Matt 5:28 adultery

[chevalier]

Hi, guys. I’ve been thinking for a while about Matt 5:28 (“whoever looks at a woman to lust after her commits adultery with her in his heart”) and wondering how for does the equality of the lustful look and physically carried out adultery (fornication) go?

Is it a way of saying that lust, which is under the 10th commandment, is a form of adultery, which is against the 6th, from which grave matter would follow? Or does it go as far as equalising a lustful look (premeditated lusting or not) with a fully externally completed act of adultery?

I’m inclined to think that someone actually committing adultery would normally have gone through a phase of contemplating, imagining and planning, then carry it out physically, so it would seem that there must be some difference… at least if it’s not simply that external obstacles prevented a contemplated adultery from completion. But 5:28 doesn’t talk about contemplated adultery, it talks about a lustful look.

So, suppose we have to solve a moral theology case study or something of the sort. Where does such a look fall in the hierarchy of gravity of adultery, or what kind of mindset does the looker need to form in order to commit the sin that’s equal to adultery? Especially is everybody who is oggling committing adultery or does it take something more pronounced?

 

[DaveBj]

You’re going to get a lot of difference of opinion on this. Most of my Christian life (including the pre-Catholic life) I’ve heard that if I look at a woman and think, “If I had half a chance, I would,” that’s looking with lust. On the other hand if I look and think, “Yeah, she’s good-looking, but no way!”, then that’s not looking with lust.

I’ll be interested to read further responses.

 

[chevalier]

You’re going to get a lot of difference of opinion on this. Most of my Christian life (including the pre-Catholic life) I’ve heard that if I look at a woman and think, “If I had half a chance, I would,” that’s looking with lust. On the other hand if I look and think, “Yeah, she’s good-looking, but no way!”, then that’s not looking with lust.

I’ll be interested to read further responses.

Yes, there’s a controversy as to where the difference starts between lust and simple sexual reactions too.

There were also controversies about translation: “whoever looks lustfully” or “whoever looks [in order] to lust”.

 

[classica87]

Well, speaking from a purely personal perspective, I think it has less to do with looking and more to do with how or why you look at a person, if that makes any sense.

A desire for members of the opposite sex is natural. Sometimes we look at another person and those feelings of attraction just come up, even if we’re not being purposefully lustful. So, we’re attracted to this person. What do we do? That, I think, is where we cross into sin territory.

Original Sin brands us with temptation, with the inclinations to sin. It happens to everyone, no matter how pious the person, or how holy. So, you see a pretty lady and think, “Wow, she’s pretty,” or whatever else your brain conjures up at the moment. Red flag. Caution sign. Opportunity for lust ahead. Free will gives you a choice. Do you act on this lustful impulse, or do you fight it off and refuse to allow impure thoughts?

Everyone is inclined to sin; it’s whether or not we choose to act on these inclinations that matters. Lusting over a woman is equated with adultery because the sins of the mind are no less a sin than those done in the flesh. “Well, I didn’t sleep with her,” you say, and that’s true. You didn’t physically do anything, but God knows the heart. He knows your thoughts as well as your actions, and whether done physically or mentally, you have still acted on a sinful impulse. You have still committed adultery; the mode of the sin doesn’t matter. A sin is a sin regardless of how it’s carried out.

 

[CopticChristian]

Hi, guys. I’ve been thinking for a while about Matt 5:28 (“whoever looks at a woman to lust after her commits adultery with her in his heart”) and wondering how for does the equality of the lustful look and physically carried out adultery (fornication) go?

Is it a way of saying that lust, which is under the 10th commandment, is a form of adultery, which is against the 6th, from which grave matter would follow? Or does it go as far as equalising a lustful look (premeditated lusting or not) with a fully externally completed act of adultery?

I’m inclined to think that someone actually committing adultery would normally have gone through a phase of contemplating, imagining and planning, then carry it out physically, so it would seem that there must be some difference… at least if it’s not simply that external obstacles prevented a contemplated adultery from completion. But 5:28 doesn’t talk about contemplated adultery, it talks about a lustful look.

So, suppose we have to solve a moral theology case study or something of the sort. Where does such a look fall in the hierarchy of gravity of adultery, or what kind of mindset does the looker need to form in order to commit the sin that’s equal to adultery? Especially is everybody who is oggling committing adultery or does it take something more pronounced?

Chev,

I suggest you look at the Greek…
interlinearbible.org/matthew/5-28.htm

Look at where the words look and lust are used elswhere and think a bit…then look a the Greek definition of the words…

Look…

991 blépō – properly, to see, be observant (watchful). 991 (blépō) suggests “to see something physical, with spiritual results (perception).” That is, it carries what is seen into the non-physical (immaterial) realm so a person can take the needed action (respond, beware, be alert).

Lust…

1937 epithyméō (from 1909 /epí, “focused on” intensifying 2372 /thymós, “passionate desire”) – properly, to show focused passion as it aptly builds on (Gk epi, “upon”) what a person truly yearns for; to "greatly desire to do or have something – ‘to long for, to desire very much’ " (L & N, 1, 25.12).

So, the translation is more than looking and lusting…don’t ya think…then look at what you wrote…

How many sources of information do you have in your head?

I give up…tell me…2…

Stored Information and Imagination…and guess what both are just as powerful in driving you to believe, think and act…

Lust requires a thought…from stored memory…no from Imagination…and that imagination does not happen in an instant for most…

Imagine a car right now…takes a while does it not…then imagine it red…imagine it parked…imagine it with someone in it waving at you…imagine where the car is…now how long did that take you?

So when you look at a woman and imagine…takes a little time and concentration to conjour up the notion of what if…hummm…whoa…slow down big guy…I wonder…

You are spending time on this thought and as you do you are giving way to unrestrained imagination…

Would you agree that unrestrained imagination is what this is about and that if you are not careful that imagination can cause you to act in an unrestrained way…?

 

[cap76]

But 5:28 doesn’t talk about contemplated adultery, it talks about a lustful look.

It is speaking about all forms of adultery* “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ *

This includes the adultery that begins in the heart and mind. “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Jesus is teaching us how to avoid commiting such adultery and why, “If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.”

Of course Jesus doesn’t mean we should maim our bodies. That would not solve the problem of our adulterous hearts. But we should be radical at avoiding enticement and dealing with our sin.

 

[COPLAND_3]

I think it boils down to our call to holiness, and holiness is not just accomplished by our actions alone, but also mentally. Our commitment to God is compromised when we let our minds stay in the gutter. As far as the physical damage done, the actions of adultry will have obvious physical consequences that would be more harmful than lust alone. But on the otherhand, lusting has mental consequences when it comes to our devotion and commitment to God, because God knows our every thought and compromise we make with our conscience, and lust damages our relationship with Him because it takes away parts of our inner devotion because we fail to give God our whole body, mind, and spirit.

And lust is also that first step to adultry because the more we cross that line in our hearts, the increase in our chances to cross the physical line when in a situation where an opportunity of adultry arises. Basically lust is flurting with danger.

 

[TimothyH]

Jesus does not qualify the look. When you look at someone lustfully, you have already committed the act of adultery. Lust is not a first step toward adultery. It is adultery. That’s what Jesus says.

True love is a giving of self as an offering, as an oblation, for the good of the other. Lust is the other way around. Lust appropriates another human being for the pleasure of self. Love gives while lust only takes.

Blessed Pope John Paul II stated that hate is not the opposite of love, but using another human being is the opposite of loving them.

-Tim-