If you look up Exodus 20:14 and 20:17a you will discover that they are two distinct verses and two distinct but related commandments.
Breaking 20:17a and only 20:17a does a number of things which are bad, but will not, for example, get some one pregnant. It also does not reach the level that Paul is dealing with in I Corinthinans 6:16 et al.
There is a reason that Our Lord included the final clause in the two verses he cited—”IN HIS HEART.” By doing this he closely allies the sixth and the ninth commandment (Our numbering) but he does not say that they are the same—indeed by introducing the two verses with different phrases he makes it quite clear that they are distinct in Moses, but that they both need to be taken seriously.
Before passing judgment on Catholics (or Methodists or any denomination that does not have access to a mind reading device that allows for exercising diligent expulsion of people who have improper sexual thoughts as advocated in post 37), I would note that a thought that a thought observing the sexual nature of another is not automatically lust—if it is not about a spouse, it may be a temptation to lust, but whether or not the person gives in to lust depends on what is done with the initial thought, not upon having such thoughts.
Actual Catholic teaching is really big on custody of eyes and thoughts. It isn’t always lived out, but it isn’t always not lived out. I’d bet that Baptists etc. also have similar teachings and at least some success.
It's still adultery no matter how you cut it. It is still a sin. Are there different consequences? Yes.
But from God's perspective it is sin.
Yet in Matthew the commandment being addressed is one of adultery.
27“You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY’; 28but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matthew 5:27-28 NASB
Jesus is telling the Pharisees that the mere thought of lust after a woman, be she married or not, is equal to adultery.
From a sin perspective and trying to keep the commandment, Jesus is saying the mere thought of wanting to have sex with a woman is equal to having committed adultery. The individual is just as guilty for lusting after a woman as if he'd actually had sex with her. In other words, it breaks the commandment.
I agree no one gets pregnant with a passing fancy for someone....yet the person has committed a sin in the eyes of God.
It doesn't matter if they followed up on their lust with the actual physical act or not.....Jesus said they'd committed adultery, thus breaking the commandment.
This is why I say the vast majority of Roman Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, Mormons, Muslims, etc, break this commandment and may not even realize they've done so.
Are there consequences of the physical act Paul is writing about? Sure are. Possible pregnancy, STD, family impact, etc.
But Paul is also noting the spiritual impact of this as well.
Roman Catholicism, like the Pharisees, seems to want to focus on just the physical aspect of this......yet Jesus said the mere thought of lusting after someone is adultery.
I see the problem Catholics have with understanding the seriousness of sin a result of their categorizing it as *mortal* or *venial*.
They approach sin from the more severe, less severe mindset they’ve grown up with.
God’s word is clear that sin is sin and that the thought is the same as the action.
Now, you can not like it all you want and argue against it all you want, but sin is sin in GOD’s eyes.
And honestly, so what if no one gets pregnant? It’s not like it’s a worse sin because pregnancy resulted. True it has far greater consequences to those involved here on earth, but it does not change the seriousness of the sin nor the violation of the commandment in God’s eyes.
James 2:8-11 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.
So it doesn't matter which sin you commit, law breaking is law breaking and carries the same penalty.
And here James lumps in partiality, which isn't even listed in the Ten Commandments, with murder and adultery.
It's still sin and anyone who commits it is still a law breaker.
The point isn't what laws are broken, how they are broken, or how much they are broken. It's THAT it was broken.