Dear Editor,
I have read the debate between Matthew Roberts and John Stevens on “concupiscence” and have to confess that I did not fully understand it!
It seems to revolve around the question of when temptation becomes sinful. These two men have bigger minds than I do and are trained theologians, unlike myself. I have always found the proverb helpful that says something like “You cannot stop a bird landing on your head, but you can stop it nesting there”!
Matthew Roberts is clearly concerned about the idea that someone can have same-sex attraction and still remain without sin. I have never experienced such attraction, so I am in no position to comment on that particular matter. It is clear that Jesus was both tempted and without sin (Heb. 4:15). It is also clear that Paul experienced covetousness, which of necessity is internal (Rom. 7:7-9). So I can understand something of the issue here.
In my limited experience, sin is messy and difficult and I do not understand my own heart (Jer.17:9). I suppose that is how most Christians feel. The difficulty comes when we try to translate that into rules for others, and I suggest that this road leads to legalism. Why do I want to make things more definite than Scripture? Will I make things even clearer or better?
Yours sincerely,
Andy Woods
Gloucester
