u/VeritasAgape

Many have come out of "purity" culture with baggage. Some now know that they're allowed to enjoy various forms of sexuality. However, due to leftover shame and guilt, they put their sex life in a box "outside of their Christian life." They evade God. They don't ask Him for wisdom about whether they should date and have sex with a certain person. They don't pray to have a romantic sexual partner that is mutually satisfying and safe for both. They don't ask Him for wisdom and strength to enjoy something like masturbation but in moderation.

Don't let leftover guilt and shame about sex cause you to "hide" from God. Perhaps you subconsciously think it's "dirty" so you then evade Him in this matter. We are to "walk in the light" (1 John 1:7). This verse isn't just about doing what's right. It's about living honestly and openly with God. He already sees everything. If you're allowed to engage in certain things, then you can do so in good conscience and thank Him for it ("give thanks in all things"). Sometimes baggage from left over man-made traditions causes people to feel like they shouldn't include God in the domain of their sex life. You can. It's good to pray to Him for wisdom, blessings and opportunities in it, and for others and yourself to not be hurt with your sex life and sin/problems to be avoided (1 Chronicles 4:10). We are to include God in all aspects of our life, not just in "church" on Sunday but during the whole week, and the week includes our sex life/sexual desires and others connected to that.

Porneia (translated at times as fornication) is a broad word that can mean a number of things. But by far its most common meaning in extrabiblical literature is prostitution. But not just any type of prostitution as there were other words for that, it commonly referred to a very tragic form of it. It often referred to temple brothel prostitution with trafficked slave women. These women were captured and forced to work in pagan idolatrous associated brothels as sex slaves. Obviously the Bible condemns this sort of behavior and anyone with some common sense and decency can know this isn't ok. In Corinthians 6:15-18 it uses the word fornication and its feminine noun forms to warn against this. Then just a few verses later it warns against various types of fornication in general (7:2). The warning against temple prostitution would also be a part of this since this is just mentioned a few verses before 7:2 and such is the primary default idea behind the word.

I have a post here about 1 Cor. 7:2 here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChristianSexuality/comments/1t1avx9/premarital_sex_is_not_a_sin_in_itself/ . In the cultural context this is warning against any type of fornication (stealing a wife or a man's adult daughter without consent/ proper dowries). But temple prostitution would be at the forefront. Why? Why would such a heinous thing be a temptation for Christians?

In my next book I've painstakingly show many details as to why they'd be tempted and it largely comes down to the cost and context. Outside of marriage there were very few people that you could have sex with. Many men wouldn't want to share their wives as many men today wouldn't. Fathers often forbade their daughters to be with men until proper dowries and marriage were setup as a sort of insurance policy for the daughter in case divorce happened and even forbade their widowed mothers from sex too.

So who were you left with? The few women that were free to have sex with others were far from "free." They saw their opportunity and charged a fortune for a man to be their companion. These free (non-enslaved) women were called hetairas (hetaera). It was understandable though that they would charge fees since few jobs were available for them. But I examined the costs for them and it was a lot. A "date" could easily be the equivalent of thousands of dollars in today's money. Supply and demand meant they could charge a fortune. These women were "companions" like modern day sugar babes and were very expensive. Thus, they were out of the price range of most men back then and would be for most men today.

So who's left? Some Greek governments found a "solution" to this and called the man who came up with this idea the "savior" of social cohesion (since horny men going around cheating and stealing other men's women created civil conflict). What was this solution? Pagan temple prostitutes with slave women. For the cost of around what would feel like $50 in today's money (give or take a bit) you could sleep with a temple prostitute. That was affordable to most men back then as it would be today. These prostitutes weren't necessarily in the temples themselves but in temple sponsored/associated brothels. Legal sex for a mere $50 when you have no other option was a strong temptation for people and would be for people today if this sort of thing was normalized (people can do pretty wicked things once society accepts something). You could walk into a pagan brothel and have a row of different women of various body types in lingerie and have your pick for about $50ish.

But doing so would be wrong since these were enslaved women and because idolatry was associated with it. Nevertheless, in the cultural context of having no other realistic options even if you were an attractive man, this was a temptation. Single women were also tempted to go against their family and have sex (which was a significant cultural breach of conduct and could harm the daughter's well being and financial security in a harsher pre industrial world). Generally, this situation doesn't apply to men and women today as single people can typically choose to have sex if they want. Although the "incel" subject does overlap some with the above.

I'll keep this post brief and add in the comments some citations for this. But in my next book (So Sex isn't Dirty, Now What?) I include a very large amount of citations from original sources for all of the above with links so you can see this for yourself.

Porneia (translated at times as fornication) is a broad word that can mean a number of things. But by far its most common meaning in extrabiblical literature is prostitution. But not just any type of prostitution as there were other words for that, it commonly referred to a very tragic form of it. It often referred to temple brothel prostitution with trafficked slave women. These women were captured and forced to work in pagan idolatrous associated brothels as sex slaves. Obviously the Bible condemns this sort of behavior and anyone with some common sense and decency can know this isn't ok. In Corinthians 6:15-18 it uses the word fornication and its feminine noun forms to warn against this. Then just a few verses later it warns against various types of fornication in general (7:2). The warning against temple prostitution would also be a part of this since this is just mentioned a few verses before 7:2 and such is the primary default idea behind the word.

I have a post here about 1 Cor. 7:2 here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChristianSexuality/comments/1t1avx9/premarital_sex_is_not_a_sin_in_itself/ . In the cultural context this is warning against any type of fornication (stealing a wife or a man's adult daughter without consent/ proper dowries). But temple prostitution would be at the forefront. Why? Why would such a heinous thing be a temptation for Christians?

In my next book I've painstakingly show many details as to why they'd be tempted and it largely comes down to the cost and context. Outside of marriage there were very few people that you could have sex with. Many men wouldn't want to share their wives as many men today wouldn't. Fathers often forbade their daughters to be with men until proper dowries and marriage were setup as a sort of insurance policy for the daughter in case divorce happened and even forbade their widowed mothers from sex too.

So who were you left with? The few women that were free to have sex with others were far from "free." They saw their opportunity and charged a fortune for a man to be their companion. These free (non-enslaved) women were called hetairas (hetaera). It was understandable though that they would charge fees since few jobs were available for them. But I examined the costs for them and it was a lot. A "date" could easily be the equivalent of thousands of dollars in today's money. Supply and demand meant they could charge a fortune. These women were "companions" like modern day sugar babes and were very expensive. Thus, they were out of the price range of most men back then and would be for most men today.

So who's left? Some Greek governments found a "solution" to this and called the man who came up with this idea the "savior" of social cohesion (since horny men going around cheating and stealing other men's women created civil conflict). What was this solution? Pagan temple prostitutes with slave women. For the cost of around what would feel like $50 in today's money (give or take a bit) you could sleep with a temple prostitute. That was affordable to most men back then as it would be today. These prostitutes weren't necessarily in the temples themselves but in temple sponsored/associated brothels. Legal sex for a mere $50 when you have no other option was a strong temptation for people and would be for people today if this sort of thing was normalized (people can do pretty wicked things once society accepts something). You could walk into a pagan brothel and have a row of different women of various body types in lingerie and have your pick for about $50ish.

But doing so would be wrong since these were enslaved women and because idolatry was associated with it. Nevertheless, in the cultural context of having no other realistic options even if you were an attractive man, this was a temptation. Single women were also tempted to go against their family and have sex (which was a significant cultural breach of conduct and could harm the daughter's well being and financial security in a harsher pre industrial world). Generally, this situation doesn't apply to men and women today as single people can typically choose to have sex if they want. Although the "incel" subject does overlap some with the above.

I'll keep this post brief and add in the comments some citations for this. But in my next book (So Sex isn't Dirty, Now What?) I include a very large amount of citations from original sources for all of the above with links so you can see this for yourself.

Premarital sex is not a sin in and of itself. This misconception is causing a lot of harm to peoples' lives and needlessly chasing people away from God. There are times that it can be sin, and some need more moderation with it in light of the modern problems with hookup culture. At other times it can be a blessing to others, a wonderful gift to enjoy and share, and foster closeness. But for now, let's look at the main argument in this debate.

-"Fornication Argument": Much of this debate centers around 1 word: "fornication," often translated as "sexual immorality" from the Greek word porneia. Those who insist that premarital sex is always a sin base such on this word. The problem is they use circular reasoning. When pressed on the matter, they say, "premarital sex is sexual immorality because sexual immorality is premarital sex." That's circular. Others think that the word "porneia" itself means mere "premarital sex." Almost no published Greek lexicon says such. Neither usage of this word in the New Testament, nor in the LXX (Greek Old Testament), nor in extrabiblical usage supports such a definition of it. For premarital sex to be a sin, there has to be a vice attached to it such as: rape, cheating, violation of dowry code, etc. or anything that is unloving towards another.

It usually referred to a low form of prostitution that often involved trafficking women for sex slavery and at times idolatry. It would be wrong for a Christian to take part in this abuse. Sometimes it more broadly referred to "whoring oneself out to any sort of wicked lust," idolatry for example is a common usage. Whether idolatry, adultery, or sex trafficking, fornication could encompass these things and Christian's weren't to take part in this.

-"1 Corinthians 7:2": When one mentions the above, this verse is brought up at times. It reads, "But, because of sexual immoralities, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband." It's assumed that this implies premarital sex is a sin since marriage is portrayed as mitigating sin here. Note however that it is in the plural ("immoralities"). It's not just one type of sin that is the issue but a variety of different types of sin. But what types of immorality? While it could encompass any sin that the word porneia indicates, the context points to a more specific answers.

Just a few verses earlier in the near context of 1 Corinthians 6 the word porneia is used there and refers to prostitution. Christians are warned to stay away from this form of abusive practice (which often involved sex trafficking and idolatry).

There is also the historic context. Most women were not free to have sex (unless consent by whoever was in charge of her care and dowry was situated). If a young man wanted to be with a young woman (or vice versa a young woman wanted to be with a man) this was not permitted unless the man in charge of her care (often her father) gave consent for such. To violate this was considered a form of porneia (immorality) that was a serious offense to the family. This is actually called moicheia (adultery) in Classical culture. If the woman was married, she would often be off limits too since again the male in charge of her care (her husband) did not always consent to another being with his wife.

Thus, an unmarried man would be tempted with different "immoralities" as few options would be available to him. He could be tempted to: 1. be with a woman without a father's consent (culturally insulting to the family and the woman and considered theft), 2. commit adultery with a married woman, 3. be with a woman trafficked into sex slavery and/ or a temple prostitute tied to idolatry. Few women were free to be with a man and those who were free legally were often not free financially but worked as hetairas (sort of like modern very high priced sugar babes, an often upscale companion who wasn't normally a slave but a free woman charging for sex). Thus, for many marriage would lessen this temptation of burning with no readily available way of having sex. Women too were often left tempted since often they weren't permitted to be with a man unless married (unless their father or husband consented or they were an independent woman which wasn't overly common). For more on this subject or to see citations and original sources that support the points in this post, see my book 40 Christian Myths about Sex.

Masturbation is not a sin in itself. It can be at times. Anything that becomes an addiction that causes you to harm others or yourself (violating Christ's law of love) is sin. There can be ways that masturbation is harmful, but also ways it can be beneficial. Before looking at some of these practical issues, let's first look at some biblical misconceptions regarding masturbation.

-Lust:

Many when referring to the subject of masturbation (and pornography) bring up the subject of lust. They say "lust is lust and lust is a sin." Yet few have taken the time to study this word "lust" in the Bible. It simply means "desire," whether good or bad. The word is even used for when Jesus desired to eat the Last Supper (Luke 22:15) which is obviously not sinful desire. It's for good desire such as in 1 Timothy 3:1 where it says if a man aspires to be a church leader he "desires a good thing." Part of the understandable confusion is that English Bibles translate the Greek word with different English words. Both lust and desire are the same in the Greek. You can see this here: https://biblehub.com/greek/strongs_1937.htm . Mere sexual desire and looking at sexual arousing images isn't sinful in itself.

-Matthew 5:28:

This verse is often the go to proof text for those who assume masturbation/ pornography are sinful. I challenge people to ask certain questions about the verse to encourage them to take a closer look at it. When these questions are asked, one realizes that this verse does not condemn mere masturbation. A list of these questions is here: https://www.reddit.com/user/VeritasAgape/comments/1197gp9/questions_about_matthew_528_and_masturbation/ Matthew 5:28 is teaching against coveting a woman that belongs to another man (typically a wife). It refers to planning to steal her sexually without the man's consent. Jesus cites the OT passage here that refers to the 10 Commandments and stealing that which belongs to another. Mere sexual desire for an "unspoken for" woman certainly is not the point here. How could it be adultery if she is single (or not with anyone else)? It also doesn't refer to sexual desire for some woman that you never could nor plan to ever have sex with.

-Practical Issues:

But if the Bible does not condemn masturbation or pornography in itself, what about the practical side of this? It's important to note that simply because the Bible doesn't directly condemn something that doesn't make it automatically ok. For some masturbation becomes a harmful addiction. They waste their lives with it. Some let it get out of hand (or in hand) too much. Some cause themselves to have ED from it. Some ignore their spouses needs from it. Some let it increase desire to a dangerous point where they do or look at things that they shouldn't. Yet for others it is the opposite of these things. For some it helps to decrease desire for people they shouldn't be with. For some it helps them to meet their spouses needs. For some it is beneficial to their health since they lack other means.

I don't like to use crude language but I've counseled with people who at times just really needed to "bust a nut." Their "lust" for women and sexual frustration was out of hand. Yet they felt guilty about masturbating. Others needed some "post nut clarity" via masturbation to not act on their desire for a woman that it was not wise for them to be with. Some Christian men, especially ones in their prime, that haven't orgasmed in months are literally walking around with an erection, feeling guilty about it, and tempted to act on it irrationally with the wrong person or wrong time with the person. Women at times find their release in this matter helpful as well to avoid various risks involved with sex.

These benefits of masturbation are part of the reason for writing this article. It's also important to understand this matter because of the guilt and judgment associated with it. So many Christians are burdened by unnecessary guilt in this matter. This guilt is quite harmful to their spiritual lives and lives in general. Feel free to share this article with others struggling with this subject. Or let them know of the book 40 Christian Myths about Sex on Amazon which goes into much more detail about masturbation and the subject of a more open yet biblical Christian view on sex in general.

In Luke 22:15 Jesus said, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you...." Few notice that the word "desire" here is the same word translated as "lust" in Matthew 5:28. Matthew 5:28 is the "go to" passage for those who teach that things such as sexually desiring another person or masturbation are always wrong. It says, "But I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart." The word "lust" is also translated as "desire" in other places. It could be a good desire such as when it says, "Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a good thing" (1 Timothy 3:1). Obviously Jesus, Our Perfect Savior, was not sinning by "desiring" to eat the last supper.

But can desire be wrong at times too? Mere desire or lust isn't wrong in itself. The object of your desire along with what you're planning in your heart or what your desire leads you to do is what can make it wrong. In Matthew 5:28, the issue is coveting to steal (sexually speaking) another man's woman (or wife) without his consent (the word "woman" can just as easily be translated as wife). This same word is also used in the LXX (Greek Old Testament) when referring to "thou shall not covet" (Exodus 20:17). In that Old Testament passage it lists things not to covet: "anything that belongs to your neighbor."
Obviously you can desire to have some of the things that your neighbor has. In today's culture you could desire to have your neighbors lawn mower, desire to borrow it, or desire to buy it or own one like it for yourself. The problem is if your desire would lead you to steal it from him (or even if in your heart you would steal such from him if you could).
Desire or lust in itself is not wrong. Even sexually desiring another person can be completely fine and be a natural desire that is God given. Masturbating or looking at porn or finding another to be sexually beautiful can be fine. Of course, there can be abuse of such things and they can be inappropriate, sinful and harmful at times depending on the circumstances. But overall, this subject has been misunderstood and caused unnecessary guilt and unhealthy suppression that has harmed people!

Instead of feeling guilty just for having sexual desire and masturbating etc., we should be open with the Lord and in good conscious seeking His wisdom about moderation with these things. They can be used as a release of sexual tension and actually help one's Christian life and be God given gifts to enjoy. Or they can be harmful for others when done in a certain way. If you want to learn more about the myth that masturbation is always wrong or other Christian myths about sex, check out the book "40 Christian Myths about Sex" by Alex Williamson. Few other books have the balls to speak as boldly and biblically on this touchy subject and it has helped many people.