Is It Sinful for A Man to Be Tempted to Sodomize Another Man?

Warning, the following message may be offensive to some audiences. These audiences may include, but are not limited to, professing Christians who never read their Bible, sissies, sodomites, men with man buns, those who approve of men with man buns, man bun enablers, white knights for men with man buns, homemakers who have finished Netflix but don't know how to meal plan, and people who refer to their pets as fur babies.

Viewer discretion is advised. People are tired of hearing nothing but doom and gloom.

The message of Christianity is that salvation is found in Christ alone, and any who reject Christ therefore forfeit any hope of salvation, any hope of heaven.

The issue is that humanity is in sin, and the wrath of almighty God is hanging over our heads.

They will hear his words, they will not act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment, when the fires of wrath come, they will be consumed and they will perish. God wrapped himself in flesh, condescended and became a man, died on the cross for sin, was resurrected on the third day, has ascended to the right hand of the Father, where he sits now to make intercession for us.

Jesus is saying there is a group of people who will hear his words, they will act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment come in that final day, their house will stand.

The Show’s Mission and the Episode Question

Welcome to Bible Bash, where we aim to equip the saints for the works of ministry by answering the questions you're not allowed to ask. We're your hosts, Harrison Kerrig and Pastor Tim Mullett, and today we seek to answer the age-old question, is it sinful for a man to be tempted to sodomize another man?

Now, a little bit of pulling back of the curtain for you guys before we jump into the discussion on this episode. You guys are hearing this like a normal episode that would come out on a Monday like we've been doing for a while now, but the reality is we are actually recording this just a few days after last week's video that you guys heard.

And so we're kind of cranking them out right now, just a few days removed from the last one. And so we spent a lot of today and yesterday trying to brainstorm a topic that we thought would be helpful, edifying for you guys as always.

And so I just think it's amusing to me to think we're recording this just a few days from each other, and you guys are hearing it like a week apart basically. But the reason we're doing that is just because at our church, we've got an event going on on the night that we would normally record, so we're trying to get ahead of things so that there's not like a breakup in episodes for you guys.

But anyways, like I said, the topic question for today is, is it sinful for a man to be tempted to sodomize another man? And the reason we're talking about this is because whether you realize it or not, there's actually a movement within the church where a lot of people— what did you say before we started this episode?

It's called the same-sex attraction movement, right, Tim?

Yeah, the same-sex attracted Christian movement, or it's known as the celibate gay Christian movement.

The celibate gay Christian movement. And basically, if I understand you correctly—.

They like to pile up oxymorons together.

Basically, they think the act of sodomy is wrong. I mean, on paper. Right, right. I'm sure there's contradictions. I'm sure there's plenty of contradictions up in there when it gets practical.

Yeah, I mean, the funny thing about it is, on paper, they've said for the past few years that they think that sodomy is sinful. But then, it's a position they haven't really been able to maintain. So a lot of the guys that have been involved in that kind of thing have come out and are proud since the beginning of that movement.

And so, I think it's just a way of softening the consciences of Christians and preparing for the next step, so to speak. But yeah, you might call them the celibate gay Christian movement, the same-sex attracted Christian movement, or even the—these are the kind of individuals who are advocating for lifelong committed celibate friendships between men, covenantal friendships, and that kind of thing.

But yeah, that's just—on paper, they supposedly had believed that sodomy itself is wrong.

But they're typically not very firm on that belief.

External Temptation and Internal Desire

Yeah, so the idea is, essentially, you can't help being tempted to want to sodomize someone so long as you don't act on it, essentially. That's the point. It's not a sin to be tempted with homosexual desires towards sodomy or same-sex romantic relationships.

It's just a sin to act on it, so to speak.

Okay. So that's kind of why we're talking about this, because there is this movement. I even hesitate to say within the church, because I don't want to communicate anything that would say—.

You could say a movement among individuals who claim to be Christians, who are being broadly accepted as actually Christians by dupes in the evangelical world, or something like that.

People who are Christians, with the air quotes, the very deliberate air quotes around it.

Right. Who are being acknowledged as such by naive and gullible people you should know better.

Right. But essentially, the crux of the issue for them is they're saying, Hey, look, it's one thing to perform the act, right? But then just to have the desire, just to be tempted to do it and not actually following through, that's not sinful, right?

Yep. That's what's essentially being argued.

Okay. Well, our title question for today is, Is it sinful for a man to be tempted to sodomize another man? So that's their take, Tim. Basically, no. The answer is no. What is your take on that question?

Yeah. It's a ridiculous question to think about. So the way you worded it, is it sinful to be tempted to want to sodomize another man? Like that's trying to bring to light some shameful things that are being smuggled under the door.

And so it's one of those things where I think Christians, largely because individuals are, the world itself is trying to cram down our throat this idea that gays are essentially normal people, just like everyone else, despite all the gay pride parades and the evidence of our eyes to the contrary.

You mean you're not holding parades about your pride in being a heterosexual man?

Yeah. I'm not dressing in the BDSM stuff.

Doing story reading time at the library.

Yeah. Asking kids to put money in my underwear. That kind of stuff. But despite all that, individuals are trying to normalize the idea that sodomites are just the same as everyone else. And a lot of Christians basically believe it.

And that's the play that progressive Christians are running on us too. So when you word it like that, you're bringing attention to the fact that what we're actually talking about, we're talking about anal sex.

That's what we're talking about. We're talking about something that's gross and disgusting that you're trying to wrap in the language of euphemisms to hide. But then if you try to answer that question, part of what's difficult is that as the Bible speaks about the nature of temptation, there are different types of temptation.

So part of me wants to say, no, it's not a sin. Surprisingly, no, it may not be a sin to be tempted to sodomize another man. But then in the obvious sense of the expression, yeah, it absolutely obviously is.

And anyone who thinks it's not is crazy. So what I mean is that there are different types of temptations in the Bible. Part of what's happening with the SSA movement in general, and those who are being influenced by that, so you can broaden out this discussion just to a discussion about temptation in general.

And that's part of what we'll do today is just try to talk about what is temptation in general. But there are different types of temptation, and every type of temptation is being essentially put in the same category, and individuals are refusing to make just basic biblical distinctions.

Meaning, if a and you've had sodomites who have essentially tried to proposition you before.

Oh, yeah. It was really uncomfortable. I hated it.

Yeah. You told me this awkward story of a man rubbing his finger on your ear just to gross everyone out, right? Yeah. But that was essentially tantamount to an offer. And the issue is, were you being tempted by that offer?

Well, no and yes, right? Meaning, you might not want to say yes in any sense because it's so gross to imagine and think about.

Because people's minds immediately jump to like a, oh.

Yeah. You were tempted, huh? No, but the issue is, in the Bible there's external temptations and there's internal temptations. And so you have to talk about what kind of temptation you're talking about.

And I've been propositioned by sodomites in my life over the course of the years I've been alive. And they're presenting me with an offer. So temptation can mean nothing more than an offer that's being presented to you.

And they're presenting you an offer that you detest and can't stand. And the entirety of your being in terms of mentally, emotionally, physically literally recoils at the thought of that offer, right?

Mm-hmm. So that's a temptation towards sin, meaning it's an offer towards sin. But then it's not an internal, it's not a temptation that's arising from your own heart. It's just a purely external temptation, right?

Right. So there's a category for that. There's a variety of things that individuals could present me with external offers towards. Hopefully not eternal. Yeah, not eternal. Yeah, which I would recoil at, right?

Yeah. So, you know, hey, you want to go rob a bank with me? It's like, no, are you dumb? You know, like, I mean, was I tempted? Yes, I was tempted and I was given an offer. But like it's not something that I really have any interest in doing whatsoever.

So, you know, as you think about the categories of temptation, there's like external temptation and then there's internal temptation. And that's part of what James is talking about when James says that, you know, each person is tempted when he's learned and enticed by his own desires.

So there's a kind of temptation that comes from without, meaning an offer presented towards evil. And then there's a type of temptation that's coming from within, meaning like my own sinful flesh, my own sinful heart is being pulled towards that offer.

So it's not just like an offer that I'm recoiling, like the entirety of my being is recoiling at. It's an offer that my heart wants and I'm struggling to resist. Right? Does that make sense? So, you know, is it a sin?

Like if you're trying to say, is it a sin to be tempted to sodomize another man? If you're talking about an external offer, no. If you're talking about an internal pull that's coming from a sinful heart, obviously.

Right? Obviously that would be sinful for me to be pulled towards sin. So, you know, depends on what we're saying. But then what the SSA movement essentially is doing is they are refusing to make that basic distinction.

And then they're treating all sin, they're treating all temptation as if it's just some purely neutral thing. Meaning it's just as if it were just some kind of external offer or something like that. They're not even working within those categories.

They're just treating it all as if it's just completely like it's not a sin to be tempted. You know, so long as you don't act on it kind of thing. And that just is a grossly naive view of how sin and temptation actually works.

So, you know, I don't even know how you get there in your mind where that kind of thing makes sense to you. It's almost as if you've totally surrendered all personal responsibility for everything that happens in your brain at that point.

As if, you know, the Bible had nothing to say about sinful desires or lust or anything else. It's just like how do you get there to where you've now taken, like you've erased the concept of lust. You've erased the concept of internal sinful desires.

And now it's just all about good behavior and bad behavior. And it's like, I don't get that. Right? Right.

Temptation in James and the Biblical Meaning of Desire

So, do we see, like, so you're saying temptation is simply like an offer. An offer. It's an offer. And in this context, it would be an offer to sin. Right? And then you're saying there's essentially two different categories of temptation.

The first one being like an external temptation. And that would be something like, yeah, when I'm trying to share the gospel with a guy. And I'm telling him to repent of his being attracted to other men.

And then he makes a move on me during that. That would be like an external offer. Right?

The offer or the invitation is coming from the outside purely. Right. And there's nothing in you that, there's not an inward pull towards it. There's no like, oh, I'd kind of like to see where that goes kind of thing.

It's just like, no, like the entirety of your being is like, no. Right? And you can imagine any number of scenarios just like that. I mean, just to give you a silly example, I'm not like a big fan of heights.

When me and my brother went to the Grand Canyon to visit, I stood behind him on the rail and looked the other way and kind of held onto his shirt because I don't like heights. But if someone were to say, hey, you want to go skydiving or something like that, that would be an offer.

Right? That I would, no. You would reject immediately. Yeah. There's nothing in me that would ever want to do that. Like at all. Ever. Like nothing. Like zero. Like no pull whatsoever. Go have fun. I'm good.

So an external temptation is something that's pure. You can be both at the same time though. Right? Yeah. Meaning you can have an external and an internal pull. So there's an external offer and an internal, like your heart is Desiring it.

Inviting you to do the same thing. Right? And then you're conflicted. Part of you wants to do it, part of you doesn't. There's a pull coming from inside or an invitation from the inside and an invitation from the outside.

So the one from the outside is neither here nor there, if that makes sense.

Right. Now, I think from a logical perspective, that makes a lot of sense. You have the two categories of external and then internal temptation. External being neutral, right? In terms of your own guilt.

But then internal being the one that has a negative moral consequence. Meaning it's a sin. So like I said, that makes sense from a logical perspective. Do we see these two categories in scriptures and the scriptures?

Yeah. Okay.

What are some examples? Let me clarify first. Okay. So I think the external one is largely neutral, but I wouldn't want to say it's always neutral. Meaning there are times where you're presented with offers that are only coming because you put yourself in a horrible situation.

So like the foolish man that I think Solomon sees going down to where he knows the promiscuous women will be, basically?

Yeah, and if you're doing that, then the issue is it's probably a little more complicated. I think there's something in you that's wanting to put yourself in a place where you might get that external offer, right?

Yeah. And then there is kind of a plausible deniability in the sense that you can say, well, I didn't know that that would happen, even though you did, and you're just trying to lie about it. Does that make sense?

Yeah. So in that kind of moment, you might have an internal pull to put yourself in a situation where you get an external offer that on paper you're saying you don't want, but then there was part of you that wanted to get the offer.

Does that make sense? Yeah. Even if you're nervous to act on it kind of thing. But largely, for the most part, external is external, and that makes sense, versus internal. But then you're asking, well, logically that makes sense.

Is that biblically true?

Do we see both categories biblically? Yeah, sure.

The only way you come up with those kind of categories is you're trying to make sense of a variety of different kinds of passages in the way that they actually work. So the Bible says that Jesus was tempted in all ways like us, except without sin.

And if you think about the nature of Jesus's temptations from the devil, you have to ask, well, Jesus was tempted with respect to bodily weakness, meaning that he is an individual who's God who's put on human flesh and dwelt among us.

And the God-man did suffer hunger. He did suffer from sickness. He did suffer from being cold and hot and tired and all that. So with respect to bodily weakness, he was tested in all the ways that were tested.

And then when you look at his temptation by the devil, the devil is certainly presenting offers to the Bible says he went into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil, right? Right. So Jesus is certainly being he's in a situation where the devil is presenting him with offers to sin, okay?

And so the word in that passage is clearly being used in it could mean more, but at the very least, the primary sense of it is the external offer, right? And Proverbs says, like, my son, if sinners entice you, right, do not consent.

So like this idea of being enticed or tempted in the Bible, there are plenty of examples that are talking about an external offer. Does that make sense? Yeah, yeah. So you don't have to now, like, that's just like, those are scenarios where the word itself is being used as an offer from the outside, okay?

Okay. Right. But then when you get to James, James says, let no one, you know, when he is being tempted, say he's being tempted by God. For God can't be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.

But each one is tempted when he's lured, essentially, and enticed by his own desires. And so that kind of temptation is like, the only way to describe that is an internal temptation. It's a temptation that comes from the desires, right?

Right.

You can't yeah, you can't say like, if you use if you read temptation in that passage the same way as the other one, then essentially the Bible is contradicting itself at that point, right? Because you have one that's saying he was tempted in every way, and Jesus is God, and then in the other passage it's saying God is never tempted, right?

Yeah, I mean yeah, I think, you know, essentially the contradiction would involve, like, if you think that Jesus so it's like a contradiction if you you have to harmonize a variety of passages, meaning so, like, meaning, like, okay, when Jesus went out into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil, like, that on the surface it reads external temptation, right?

Yeah. And then, like, when you read the narrative itself, you know, Satan says, like, you know, all the nations of the earth I'll give to you if you bow down and worship me. And, you know, Jesus' response is, like, you know, essentially to say like, I'm trying to think through which response he had to which temptation, you know, but, you know, it's written you should not put the Lord in God your test.

He says that when he asked him to throw him off the temple or throw himself off the temple because the, you know, angels will bear you up, and then, you know, when, like, he tempts him with the food, you know, he says, man shall not live by bread alone.

I can't remember the other one off the top of my head, but essentially Jesus he doesn't sound like he's being pulled from the inside in those, right? Mm-hmm. But if temptation always meant that, then you could read it in, so to speak, to say, well, I guess he was tempted, like, because that's what tempted means.

But then you do, you know, where that would be a contradiction would be, like, the Bible tells us in Colossians 3, 5, to put to death what is earthly in you, and what's earthly in you is, you know, sexual immorality, and then evil desire even, okay?

So, like, there are desires that are evil. The Bible tells us to hate the evil and love the good, right? Mm-hmm. There are passages which say that desires can be sinful, and so if Jesus if his temptation inherently meant he desired all the evil, then he's violating his own character at that point, and so at that point it becomes a contradiction.

But then there's other passages, too, you know, like, my son, if sinners entice you, do not consent. Like, there's nothing intrinsic to being enticed that is, like, an internal pull from the inside. You can just have individuals trying to pressure you to do something, and you can either want to do it and resist, or you not want to do it and tell them to go away kind of thing.

So, I don't know if that makes sense.

Yeah, yeah. No, no, that makes sense. I guess the question then becomes, well, thinking about that passage in James specifically, you know, I know I've talked to a lot of people who aren't even necessarily they think that temptation, internal temptation, is not a sin.

Only the action is a sin. Or I think I might have met some people, too, who they have a variation of that where they essentially say, you know, if you dwell on it for too long, it becomes a sin, whatever that means.

I've never no one's ever been able to give me, like, the what is it, like, five minutes, or is it, like, per thought?

This isn't a discussion that's unique to the SSA movement. It's also kind of a there's a lot of platitudes that are thrown out related to just what you might describe as heterosexual lust in order to help people feel better about, like, the presence of remnant lust in their own heart.

And part of it is, like, an effort to redefine, like, the nature of lust itself in order to, you know, not make people feel so bad about themselves. But, yeah, I understand where you're going with that.

Yeah, and oftentimes they go to that

So, like, if you picture the woman naked in your brain, you know, and you think about it for a few minutes, you know, just, you know, if at that point you say, you know, get that thought out of my brain, you did an okay job, right?

Right, yeah, like, if it's a, you know, like, you have the brief fleeting moment of, like, the thought that you know you shouldn't have, even though you're telling yourself that it's okay to have that thought, you know, it's okay to have that thought, you know you shouldn't have it.

And so, like, you try and get it away really quick. Well, then they would just say, well, no, that wasn't sinful because I got it away. You know, if I wanted it, I wouldn't have gotten it away, right?

And often, I mean, I've had that kind of conversation so many times with a lot of people. And what is always brought up is that passage in James, right? Because it seems like if you're just reading it at surface, you know, if you're just, like, read it at a glance, it does seem like James has different categories for desire, temptation, and sin.

You get what I'm saying?

Well, I know what you're saying, but...

You don't think I said it carefully enough?

No, you did. It's just, I disagree with the premise. Okay. But I understand what you're saying is the text says, like, then desire, when it conceives, it gives birth to sin. Right. And sin, when it's fully formed, brings forth death, right?

Right.

And so, when I talk to these people, they're telling me, hey, see, look, there's different categories.

Well, it's a different step process, yeah, is the way they're saying it. But, yeah, the only thing I'm objecting to is I don't think that the natural reading of the text is what they're saying. Okay. Like, the natural reading of the text is different than what they're saying.

It's just a pervasive confusion about the nature of language at that point. Okay, yeah. If that makes sense. Like, the straightforward reading of the passage is not saying, okay, there's, like, a neutral desire that is going to grow and grow and grow at some point and give birth to sin.

Right? Mm-hmm. So, that's what they're saying. They're saying, like, you can't help the desire. Desire is neutral. It's, like, but then once it grows to a certain point, it gives birth to sin. Like, that's not actually what it's saying.

Okay. Okay. That's just the common misunderstanding of what's being said. So, like, if you look at the passage, like, it's saying desire when it's conceived gives birth to sin. So, notice the timetable.

Like, so, think about the timetable there. Like, when the desire is conceived, it says it gives birth to sin. Meaning, like, all that's collapsed into one event. Do you understand what I'm saying?

Okay. Probably not. Meaning, like, the way that you read that passage is basically once the desire is conceived, it's giving birth to sin.

Once it enters into your mind, right? It's giving birth to sin, right? Yeah. So, you have to ask when is the desire conceived, right? Okay. So, you think about the normal birth metaphor. The normal birth metaphor is, like, you know, there's a well.

Go on. We're doing a birds and the bees lesson here, you know. Yeah, like the

Should have put a TVMA rating on this episode.

Think about the normal, you know, when a man's sperm and a woman's egg, you know, come together and are fertilized. That's what you call conception, right? Right. So, the normal process is, like, after conception, you have, like, this fertilized egg essentially implanting in a uterus, and then over the course of nine months, it grows and grows and grows and gives birth to sin, right?

Or gives birth to a baby. Yeah, a baby. A sinful baby. A sinful baby. All right. Good save. Good save. Yep. So, the issue is that, like, that process is a long process. But then what this passage is actually saying is it's saying when the desire is conceived, you know, when desire is conceived, it gives birth to sin, meaning it's collapsing the whole birthing process into, like, the moment that

A single event. A single event. And that's the most straightforward way to actually read it. Do you get what I'm saying? Uh-huh. Like, that's not, you know, trying to save a position. That's just what it's saying, okay?

Okay, yeah. When the desire is conceived, it gives birth to sin. And then when sin is fully grown, it brings forth death, right? Right. So, it's taking the growth part and not putting it, like, pre-birth.

It's putting it post-birth. Uh-huh. Does that make sense? Uh-huh. So, desire conceives immediately, brings when desire is conceived, it brings forth sin, right? And sin, when it's fully grown, brings forth death, essentially.

So, it's just it's taking the birth metaphor and modifying it that way.

But, like, if you leave that And I guess extra I don't mean to cut you off, but I want to say this before you move on. I guess the extra proof that that's the way to read it is when you think about, like so, think about Adam and Eve and their sin, right?

Uh-huh. Like, it's not like they sin and then, you know, the first time they face death is when their lives end, literally, right? Right. The first time they face death is immediately afterwards when God curses them, right?

Right. Which is why God said the day you eat of that tree, or the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you will surely die. So, he's saying that day, right? So, that's like a so, James is confirming that aspect of it.

Like, the moment you sin, you face death, right? And, you know, that's not to get into, like, original sin and whatnot. But, you know, you see a consistency there. So, if that's the way that you read one half of the statement, then you should probably I mean, you should probably read the other half of the statement that way as well, right?

When I'm talking about James, you know, the one half of the statement is death immediately comes when you sin. Even though he's like you're saying, he's using, like, a lifelong example as a metaphor, but he's compressing it down into essentially one single event, right?

Yeah, so, like, when the desire conceives, it immediately, it, you know, brings forth sin. And sin, when it's fully grown, it brings forth death. And so, you know, essentially, as you're let's see. When desire is conceived, it gives birth to sin.

Sin, when it's fully grown, brings forth death. So, I think you have that metaphor, the birthing metaphor is just being altered in terms of, like, at the moment of conception, you're giving the moment of the conception of desire, you're giving birth at the moment of conception to sin, right?

And then, like, the more that So, you're saying men can give birth? In a metaphorical sense.

Now, it's the sin, you know, the sin can give birth, not the men, but the sin and the men can give birth. Right, right. But, like, even if you don't even if you're confused there, like, I can propose an alternative interpretation that doesn't make sense to me, but it's the interpretation that other people are using.

Okay. And that, like, let's go with it for a second, and I still it doesn't change anything. So, meaning, like, let's say that, you know, when desire conceives, it gives birth to sin, somehow means you have a desire for a period of time that is growing and growing and growing.

I don't know how you get this grammatically, but then, all of a sudden, at some point, when the desire gets really big, then it gives birth to sin, okay? Mm-hmm. So, that's it's missing the change of metaphor.

Well, let's just go with that. Well, then, all you would have to do at that point is just say, well, they're talking about external sin at that point.

Okay. Like, the passage is limiting itself to external sin.

Right, because, like, the issue is you have so many other passages which describe internal sin, and this wouldn't be a passage that like, covetousness is an evil desire, right? Mm-hmm. Lust is an evil desire.

Like, you're told not to, you know, like, there's you agree to the law, the Ten Commandments, you're not supposed to desire your neighbor's property, you're not supposed to, you know, desire anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Like, that desire itself, as covetousness, is wrong, okay? Mm-hmm. Like, and so, as you read through the Bible, you know, we're told to put to death what's earthly in us, and that includes evil desires, okay?

Like, you know, we're supposed to love the good and hate the evil. The good man out of the good treasure of the good heart brings forth good. The evil man out of the evil treasure of an evil heart brings forth evil.

So that, like, we're talking about, like, evil desires. Like, the Bible, over and over again, has a category for evil desires. And what you don't want to do is you don't want to read James in such a way as to remove this category of evil desires, and then pretend that sin only happens once it's acted upon.

Like, that's just like, I don't know, like, Jesus says, if you look at a woman with lust, you've committed adultery in your heart. I don't know how you get from that to this category that, like, it's okay to want to do bad things so long as you don't externally act on it.

It's like there's two like, there's two dimensions to every sin, right? So, like, there's an internal desire, and there's an external desire for sin. Mm-hmm. And you can think through different passages that are going to talk about these two different aspects.

And, like, sometimes, like, the issue is sometimes, like, there's not an like, sometimes it's like you have different types of sin. So, you know, when Uzzah studied the ark, for instance, you probably wouldn't describe that as an internal evil desire, if you know what I mean.

Okay. Like, meaning like, I don't think Uzzah had any idea what the law said, that he wasn't supposed to touch the ark. Uh-huh. Right, right. So, when the cart starts to move, right, he reaches over to study the ark.

And as far as like, as far as the desire component of that act, I don't have anything to fault that desire.

Does that make sense? Right. Like, if anything, he's trying to, in his mind, protect the Ark. That would be a good desire, right?

Right, right. Like, to protect God and to protect His glory and to protect the ark and to keep it from, you know, being defiled by falling on the ground. Like, that's a fine thing, but then the issue is the external act itself was forbidden, right?

Uh-huh. And so, like, you can come up with a scenario like that where you have an external action with a good desire that still means Uzzah's dead, right? Yeah. And then in the opposite, you could think of, like, a bad desire that's restrained and doesn't lead to the bad behavior, right?

Uh-huh. So, there's plenty of times where you can, like, grit your teeth and do the right thing even though you don't want to. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Now, like, what's happened is you have a lot of people who come along and then they're looking at that transaction where you're gritting your teeth and doing the right thing.

And they're saying, well, that's a victory, right? And the issue is, yes, is it a victory? Yes, but it's not a total victory.

It's better than not doing it at all. Right. But it's not like a that's not what Jesus did.

Right, right. So, like, the issue is, like, yes, I would rather, you know, like, if an individual is tempted to, you know, have gay sex with a man, I would rather any day of the week that he say no to that.

Right. Even though everything in him is drawn towards that perverted act. But then the issue is, like, the Bible isn't just stopping. Like, the Bible doesn't just stop at the behavior. And it's only behavior that's bad.