Masturbation

[david_x]

Red herring. I was not defining a biblical term.

You didn't know you were. Passions would be the Biblical equivalent. Romans 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.

Then why did you bring it up? I'm not being legalistic. I'm asking logical questions given what YOU stated.

You took it to mean something I didn't though, I was just explaining.

Another red herring. It is the act that is condemned, not the context of it.

This is something you assume, it doesn't say that.

 

[Kencj]

The greek is a negative affiliation as well. Epithumeo a word which has two meanings, one positive "to desire" the other negative "evil desires". Matt. 5:28 is a negative sense of the word.

The word has no inherent good or evil implication in itself, nor does it have anything to do with sex in itself, as I indicated. Your dictionary definition was entirely about sex, and was not applicable to this context.

 

[david_x]

I keep coming back to it because it's what you said earlier.

First you said;
"It is a sin of our nature to think about it, it is a sin of choice to keep thinking about it".

Then you said;
"Nor did I say a "desire" for sex is sinful. When you linger on it and entertain it, you sin."

Now you're saying:
"Desire that is dwelt upon becomes sin."

I can agree with you that improper desires become sin, that's certainly what Paul teaches, but only depending on how we act on them and not independent of that.

You know I didn't realize you're only 20 -I actually used to think like you do at your age, simply because I was so unfamiliar with the concept of livng in the grace of God and they weren't teaching it at all at my church. I don't know if that's your situation or not but it is with plenty of people, unfortunately. At 20 the desire for sex can be genuinely scarey and it seems like your'e being pulled between complete loss of control on one end and clamming up entirely on the other. There is a middle ground that comes from faith in God's grace, but it takes time to learn it. It took me forever.

Talk down to me because of my age i will quote that verse.

Let me define my position for you then. Lust (the negative context) is a sin we choose to do, it is the entertainment of the temptation.

Romans 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.

 

[david_x]

The word has no inherent good or evil implication in itself, nor does it have anything to do with sex in itself, as I indicated. Your dictionary definition was entirely about sex, and was not applicable to this context.

So because you didn't know that the word could be negative, it can't be negative?

Covet, Covetous, Covetousness [Verb]

epithumeo "to fix the desire upon" (epi, "upon," used intensively, thumos, "passion"), whether things good or bad; hence, "to long for, lust after, covet," is used with the meaning "to covet evilly" in Acts_20:33, of "coveting money and apparel;" so in Rom_7:7; Rom_13:9. See DESIRE, FAIN, LUST.​

 

[revrobor]

"Did too", "Did not", "Did too", "Did not", "Did too", "Did not". Good grief you two! How old are you anyway? My grandchildren do a much better job of settling differences. If you are Christians as a fellow Believer I find your behavior embarrassing.

 

[david_x]

"Did too", "Did not", "Did too", "Did not", "Did too", "Did not". Good grief you two! How old are you anyway? My grandchildren do a much better job of settling differences. If you are Christians as a fellow Believer I find your behavior embarrassing.

We get along just fine. Sheesh. We've done this many times with few hard feelings.

 

[Kencj]

Let me define my position for you then. Lust (the negative context) is a sin we choose to do, it is the entertainment of the temptation.

Romans 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.

Sorry but that doesn't make sense either -"strong desire", which is translated as "lust" in older versions, is not a sin, nor is entertaining it.

The Bible is very clear as to what is and isn't sin, and desiring things, like sex or food or whatever, whether strongly or intentionally, is not a sin. Desiring what belongs to someone else, which is covetousness, is, but that's not what we're talking about here.

 

[david_x]

Sorry but that doesn't make sense either -"strong desire", which is translated as "lust" in older versions, is not a sin, nor is entertaining it.

The Bible is very clear as to what is and isn't sin, and desiring things, like sex or food or whatever, whether strongly or intentionally, is not a sin. Desiring what belongs to someone else, which is covetousness, is, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We are talking about the Matt. 5 verse were the word means 'evil desire', does that make more sense?

 

[Kencj]

"Did too", "Did not", "Did too", "Did not", "Did too", "Did not". Good grief you two! How old are you anyway? My grandchildren do a much better job of settling differences. If you are Christians as a fellow Believer I find your behavior embarrassing.

This is hardly a hissy fight but an attempt to determine what is "lust" and "sin", which is not exactly a frivolous subject for Christians.

 

[david_x]

This is hardly a hissy fight but an attempt to determine what is "lust" and "sin", which is not exactly a frivolous subject for Christians.

Not to mention it's getting you a lot of posts, n00b.(and i only mean that in the kindest sense of the word. )

 

[Kencj]

We are talking about the Matt. 5 verse were the word means 'evil desire', does that make more sense?

No, the word means "strong desire" with no inherent moral connotation in itself, as your quote mentions. That is only added from the context by translators.

 

[Zebra1552]

The greek is a negative affiliation as well. Epithumeo a word which has two meanings, one positive "to desire" the other negative "evil desires". Matt. 5:28 is a negative sense of the word.

That's hardly what the Greek says. We've cited numerous examples to show this.

 

[Zebra1552]

You didn't know you were.

Now you are putting words in my mouth, and I don't appreciate that. 'Sex drive' is not a Bible term.

Passions would be the Biblical equivalent. Romans 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.

Red herring.

You took it to mean something I didn't though, I was just explaining.

You stated that masturbation is superficial: does that statement carry any value or not?

This is something you assume, it doesn't say that.

It's right there in the text.

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

 

[david_x]

That's hardly what the Greek says. We've cited numerous examples to show this.

Where

 

[revrobor]

To me your posts indicate you are a couple of "Right Fighters" rather than seekers of truth. I haven't seen anything of substance in about 20 pages.

 

[david_x]

Now you are putting words in my mouth, and I don't appreciate that. 'Sex drive' is not a Bible term.

The term can easily be seen as passion though.

You stated that masturbation is superficial: does that statement carry any value or not?

It is superficial...

It's right there in the text.

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

Not seeing it, all I see is that they were lusting for one another. That's something straight people shouldn't do in a loving hetero relationship.

 

[david_x]

To me your posts indicate you are a couple of "Right Fighters" rather than seekers of truth. I haven't seen anything of substance in about 20 pages.

Good perseverance, I would have skimmed over the last 18.

 

[Zebra1552]

The term can easily be seen as passion though.

No, not really. Try that argument with a psych or sociology major, see how far you get.

It is superficial...

Does that statement carry any value?

Not seeing it, all I see is that they were lusting for one another. That's something straight people shouldn't do in a loving hetero relationship.

Must have missed the bolded portion:

Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

 

[Zebra1552]

Where

Check the first 200 posts, I'm sure there's plenty.

 

[Zebra1552]

To me your posts indicate you are a couple of "Right Fighters" rather than seekers of truth. I haven't seen anything of substance in about 20 pages.

The thread only has 13 pages, what are you talking about?