From the thread "Should Christians touch"

[sparow]

That was Onan in Gen. 38. You miss the story on a couple of important points:

1 - Tamar was not his wife, she was the widow of his dead brother Er.

2 - it was not that he did not want her to get pregnant per se; the text says "He knew the offspring would not be his;" (v 9) which means he wanted to deny his dead brother the birth right which would go then to Er's eldest son.

The implication is that if Tamar's children would have been counted as his own kids, he would have gladly impregnated her.

Given that, this story has nothing to do with masturbating.

That explains Onan but what was God angry about? What is significant about the first bourn; could masturbation mean the best seed is wasted?

 

[SkyWriting]

I didn't know that masturbation existed until I read about it on the Internet in my early teens. It was not talked about, but I'm guessing it was more because no one cared whether we did it (rather than it being taboo). It also wouldn't have been polite conversation outside of our family/sexuality school program, but it wasn't talked about even in that.

Men, usually find out about it at puberty. Even with no effort,
"wet dreams" will make the discovery for you while you sleep.

 

[SkyWriting]

To me that silence says a LOT.

People say this for effect, but it really says nothing,
not even revealing what your thinking.

 

[Dave-W]

That explains Onan but what was God angry about?

Onan defrauding Tamar and his brother Er.

What is significant about the first bourn;

God has always placed importance on the first born. That is why they were killed in Egypt. Also why they were selected for being priests. (later replaced by the Levites)

could masturbation mean the best seed is wasted?

not necessarily.

 

[Dave-W]

"To me that silence says a LOT."
People say this for effect, but it really says nothing,
not even revealing what your thinking.

It means that M was a well known quantity. It was part of the egyptian cult of worship of their gods. (part of their creation myth)

So its being left out of the Bible could not have been accidental. And even though people said "it is the only sin so bad it could not even be mentioned in a HOLY Bible;" other more disgusting practices are mentioned and even described in their prohibitions. So that cannot be the case.

The only other conclusion left is that there is no blanket prohibition of the practice.

 

[SkyWriting]

It means that M was a well known quantity. It was part of the egyptian cult of worship of their gods. (part of their creation myth)So its being left out of the Bible could not have been accidental. And even though people said "it is the only sin so bad it could not even be mentioned in a HOLY Bible;" other more disgusting practices are mentioned and even described in their prohibitions. So that cannot be the case.The only other conclusion left is that there is no blanket prohibition of the practice.

I've left out some of the context to make this passage more dramatic!

Genesis 38:9 ...he spilled his sperm on the ground...
10 What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death.

 

[Dave-W]

I've left out some of the context to make this passage more dramatic!

More dramatic; or to say something other than what the entire passage says?

 

[SkyWriting]

More dramatic; or to say something other than what the entire passage says?

In order to alter the intent...yes.
Who says Christians can't have fun?

 

[frettr00]

It is is the bible as the sin of uncleaness or effeminancy.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/masturbation-mortal-sin/#.Vyig7XMpCBY

 

[Dave-W]

It is is the bible as the sin of uncleaness or effeminancy.
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/masturbation-mortal-sin/#.Vyig7XMpCBY

Prove to me that "uncleanness" is sin. The worst uncleanness (tamay) was from touching a dead body, which Our Lord did on several occasions. And He was "without sin. "

Cutting your finger so that it bleeds = uncleanness
women's menstrual flow = uncleanness
child birth = uncleanness
Marital sexual relations = uncleanness

Do you believe all those things are sinful?

 

[Cearbhall]

It is is the bible as the sin of uncleaness or effeminancy.

Effeminacy? Well then. That's an argument I've never heard before. I can't say I see the logic in that, unless the idea is that only a woman should touch a penis, and masturbation is autohomosexuality.

 

[SkyWriting]

Prove to me that "uncleanness" is sin. The worst uncleanness (tamay) was from touching a dead body, which Our Lord did on several occasions. And He was "without sin. "Cutting your finger so that it bleeds = uncleanness. women's menstrual flow = uncleanness. child birth = uncleanness. Marital sexual relations = uncleanness. Do you believe all those things are sinful?

Contact with the body fluids of others is......a related factor in a handful of Sins.
But not sinful in and of itself.

 

[Dave-W]

Effeminacy? Well then. That's an argument I've never heard before. I

Probably based on a faulty translation.

1 Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,

As Dr. Derek Prince ks,ks stated on this verse, the last 2 groups were two different types of homosexuals. It has nothing to do with M.

 

[Dave-W]

The reason that it can be sinful is because of lust. The Bible says that even if a man thinks of a woman in that way, he's already committed adultery. Most of the time, people use either porn or visual thoughts to stimulate, which is lust. HOWEVER, it IS possible to touch without having those thoughts. I'm in a similar situation at OP, trying to wait for sex, and I've found that I'm able to self-stimulate with a clear mind, just focusing on what I'm doing. Hope this sheds some light.

This post was recently added to the parent thread. IMO Seeing_Glory has the right idea. Or at least that used to be my position. Then I read this:

Song of Solomon 5.2 “I was asleep but my heart was awake.
A voice! My beloved was knocking:
‘Open to me, my sister, my darling,
My dove, my perfect one!
For my head is drenched with dew,
My locks with the damp of the night.’
3 “I have taken off my dress,
How can I put it on again?
I have washed my feet,
How can I dirty them again?
4 “My beloved extended his hand through the opening,
And my feelings were aroused for him.
5 “I arose to open to my beloved;
And my hands dripped with myrrh,
And my fingers with liquid myrrh,
On the handles of the bolt."

but my heart was awake; i.e. she was either dreaming or fantasizing about her fiancee.

through the opening; Literally this is "by the hole." The word for hole is used elsewhere in scripture to denote a body cavity (eye socket) or a snake den in the ground.

my hands dripped with myrrh, and my fingers with liquid myrrh; From earlier in the book we see myrrh and frankincense representing female wetness. (from arousal)

So she is fantasizing during it and is called in verse 2 as "perfect," or other translations render it "undefiled."

So maybe some fantasizing is ok?

 

[Cearbhall]

This post was recently added to the parent thread. IMO Seeing_Glory has the right idea.

Thoughts?

How could he be committing adultery in any form if he's not married? And if he is married, can't he just think of his wife?

 

[Dave-W]

How could he be committing adultery in any form if he's not married? And if he is married, can't he just think of his wife?

That is from Matt 5:

27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; 28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Good questions of course. As to the 2nd one - I see nothing in scripture to demean thinking of one's spouse.

On the first one: The word for "woman" is often translated wife. So clearly it is talking about lusting after some one else's wife. That is where the adultery part comes in.

 

[Mudinyeri]

... with a mental partner from a God perspective would most likely be adultery.

Maybe not adultery but at least lust. Now, if your mental partner is your spouse ... then, it would seem, that is a matter between you and your spouse.

 

[Cearbhall]

On the first one: The word for "woman" is often translated wife. So clearly it is talking about lusting after some one else's wife. That is where the adultery part comes in.

So if the woman in question isn't married, either, is it still adultery, according to this verse? Just curious.

 

[Dave-W]

So if the woman in question isn't married, either, is it still adultery, according to this verse? Just curious.

I do not think so. Rather it would be fornication.

But remember that the operative word is not "woman" or "adultery;" rather it is "lust." As some commentators including a former pastor have noted, the context is discussing the 10 commandments and the human oral extensions thereof. "You have heard..." rather than "It is written..."

This command in order seems to be "Thou shalt not covet." That would mean the "lust" would have to rise almost to the level of obsession or idolatry.

 

[Dave-W]

Is masturbation wrong. Is it wrong to imagine a male(has no identity) and yourself on your wedding night?

I believe that is EXACTLY what Shulamite was doing in Song of Solomon 5.2. See post # 54 above.