-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What do you see masturbating as? Sin? Sorry about all the topics you must have!
- Thread starter SamSmithMarkSanford
- Start date
- Status
Floatingaxe
Well-Known Member
- Apr 14, 2007
- 14,757
- 877
- 73
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
That's what wet dreams prevent. That is normal. so, this guy had an abnormal condition, so what? Sinning doesn't prevent medical problems! LOL
Upvote
0
Gamezilla
Senior Member
- Jul 10, 2007
- 846
- 40
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Thank you for the welcome! No offense to you, but I see this story highly unlikely. Masturbation is not the only source for [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Guys still have "wet dreams", which trigger [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Now I'm a guy, and this happens to me quite a bit. Obviously your friend had some serious medical problems, because I don't know any guy that doesn't have some form of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] before he has sexual relations with a woman. There is no way it can seal off unless it is never used at all.
Upvote
0
BloodwashedPilgrim
Regular Member
Wouldn't you have to consider wet dreams sinful too, though? I mean...in order to have a "wet dream" (not just some random nocturnal emission) your thoughts have to be on something that would be what would be classified as "lustful" or "fantasy" or whatever. Impure thoughts are part of sexual immorality as well, are they not? I thought that that was what many people saw as the key to making masturbation a sin...If masturbation is a sin, "wet dreams" must be as well...right? Maybe not some random, no reason, nocturnal emission (if such a thing exists, who knows). The chances of randomly having a sexually provocative dream, with no thoughts that led your dream life to that place is not possible. You cannot discount it as sinful because you are asleep...it doesn't work. That's the same kind of argument as ignorance excusing sin, which it doesn't. If your thought life adhered to the Scriptural standard (Phil 4:8), your dream life would correspondingly adhere to that standard, would it not? The marker of sin is not the amount of people that experience or involve themselves in it, but it adherence to God's level of perfection and holiness (because otherwise this is useless because alomst everyone if not everyone has/will/does touch and so if that is why it is not sinful for "wet dreams" then neither is masturbation). Could such a thing happen outside of a fallen mankind and thus depraved nature?
Much love in Christ.
Upvote
0
BloodwashedPilgrim
Regular Member
And isn't "normal" and "natural" almost the exact same thing? Especially considering your context. So, that can't be the justification, because "normal" and "natural" have already been shown to not be justifications.
Much love in Christ.
Upvote
0
Floatingaxe
Well-Known Member
- Apr 14, 2007
- 14,757
- 877
- 73
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
No, nocturnal emissions are not sinful. A Christian man who is keeping himself pure for his bride can have them often, because he is suppressing and not acting on his desire for her. God bless him!
The body stress of that transfers to NE's as a natural function. AS you know, young boys at the beginning of sexual maturation have them. they continue in a man's life.
Upvote
0
Ave Maria
Ave Maria Gratia Plena
- May 31, 2004
- 41,132
- 2,030
- 43
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
You are right, sinning doesn't prevent medical problems. However, masturbation is not sinning and masturbation has been shown in males to help prevent prostate problems. Its also healthy for females to touch. It helps to relieve stress for one thing.
http://www.coolnurse.com/masturbation.htm
http://www.coolnurse.com/masturbation.htm
Upvote
0
Jedi
Knight
- Sep 19, 2002
- 3,995
- 149
- 41
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Floatingaxe said:
Well at least you’re reading what I write, even if you’re not answering the questions I ask.
This is a copout answer and further begging the question, blindly supposing that sexual thoughts and pleasures should never be experienced outside of marriage. Prove it. You say such an idea is Christian. Very well, by what authority do you make this claim? I’m still waiting.
But apparently, you don’t consider it bad manners to call others ridiculous, selfish, dumb, incapable of distinguishing between the voice of God and Satan, and on the same level as prostitutes. If acting contrary to your behavior here is “rude,” she should take that as a compliment.
Once again, you have yet to show us a single bloody passage that can be used as a proof text to condemn masturbation as inherently sinful. You claim it is enough? Fine. Prove it. Show me just one passage or verse that condemns masturbation as inherently sinful, whether explicitly or by principle. Show me how masturbation inherently falls under the category of “lust,” “of the flesh,” or “lack of self-control.” For once in this discussion, stop spewing diarrhea from your mouth and answer the questions people ask you. Mocking them does you no good.
x0xJesusislovex0x said:
Says who? You? Insufficient. The Bible? Where? Philosophy? How?
Upvote
0
Floatingaxe
Well-Known Member
- Apr 14, 2007
- 14,757
- 877
- 73
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Upvote
0
That's okay. This isn't the sort of thing you just know. Look at it as an opportunity to learn.
Logical study has held up for everything we've observed so far.
Can you cite an example of properly applied logic failing? I can't think of one.
Miracles contradict logic, sure. Unless you accept that the spiritual world exists, and then you incorporate miracles as being possible into your worldview.
Yes, but it doesn't change the rules of logic - it just applies it to something new (in this case, faith).
It certainly opens a door that was previously shut, but that doesn't mean your logic changes. It just becomes something else to incorporate reasonable thought into and vice versa.
But if you start with the assumption that your ability to observe is flawed, how can you be certain that it's even the Holy Spirit guiding you?
Because there is no cause for thinking such a thing. It is certainly a convenient belief for your worldview, but you don't get to assume something just to get more support for your position.
Yes, that account does impress upon us that we have been separated from God. That doesn't mean we suddenly became stupid. It was a spiritual separation.
This is spiritual wisdom that is being discussed. This is yet another mistake that Christian fundamentalism makes. There's a word in the Bible (like "wisdom"), and they decide to apply it to anything that word could refer to, regardless of how it was intended.
I really don't think that it is. Christian logicians use the same rules that secular logicians use.
Could you explain this, or perhaps give an example of what you mean?
Spiritual truth, perhaps. But reason applies to it all the same. I hold the position that reason bolsters faith and faith bolsters reason. Neither is required for the other, but neither is truly complete without the other. Perhaps you believe the same and we're just debating the semantics.
I believe that part of the gospel comes from the Bible. But that's not the whole picture. The Bible has its uses within faith. So do your fellow Christians. So does your church. So does the world around you. So does your relationship with God. These are all part of our total understand of spirituality and what to believe. I do not believe that the Bible is the be-all, end-all of what faith should be, nor do I believe that it is perfect and unchallengeable. The only thing unchallengeable is God.
I believe the resurrection actually occurred, but ask yourself: does it really matter? Whether God wanted the resurrection to be literal or purely symbolic, the end result is that our souls have been saved through Christ's sacrifice and spiritual rebirth. The meaning is not degraded by making it symbolic. Indeed, symbols are more timeless than even historical events.
Trying to establish where it's literal is tricky. We're quite certain, for instance, that Noah's flood wasn't literally global. We're quite certain that the Red Sea parting was actually the Reed Sea, and that it was just a swampy marsh with probably no miraculous parting. We're quite certain that the genealogies of the Genesis account cannot be taken literally to establish the age of the earth, because the earth is billions of years old. But none of these things matter, because the Bible isn't there to tell you what literally happened. It's there to provide a message of hope, peace and fulfillment in one's relationship with God.
Yes, certainly it is difficult for those without belief in God to see God's presence, but it isn't impossible. The message of Christ is one of brotherhood and compassion, and very few people can disagree with that. What most people disagree with, when it comes to Christianity, are the hypocrites and poor examples of Christian behavior. They also see many fundamentalist beliefs depressingly naive, and they're right.
But you have to be willing to admit that sometimes the Bible is not the right source. I can't imagine limiting my theology to a book. It's such a narrow worldview, like willingly putting on blinders. There's a difference between not understanding something, and understanding that something isn't true. When the former happens, hold onto faith. When the latter happens, seek truth.
Keep this in mind when examining your later beliefs. It began with a sense of societal shame (it should be noted that such a sense depends a lot on where you live).
Was it awful because it was ineffective advice, or because you were repulsed by the fact that it was there?
It glorifies God in the same way that scratching an itch, receiving a backrub or stretching in the morning glorifies God. It's physical relief, and physical relief isn't a bad thing.
Neither do back scratches or bubble baths or scented candles, but I'm sure you don't object to any of those things. Pleasure isn't a bad thing.
Imagine, for a moment, that you were raised in a society where, from birth, it was impressed upon you that eating strawberries is awful and shameful. This impression continues to be reinforced your entire childhood, and finally at adolescence you're exposed to another society where eating strawberries is perfectly normal. You would still be offended that this new society is partaking in something you see as shameful. Your conscience would be telling you that strawberries are bad, but does that mean your conscience is right? The way in which we were raised plays a huge role in our later perceptions. You probably don't like the idea of masturbation because you were raised to believe it was bad - the fact that the religious beliefs you were exposed to reinforced that only exacerbated the issue.
That's because it isn't God who is convicting you. It's you, and the society you grew up in. You're going to either live with that part of life walled off by shame, or learn to confront that shame and come to a better understanding of why it exists.
Upvote
0
If you're coming in with the attitude that what you have to say is final and absolute, why are you even in a debate forum?
Upvote
0
Really? I didn't see you complain when DMagoh did it to me. Twice. I think you just don't like being put on the spot. It's only okay when other people get discussed, huh?
I do. Are we not to watch out after our brothers and sisters, though?
Upvote
0
Floatingaxe
Well-Known Member
- Apr 14, 2007
- 14,757
- 877
- 73
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
It IS ridiculous. Who said anything about prostitution? You are losing it.
Everyone knows there is not a single verse that tells us not to touch. Doesn't mean that it is right. Men of biblical times were too tired working hard in their livelihoods and servicing all their wives and concubines to think about diddling. Get real. Men have far too much time on their hands---and minds---today. Men--and many women--either need a job, or a new hobby.
Yes, it is lack of self-control, self-respect and lust that causes people to do this behaviour.
Upvote
0
Floatingaxe
Well-Known Member
- Apr 14, 2007
- 14,757
- 877
- 73
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
I don't pay close attention to what people write regarding you, Dannager. I can't be all things to all men. Do you want me to monitor people's posts for you? It'll cost ya! LOL
You would do well to deepen your own faith, rather than "diss" mine. My faith is deepening more and more with each passing year, as I give myself over to the control of the Holy Spirit. God is awesome!
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
