Banner
Dealing with Nuisance Lust PDF Print E-mail
Culture and Politics - Sex and Culture
Written by Douglas Wilson   
Sunday, 05 September 2010 20:07

Note: this is an imaginary Christian couple, assembled as a composite from various counseling situations.

Dear Tony,

Thanks for the email and the follow-up phone call. I am glad you decided to get help with this, and I am glad that you and Suzanne are talking about it. A central part of this letter will be some advice on how to make those talks more profitable.

Let me summarize the problem as you outlined it, so that we can be sure I've got it right. Your marriage is solid, you think the world of Suzanne, and she of you, your sex life is robust, and you love your family. Your wife does not doubt your Christian commitments at all. At the same time, from time to time you are distracted by various lusts -- not the triple x stuff, nothing hard core or marriage threatening -- but enough to hurt your wife significantly whenever you stumble or you try to talk with her about it. Whenever you talk about it because you are confessing having fallen into some sin, you are in the doghouse and the talks are not productive. Whenever you are trying to anticipate a problem, she doesn't understand what you are talking about at all, and cannot comprehend why you would be bringing it up. Does this sum up the situation reasonably well? If it does, it may help you in knowing you are not the lone weirdo. A lot of Christian husbands are in this situation.

Now what I am going to explain to you does not fall under the heading of "lighten up, it's not that bad." Rather, it is "lighten up or it is going to get really bad." What you are dealing with could be called nuisance lust. At the same time, unaddressed, porn can be a marriage destroyer, and nothing I am going to say here should be taken as minimizing the impact of infidelity in marriage, whether actual infidelity or computer-induced fantasy infidelity. The thing to learn is how to turn away from unedifying stuff in a way that does not churn up nuisance lusts inside, in a way that makes things worse. Christian husbands have to learn how to stop trying to put out these fires with buckets of gasoline.

There is a form of lust that is more a function of your relationship to the "protective" laws you have created than it is a about your relationship to another woman's body. It even works this way with God's law (Rom. 3:20; Rom. 5:20).

But with God's law, you are not allowed to give yourself a pass as way of getting around this problem. The way to deal with the law that God laid down is by turning to Christ -- that is one of the ways the law was designed to work. But the same principle we learn about God's law and our justification also applies to our own laws, and our sanctification. We must learn to use them as a reason to turn to Christ for grace and wisdom, and not to use them as a source of spiritual power in themselves.

I am talking here about the fences around the law that we tend to build for ourselves, thinking that rules can fix these things. Well, they don't. Your laws can't bring the power for godliness in sanctification any more than God's law can bring justification. The divine law is a schoolmaster that makes us aware of our need for grace. Your house laws for your use of the family computer don't have any more sanctifying power than God's law does, right? How could they?

Paul would not have known the wretchedness of his sin if the law had not said, "Do not covet." Remember that the centerpiece of that commandment was the reminder not to covet your neighbor's wife (Ex. 20:17). Your lusts are the hornet's nest, and God's law is the stick that whacks it. This is done so that we will turn to Christ, but for some reason we think that after we have turned to Christ, we can grow in sanctification by whittling some extra sticks of our own for whacking the remainders of that hornet's nest. But whacking that nest always gets the same results, whether the rules are God's or yours. And it gets the same results even if your rules are good and wise -- especially if they are good and wise.

Now there is obviously a delicate balance here, because the point is not to drop the rules so that you can go watch images that are corrosive to your soul. The point is not to grant yourself a looser set of permissions so that you can entertain yourself with porn lite. This is not "go ahead and sin" counsel. The point is to grant yourself a looser set of permissions so that you can walk away from it, for the right reasons, and without leaving your heart back in front of the computer keyboard, wishing the better half of you hadn't turned the dern thing off.

So there are two steps in what you need to do about this. The first is that you have to get your mind around what I am explaining. You can't just check the right box. You have to get it. After you get it, you need to show this letter to Suzanne, and work through it with her. Her first reaction will probably be something like, "Do you agree with this?" Or perhaps she will phrase it differently. "You don't agree with this, do you?" If you have internalized it rightly, the answer will be yes, but you should then be able to talk about it in a way that won't be offensive to her, or a stumbling block for her. Hope this makes sense.

So let me explain. Suppose you are sitting at your computer, and some blonde bikini-clad welterweight pops up on the screen. Imagine three possible responses from you, with your wife observing those response without your knowledge. The first response is if you give way to sin simpliciter. You lust after that babe, and worse, for a hour or so. Your wife would be upset with you, and rightly so. You would be in the doghouse, right where you belong. Sin is sin. Jesus said not to do that (Matt. 5:28), and you did it anyway. Solomon said that you should be satisfied with your wife's breasts (Prov. 5:19), and you weren't being.

The second response would please your wife very much. You react like someone dumped a pan of scalding water in your lap. You yell, jump up, and turn off the computer, praying imprecatory psalms down upon the hairy heads of the manufacturers of red bikinis. Your wife admires your fortitude and godliness, and she is astonished at the holy alacrity with which you leapt toward the ceiling.

The third response is that you look at it for a few seconds, say "huh, I wonder where her mother got to," and then you head on over to Drudge to find out what Nancy Pelosi is up to.

Now in the first instance, your wife won't want to hear any explanations, which is good, because there aren't any good ones. In the second, she thinks explanations are not necessary, which is false. You have drawn the line in such a way as to look like joe godly to her, but the images you saw are eating at your innards even while we speak. This is because you are trying to get sanctified through an external application of the rules or the standards. In the third setting, you treated it with the seriousness it deserved, which is to say, not very much, but your wife might still be miffed -- because you didn't bolt away in a nanosecond. Was he really casual about it, she wonders, or was he "dallying"? But the dallying more often occurs with the second scenario, not the third. She is getting her security from the rule, and you are trying to get security from the same place. But you should know, in your heart, the true nature of the insecurity that is being generated. You sometimes feel like you have an impossible situation in your heart -- whether or not you look at anything -- and every time you try to explain it to her you have a tangled and unhappy conversation.

Here is another scenario. Suppose a man and his wife are out walking at the mall, and some chick is walking toward them, bouncing away like there's no tomorrow. If the couple walk past her, and he says, "that's just terrible. I can't believe some people," and his wife agrees, and they walk to the other end of the mall, clucking their tongues, I would be willing to bet ten dollars that the spectacle was far more of a problem to him than he is letting on. But if he could say to his wife, "Is this a great country, or what?" the chances are much better that he is handling it right. The problem is this: if he says that to his wife, then she might have trouble handling it right. What does he mean by saying, "is this a great country or what?" It is that kind of thing, she fulminates, that is causing the country to descend into a sinkhole of corruptions. Yeah, she's right about that. But we want to be the kind of men who can learn to see this sin rightly, including these delights of sexual lust being advertised by herpes on heels.

Now if the wife comes to her husband afterwards and says, "Was that girl at the mall a problem to you?" his answer should be, "That's the kind of thing that would be a problem if we couldn't talk and joke about it." If she takes offense immediately, then that is going to cause him to clam up, not wanting unnecessary conflict with a wife who is dear to him. And when he clams up, he is left alone with things in his head he ought not to be left alone with. When that happens, petty sins grow into more significant sins.

Most Christian women think that lust happens to guys when they are in the presence of any image of a scantily clad whoosit, and they think that this lust happens the way a bowling ball falls when you drop it. But this is not true. Far more is involved than simple stimulus and response. There is stimulus, response, law, grace, marriage, communion, context, and wisdom. If you shut it up inside your head, then it will be largely confined to stimulus and response, which is why you have such a struggle with it.

Now what Jesus prohibited was the lust. He didn't require that you drive that stretch of the freeway, that place where the skanky billboard is, with your eyes closed. He prohibited the wanting and desiring; He did not prohibit the seeing.

But yes, someone will say. The seeing leads inexorably to lusting, just like when you drop that bowling ball. Sure, it often does. But my point here is that lurching away with the wrong understanding of your house rules leads to lust more often. The fact that your wife really likes those rules does not give those rules the power to protect her, even though she thinks they do. Let us say another pop-up twinkie appears on your computer, this time with a green bikini, and even less of it than the girl with the red one had. If you yell, and cry out, "Akkk! my eyes, my eyes!" then you are in far greater danger than if you say, "Well, huh. We are a mammalian species it seems. Go put some clothes on now, dearie. There's a good girl."

You see the strategy. Minimize the seriousness of this, but not so that you can feel good about indulging yourself. Minimize the seriousness of it so that you can walk away from a couple of big boobs without feeling like you have just fought a cosmic battle with principalities and powers in the heavenly places, for crying out loud. Or, if you like, in another strategy of seeing things rightly, you could nickname these breasts of other woman as the "principalities and powers." Whatever you do, take this part of life in stride like a grown-up. Stop reacting like a horny and conflicted twelve-year-old boy.

The problem you are fighting has far more to do with how you and your wife are thinking about this than it has to do with "that lingeried hazard over there." This is a trick, I am telling you. The snare is inside you. The more you lay extra layers of rules on top of those flickering images, the more they shine through. The more you can see them, the more you want to see. It is not like the rules work the same way layers of wool blankets might. The point is for you to be free of this stuff, and not to try to obey an arbitrary restriction. I am saying that the arbitrary restrictions are often counterproductive. They don't work. You doubt what I say? Look at your own experience. This is like the old joke where guy flexes his arm back and forth, and says, "Doctor, it hurts when I do this." The doctor said, "Well, don't do that." Whatever it is you are doing right now doesn't work, right? So try something that will. Quit hitting the tar baby.

Walk away because you want to, and you know that you really want to because you could stay if you wanted. You could not stay "if you wanted to" in order to give way to lust because God's Word speaks directly to that. But you could see it if you wanted, free of lust, and since it is lawful (but not necessary), you might as well leave. Leaving is the point, but you want it to be the right kind of leaving, because otherwise you are not really leaving.

John Owen once said that a man should not think he makes any progress in godliness who walks not daily over the bellies of his lusts. I am not arguing against this; I am arguing for it. What I am trying to communicate to you is that a vampire needs to have a stake driven through the heart. Stop pelting him with your homemade nerf balls.

I assume that you or Suzanne may have questions, and I am happy to try to answer them if I can.

Cordially in Christ,

Douglas



Add this page to your favorite Social Networking websites
Digg! Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! MySpace! Yahoo! BlogRolling! Twitter! LinkedIn! TwitThis
Last Updated on Monday, 06 September 2010 06:44
 
Comments
Search
Only registered users can write comments!
Robert Seward  Sunday, September 05, 2010 9:23 pm
Is there another letter coming for the women on how to help their husbands?
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Monday, September 06, 2010 1:13 am
Oh my goodness. This is the best article I have ever seen on how to deal with this issue of lust/porn. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Robert, a wife can pray for her husband and love him, but we are all responsible for our own sin. If we put the burden on a wife to help her husband with lust/porn, then she is burdened with something that is unbearable for a woman -- and could put an enormous amount of false guilt on her -- and zap the joy out of sex. She is already dealing with the hurt and pain of her husband's lust issues, trying not to be bitter or angry, etc. She is already trying to have sex with a man who likes looking at other women. I have seen more broken wives than I could count in my counseling ministry. Husbands . . . . love your wives. Don't make them partly responsible for your sin. God does not hold them responsible for anyone's sin except their own. If there is sin there, God will reveal it. Love her. She was designed to be loved. You would be surprised by the results and response. With Much Love for the Family of Christ, Megan
Robert Seward  Monday, September 06, 2010 2:58 pm
I am not asking her about dealing with his sin. Temptation is no sin. Men are tempted to notice attractive women whether they are trying to draw attention or not. That is biological. Noticing an attractive woman is not the same as wishing you could be with her. Was it a sin for David's cohort to notice that Abigail was a beautiful woman? If a woman honestly thinks that if her husband notices an attractive woman is the same as her husband wishing he could get her number, then she will always worry, because even a blind man notices. How he deals with it determines whether there is sin or not.
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 12:25 am
So, Robert. Are you saying a wife "should" help her husband with his temptation? It makes me sad, if that is true. I know that God made men and women to glorify Him and to show his many, complicated attributes in different ways. It is just a beginning of understanding Him. If my role as a wife were to come down to "keep him from temptation", I would have no self worth. If I really believed that God created me to keep my husband out of temptation, I probably wouldn't want to live -- much less, be married. Or have a relationship with Him. I thank God that my husband loves me deeply. That He respects me. And, because of his love, we have a beautiful marriage now. But, my husband initiated that -- like Christ did with the Church. And my response is as beautiful as my husband's sacrificial love. As a result, we don't have these problems. I am secure in our marriage. He can "laugh off" temptation much as Mr. Wilson described up top. My giving is a result of his loving and my loving him. It is very freeing. I understand that men were created with a lot of drive and a lot of temptation. And I am super grateful that I do not have a requirement put upon me that I am partly responsible for whether or not my husband lusts. And all of this is due to Christ's massive work in our marriage and one year of intense counseling with Mr. Wilson's father, Jim Wilson. I take no credit. Please listen to this: Making a wife responsible for helping her husband in his temptations is not loving your wife. If a man loves his wife, maybe she WOULD help him with his temptations. But, she would do it freely. And that is beautiful.
Robert Seward  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 5:16 am
I'm saying that a wife needs to know in her head and her heart that temptation to lust is not the same thing as lust. I have some relatives who almost destroyed their marriage because the wife didn't understand this. She was condemning him continually for things he wasn't doing. Their marriage barely survived.

Can you tell the difference between lust and the temptation to lust?
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 am
Robert -- My responses have been in response to your very first comment:

"Is there another letter coming for the women on how to help their husbands?"

But, I think I've exhausted that! Until another time! Blessings! Megan
Matthew N. Petersen  Monday, September 06, 2010 8:24 am
I'm a little confused by one point:

You say that the problem is the legalism. But I'm not sure that's correct. I could see deciding to use the "family friendly" isle at the grocery store. (The one with cooking magazines, not Cosmo and Maxim.) "Flee temptation" means avoid it. Cutting off the right hand is not mere legalism.

But you also say the problem is reacting according to the temptation. When we treat something with passion it sticks with us. So that sounds plausible. And it may be that a certian way of talking about this with a wife is over reacting. (Not being married, I have no idea.)

But I have trouble seeing how this is applicable here. He isn't over-reacting, he's reacting poorly. And, though he may think the solution is to over-react, the problem may still remain, even if when he does not fall, he reacts casually. Moreover, the problem may well be that he doesn't have power to react casually. So in that case, "react casually" is just useless legalism, rather than Christian love which makes others righteous.

It seems that if the husband is coming to his pastor to talk about it, it's a pretty big issue, and the best response would be to tell his wife to stop being selfish and listen to him. By refusing to listen to his temptations, and pharisaically condemning rather than giving him life, she gives death, and perpetuates the sin. (And indeed she wouldn't let him refuse to listen to her temptations, so she's violating the golden rule.) (Though of course it should be done delicately.)

Or maybe, if it is really serious, and she is too insecure to listen, so she really can't; having him talk to her about it with you as a moderator.

But neither of the solutions here seem to make sense.
Matthew N. Petersen  Monday, September 06, 2010 8:27 am
Or else, perhaps telling him, "just lighten up. Yes, it's sin, but you wouldn't want her telling you all her sins, especially all her thoughts about how you aren't a good leader."

I suppose it depends on how serious the sin is. If he really is just spending ten minutes a month lusting after the girls on magazine covers in the check-out line, maybe he just needs to lighten up.
Kathleen  Monday, September 06, 2010 9:23 am
"If he really is just spending ten minutes a month lusting after the girls on magazine covers in the check-out line, maybe he just needs to lighten up."

Soooo...Maybe if she's just fantasizing about other men during sex a few times a month, she just needs to lighten up.

What??!?!

I really agree with Doug's point on all of this, but married men need to make sure their wives "love tanks" (for lack of a better name...) are full to overflowing with memories of their husbands lusting after them, before they expect her to be OK with the casually looking, laughing and commenting on the bouncing boobies.

Just a wife's opinion. It is sensitive.
Matthew N. Petersen  Monday, September 06, 2010 10:11 am
thleen,

I think you may have misread me.. I didn't say she should lighten up, but he should. I didn't mean "It shouldn't bother wives if he's lusting sometimes, boys will be boys." But "If it's something really minor, why pester your wife with it. You'll only hurt her. You want her telling you about how much she respects you, not how she thought about your failings for a minute while cooking dinner, but then repented. Treat her likewise."

I also think we may be reading this slightly differently. I read it as a post about a guy who lusts sometimes, and his wife refuses to even try and understand or forgive. I hear: "Your marriage is solid, you think the world of Suzanne, and she of you, your sex life is robust, and you love your family. Your wife does not doubt your Christian commitments at all...but sometimes you struggle with lust, and your wife makes you bottle it up rather than forgiving and embracing your weakness as hers." The title isn't "dealing with a lust problem" but "dealing with nuisance lust".

But I wonder if the girls hear "At the same time, from time to time you are distracted by various lusts -- not the triple x stuff, nothing hard core or marriage threatening -- but enough to hurt your wife significantly whenever you stumble or you try to talk with her about it." He's doing something that hurts me, how can he stop.

Here's the problem as I see it (and it really is a dilemma): I was at a wedding yesterday, and everyone said, as they often do "Jeff, don't reject her for her weaknesses, love her for them. They are yours too."

And that is wonderful advice to live by. But it isn't just advice for a man. She needs to love [i]him[/] for his weaknesses, not reject him. And if a wife refuses to listen to her husband talk about temptations to lust, she is failing to love him for his weaknesses, but is treating him as she would not bear being treated.

Of course, by lusting, he is treating her abysmally, and when he insists that they talk about it he isn't loving her for her weaknesses, but is insisting that she be strong.

The real dilemma is that either way both sides are wrong.

It's also a sensitive issue for me as a man. Must I just believe that my wife will so utterly reject me if I lust that she won't even allow there to be communication? Must I be free from sin to have a marriage with communication?
Robert Seward  Monday, September 06, 2010 3:03 pm
Sice we are talking the subject here, let's extend this discussion a little.

What about Romance Novels, which in my opinion are women's porn. Anyone agree with me? Disagree with me? Why?
Oscar A. Fernandez  Monday, September 06, 2010 9:41 am
“…herpes on hills,” and “principalities and powers”; man-alive…too funny.
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Monday, September 06, 2010 11:08 am
One quick thing for Matthew: I appreciate your thinking through this. You have a lot of understanding, even though you are not yet married! One thing. You wrote this:

"By refusing to listen to his temptations, and Pharisaically condemning rather than giving him life, she gives death, and perpetuates the sin."

As a wife, and a woman, and one who has been through this, I think you are right in assuming that a woman would be insecure if she has trouble listening to her husband's tales of lusting after other women. If he has a lust issue, she probably IS insecure and this constant confessing would only drive the nail in harder. Husbands hurt their wives with lust and porn. No doubt about it. But the sin needs to be confessed to GOD, not to the wife. I am not saying that the husband should keep the wife in the dark. But, really . . . is it the most loving thing to confess all the gory details? No. I don't think so. It might relieve the hubbie's conscience but, ultimately, it can become an enormous stumbling block for a wife. CONFESS TO GOD. Share with your wife in an honoring way, just so you are on the same page.
Matthew N. Petersen  Monday, September 06, 2010 11:58 am
Thanks!

Yes, I agree. That may have been too strong a statement.

I think it matters what sort of temptation he's struggling with too. If can't go to his wife and say "you know, I have a real hard time grocery shopping. I always seem to leave lusting after the Maxim girls." Something's wrong. (Of course, depending on how minor it is it may be better not even to want to talk about it. But maybe now he regularly picks things up from the store on the way home, and is trying to explain why he thinks they should have a different plan.)

On the other hand, a catalog list every day of all his failings in lust would be as disastrous for her as it would be for him if she were to catalog all the times she was frustrated with his leadership.
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 12:31 am
Yes, Matthew -- I think we're on the same page. :)
Robert Seward  Monday, September 06, 2010 3:09 pm
It never hurts to have a pal to talk to. Every man should have at least one male pal who you can talk to about this stuff.
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Monday, September 06, 2010 11:56 am
Oh, Matthew, one more thing. It is really difficult to make lusting after another woman comparable to anything a woman deals with and might share with her husband, unless it is lusting after another man or wanting to be another man's wife. It isn't as though a man is looking at a beautiful vase for a moment and coveting it. We are wives . . . we are women . . . and a husband is lusting . . . after another woman. If there is some sin that deeply affects a husband and is comparable. Well, I just cannot think of anything. It is not as though we are accepting another man's weakness and making it our own. I'm not even sure what that comment means. Because in our weakness, Christ is strong. Anyway, I don't know that any woman could honestly make her husband's sin of lusting after other women her own. Why would we do that? Each person is responsible for his/her own sin. It isn't in marriage that God sort of morphs us together and makes us responsible for each other's sins as well. Porn/lust is not a weakness. It is a sin.
Robert Seward  Monday, September 06, 2010 3:15 pm
Lust is a sin. Temptation to lust is not a sin. Can you differentiate them, in your heart and your mind? If you can not do that, you need to pray for the wisdom to see the difference or you will believe that your husband is being unfaithful in his thoughts when he is not being unfathful
Matthew N. Petersen  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 9:50 am
Yes. It it's a very sensitive issue. The one point (which Kathleen brought up below) is that though lust is a sin, temptation to lust is a weakness. And though a husband should be super sensitive--he's tempted to leave her, and telling her that isn't terribly easy for her (though to him it probably seems like a sign of loyalty)--if a man cannot talk to his wife about his temptations in such matters, the man is going to be really really hurt, and pushed toward the sin.
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Wednesday, September 29, 2010 10:13 pm
See, again, I'm concerned here, Matthew, because the burden is back on the wife. (Yes, everyone . . . my wife knows the difference between lust and temptation to lust.) But, to say, "Wife, if you don't listen to me . . . I will be hurt and actually be 'pushed' toward sin . . ." I just don't see the self-sacrificing love here. Again, sort of forcing the wife to be partly responsible for sin. She must listen . . . or he might sin. It IS a sensitive issue so, men will have to really lead here. Know that women are the weaker vessel -- don't blame your wife. It is still blaming, still excusing and still making someone responsible for your own sin. Isn't that what Adam did? If I thought my wife was responsible for my sin, I would continue to blame and have no victory over my sin. James 1 says "For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone. But, each of you is tempted when you are dragged away by your own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin. And sin, when it is full grown, gives birth to death" James 1:13-15 So, here, I take responsibility. If it is my evil heart that leads me into sin, then it is my evil heart that is responsible for it. No one else. Konstantin Lieder
oldfatslow  - re:  Monday, September 06, 2010 12:33 pm
Megan Lieder wrote:
But, really . . . is it the most loving thing to confess all the gory details? No. I don't think so. It might relieve the hubbie's conscience


Tolstoy - a Christian of sorts -
would make his wife read his
diaries and their recounting
of his infidelities. I think
this may be a common phenomenon
of philanderers, but I don't
remember where I read it.

ofs
Kathleen  Monday, September 06, 2010 3:14 pm
Matthew,
I think we are on the same page with this.

Please don't read into my comment that the wife shouldn't love and forgive. She should even attempt, as Doug says, to help him laugh it off.

But there's an important distinction that we are trying to teach the three young fellas in our brood--you can't help (and should laugh off, even) the bouncing boobies in front of you at the mall. Where you've crossed the Matt. 5 line, though, is when you turn around to see if the rear view bounces, too. You can't help the first slam of the checkout mags, but you can start scrolling through your emails on your phone while you wait, to keep from soaking in the skin.

But I know it is sensitive, and a struggle, and sometimes my honey comes home saying it has just been a struggling kind of day. I don't get a catalog, but I just know it has been hard. And I do what I can to make that better on the home front. :0)

Blessings on the journey,
Kathleen
Robert Seward  Monday, September 06, 2010 8:34 pm
Good for you. Keep up the good work. :D
Konstantin & Megan Lieder  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 2:11 am
Robert -- Careful. You might be setting up wives to be blamed for husband's sin problems if a wife doesn't do what she "should". Way too reminiscent of Adam in the Garden. Joseph fled. No wife to "help" him there. Joseph is a good model of how to flee temptation. Without outside help. Just plain old fashioned Holy Spirit-given self-control. By the way, this is Megan's husband, Konstantin. Blessings
Robert Seward  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 12:26 pm
I am not certain which post you are responding to.
Matthew N. Petersen  Tuesday, September 07, 2010 9:51 am
Thank you. You too. =)
Eric Stampher  - Thanks  Monday, September 06, 2010 4:37 pm
Pastor, this type of counseling and writing is a gift. a la Screwtape in reverse. You should write a book -- again.

(And you're right, Pelosi makes a dandy fire extinguisher.)
Rob Hays  Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:34 pm
Pastor Wilson,

After having a couple of days to ruminate on this post, I wonder if this same principle might apply to another area of sexual sanctification.

For our unmarried brothers and sisters, the lines of what is acceptable within pre-marriage romantic relationships is often cast in the same light as lust within marriage. That is, many would say that the best way to prevent sin (fornication) is to completely abstain from physical contact with that sweet young thing you intend to marry. Sit chastely on the couch and wait for the wedding bells.

Do we not run the risk of (A) legalism and (B) stumbling into greater fornication through unnecessary strictures on these relationships? Certainly honoring the young lady and her father are Scriptural commands, so I'm not assuming an "anything goes" approach. But I wonder if we make a bigger deal of what is ultimately harmless if not made into a sin because of its resemblance (in form) to fornication.

I'm not firmly convinced that I'm in the right here, just curious what you think.