do you believe that looking at a woman/man with lust gives you a ticket straight to hell?

this belief goes to the muslim religion also not just christianity, that's why traditional muslim/christian keep thier women covered (i.e. nuns)

to me it's just basic biological desire to mate, so I don't see anything wrong with it. I believe love is just a romantic view of lust.

wiki
Many people acknowledge that feelings of lust do not always imply feelings of love, and they make a strong distinction between the terms lust and love. Love has many definitions, but in general the word implies a concern for the well-being of the other person as well as carrying a more "pure" connotation (See Love for more details), whereas lust in the average person is often more a product of their own libidinal urge than it is a product of a desire for the well-being of the objects of lust, although the two can certainly co-exist. Others consider lust ultimately incompatible with, or unrelated to love.

Some sects of Christianity believe that receiving or desiring to receive any pleasure from sexual activities, such as lust, is an act of selfishness.

This view of lust as an inappropriate desire has led to its metaphorical extended use in other forms of desire to signify overwhelming desire or craving, such as a lust for power, success, or recognition. It has also been used in the sense of intense eagerness or enthusiasm, such as a lust for life.

On the other hand, in different cultures, individual groups see lust as the purest form of love. This viewpoint argues that being a pure emotional wish, based upon physical attraction, frees lust from the constraints of emotional baggage (or negative inner conceptual responses), and respects it for what it is, the direct emotional inner instinct and desire of one person, to carnally know and be intimate with another

You have to believe in sin, hell, and divine retribution first before you can even approach this topic... Mostly.
I don't, so I'll leave it up to the believers to discuss the merits of the idea in detail.

But I do know that within the faiths of people who believe these things (orthodox Jews are another group), there is a lot of disagreement.

I don't think it's a sin to lust, but I think it's pretty rude to go checkin' people out while you're out with your girlfriend/boyfriend. I mean they're standing right there. T_T Lust: So Many Bad Decisions!

I believe we're meant to be attracted to people. And intimate relations are enjoyable and meant to be enjoyed. If it wasn't pleasing, we wouldn't do it... and BOOM - end of species.

Now, if any set of beliefs says it's wrong to be attracted to people or to actually enjoy sex, then I don't know how they expect us to marry and/or have children.

http://www.porn-free.org/lust.htm [porn-free.org]

from the christian argument (since that's what i'm familiar with)

Someone
What God says about lust: Lust is sin (Matthew 5:28) and sin is death (Romans 6:23). Jesus said, "But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5:28 NKJV). When we entertain fantasies through pornography, masturbation, voyeurism, adultery, fornication, phone sex, etc., we sin with our minds. According to Jesus, that's the same as committing the act.

didn't adam have lust for eve? nothing in the bible really shows today's definition of love. how is having a sex fantasy as bad as doing it? right now i'm fantasazing a cheeseburger, my artery's aren't as clogged, i didn't gain any weight.

Someone
Lust and pornography: Pornography uses the same lies that Satan used in the Garden of Eden. Porn images tempt our eyes and flesh to lust (see how porn works page). James described the temptation process in James 1:14-15 NKJV: "But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death." Sin by lust causes the death of innocence, sexual health, the ability to love and sensitivity to God.

satan is a scapegoat. stop blaming him for your OWN actions. lust can turn to life with the advent of a baby. not like adam and eve were married when they started having kids.

Someone
What lust does to us: Lust has many destructive effects. The most serious effect is that lust corrupts our ability to love God. John explained that lust is a way of loving the world. He wrote, "Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world--the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life--is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever" (1 John 2:15-17 NKJV). Lust cripples our ability to give and receive love, and blocks God's love from working in us. See our page Lust vs. Love for more information.

isn't God everything, inclding the world? why can't we love the world? isn't falling in love with a woman(or lusting) same as loving God? first comes love then lust...love, in today's definition is knowing that person. lust is the first knee jerk reaction of bieng around that person.

i might go up to a woman I like(lust) because she interest me...then we would go out and get to know each other, then maybe fall in love. that's how these things work. love isn't a short term thing. it's long term.

You would have to believe in sin first off. Which I don't, but from what i've read the bible never really talked about love all that much, and wouldn't adam have to have lust towards eve to wonder "i wonder what i could do with her!"

Gods a hypocrit.

actually, the bible is full of hypocracy.
i don't believe the bible is God's true word.

it's full of mistakes because it was filtered through men..yes men. i don't see any sermons from women in there.

The bible wasn't written by god or Jesus, it was written by monks. If it had been written by god or jesus (if they exist, which I believe but really noone can be sure), I'm sure that there would be alot less mistakes. That's reason 240 as to why I don't take my religion so seriously.

I can see how some people out there would think Lust was bad.... espeically if they'd had bad expernices with some people doing the wrong thing out of thier own lust.

there's men AND women who doesn't seem to be able to control themselves too well when it comes to thier pyschical desires....they're the ones who often does that whole "one night stand" thing, has tons of sex fruently and have caught many various dieases as an result of it... and still they haven't really learned anything, they still go "mmmm, that person is SO fucking hot! I want to have sex with her/him! I think I'll talk that person up into having sex with me!"

To me that would certainly be the wrong way to go about it. and if they were married, then yes I can see how lust could become adultery, and therefore an sin.

However, the majority of people seems capable of controlling themselves, and whenever they feel lust for an person, they turn it into nothing but a type of adimaration. like: "Hmm, that person is pretty much attractive!!" and just leave it at that.
I think wives and husbands that can control themselves can lust after celebrites and other people and still only want to have sex with thier spouse.

so in total: if you act in the wrong way just because you felt lust, then yes you can sin. But if you have self-control, then it's not a sin.. just some immature feeling that you can get over easily.

turning a perfectly normal human reaction into a "sin" is just a tool some religions use to make you feel bad and shamefull about youreself so they can step in with the solution. it's the same strategy used in marketing houshold cleaning products; like that comercial that shows all those millions of bacterias swarming on the counter top because they used some special infrared light to reveal them and then they try to scare you that these bacterias are somehow abnormal and yet Huamns have been living with these creatures for millions of years !! It's the same with lust ; when i go browsing around on the internet checking out naked porno it's just my animal instinct to apreciate naked sexy stuff , Why is that wrong ? without it there would be no human beings left on this planet !

lothar
turning a perfectly normal human reaction into a "sin" is just a tool some religions use to make you feel bad and shamefull about youreself so they can step in with the solution.

My guess is they didn't write it to scare people, but rather to try and make the world a better place. Of course, they tried too hard and failed.

i have a picture of a dam, suppress it so much and just a single droplet can crash it. maybe it works for some people, but it doesn't work for everyone.

just like medication, sometimes it works, sometimes you get allergic to it.

Technically, yes.

what does technically mean?

It's a totally natural human reaction, but that doesn't mean I wont get a flick to the ear from my girl. :)

Really, it's become more of a societal thing now, where it's still considered taboo, but I don't think it's from the religious standpoint as much anymore; just more of a social rule. The religious connotations of lust are still there, but I don't believe thats the prominent rule keeping people in line, I think it's more internalized guilt.

-W

I think lust is fine and dandy, and is only "sinful" if used in a way that will hurt someone else. It's a pretty necessary human function, for obvious reasons...
and I'm starting to think that maybe things like lust are displayed as being sinful or guilt-inspiring just to make sex kinkier. hohohoho! I sound like a pervert!

It might as well be a sin to breath.

As always, I can only really speak intelligently about Catholic doctrine... but not for all Catholics (because I admit a lot don't really know what Catholics actually believe - they choose ignorance) and definitely not for all Christians/followers of the Bible.

I think "lust" as a sin - in terms of the Bible - means more than just the instant attraction of seing someone sexually desirable. Even to Catholics, this is a scientificly provable reaction (theory). Confidently, I can say that the proveable biological reaction to sexually appealing people is not a soul-damning offense. The sin comes later.

From "New Advent dot Org", a highly respected member of the catholic knowledge base and the contents of New Advent are generally to be regarded as authentic catholic teaching:

Someone
Lust
The inordinate craving for, or indulgence of, the carnal pleasure which is experienced in the human organs of generation.

The wrongfulness of lust is reducible to this: that venereal satisfaction is sought for either outside wedlock or, at any rate, in a manner which is contrary to the laws that govern marital intercourse. Every such criminal indulgence is a mortal sin, provided of course, it be voluntary in itself and fully deliberate. This is the testimony of St. Paul in the Epistle to the Galatians, v. 19:

"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury, . . . Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God."

Full article on the matter found here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438a.htm [newadvent.org]

Mortal sin (the hell-damning-if-unrepented kind) to Catholics has criteria to actually be a mortal sin. The "sinner" must: 1) fully know it's a sin (intentional ignorance of Bible teaching could be a sin, however); 2) the sin must be commited voluntarily; and 3) it must actually be of a grave nature... that is to say that it is severe enough to intentionally (through act of the sin) alter the "sinner's" connection with God and His grace.

Example: Skipping Mass is a mortal sin to catholics. But, if the person skipping didn't know it was so, then doing so wouldn't actually be a mortal sin. Also, if the person knew, but was in a car accident (for example) that forced them to skip, then it too is not a mortal sin. Finally, if the sin is, let's say, a white lie that will help a person - like saying "that whipeout on the ski hill wasn't bad - no one noticed" when people DID notice and laughed and telling the person so might ruin them to skiing forever. It is a lie and therefore probably a sin, but it is not so severe that it qualifies as a mortal sin (and yes, there is distinction between sins in the Bible).

So, is "Lust" a sin? Well, yes. Is being subconsciously/instantly sexually attracted to a person a sin? No. It's uncontrollable... and definitely not a mortal one - the act was not voluntary. Going forward beyond the instant, biological reaction however IS a mortal sin... assuming you knew it was so in the first place (which if you are a Catholic/Christian and believe all this... then you probably knew it was).

For this and many more reasons, Catholic doctrine does not suggest and in fact discourages people from trying to judge sin and/or the state of a person's soul. That is left for God, as commanded by the Bible. Through His Word, we've gained insight, but ultimately it is too complex and divine to know for certain.


Finally... I think it's fine to see someone of beauty and think that they are so. Furthermore, I think it's fine for the thought to instinctually enter your mind. It is what you do with that thought after it enters that determines the nature of its potential inherent sin.

Long post complete. phew.

~Jerome~

so why are all catholics groups afraid of nudity on tv, but it's okay to show blood and violence.

sex is a human function, yet people are afraid of it.
violence and killing is an inhuman function, but churches aren't as afraid of it as nudity.

it's like "jesus was put on the cross, tied and speared", yet any mention of sex is put down. ABSTINENCE!

i think priorities are messed up with religion.

subcultured
so why are all catholics groups afraid of nudity on tv, but it's okay to show blood and violence.

sex is a human function, yet people are afraid of it.
violence and killing is an inhuman function, but churches aren't as afraid of it as nudity.

it's like "jesus was put on the cross, tied and speared", yet any mention of sex is put down. ABSTINENCE!

i think priorities are messed up with religion.

Well, I wouldn't say catholics are against nudity but okay with blood and violence. I'd say they're probably doctrinally against all of it. As for groups... people do things in the name of their religion which are in fact against their religion's teachings.

I'd guess that churches/religions argue that access to one sin would create an increase in the associated sin. i.e. - the more lust-intended nudity there is around, the more likely people are to commit the sin of lust... and probably other associated sins like fornication, adultery and masterbation. (not MY arguement... just what I'd guess THEIR arguement is)

I think there are some religions with pretty messed up priorities. But, I think I more accurate statement would be "I think priorities are messed up with religious people" since it is probably more often the people abusing their religious doctrines rather than the religious doctrines being messed up in the first place.

The arguement against lust/nudity on TV is probably: just because sex is natural and right and lust is a biological response, doesn't mean that having such on TV is right and/or good for more people since it's avoidable temptation. (again, just what my guess on their arguement is)

seems like they touch more upon the gory detail of violence in the bible and hide away the sexual parts. mostly it's "begat" or "layed"...maybe it had something to do with the people who wrote it. the monks. i mean what did they know about sex.

some bible scholars even think that jesus and magdalena were married, but the knowledge was supressed. I always wondered what else they surpressed. like jesus's teenage years. maybe he did some crazy things that isn't very "christian".

I see the church groups on the news getting mad about nudity, they wrote like crazy when janet's boobs was exposed. "the end of decency in AMERICA"...wtf. thur night shows like CSI where some man getting shot in the head.

Someone
The arguement against lust/nudity on TV is probably: just because sex is natural and right and lust is a biological response, doesn't mean that having such on TV is right and/or good for more people since it's avoidable temptation

having seen sex on TV doesn't mean that the person looking at it is able to have sex with the woman being shown, so i don't see how THAT is a sin. since the sin part comes with the act of carrying out the lust.

subcultured
having seen sex on TV doesn't mean that the person looking at it is able to have sex with the woman being shown, so i don't see how THAT is a sin. since the sin part comes with the act of carrying out the lust.

Well, I can't really say why that is a sin. But I can say what Jesus said on the matter (as you've already had in one of your quotes):

But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart

I think it has to do with a betrayal of your spouse (present OR future) and/or of God. You are willfully persuing sexual interaction with someone other than your wife, even if it only reamins 100% mental. And if you're never going to get married, then you're doing so against the calling of God to practice abstinance outside of marriage.

Lust isn't only about a biological reaction. Lust, as the sin, is about the willful mental persuit of resulting from that biological reaction, and thus the priority of lusting after another becomes higher momentarilty/mentally (even if it remains mental) than that of God and/or spouse.

As Jesus clearly stated , the 2 greatest commandments are a) keep God above all else and b) treat others as you'd like to be treated. As with all sin, Lust violates those.


That is the Christian arguement. It isn't necessarily mine. But, as I've stated in other forums... I'm not really a practicing christian... just a christian scholar, of sorts.


As for the "Adam lusting for Eve" arguement I've heard a couple times here. 1) We can't possibly know what Adam was thinking and whether Adam lusted for Eve. That's an assumption; and 2) Adam and Eve were created for one another. Our entire notion of marriage is originally derived from their creation and union. And, I don't think you can technically lust after your wife. And even if you can, we couldn't possibly know whether Adam did so.

Here's my final point: If you're a Christian, then lust is a sin because Jesus explictly said so. If you're not, then why is "sin" even relevant?

I believe that we are still animals, no matter how you cut it. We have hormones in our body to tell us what we should do at the time we should do it. I think a lot of the time our beliefs get in the way of our natural behavior. We stifle what we want to do because we think it is wrong or immoral. But, that is what civilization and religions teaches us, we should not be like animals, or we will be locked in a cage!

I don't believe that looking at some one that you are attracted to is wrong. It is just a way of showing them that you appreciate their presents, the way they take care of themselves, and in fact is a complement to them. I mean, if you dress nice or have been working out; don't you want to be noticed? Everybody likes to be noticed!

If you are in a relationship, I think that you can still admire others, but be respectful about it. Looking does not hurt. We look at art don't we? Why not look at God's art? There is all kinds of art running around out there. The whole world is a gallery. Just make sure that you let you significant other know that you are not interested in doing more than looking! In fact, partake in looking at other together; you might learn something you did not know about each other.

reconjsh
Here's my final point: If you're a Christian, then lust is a sin because Jesus explictly said so. If you're not, then why is "sin" even relevant?

Theres more reason to it than that. In the Judeo-Christian faiths it is held that thinking an sinful thought is comprable to actually DOING that sinful action. So seeing someone have sex on TV and thinking, "she's really hot I'd like to do her" or even indulging in that fantasy is the same, in the eyes of God, as actually doing that thing. This is because God is so perfect, and he's set his expectations on us based on his own perfection. For example, the sin isn't to sleep with your neighbors wife, its to COVET your neigbors wife. Covet means want. Just desiring her is the sin. But as Jesus taught, all men are frail, and can not help but have these base thoughts, which is why we have confession, and why God offers forgivness. Every man, by his very nature is to some degree a sinner, and while God's expectations are high, he understants our weaknesses.

Lust is considered a sin because it takes the physical act of love as merely a means of self-gratification, when it's supposed to bond two people together, and to create life. It's not a ticket to hell. None of the seven deadly sins are. They're called as such because by their very nature they become habitual in such a way that we no longer see the evil in them, and accept them, despite the fact that they only lead to sinful thoughts and actions. American society is actually strife with the seven deadly sins to such a degree that most people don't even see these indulgences as a bad thing. It's not just lust. Soth, gluttony, pride, hell our entire capitalistic society is run on a combination of avarice and envy.

Someone
seems like they touch more upon the gory detail of violence in the bible and hide away the sexual parts. mostly it's "begat" or "layed"...maybe it had something to do with the people who wrote it. the monks. i mean what did they know about sex.

some bible scholars even think that jesus and magdalena were married, but the knowledge was supressed. I always wondered what else they surpressed. like jesus's teenage years. maybe he did some crazy things that isn't very "christian".

Remember that the old testemant has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, it was an oral tradition that far predated it. It's meant to put the New Testament in context, to show why people believed Jesus to be the messiah even before his ressurection. Much of the lessons in the old testament were voided by the new testament, as that covenant was fullfilled by the Messiah, and there was now a new covenant to be upheld. It's why catholics don't need to be circumcized, and can eat pork, and all that.

You're talking about the Apocrypha. That knowledge was not surpressed, thats a common misunderstaning. It's just not part of the holy bible. You can still go to Barnes and Nobles and pick up the Apocrypha, which includes all the books left out of the Bible, the Torah, and the Koran. It includes the Book of Adam and Eve, the Book of Mary Magdelene, and The book of Nicodemus (my favorite, it's about what Jesus DID between the time he died and the time he was ressurected.) They're considered "holy books" by the church in the same way that Paradise Lost and The Inferno are, where while they aren't nessecarily the "word of God" they do grant greater insight into the nature of God.

Jesus was a little vengeful during his childhood, but to be fair, that kid he smited was a total dick, he had it coming.

I think a defanition of lust might be in order. If we are talking about acting on the lust in any physical way then yes, from my knowledge of the Abrahamicc religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam,) that would be a sin. It's pretty clearly defined that promiscuous sex and sex outside of marriage is sin. But, if by lust we just mean looking at a man or woman with sexual desire, then I would have to say no. My reasoning here is pretty simple. When asked if homosexuality is a sin most Christian denominations answer yes. When then asked what constitutes the sin of homosexuality most churches will say that the sin requires acting on homosexual urges, physically engagins in homosexual behavior. Simply having the desire to engage in homosexual activities is not a sin. To simplify, it has been stated by most christian churches that it is not a sin to be tempted. Jesus himelf was tempted. The sin comes from acting on the temptation. I know that's pretty oversimplified and doesn't really address every issue, but that's more or less my thoughts on it.

And for the record, I personally don't consider lust OR homosexuality a sin, but the above is based on what I know of conventional religion.

looks like all those teenagers are going to hell then ^-^ ha ha. Having a crush on someone is like lusting after them. You don't quite know them but you like certain physical features about them and thus wish you could closer. ha ha! Poor poor teenagers...

There is a vast difference between "Lust" and being attracted to someone.
Difference between acknowledging beauty and capturing beauty to make yours.
It has been stated earlier...Lust is the active mental pursuit...
Also Lust is not just sexual...you can lust after anything...power, possessions...etc.

Think of this way...a thought pops into you mind...you have a choice...think about it, mull it over, find ways to make this thought a reality....or acknowledge the thought for what it is and handle appropriately by dismissing and pursuing other things.


Have you ever wondered how some people turn into rapists, murders, etc...?
Its not a sin to have a thought.
Its a sin to allow that thought to over take you and draw you to where you don't need to be.
Most people don't get to that point where they are murdering and raping because they have excepted a boundary excluding them from moving beyond a certain socially acceptable behavior. We choose not to go there. We choose to dismiss the weird thought which tugs at us.

Now is there anyone who has never lusted? no.
That's the fly in the oinment...if everyone struggles with this then what are we to do?

I don't think so, even if mentonned in the bible, that it's a sin to lust.

Why?

Well, for one thing. If we don't lust, then we'll have a hard time trying to fall in love, and will have fewer desire- perhaps none- to have intercours of sex, and then that means fewer or no baby will be borned....
Think about it. God- if there is one- allowed lust for a thing. To help us reproducte.
See, animals, they do lust- just think of the 'dog in heat'. It's the same thing as a human.

But what I think God's image of the forbbien lusting in the bible are:
One mustn't lust for nothing.

Well, that's what I think.

I am going to post a response to this, but first a disclaimer:

For any of the following to make sense to you, you must first:

1. Have a strong belief in protestant Christianity.
2. Generally accept the Bible as true and the Word of God.
3. Believe Jesus is the Christ

If you can check off all of those, proceed. If not, then we will have little common ground to work from. I am not interested in what you think about the truth or the nature of the Bible. I am simply answering the religious question in a religious context.

You cannot control what comes into your head, and as was pointed out
there, if you even look at a woman and wonder what she might look like
naked, which I tend to do when I see a very beautiful woman, it is
lust. The point that Christ is making is that you cannot be good
enough to get to Heaven by your good works. The context was in
reference to the old Mosaic law. He was trying to cut off all hope of
someone earning their way into heaven. People try to take this verse
and condemn others with it. If I look at someone's wife and start
planning on how I can sleep with her, nothing good can possibly come
of that. So yeah, look, admire, but understand that nothing will ever
come of it, and the sooner you realize that, the sooner you are going
to start thinking about other things. Like, as an artist, I have seen
many nude women, I am looking at them, is that going to send me to
hell? Of course not. Even if I picture myself having sex with them, is
that going to send me to hell? No. We are saved by the grace of God,
we can only try to do what we can to act in a Christian manner. God is
not the thought police. Much to the chagrin of many a religious
oppressor. This leads me to porn. Why is porn wrong? Naked women?
Naked women having sex? Pictures of genitalia engaged in sexual
activities? No. None of these things is what makes porn wrong or
immoral. What makes it immoral is that it can cause people to debase
what sex is supposed to be about. If I have sex with my wife, I am
going to see all of those things in person. But if I think that sex
with my wife is supposed to be the way that it is portrayed in adult
media, then I will not be understanding of the symbolism of it. It is
also bad, because it causes a lot of people to devalue love and other
human beings. It is easy to view people as animals and nothing higher,
if they behave like such.

Vindibudd
What makes it immoral is that it can cause people to debase
what sex is supposed to be about. ....It is
also bad, because it causes a lot of people to devalue love and other
human beings. It is easy to view people as animals and nothing higher,
if they behave like such.

In your post, you say porn is immoral for these reasons. Is lust also considered a sin? If so, is it sinful for these similar reasons, i.e. that lust dehumanizes each other and devalues love?