Masturbation (right or wrong?)

[Miss_Behave]

I do not have a problem with masturbation. I feel it is a healthy expression of sexuality and can be good for relieving stress and tension. When the addiction starts to the point of preferring masturbation to sex, I would think something has to be changed.

 

[Glorianna]

I do not have a problem with masturbation. I feel it is a healthy expression of sexuality and can be good for relieving stress and tension. When the addiction starts to the point of preferring masturbation to sex, I would think something has to be changed.

Thanks for sharing your opinion!

 

[bliz]

Umm... how can you multiply when there are no women around? Isn't that impossible?

Not at all impossible. You missed the point! I can multiply with no women around and so can you, becasue you are a woman. If there are no men arouond, then it becomes impossible for me and you. My point was that the poster saw things only from a male point of view, and apparently you did, too.

 

[Mr.Cheese]

Which creation story would you be referring to?
There are two of them and man, Adam and Eve, is the focus of the second one.
And the verse clearly names "the man." God is not implied in the verse at all.
The second creation story is entirely centered around humankind while the first one is entirely centered on the Creator. Even so, God declaring his creation as good has nothing to do with it being good for God. God simply declares the work of his hands as "good." Nothing about creation is good or bad for God. Creation is entirely superfluous. Why on earth would it be good or bad for God regarding anything having to do with man and woman? By eisegeting the words "for god" in "it is not good 'for God' that the man should be alone" the passage now implies that God is somehow dependent on creation regarding what is good or not good for him. This elevates our importance way beyond anything I would care to agree with.
The whole second half of Chapter 2 is centered on God providing the man a suitable companion entirely out of grace in order to meet his, the man's, need rather than that man's need of a suitable companion is somehow not good for God. God's point of view has already been covered in the first chapter.

 

[bliz]

Which creation story would you be referring to?
There are two of them and man, Adam and Eve, is the focus of the second one.

But there was only one creation. To clearly understand it, we need to consider both accounts of the one creation.

The second creation story is entirely centered around humankind while the first one is entirely centered on the Creator. Even so, God declaring his creation as good has nothing to do with it being good for God. God simply declares the work of his hands as "good." Nothing about creation is good or bad for God. Creation is entirely superfluous.

We disagree. The second creation story is not centered on humankind. It, like the first story, like the whole of the Word, is centered on God. It is always all about God, no matter what "it" is. It is not about humans and their needs; it is about God.

Why on earth would it be good or bad for God regarding anything having to do with man and woman? [

You'll have to take the up with God. He's the one who kept declaring His creation "Good".

By eisegeting the words "for god" in "it is not good 'for God' that the man should be alone" the passage now implies that God is somehow dependent on creation regarding what is good or not good for him. This elevates our importance way beyond anything I would care to agree with.

You see my undertanding of the passage elevating humankind beyond what is proper. I see your understanding of the same passage elevating the male beyond what is his place.

The whole second half of Chapter 2 is centered on God providing the man a suitable companion entirely out of grace in order to meet his, the man's, need rather than that man's need of a suitable companion is somehow not good for God. God's point of view has already been covered in the first chapter.

First, I don't think God's point of view has no bearing on the second chapter! God's perspective has bearing on everything!

Scond, I disagree with you on the subject of the second half of the chapter. Again, you have made the male central when he does not belong there. The second half of the chapter focuses on God's compleation of His creation, which entailed God's creation of a man and a woman.

Was God surprised that there was no suitable helper found for Adam? Was that an oversight on God's part? Of course not. This was His plan that there be male and female.
----------------------------------------

I used to direct high school plays. I would "block" the scenes detailing where the actors were to move, sit, stand, cross the stage etc. On more than one ocassion I would watch a scene being acted out and have them stop, sometimes saying something like "It's not good for Bill to cross the stage at that time." And "Bill" would sometimes be clueless and say "I had no problem with it - I just walked right over here!" And I would have to explain that while Bill was quite capable of walking across the stage, it was not good for the scene to have him standing on that side of the stage becasue of other actors entering soon, or it made the set off-balanced or we coudn't see him do an important piece of business, or whatever reason. But I was clearly not saying "It is not good for you, Bill, to cross the stage at this point." I was, in effect saying, "It is not good for the play that you cross the stage at this time."

God is saying "It is not good for my creation, for my plans for the universe, that the man should be alone." "My creation" refers to all that God has made, not just to the male.

 

[Glorianna]

Not at all impossible. You missed the point! I can multiply with no women around and so can you, becasue you are a woman. If there are no men arouond, then it becomes impossible for me and you. My point was that the poster saw things only from a male point of view, and apparently you did, too.

Okay, sorry. I completely misunderstood you. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[LovingMinistry]

OK. My turn.

As for manually stimulating one's spouse without continuing to intercourse--that's fine, especially if one person is unable to have sex for some reason (ie bed rest during pregnancy, recovering from pregnancy, other medical problem). Fact is it can be very intimate. However, it's something that should be reserved for marriage--heavy petting & manual stimulation of one's partner is a huge step towards premarital sex and, mentally, you ARE having sex with your partner, which is spoken against rather strongly in the Bible.

I agree with that PurpleBunny. Some people seem to think it is a grey area. But when it somes to sexual contact of any kind GOD is not fudging.

I believe masturbation alone is wrong because you are robbing your marriage/relationship of something that is supposed to be mutually shared. But mutual-masturbation (this is the term I'm going to use, heh) *is* being mutually shared and enjoyed, and as I don't want to deprive my husband for the rest of my pregnancy of sex of any kind, I don't mind this alternative, and neither does he. The experience isn't being robbed, you aren't being "selfish" on your own, you are giving and receiving but in a different way.

I don't see masturbation beween married couples as an issue. As once two are married then any sexual contact between them is accepted in GOD's eyes, since that is what marriage is for.

Here is my rule: When not married, sex organs are off limits, for any length of time, in any type of way. If you are not married to the person, do not touch their genitals, period. This was a difficult rule to follow, and at times was not followed very well, but I needed that guideline to keep myself in check.

I agree Dave.

Now in a marriage, I believe that servicing yourself is not ok. I forgot hwich scripture it is but it's something like, "For the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does, likewise the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does."
You don't belong to yourself anymore. As I said in another thread, it's time to break up with the hand. You've got someone to take care of that for you now

I agree here too Mr.Cheese

Masturbation is one of those gray area's in the bible- it dosent really say a whole lot about it- or any really for that matter. The bible is very clear about keeping away from evil, and our minds and hearts pure. When it comes right down to it, sex was created for man and woman, for eachother, a deep, strong bond- pleasure and to create life. Masturbation is a selfish act. And Im not sure about you, but I dont know how one could be aroused, and touch at the thoughts of anything that isnt impure (think about it- can you be aroused, and touch while you are concentrating on your math homework? Doubt it) Even before you are married, having impure thoughts about your s/o is still considered a sin. YOU ARE NOT MARRIED TO THAT PERSON. And until you are married to taht person, any lustful or impure thought about that peson, whether you like it or not, is a sin.

Now do I think masturbation within marriage is wrong? Yes and no. Let me explain. If you are substituting masurbation for sex, meaning, if you are masturbating instead of having sex with your husband/wife, then yes its a sin, and it is depriving your husband/wife of the intimacy that God intends through Sex. So then what about when your wife is on her period? Or pregnate, or just not feeling well.... I still think you should restrain yourself from masturbation- I think its important for people to practice self control even when they are married.

Now- with your husband/wife... is it wrong? I dont think so. I dont see anything wrong with manually stimulating your husband/wife within the marrige bed together. But that would be a decision made between the couple. What goes for one couple, may not be the same for another couple. As far as I am concerned, anything respectable goes between a husband or wife (excluding bringing in another person, or watching porn etc) as long as they both agree, and no one is getting hurt.

Now to adress something in the OP- It sounded like you said something about manually masturbating someone, but not having sex. I think its very important that you understand that all sexyal activity is considered a sin outside of marriage. If you are awakening desires that should not be awaken before you are married, Im sorry to say but that would be considered lustin... which is a sin.

Exactly. Not much more to say. Wise words Sign.

Wow, I really like thinking of it like that. And I also like the fact that you call woman a gift from God.

 

[Glorianna]

Hehehe, I don't think I've ever seen so many quotes in one post!

 

[ANN2626]

yea thats a difficult question.
i for one never do it. i have but i have never had thought running in my mind or any sort like that. i just did it to see what it wa like.
thats the difference between guys/girls...i dont mean to judge but guys are physically attracted to women. i know there are women out there who are like that also but mostly women are emotionally attracted.

 

[Glorianna]

That may be just a stereotype.

 

[Tenken]

yea thats a difficult question.
i for one never do it. i have but i have never had thought running in my mind or any sort like that. i just did it to see what it wa like.
thats the difference between guys/girls...i dont mean to judge but guys are physically attracted to women. i know there are women out there who are like that also but mostly women are emotionally attracted.

I'm sure not all guys are physically attracted to women, they can be emotionally attracted as well.

Anyway, pack to the OP, masturbation in any circumstance is a sin. Didn't Jesus say not to lust in heart? That's like no difference from committing adultery

 

[Glorianna]

I'm sure not all guys are physically attracted to women, they can be emotionally attracted as well.

What? Guys are both emotionally and physically attracted, just like girls are.

 

[lunalinda]

Hmmmm...I remember I was so obsessive about finding out the answer to that very question after I was once asked by a good friend if I touch. After he unknowingly made me feel like I was some sort of freak for never masturbating before, my curiousity about the act was sparked, and I was on a rampage for information on it. I wanted to know whether or not I was "normal."

I still don't have a solid answer as to whether or not it's wrong or right, but I more lean towards wrong. Why? Because more often than not, masturbation requires some sort of visual influence, or even your own imagination. You allow impure images or fantasies inside you head, and you feed on them to pleasure yourself. So I guess the actual ACT isn't really wrong, but the way most people achieve that act is.

There was one particular article online that talked about the point I'm trying to make. Click on the link to read it. It was a very interesting article.

http://www.acts17-11.com/dialogs_masturbation.html

I for one can agree with what it talked about. The bigger problem I think is the emotional side of it, not the physical. Thankfully, I don't need to touch, and I have no desire to. I've tried it yes, but was still unaffected. I didn't get addicted to it, and wasn't even that fascinated with it. *shrugs* Why? Because thankfully, I'm just terrible in creating sex fantasies in my head with dream guys. My mind was and still is incapable of fantasizing. I just can't contemplate being "turned on" by anything other than a human being in the flesh. And since watching porn is of course NOT AN OPTION, I just shrug it off. So because of my mind being cleared of impure images, my body has no desire to follow up on what I visualize.

As far as couples masturbating each other? Ehh...I don't think I have a valid opinion. I'm actually disgusted with masturbating. Men OR women types. But that's just me. It's just not my thing, I guess.

 

[Glorianna]

As far as couples masturbating each other? Ehh...I don't think I have a valid opinion. I'm actually disgusted with masturbating. Men OR women types. But that's just me. It's just not my thing, I guess.

That's how I feel about it too actually. You're not alone.