"A repentant homosexual could expect his temptations to come from that direction, and that it was not a sin to be tempted. But then Revoice used that standard understanding as a way to carve out a space to be a celibate gay, which is effeminate, and which is a sin." -- Doug Wilson, Letters of No Little Empathy
What follows was a reply I wrote to Doug requesting some further clarification...
Is it fair to say that some temptations are only experienced by having given in to previous temptations? For example, when the Word says that Jesus was tempted as we are, I take that to mean that He was tempted in the core ways every man, woman and child is, yet to degrees more intense than we ever experience by having never given in to them. So He experienced an intensity of temptation to which we cannot relate, but we, by giving in, experience a diversity of temptations to which He cannot relate. For example, Jesus was never tempted to molest a child. I would argue that this temptation is a product of having given in to other temptations. It is not a front end temptation, but a result of compound temptations stacked and influencing the others. The whole cardboard box gets wet when you set the bottom in a puddle. When some say that Jesus experienced every temptation we did and then go on to say He knows what it's like to want to cheat on your wife or molest a child or desire another man sexually, I don't buy it. Jesus was never tempted to hide the body after a premeditated murder because He never gave in to numerous temptations required to get to that point. Am I wrong? Have you written anywhere about this kind of thing as it relates to temptations and what might be considered the doorway temptations (perhaps lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, pride of life) that give way to all other perversions and temptations?
No comments:
Post a Comment