Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: newheart

What you describe in that sentence is indeed sin. But that is not the same as opposite-sex attraction. Attraction is not the problem, opposite or same. It is what the individual does with that attraction.


Jesus said if a man lusts after a woman in his heart he has already committed adultery.

Why would,nt it also apply to another of the same sex?


28 posted on 11/02/2013 10:21:54 AM PDT by ravenwolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: ravenwolf
Why would,nt it also apply to another of the same sex?

Of course it would apply. The problem is that equating attraction with lust is a category error. The kind of thing that leads to a complete denial of the worth of the human body (ala gnosticism). It is a profoundly Islamic concept that leads to things like treatment of women like a necessary evil.

You are attracted to food but the sin comes in what you do with that attraction. If it turns into an obsession and you fixate on cheeseburgers you have sinned. But simply because a cheeseburger whets your appetite it does not man you have sinned.

God created men and women and and all things beautiful. I can say that both Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are physically attractive human beings without doing anything more than recognizing God's handiwork. But if I were to take that to the next level via lust (toward either of them), I would be sinning.

33 posted on 11/02/2013 12:46:57 PM PDT by newheart (The worst thing the Left ever did was to convince the world it was not a religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson