"not in passion of lust" > in 1 Thessalonians 4:5 . . .

[com7fy8]

"For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor; not in passion of lust, as the Gentiles who do not know God." (1 Thessalonians 4:3-5)

So . . . does this mean that married people can relate sexually "in the passion of lust", and therefore in a wrong way?

And how does God desire for married people to share intimately, instead of in lust, in case this is what 1 Thessalonians 4:5 means?

[JimmyB]

16 minutes ago, com7fy8 said:

"For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor; not in passion of lust, as the Gentiles who do not know God." (1 Thessalonians 4:3-5)

So . . . does this mean that married people can relate sexually "in the passion of lust", and therefore in a wrong way?

And how does God desire for married people to share intimately, instead of in lust, in case this is what 1 Thessalonians 4:5 means?

1 Thessalonians 4:3-6 (NRSVue), "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control your own body in holiness and honor, not with lustful passion, like the gentiles who do not know God; that no one wrong or exploit a brother or sister in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, just as we have already told you beforehand and solemnly warned you."

I don't think that this applies in any way to married people, as sex would be very boring if it had no passion.  "Lust" has the connotation of uncontrolled desire

When I researched the word online, this was one of the definitions: Aquinas says the sin of lust is of "voluptuous emotions", and makes the point that sexual pleasures, "unloosen the human spirit", and set aside right reason.  IMHO, Aquinas must have been a very unhappy, frustrated man.

[com7fy8]

"Let all that you do be done with love." (1 Corinthians 16:14)

Love is better than lust, in my experience. I mean even the pleasure of love is nicer and kinder and tender and personal, not just driving and pushing and distracting for pleasure. 

Lust has a way of not ever being satisfied, while God's love is perfectly satisfying before you even start what love has you do 

And in God's love we are pleasing to God Himself, while we do what He has us doing in sharing with Him and each other. So, with God everything can be intimate and personal and tender and enjoyable and pleasing.

But lust can be desperate for the pleasure, not already satisfied and resting in Jesus. And so it is weak and makes a person weak for and "under the power of" the pleasure.

Paul says, "I will not be brought under the power of any", in 1 Corinthians 6:12.

So, if we exercise in what is weak for pleasure, we can get weaker so we then can give in to anger and arguing and hurting one another.

So, thank You who are the true God, for this. Thank You for delivering us "from the power of Satan to" You (in Acts 26:18).

[com7fy8]

9 hours ago, JimmyB said:

 

I don't think that this applies in any way to married people, as sex would be very boring if it had no passion.  "Lust" has the connotation of uncontrolled desire

 

Oh, so now I see you were answering my first post while I did my second one!

Yeah, I think you have made good points. Thanks 

I would say sexual sharing in God's way has passion and pleasure. And even if it didn't, still it would be interesting simply because my companion is interesting, whatever I do with her or for her.

And a kiss can be very exciting, because I love her, and because God's love is never boring.

If I get bored, I am my problem!

And I find that with God we do have control. And we enjoy whatever He shares with us.

God "gives us richly all things to enjoy," we have in 1 Timothy 6:17.

[com7fy8]

9 hours ago, JimmyB said:

 "Lust" has the connotation of uncontrolled desire

When I researched the word online, this was one of the definitions: Aquinas says the sin of lust is of "voluptuous emotions", and makes the point that sexual pleasures, "unloosen the human spirit", and set aside right reason.  IMHO, Aquinas must have been a very unhappy, frustrated man.

I think lust can have passion that concentrates on getting the pleasure, and does not have us first loving and caring about each other; it cares only about getting the intense and nice sensations. And it has a way of being out of control. 

I find that lust can not take no for an answer and enough is never enough.

So, Thomas said sexual pleasure loosens our human spirit?

That sounds like what the Bible says about wine! 

But if we do things in the Holy Spirit . . .

We can humble the nicer things and pleasures of this life, and therefore always be ready to pleasantly take no for an answer, and be ready to make adjustments without getting upset or downcast about not getting things the way we hope or expected.

And in God's love we are more creative 

So, yeah, Thomas could be speaking for what is true of himself and ones he knew personally.

And was he ever married? Also, I read that Francis of Assisi was supposed to be a celibate monk but he all through his life had major trouble with lust. And that might have affected how he saw marital sharing, maybe as a relief and release thing, versus it being personal and tender sharing with sensitivity and self-control.

Lust can corrupt how people see things. There is "the corruption that is in the world through lust." (in 1 Peter 1:4)

Edited July 24, 2023 by com7fy8