What is the meaning of concupiscence in the Bible?

The last commandment strikes, not at the things people do or say, but at the thoughts of their hearts, "You shall not covet." To covet is to crave something that another has. Though one may not steal from another, yet only the craving for his possessions is sin. Paul focuses on this one law in Romans 7:7, where he clearly shows that he would not have considered covetousness as sin unless the law had declared this. Who has not been guilty of such desires? Nor can we get rid of this covetous attitude unless the Lord Jesus works in our hearts by new birth, causing us to willingly judge our motives and seek to live by wholehearted faith. Then, instead of being envious of others, we shall know how to unselfishly "rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep" (Rom.12:15). We shall be glad if others are blessed even if we are deprived, and this, not because the law commands not to covet, but because the grace of God is working in our hearts. It is the grace of God that teaches us "that, denying ungodliness and worldly lust, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present age" (Tit.2:11). The law told people to live in such a way, but it was unable to teach us, as grace does.

When we judge things according to our state, we are always under the law, in one way or another. The law gives the duties of our relations, but when it says, "Thou shalt not covet"; then it touches the root, the seat of evil in the heart. Nevertheless, the law does not say that man is lost; only the result is, that we cannot fulfil it. Some people quote James 1:14-15, and pretend that "concupiscence" is not "sin," unless the will consent to it; but in this passage sin is outward sin; whilst, instead, in Rom. 7:8, it is sin which works "concupiscence" and here sin is the cause and the root.

But this is not all. The law has its use, namely, in bringing out the consciousness of what we are - of our state. Was it the fault of the law, this dominion of sin, while we were under it? Nay, it was the fault of the sin, and lust which the law condemned. "But that," says the apostle, "I had not known, unless the law had said, Thou shalt not lust." If he had murdered, he would have known the fact; his natural conscience would have taken cognisance of it. But we are not treating of sins now (as before observed), but of sin. I had not known that, unless the law had dealt with its first movements as evil. Many have committed no crimes - have neither murdered, stolen, nor committed adultery; but who has never lusted? It would be to say, I am not a child of Adam at all. And note here, we are not speaking of guilt by acts, but of state; not of judgment, nor of forgiveness, but of deliverance, of setting free. And note further here, how great the error is of those who hold lust not to be sin if not consented to. The object here is to detect the evil nature by its first motion - lust. Not, indeed, what we have done, but what we are; and the sinfulness of flesh is detected by that first movement, which is lust - will in evil. It proves, by its sinfulness, the sinful source in me. I know that in me dwells no good. Important though humbling discovery! Not, I repeat, what I have done, but what I am; but how important that! What simple folly the thought to make the child of Adam good, unless he be born again!

How it aroused it the apostle likewise shows. — "I had not known sin, but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet [or lust]; ' but sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence [or lust]." There the very point is touched that reveals man's departure from God. To "lust" is to manifest a heart not in subjection to God. The "corruption which is in the world" is "through lust" (2 Peter 1:4). Had we not dropped away from the sense of God's wisdom and His love — did we believe in absolute goodness on a despotic throne, the Lord of heaven and earth our Father, — whatever the circumstances, how could one's heart crave more? how should it do other than rest absolutely?

Undue and unlawful lust. Rom. 7:8; Col. 3:5; 1 Thess. 4:5.

The word ἐπιθυμέω signifies 'to desire earnestly,' and is often translated 'desire,' without the thought of the desire being an evil one, as in Matt. 13:17; 1 Tim. 3:1; 1 Peter 1:12, etc. The English word 'lust' was anciently not always used in a bad sense, as it now is: see Deut. 12:15; Gal. 5:17.

"Desire" and "lust" are really the same word, as may be seen from many passages. For example, the word translated "lust" in the above scripture is the same as that in Phil. 1:23 (and a number of other places), where it could only be rendered "desire." It is the thing longed for that characterises the nature of the feeling cherished. If the object of the craving is good, according to God, then it is a holy desire. Thus the Lord Himself uses the word in question when He says to His disciples, "With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer." (Luke 22:15.) When the object, on the other hand, is evil, then the desire for it is "lust." Hence the apostle employs the word when he speaks of the "lusts of our flesh." (Ephesians 2:3.) There is consequently an important distinction to be noted. "Lust," as James teaches, has its origin in ourselves (chapter 1:14), but holy "desire" is the fruit of the action of the Spirit of God in the believer.

This is the doctrine. Now for the conclusions that may be deduced from it. Is the law, then, sin, that we are withdrawn from its authority? By no means. But it gave the knowledge of sin, and imputed it. For the apostle says, that he would not have understood that the mere impulse of his nature was sin, if the law had not said, Thou shalt not covet. But the commandment gave sin occasion to attack the soul. Sin, that evil principle of our nature, making use of the commandment to provoke the soul to the sin that is forbidden (but which it took occasion to suggest by the interdiction itself, acting also on the will which resisted the interdiction), produced all manner of concupiscence. For, without the law, sin could not plunge the soul into this conflict, and give the sentence of death in it, by making it responsible in conscience for the sin which, without this law, it would not have known. Under the law lust acted, with the conscience of sin in the heart; and the result was death in the conscience, without any deliverance for the heart from the power of concupiscence.

After the seventh verse, we have the details of the experience which is made of the law when it acts on a man in whom are found the two natures — the flesh and the inner man. Is the law sin, that we are withdrawn from its authority? But it gave the knowledge of sin and imputed it. The apostle says that he would not have understood that the mere impulse of his nature was sin if the law had not said, "thou shalt not covet." But the commandment gave sin the occasion to attack the soul. Sin, that evil principle of our nature, making use of the commandment to provoke the soul to the sin that is forbidden, (but which it took occasion to suggest by the interdiction itself, acting also on the will which resisted the interdiction,) produced all manner of concupiscence.

The truth is, as the apostle teaches us, "the law entered that the offence might abound." (Rom. 5:20) This shows us, very distinctly, the real object of the law. It came in by the way in order to set forth the exceeding sinfulness of sin. (1 Cor. 7:13) It was, in a certain sense, like a perfect mirror let down from heaven to reveal to man his moral derangement. If I present myself, with deranged hair, before a mirror, it shows me the derangement, but does not set it right. If I measure a crooked wall, with a perfect plumb-line, it reveals the crookedness, but does not remove it. If I take out a lamp on a dark night, it reveals to me all the hindrances and disagreeables in the way, but it does not remove them. Moreover, the mirror, the plumb-line, and the lamp, do not create the evils which they severally point out; they neither create nor remove, but simply reveal. Thus is it with the law; it does not create the evil in man's heart, neither does it remove it; but, with unerring accuracy, it reveals it.

"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Yea, I had not known sin but by the law; for I had not known lust except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." (Rom. 7:7) He does not say that he would not have had "lust." No; but merely that "he had not known it." The "lust" was there; but he was in the dark about it until the law, as "the candle of the Almighty," shone in upon the dark chambers of his heart and revealed the evil that was there. Like a man in a dark room, who may be surrounded with dust and confusion, but he cannot see ought thereof by reason of the darkness. Let the beams of the sun dart in upon him, and he quickly perceives all. Do the sunbeams create the dust? Surely not. The dust is there, and they only detect and reveal it. This is a simple illustration of the effect of the law. It judges man's character and condition. It proves him to be a sinner and shuts him up under the curse. It comes to judge what he is, and curses him if he is not what it tells him he ought to be.