This is one of those times where each translation agrees across the board
Most, but not all (the Wycliffe translation doesn't for example). The ones that do all agree on "lust" as the translation do so because all Bible translations in use today post-date man-made doctrines that separated the concept of "lust' from the concept of "covetousness" and spun it off into its own separate sin (when in fact every instance of "lust" used to refer to sin in the Bible is referring to coveting something that either belongs to someone else or is otherwise expressly forbidden for one to have).
Technically, it could be said that "lust" isn't necessarily a mistranslation in and of itself, as long as one understands that it is covetousness and not a separate category of sin in its own right.
but you want to find the interpretation that agrees with how the satanic world wants us to behave
Not at all. The "Satanic World" wants no restrictions at all. Translating Matthew 5:28 correctly (with "covet" instead of "lust") and with the understand that it's referring specifically to married women), doesn't retract any of the many commandments restricting sexual behavior.
Also keep in mind that less restrictive doesn't always equal more Satanic; Satan wants man-made commandments to exist in Christianity in order to drive away potential believers and create stumbling blocks for believers.
This is one of those times where each translation agrees across the board
Most, but not all (the Wycliffe translation doesn't for example). The ones that do all agree on "lust" as the translation do so because all Bible translations in use today post-date man-made doctrines that separated the concept of "lust' from the concept of "covetousness" and spun it off into its own separate sin (when in fact every instance of "lust" used to refer to sin in the Bible is referring to coveting something that either belongs to someone else or is otherwise expressly forbidden for one to have).
Technically, it could be said that "lust" isn't necessarily a mistranslation in and of itself, as long as one understands that it is covetousness and not a separate category of sin in its own right.
but you want to find the interpretation that agrees with how the satanic world wants us to behave
Not at all. The "Satanic World" wants no restrictions at all. Translating Matthew 5:28 translated correctly (with "covet" instead of "lust") and with the understand that it's referring specifically to married women), doesn't retract any of the many commandments restricting sexual behavior.
Also keep in mind that less restrictive doesn't always equal more Satanic; Satan wants man-made commandments to exist in Christianity in order to drive away potential believers and create stumbling blocks for believers.
This is one of those times where each translation agrees across the board
Most, but not all (the Wycliffe translation doesn't for example). The ones that do all agree on "lust" as the translation do so because all Bible translations in use today post-date man-made doctrines that separated the concept of "lust' from the concept of "covetousness" and spun it off into its own separate sin (when in fact every instance of "lust" used to refer to sin in the Bible is referring to coveting something that either belongs to someone else or is otherwise expressly forbidden for one to have).
Technically, it could be said that "lust" isn't necessarily a mistranslation in and of itself, as long as one understands that it is covetousness and not a separate category of sin in its own right.
but you want to find the interpretation that agrees with how the satanic world wants us to behave
Not at all. The "Satanic World" wants no restrictions at all. Translating Matthew 5:28 translated correctly (with "covet" instead of "lust") and with the understand that it's referring specifically to married women), doesn't retract any of the many commandments restricting sexual behavior.
Also keep in mind that less restrictive doesn't always equal less Satanic; Satan wants man-made commandments to exist in Christianity in order to drive away potential believers and create stumbling blocks for believers.