Daily Meditation

How to Defy Sinful Desire

By faith Moses . . . [left] the fleeting pleasures of sin . . . for he was looking to the reward. (Hebrews 11:24–26)

John Piper

Faith is not content with “fleeting pleasures.” It is ravenous for joy. And the Word of God says, “In your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore” (Psalm 16:11). So faith will not be sidetracked into sin. It will not give up so easily in its quest for maximum joy.

The role of God’s Word is to feed faith’s appetite for God. And, in doing this, it weans my heart away from the deceptive taste of lust.

At first, lust begins to trick me into feeling that I would really miss out on some great satisfaction if I followed the path of purity. But then I take up the sword of the Spirit and begin to fight.

I read that it is better to gouge out my eye than to lust (Matthew 5:29).

I read that if I think about things that are pure and lovely and excellent, the peace of God will be with me (Philippians 4:8).

I read that setting the mind on the flesh brings death, but setting the mind on the Spirit brings life and peace (Romans 8:6).

I read that lust wages war against my soul (1 Peter 2:11), and that the pleasures of this life choke out the life of the Spirit (Luke 8:14).

But best of all, I read that God withholds no good thing from those who walk uprightly (Psalm 84:11), and that the pure in heart will see God (Matthew 5:8).

As I pray for my faith to be satisfied with God’s life and peace, the sword of the Spirit carves the sugar coating off the poison of lust. I see it for what it is. And by the grace of God, its alluring power is broken.

Douglas Wilson's Letter From America

Special Parking Privileges

Culture and Politics - Sex and Culture
Written by Douglas Wilson
Monday, December 13, 2010

So, a professor at Columbia has been charged with some kind of incestuous relationship, and everybody was apparently a consenting adult, and so we are, again, face to face with the public incoherence of our rudderless sexual ethic. How is it possible, given all that we as a society have already granted, for us to say no to the next lust that demands recognition? The logic of what we have already allowed not only demands that we leave this guy alone, but it may even require that he be given a tag for his rear view mirror granting him special parking privileges.

He who says A must say B. You cannot reason with lust. You can either mortify your ungodly lusts (Col. 3:5), or you can begin a never-ending process of trying to appease them. But our horseleach lusts have two daughters, as it turns out (Prov. 30:15).

If there is a law of God over us, then there are limits. If there is not, then there are not. You cannot banish the God who alone gives sexual limits a liberating coherence, and yet still keep those limits. And you cannot expect the ick factor to protect us, because lusts specialize in battering down the ick factor. Lusts just love taboos. Taboos are the air that they breathe.


Now as long as the ick factor is still somewhat functional, our pretty boy preachers will not say a word about it, because it is clearly "unnecessary." Nobody is advocating that, they will say. But as soon as somebody influential does start advocating it, and it becomes necessary to say something, do you think that the relevant pulpits of the land will magically fill up with sons of thunder? I wouldn't bet too much on that happening.

So those who can follow an argument need to come to grips with how this will play out for them. Do you object to a guy bonking his sister? You, my friend, are clearly filled with hate.