Matthew 5, beginning at verse 27. You have heard that it was said to those of old, you shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. For it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish than for your whole body to be cast into hell." Congregation, this is the Word of the Lord. Amen. You may be seated. So the next commandment that Jesus takes up in illustrating the greater righteousness of the kingdom of God, remember the reference in verse 20 of the chapter, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter into the kingdom. The next illustration of that is from what we call the seventh commandment. the seventh commandment from the ten commandments, thou shalt not commit adultery. And as we've said before in the last couple of lessons in this study, the contrast here is not between Moses and Jesus, it is between the way in which the rabbis had interpreted and applied the law of Moses versus the true standard of righteousness that was revealed by God and intended by God and is now being clarified and confirmed by the word of Christ. Jesus comes to fulfill the law, not to change it. And His exposition and application of this seventh commandment confirms and upholds what the Lord had always required of His people, but is now expressing more fully. applying more completely, more explicitly, bringing to bear the true intent of that heart righteousness that the law required and calls us unto. Now, we live in a hyper-sexualized society. You think about the term pornography, which originally, you can tell even from the Greek construction of it, it originally denoted writing that was sexually illicit or provocative. But now we use pornography to describe images and videos beyond anything that anyone in the ancient world could have even imagined. And that is not to suggest that the ancient world was sexually pure. Far from it, as a matter of fact. In many ways, the sexual perversity and the open perversity of the ancient world far exceeded our own, as hard as that might be to imagine. But we are long past titillating stories and sexually descriptive novellas. Even when I was a child, if a young man wanted to find sexually provocative material, he had to go find it somewhere. A magazine or photos buried in a book in a library. Now, most young people in our community have almost unlimited access to hardcore and interactive pornography on their phones, in their pockets, 24 hours a day. every day. In fact, simply checking email or watching a baseball game on television or going to the grocery store, especially in the summertime in Arizona, exposes every one of us to more sexually provocative images every day than many people in earlier generations would find in an entire lifetime. or could find, even if they had tried to seek them out. This passage, which is relevant in every generation and in every society, has never been more relevant to any generation than our own. And the basic principle of the text is easy to understand. Applying it on a daily basis is very hard to do. And that is not because we do not know what we should do. It's because we are constantly surrounded and constantly assaulted by a world that is hell-bent on capturing our eyes and polluting our hearts. But Jesus makes the stakes very clear. He is speaking about matters of eternal life and death. And that is sobering because that is not the way in which our world discusses this issue. I am thankful, and I'll mention this again later in the lesson, I am thankful that in the last couple of years there has been a push, even within secular spaces, a pushback against pornography. And say, we are literally poisoning young people's minds. This is having a detrimental effect. Thank God. But they are not talking about it from the standpoint of eternity. They're not talking about the spiritual impact that this is having on so many lives. We must go to war against the sinful pollution of our own hearts. That is what Jesus is calling us to. We may not be able to do anything about the way that someone dresses at the grocery store, or the images that we encounter even inadvertently online, but we must deal with the problem of lust which is not outside, but inside of our hearts. And Jesus says the stakes are our own soul. John Stott observes that the rabbis, quote, gave a conveniently narrow definition of sexual sin and a conveniently broad definition of sexual purity. Of course, that's the very problem that Jesus is addressing. Ironically, what Jesus says here about the 7th commandment is made explicit and clear in the 10th commandment in Exodus chapter 20. You shall not covet your neighbor's house, you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's. Lust is simply a form of coveting. And Paul, in the New Testament, twice, says that coveting is a form of idolatry. But this is not the idolatry that involves gold or stone statues and religious obeisance. Idolatry exists in the heart whenever we look to something other than God to provide the satisfaction and fulfillment that is due and found only in God. Sexual gratification within the marriage covenant is holy, righteous, and good. God made that relationship for us to enjoy, and he didn't have to. We don't want to be tacky. This lesson is going to be tricky enough as it is. But sex could have simply been a bodily function, like breathing. Like, just the same way that God did not have to make eating a pleasurable experience. Everything could have tasted like unsweetened oatmeal. And we could have simply eaten for the purpose of sustaining our bodily functions and our energy levels. But God gave us taste buds and he created fruit trees and all kinds of things that are just bursting with flavor. And in the same way, the gift of sex is grace. It is grace that God intends to be received with pleasure and celebrated and enjoyed, but like all privileges and pleasures, the gift of sexual gratification can be easily corrupted and misused. The glutton turns the gift and pleasure of eating into idolatry, and in doing so he becomes more like a beast than a man. And ironically, the man who is addicted to sexual arousal and gratification is being similarly dehumanized. He has turned a holy gift and pleasure into a mere bodily function. He has taken something that God meant for enjoyment and turned it merely into a physical release. In other words, the man who is enslaved to lust is treating sex and sexual arousal like a bowel movement. And our Lord calls us to a higher standard. To a greater righteousness. Greater than that exhibited by the Scribes and Pharisees and certainly, therefore, far greater than the pattern of sexual depravity that is endemic to the modern Western world. We cannot be content merely to abstain from behavior in which those around us freely indulge. Christ demands that we pursue holiness in the heart and with our eyes. In other words, that we not just observe a higher level of sexual conduct, but rather a higher level of purity in the way that we think. in what we meditate upon, in the desires that we pursue. If unrighteous anger held privately in the heart warrants the judgment of God, so too does the lust that so frequently contaminates our private thoughts and desires. Now, men in particular are reasonably good at dealing with sinful behavior. And this connects obviously with our discussion last week about anger. We watch for the appearance of anger or speech or behavior that is sexually crude. And if we're serious about our faith and our holiness, we act quickly to cut down the sin that has arisen in our lives. But what Jesus requires in the Sermon on the Mount is for us to look deeper. not just deal with the stalk that is pushing up above the ground, but to dig down and uproot the underlying desire from which it springs. We gaze at women in places that we would never touch. We think in ways that we would never openly speak about. And Jesus says it is not enough to abstain from the behavior of adultery because adultery begins in the heart. And therefore it is in the heart that we must attack it, subdue it, and ultimately destroy it. You cannot make peace with this particular demon. But this is not a passage that only applies to men. Or even primarily applies to men. Because women are just as accountable to our Lord's teaching here as are their brothers. And women have not only been sexualized in the current culture in perverse ways, they've also contributed to it. A woman can be guilty of lust just like a man, but she also has a greater ability to excite and encourage that lust than men typically do. And this passage is not about provocation, but there are many other texts in the New Testament that are, that are related to the same principle. Godly women must think about this principle, not just in terms of their own hearts, but also being on guard not to become a stumbling block to their brothers. If this is a problem that your brothers in Christ are struggling with, you are supposed to support them in that struggle, not make it more difficult. Now one of the ways that some, and I have heard this multiple times in pastoral counseling, it's not funny but it actually is a little bit funny every time I hear this rationalization. One of the ways some have tried to circumvent the high standard of this passage is by emphasizing that the Lord here refers to adultery and therefore single men are exempt from it. They will sometimes cling to this in the hopes that it exempts them from the demand that Christ is making, so long as the object of their lust is not a married person. Because, after all, it can't be adultery, Pastor, if neither party is married. Or so the argument goes. So the argument I have heard. It's buttressed by the insistence that one cannot find a person to marry, after all, unless he is first sexually attracted to them, and therefore, at some level, we have to be freed to lust. Well, this position fails at multiple points. First of all, it is not sexual attraction that the Lord is forbidding here. The text says, Jesus says specifically, looking toward lust. It's very specific in the preposition. So it's gazing toward lust. Gazing for the purpose of lusting after this other person. Now, of course, an unmarried person should find their would-be partner sexually attractive. No one wants to marry someone who is unattractive. But finding a person attractive is not the same thing as indulging in lust. In deciding whether to pursue a woman, a man must decide whether he finds her appealing, and if he does, he must spend the rest of their courtship disciplining his eyes and his mind so as to not notice just how appealing she is. Recognizing physical beauty and admitting it is desirable is not sinful lust. But what the sinful heart can quickly and easily do is make that transition. to observe beauty, to observe attractiveness, to admit attraction, and then quickly to slide into something that Christ would rebuke. Another reason that this particular argument fails is that the man who claims exemption from this law on the basis of his singleness is playing the very kind of rabbinical game that Jesus is going to war against in Matthew 5. Jesus refers to adultery because that is the language of the original command in the Ten Commandments. But it's clear from the context, both immediate as well as in the rest of Scripture, that he has all kinds of fornication in view. If a single man is allowed to look with lust at a single woman, then would he also be allowed to look with lust at a farm animal? Because that's not adultery either. And someone would say, well of course not, that's an unnatural desire, whereas sexual desire for a member of the opposite sex is a natural desire, and that's true. Those who are sexually aroused by animals or members of the same sex or children are perverts. They are guilty of an unnatural and unholy desire that defies creation and cannot be sanctified by marriage, as ordinary heterosexual desire can and should be. But the single man who seeks to avoid the high standard of this passage knows that he is playing games. Because he does not ask every woman that he sees on the street whether she is married so that he might know whether he is permitted to lust after her. No, he is simply a slave to his lust. And like a slave, he will remain in bondage to the idol of his lust, no matter the marital status of the particular person who arouses it. So by adultery, Christ is referring to any union that adulterates or corrupts what God intends, and that is sexual fulfillment within marriage. Now the issue Christ focuses upon is lust, which is pursued with the eyes and cherished in the heart, and he equates that lust with adultery. Whether it is ever expressed in behavior, whether a man remains chaste in his conduct and exclusively loyal in his actions toward his wife, if he looks toward or with a view toward lust, Jesus says he's committed adultery in his heart. And that basically indicts every man that's ever lived. The law of God has never been exclusively concerned with behavior. A man's actions are important, because actions performed repeatedly become habits, and habits both form and reveal the character of a man. But the law of God is a transcript of God's holy character, and its purpose is both to reveal and lead us to the same holiness that we see embodied and personified in Jesus Christ. And can you imagine Jesus looking toward lust and cherishing lust within his heart? And if you can, you've got a really warped conception of our Savior. And this is why a merely external or behavioral approach to overcoming sin will always be insufficient. A man who is in the grip of lust, for example, someone who views pornography in a compulsive manner, let's say, will not become pure merely by restricting his smartphone and monitoring his internet use and staying in regular contact with an accountability partner. And that doesn't mean those things are not appropriate. They can be helpful steps to take. They can be important steps to take. We've done that for many men over the years. The fact that an obese person cannot exercise his way out of his situation does not mean that exercise should not be one part of the solution. But you cannot heal cancer with Band-Aids and antibiotic cream. An uncontrolled lust is a cancer of the soul, and it will not be resolved by topical treatments. You cannot just put behavioral controls into place and expect that to fix what is wrong in your heart. The Apostle Paul later deals pointedly with the danger of sexual immorality on this very point. 1 Corinthians 6, he says, flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price. Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's. If we think that Paul only has in mind sexual sins that are practiced with the body, then we have not yet learned the lesson that Jesus is teaching us in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is saying lust, cherished in the heart, is the same thing. It's the same sin. It may not have borne the fruit of behavior yet, but the problem in the heart is real. As Solomon admonishes us in Proverbs chapter 6, can a man take fire to his bosom and his clothes not be burned? Can one walk on hot coals and his feet not be seared? You are literally playing with fire. When you cherish lust in your heart, you are bringing fire into your bosom and hoping that your clothes do not ignite. You do not try to contain the fire that has already lit you. You cannot control this danger. You have to wake up and put it out, or you will find that the fire of lust, cherished in the heart, is the beginning of the fire of hell. The question that has to be addressed is, what is in my heart that is drawing me continually to look with lust at that which I know is an offense against God and harmful to my soul? That's how you get at the underlying idolatry. Why is this a compulsive problem? You say, well, it's because I'm just a healthy person. Well, you have natural desires, but why are they in control of you instead of you being in control of them? What is it in the heart that is driving you compulsively to this kind of behavior, even if it is entirely internal? What is the unmet need that I am looking to fulfill by my foolish and dangerous pursuit of cherished lust? What idol have I erected in my heart that is being serviced in this way? Because make no mistake, sex has been associated with religion since ancient times. You will either worship God in a holy sexual relationship with your spouse, or you will worship demons by sexual immorality, whether acted or imagined, and those are the only two possibilities. Sexual desire is holy, righteous, and good. God made us to enjoy its fulfillment. He gave us marriage as a holy and wholesome frame in which to enjoy it. And if we think biblically, we will not be prudes when it comes to sex. But if you think biblically, the world will think of you that way. They will think that you are backwards. They will think that you are very outdated, because lust is thought harmless by the world. Its destructive nature is undeniable. In the last few years, as I said a moment ago, non-Christian influencers have begun decrying the destructive effects of pornography and warning young people about the harm it can cause. It's astonishing to me to get on YouTube to watch something completely unrelated to this kind of topic, but for whatever reason, the algorithm thinks that if you're watching a video by this particular account, you might be interested in something over here, and this account is talking about the dangers of pornography, and it's not a Christian. It's an unbeliever. And yet saying, young men, stop. Stop doing this. You are destroying your hearts and minds. I would say that is a good development. Some of the sons of darkness see with more clarity the danger that Christians are unwilling to take seriously. Lust is corrosive and degenerative. Its relationship to neurological and hormonal patterns of addiction have led to an entire industry catering to that diagnosis of sexual addiction. And lust can be an addiction, but we should not use that categorization as a therapeutic excuse for a sin problem. So understand what I'm saying. It absolutely can be an addiction. And hormonally and physiologically, the patterns are the same internally. But if you are using addiction as an excuse to say, this is something I can't control, you are deflecting responsibility for something you are absolutely responsible for. No one put a gun to your head to introduce you to pornography. And even those, and there are many, sadly, who were first exposed to it as children by molesters are still morally responsible as adults for choosing to return to it when they do. And when we say that lust is corrosive and degenerative, we mean that it will not remain where it begins. Like an addict, you will need increasingly higher doses to get satisfaction. Indulgence in lust and regular use of pornography rewires the brain and alters one's ability to form healthy and lasting relationships with proper biblical expectations. Your wife is not going to look like the AI-enhanced model on your computer screen, and no seductress, real or imagined, will ever provide the kind of joyous and holy fulfillment that a godly wife can give." Both of those statements are true. Now Jesus clearly condemns looking toward lust, and as we said, not just noticing that a person is attractive. But that provides plenty of room for the Pharisee within us all to rationalize and justify and make room for all kinds of noticing that we are convinced on good exegetical grounds is not lust. And we must be prepared to make careful distinctions with discipline and wisdom if we are to faithfully follow Jesus in this matter. As we've noted before, there is a difference between observing that the Creator has been kind in His endowments to an image-bearer of the opposite sex, a difference between that and groping her with one's eyes like a male baboon who just drank three espressos. The former is natural and not at all sinful. The problem is when our eyes and heart linger in the name of appreciating his handiwork." Now, Augustine dealt with this at length in his preaching. Augustine takes note in his preaching on this particular section, he takes note of the three stages in the progress of sin, and he calls these the suggestion of, the taking pleasure in, and the consenting to. He says this, Suggestion takes place either by means of memory or by means of the bodily senses when we see or hear or smell or taste or touch anything. And if it gives us pleasure to enjoy this, this pleasure, if illicit, must be restrained. Just as when we are fasting, and on seeing food, the appetite of the palate is stirred up, this does not happen without pleasure. But we do not consent to this liking, and we repress it by the right of reason, which has the supremacy. But if consent shall take place, the sin will be complete, known to God in our heart, although it may not be known to men by deed." Now that's a very helpful passage. It's interesting how that passage plays into later discussions between Roman Catholic and Reformed theologians. I won't bore you with all of that, but that in itself is a very helpful distinction to say you are going to see something suggested, you are going to have some pleasurable response to that, and if it is ungodly, That is the moment you must repudiate it. Because if you give consent to it, even if you never act upon it, if you give consent to it in your heart, you are falling into transgression. For men and women polluted by sin, and who have long-standing practice of it, it may seem as if there is no gap at all between noticing with pleasure a person's attractiveness and lusting in the heart. It may seem as if the two happen simultaneously, and that is an indication that our hearts are more practiced in unholy desires than in holy discipline. But there is, in fact, a real difference. We can be honest about the personal qualities that make a person attractive to the eye, but we must ever be on guard against giving consent with our hearts to sinful lust. And Augustine goes on and says, just as there are three steps to sin, so once you have given consent in your heart to that temptation, there are three stages by which that sin takes over and corrupts our lives. He says it this way, quote, just as we arrive at sin by three steps, suggestion, pleasure, consent, so of sin itself there are three varieties, in heart, in deed, in habit, as it were, three deaths. One, as it were, in the house, that is, when we consent to lust in the heart. A second, now, as it were, brought forth outside the gate, when assent goes forward into action. A third, when the mind is pressed down by the force of bad habit, as if by a mound of earth, and is now, as it were, rotting in the sepulcher." Again, Augustine's super helpful. So he says, when you consent to that temptation before any physical action has taken place, you're still inside your house, within the privacy of your own heart and mind, you've committed sin against God. But then, the next step is you're going to walk outside the house. You're going to begin to act upon that sin that you have already committed within your heart. And then when you have practiced that for a while, it's going to bury you. it's going to bury you under the weight of guilt and grief, and you will now be in bondage to that corruption that has taken you much farther than you ever meant to go. It's a helpful taxonomy. Sin begins in the heart, and we must fight against sinful desires and so obtain forgiveness and deliverance from them. But if we indulge in those desires, even if it's only with our imagination, we become guilty before God. And once lust begins to be entertained in that way, it is only a matter of time before it is expressed in outward actions. And we know this. We know this personally, by experience, every one of us. No man alive today has any need to ever seek out pornography. He already has a virtually unlimited library of images already in his mind. And no end of opportunities to look with lust in the minefield of sexual temptations in which we live. And so if a man wanted to be covertly corrupt, he could simply entertain himself with internal thoughts without anyone ever being the wiser. But that's not what happens, is it? It's not. Lust in the heart leads to behavior to further gratify that lust, and eventually that becomes known. Maybe it was seeking out pornography, maybe it was seeking out a person to act sexually with, or much further than that, a person falls into bondage because the lust in the heart does not remain in the heart. No secret sin will remain so for very long. The second step in a person's corruption by his sin is in that behavior. A person may become flirtatious or provocative or crass in their words or dress or demeanor. They may begin seeking out pornography or justifiable opportunities to be aroused without clear-cut transgression. And some will eventually find themselves doing the unthinkable and crossing lines that they never imagined they would. And that is when the third step happens when sin has become the master and now dominates and controls one's life. The soul is like a rotting corpse inside a tomb. Augustine says we're pressed down by guilt and misery and we cannot escape. He imagined that he could control the lust that began in his heart, but in reality he just handed his heart over to the devil and now corruption is controlling him. And the only way to stop the infection and to avoid eventual destruction is by attacking the sin at its root, in the heart, before it is ever manifested in outward actions. And that is what Jesus is talking about here in Matthew 5. It's what every disciple is called to do every day. If any man desires to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. Discipleship begins with self-denial and the mortification of our flesh. And that means killing it. It means putting it to death. John Owen famously said, be killing sin or it will be killing you. Only one of you can survive. Spiritual warfare includes resisting the world and the devil, but it must begin and always focus first and foremost on the battle waged within and against our own heart. Your heart and your sinful nature is a much larger threat to your holiness than anyone or anything else outside of you. It is not your spouse. It is not your co-workers. It is not the devil. It is not the world. It's you. As Chesterton was asked, what is wrong with this world? And he simply wrote back and said, I am. Stott says it this way, quote, imagination enriches the quality of life, but all God's gifts need to be used responsibly. They can readily be degraded and abused. This is certainly true of our imagination. I doubt if ever human beings have fallen victim to immorality who have not first opened the sluice gates of passion through their eyes. It's an interesting observation. Similarly, whenever men and women have learned sexual self-control indeed, it is because they have first learned it in the eyes of both flesh and fantasy." I think that's exactly right. Do you want to gain the self-control to stop engaging in immoral behavior? Then start controlling your eyes and your mind. And do you want to see you lose control of your life entirely? Then let your eyes and your mind run free. Lest we misunderstand the seriousness of the issue, the Lord gives a startling and strong command to those who find themselves in the grip of lust. He says, if your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. Similarly, if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. Why? Twice he repeats the reason. It is more profitable for you that one of your members perish than for your whole body to be cast into hell. But no worries, because we know that Jesus was only speaking figuratively. And He was, of course, speaking figuratively, but before we get there, maybe we should spend just a minute on what this figure of speech actually means. Make a general observation, in fact, about how figurative speech in the Bible works. Where did we get the idea that if something is figurative, we don't have to take it seriously? And respectfully, I blame dispensationalism, which has inadvertently taught exactly that. We take prophecies literally, not figuratively, because the implication is if they were figurative, they wouldn't really mean the same thing. Well, inadvertently, we've gotten the idea that figurative language, it doesn't carry the same weight as something that is literal. But figurative language is used in the Bible when literal words would not do justice to the point. You use figures of speech to impress, to emphasize something that would not be conveyed by simple, straightforward language. In other words, figurative language does not mean a passage is less serious, it means it is more so. And so here Jesus describes self-mutilation. Why would He say such a thing? Well, He tells you, because the alternative is to go to hell. I mean, do you understand that? Jesus is trying to get our attention. We are saying it's not really that big of a deal. Everybody watches unclean movies. Everybody looks at porn. Everybody looks at the girls as they're going by or talks about the guys and how hot they are. It's not that big of a deal. Jesus says you'd be better off tearing out your eye or cutting off your hand because you're going to go to hell. This will kill you. I just can't stop watching porn. I've had many young men tell me that. Others have said, my girlfriend and I love each other so much we just can't help ourselves. Jesus is talking about removing body parts. Do you understand how serious this is? Now some church fathers who might have had more sincerity than wisdom did take Jesus literally here. Origen infamously castrated himself in what he allegedly believed to be obedience to this passage in Matthew 19, 12. And like several other important doctrines, Origen was wrong about this. But he was not wrong in his zeal to be saved. His sincerity there is to be commended, not his hermeneutical approach. But is zeal to be... I want to be holy. I don't want to be in the grip of lust. I want to be consecrated to God. I would rather have to explain to a young man why he doesn't need to cut off his hand than to argue with him about the dangers of the smartphone that he seems to love more than his soul. Because those arguments do get tiresome. Now, how do we know that Jesus was speaking figuratively here? Well, first of all, because of the specific language that he uses. Did you notice it as I read it a couple of times? If your right eye offends you, you can't lust with your left eye. If your right hand offends you, you can't sin with your left hand. He doesn't say your eyes. If your eyes offend you, tear them out. He says your right eye. He doesn't say if your hands cause you to sin, cut them off. He says your right hand. because he's making a point. He's not giving you an actual prescription. Secondly, we know that Jesus is speaking figuratively because the problem of lust doesn't lie in the eye or the hand or any other member of our physical body. You could rip out both of your eyes, cut off both of your hands, and still live in a cocoon of lust all the time. As we've said before, maybe if we could lobotomize those who are in bondage to lust, we could make some headway in getting their thoughts under control, but that might create more problems than it would solve. The problem of lust is a problem in the heart, and that is not something that you can correct by simply taking physical measures, no matter how drastic or violent. So Jesus is not talking about physically maiming ourselves, but the fact that he uses that kind of figure of speech indicates clearly the seriousness and extent to which our self-denial ought to go. We've already established that restrictions and structures cannot produce real purity in the heart. That is the error of an unbiblical asceticism, the very kind that Paul denounces in Colossians 2, if you remember. Why do you subject yourselves to limitations? Do not eat, do not touch, all of these things which perish with the using. He says that's associated with the commandments and wisdom of men. It doesn't lead to holiness. Just having a list of rules is not going to make you more holy before God. Asceticism of that type is not the way. But there is a type of asceticism to which every follower of Jesus is called, and you see it here in the text. Getting rid of your smartphone will not make you a holy person. But if you cannot stop accessing pornography on your smartphone, is its GPS capability really worth more than your soul? Do you love your cable connection or your streaming service more than you love your Savior? Is social media helping you grow spiritually or actually making you less like Jesus? Again, getting rid of those things is not going to fix the problem. But if you have this compulsive problem, Jesus is talking about cutting off parts of your body. I've been assured that getting rid of such things is too extreme by those who are in bondage to lust, and yet it doesn't seem nearly as extreme as what Jesus speaks about here. I almost think some people would rather be without a hand than without the internet. John Calvin says it this way in his commentary on the text. He says, quote, Christ employs an exaggerated form of speech to show that whatever hinders us from yielding that obedience to God which he requires in his law ought to be cut off. And he does so expressly because men allow themselves too much liberty in that respect. If the mind were pure, the eyes and hands would be obedient to it, for it is certain that they have no movement of their own." That's a great point. Your body has never sinned without the consent of your mind. The problem is within, and whatever is standing against your obedience needs to be put away. The rationalizations and excuses that we make for our lack of purity are embarrassing and contemptible when set in contrast with the Lord's words here. But many people are more afraid of missing out than they are of going to hell. They're more interested in what is going on in the world than they are what awaits them in eternity. And so Stott makes this point in his comments on the text. He says, quote, we may have had to become culturally maimed in order to preserve our purity of mind. The only question is whether, for the sake of this gain, we are willing to bear that loss and endure that ridicule. It is better to forego some experiences this life offers in order to enter the life which is life indeed. It is better to accept some cultural amputation in this world than risk final destruction in the next. Of course, this teaching runs clean counter to modern standards of permissiveness. It is based on the principle that eternity is more important than time and purity more important than culture, and that any sacrifice is worthwhile in this life if it is necessary to ensure our entry into the next. We have to decide quite simply whether to live for this world or the next, whether to follow the crowd or Jesus Christ." I think that's right. Now there's more that we could say about this topic, but I want to just kind of draw this to a close tonight with some pointed application in light of our own cultural context. And I want to do it in just three very brief points. First, the corruption of men and the subversion of true masculinity. Second, the impact of feminism in exacerbating the issue. And third, the way in which this principle should inform our decisions about modesty and decorum. So first, the corruption of men and subversion of true masculinity. I'm thankful that there has been a resurgence and a renewed interest in recovering and taking some pride in masculinity in recent years. I think that's a good thing. In reaction against an out-of-control, hyper-feminized culture, men and women, both believers and unbelievers, have begun to return to and reaffirm the goodness and worth of strong manly men who are not soft, effeminate, and weak. And that is praiseworthy. Thank God for it. But not every instance of this cultural recovery has been good. The movement originally known as the Manosphere has also given us role models like Andrew Tate. And it has glorified hookup culture. It has cultivated a physical image of masculine strength that is a mile wide and an inch deep. It has encouraged anger, resentment, and behavior toward women, and more recently other ethnic groups, that could genuinely be described as toxic. And the fact that feminists characterize all masculinity as toxic does not change the fact that there really is a type of masculinity that is toxic and unbiblical and wicked. Such men are not protectors and providers, they are predators and parasites. And sadly, some of those men are pastors and influential leaders in Christian spaces. Men must be taught that the perfect and true image of masculinity is the Lord Jesus Christ, and not social media influencers or those who represent themselves as real men. Because even the best of unbelieving men are poor role models for those who seek to spend and be spent as those called to be warriors of the kingdom of God. You may learn from men like Jocko Willink and Jordan Peterson. They say some good things that align with biblical wisdom, but they are not the men that you should be trying to imitate. The man whose image you must emulate and pursue is the God-man who was born in humble circumstances to an impoverished family, a man who honored his father and his mother, who worked hard with his hands, who cared for the poor and needy, who prized purity above popularity. and who made the ultimate sacrifice to save our souls. Jesus was a strong man. He was a carpenter who walked hundreds of miles in simple sandals, who went without adequate sleep or food for days because of his commitment to prayer and providing for others. But his manliness was measured by his godliness, not by his bench press or his biceps or his pickup truck. Second, the impact of feminism in exacerbating this issue. There is a straight line in our American history from the rise of feminism to the appearance and promotion of contraception, which decoupled sex from marriage, procreation, and responsibility. to a culture of free love and promiscuous sex, to no-fault divorce, to more recently the Obergefell decision and the rise of transgenderism. It's a straight line, and you've got as many Republicans to blame for that as Democrats. Feminism is not the source of all evils. It is itself the byproduct of earlier evils, but it has given birth to many further evils, including much of today's sexual depravity. Feminists, both male and female, now publicly praise and thank sex workers who used to have a different name. You might have seen at the Academy Awards recently a number of effeminate men and women doing that very thing. Feminism is part of the air that we breathe, and many Christians have been more influenced by it than they realize. That the reaction by some Christians to feminism, including too many reformed Christians, is misguided and sinful does not change the fact that feminism is rebellion against biblical norms. And Christians must self-consciously critique, and where necessary and appropriate, resist it as a paradigm and program. Third, the way in which this principle should inform our decisions about modesty and decorum. Now when we think about modesty in the church, most of the time we think about skirt lines, neck lines, and the amount of skin and outlines that are shown. When the Bible speaks about modest dress, it more often has in view that which is neither extravagant nor vain. But the principle of modesty is larger than just humility in dress. It is a principle that should be incorporated into our attire, into the way that we interact with other people, especially members of the opposite sex, and our speech. It is not modest to wear clothing that practically dares a man not to look at your cleavage or your butt. It is not modest for men or women to cuss or speak in crass and sexually crude ways. It is not modest to flirt with someone else's spouse. And if you are flirting with someone you hope to make your own spouse, you need to be careful to do that in godly and appropriate ways. All of us, men and women, are warned in Scripture not to place a cause for stumbling in a brother's way. Now ladies, it is not your fault that God made you beautiful. And yes, your brothers in Christ should discipline their eyes and hearts when they look at you. But you are responsible for how hard you make that particular exercise. And if they are responsible for their sins of lust, and they are, you are responsible if you provide extra and unnecessary opportunity and provocation toward it. There is a difference between being attractive in the sense of looking beautiful and being seductive in the sense of trying to attract sexual attention from men who are not your husband. The latter is not appropriate for godly women. There's one man you are trying to attract in that way, and that is best done in the bedroom or with great discretion when you're in public. Job in his book says, I have made a covenant with my eyes. Why then should I look upon a young woman? Does he not see my ways and count all my steps? We all should resolve to live with the same holy resolution, being conscious that even our inner thoughts and desires are open and fully exposed to the eyes of God. Chrysostom speaks in his sermon on this text about the wrong committed against one's wife and against the object of your lust when you touch her with your eyes in the way that Jesus describes. That's helpful. That's a helpful description of this error. Don't let your eyes linger where it would be inappropriate to lay your hand. Augustine, in his own exposition, counsels us to remember the loss of peace in our hearts that we will incur when we consent to unholy desires. Augustine's saying, think about this. Every time you've gone down this road, you've regretted it. Remember the loss of peace and don't surrender your conscience. Indulgence leads only to shame and regret for a Christian, but abstinence and doing battle against unholy desires carries its own reward. And parents should be especially diligent to teach and protect their children with regard to these issues. If you are giving your young child a smartphone or unmonitored access to the internet, I expect to be counseling them very soon about their porn problem. So let us hear and heed with seriousness the Lord's call to moral discipline. Set a guard over your eyes, your heart, and your life. Gird yourself every day for the battle, and go forth in faith and prayer to do war against the lusts of the flesh for the glory of God and the good of your soul. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.