Ministries for women porn addicts

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Lol.....TS there's no such thing as worser.

I've seen worster.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Lol.....TS there's no such thing as worser.

I know, but I ain't no english major.

[DaveC519]

Originally Posted by Aquila

True. Lust desires to merely use someone for the purpose of gratifying your own needs without regards to their wellbeing or identity as a person. Of course, not all fantasy is lusting.

I disagree. A person could lust over another with the intention of having a meaningful monogamous relationship with them. And the second person could reciprocally lust after the first, with the same intentions.

A fantasy is merely a fantasy. Should it be elaborated upon? I’d advise against it. But I see “lust” as something far more serious than an adolescent fantasy or daydream.

No, “lust” is not healthy. But we’re defining lust differently.

I think you're right. Each of us is defining "fantasy" and "lust" in different ways. Here's how I would define each:

Fantasy:
–noun
1. imagination, esp. when extravagant and unrestrained.
2. the forming of mental images, esp. wondrous or strange fancies; imaginative conceptualizing.
3. a mental image, esp. when unreal or fantastic; vision: a nightmare fantasy.
4. Psychology. an imagined or conjured up sequence fulfilling a psychological need; daydream.
5. a hallucination.
6. a supposition based on no solid foundation; visionary idea; illusion: dreams of Utopias and similar fantasies.
(Dictionary.com, entries 1-6)

Most of these definitions have bearing on our discussion, but I'd like to focus on #2: "imaginative conceptualizing". You made reference above to "adolescent fantasy". My question is: what would this adolescent- let's say a young male- be conceptualizing in an imaginative way? Would he be wondering what it would be like to be married in the sense of having a true constant companion, or is he conceptualizing sexual activity? The former I would call healthy conceptualization, the latter- lust. Even if he never intended to act upon his sexual conceptualizations, I believe the Bible labels this lust. The point of the definition is that the act of conceptualizing is more than momentarily possessing a fleeting thought. It is purposeful intent to develop a line of thinking.

Conceptualize:
–verb (used with object)
1. to form into a concept; make a concept of.

–verb (used without object)
2. to form a concept; think in concepts.

A concept being a well-formed and developed thought.

Now, let's define "lust":

Lust
–noun
1. intense sexual desire or appetite.
2. uncontrolled or illicit sexual desire or appetite; lecherousness.
3. a passionate or overmastering desire or craving (usually fol. by for): a lust for power.
4. ardent enthusiasm; zest; relish: an enviable lust for life.
5. Obsolete.
a. pleasure or delight.
b. desire; inclination; wish.

–verb (used without object)6. to have intense sexual desire.
7. to have a yearning or desire; have a strong or excessive craving (often fol. by for or after).

Now, let's look at lust as it is described in Scripture:

"In the New Testament, the word moves from referring primarily to idolatry [in the OT] to referring instead almost exclusively to sexual immorality. While the idea of idolatry is not completely absent, the primary intention is as a strong, inordinate desire for sexual relations. This sexual immorality, however, is not intended to represent actions alone since lust occurs first as a thought in the mind. The warning is to stop the lust before it moves into the realm of action. For instance, Jesus commands that a man is not to even look at a woman lustfully (i.e., with a desire to have sexual relations with her) because that is the same as committing the physical act of adultery (Matt 5:27-30); both are sin.

In each of the texts where Paul uses the word, it clearly is condemnatory of sexual immorality, both homosexual (Rom 1:26-27) and heterosexual. The command from Paul is to utterly destroy those inordinate desires that most often manifest themselves in the area of sexuality (cf. Col 3:5). Paul continues to warn that we must learn to control our bodies and be sanctified rather than giving in to our base desires, which is characteristic of those who do not know God (cf. 1 Thess 4:3-5).

Paul is not alone in pointing out that the lustful lifestyle is characteristic of lost humanity. Peter concurs, and exhorts his readers to quit living as they did before they received Christ. He points out that lust is evidence of a pagan lifestyle (1 Peter 4:3). Also, according to Peter, lustful desires (not necessarily just sexual desires, but desiring anything more than one desires God) are a basic motivation inherent in human sinful nature (2 Peter 2:18).

It is obvious from John's writings that our lusts do not come from God but from the world. However, we are reminded by John that the world and its desires (lusts) pass away, whereas "the man who does the will of God lives forever" (1 John 2:16-17). Here we see that our lusts are in direct violation of God's perfect will, because they usually are misdirected, moving and leading us away from God to our own selfish desires.

Our lusts have a very powerful influence on our actions if they are not caught and corrected immediately. We must remember that lust occurs in the mind and is not a physical action in and of itself. It does, however, have great potential of becoming an action-indeed a very damaging action. That is why we must heed the admonition of Paul in 2 Cor 10:5: "We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."
(from Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Copyright © 1996 by Baker Books. All rights reserved. Used by permission.)

From these definitions, we see that "fantasy" is more than simply a fleeting thought. To fantasize about something is to dwell on and develop the thought into a concept. To "lust" is to have intense desire, the antonyms of "intense" being "calm, dull, mild", etc.

So, then, how is lust conceived in the mind? It is by taking a thought, dwelling upon it, and conceptualizing it. Is it, then, "healthy" for our young adolescent male to "fantasize" about what it would be like to have sexual relations with another person? Not according to Scripture it isn't.

I don’t think every fantasy is lust. I don’t believe that every daydream about owning a corvette is covetousness. Now, if you look at that corvette and consider how you might steal it… you’ve sinned the sin of covetousness in the heart before the actual theft.

This is apples and oranges, though. Daydreaming about owning a corvette and daydreaming about sexual relations with another person are two separate things.

That’s the crux of the matter. God looks at the intent of the heart. An adolescent fantasy isn’t “lust”.

See above

A single having a fantasy about someone they’re attracted to or would like to marry isn’t “lust” either.

Depends upon the content of the fantasy. If it involves fantasizing about sexual relations, even if the person never plans to carry out the fantasy, then it's still lust, which is sinful behavior.

Another point is that Jesus said that lust is adultery in the heart. Jesus didn’t say that it is actual “adultery”.

See above.

One would hardly stone another person for a fantasy…or perhaps you would.

Ad hominem. My friend, you are undermining your argument each time you employ this.

I don’t disagree. Where we disagree on is the definition of “lust”. You’d say every fantasy outside of fantasizing about one’s spouse is “lust” and is actually adultery. I contend that there are boundaries wherein there is “fantasy” and then there is a point when fantasy can become “lust”.

The boundary, according to Scripture, is when the content of the fantasy is sexual in nature.

Again, we’re disagreeing with the definition of lust and sin. I believe some things are normal and perhaps even healthy. You contend that it’s all sinful. When it comes to what I believe to be “sin” I fully agree with you. But I’ll disagree where I don’t see something as “sin”. Personally, I believe there is wisdom in Dobson’s position. For the vast majority of young people and singles this isn’t a battle won. We can either keep them in a constant position of condemnation or we can teach them that they are human, that God loves them, and that there are boundaries.

It sounds like what you're advocating then is to tell young people that since winning the battle over the desire for self-gratification is a difficult battle that is not easily won, then let's just redefine what we're supposed to be battling against so it won't be a battle at all.

Rather, I advocate that we don't redefine those things which the Bible calls sin, that we don't call evil good and good evil (Is 5:20), and then proceed to give them the scriptural tools they need to win the battle over sin in their life.

When a fantasy progresses into an actual desire to have something in spite of God’s commandment its sin, rather it be interest in a person or a material possession.

According to the definitions above, fantasizing over content which God considers to be sin (e.g.- sexual activity outside the marriage bond) IS the process by which lust is conceived in the mind.

[DaveC519]

Originally Posted by Aquila

CONTINUED...

But you’re definition is such that if anyone is honest, one cannot be pure and holy before God. I contend that human beings can be pure and holy before God. Not because they achieve some puritanical level of perfection…but because sin is properly defined to the point wherein it’s understood and boundaries aren’t crossed.

You've missed my point. My contention is that God calls us to holiness and purity, and then, through the power of the Holy Ghost, enables us to actually be holy and pure. Not by redefining what sin is so that our battle is easier to fight, but by freely giving us the victory over sin in our life.

I attended an ultra conservative church for many years. Our retention regarding our youth was abysmal. We lost nearly 87% or more of our youth after they graduated from the school we had. Most felt condemned, defeated, and unloved by God for merely being human. And so they gave in and decided if they can’t beat what they were taught was sin…they might as well give in and join up with the world. It’s truly a sad state of affairs.

You're right, this was unfortunate. To preach against sin without preaching that God freely gives us victory over it is to only preach half the message. It is because God loves us that he gives us power to be overcomers (1Jn 2:14). We no longer walk in condemnation when we live and walk in the Spirit (Ro 8:1).

Now, imagine a church which preaches true "holiness of the heart" to its adults AND its young people. Imagine that same church retaining its young people because they are truly dedicated to the Lord, and are up at the altar every Sunday. Not because something's continually wrong in their life, but because something is right. They desire to be filled to overflowing with the Spirit of the living God. They're on fire for him, and their youth group is thriving. Imagine that this church actually preaches against sin, but yet offers the hope of a loving God who forgives sin, and cleanses from all unrighteousness (1Jn 1:9). Hmmmm... what would that kind of church be like? Come to my church some Sunday and you'll see for yourself.

I remember talking to a boy who had some struggles in this area. His father caught him and berated him, calling him an “animal”, and even went as far as to tell his son it was a homosexual act because being a male, self gratification was male/male gratification. This kid was “horrified”. He began to drift badly. Condemnation caused him to give up. One day I asked if we could talk and asked him what was wrong. At first he resisted but eventually he broke. Sobbing about how much God hated him and how badly he’d failed he detailed what had happened. I stood there looking at a health young man who was spiritually shattered by spiritual abuse. I told him that I don’t think it was a homosexual act. He looked into my eyes in disbelief. He said, “You don’t?” I explained that I felt it was a normal phase of self discovery and it was a normal aspect of being a human being. I shared with him some things that Dr. James Dobson had written or said on the matter. This young man was so broken he actually asked, “So does that mean that God still loves me?” I said, “Yes, God still loves you more than you’ll ever know.” He explained how he had a fantasy about a woman in an add. I asked if he’d ever truly do anything. He said, “NO! That would be such a sin against God!” I said, “If you’d never do this outside of marriage…you’re not in sin. It’s just a fantasy. Understand it as such and don’t let this kind of thinking become something that leads you to desire to act on the interest.” This time he broke and wept because the weight of condemnation was finally lifted. I went to the altar with him that evening and he felt a mighty touch from a loving Heavenly Father. He soon began participating in youth functions again. He then joined the choir. Every now and then we’d talk. He said that for some reason when he was feeling lost his behavior seemed to have him in the grips. It was three or more times a day with feverish intensity. After lifting the condemnation and giving it to the Lord things calmed in his soul. Now it was less frequent and when it did happen, he was assured in a God who loved him and created him a healthy male. He later began attending Gateway Bible College. I lost track of him after I left that church. But I hope this illustrates what I’m talking about.

Without knowing more of the specifics, I can't comment on the specifics. Were you the boy's pastor? If so, did you sit down with the father of the boy before directly contradicting what the father had told his son? This is not to justify the father's behavior, which was incorrect. It would have been to gently correct the father's thinking and actions so that he could have gone back and repaired and restored that which had been damaged in the boy's spirit. That way, the father's authority and counsel could have been restored in the boy's mind, as well. Or at the least, the father AND the boy could have sat down for counseling together on this. And when I refer to something being damaged in the boy's spirit, I mean having been told that a particular action is sinful without being told that God loved him and wanted to grant him victory over this and to be restored to fellowship and communion with God.

And one more thing: please tell me you were at least a pastor of this church, rather than just one of the saints taking matters into your own hands. It's easy to justify the ends by the means.

I assure you, many are lying to you about their being “free”. I’ve seen it over and over and over. I’m an easy going person. People know that unless you’re a legalistic Pharisee, I don’t judge you. I’ve known people to put up a front because the standard expected of them is so high…but when talking to me they admit the truth. It’s disheartening how we teach people to be hypocrites.

While I’m inclined to believe that you have lived the victory you’ve talked about… I wouldn’t be surprised if you sent me a private message about those battles you’re fighting that no one knows. Like I said, I’ve seen it time and time again.

Your unstated premise here is that people who claim to walk in victory over sin are: a)- lying; and b)- hypocrites. This is troubling on so many levels. First, it does not reflect biblical truth. Scripture makes the assertion that believers can and should be pure, holy, and walk in victory over sin. You seem to be asserting this is not possible. Next, I question whether you, personally, have ever come into contact with the class of believers Scripture refers to above. Perhaps this is not your fault. Perhaps all you've ever been exposed to are believers who either lie (as you put it) about walking in victory, or have redefined what it means to walk in victory so as to circumvent ACTUALLY walking in victory.

We agree in pure Christian living…we just disagree as to where innocent fantasy begins and actual “sin” begins. In my mind, pure and holy Christian living is honest living. You are what you are. All the religiosity and desire to fulfill religious notions and standards are meaningless. You do well being REAL and falling before a loving Savior. You do well knowing that is truly “sin” and what is simply human. I know a pastor who taught that red pantyhose on a woman was a “sin”. Please… I have no time for that mess. Purity isn’t built on some legalistic or puritanical code as interpreted through legalistic eyes. Purity is being real. You’re outward religious self lining up with your hidden self. A man who is honest about his own condition (sinful or not) is far more righteous than the most righteous sounding Pharisee who beats the drum for a righteousness neither he or another other has truly achieved.

Couldn't agree with you more here. So let's not sugar coat it, white-wash it, or redefine what the Bible says is sin. Let's accept it, confess it, and then GET THE VICTORY OVER IT THROUGH THE POWER OF THE HOLY GHOST!

I agree. We simply draw the line in different places. I used to be an ultra con who was so heavenly minded I was no earthly good. Religion looses sight of reality and the human condition. If you’ve ever studied cults and “mind control” techniques, you’ll know that the establishment of false “taboos” is one way to break the will. The “true believer” will strive to master victory over the taboos…but unbeknownst to them, the victory is short lived and intended to keep them on the hamster’s wheel. Constantly striving and never arriving. It keeps people under control. Some of what we think are “sins” or “sinful” in Pentecost truly aren’t. Some things are just a matter of living as a human being on planet earth.

Hmmm...well, my church and I certainly aren't considered to be "ultra con" by any sense of the word. We are, however, on a quest to draw closer to God and away from the world, it's standards and values. We are about "coming out from among them and be ye separate, says the Lord". We are about being in the world but not of the world. We are, most of all, about focusing on our Savior and what is the desire of his heart, rather than focusing on what is the desire of our heart. His desire should be our desire. We serve a holy God who commands his people, his body, his bride to be holy. That's what we're all about. He's preparing a bride who is without spot, wrinkle or blemish. But this cannot take place unless we yield to his leading and let him do his stuff. Thank God we are!

[mizpeh]

Dave,

On a practical level how does one go about "...GET THE VICTORY OVER IT THROUGH THE POWER OF THE HOLY GHOST!"?

[Aquila]

No one has answered this question. Dave, can you tackle it?

In the Song of Songs, didn't the lovers fantasize about each other prior to their marriage? If so... is this book depicting grevious sin? Or are we seeing an example of normal human interest and a celebration of this most private aspect of our nature?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Aquila

No one has answered this question. Dave, can you tackle it?

In the Song of Songs, didn't the lovers fantasize about each other prior to their marriage? If so... is this book depicting grevious sin? Or are we seeing an example of normal human interest and a celebration of this most private aspect of our nature?

Many Christian commentators interpret the Song of Songs as a picture of the church as the bride of Christ.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Timmy

I've seen worster.

I've driven through Worster (Worcester)!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Many Christian commentators interpret the Song of Songs as a picture of the church as the bride of Christ.

That is true, and I can see it. However, would Jesus use something inherently sinful to represent the love that exists between the church and himself?

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Many Christian commentators interpret the Song of Songs as a picture of the church as the bride of Christ.

I think that's an unfortunate primary interpretation of the Song of Songs.

And that analogy people read back into gets especially awkward when referring to Jesus and "how beautiful are thy young rows." The description of erotic love in the Song of Songs goes far beyond if someone was using a story of love/redemption, like say Hosea.