Is Masturbation a sin?

[TheBarrd]

Nocturnal emission was considerd to make a man unclean (Deut 23:10). One needs to read the context to try to determine why it was considered unclean. I think it was because the seed of a man was for one purpose only, ie sex with a wife. Many OT laws were symbolic of spiritual truths in the NT, especially the animal sacrifices.

.

Or maybe it just makes a stinky mess?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Nocturnal emission was considerd to make a man unclean (Deut 23:10). One needs to read the context to try to determine why it was considered unclean. I think it was because the seed of a man was for one purpose only, ie sex with a wife. Many OT laws were symbolic of spiritual truths in the NT, especially the animal sacrifices.

.

It is a common misconception to believe that it was wrong to be unclean. Being unclean was never considered a sin, merely an impediment to participating in certain practices. For example, if people buried a body, they were unclean until sundown. Surely everyone was very grateful for those who did bury the body, but they were still unclean. I even read once where some groups passed a rule that reading scripture made one unclean, in order to make people realize the reading of scripture was very significant.

So you can't read "sin" into something that made people "unclean".

 

[Cearbhall]

Sorry. When you said "compulsive", I thought you meant "forced".

Perhaps you read it as "compulsory?"

 

[Neogaia777]

Masturbation, while trying to serve and obey God is "dangerous" it can quickly become an idol in your life, sexuality and sensuality taking over your soul becoming your god, and drawing you away from the true God...

Just my opinion,

God Bless!

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Masturbation, while trying to serve and obey God is "dangerous" it can quickly become an idol in your life, sexuality and sensuality taking over your soul becoming your god, and drawing you away from the true God...

Just my opinion,

God Bless!

And others of us don't share that opinion.

May you also be blessed!

 

[RDKirk]

I don't see how it increases lust. It's a form of release that makes the lust go away (for a time). If you think that the act of releasing in and of itself is sinful, as the Catholic Church does, then I understand, but I don't see how masturbation adds to the problem if the desire is the issue.

And the mind will continue to want more of that release, not less (however, females may be different from males in that respect).

If the act of "releasing" is a decision made in servitude to the body's desires--rather than a decision made to serve God--then it is a sin. That's what would have made it a sin for Jesus to have turned stones into bread: A decision to serve His flesh rather than His Father.

Don’t you know that you are slaves of the one you obey? You can be slaves of sin and die, or you can be obedient slaves of God and be acceptable to him. -- Romans 6

 

[RDKirk]

Saying masturbation causes someone to lust more is like saying eating causes you to be more hungry.

You're sating a hunger when you eat and when you touch. Afterward, that hunger goes away for a while. If you don't eat for a while, you will start to feel irritable and probably have some pain in your stomach. For many people, not sating their sexual hunger for a while can cause physical discomfort and irritability. Sate the hunger, and that will go away until your body cycles and needs something again.

A lot of people, especially in the West, eat for reasons other than hunger.

 

[Cearbhall]

And the mind will continue to want more of that release, not less (however, females may be different from males in that respect).

Yes, but again, I don't know that this is caused by allowing that release to happen on occasion. It's just a natural urge.

If the act of "releasing" is a decision made in servitude to the body's desires--rather than a decision made to serve God--then it is a sin.

Are those mutually exclusive? It sounds like you're saying that it's wrong just because it's a bodily desire, which doesn't make any sense. Is a soothing bubble bath a sin?

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, but again, I don't know that this is caused by allowing that release to happen on occasion. It's just a natural urge.

Are those mutually exclusive? It sounds like you're saying that it's wrong just because it's a bodily desire, which doesn't make any sense. Is a soothing bubble bath a sin?

I'll repeat what I said:

If the act of "releasing" is a decision made in servitude to the body's desires--rather than a decision made to serve God--then it is a sin.

 

[Cearbhall]

I'll repeat what I said:

I wouldn't have asked the question if I thought that what you said answered it. The words "in servitude" don't really change anything. You're still just satisfying a bodily urge. I wouldn't call that idolatry. But if you mean to say that people should just take this statement as they will, then I understand.

 

[RDKirk]

I wouldn't have asked the question if I thought that what you said answered it. The words "in servitude" don't really change anything. You're still just satisfying a bodily urge. I wouldn't call that idolatry. But if you mean to say that people should just take this statement as they will, then I understand.

Well, you don't claim to be Christian, so I'm not really going to debate you about "sin," particularly with regard to sin for Christians. It doesn't really matter what an unbeliever does, in terms of what sin is for a Christian.

But for a Christian, placing oneself in servitude to the flesh is sin. It's not a question of any particular act, because righteousness or unrighteousness is not inherent in particular acts. The entire issue is a matter of who or what influences your decisions.

 

[Cearbhall]

Well, you don't claim to be Christian, so I'm not really going to debate you about "sin," particularly with regard to sin for Christians.

I realize that I'm not going to agree with you theologically. I'm only debating the logic.

But for a Christian, placing oneself in servitude to the flesh is sin. It's not a question of any particular act, because righteousness or unrighteousness is not inherent in particular acts. The entire issue is a matter of who or what influences your decisions.

Ok, that's what I was looking for. If it's not the act that is inherently wrong, then that makes more sense. If you're only saying that it can lead to serving one's body and not God, then I understand.

 

[TheBarrd]

Perhaps you read it as "compulsory?"

Well, it was after midnight...and it had been a long day...

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I'll repeat what I said:

If the act of "releasing" is a decision made in servitude to the body's desires--rather than a decision made to serve God--then it is a sin.

I advise you to stop making up sins.

 

[RDKirk]

Well, you don't claim to be Christian, so I'm not really going to debate you about "sin," particularly with regard to sin for Christians.

But for a Christian, placing oneself in servitude to the flesh is sin. It's not a question of any particular act, because righteousness or unrighteousness is not inherent in particular acts. The entire issue is a matter of who or what influences your decisions.

I advise you to stop making up sins.

So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?

I advise you to stop making up sins.

 

[ken777]

So you can't read "sin" into something that made people "unclean".

That is right but "unclean" in the OT has a spiritual application.

.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

"Unclean" in the OT has a spiritual application.

.

Oh, of course, it has a teaching component for us all.

But the fact that something was ritually unclean does not make that thing a sin.

 

[StephanieSomer]

But my real question is, is it a sin if you do it and not look at porn. Because I do touch but I don't don't look at other women.

Sin is defined by God alone, not by what someone thinks should be. Without a clear condemnation of it in the Scripture, I believe people err by stating that it is sin. However, there is a verse which could apply here.
1 Cor 6:12
"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any."

No doubt, someone will respond that if you read a little further past this verse that it condemns sexual immorality. Agreed. It does. But the Scripture makes no designation that masturbation is immoral. That is a personal belief of many. But, that idea is not in the Scripture.

Perhaps I can shed a little light with a story that a pastor gave many years ago. This pastor loved to play basketball. He played whenever he had the opportunity. He played well, and he was very competitive in the game. He was so competitive that he derived a sense of glee when an opponent was injured and was kept from playing at their peak. And, he would sometimes elbow another player to inflict such injuries. God dealt with him about his attitude. He came to the conclusion that although playing basketball was not technically a sin, it led him into sin whenever he played it, since his competitive nature was so fed with it. He therefore decided that for him, he could not in faith play basketball any longer. He recognized that it was completely ok for anyone else. But a very poor choice for himself.

In all issues that Scripture does not address specifically, the best response is whatever can abide the verse, "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.", is allowable for the individual. And, we are not to judge any brother or sister who DOES have the faith to allow that which our own convictions disallow. God is able to uphold that brother or sister who acts in faith, regardless of our own personal convictions.

So, there really is no clear-cut response to your question. Not all men have faith. Just remember, that love builds up.

 

[ken777]

Oh, of course, it has a teaching component for us all.

But the fact that something was ritually unclean does not make that thing a sin.

The person was not necessarily a sinner but the condition of uncleaness represents sin: Hebrews 9:11-14

The question I raised was why did nocturnal emission make a man unclean. Was it just a matter of hygiene as one poster suggested, or was there a deeper significance? It is a question readers can answer for themselves.


.