The sin of refusing sex

[IamLisa]

Very interesting topic. Ok so I'm speaking as a single or unmarried woman. If you have no self control you should be married. But then someone mentioned couples having sexless marriage. I then would have to question, what would the point be to get married? Why not then be platonic friends. Because my understanding is sex is obviously a part of and one of the benefits of marriage. God created sex for marriage and is displeased with sex outside of marriage. So I might stir the pot with my opinion but the moral, of my commenting is If you don't want sex yet companionship, stay single, don't get married, and be friends. Just don't cross the line into sexual relations, cuz that's a whole other animal then you're on the other side of what God wants for you. Married benefits without the marriage, which is opposite of what God wants for us.

 

[EleventhHour]

Man is COMMANDED...Be Fruitful and Multiply. Therefore, yes G-d want's kids in this world, he wants souls in this world to better them and for them to grow and that is only but us multiplying. The world multiplying and not "adding" actually means you must have both a boy and a girl....for you cannot multiply without both genders.

I would say the majority of Christians have no problem with the use of contraception... so if what you state is biblical then they are contravening God's commands.

 

[SarahUmbreon]

I actually wanna jump in and say I just talked about it with my mom again, apparently my mom does know straight couples with no children, but she is sure they had sex. I just thought people only have sex to have children, but I forgot that you can have sex in a marriage for fun.

Sorry if I caused any confusion, I’m not the most knowledgeable on this topic, so take my opinion with “a grain of salt” as it were, lol.

 

[Happy2020]

Very interesting topic. Ok so I'm speaking as a single or unmarried woman. If you have no self control you should be married. But then someone mentioned couples having sexless marriage. I then would have to question, what would the point be to get married? Why not then be platonic friends. Because my understanding is sex is obviously a part of and one of the benefits of marriage. God created sex for marriage and is displeased with sex outside of marriage. So I might stir the pot with my opinion but the moral, of my commenting is If you don't want sex yet companionship, stay single, don't get married, and be friends. Just don't cross the line into sexual relations, cuz that's a whole other animal then you're on the other side of what God wants for you. Married benefits without the marriage, which is opposite of what God wants for us.

Hi Lisa! Nice to meet you. You are right. G-d loves the union and body between husband and wife. The whole concept of a family leads to communities, leads to nations and is ultimately providing "life". Without life there is no purpose whatsoever. Wasting seed is a very horrible sin and for men, this is a much harder temptation for him to overcome because he is more physical and desiring. Hence why ever ad you see has a "woman on it" for no reason at all. You want to buy a tool belt, it comes with a calender girl etc. You ever see women by make up with a picture of a men's neckline or his ankles? LOL!

I would advice that man and women should not be close friends. You are playing with fire if you are not planning on getting married. That is why Paul urges "those who cannot be like him (a massive exception and fully pure in heart)", must get married.

 

[Happy2020]

I would say the majority of Christians have no problem with the use of contraception... so if what you state is biblical then they are contravening God's commands.

1. One of the major reasons of the flood was for this. For is life is in the man's blood and his seed (G-d speaks a lot about seed and offspring), then we cannot use the creative power to "waste". That is equal to murder.
2. Judah's sons are the easiet example to see. The first 2 sons wanted "only pleasure". I am sure being the Grandson's of the Patriarch Jacob, they had a very firm hold on Holiness and a Loving Family. But their temptation was to keep their wife "pretty and fit", rather than lose her appeal and get pregnant. G-d killed both of them due too "wasting seed".

So yes, it is very very sad for Christians or anyone to think they can play the role of G-d by "planned parenthood".

3. The sadest thing is, the #1 answer is "Well we aren't ready 'financially' for kids". Tell me, what is the greater miracle...a) Babies being born upside down, in fluid, in a stomach and being created from nothing with a soul attached to it or b) Getting a job? Jesus tells us that our Father provides. Thus the answer is...these people lack faith if G-d.

 

[EleventhHour]

1. One of the major reasons of the flood was for this. For is life is in the man's blood and his seed (G-d speaks a lot about seed and offspring), then we cannot use the creative power to "waste". That is equal to murder.
2. Judah's sons are the easiet example to see. The first 2 sons wanted "only pleasure". I am sure being the Grandson's of the Patriarch Jacob, they had a very firm hold on Holiness and a Loving Family. But their temptation was to keep their wife "pretty and fit", rather than lose her appeal and get pregnant. G-d killed both of them due too "wasting seed".

So yes, it is very very sad for Christians or anyone to think they can play the role of G-d by "planned parenthood".

3. The sadest thing is, the #1 answer is "Well we aren't ready 'financially' for kids". Tell me, what is the greater miracle...a) Babies being born upside down, in fluid, in a stomach and being created from nothing with a soul attached to it or b) Getting a job? Jesus tells us that our Father provides. Thus the answer is...these people lack faith if G-d.

Interesting... we shall see what others have to say... if they respond.

 

[Happy2020]

Interesting... we shall see what others have to say... if they respond.

We shall see Family is so vital and today that is exactly what the satan is destroying, the family home and just look at our society, more depressed than ever and it breaks my heart It is a hard generation...but...Jesus tells us that these are "signs of them times" when Jesus shall return. Yay!!! I hope I am worthy myself to be accepted...

 

[EleventhHour]

We shall see Family is so vital and today that is exactly what the satan is destroying, the family home and just look at our society, more depressed than ever and it breaks my heart It is a hard generation...but...Jesus tells us that these are "signs of them times" when Jesus shall return. Yay!!! I hope I am worthy myself to be accepted...

If you are saved you are accepted.
Salvation is secure and eternal in Christ.

 

[TaraSkye]

I would hope that in a good marriage, each partner would understand that when the other is just not feeling into it, they just aren't. A good marriage will have that patience and understanding. We all go through things that exhaust us, stress us, and just make us not in the mood in general. To use a bible verse to almost threaten a spouse that they need to provide sex, or it's a sin? Wow, that's just over the top in my opinion.

 

[EleventhHour]

I would hope that in a good marriage, each partner would understand that when the other is just not feeling into it, they just aren't. A good marriage will have that patience and understanding. We all go through things that exhaust us, stress us, and just make us not in the mood in general. To use a bible verse to almost threaten a spouse that they need to provide sex, or it's a sin? Wow, that's just over the top in my opinion.

Agree the OP does not address the context of Paul's direction.

 

[IamLisa]

Biblical married sex is like GLUE......
That's all I'm going to say on the topic right now (and I think the married folk reading will get this, while the unmarried are going )

I think that's a valid point, although I'm not married👏🏾

 

[TaraSkye]

I'm just going to say this, as someone who has been happily married for almost 20 years. Sex is a nice perk of marriage, yes. But if you think sex is the "glue", you would be wrong. What holds a marriage together is mutual respect, patience, understanding, doing for the other person as much as you can in OTHER ways then sex, too. If you have children, it's about raising those kids properly. When I see what a good father my husband is to our children, when they are laughing, playing games together, I am the happiest. Those are the truly worthwhile moments that mean more to me than sex ever could. And he would say the same. I just wanted to put this out there to those who aren't married, and aren't in a relationship. Please do not feel there is a quota for how much sex you'll need to have with your spouse, because that's ridiculous. Sex is NOT the glue, it's just an ingredient in the glue. Hope that makes sense.

 

[presidente]

I’m just coming in here to say: I don’t get it.

Can’t a couple be happily married without sex? My mom knows plenty of couples, that are straight, that don’t have kids. What if the man and woman want to marry for the companionship part of marriage, rather than the having kids/sex part?

Then again, this is coming from a woman who has never dated anyone and struggles to see why masturbation is a sin. I didn’t know it was a sin until I got on CC. My mom said she could she it being a sin if it becomes more important than God in a person’s life, and my Dad said if you imagine seeing someone else while jerking off, then that is a sin.

But I’m sticking to what my parents said, I don’t even know how to masturbate, I thought it was just a way to relive stress? That’s what I hear most of the time, y’all can say whatever to me, but I’m sticking with what my parents said, I’m not changing my mind.

I don't get why a couple would marry, not have sex, and each masturbate. Among other things, that sounds uber lame. The Bible says two shall be one flesh. Sex is a part of marriage. If both have a low sex drive and don't want sex hardly at all, then not having sex is depriving the other of something they both want and need. It might be a good idea for such a couple to schedule physical intimacy.

There is not a unanimous opinion among Protestant type churches. Roman Catholic theology opposed masturbation. One approach to arguing against it is the sin of Onan, but in the passage, he wasn't fulfilling the obligation to raise up seed unto his brother. He married her widow with whom he was obligated to raise up seed unto his brother (assuming that means try to.) It appears he was engaged in coitus interruptus. It is not clear whether any masturbation was involved in that. I read on a forum once that Greek Orthdox consider a masturbator to be malakos, a Greek word meaning 'soft' that shows up right after a reference to 'arsenokoites.' I suspect in context it refers to two men in a homosexual act, but 'malakos' could refer to those who were weak in terms of virtue in some contexts, also. It sounds like a way to condemn it using a rather vague adjective that shows up in scripture.

In the Old Testament, an emission made a man unclean. So a man who went out to camp with the army had to wash himself and be unclean until even if that happened to him. But it doesn't specify how. Intercourse-- to male completion-- would make both male and female engaged in the act unclean and required to wash themselves.

 

[SarahUmbreon]

I don't get why a couple would marry, not have sex, and each masturbate. Among other things, that sounds uber lame. The Bible says two shall be one flesh. Sex is a part of marriage. If both have a low sex drive and don't want sex hardly at all, then not having sex is depriving the other of something they both want and need. It might be a good idea for such a couple to schedule physical intimacy.

There is not a unanimous opinion among Protestant type churches. Roman Catholic theology opposed masturbation. One approach to arguing against it is the sin of Onan, but in the passage, he wasn't fulfilling the obligation to raise up seed unto his brother. He married her widow with whom he was obligated to raise up seed unto his brother (assuming that means try to.) It appears he was engaged in coitus interruptus. It is not clear whether any masturbation was involved in that. I read on a forum once that Greek Orthdox consider a masturbator to be malakos, a Greek word meaning 'soft' that shows up right after a reference to 'arsenokoites.' I suspect in context it refers to two men in a homosexual act, but 'malakos' could refer to those who were weak in terms of virtue in some contexts, also. It sounds like a way to condemn it using a rather vague adjective that shows up in scripture.

In the Old Testament, an emission made a man unclean. So a man who went out to camp with the army had to wash himself and be unclean until even if that happened to him. But it doesn't specify how. Intercourse-- to male completion-- would make both male and female engaged in the act unclean and required to wash themselves.

I want to direct you to this post I made in the thread:

I actually wanna jump in and say I just talked about it with my mom again, apparently my mom does know straight couples with no children, but she is sure they had sex. I just thought people only have sex to have children, but I forgot that you can have sex in a marriage for fun.

Sorry if I caused any confusion, I’m not the most knowledgeable on this topic, so take my opinion with “a grain of salt” as it were, lol.

I honestly forgot people can do sex in a marriage, and not have children. The reason why I struggle to understand why people seem to be against masturbation is that we are human and will mess up, yes it appears it’s something that people shouldn’t be doing, but from what I know, it helps people dealing with their sexual frustrations and having an outlet. But then again, you are talking to someone who has not had an orgasm yet and honestly doesn’t know how to know if you have one. At this point, I have given up quite awhile ago to understand how to masturbate, but that was because I was frustrated that I couldn’t figure it out, it’s easy for me to give up on stuff I don’t care about. But I will not judge those that used to/are currently masturbating, they are probably struggling in life if they are still doing it, not everyone is lucky enough to find love, I know I still haven’t and I’m honestly okay with that, I just want to appreciate what I have now.

 

[presidente]

I would ask to you reflect just a little
there is a long running thread about how many people are going to hell and gloating over this (don't deny it they are GLOATING), and some are justifying rape right here in this thread and you pick on me?

Who justified rape? I haven't read that in this thread.

 

[presidente]

Agree... how this comment was overlooked and how no one made a big deal about it.

The entire OP by @presidente is out of context and misapplied.
Paul was not writing to specific situations occurring in the assembly... he is not writing about sin.

If you want to see the context of the passage, to ahead. It aligns with what the verse appears to mean.

Many Christians consider it to be a sin to disobey apostolic commands on subjects like this.

I would agree that it is unlike that the situation was occurring in the assembly and the married couples were doing this stuff at home.

 

[EleventhHour]

If you want to see the context of the passage, to ahead. It aligns with what the verse appears to mean.

Many Christians consider it to be a sin to disobey apostolic commands on subjects like this.

I would agree that it is unlike that the situation was occurring in the assembly and the married couples were doing this stuff at home.

Not an apostolic command.
The context is Gnosticism and what some people in the congregation were promoting with regards to the flesh... it has nothing to do with sin.

 

[kaylagrl]

I’m just coming in here to say: I don’t get it.

Can’t a couple be happily married without sex? My mom knows plenty of couples, that are straight, that don’t have kids. What if the man and woman want to marry for the companionship part of marriage, rather than the having kids/sex part?

If both partners agree to a sexless marriage, and to be faithful to one another, I don't see an issue.

Then again, this is coming from a woman who has never dated anyone and struggles to see why masturbation is a sin. I didn’t know it was a sin until I got on CC. My mom said she could she it being a sin if it becomes more important than God in a person’s life, and my Dad said if you imagine seeing someone else while jerking off, then that is a sin.

I didn't say it was or wasn't a sin. I didn't make any comment on it either way. I said his joke was crude, and it was. I didn't derail the thread to discuss another subject. Plenty of thread here on the rights or wrongs of it.

But I’m sticking to what my parents said, I don’t even know how to masturbate, I thought it was just a way to relive stress? That’s what I hear most of the time, y’all can say whatever to me, but I’m sticking with what my parents said, I’m not changing my mind.

No one is trying to change your mind. If you're a Christian it's what the Bible says that matters, unless your parents are following the Bible. This is an issue I think each person has to find their own answer to. Other than the ideal being sex is within a marriage I know of no specific verse that speaks to the right or wrong of this issue. Someone here may know something I don't.

 

[SarahUmbreon]

If both partners agree to a sexless marriage, and to be faithful to one another, I don't see an issue.



I didn't say it was or wasn't a sin. I didn't make any comment on it either way. I said his joke was crude, and it was. I didn't derail the thread to discuss another subject. Plenty of thread here on the rights or wrongs of it.





No one is trying to change your mind. If you're a Christian it's what the Bible says that matters, unless your parents are following the Bible. This is an issue I think each person has to find their own answer to. Other than the ideal being sex is within a marriage I know of no specific verse that speaks to the right or wrong of this issue. Someone here may know something I don't.

I was just throwing my two cents based on what I saw on the 1st page, I saw the argument going on, I wasn’t trying to say anything towards that argument, I have seen this thread for awhile and just wanted to throw my two cents into the discussion.

I’m sorry if you thought I was joining the argument, I don’t like joining arguments unless the aruger says something towards me or I read something really offensive, and not a lot of people have responded to it. I saw there was enough people trying to tell the person in the wrong, what was wrong, I’m not defending his actions, I was just coming in a as random person, to show the side that struggles to understand. I have already made two other posts, I implore you to read them if you get the chance.

Have a blessed day ^_^

 

[presidente]

Not an apostolic command.
The context is Gnosticism and what some people in the congregation were promoting with regards to the flesh... it has nothing to do with sin.

I have heard of such ideas promoted as proto-gnosticism. But your analysis of the passage sounds speculative. It is clear from the context what Paul is addressing. Speculation about the specifics of the contemporary issues in the congregation do not change what Paul wrote.