ECT Lust

[elohiym]

Elo is like the Jews. They went about trying to establish their own righteousness....they hoped by keeping the letter of the law, they didn't have to worry about what was in their heart.

Except I have argued it is about what is in the heart, so you are just spreading malicious gossip again, which is a sin.

Elo tries to tweak the law to make it say what he wants so he can claim he's keeping it perfectly.

No, I don't tweak the law, and that's just more malicious gossip. I have argued exactly what Jesus stated, that if you lust (covet) in your heart, you already commit adultery.

 

[elohiym]

Thoughts can take you in many directions if you don't show em who's boss. I try to keep my goals in mind every time my thoughts go astray.

Do you think you are morally superior because you think you can keep your "astray" thoughts under control by showing them "who's boss?"

Romans 8:7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,

 

[elohiym]

You have already claimed numerous times I'm not a Christians for far more trivial reasons than murder.

What have I done that disqualifies me as a Christian, if you agree with Clete?

It's never been about what you've done. It's always been about what you say. It's your inability to understand the simplest truths of God's word.

So I can simply say something you decide disqualifies me, but a "Christian" who commits murder isn't disqualified?

What exactly did I say that disqualifies me? :idunno:

 

[elohiym]

As I said, you're under the law. And it will do nothing but condemn you. I've merely been pointing out that it does condemn you,...

According to the Apostle Paul, I'm not under the law. Why are you teaching that I am under the law?

... and all your attempts to claim lust doesn't really mean lust is how you try to escape the consequences of the law.

I'm not trying to escape the consequence of the law. I haven't claimed lust doesn't really mean lust. You are simply spreading malicious gossip, and have been since you joined this thread.

Neither am I claiming I'm morally superior to you....my "righteousnesss" counts for no more than yours does.

Well, then if you still ever covet immorally, don't worry about what I do. You need to get that beam out of your eye first.

NO ONE will be found IN HIM because their own righteousness merits their being there. You haven't figured that out yet.

Why do you think you get to declare what I have figured out? I've posted numerous times on this forum over the years and I have never claimed my own righteousness exists, let alone merits me anything. You are once again spreading malicious gossip.

 

[elohiym]

You say you can look at another woman, and even be aroused without it being adultery. You can't tweak the law. It finds you guilty.

You are misunderstanding what I believe and the law, but let's test your theory.

Exodus 20:8 "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy."​

Do you keep that law by remembering the seventh-day sabbath every Saturday?

 

[elohiym]

It's easy to be sinless when nothing is a sin anymore.

Who said nothing is a sin anymore? I've never claimed that.

This is why his theology was appealing to me for the longest time.

But I didn't teach that, so what you found appealing was only in your imagination.

The other reason is that there are some really horrible people out there who claim to be saved because they have been forgiven all sins already.

You think they are not saved? Why?

This also made his theology appealing.

Because I believe a murderer has no eternal life abiding in him, per 1 John 3:15. Do you now believe a murderer has eternal life abiding in him, contrary to scripture?

You can't tweak the law, it finds you guilty....indeed.

Why would I have to tweak the law if I'm not under the law?
Why would I have to tweak the law if all things are lawful for me, as the Apostle Paul wrote?

It's obvious that you never really understood what I was sharing with you. Don't spread malicious gossip about what I believe. Just argue the points without getting personal.

 

[intojoy]

Except I have argued it is about what is in the heart, so you are just spreading malicious gossip again, which is a sin.



No, I don't tweak the law, and that's just more malicious gossip. I have argued exactly what Jesus stated, that if you lust (covet) in your heart, you already commit adultery.

That's not accurate. If I look at a woman and lust after her I have not committed adultery. I am guilty of failing inwardly but I am not guilty of the sin of adultery.

 

[elohiym]

If I look at a woman and lust after her I have not committed adultery. I am guilty of failing inwardly but I am not guilty of the sin of adultery.

I believe Jesus claimed it was adultery in thought (heart), but if you agree that it is a sin to covet your neighbor's wife then I'm not going to argue the point with you. The "inward fall" is covetousness.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Elohiym is my husband. I just wanted to give my testimony to his witness about this topic, in his real life. We've been married for over 16 years, and in all that time, he has been true and loyal, not a womanizer, not a coveter of women God did not give him, and he's been every bit the man God wanted him to be.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

Romans 7:7 ... for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.​

When the word lust is use according to it's strict English definition, it means very strong sexual desire. However, when lust is used in the Bible, it means covet because the underlying Greek word means covet not strong sexual desire, as we see in the NASB translation:

Romans 7:7 ... I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET."​

When Jesus used the word lust, he meant coveting, not strong sexual desire.

Matthew 5:27-28 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.​

Here's the Greek word he used:

1937 epithyméō (from 1909 /epí, "focused on" intensifying 2372 /thymós, "passionate desire") – properly, to show focused passion as it aptly builds on (Gk epi, "upon") what a person truly yearns for; to "greatly desire to do or have something – 'to long for, to desire very much' " (L & N, 1, 25.12).​

He was referring to the commandment:

Exodus 20:17 "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor."​

If we were to interpret the word lust in Romans 7:7 KJV and Matthew 5:27-28 to mean lust strictly according to English definition of the word, a single man could not become sexually aroused by a single woman without sinning. Surely, Jesus didn't mean to convey such an idea but was rather magnifying the commandment to not covet.

Discuss.

Speaking as one who knows my only freedom from lusting after anything, or covetting anything, has come from desiring Jesus and His love and presence more. His Spirit convicts, but we can not just simply act in our own effort.

Pornography is an epidemic of evil and after being exposed to it as kid it had its evil grips on me even after I first turned to Jesus. It was only through His love and my desire to Love Him back that I asked Him to do what I could not. Christ is all about us desiring Him and His love above all!

 

[patrick jane]

Elohiym is my husband. I just wanted to give my testimony to his witness about this topic, in his real life. We've been married for over 16 years, and in all that time, he has been true and loyal, not a womanizer, not a coveter of women God did not give him, and he's been every bit the man God wanted him to be.

Well, of course. He will say the same about you.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Elohiym is my husband. I just wanted to give my testimony to his witness about this topic, in his real life. We've been married for over 16 years, and in all that time, he has been true and loyal, not a womanizer, not a coveter of women God did not give him, and he's been every bit the man God wanted him to be.

You seem to be an okay poster. Your husband: Not so much!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Didn't ELO used to be called "Doormat?"

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Except I have argued it is about what is in the heart, so you are just spreading malicious gossip again, which is a sin.



No, I don't tweak the law, and that's just more malicious gossip. I have argued exactly what Jesus stated, that if you lust (covet) in your heart, you already commit adultery.

Glorydaz is one of the Great posters on TOL. You, are one of
the worst. You're disgusting in fact. No offence, just keeping
it honest.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Why will I face the judgement if Jesus died for my sins?



I haven't claimed lust isn't really lust.

I have to go along with Glorydaz, I doubt you're a member
of the Body of Christ. And, if you truly aren't, you'll stand
before God and be judged by your works.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Christ died and was resurrected for all of mankind's sins. However, only
those who place all their faith in Christ as their Savior will receive the
benefits.

1) Eternal life
2) Indwelling and sealing of the Holy Spirit
3) Become a member of the Body of Christ
4) Receive the righteousness of Christ
5) Will not be judged or suffer eternal damnation

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Well, of course. He will say the same about you.

Because it's true. But plenty of couples have a different history. I'm not trying to say anything about them, but making a point about my man.

If we'd been separated, dealt with adultery, etc, I'd be honest and say so. Instead, I prayed for years for God to prepare his heart before I'd even met him, and he's been my angel all these years - an answer to prayer!

And all this while enabling me, according to my heart's desire, to have as many children as I can for Christ - which is so far - 8 children, counting the one due in May. He's an excellent father to his children, also, although that's a slightly different topic.

You seem to be an okay poster. Your husband: Not so much!

I know and love the man in real life, and so would you. He's a very good debater (it really comes out online!) and you don't want to be on the losing end of a debate with him. I'm sorry if you find him offensive. I'm very proud of him and love what he's done for others here at TOL.

Didn't ELO used to be called "Doormat?"

Yes and if someone pmed and asked, he told them. I was also openly his wife. He didn't sneak back as a banned member.

Glorydaz is one of the Great posters on TOL. You, are one of
the worst. You're disgusting in fact. No offence, just keeping
it honest.

It's offensive, Gros, that you never really tried to understand him. I'd rethink that, if I were you. My feeling is that you have projected the character of someone you've met in real life or elsewhere onto him. Get to know him before passing judgment.

I have to go along with Glorydaz, I doubt you're a member
of the Body of Christ. And, if you truly aren't, you'll stand
before God and be judged by your works.

Again, sad. Sad and offensive. Notice that GD can't help but try to turn everything he says into something she doesn't agree with, instead of actually listening! She's also projecting - a lot. Don't just take her word for everything. Please.

Also, since she does that so often I get the impression that she's a false accuser. She doesn't see the way she appears to me, that's for sure.