Is masturbation REALLY a sin?

[Zebra1552]

Masturbation is lust though, isn't it?

No, masturbation is not lust. Nowhere, biblically or otherwise, are the two equated as the same thing.

 

[yasic]

No, masturbation is not lust. Nowhere, biblically or otherwise, are the two equated as the same thing.

But masturbation without lust sure does feel empty.

 

[bored]

Yes they did. God gave them commands that they were to follow, and in turn God provided for them. In what way is that not a contract? And how do you pull sex out of that passage?

So entering into a contract makes 2 individuals one flesh? I am still not seeing the need for a contract in the modern sense since states did not exist.

I guess you could say marriage is a form of contract, but to suggest that a piece of paper is needed from the state is not biblical and if it were that important it would have been mentioned in the NT where they had established societies and contracts for other things. That quote from genesis is way to vauge to draw the sorts of conclusions you are drawing, in my opinion anyways. Your certianly entitled to do that if you want to though, I dont think it would be wrong just more onerous than what is actually writen.

 

[Zebra1552]

But masturbation without lust sure does feel empty.

What is lust?

 

[yasic]

What is lust?

I would define sexual lust as a desire to engage in sexual relations with another person.

Masturbation with lust would be masturbating while fantasizing, or remembering a sexual encounter with another individual or individuals.

 

[Zebra1552]

So entering into a contract makes 2 individuals one flesh? I am still not seeing the need for a contract in the modern sense since states did not exist.

A state does not have to exist for a contract to be a contract.

Contract (disambiguation) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I guess you could say marriage is a form of contract, but to suggest that a piece of paper is needed from the state is not biblical and if it were that important it would have been mentioned in the NT where they had established societies and contracts for other things. That quote from genesis is way to vauge to draw the sorts of conclusions you are drawing, in my opinion anyways. Your certianly entitled to do that if you want to though, I dont think it would be wrong just more onerous than what is actually writen.

Prove that it isn't biblical. Give reasons, rather than empty claims, and I might be more inclined to pay attention.

 

[bored]

A state does not have to exist for a contract to be a contract.

Contract (disambiguation) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Prove that it isn't biblical. Give reasons, rather than empty claims, and I might be more inclined to pay attention.

I just dont see any scripture that explicitly states that a contract is nessicary or that a cerimony is even nessicary. Thats all im saying. I hope you dont address people in your own church with such contempt.

 

[Zebra1552]

I just dont see any scripture that explicitly states that a contract is nessicary or that a cerimony is even nessicary. Thats all im saying. I hope you dont address people in your own church with such contempt.

If someone I'm disagreeing with is merely disagreeing and saying I'm making unbiblical statements without providing evidence, yes, you're right, I'll be demanding evidence from them too, rather than empty claims. Or more likely I'll just demand it and walk away if they don't give it. You see, in a discussion it's usually polite to address the other person's argument rather than flippantly dismissing it. You don't see anything in Scripture against pedophilia, does that make it okay? No. So why make the same statement about sex without marriage, when Paul specifically condemns it in his first letter to the Corinthians?

 

[Zebra1552]

I would define sexual lust as a desire to engage in sexual relations with another person.

Masturbation with lust would be masturbating while fantasizing, or remembering a sexual encounter with another individual or individuals.

If you're desiring to have sex with them, then it's not merely fantasy anymore. Same with remembering a sex encounter. Lust isn't just sexual desire, as you wisely point out, it's desiring to do something about that desire that goes beyond the privacy of your own mind.

 

[bored]

If someone I'm disagreeing with is merely disagreeing and saying I'm making unbiblical statements without providing evidence, yes, you're right, I'll be demanding evidence from them too, rather than empty claims. Or more likely I'll just demand it and walk away if they don't give it. You see, in a discussion it's usually polite to address the other person's argument rather than flippantly dismissing it. You don't see anything in Scripture against pedophilia, does that make it okay? No. So why make the same statement about sex without marriage, when Paul specifically condemns it in his first letter to the Corinthians?

Pedophilia is illegal so that makes it pretty easy, although back in the day girls got married at VERY young ages and it was not a big deal, so I would say that the very term is hype and specific to our time and society. If its not in the bible and/or not illegal then yea its pretty tough to make a moral argument about it, unless you derive certian morals in addition to the bible from your own consience which I guess is ok too but once you do that you cant really challenge someones faith anymore because its just your opinion.

Christians agree that you should be married, however the finer point of what exactly needs to happen to be considered married is what is being discussed and is no where in the bible other than the 2 becomming one flesh which does not define a contract or cerimony in my mind to me that sounds like sex. Your certianly free to disagree but there is nothing explicitly writen about it so it becomes a matter of opinion.

The bible also instructs us not to quarl over issues that are not explicitly writen in the bible and that such matters are up to the individual. You were trying to preach contracts and cerimonys as gospel and its not so I was asking you to prove it and you could not, the one scripture you provided had nothing to do with contracts or cerimonys, maybe in your own mind it did but it was not explicitly writen as such. There are alot of things that ARE explicitly writen in the bible so it says alot when the bible is not specific about a particular issue or does not mention it at all.

 

[yasic]

If you're desiring to have sex with them, then it's not merely fantasy anymore. Same with remembering a sex encounter. Lust isn't just sexual desire, as you wisely point out, it's desiring to do something about that desire that goes beyond the privacy of your own mind.

Well I simply disagree with your definition of lust. There are plenty of times I masturbated to a fantasy of having a sexual encounter with someone I have no actual intention of having a sexual encounter with nor would I accept such an opportunity were it to arise... and I certainly would call it lust.

 

[Zebra1552]

Pedophilia is illegal so that makes it pretty easy, although back in the day girls got married at VERY young ages and it was not a big deal, so I would say that the very term is hype and specific to our time and society. If its not in the bible and/or not illegal then yea its pretty tough to make a moral argument about it, unless you derive certian morals in addition to the bible from your own consience which I guess is ok too but once you do that you cant really challenge someones faith anymore because its just your opinion.

Marriage is in the Bible all the time, and sex before marriage is viewed as a sin. It's in the Bible.

Christians agree that you should be married, however the finer point of what exactly needs to happen to be considered married is what is being discussed and is no where in the bible other than the 2 becomming one flesh which does not define a contract or cerimony in my mind to me that sounds like sex. Your certianly free to disagree but there is nothing explicitly writen about it so it becomes a matter of opinion.

Marriage is a contract that two people make to each other, a commitment that is usually recognized by the state to have certain benefits. I dunno what country you live in, but what constitutes a marriage isn't exactly a big debate except among those trying to justify sex before marriage- and then it's not a debate, it's an excuse.

The bible also instructs us not to quarl over issues that are not explicitly writen in the bible and that such matters are up to the individual.

Prove it. Where is that in the Bible?

You were trying to preach contracts and cerimonys as gospel and its not so I was asking you to prove it and you could not, the one scripture you provided had nothing to do with contracts or cerimonys, maybe in your own mind it did but it was not explicitly writen as such.

It doesn't need to be explicit to be there. You read the context and the culture and it becomes quite clear that it's a commitment that two people make to each other before God. You haven't provided any Scripture at all, and yet you expect me to believe that what marriage is is unclear.

There are alot of things that ARE explicitly writen in the bible so it says alot when the bible is not specific about a particular issue or does not mention it at all.

And THAT is an argument from silence. Just because there's nothing explicitly stated doesn't mean it's not there. The Bible implies all sorts of things when it states that our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit- like that we should take care of our bodies and not smoke, do drugs, or refrain from exercising.

 

[Zebra1552]

Well I simply disagree with your definition of lust. There are plenty of times I masturbated to a fantasy of having a sexual encounter with someone I have no actual intention of having a sexual encounter with nor would I accept such an opportunity were it to arise... and I certainly would call it lust.

You don't get to define what lust is when we're talking about sin, the Bible does that.

 

[bored]

Marriage is in the Bible all the time, and sex before marriage is viewed as a sin. It's in the Bible.


Marriage is a contract that two people make to each other, a commitment that is usually recognized by the state to have certain benefits. I dunno what country you live in, but what constitutes a marriage isn't exactly a big debate except among those trying to justify sex before marriage- and then it's not a debate, it's an excuse.


Prove it. Where is that in the Bible?


It doesn't need to be explicit to be there. You read the context and the culture and it becomes quite clear that it's a commitment that two people make to each other before God. You haven't provided any Scripture at all, and yet you expect me to believe that what marriage is is unclear.


And THAT is an argument from silence. Just because there's nothing explicitly stated doesn't mean it's not there. The Bible implies all sorts of things when it states that our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit- like that we should take care of our bodies and not smoke, do drugs, or refrain from exercising.

It sounds like this is starting to get hostile so I will just agree to disagree.

 

[Zebra1552]

It sounds like this is starting to get hostile so I will just agree to disagree.

Psh. It's called logical discourse. If you think logic is hostile, then you probably shouldn't be in EM.

 

[QuantaCura]

Eating meat on Friday was also a mortal sin then, but I have heard that that has since changed.

I have always wanted to ask a Catholic if those who went to hell for eating meat on Friday were released from hell when the rules changed.

It's a penitential discipline, not part of the moral law per se. Due to the variety of cultures, the particular discipline for fasting was left up to regional bishops' conferences in the last few decades. Most of Europe retained meatless Fridays for example, but in the USA the bishops pretty much said practice whatever form of self-denial or almsgiving, etc. that you want.

The sin is in the disobedience to lawful authority when they are acting within their rights.

Here's an analagous situation: say we're kids and siblings. Dad tells me to mow the lawn, but not you. We both go hang out at our respective friends houses all day. The lawn never gets mowed. I sinned, you didn't. The same analogy can be made with reasonable civil laws (concerning morally neutral subjects) that may be amended or repealed from time to time. I hope that makes sense!

As to the original question, the constant tradition of all of Christianity until very recently was that the use of the sexual faculty outside of marriage is a sin (and this has been retained by the vast majority of Christianity--Catholics, Orthodox).

Remember, in the second Chapter of St. Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians, he states: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle."

 

[Gracchus]

It's a penitential discipline, not part of the moral law per se. Due to the variety of cultures, the particular discipline for fasting was left up to regional bishops' conferences in the last few decades. Most of Europe retained meatless Fridays for example, but in the USA the bishops pretty much said practice whatever form of self-denial or almsgiving, etc. that you want.

The sin is in the disobedience to lawful authority when they are acting within their rights.

Here's an analagous situation: say we're kids and siblings. Dad tells me to mow the lawn, but not you. We both go hang out at our respective friends houses all day. The lawn never gets mowed. I sinned, you didn't. The same analogy can be made with reasonable civil laws (concerning morally neutral subjects) that may be amended or repealed from time to time. I hope that makes sense!

As to the original question, the constant tradition of all of Christianity until very recently was that the use of the sexual faculty outside of marriage is a sin (and this has been retained by the vast majority of Christianity--Catholics, Orthodox).

Remember, in the second Chapter of St. Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians, he states: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle."

Yes, I know it is a matter of obedience. You also have to drop a little coin in the collection basket. That never changes.

 

[bored]

Psh. It's called logical discourse. If you think logic is hostile, then you probably shouldn't be in EM.

Its not the logic its the tone.

 

[yasic]

You don't get to define what lust is when we're talking about sin, the Bible does that.

Could you point me to where in the bible the definition of lust is provided?

 

[Zebra1552]

Its not the logic its the tone.

Accusations without evidence get you nowhere with me. If that's 'tone', then you may want to read the forum rules:

Provide Supporting Statements
Debate threads can get heated as diverse views are presented and argued. When presenting and arguing a view all members should post evidence and supporting statements for your position. This policy, sometimes referred to as "X means Y because of Z", must be followed especially when posting claims that are widely considered to be controversial. This applies to discussions on past and present religious figures.

You see, I'm not the only one who thinks evidence is important. The moderators do too. I've stated my position, I've given evidence for my position, and all you've done is labeled that position as unbiblical and vague without any supporting evidence. If you expect me to listen to your position, then you can provide evidence for it. I'm not going to believe you just because you say something, that's not how discussion works.

If you want to have a discussion without evidence or without someone disagreeing with you, go someplace else, because here in EM we state our positions and give evidence for them, even if we do disagree.