function" of being a human being. I don't have sex, haven't had sex for 23 years. Am I less a human being for that?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 10:55 AM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I really like the idea of Jesus laughing at a dirty joke. And, given the nature of the people he hung out with, I'm willing to bet he did.
Ephesians 5:4
Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving.

Colossians 3:17
And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

If Jesus told dirty jokes, then Paul obviously expected more from Christians than Christ himself actually delivered.

The "people he hung out with" doesn't mean he told or even laughed at dirty jokes. If someone doesn't like dirty jokes, they won't laugh at them. I worked patrol in a police department for 7 years. I heard plenty of dirty jokes from the cops I worked with. I don't like dirty jokes, so I didn't laugh at them.

If Jesus laughed at dirty jokes, it's either because he liked them or because he wanted to "fit in". Considering those two verses above, do you think he liked dirty jokes? If not, was he insecure, so that he felt he needed to act a certain way in order to fit in with his disciples?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
This is again a discussion for a different thread -- but I think lust is different than sexual thoughts. Lust has to with control, particularly of that which does not belong to you.
Look up the definition of lust (verb) in a Lexicon.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 01:07 PM   #27
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,498
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sU2isBest View Post
Having sex, however is not a "basic function" of being a human being. I don't have sex, haven't had sex for 23 years. Am I less a human being for that?


i know we're totally going off topic but i think this is so interesting that i want to respond ... no, i don't think you are less of a human being for that. i think you are exerting a great, almost unnatural degree of self-control. actually having sex involves two willing participants, and there are people who choose not to have sex either because of the unavailability of an appropriate partner or because they do not yet have the correct circumstances in which they feel it is appropriate to have sex with said appropriate partner.

while there are a small amount of people who are genuinely asexual, the vast majority of human beings -- male, female, gay or straight -- are hardwired to want to have sex. i don't think there's anything wrong with that, and since you believe in God (i myself remain agnostic), that's obviously what he wanted us to do. yes, self-control is a good thing, as is the delaying of gratification, but it does strike me as odd this wishing away of "lustful" thoughts. there is an animal aspect of sexuality, the drive itself, that has a critical evolutionary function for the past, what, 65 milllion years -- up until my parent's generation, we lived in a world where children (and mothers) used to die in childbirth, in a world where if you made it to 50 you were doing well, in a world where disease and accidents and plague wiped out millions of people, it really does seem necessary for the survival of the species for most people to have a very, very strong drive for sexual relations that are about little more than friction for the sake of ejaculation. it seems to me a part of being human.

for example, when looking at men, orgasm and ejaculation are actually two separate things. some people ejaculate with no orgasm, and some people orgasm without ejaculation, but that's either the result of training or dysfunction. sex does feel good, and it feels good so you have incentive to do it again and again and again. men especially when they are younger get frequent erections, and every man has a virtually inexhaustible supply of semen for most of his lifespan. clearly, nature wants us to have sex. where we come in is recognizing the dangers of unregulated sexuality -- the #1 consequence being unwanted, unintended children ... and, imho, that's where most religious instruction against sex outside of marriage actually find their motivation, rather than from God himself -- and we thusly regulate our urges in the same way that we don't eat ice cream and nachos all day everyday.

now, with all that in mind, i think it's entirely possible for people to willingly and happily subjugate their sexual urges, thoughts, impulses, or whatever. you obviously have thought about it and have arrived at an intellectual understanding of the role that sexuality should play in your life. and that is fine. i totally respect that and am impressed at how thoroughly your faith influences your choices. but i also think it would be remiss, 80s, to not recognize the fact that many, many people are unable to exercise the restraint you are able to -- and to exercise that restraint in a way that does no psychological damage.

i suppose my own view is that being sexual is a bit like being a superhero -- and that with great power (and it is a great thing) comes great responsibility. so act accordingly.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 01:32 PM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 09:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sU2isBest View Post
If Jesus told dirty jokes, then Paul obviously expected more from Christians than Christ himself actually delivered.
I didn't say he told dirty jokes -- I said I liked the idea of him laughing at one. (To me it makes him human.) Given that he hung out with guys who were mostly illiterate and uneducated, chances are good their vernacular was more vulgar than we might like to admit. Paul himself is given to some vulgarities in the New Testament -- we've cleaned up the language to make it polite, but it's still there.

Quote:
do you think he liked dirty jokes?
I don't know -- there are some dirty jokes that are pretty funny...

Quote:
Look up the definition of lust (verb) in a Lexicon.
Among the definitions of "lust" is this:
a passionate or overmastering desire or craving (usually followed by "for"): a lust for power.

Since one does not, generally speaking, lust sexually for power, then it's entirely legitimate to say that, in addition to the sexual connotation of lust (which is obvious), there is a much deeper force at work. I'd argue that this force is covetousness (another definition of lust) -- the desire to possess that which we do not own. Lust then seems to take covetousness (already condemned by the Torah) and add a sexual component to it. As a result, Jesus says that anyone who wishes to sexually possess another person to whom they are not married, has committed adultery in their heart -- because they've violated the basic tenets of God's law, which is to value other people before ones'self. Lusting after someone else reduces them to merely being your sexual plaything.

Anyone who's been on the other end of a disgusting leer knows what I'm talking about.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 02:48 PM   #29
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,694
Local Time: 03:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sU2isBest View Post
They may suggest that, but it's not accurate. Lexicons tell us that the Greek word for "woman" used in this verse simply means "woman". The only other meaning for that Greek word in the entire New Testament is "a female".

Bible Shockers!: Wife, not woman in Matthew 5:28


Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sU2isBest View Post
Why do you say that? It's not possible to date without fantasizing about having sex with that person?
Well there doesn't seem to be a agreed upon definition in here, but by your definition it seems very difficult. Part of dating is sexual attraction, is it not?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 03:25 PM   #30
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,498
Local Time: 04:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Among the definitions of "lust" is this:
a passionate or overmastering desire or craving (usually followed by "for"): a lust for power.

Since one does not, generally speaking, lust sexually for power, then it's entirely legitimate to say that, in addition to the sexual connotation of lust (which is obvious), there is a much deeper force at work. I'd argue that this force is covetousness (another definition of lust) -- the desire to possess that which we do not own. Lust then seems to take covetousness (already condemned by the Torah) and add a sexual component to it. As a result, Jesus says that anyone who wishes to sexually possess another person to whom they are not married, has committed adultery in their heart -- because they've violated the basic tenets of God's law, which is to value other people before ones'self. Lusting after someone else reduces them to merely being your sexual plaything.

Anyone who's been on the other end of a disgusting leer knows what I'm talking about.


this seems a fair exploration to me. i think it's far to easy to conflate "lust" with simply getting turned out at a sexual thought.

it could be argued that within sexuality there are impulses and desires between two people where by they might act out roles of sexual possession and certainly those withing s/m communities would argue that the it's really the "m" that's in control even if it looks like they are being possessed and used like a plaything by the "s" ... but that's a dive too deep into the complexities of human sexual desire than i think the Bible would ever go.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com