That doesn't mean the reason of it being "sin" doesn't exist.The question was not "is it wrong?" the question was "is it a sin?"
"Sin" exists only in the realm of religion.
Upvote
0
That doesn't mean the reason of it being "sin" doesn't exist.The question was not "is it wrong?" the question was "is it a sin?"
"Sin" exists only in the realm of religion.
I prefer not to indulge my thoughts on what transpires in other people's sexual activities. :/Yeah that's true. Do you believe that when most people touch they don't fantasize about people?
Stephen, these are biological or medical terms. You may call masturbation "sex" if you wish, but the correct term is masturbation, because it fits a specific criteria for self pleasure. Yes, masturbation is part of the sexual experience, but it's not the same as intercourse. These are quite easily defined as separate acts.Don't forget that masturbation is sex. When we call a baby a fetus, to abort seems less damaging for some reason. To call masturbation, which is just sex, by this fancier name makes it more vulnerable for attack, just like calling a baby a fetus does. When sex becomes immoral, then the name doesn't matter, it is immoral sex. A name doesn't make it any different than it is. Name calling isn't wisdom or knowledge. If you have occasional sex by yourself without any immoral thoughts, guess what, you have non-immoral sex or just plain old sex that you might want to call masturbation. Does anyone understand this? Why do we become so bothered and weak about things? Is it because of our own failures and sin? Our biology was made by God. We can use basic wisdom to deal with it, not banding together to chase off our demons and failures. Basic wisdom is that our biology was made for a moral purpose of God's and we can satisfy this in an occasional moral relief (not to submit to an addictive behavior though). Does everyone agree with this? If the pressure to have sex has built (the way God made us) and we haven't a wife to be with, then pure thoughts in our own privacy without any immorality or addictive nature, just being responsible to our own body and its needs, is what we address. We just have moral sex to relieve this pressure that naturally occurs. Some restraint and definitely moral character is necessary, but not foolish condemnation on the handy work of the Lord's, our biology.
The act of masturbation is a sin in the sense that it doesn't connect you with anything outside of yourself; it just gives pleasure.
That doesn't mean the reason of it being "sin" doesn't exist.
then pure thoughts in our own privacy without any immorality or addictive nature,
It is impossible to know what people think about during masturbation. People can only know what they think about during masturbation, if they think adulterous thoughts during masturbation then by all means they should stop.
I wasn't the one who initiated the 'adulterous thoughts' perspective, I was merely responding to it, however, the perspective is on "sin" and scripture states that "anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matt 5:28) Some evidently believe that this applies also to "thinking about" a person other than the spouse during masturbation. It's a long shot, for sure.What precisely are "adulterous thoughts"?
I'd think that it is adulterous intent that would be a problem. But simply fantasizing about other people is harmless.
The worst that can happen is feeling guilt at doing so, but that is the "solution" creating its own problem.
eudaimonia,
Mark
I wasn't the one who initiated the 'adulterous thoughts' perspective, I was merely responding to it, however, the perspective is on "sin" and scripture states that "anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matt 5:28) Some evidently believe that this applies also to "thinking about" a person other than the spouse during masturbation. It's a long shot, for sure.
Because some branches of Christianity balk from the concept of sex = pleasure.
I'm not sure I see why "just gives pleasure" is a problem.
Not necessarily. Masturbation can be an addition to a normal, satisfactory sex life. It can also be a shared activity.Pleasure isn't the problem; it's when the pleasure isn't shared that masturbation becomes a practice of isolation; isolation then leads to self-centeredness and lack of need of others. This doesn't mean that masturbation necessarily will make you self-centered, but it is a small force that contributes to that direction.
Not necessarily. Masturbation can be an addition to a normal, satisfactory sex life. It can also be a shared activity.
Hmm, if you're in a room full of people, I sure hope you aren't masturbating .. moving swiftly on .. I just don't see the problem. If spouses aren't cheating each other by relying upon masturbation for him or herself while depriving the other person of pleasure, I don't see it 'self pleasure' as a problem. I see it as an extra - over and above IC with the spouse. All things being equal, that shouldn't be a problem.Well, sure, masturbation can be a shared activity. There's nothing magically different from having sex and from shared masturbation; the only difference is the physical location and situation of the acts; in a strict sense, sex can be masturbation as well, if, for example, a guy just uses a girl for pleasure. So, what I mean is not the objective act of masturbation as a sin, but the effects of isolating self-pleasure.
Just because I'm in a room full of people, that doesn't mean I don't feel lonely.
Hmm, if you're in a room full of people, I sure hope you aren't masturbating .. moving swiftly on .. I just don't see the problem. If spouses aren't cheating each other by relying upon masturbation for him or herself while depriving the other person of pleasure, I don't see it 'self pleasure' as a problem. I see it as an extra - over and above IC with the spouse. All things being equal, that shouldn't be a problem.
I don't really know why we're arguing; we're talking about two separate elements of masturbatory theory. You're talking about the objective act and I'm talking about the subjective.