Lust sees another human being as an object, a mechanism for personal gratification. Lust thus considers the other to be essentially replaceable, to be judged against competitors on the basis of how well they satisfy lust’s demands. And if one is not satisfying fully, lust instinctively seeks using another to reach quota. If lust considers serving the other or giving pleasure away, it does so as a means of proving it’s adeptness at conquering the other or as a more reliable means of securing reciprocal favors with the evidence it has satisfied the provisions of the arrangement. Lust believes in negotiation and protecting itself, demanding its rights.
Love sees another human being as a person, an opportunity to honor God by serving His image-bearer. Love thus considers the other to be essentially unique, precious in their own right and incapable of comparison with another. Love cherishes the needs and desires of the other, finding maximum satisfaction in meeting them while knowing that the greatest need of the other is to love similarly in return. If love considers its own pleasure, it does so as a means of giving the other the joy of fulfilling service. Love strives only to conquer itself and its own deficiencies. Love believes in sacrifice and making itself vulnerable, demanding nothing beyond not being used by the other in lust, since allowing the beloved to defile them both this way would be unloving.
So, does marriage magically transform the evil of lust into a good thing? Quite the contrary. To lust a non-spouse is at least consistent with the failure to love through marriage. But to lust a spouse is to violate by deed the vows made by word.
No comments:
Post a Comment