1. Welcome to NoFap! We have disabled new forum accounts from being registered for the time being. In the meantime, you can join our weekly accountability groups.
    Dismiss Notice

God doesn't want us to masturbate

Discussion in 'Porn Addiction' started by JesusStrength, May 6, 2019.

  1. Freedom_from_PMO

    Freedom_from_PMO Fapstronaut

    555
    631
    93
    Oh, a wild pedo priest argument appeared. I don't want to make big interdenominational drama like it's 1517, but celibacy is very encouraged by Paul and traditionally practiced by bishops and higher clergy since early christian times. Celibacy of lower clergy is not a catholic dogma and not all catholic rites practice it. So the Pope could abolish it, but I think that in a modern period it would start a slippery slope of expectations so better not to touch this. I see some benefits from it, but I am not strong in favor of abolishing it. When it comes to pedophilia, I think that celibacy has nothing to do with it, practicing it doesn't make you pedophile. The problem of pedophilia is a complicated one. Benedict XVI said that Church beaurocracy responsible of finding and exposing abusers became inefficient and procedures too slow, while various secret circles of pedos, homoexuals and enablers of such behaviours were infiltrating the entire structure and sabotaging attempts to do something. Hollywood is full of pedos, political elites are full of pedos, Church also have this problem but in opposition to actors or political class it is single organisation and can be taken responsible for this and should take this responsibility. But as long as Francis or any other liberal is the Pope nothing will change because the liberal faction is full of enablers as was exposed recently by cardinal Vigano. If a traditionalist or a conservative will be elected we might have a chance. The number of pedophile priests isn't bigger than among other groups and afaik is lower than among clerics of other religions and definitely lower than among artists, this is not the problem of numbers. what is the real problem here is that those people are protecting themselves and subverting the system to stay in the shadows.
     
  2. Freedom_from_PMO

    Freedom_from_PMO Fapstronaut

    555
    631
    93
    Very well written post.
     
  3. Thanks for the feedback buddy. I am not as versed in the god versus gods theory you are suggesting but I Do recognize it as a lds doctrine. Good for you for standing up for it. I am familiar with the designation sons of god and sons of man. Actually that one I studied intensely as some bible passages lend them selves to misinterpretation. Greatly!

    That one in genesis sounds like an introduction to a video game! Lol. And I always thought (probably like many readers familiar with any classical mythology background) the Bible was describing Demi gods and mingling between races of super beings. Unfortunately for my zealous imagination it is not the case.

    I didn’t get a chance to listen to your podcast but I will.

    Our conversation is heading in a distinct thread; so I will make this brief.

    Sons of god versus sons of man was the classification of the descendants of Adam who followed gods instructions versus those who rebelled against them.

    The distinction depended whether you were of Cain’s lineage or of Seth’s lineage. The reason one is called “sons of God” is because Cain’s descendants after they were marked were driven from the earth — that is to say separated from their families. As they grew in number and size they lived distinctly and differently from the people’s that had choosen yhwy and their customs were dofferent as well.

    IN case you are wondering “but were angels were having sex with humans” in an attempt to understand what the verse was meaning ... Jesus said that angels neither marry nor give life. This unique function was given to humans. All of the angelic host, which predate humanity, did not have this ability.

    As for how we know God the father and God the son are one , we know that because Jesus described that they were one. They are distinct beings but one organism. While in heaven the arch angel (or angel in chief) was named “Michael” who is a Hebrew translation for Micha-el or “he who is like” —el. “ El “ = means God.
    We have a similar expression for commander in chief — in the us that is the president. He is not a soldier but “chief among them.” A similar expression appears with the Jesus being compared to a cornerstone or building block of the temple. He is called Chief cornerstone. He is not a stone, but rather figuratively the principal foundation as is implied.

    Let’s understand a little further: (ang-el) means messenger of God. There are many messengers (angels) of God, but only one Ang- “el” —Messenger who is God (Jesus). Also many angels of God, but only one designated Angel of the Lord (was referred to as Michael who is whom Lucifer fought against while permitted to exist in heaven) the enmity Lucifer had with Michael is the same he had against the god child and whom he had crucified. The angels carry the “gosp”-el. Or good news from “El”. Not their own news. So does Jesus when He takes His Father’s message to the world. He speaks according to the words His father had. He does not his own will but His Fathers.

    Do this , find the verses that discuss encounters with angels and in the biblical accounts —-no angel accepts adoration. But all bow to God. Angels do not accept praise for they were and are fellow creations. But God (when taking the form or a message to humanity) does accept worship. For example as manoah (Samson’s father does): we offer sacrifice to God and he accepts it.

    Or as Abraham’s does when he was visited by God prior to the destruction of sodom and Gomorrah, God can eat with us. This ability is also limited to God. The name that Jesus was given is reminiscent of this fact : “Immanuel” God with us.

    Just to respectfully suggest , His many names, or many attributes does not imply more than one God. The belief in poly deism is contradicted by Gods express words in the Decalogue (10 commands) thou shalt not have any other gods before me. So if he’s not telling the truth that he is the only God while handing us the Law, then He is a liar and all he says must be re-evaluated.

    I agree there is a war of Gods against gods. It is the creator versus created gods; especially like porn who has millions of followers.
     
  4. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    525
    905
    93
    We're doomed because of a technology that we're not designed for, nobody here would complain about having too much sex. You took my phrase out of context, so maybe I should've explained it better. To say for example that "But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart." means to doom you because of your biological reality. It's impossible for a normal man to NOT feel a hint of arousal when he looks at an attractive woman.
    Fair enough. It might be that it's a consequence of bad bible interpretations.
    I don't know what makes you think that you can isolate the arousal you feel in life as a separate evil entity. Since you've read my thread "The Porn Goddess" you know I'm using the Jungian perspective on personality in which lust is a separate part of you acting with its own goals and beliefs. But it's that same lust that makes you aroused when you have sex with your wife, just as it makes you aroused when you look at porn. You can't isolate the bad aspects of your lust from the good ones, call them a separate entity and then presume that the bible verses are talking about that. How do you know they're not talking about lust in a more general sense? Healthy sexual desire, lust, these are just terms to describe your arousal.

    Also we're arguing besides the point I'm trying to make here. My point is the bible does not give you a proper understanding about sex. It only gives you warnings.
    The term sexual immorality is as ambiguous as can be. Is it sexually immoral of me to fuck my girl up the ass? Because it's clearly just for arousal and not for making kids, so kinda seems like it's immoral from the bibles perspective! What if I get into tantra, that's enemy belief system territory, I'm sure the biblical God doesn't like that. But what if it leads me to have a better sexual relationship which makes for a stable family?
    Also the bible speaks against "impurity" "passion" and something like "Treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure" clearly tells you that you shouldn't enjoy yourself too much with sex. That's what I mean with sexual suppression. The bible only puts up fences, ambiguous ones at that, but it doesn't give you a map.
     
  5. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    The entire Song of Solomon is a celebration of sexual pleasure. The Song of Solomon never talks about procreation. One verse says "your love is better than wine" i.e. intoxicating. Hell, chapter 7 alone starts with a first half where Solomon basically describes his lover's body parts in erotic terms (for their time) and her response is that they retreat to the countryside for hot sex.

    I honestly don't know where you get this idea that the Bible is somehow against sexual pleasure.

    Is it sexually immoral for you to "fuck your girl up the ass?" Biblically speaking, it's immoral if you're not married to her. And contrary to what you said, "sexual immorality" is not ambiguous in the Bible. You can have sex within the boundary of a marriage relationship--the end. Anything outside of that is considered fornication. Nowhere in scripture is it suggested that anal sex is sinful in and of itself.

    When scripture talks about "lovers of pleasure," it's describing people who exalt pleasure above all other aims--hedonists, if you will. As CS Lewis said, there's nothing wrong with enjoying sex, but there's everything wrong with making sexual pleasure the primary focus of your life. Sex was a gift given to us by God, like the most delicious dessert. It wasn't intended to be the entire meal.

    Nonsense. Virtually every human emotion and desire has a spectrum where it's healthy and where it's destructive.

    If I'm overcome with anger while watching a bully assault a weaker victim, and if that anger compels me to step in and defend the victim,then my anger is a good thing. If I'm overcome with anger because my girlfriend smiled at another man, and that anger compels me to hit her, then my anger isn't good at all.

    Or look at hunger. To paraphrase Lewis once again, starving people crave food, but so do gluttons. Hunger can be healthy at times, and destructive at other times, depending on the circumstances.

    So, not all sexual arousal is created equal. There is a difference between healthy sexual arousal (the natural response you get from seeing an attractive person) and lust (which just wants to fuck that person and get off whether they're up for it or not). Sexual arousal can start and cultivate families, or it can rip families apart.
     
    Deleted Account and need4realchg like this.
  6. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    525
    905
    93
    Yeah sure, it's cute. But is in no way a comprehensive roadmap on how to deepen a sexual relationship. Which again is my point. I'm not saying the bible doesn't talk about sex at all, I'm saying what it says consists (apart from that little song) of warnings. It lacks any kind of recommendation.
    Well you define sexual immorality as simply as having sex when not being married. How do you know that's all that's meant by that? Immorality is a big word. And at the end of the day you can interpret it anyway you like. Again, that's not my main point.
    No, but perverted lust is sinful, as you point out in your next paragraph. So what makes you think anal sex is not perverted? My point is the bible clearly cares about the type of lust that you embody in the world, what makes you think that it doesn't impose those tight restrictions inside the marriage bed as well? I don't see why the marital bed should be a safe zone from sin from a biblical perspective.
    I agree with all of this. But mostly because you've specified that your lust (just like anger and such) can be abused. The way you've written it the first time it reads like you think lust in and off itself is sinful. Which doesn't make sense.
     
  7. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    If we're going to have a productive conversation (and this goes for any topic), we need to have some kind of agreement on the definition of terms. It's pointless for us to talk about whether or not "lust" is bad if lust means one thing to me and something else to you.

    In terms of biblical principles, lust is sinful in and of itself and it is distinct from healthy sexual desire.

    To help illustrate this, it might be easier to consider a couple other sins--pride and greed. Greed is, in essence, selfishness run amok. There's nothing good about that. There's no "good" greed (regardless of what Gordon Gecko says). Same thing with pride--there is nothing redeeming or good about thinking you're better than someone else. It's perfectly healthy to be proud of your own accomplishments and to pat yourself on the back for hard work--but if that becomes "I'm so glad I'm not lazy bum like Mike from accounting," then you're off track.

    When someone reads the Bible in context, they can typically infer consistent themes throughout it. Principles emerge. Besides, how could God possibly be just if he's punishing people for not adhering to rules that haven't been made clear? It would be like saying, "if you don't drive the speed limit, we're going to give you a giant ticket" ... and then never telling you what the speed limit actually IS.

    Normal, reasonably intelligent people should be able to read scripture and understand what guidelines it lays out for sexual activity. They might disagree with those guidelines, for sure--but they should get a clear idea of what the Bible says is okay, and what isn't. Read Romans 1:26-27 and let me know if you think it's ambiguous.
     
  8. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    525
    905
    93
    Agreed. I look at it from a psychological perspective, since lust is a psychological phenomenon and I like to tie whatever wisdom I can find in sacred scripture with more modern findings and concepts. Because generally in life when you have different schools of thought speaking of the same thing, you can be fairly certain that you're as close in touch with reality as possible. For this discussion that can be confusing however.
    I don't think it's gonna be fruitful to talk further about the subject of lust and it's different forms, because I believe we have basically the same understanding of it, apart from using different terminology.
    Well here we get into murky territory, because it depends on how you see the creation of the bible.

    My belief is this: God isn't tied to the bible or Christianity. God is inside all of us and we have an inherent instinct for whats good and bad. We don't need the scripture, if it was lost we have what it takes, with sufficient amount of time (several thousand years) to create another one.

    Second as I already said I believe the bible was written by men with seriousness and good intent. But still written by men.
    Third, the stories and wisdom they write about are based on stories which are based on stories which go thousands of years back. Since the first time we began to tell each other stories. We've abstracted and brought things to the essence over a long period of time in all human cultures, hence the multitude of sacred scriptures.

    That's why I don't see the bible as a perfect manual handed down to us by God. More like the best approximation of what we understand to be Gods will.

    Therefor yes you can infer themes and understand principles. But in no way could I take something like Romans 1:26-27 serious, because I live in the 21. century and I know that homosexuals aren't just together because of sex.


    Last but not least, you haven't really addressed this point yet (you don't have to ofc) which was my main point: The bible does not give us teachings on how to properly form a sexual relationship (apart from "go get married"), how to deepen it or anything about a spiritual understanding of what sex is. Even tho the best sex is a deeply spiritual experience. A connection to God.
    The bible teaches you about everything else, that you should work hard, stick to your word, don't envy, don't do this and that, how to form a state etc etc.
     
    SuperFan likes this.
  9. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    I don't think the Bible was intended to be a life manual on everything. It doesn't explain the birds and the bees, but it also doesn't teach about how to hunt game or cook a delicious meal. It doesn't go into detail about how to plant crops and farm. It doesn't say much about how to construct a fortified shelter, or how to make clothing. All of these are just as important to sustaining life as sex is, and for whatever reason, God and the writers of scripture determined that we could learn those things well enough from other places.

    But even so, would we need to have sex explained to us? The animal kingdom seems to have figured it out pretty well on its own without Alfred Kinsey, tantra, or Dr. Ruth. The Bible seems to have done a pretty good job of creating a moral boundary for sex without having to get into the details of positions, orgasm, erogenous zones, foreplay, etc.

    Of course that's not the only reason why they're together ... but let's be real, it's the sexual part that makes someone homosexual. The main thing that differentiates a gay couple from two men who are simply best friends is that the gay couple has sex.
     
  10. I do believe in God, not in the institutions that supposedly represent God(any kind of church). In my opinion when it's said that God made human in his own image it's not about superficial apperance but giving each and every one opportunity to progress. It's said and pretty much confirmed as long as you really want something and work towards that goal you can achieve anything and PMO does hinder us in our endeavor which is essentially against God. In short if you hurt yourself or someone else and hinder your or his/her ability to grow(any addiction including PMO etc) then that's what can be considered sin. Treat others like you wished to be treated yourself and treat yourself just as good.
     
    Deleted Account likes this.
  11. That is very well said. IMO the whole concept of church has become too 'earhtly.' When we think of the Church, we think of an institution, buildings standing in Rome, while in essence the Church should be nothing more than a group of people who share a spiritual connection with God. For instance, the First Apostle, Mary Magdalene, alone was the Church when she first witnessed the Ressurection. It's the spiritual connection with God that counts, not the buildings or even the clergy. I'm not a protestant but also feel the Church can sometimes stand in the way of a personal relationship with God. People losing the faith over the scandals happening etc. You could say the same thing about religion. Did Jesus come to found Christianity, or did He come to save mankind? People like shoving things into boxes. I guess it facilitates organisation and the way we view the world around us.
     
  12. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    525
    905
    93
    I didn't mean the bible needs the equivalent of the kamasutra. I'm wondering why the bible doesn't explain more about the realm of sex itself. On a philosophical level. But coming from my belief of how the Bible came to be I already have my answer why.
    I disagree. I don't want to live together with my friends, I don't want to hold hands with them or cuddle (which is intimacy not sex), I don't want to raise a kid with my friends either, nor do I want to get married to them. Those points have nothing to do with sex and yet gay people want that, just like we want that with women.
    If it was just about sex you could proclaim that all the guys on this forum who have or had HOCD (which I belong to as well) are in fact gay/bi. The reason why I got over my HOCD was because I realized that there's a lot more levels to being gay than being aroused by a cock. Because if you watch enough hypnosis videos like I did (since you have a self-destructive tendency that turns you on) you can start to become aroused by a dick. That doesn't make one gay tho. Especially because, thank god, the effects are reversible through abstinence.
     
    need4realchg likes this.
  13. SuperFan

    SuperFan Fapstronaut

    Is there really a difference? If someone accepts Christ as Lord and Savior, they are a Christian ... and it's also what they must do to be saved, according to Christ himself.

    It'd be like saying, "Did Ray Kroc (of McDonald's) set out to start a business or to feed millions?" The answer is both.
     
  14. Koloz

    Koloz Fapstronaut

    36
    25
    18
  15. Alright, here's the thing.

    There isn't a single shred of text that directly references masturbation in the Bible. The only thing they reference is the story of Onan which has everything to do with him defying God's command to impregnate the wife of someone that God killed for being evil, and absolutely nothing to do with masturbating.

    The only other thing that could be used here is lust. Okay, that big fancy word. Lust isn't simple desire. God intended us to have that desire for women, if we didn't have that it wouldn't be possible to find a wife now would it? Lust is the intention to act solely on that desire. In today's terms, that would be like marrying somebody just because you desire their looks, but not because you actually love them.

    And by the way, masturbation doesn't have to involve fantasizing or looking at anything at all. Before I started watching porn, I could easily masturbate without anything except the raw physical sensations, I didn't even recognize it as a 'sexual' thing.
     
  16. My own journey with the Lord as a late convert involved a lot of discussion about the need of church, the need for baptism and why just a direct relationship with God in an otherwise heathen life is not enough.

    Very early after my conversion God directed me to a specific parish and put my baptism onto the agenda, while my free will wasn't really ready to comply with it. So many months full of PMO passed, before I actually came out of the Christian closet and met other Christians.

    Once I finally submitted my life to Jesus, PMO got out of the way. Few days later I got very clear signs of what to do next, where and when, so I ended up in church, simply by obedience. From there the Lord used His earthly employees to let things fall into place.
     
    need4realchg likes this.
  17. I’m sorry god. I hope you can forgive me
     

Share This Page