Getting hold of our lusts… before we end up in the trash.

by K.W. Leslie, 06 September

Matthew 5.27-32, 18.8-9, Mark 9.43-49, Luke 16.18.

In case you didn’t read that last lesson, I should remind you: Christians too often read these teachings, and assume Jesus condemns people for being tempted. Tempted to get angry and act on it is treated as sin. Tempted, in today’s passage, to indulge one’s lusts is likewise treated as sin. But temptation is not sin. Everybody gets tempted. Jesus got tempted. His teachings are warnings not to act on these temptations. Same thing with his next lesson on adultery—and how it’s connected to lust. (’Cause duh.)

Matthew 5.27-28 KWL
27 “You heard this said: ‘You shall not adulter.’ Ex 20.14, Dt 5.18
28 And I tell you this: Everybody who looks at a woman to covet her,
has now adultered with her in their heart.”

The Textus Receptus has “You heard this said to the ancients.” It borrowed “the ancients” bit from Jesus’s previous instruction, Mt 5.21 to make it line up better.

First of all I need to remind you of the historical context of adultery. Our culture assumes it means extramarital sexual activity, and conservative Christian culture includes all nonmarital sexual activity. But that’s not what adultery meant in the 14th century BC, when the Ten Commandments were declared. Nor the first century when Jesus taught. It has to do with patriarchy. Women were subjects. Either of the head of their tribe or family; or if they were slaves they answered to a master. So if a man wasn’t her patriarch, husband, or owner, he had no right to have sex with her, and if he did it was adultery.

Or, more accurately, rape.

Yes rape. People keep presuming “adultery” in the bible was consensual. And in some cases it might have been. But that just makes it statutory rape, like when someone in our culture has sex with a minor: The woman’s “consent” wasn’t lawful.

God, and our current laws, did away with patriarchy and slavery. Yeah, various sexists try to re-implement it, or some form of it, and claim their variant is somehow biblical. Nevertheless (in the United States anyway) we live in a free society. Married women voluntarily belong to their spouses. Underage girls belong to their parents till they reach an age where (supposedly) they’ll be responsible. Every other woman is free: She belongs to no one but herself. And if she doesn’t agree to be yours, once again, sex with her is rape.

Yep. That’s what Jesus’s teaching now means in today’s culture.

If you thought doing away with patriarchy made things lighter, or gave us a bunch of loopholes, it really didn’t. Everybody who looks at a woman to deliberately covet her, who has no business nor permission to imagine such things of her, has raped her in their heart. People object to radical feminists (or even ordinary feminists) using such terms to describe the way men leer at them, or referring to their objectification as “rape culture.” Turns out they’re absolutely right.

And I remind you: Jesus’s instruction was primarily addressed to the young men he taught, but it applies just the same to women. Covet a man who’s not yours, and it’s either mental adultery or mental rape. So don’t go there.

Again: Temptation isn’t sin.

As I pointed out in the previous lesson, temptation isn’t sin. If you see an attractive person, and you covet them, stop. There’s a whole other command against coveting what’s not yours, Ex 20.17, Dt 5.21 and that person isn’t yours. Resist temptation.

Problem is, it’s not the way popular Christian culture interprets Jesus. To them, temptation is as good as sin—because they honestly don’t expect us to practice any self-control. Hey, they don’t control themselves; why should they expect anyone else to?

Popular Christian culture defines adultery as any nonmarital sexual activity. Most of the reason Christians interpret the word this way is ’cause they’re trying to discourage nonmarital sex. And rightly so: The authors of scripture considered all sexual activity, appropriate or not, to be marital. 1Co 6.16, Ge 2.24 In the bible there’s no such thing as casual sex. That’s why Christians wanna confine it within the boundaries of matrimony. Technically it is matrimony, whether you said marital vows, filed the paperwork with the state, privately worked out some arrangement, or not.

Combine this wrong thinking about temptation, with this inaccurate thinking about adultery, and you wind up with a really difficult scenario for a lot of Christians. And this is some of the reason many Christians think the Sermon on the Mount is an impossible standard, meant to make us despair of ever following Jesus, and give up and depend on grace. I’m not saying we shouldn’t depend on grace; we absolutely should. But embracing disobedience in favor of grace? Ro 6.1 That’s cheap grace. That’s not just a work of the flesh; it’s a lifestyle of the flesh.

Back when I was a teenager, our youth pastors taught us we teenage boys shouldn’t even look at teenage girls, lest we lust for ’em. Now, if you’ve ever been a teenage boy, you know full well you don’t even have to look at a girl to lust for ’em. Puberty means teenage boys’ bodies are flooded with all these new hormones, and they haven’t yet learned self-control, so they’re a big ball of overemotional, horny lust. It’s gross, but that’s puberty for you. Adult men often forget how awful this time was—how gross they were at that age—and aren’t as patient and gracious with the boys as they oughta be. (And since some adult men never did learn any self-control, women often assume men are always this gross.)

So, in hearing this interpretation, a lot of us boys struggled. Really struggled. Many of us gave up on Jesus in despair. Or sometimes no despair at all: “Well, since I’ve already committed adultery in my heart, may as well commit it for real.” So much for preventative measures.

It’s because we were trying to do the impossible—to not just resist temptation, but avoid it in the first place. Which can’t be done. Even Jesus was tempted! He 4.15 Even Jesus was a teenage boy once. And either we imagine Jesus as some weird, freakish, temptation-proof being with all the passions of a block of wood, or we recognize he’s been there, done that, and defeated temptation. As can we. Turn to the Holy Spirit. Lean on him as he develops gentleness and self-control in our lives. Remember grace is there for when we slip up, as we will. 1Jn 2.1 Doesn’t mean to quit. Keep resisting.

Because sin is just that bad.

The next bit, about gouging out eyes and cutting off hands and feet, is regularly used as an example of Jesus’s hyperbole: He exaggerated in order to make a point. He actually used this imagery twice in Matthew. (And once in Mark, when talking about salt.)

Mark 9.43-49 KWL
43 “When your hand trips you up, amputate it. It’s better for you to enter life crippled
than have two hands and go into ge-Henna, into the endless fire.
45 When your foot trips you up, amputate it. It’s better for you to enter life limping
than have two feet and be thrown into ge-Henna.
47 When your eye trips you up, toss it. It’s better for you to enter God’s kingdom one-eyed
than have two eyes and be thrown into ge-Henna.
48 Where their worm doesn’t stop and the fire doesn’t end.”
Matthew 5.29-30 KWL
29 “If your right eye trips you up, gouge it out and throw it from you.
It’s to your advantage: One of your limbs can be destroyed,
so your whole body might not be thrown into ge-Henna.
30 If your right hand trips you up, cut it off and throw it from you.
It’s to your advantage: One of your limbs can be destroyed,
so your whole body might not go off into ge-Henna.”
Matthew 18.8-9 KWL
8 “If your hand or foot trips you up, cut it off and throw it from you.
Which is better for you? To enter life crippled or limping?
Or having two hands or two feet—to be thrown into the fire of the age to come?
9 If your eye trips you up, gouge it out and throw it from you.
Which is better for you? To enter life one-eyed?
Or having two eyes—to be thrown into the fire of ge-Henna?”

Ge-Henna is one of the words which get translated “hell” in a lot of bibles, following the KJV’s practice. Literally it was the landfill outside Jerusalem. Its trash fires burned day and night—like hell, which is why the Judeans tended to use ge-Henna as a euphemism for hell. So when Jesus talks about ge-Henna, he might only mean negative consequences, like getting dumped on society or history’s trash heap. But most Christians are pretty sure he means hell.

Jesus spoke about your hand, foot, or eye causing you to σκανδαλίζει/skandalídzei, “trip up.” In context he’s talking about temptation, and that’s how people tend to interpret it. Temptation trips us up. That was the original sense of the KJV’s “offend thee,” since offend comes from the Latin offendō, “trip up.” Other bibles correctly went with “stumble.” (NASB, NIV)

Trouble is, offend currently means “feel upset”—same as our English word scandalize, which is based on skandalídzei. So people assume this word has to do with emotion or outrage. If your limb outrages you, lop it off. Of course, if you’ve given in to temptation, and are neck-deep in sin, you’re long past the point of outrage. Still, some bibles made the same mistake popular Christian culture does, and confuse temptation with sin. Hence “sin” (ESV, NKJV) or even “lose your faith.” (GNB) Supposedly these body parts might so offend you, you’ll quit trusting God. Yikes.

The point of this statement is how sin is so destructive, so bad, we ought to be willing to lose a limb in the struggle against temptation. Better to live in God’s kingdom maimed or half-blind, than wind up outside the kingdom altogether.

Problem is, few of us are willing to take sin and temptation so seriously. We might mention sin is bad and destructive and to be avoided… but never say it takes serious effort on our part. Never say it takes dedication, commitment, persistence, and self-control. Those who do, get called legalists. Even though it’s not legalism. Legalism is about expecting your works to save you; we’re only talking about obedience. But Christians don’t wanna obey. So they redefine obedience as legalism, and disobedience as grace. That’s their loophole.

And Jesus’s teaching here, that temptation is so bad we oughta be willing to saw off our own hands in self-defense? Yes it’s still hyperbole. But few Christians bother to seriously consider what Jesus meant when he taught it. “Oh, it’s a grab at our attention,” we say… and shrug, and give it none of our attention. It’s just Jesus being wacky.

We don’t just miss his point; we fully ignore it.

Sin is bad. Don’t do it! Stay the [profanely strong word] away!

Jesus, divorce, and adultery.

Jesus discusses divorce in greater detail elsewhere in Matthew and Mark, but for now we just have this brief statement, which ties together with the whole adultery theme.

Matthew 5.31-32 KWL
31 “And this said: ‘Whoever may divorce his woman: Give her a divorce scroll.’ Dt 24.1
32 And I tell you this: Everyone who divorces his woman outside of a sexual reason, makes her adulter.
And when anyone marries the divorcée, he adulters.
Luke 16.18 KWL
“Everyone who divorces his woman and marries another, adulters.
One who’s married to a man’s divorcée, adulters.”

In the Luke passage, Jesus was asked about the Jews’ common practice of no-fault divorce. Yep, they practiced it back then too. Learned it from the Romans; justified it by the fact there’s a command in the Law allowing for divorce. Dt 24.1 If the Hebrews wanted a divorce, they weren’t to just stop living together like pagans, and go shack up with other people. Marriage was serious, dangit, so there needed to be something put into writing. Nowadays Jews call this a גט/get, which is an Aramaic word meaning that divorce scroll in Deuteronomy 24.1. Religious Jewish women have to have it to make their divorce final.

In contrast, Jesus stated divorce is valid for only one reason—a λόγου πορνείας/lóyu porneías, literally a “porn word.” Properly, any matter having to do with inappropriate sexual activity. In other words, somebody already cheated. And if they didn’t, Jesus is stating divorce was essentially gonna make them cheat, ’cause it’s not a legitimate divorce: Anybody either partner gets together with in the future, counts as an adulterous relationship.

In our egalitarian culture, this works both ways. If the man cheats, it’s grounds for divorce. Might be with another person; might be pornography. After all we did just discuss adultery in one’s heart, and isn’t that idea the entire basis of pornography? Porn’s cheating. Don’t kid yourself.

And porn’s a common temptation for married men. Especially since on the internet, it’s everywhere. Do a simple Google search and you’ll find it on accident. (Or at least that’s the excuse your teenage boy will use.) Not every man is willing to pluck out his own eye, or cut off his own hand, lest he lead himself astray with it. As for cutting off one’s own foot… well, some of us know “foot” is a euphemism for “genitals” in the Old Testament. Jg 3.24, 1Sa 24.3, Ek 16.25 KJV They’re definitely not doing that.

But this is how dangerous temptation is. So this is the level of commitment God wants for those who follow him: We have to love him more than our own lives and comfort. We have to be willing to go to extremes to resist our temptations, and do anything but sin. Not resort to legalism, and force others to cater to our hangups; Ro 14.3 but take control of ourselves, fight fear, and reject heresy with God’s armor. Ep 6.10-18 We have to make a stand, with grace as our safety net. Not give up and treat grace like our bounce house.

Lust is a tough one. Probably the toughest one for most of us. But unless we get hold of it, we’re unfit for marital relationships. So it’s gotta be conquered.