Self-pleasure as a sin

[Jedi]

“Does this mean people who behave in such ways are “inherently evil?” No. They’re just confused about how to satisfy their genuine desires for love."

So not using something only in the way the designer designed it is to be confused? That’s nonsensical. I know very well the purpose for sexuality – simply choosing to use it in another way (that doesn’t hinder that purpose) in no way necessitates confusion.

The interesting jump is when in the next verses he speaks of the sexual sins of people and them being given over to their shameful lusts...it is a parallel in that people who seek things other than a god-centred, marital sexual relationship are exchanging that which is made perfect and to be an example of God's providence

WOAH! Look at what the text says, friend. They’re talking about homosexuality and being “inflamed with lust for one another.” There is no textual or philosophical reason whatsoever to throw masturbation into that mix.

With masturbation it is such a falling short of the beauty of a sexual relationship between husband and wife that it is in itself an atrocity such as someone worshipping an idol made of wood or stone rather than the Immortal, Invisible, Almighty God!

You have got to be kidding. Simply because something is not being used only for the purpose for which it was designed does not make it an “atrocity.” Where do you people come up with this stuff?

There is a human, rationalistic, and humanistic response (this is not an insult nor duplication of terms) that is coming from one "camp" that refuses to engage the Biblical arguments of the other "camp".

That’s a false presentation of the situation. The other “camp” has no Biblical arguments. No one, not a single soul, has shown how masturbation is condemned by scripture either explicitly or by principle. It’s just that simple.

When answers such as was given by enelya_taralom relating to the demand for a "passage" by Jedi, and then giving it, and having that glossed over shows there is a difference in opinion as to what is essential in a dialogue or debate.

If you feel something was glossed over or that my response was somehow inadequate, please, explain how. Looking back, I have responded to every bit of “evidence” provided to me by others from scripture and have only explained how the texts presented are of no use in condemning masturbation as inherently sinful.

There is enough biblical and reasonable evidence to cast doubt into the minds of reasonable believers as to the nature of self-pleasuring as a means of biological release or personal gratification.

And it is this attitude in the church that makes me want to spit every time someone wants to promote it: if it feels good, it must be bad; if you do something for yourself, you’re a devil.

No one has called anyone a devil (though that has been attributed to me by Jedi in an earlier post)

When you throw masturbation in with homosexuality and idolatry, think just for a moment how that might come across. Just for a moment. Ponder. Hmmm…

Should we compare the historical Christian standard to your personal view, Jedi, at all points and then declare all who disagree with your position to be either ungodly or unreasonable?

Um, no… but if you can’t show any basis from which to condemn masturbation as inherently sinful, why in the world should anyone believe it to be such?

Would you well defend yourself biblically or ethically were this debate between you and Paul, you and Acquinas?

Yes. Smart as they were, Paul and Aquinas were not perfect. Do not make the mistake that because Paul’s writings became scripture that all of what Paul said and did was flawless and anyone who disagreed with him was wrong by default.

Do you claim you are using the Mind of Christ as believers are said to possess, and thus representing the perspective of Jesus rather than your own reason?

I use reason to get my points across – I don’t make unsupportable claims of being a divine mouthpiece.

I grew up in a church where the girls around me displayed the “Ew! Sex is icky!” mentality. For anyone to even speak of it was analogous to speaking in a demonic tongue. These people are fake – they disgust me. Or perhaps they’re just ignorant of the raw pleasure their bodies are feeling. Either way, I have no respect for their opinions; they are either fake or stupid and I quickly draw my mental weapons whenever they wish to speak condescendingly about those who are real about sex & pleasure.

The more we use a part of our brain, the more it develops. It’s just a psychological fact. My big concern is that the church today chokes sex to death so that all the sexual feelings people have – especially women – are more suppressed than they ought to be and that part of their brains is shriveling up like a raisin. When it comes to my honeymoon, I can only pray to God that my wife isn’t hypnotized by the church to the point where her interest and ability to experience sexual pleasure has faded almost to nothing. I have no idea who she is, but you want to know something? I hope she masturbates. I pray she thinks sexual thoughts. Why? Because then she has a significant interest in sex and that is going to make our marriage all the spicier. I will be darned to heck if the church is going to choke my sex life to death.

 

[caireann]

Very boldly stated, and well said!!

 

[Jedi]

Very boldly stated, and well said!!

Oh, well thank you. (j/k)

 

[caireann]

oops... sorry Jedi... that was for Fandera :o

 

[enelya_taralom]

No doubt sex can be symbolic of a union between God and the church, but nowhere does scripture teach marriage or sex to be that alone, especially since Christ didn’t come along until about 4 B.C.E. and people were marrying and having sex long before then.

I expect that my involvement in this thread is at an end, or will be less, as this week is shaping up to be very busy for me, but I wanted to quickly throw some ideas out relating to this.

Personally, I love the idea of marriage being a symbol of the Kingdom. Frankly, given that the Kingdom and marriage with God and Christ (Mt 22:30, Hosea 2:19, Rev 19:7) are our ultimate destinations, I fail to see how marriage and sex could be anything but. Especially when one considers what the articles say about Christ giving up his body for us, and us doing the same in marriage (or celibacy). It all parallels what Christ did (for more see the pasted article).

Now, in regard to sex and marriage before Christ, we have to remember that with Christ, our ability to relate to God was changed. We don't offer animal sacrifices anymore as Christ came to be the ultimate sacrifice. He changed the way we relate to God in that sense, as such, it's possible (and plausable) to also consider that He restored / redemeed our relation to God in marriage and sex; especially in light of Matthew 19: 3 - 9:


Some Pharisees came to Him to test Him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"


"Haven't you read",he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' (Gen 1:27)" and said, " 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' (Gen 2:24)' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not seperate."


"Why then, " they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"


Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except from martial unfaithfulness and marries another commits adultery."


Course, on another level, there seems to be little reason to not think that, just as animal sacrifrice was a forshadow and symbol of Christ's sacrifice (The unblemished lamb at passover- Exodus 12: 1-30, Leviticus 14:11-20, Isaiah 53), sex and marriage, even in the OT, foreshadowed what Christ would do and as such still proclaimed and symbolised our ultimate unity with and destiny in Him.

This makes sex and marriage all the more meaningful. Makes it so much more than the carnal....

 

[enelya_taralom]

From: http://www.christopherwest.com/article1.asp

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]A Basic Theology of Marriage[/FONT]
by Christopher West


The twentieth century witnessed significant developments in the Church’s theology of marriage, beginning with Pope Pius XI’s 1930 encyclical Casti Connubii, passing through the Second Vatican Council and Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae, and culminating in the manifold writings and original insights of Pope John Paul II. In fact, over two thirds of what the Catholic Church has ever said about marriage in her two thousand year history has come from John Paul II’s pontificate.[1]

The Second Vatican Council marked a shift from a merely “juridical” presentation of marriage, typical of many previous Church pronouncements, to a more “personalist” approach. In other words, rather than focusing merely on the objective “duties,” “rights,” and “ends” of marriage, the Council Fathers emphasized how these same duties, rights, and ends are informed by the intimate, interpersonal love of the spouses. “Such love, merging the human and the divine, leads the spouses to a free and mutual gift of themselves, a gift providing itself by gentle affection, and by deed; such love pervades the whole of their lives, growing better and growing greater by its generosity.”[2]

Explaining how conjugal love is a “merging of the human and the divine” is the task of a theology of marriage. While much more can and should be said than this article allows,[3] we can at least present a basic marital theology. We’ll start with a definition of marriage gleaned from Vatican II and Canon Law, and then explain each of its points.


A Definition of Marriage


Marriage is the intimate, exclusive, indissoluble communion of life and love entered by man and woman at the design of the Creator for the purpose of their own good and the procreation and education of children; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.[4]
Intimate communion of life and love: Marriage is the closest and most intimate of human friendships. It involves the sharing of the whole of a person’s life with his/her spouse. Marriage calls for a mutual self-surrender so intimate and complete that spouses – without losing their individuality – become “one,” not only in body, but in soul.

Exclusive communion of life and love: As a mutual gift of two persons to each other, this intimate union excludes such union with anyone else. It demands the total fidelity of the spouses. This exclusivity is essential for the good of the couple’s children as well.


Indissoluble communion of life and love: Husband and wife are not joined by passing emotion or mere erotic inclination which, selfishly pursued, fades quickly away.[5] They are joined in authentic conjugal love by the firm and irrevocable act of their own will. Once their mutual consent has been consummated by genital intercourse, an unbreakable bond is established between the spouses. For the baptized, this bond is sealed by the Holy Spirit and becomes absolutely indissoluble. Thus, the Church does not so much teach that divorce is wrong, but that divorce is impossible, regardless of its civil implications.

Entered by man and woman: The complementarity of the sexes is essential to marriage. There is such widespread confusion today about the nature of marriage that some would wish to extend a legal “right” to marry to two persons of the same sex. The very nature of marriage makes such a proposition impossible.

At the design of the Creator: God is the author of marriage. He inscribed the call to marriage in our very being by creating us as male and female. Marriage is governed by his laws, faithfully transmitted by his Bride, the Church. For marriage to be what it is, we must conform to these laws. Man, therefore, is not free to change the meaning and purposes of marriage.

For the purpose of their own good: “It is not good that the man should be alone” (Gn 2:18). Conversely, it’s for their own good, for their benefit, enrichment, and ultimately their salvation, that a man and woman join their lives in marriage. Marriage is the most basic expression of the vocation to love that all men and women have as persons made in God’s image.

And the procreation and education of children: “By their very nature, the institution of marriage itself and conjugal love are ordained for the procreation and education of children and find in them their ultimate crown.”[6] Children are not added on to marriage and conjugal love, but spring from the very heart of the spouses mutual self-giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. Intentional exclusion of children, then, contradicts the very nature and purpose of marriage.

Covenant: While marriage involves a legal contract, this must be subordinate to the spousal covenant which provides a stronger, more sacred framework for marriage. A covenant goes beyond the minimum rights and responsibilities guaranteed by a contract. A covenant calls the spouses to share in the free total, faithful, and fruitful love of God. For it is God who, in the image of his own Covenant with his people, joins the spouses in a more binding and sacred way than any human contract.

The dignity of a sacrament: Marriage between baptized persons is an efficacious sign of the union between Christ and the Church, and, as such, is a means of grace (see below for a more thorough discussion). The marriage of two non-baptized persons, or of one baptized person and one non-baptized person, is considered by the Church a “good and natural” marriage. While not sacramental, such marriages are holy unions that share in the same goods and purposes of sacramental marriage.


The Centrality of Marriage in God’s Plan


“Sacred Scripture begins with the creation of man and woman in the image and likeness of God and concludes with a vision of the ‘wedding feast of the Lamb.’ Scripture speaks throughout of marriage and its ‘mystery,’ its institution and the meaning God has given it, its origin and its end, ...the difficulties arising from sin, and its renewal ‘in the Lord.’”[7] Throughout the Old Testament, God’s love for his people is described as the love of a husband for his bride. In the New Testament, Christ embodies this love. He comes as the Heavenly Bridegroom to unite himself indissolubly to his Bride, the Church.


Marriage, then, is not a peripheral issue in the Christian life. It finds itself right at the heart of the Christian mystery and, by means of its grand analogy, serves to illuminate it. All analogies are inadequate in their attempts to communicate God’s mystery. Yet, speaking of marriage and the family John Paul states, “In this entire world there is not a more perfect, more complete image of God, Unity and Community. There is no other human reality which corresponds more, humanly speaking, to that divine mystery.”[8]

Pope John Paul II goes so far as to say that we cannot understand the Christian mystery unless we keep in mind the “great mystery” involved in the creation of man as male and female and the vocation of both to conjugal love.[9] According to the analogy, God’s eternal plan is to “marry” us (see Hos 2:19). He wanted this eternal plan to be so present to us that he stamped an image of it in our very being by creating us male and female and calling us to marriage.


Male & Female: Image of the Trinity


The human person is made in God’s image (see Gn 1:27). John Paul II brings a dramatic development to Catholic thinking by positing this image not only in our humanity as individuals, but also in the communion of male and female.

As John Paul II says, “God is love and in himself he lives a mystery of personal loving communion. Creating the human race in his own image, ...God inscribed in the humanity of man and woman the vocation, and thus the capacity and responsibility, of love and communion. Love is therefore the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being.” The Pope continues, “Christian revelation recognizes two specific ways of realizing the vocation of the human person, in its entirety, to love: marriage, and virginity or celibacy. Either one is in its own proper form an actuation of the most profound truth of man, of his being ‘created in the image of God.’”[10]

Thus, marriage and Christian celibacy are not in conflict, but stem from the very same call to the sincere gift of self in “nuptial” love. Every man is called, in some sense, to be both a husband and a father. Every woman is called, in some sense, to be both a wife and a mother. This is why the terms husband, wife, father, mother, brother, and sister are applicable to both marriage and the celibate vocation. Both, in different but complementary ways, form us into the one family of God.

Marriage is an earthly foreshadowing of the heavenly reality of love and communion. When Christ calls some to celibacy “for the sake of the kingdom” (Mt 19:12), he calls some to “leapfrog” over the sacrament in order to devote all of their desires for union to the marriage that alone can satisfy: the heavenly marriage of Christ and the Church.


Marriage: Sacrament of Christ & the Church


The marriage of Christians is a sacrament by virtue of the spouses baptisms. In other words, marriage is a living sign that truly communicates the love of Christ and the Church. The spouses’ vows lived out in their daily commitment, and most specifically in their “one flesh” union, constitute this living sign.[11] As St. Paul says, “‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the church” (Eph 5:31-32).


Since the “one flesh” union of man and wife foreshadowed Christ and the Church right from “the beginning,” John Paul II speaks of marriage as the primordial sacrament. “All the sacraments of the new covenant find in a certain sense their prototype in marriage,” says the Holy Father.[12] This is why Baptism is a “nuptial bath”[13] and why the Eucharist is “the Sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride.”[14] When we receive the body of Christ into our own, in a mysterious way, like a bride, we conceive new life in us – life in the Holy Spirit. It is this same Holy Spirit that forms the bond that unites spouses in the Sacrament of Marriage.

This is the “profound mystery” in which marriage participates. The Eucharist, then, is the very source of Christian Marriage. “In the Eucharistic gift of charity the Christian family finds the foundation and soul of its ‘communion’ and its ‘mission,’”[15] that is, to love as God loves.


The Marital Embrace


The free exchange of consent properly witnessed by the Church establishes the marriage bond. Sexual union consummates it – seals it, completes it, perfects it. Sexual union, then, is where the words of the wedding vows become flesh. The very “language” that God has inscribed in sexual intercourse is the language of the marriage covenant: the free commitment to a union of love that is indissoluble, faithful, and open to children.
If spouses willfully contradict any of these goods of marriage in their sexual expressions, marital intimacy becomes less than God intended it to be. In turn, spouses, rather than renewing their vows through intercourse, contradict them. In practical terms, how healthy would a marriage be if spouses were regularly unfaithful to their vows? On the other hand, how healthy would a marriage be if spouses regularly renewed their vows, expressing an ever-increasing commitment to them?

The often disputed sexual moral teachings of the Church become lucid when seen through this lens. Like all sacramental realities, if sexual union (as the consummate expression of the sacrament of marriage) is truly to communicate God’s life and love, then it must accurately symbolize it.

Sexual union that is free, total, faithful, and open to new life (i.e., sexual union that truly expresses wedding vows) symbolizes and participates in the communion of Christ and the Church. Masturbation, fornication, adultery, intentionally sterilized sex, homosexual acts, etc.– none of these accurately symbolize, and thus never bring about the love of Christ for the Church. None of these behaviors are marital. Thus, for sexual union to consummate a marriage it must be performed in a “human manner” and be “per se suitable for the generation of children.”[16]

 

[enelya_taralom]

Marriage and the Rupture Caused by Sin


This sublime vision of marriage often meets with much cynicism and resistance. When Jesus proclaimed the permanent nature of marriage, even his disciples said to him, “If this is the situation for a husband and a wife, it is better not to marry” (Mt 19:10).


Universal experience reveals that marriage is wrought with difficulties. “According to faith, the discord we notice so painfully does not stem from the nature of man and woman, nor from the nature of their relations, but from sin. As a break with God, the first sin had for its first consequence the rupture of the original communion between man and woman.”[17]

History affirms the poignant story in Genesis attesting to the havoc wrought in the sexual relationship as a result of our disobedience to God. Male and female differences, rather than complementing one another and bringing about communion, are often a cause of great tension and division. Sexual attraction itself, originally given by God to be the power to love as he loves, tends to be – because of sin – a desire for self-gratification at the expense of others.

All of this inflicts deep personal wounds on husbands, wives, and their children who, in turn, often grow up to repeat the same fallen patterns of relating. Hence, it becomes easy to loose faith in marriage. Even Moses conceded to human weakness and allowed divorce. Yet, as Jesus says, “For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce.” But then he adds that “from the beginning it was not so” (Mt 19:8).

Christ is able to restore God’s original plan for marriage as the norm because, unlike Moses, Christ is able to remove our “hardness of heart.” His miracle at the wedding in Cana tells the story of marital redemption. If couples have “run out of the wine” needed to live marriage according to God’s original plan, Christ came into the world to “restore the wine” in super abundance (see Jn 2).


A Call to Conversion


If men and women are to experience marriage as God intended it “in the beginning,” they must consciously renounce all that is contrary to God’s plan and continually surrender themselves to the grace of redemption. The cross of Christ, therefore, lies at the center of the Church’s theology of marriage.

Since it was man and woman’s turning away from God that distorted their relationship in the first place, it makes sense that restoring marriage requires a radical return to God. Thus, an authentic theology of marriage is not only informational but, above all, transformational. It calls couples to a life of ongoing personal conversion. Only as spouses renounce themselves and take up their crosses to follow Christ can they experience the true joys of marriage that God ardently wishes to shower upon them.

Marriage and family life find themselves, as Pope John Paul II explains, “at the center of the great struggle between good and evil, between life and death, between love and all that is opposed to love.”[18] Living the truth about marriage, then, is a very difficult struggle, even for those with solid moral formation. This struggle brings us to the heart of the “spiritual battle” (Eph 6:12) that we must fight as Christians if we are to resist evil (in the world and in ourselves) and love each other as Christ loves his Bride, the Church.


Good News for the World


History tells the tale of entire nations separating from the Church because of disputes over the nature and meaning of marriage. In the face of fierce persecution and resistance, right up to our own day, the Church stands firm in her teaching. Why is the Church so obstinate? Because marriage is the primordial sacrament of God’s love. To diminish in any way the nature and meaning of married love is to diminish the nature and meaning of God’s love.


The Church’s teaching on marriage can seem almost impossible to live. “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible” (Mt 19:26). As we surrender our lives to the grace of redemption, it is truly possible to know the joy and freedom that come from living and loving according to our true dignity as men and women made in the image and likeness of God. It is truly possible for men and women, husbands and wives, to experience restoration of proper balance and mutual self-giving in their relationship.

This is the Good News of the Gospel. The Holy Spirit has been poured into our hearts (Rom 5:5). The Spirit of love makes the cross of Christ fruitful in our lives enabling us to live the full truth about marriage. The Church never ceases to proclaim this Good News for the salvation of every man and woman.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]John Paul II’s “theology of the body” – a collection of 129 addresses delivered between September 1979 and November 1984 – provides the Pope’s most extensive biblical theology of marriage.
[2]Gaudium et Spes, n. 49
[3]For further expositions see Christopher West, Good News About Sex & Marriage (Servant, 2000) and Theology of the Body Explained (Pauline, 2003).
[4]Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 48 and Code of Canon Law, Can. 1055
[5]Cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 49
[6]Gaudium et Spes, n. 48
[7]Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1602
[8]Homily on the Feast of the Holy Family, December 30, 1988
[9]Cf. Letter to Families, n. 19
[10]Familiaris Consortio, n. 11
[11]Cf. John Paul II, General Audience 1/5/83
[12]General Audience 10/20/82
[13]Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1617
[14]Mulieris Dignitatem, n. 26
[15]Familiaris Consortio, n. 57
[16]Canon 1061
[17]Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1606, 1607
[18]Letter to Families, n. 23

 

[Jedi]

Frankly, given that the Kingdom and marriage with God and Christ (Mt 22:30, Hosea 2:19, Rev 19:7) are our ultimate destinations, I fail to see how marriage and sex could be anything but.

Sure it could: a union between a man and woman. I do not see anything about marriage/sex that necessitates an analogy to God and His people. There may be an analogy there, but sex/marriage can also stand on its own merit; it is a thing in and of itself, not merely a sign pointing to something else.

Course, on another level, there seems to be little reason to not think that, just as animal sacrifrice was a forshadow and symbol of Christ's sacrifice (Isaiah 53), sex and marriage, even in the OT, foreshadowed what Christ would do and as such still proclaimed and symbolised our ultimate unity with and destiny in Him.

Eh… be very careful about putting Jesus in the Old Testament. People who Christologize the Old Testament demonstrate poor scholarship. The Messiah is mentioned only in a few choice places and none of them are linked to sex, so to say that sex symbolized what was to come with Christ for those living before 4 B.C.E… there’s just no basis for that.

In the end, I think this is a moot point, for even if sex were necessarily, inherently, and only a device to point to God’s union with His people, it does not negate the possibility to use sexuality in an alternative method for as long as that method does not hinder the purpose of sexuality.

 

[enelya_taralom]

Yet a major flaw with many humans (and I include myself) is lust or is it that we use the word lust as a surpression of our sexuality? As our for-fathers have done? As the showing of one's skin was once thought to be [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tish. Ophilia was the first painting which caused contraversy because of the expression a female nude was looking at the audience with.

What I am getting at is, that our purpose may not be to be sexually active but it has been surpressed in many different ways, using many different devices, even christianity. [/font]

Yes, unfortunatley Christianty has been used as a device for evil many things throughout our history. Lust has definitely been used, is being used and probably will always be used as a way of surpressing the sexual. But at the same time, it has been, is being and may always will be ignored or treated as a lesser issue in the name of sexual liberation and/or rebellion against the surpression. The thing is though, lust is still a very real thing that can have some very real consquences. A such a balance must be sought. But, really, that's the thing with people, we're prone to letting our pride, selfishness, hate etc lead us to abuse of our gifts, religion, God and Saviour (Philippians 2:21)

We just have to try to love, forgive, pray and "seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of the Father" (Colossians 3 :1) with a humble and soft heart.

God Bless you kopilo

 

[fandera]

Sure it could: a union between a man and woman. I do not see anything about marriage/sex that necessitates an analogy to God and His people. There may be an analogy there, but sex/marriage can also stand on its own merit; it is a thing in and of itself, not merely a sign pointing to something else.

The Church is the Bride of Christ...how much more clear does the analogy need to be? Obviously marriage is not a necessity, nor personal sexual activity, for oneness with Christ (or Christ Himself is in that way incomplete as an unmarried man in the Hebrew sense - a virgin!)

Jedi, you are dodging the Biblical arguments to ponder how things sound. I agree...there are things about a sincere faith that will sound to some like foolishness. I have such a sincere faith and do not judge the sincerity of any others. If I read Romans correctly, there is a comparison between "wrong belief" and "wrong sexuality" that can be used as a reference point in this debate. You can disagree...or continue to call me a devil for this conviction of study and prayer. I will not attempt to "out-reason" you on this or any topic...but you have fallen short of giving a Biblical perspective that engages the role of marriage as the only acceptable avenue for sexual gratification, save celebacy (as grace-gifted by God as in the case of Paul). I will energetically await a Biblical exposition of your position, but without that I will have to say that you have reasoned to best of your ability and not proven a point stronger than the interpretations and expositions of the text of The Word as shared by many on this forum. Your reasoning is, as you have admitted, the foundation you stand on, as well as a personal reaction to the negative results of people demonizing sexuality and sexual activity. Believe me, sexual fulfillment is a central grace of God for all mankind, though it is similarly the biggest area of moral failure in mankind. If your reasoning causes you to skirt the issue of personal pleasure above the wisdom (I will not say command) of Scripture as shared by the many in this topic, where do you think people should cast their vote of approval or endorsement?

I would say that you have done little to state a Biblical case. Would you agree?

I would say that through the articles, articulations of fellow forum members, and shared texts, there has been a large body of Scripture used in refuting the stance that masturbation is a perfectly reasonable expression of our sexuality and a moral way for a believer to please themselves. You haven't yet agreed with this.

I would say, in closing, if you are able and willing to present a reasonably treatment of the Biblical material presented, or other passages you have studied, there would great "food for thought" for things to be considered and weighed carefully by believers (1 cor 14). I would like to weigh the depth of your argument on the foundation of the Word (that is both on Christ and the words of Scripture), and hope you are up to the task of presenting your views biblically rather than just rationally. Though ration can, and must, build on the foundation of Scripture, it cannot build simply on itself and be thought of as wise in the same sense that Scripture is. I'm not certain I would agree with you, but if there werre a foundation of Scripture we could start on there may be more to be shared or learned. Would you do this?

Thank you again for your time, though you have used it to shred much of what people have spent much time in their word and prayer about for the sake of reason, you have given at least as much of yourself to this as any has, and that is worth much.

Peacce,

 

[Jedi]

The Church is the Bride of Christ...how much more clear does the analogy need to be?

Be sure not to make the mistake of taking an analogy backwards: that sex was meant to be only a sign pointing to a union with Christ because a union with Christ was compared to sex.

Jedi, you are dodging the Biblical arguments to ponder how things sound.

I really don’t see where I’ve dodged any arguments. On the contrary, I’ve responded to show how the arguments really don’t accomplish what some people want them to accomplish.

You can disagree...or continue to call me a devil for this conviction of study and prayer.

“Continue to call you a devil?” Heh, friend, I haven’t made any such accusation – on the contrary, the accusation has been tossed at those who touch.

I will not attempt to "out-reason" you on this or any topic...but you have fallen short of giving a Biblical perspective that engages the role of marriage as the only acceptable avenue for sexual gratification, save celebacy (as grace-gifted by God as in the case of Paul).

How many times do I have to say this? It is not my place. The burden of proof is not on me to show how masturbation is outlawed and marriage is the only context to experience sexual pleasures. Again, any act is morally innocent until proven guilty. If you want to condemn masturbation, the burden of proof is on you – not me.

If your reasoning causes you to skirt the issue of personal pleasure above the wisdom (I will not say command) of Scripture as shared by the many in this topic, where do you think people should cast their vote of approval or endorsement?

Do not take comfort in numbers, friend. Often times, a consensus means only that all the fools are on the same side. To date, I have seen no biblical evidence, whether by explicit command or principle, that condemns masturbation as inherently wrong. It is this constant failure that stares those who wish to condemn masturbation straight in the face.

I would say that you have done little to state a Biblical case. Would you agree?

(1) It is not my place in this discussion to provide evidence of masturbation’s innocence, only to point out the lack of philosophical and scriptural condemnation and having it remain innocent from the start, (2) I have pointed out the problem of “silence amidst abundance” in scripture for those who wish to condemn masturbation and no one has given an adequate response.

I would say that through the articles, articulations of fellow forum members, and shared texts, there has been a large body of Scripture used in refuting the stance that masturbation is a perfectly reasonable expression of our sexuality and a moral way for a believer to please themselves. You haven't yet agreed with this.

If you want to post articles, I assure you, I can send you an information overload that will melt your brain and make your eyeballs pop out of your head. If you want to debate, then debate – I have little regard for those who wish to post books online in a forum and presume that, since the other party did not respond to all the copy & paste work, they have been beaten by the quality of the work (when in actuality, it was the quantity of the text that earned the silence from the opposition). I adamantly, adamantly disagree with those who condemn masturbation as inherently sinful and have yet to see a single ounce of biblical text or principle that supports them in their condemnation.

I would say, in closing, if you are able and willing to present a reasonably treatment of the Biblical material presented, or other passages you have studied, there would great "food for thought" for things to be considered and weighed carefully by believers (1 cor 14).

Once again, there hasn’t been a shred of biblical evidence to support the condemnation of masturbation, whether explicitly or by principle. If you want to post some evidence, then by all means do so, but do not go about pretending there has been an abundance presented when there is not even an ounce to show for it. Again, since any act is innocent until proven guilty, it is not my job to prove masturbation innocent. It is innocent by default. The burden of proof rests on those who wish to condemn it and thus far no one has been able to prove masturbation is inherently sinful.

 

[kopilo]

Yes, unfortunatley Christianty has been used as a device for evil many things throughout our history. Lust has definitely been used, is being used and probably will always be used as a way of surpressing the sexual. But at the same time, it has been, is being and may always will be ignored or treated as a lesser issue in the name of sexual liberation and/or rebellion against the surpression. The thing is though, lust is still a very real thing that can have some very real consquences. A such a balance must be sought. But, really, that's the thing with people, we're prone to letting our pride, selfishness, hate etc lead us to abuse of our gifts, religion, God and Saviour (Philippians 2:21)

We just have to try to love, forgive, pray and "seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of the Father" (Colossians 3 :1) with a humble and soft heart.

God Bless you kopilo

Thank you and God Bless you as well.

 

[caireann]

(http://www.carm.org/questions/touching yourself.htm)
The Bible does not discuss masturbation at all. This seems a little odd since it is such a strong and prevalent human event. And, given that Leviticus has so much to say about sexuality, one would think it natural that the subject would be covered. But it isn't. Masturbation is not specifically declared to be sinful. Nevertheless, we must be cautious to pronounce something to be sinful or not sinful when God has not discussed it. Therefore, we have to derive principles from scripture on related sexual issues and see if we can wisely apply them to the subject of masturbation.

First of all, sex was created by God for procreative purposes, physical enjoyment, and the demonstration of intimacy between a husband and a wife. In this context, the sexual act is intended to occur in a healthy marriage relationship between husband and wife in purity and holiness. In contrast to this, masturbation is the self stimulation to the point of sexual release without the gifting of a spouse. It would seem that masturbation is a denial of the sexual design of God for couples. But, is it sinful? Again, answering this question is difficult because the Bible does not pronounce it as sin. Nevertheless, there is the principle of purity that is obvious true. Does masturbation fall under the category of purity?

We can say this for sure. If masturbation involves sexual fantasies and/or pornography, then it is certainly not pure and is very sinful. The Bible clearly teaches that our minds are as important to God as our bodies are and that we are to remain pure in both. Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; 28 but I say to you, that everyone who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart," (Matt. 5:27-28). Jesus is saying that thinking lustful thoughts is sinful. Therefore, masturbation involving sexual fantasies (at least not of one's spouse) is undoubtedly sinful.

But this brings up the issue of a spouse masturbating while thinking of his/her spouse. Is it sinful? Again, since the Bible does not declare it sinful, can we? Let's say that a wife is incapacitated by an accident and is in the hospital for an extended period of time. Is it alright for the husband to touch if he thinks only of his wife in order to relieve sexual tension? Again, without a specific declaration of scripture it is difficult pronounce it as sinful. On the one hand, his body is not his own and it is for his wife and he is not to be mastered by anything (1 Cor. 6:12). But on the other hand, she is not available. Would his masturbation be sinful should he commit it if he only thought of his wife? I cannot say for sure.

Then again, what if someone masturbates with absolutely no sexual fantasy of any sort. Is it then sinful? Again, this is difficult to answer. But, since the Bible doesn't condemn or condone it, can we make dogmatic assertions? Furthermore, what if a person masturbates in order to reduce the sexual urge in an attempt to not commit fornication? Certainly, actual fornication would be a sin, and masturbation would be preferable in this instance. But does this mean that the person is being mastered by the flesh? If so, then that would be wrong. But, does it mean then that a self-release of sexual tension is then acceptable if it is to avoid fornication? Again, since the Bible does not declare masturbation a sin, I cannot say it is.

Let's look at some verses that speak of sexual morality. I will comment after each one.

• 1 Cor. 6:18, "Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body."
  • The Greek word for "immorality" is porneia which means illicit sexual intercourse, i.e., fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, bestiality, etc. The English word "pornography" is derived from this Greek word.
• Eph. 5:3, "But do not let immorality or any impurity or greed even be named among you, as is proper among saints."
  • Again, the word for "immorality" is porneia.
• Col. 3:5, "Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry."
  • Again, the word for "immorality" is porneia.
• 1 Thess. 4:2, "For you know what commandments we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus. 3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; 4 that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, 5 not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God."
  • Again, the word for "sexual immorality" is porneia. The reference in verse four to "own vessel" is to having a wife so that fornication

Conclusion​

The goal of the Christian life is to be pure in thought and deed. I believe that the issue of masturbation comes down to this. Therefore, I believe that though masturbation under certain circumstances may not be sinful, the desire to be sexual pure and holy should move the Christian to avoid it. Instead, he or she should seek to master the body and not give into its desires. The fight against masturbation can be a lesson in controlling the body which can have great spiritual benefits. Giving in to masturbation can have spiritual consequences and mastering the body can bring great spiritual benefit. Perhaps God did not mention masturbation the Bible because He is so aware of our sinful tendencies, our situations, our difficulties, etc., and desires that we seek holiness and purity by seeking to master our own flesh. If God had declared that it was not a sin, then we can rest assured that we would misuse the act and become enslaved by it.

If, however, you are bound by masturbation and war against it because it masters you, then you continually need to go to the cross and ask the Lord to forgive you. Also, pray and ask the Lord to provide you a spouse so that you would not fall into bondage of the flesh.would be avoided



I couldn't find a general concensus on the meaning of the word porneia. Some said it meant "fornication", others "illicit sexual relationships"... basically, "Trying to pinpoint this word without examining the passage in question is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Fornication in either the Hebrew or Greek can have and denote a wide range of definitions. It can mean literal fornication, adultery, harlotry, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, or any other sexual restriction that Yahweh has placed for mankind to observe." (http://www.yrm.org/qna-fornication.htm)

 

[Jedi]

If masturbation involves sexual fantasies and/or pornography, then it is certainly not pure and is very sinful.

This is the crux of its argument concluding masturbation is sinful, but there is something doubtful here: that sexual fantasies are inherently sinful. If we never thought sexual thoughts, we should have no desire for sex (we would’ve never thought about it in a desirable manner). This being so, we should have no desire for marriage (for why get married if you have no desire for sex? You could just as well remain friends). If this is so, the entire human race would fade into extinction. Lust is one thing, but nowhere does scripture ever equate “lust” with “thinking sexual thoughts or fantasies.”

Further still, some here have mentioned that it’s possible to touch just because it feels good and not think sexual thoughts. If that’s the case, they avoid this objection altogether.

Instead, he or she should seek to master the body and not give into its desires.

Oh, this old attitude: “If it feels good and you enjoy it, refrain! Don’t give in!” Come on, guys. Simply because we find something enjoyable does not mean we have given up mastership of our bodies…

The fight against masturbation can be a lesson in controlling the body which can have great spiritual benefits. Giving in to masturbation can have spiritual consequences and mastering the body can bring great spiritual benefit.

This could be said of nearly any pleasure or enjoyable activity.

Perhaps God did not mention masturbation the Bible because He is so aware of our sinful tendencies, our situations, our difficulties, etc., and desires that we seek holiness and purity by seeking to master our own flesh.

Not sure how this quite makes sense…

If God had declared that it was not a sin, then we can rest assured that we would misuse the act and become enslaved by it.

Don’t we do this anyway with other things? Nearly anything can make devils of us if taken to an extreme.

 

[fandera]

Thanks caireann. I've read that before, and feel strongly in exactly the same way - regarding the desire to create distance from something that has obvious connection to sin in so many and no guarantee of purity in the rest. Not that we need a guarantee of purity, but it is possible to eat for sustanance alone - it is possible to exercise for fitness and well-being alone, and so forth. If masturbation is about pleasure alone, it would be a lust submitted to, like eating because you want the taste and satisfaction rather, or drinking because you want the buzz. If masturbation is about biology alone it would not have the fixation of so many in our culture...what biological function has such a sordid appeal in the worst ways? If masturbation is about release alone, I would agree, but the body has mechanism for that which must be trusted if we are indeed fearfully and wonderfully made. On all accounts, there seems to be too much room for moral failure (and yes, hedonism - the desire for pleasure - is condemned in Scripture), why would we not flee? Why??? Pleasure above prudence?

Thanks again for the article. Great site.

 

[fandera]

Again, since any act is innocent until proven guilty, it is not my job to prove masturbation innocent. It is innocent by default. The burden of proof rests on those who wish to condemn it and thus far no one has been able to prove masturbation is inherently sinful.

Why is any act innocent if all men are guilty?

Romans 1-8...condemnation is pronounced on all mankind, and all fall short of God's glory. There is no good act and no good person and no good intent that reaches the standard of righteousness unless in Christ. Therefore instead of every act being innocent, Biblically it's quite the opposite. If no person seeks God and no one seeks good, than all actions are not innocent until put under the rule of Christ. Your foundation is humanistic, not biblical, thus your conclusions can only be understood in like terms. Show me where this is a logical inconsistency?

I yearn for all people to study, expound, trust and teach the Word. I yearn for that! If you are unwilling that is a mistake, and that reasoning has caused me to be a little caustic in my response. Forgive my conviction that there must be more to an argument on a site like this or we are all breaking the command to avoid discussions of fine sounding reason and words alone that do not build righteousness and are of earthly wisdom (Col 2:4 & 2 Tim. 2 below)

14Remind everyone of these things, and command them in God’s name to stop fighting over words. Such arguments are useless, and they can ruin those who hear them. 15Work hard so God can approve you. Be a good worker, one who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly explains the word of truth. 16Avoid godless, foolish discussions that lead to more and more ungodliness.

19But God’s truth stands firm like a foundation stone with this inscription: "The Lord knows those who are his,"£ and "Those who claim they belong to the Lord must turn away from all wickedness."£

Like Christ, Paul proves his point with Scripture, though saying that the people should avoid foolish arguments and press on towards explaining the words of truth was true and not something that needed biblical evidence, and yet he provided the above passages: from Numbers 16 & Isaiah 52. The biblical model is not to call anything innocent, or for a man to stand on his own reason...for reason alone is not a proof even Jesus maintained. Even He quoted passages from the OT about Himself, life, the end of things, and much more. How much more do we broken men in dire need of that salvation need to follow that model. Don't elevate your own understanding of reason above the Saviour's and Scripture's reliance on it's own Truth.

Know and teach from the Word. The onus is on you, my friend, to biblically prove your position as much as it is on me to prove mine. And while you may disagree with those who have posted articles or passages, you have yet to prove anything in a biblical manner, and thus have made no argument but reason itself...something none of us should be too sure of.

Peace,

 

[Jedi]

Why is any act innocent if all men are guilty?

Bad logic. Simply because all men do acts that are guilty does not somehow make every act they do guilty.

There is no good act and no good person and no good intent that reaches the standard of righteousness unless in Christ.

Any good act is, by definition, “of Christ.” C.S. Lewis once wrote, “God is not merely good but goodness; goodness is not merely divine but God.” Yet I’m afraid you’re straying away from the focus here: any act is innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa.

Therefore instead of every act being innocent, Biblically it's quite the opposite.

Show me. Show me where it says, “everything is wrong unless God says it’s right.” Come on, man…

If no person seeks God and no one seeks good, than all actions are not innocent until put under the rule of Christ.

Without getting into a debate over that ludicrous doctrine of total depravity, there is a logical flaw here again. Even if people never did any good acts (which scripture never teaches), it does not logically follow that all acts are bad by default – only that men keep choosing to do bad acts. The only way for your logic to work is to say that men have done all possible acts and have done only evil, but that’s simply not true. Further still, if you wanted to condemn masturbation on these grounds, then everything else we do is also condemned (because hey, we don’t do any good, right?). My going to McDonald’s, going to the restroom, playing a video game, etc. are all bad and it’s the perpetrator’s burden to prove all he has done innocent. Such a world is completely upside down.

The biblical model is not to call anything innocent, or for a man to stand on his own reason...for reason alone is not a proof even Jesus maintained.

Nowhere have I said that we should use reason alone and forget all about the Bible. However, the Bible doesn’t answer all questions and you must come up with a theology from a marriage between scripture and reason. The Bible is merely the raw material, much like nature is the raw material that science emerges from.

The onus is on you, my friend, to biblically prove your position as much as it is on me to prove mine.

Again, if you wanted to preach this idea, the entire world is upside down and you should do absolutely nothing until you have proved it innocent (not even breathe, not even type, not even read, not even think, for all these things are guilty until proven innocent). In your attempt to strike at masturbation, your strategy has shot down every other conceivable act as well. It’s like blowing up the world to get rid of a national leader.

 

[fandera]

Bad logic. Simply because all men do acts that are guilty does not somehow make every act they do guilty.



Any good act is, by definition, “of Christ.” C.S. Lewis once wrote, “God is not merely good but goodness; goodness is not merely divine but God.” Yet I’m afraid you’re straying away from the focus here: any act is innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa.



Show me. Show me where it says, “everything is wrong unless God says it’s right.” Come on, man…



Without getting into a debate over that ludicrous doctrine of total depravity, there is a logical flaw here again. Even if people never did any good acts (which scripture never teaches), it does not logically follow that all acts are bad by default – only that men keep choosing to do bad acts. The only way for your logic to work is to say that men have done all possible acts and have done only evil, but that’s simply not true. Further still, if you wanted to condemn masturbation on these grounds, then everything else we do is also condemned (because hey, we don’t do any good, right?). My going to McDonald’s, going to the restroom, playing a video game, etc. are all bad and it’s the perpetrator’s burden to prove all he has done innocent. Such a world is completely upside down.



Nowhere have I said that we should use reason alone and forget all about the Bible. However, the Bible doesn’t answer all questions and you must come up with a theology from a marriage between scripture and reason. The Bible is merely the raw material, much like nature is the raw material that science emerges from.



Again, if you wanted to preach this idea, the entire world is upside down and you should do absolutely nothing until you have proved it innocent (not even breathe, not even type, not even read, not even think, for all these things are guilty until proven innocent). In your attempt to strike at masturbation, your strategy has shot down every other conceivable act as well. It’s like blowing up the world to get rid of a national leader.

I stayed in too long.

This has become about more than it was ever intended.

If all men are proved liars, still He will be found true. That is it. I will stand on what I think to be a Biblically founded interpretation...and keep the dialogue open if there are texts to consider.

Depravity is not my idea. Read Romans 1-5 and if you don't think all men are born into, and slaves to sin, you are not reading the same text I am. If masturbation is a way many fall and others abuse for the sake of lust or for pure pleasure, it could be said that would be worship of the self or worship of pleasure, and thus hedonistic, which cannot be right, Scripturally.

I should have left the debate long ago...everyone else seems to have. I do not want to debate essentials of life over a topic like masturbation...but I feel involved because I have counselled dozens, maybe hundreds, of young men and women who struggle with guilt relating to sexual impropriety before marriage. Many of them are torn to pieces by this guilt based on biblical reading and a self expectation, not an expectation I or their ministers place on them. They feel it is wrong as they do it, and after...and this guilt separates them from God in relationship. I will not pronounce a stronger guilt than the Word itself, but if you looked into the eyes of a young man who feels a righteous separation because of his thoughts, actions and desires falling outside the stated Will of God, and the Truth of God as that young person knows Him in relationship, you would be emotional too. The Bergites, a cult of Christianity, followed the logic you have to a conclusion relating to love that determined that true love and intimacy was essential, and to be shown to all. This compelled them to incestuous and licencous behaviour that is repugnant, but a fair logical conclusion in the absence of particular teaching about pedofelia in Scripture. Be aware that taking logic to it's conclusions is never said to be blessed, while taking Scripture to it's conclusions is deemed both wise & useful.

You are using your reason to justify something you feel the denial of which has been a person wrong you have been afflicted with. I understand that. The minister I had growing up called drinking of any sort a grave sin because he had been abused by an alcoholic mother and father. I understand that. I am standing in the gap for some young men who fear sexuality because they don't trust themselves to be pure in this culture, and have followed the lie of license and met guilt and pain at the end of it. I hope you understand that.

If you need the last word, so be it...but I have given mine.

Blessings on all biblical things you share and build upon. Your worth is in Him.

Peace,

 

[caireann]

I have not left Fandera... and to show my support I will tell you and Jedi my experience...

I have masturbated in the past... and have felt an enormous sense of guilt, or maybe I should say conviction, as a result.

Not because my church says it's wrong (they've never talked about it) not because my parents say it's wrong (they've also never talked about it) in fact... I have NEVER been taught by anyone that masturbation is wrong... and yet I feel guilt every time.

Everytime I fall on my knees in tears and cry to God for forgiveness... I have felt the Holy Spirit convicting me of this sin... it's not an addiction I have... it's not something I have done often, and yet, everytime God convicts me.

To me, that is proof enough that it's a sin. Why else would I hear His voice telling me that it's wrong? He has said to me that that pleasure is left for marriage alone.

For me, I don't need a scripture that says "Thou shalt not touch"... God's voice is good enough.

 

[Jedi]

If masturbation is a way many fall and others abuse for the sake of lust or for pure pleasure, it could be said that would be worship of the self or worship of pleasure, and thus hedonistic, which cannot be right, Scripturally.

Almost anything can be abused so that it becomes sin. Even eating, something necessary for survival, can be sinful if you do it too much (gluttony/greed). I am not here to say that masturbation cannot be sinful, only to say that there is no reason to think it is necessarily so.

The Bergites, a cult of Christianity, followed the logic you have to a conclusion relating to love that determined that true love and intimacy was essential, and to be shown to all. This compelled them to incestuous and licencous behaviour that is repugnant, but a fair logical conclusion in the absence of particular teaching about pedofelia in Scripture.

I fail to see how anything I’ve said here logically leads to pedophilia… all I’ve said is that any act is morally innocent until proven guilty. Pedophilia certainly has a lot more evidence against its moral innocence than does masturbation.

For me, I don't need a scripture that says "Thou shalt not touch"... God's voice is good enough.

It is quite possible for something to act as a wedge between you and God and have that particular thing not be inherently sinful – only that it affects you in such a negative way. When people say that they heard God tell them this or that, I typically leave it alone (unless it was something clearly taught against in scripture). As for me personally, I have stopped trusting those little “voices” altogether. Usually, I’ve found that it’s just me telling myself certain things and mistaking my own voice for God’s. Thus until I can distinguish between the two, I shall listen to no voices and rely on pure reason & scripture instead. Given these devices, I have found no cause to deem masturbation as inherently sinful.