Last night I was speaking with a close friend when the subject arose (no pun intended) on whether or not Jesus masturbated. My argument held its roots in the idea that Jesus was human, thus having human desires that could have translated into masturbation. Granted, He was the Son of God, yet he had hormones and desires as any other human. He probably could keep his behavior in check, yet I'm having a difficult time believing that when Jesus woke up with morning wood, as a teenager, that he wasn't compelled to explore this interesting male phenomenon.

Opinions? :D

is masturbation a sin?

I don't think masturbation is considered a sin in the churches of christ, so I'd say hell yea he did! :D :D

damn i dunno...lol howd yall come up with these kinna things..lol

actually yes it is....you can sin with your mind. Having sex with someone in your own imagination is considered fornication none-the-less. So since it is a sin and Jesus cannot sin then apparently he did not masturbate.

If Jesus masturbated, then who did he think about in his thoughts?

Originally posted by Sham365
If Jesus masturbated, then who did he think about in his thoughts? God? Or maybe that would be incest? ;)

No word like masturbation is anywhere in the bible. I find it to be a bit of a conspicuous omission. As there are so many passages about the evils of simple thoughts like lust and 'coveting another's wife', why is there no mention of an incredibly prevalent act which pretty much presupposes those thoughts?

90% of men masturbate, the other 10% are liars.

:cool:

Originally posted by fritz_269
God? Or maybe that would be incest? ;) haha...

my opinion is this. masturbation may not be mentioned in the bible per say, however, masturbation is still related to the word "sex" in general. obstaining from, even thinking about, is the right thing to do and since he was a prophet, then I think its safe to say he did not masturbate.

lustful thoughts are a sin, if you think lustful thoughts when masturbating than you are sinning.

Originally posted by Lord_Vektra
lustful thoughts are a sin, if you think lustful thoughts when masturbating than you are sinning. As opposed to not thinking "sinful" thoughts when masturbating??

"mmmm, bricks"....

No, I don't think he did. Because of most of the reason above. And you're forgetting that masturbation is not something that is forced, it is not a biological need and you can CHOOSE not to do it.

Sorry, can't resist

http://rock103.com/crew/pics/

Originally posted by Tireburner
Sorry, can't resist

http://rock103.com/crew/pics/


indeed you should be sorry.......that image has appeared repeatedly across the AF boards.......



As to whether the big J was in the habit of pulling his plonker....

If he was, as record would have it,a mere human,he most definitely would have done.All men are genetically programmed to seek their pleasures in any way that they can.It may not suit the propaganda merchants and medieval spin doctors who drafted the standardised versions of the gospels,but if Jesus was an ordinary guy who just happened to also be the son of God,then yes he probably had all the shortcomings of an ordinary guy,including horny thoughts and guilt,the two staple ingredients of the Catholic faith.

yes,it's late,I've got a bad case of surplus time and Fritz has made a statement that I couldn't resist exploring further.A quick Google search took me to www.askwendi.com where I was given this little gem...


There are many more scriptures dealing with sexuality, purity and relationships. These are only a few to get you started!!!

Immorality:
Matt. 5:27
Matt. 15:19
Mark 7:21
Acts 15:20,29
Acts 21:25
Rom. 13:13
1 Cor. 5:1, 9-11
1 Cor. 6:9-18
Gal. 5:19
Ephes. 5:3,5
Col. 3:5
1 Thes. 4:3
Heb. 12:6
Heb. 13:4
James 1:21
Jude 1:7
Rev. 2:14,20,21
Rev. 21:8
Rev. 22:15

Lust:
Prov. 2:16-18
Prov. 5:3-13
Prov. 6:24
Prov. 7:6-27
Prov. 9:13-18
Psalms 4:4
Matt. 5:28
Mark 4:19
Mark 7:21-23
Rom. 1:22-29
1 Cor. 9:27
2 Cor. 12:21
Gal. 5:19-21
Ephes. 4:17-22
1 Tim. 6:9
James 1:14
1 John 2:16
Psalms 26:2

Purity:
Isaiah 1:18
Matt. 5:8
Gal. 5:16
Philip 4:8
1 Tim. 5:22
2 Tim. 2:21
James 4:8
1 Pet. 1:22
1 John 3:3
Titus 2:12
1 Peter 2:11
Gal. 5:16

Self-Examination:
Job 12:23
Psalms 19:12
Rev. 9:21
Psalms 119:59
Psalms 119:9-11
Psalms 139:23-24
Jer. 17:9
Lam. 3:40
Haggai 1:7
2 Cor. 13:5
2 Cor. 12:21
Gal. 6:3



for those of you who enjoy the reading of pious claptrap as satire,the letters page is a must!
:)

Originally posted by taranaki



indeed you should be sorry.......that image has appeared repeatedly across the AF boards.......


Sorry, I have been gone for quite a while.

no way thats not even a question.

in the words of a friend "Hell yeah Jesus masterbated"

It just occured to me that Jesus could not have masturbated. Orgasms were not invented until 1629.

I was just curious what was in here.

I think you all are ignorant.

Jesus was a PERFECT human. Since masturbation is a shortcoming, a weakness of will as it is, He most certainly did not. Jesus was not an "ordinary guy who just so happened to be the Son of God" He WAS God. Its sick to even think He could have. I can guarantee you with my life that He did not. God cannot and will not, ever, sin. And yes, masturbation is a sin. It is a form of fornication, is evil, and a sign of weakness. Ordinary mortals may not be able to keep from it, but Jesus was no ordinary mortal. He was and is God.

I am positive.

Originally posted by Darkwing
I was just curious what was in here.

I think you all are ignorant.

Jesus was a PERFECT human. Since masturbation is a shortcoming, a weakness of will as it is, He most certainly did not. Jesus was not an "ordinary guy who just so happened to be the Son of God" He WAS God. Its sick to even think He could have. I can guarantee you with my life that He did not. God cannot and will not, ever, sin. And yes, masturbation is a sin. It is a form of fornication, is evil, and a sign of weakness. Ordinary mortals may not be able to keep from it, but Jesus was no ordinary mortal. He was and is God.

I am positive.

It's good to see someone standing up for what they beleive in and being firm about what they beleive in! Good onya!

Originally posted by Darkwing
I was just curious what was in here.

I think you all are ignorant.

Jesus was a PERFECT human. Since masturbation is a shortcoming, a weakness of will as it is, He most certainly did not. Jesus was not an "ordinary guy who just so happened to be the Son of God" He WAS God. Its sick to even think He could have. I can guarantee you with my life that He did not. God cannot and will not, ever, sin. And yes, masturbation is a sin. It is a form of fornication, is evil, and a sign of weakness. Ordinary mortals may not be able to keep from it, but Jesus was no ordinary mortal. He was and is God.

I am positive.

If you've never had doubts about your religion,you've never had a religion.

Originally posted by taranaki


If you've never had doubts about your religion,you've never had a religion.

who says I've never had doubts? This just so happens to be a hard-backed fact, as far as religion goes. According to definintion, Jesus was and is God. According to definition, God is perfect. Therefore Jesus was perfect. Its not really disputeable from my viewpoint. Not all facets of my belief are so unshakeable, however...

You offended that I have a firm belief? That you feel you must tell me I do not have a belief just because I feel positive about a certain part of it? I do not understand...

Originally posted by Darkwing


who says I've never had doubts? This just so happens to be a hard-backed fact, as far as religion goes. According to definintion, Jesus was and is God. According to definition, God is perfect. Therefore Jesus was perfect. Its not really disputeable from my viewpoint. Not all facets of my belief are so unshakeable, however...

You offended that I have a firm belief? That you feel you must tell me I do not have a belief just because I feel positive about a certain part of it? I do not understand...

According to your definitions,maybe.Nothing in the Bible can be taken as fact,there are far too many contradictions,myths and impossibilities.The Bible is probably the oldest known source of urban legends.Whether you believe them to be true or not comes down to faith,which is the whole basis for any religion.

I am not offended by your beliefs,nor do I seek to mock them.My own values and beliefs are largely based on provable facts from verifiable sources,with a little bit of parents' beliefs drummed in for good measure.

The Bible,like most other spiritual resources,has been around for many years....it's content may be based on the original framewok,but there have been many subtle changes to the detail over the years through language differences,historical interpretations ,and well-meaning embellishment.The Bible as taught in most modern christian churches bears little resemblance to the original teachings of the early disciples.

As to my reasoning that Jesus was ordinary son of a carpenter and not some all-powerful,temptation-proof ,celibate deity...The concept of a 'higher being' has existed in almost every civilisation since man was able to articulate his thoughts.This practice has continued for many years,with icons ranging from cattle to cargo ships,cats to giant men with big swirly hair that live somewhere up in the sky....so many different icons,and yet there are always people with enough faith to believe absolutely that they have got it right,and the rest of humanity has got it wrong.Since they cannot possibly all be right,and nobody has yet been able to introduce me to a credible image of their deity,be it a photograph,a personal visit, an undisputable sign,whatever...then I choose to believe that there is nothing of a god-like nature in which to believe.

Which makes Jesus as human as the rest of us.

Originally posted by taranaki


According to your definitions,maybe.Nothing in the Bible can be taken as fact,there are far too many contradictions,myths and impossibilities.The Bible is probably the oldest known source of urban legends.Whether you believe them to be true or not comes down to faith,which is the whole basis for any religion.

I am not offended by your beliefs,nor do I seek to mock them.My own values and beliefs are largely based on provable facts from verifiable sources,with a little bit of parents' beliefs drummed in for good measure.

The Bible,like most other spiritual resources,has been around for many years....it's content may be based on the original framewok,but there have been many subtle changes to the detail over the years through language differences,historical interpretations ,and well-meaning embellishment.The Bible as taught in most modern christian churches bears little resemblance to the original teachings of the early disciples.

As to my reasoning that Jesus was ordinary son of a carpenter and not some all-powerful,temptation-proof ,celibate deity...The concept of a 'higher being' has existed in almost every civilisation since man was able to articulate his thoughts.This practice has continued for many years,with icons ranging from cattle to cargo ships,cats to giant men with big swirly hair that live somewhere up in the sky....so many different icons,and yet there are always people with enough faith to believe absolutely that they have got it right,and the rest of humanity has got it wrong.Since they cannot possibly all be right,and nobody has yet been able to introduce me to a credible image of their deity,be it a photograph,a personal visit, an undisputable sign,whatever...then I choose to believe that there is nothing of a god-like nature in which to believe.

Which makes Jesus as human as the rest of us.

I concur. My feelings exactly. Could not have expressed it better myself.

P.s. I liked your old avatar better Taranaki.

well, I apologize for this rather lame addition. I had a whole beautiful argument set up, and it didn't go through. I lost it. Dammit I hate it when that happens. I'll sum up my incredible long and glorious post in one feel swoop:

basically i just said that my belief is no stranger than your own. You believe in the atom, the electron, the quark. correct? Whens the last time you saw one? felt one? had any experience with one at all? You simply believe that they exist because your teachers say so and it makes a bit of sense that they should be there. Your belief (I just use a quark as an example, there are many things, such as dinosaurs and the age of the earth and the size of space, etc...)is based on magazines and other works, written by the hand of man supposedly explaining that which is difficult to understand. Well, that's no differnet from my belief. I believe something that actually happened to people who wrote it down many years ago in the same way that the people who wrote down these "scientifical" explainations have done. The age of the document is not critical. There are people who have read the ancient hebrew scrolls and they say that the meaning is not lost in the translation. some yes, but not a substantial amount to make a difference in truth.

So although that is lame, I can't be arsed to type it all up again. i hope you get my point.

Originally posted by Darkwing
i hope you get my point.


The point I get from this is that, Everybody has their own beliefs and thats that. I find that Darkwing makes good points and so does Taranaki.

theres nothing we can or should do about that. I may not believe in the bible, but someone else will.
A conversation should go like this:

Person 1:
"I believe this......."

Person 2:
"Thats a good point, but I believe this.........."

No arguments, or accusations. Just good open-mindedness

Taranaki - I take issue with the unsupported and to the best of my knowledge ignorant generalisations about the accuracy if biblical translation through the ages. Whenever a new translation is performed, they to not appropriate it from EXISTING translations. They go for the OLDEST (therefore most ACCURATE and ORIGINAL) text they can find. 95% comes from ancient Aramaic and Greek ehich the original texts were written in. These are then translated into whatever language by scholars who specialize in the two languages. Your point is often brought up (however erroneous) as proof of inaccuracies and distortion and lost meaning through mulsiple translations but is actually far from the truth.

Originally posted by ozriceboy
Taranaki - I take issue with the unsupported and to the best of my knowledge ignorant generalisations about the accuracy if biblical translation through the ages. Whenever a new translation is performed, they to not appropriate it from EXISTING translations. They go for the OLDEST (therefore most ACCURATE and ORIGINAL) text they can find. 95% comes from ancient Aramaic and Greek ehich the original texts were written in. These are then translated into whatever language by scholars who specialize in the two languages. Your point is often brought up (however erroneous) as proof of inaccuracies and distortion and lost meaning through mulsiple translations but is actually far from the truth.

An interesting concept....your belief is often repeated and therefore must be true,but my belief is often repeated,but is apparently erroneous...:confused:

I do not believe everything that I read or am told.I do not believe it from theologists or scientists or simply because it is written in a book,or posted on the internet.

Having said that,your argument that I make unsupported and possibly ignorant generalisations regarding the accuracy of translations cannot go unanswered.See under for results of web search.....

Searched the web for "errors in translation of bible. " Results 1 - 10 of about 64,100. Search took 0.17 seconds.

It's not like I'm proposing some new and heinous heresy,there are thousands of pages of similar belief out there.I don't claim for a second to have read them all, but here are extracts from a couple thatI choose to accept as credible.



The Jews in what is known as the Masoretic Text have faithfully preserved the Old Testament. There are few translation problems with the Old Testament.
However, most modern translations, from the Revised Standard Version (RSV) to the New International Version (NIV), use as their source for the New Testament a Greek Text based upon the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus of the fourth century. This text, publicized by Westcott and Hort, is also known as the Alexandrian Text. It originated in Egypt and has been massaged by "higher critics" down through the ages. These manuscripts, used in the RSV, represent less than 5% of known Greek Biblical manuscripts, but are supposedly more authentic because they are "old."
The bulk of New Testament manuscripts were copied century after century from earlier ones as they wore out. Older copies did not survive because these texts were used until worn out. This text, the so-called "Received Text" or "Byzantine Text" (also termed "Syrian", "Antioch", or Koine text) was used in the King James Version. Nearly 4,000 manuscripts of this Byzantine or Official Text agree almost perfectly with each other, and are a far better standard to go by than corrupt copies no matter how early they were made. Located primarily at Mt. Athos in Greece, copies of the Official Greek Text give us a very reliable record of the New Testament scriptures.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some versions of the Bible had the most basic of errors.

Printing errors in the Bible

In a 1631 edition of the King James Bible, in Exodus 20 verse 14, the word "not" was left out. This changed the 7th commandment to read, "Thou shalt commit adultery." Most of the copies were recalled immediately and destroyed on the orders of Charles I. But there are 11 copies still remaining. They are known as the "Wicked Bible." (The Bible museum in Branson, Missouri has one on display.) The printer was fined the equivalents of $400.


The word "not" was also left out in the 1653 edition. In 1 Corinthians 6 verse 9 it was printed: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God" - instead of ""Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Again it was recalled immediately (- dashing the hopes of many!). It is known as the "Unrighteous Bible"

The Murderer's Bible, printed in 1801, declared: "these are murderers" (instead of murmurers) and continued, "let the children first be killed" (instead of "filled.")

Perhaps the error in Psalm 119 verse 161 in a 1702 version summed it all up: instead of "princes" it read, "printers have persecuted me." It is known as the Printer's Bible.

The first book that Johannes Gutenberg printed in 1454 was the Bible. It is thought that he printed about 180 copies, known as the 42-line Bible, of which significant parts of 48 copies still survive. Gutenberg did not make any printing errors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I shall take this opportunity to further support my position on the fragmentation of religion,particularly the Christian - based religions.
Check through the list below,it is very difficult for me to accept that Christianity can spawn so many branches and yet still have millions of followers who blieve(fanatically,in some cases)that their version of God is the true and only God.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some Christians commit a great deal of energy debating which faith groups are Christian and which are not. We use a very simple, inclusive description of Christianity. We define as Christian any faith group or individual that sincerely, thoughtfully and devoutly regards themselves to be Christian. We consider Christian faith groups as diverse as the 1st century CE Jewish Christians, Roman Catholics, United Church members, Mormons, Unificationists, Jehovah's Witnesses and followers of hundreds of other faith groups to be Christian. We recognize that some conservative Christians have a much more restrictive definition of "Christian."
Another question that surfaces from time to time is which of the many denominations is the "true church." No resolution to that question seems possible.
From its beginning, Christendom has been divided into separate religious movements. There are currently about 1,200 Christian denominations in North America. They can be divided into 15 families of denominations.
Some individual denominations are:
The Amish
Anglo-Israelism; British Israelism; Worldwide Church of God
The Brethren
Catholic Church (Roman Catholic)
Children of God
Christadelphians
Christian Identity Movement
Christian Science
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons)
Community of Christ: Formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints:
Dominion Theology
Eastern Orthodox churches
The Family (David Berg), Family of Love
The "Garbage Eaters": common derogatory name for The Brethren
Gnosticism
Jehovah's Witnesses
Messianic Judaism & "Jews for Jesus"
Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)
Orthodox churches
The Process
Quakers (Society of Friends)
Reconstructionist Movement; Recent developments
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: Now the Community of Christ
Roman Catholic Church
Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Society of Friends (Quakers)
Theonomy
Two by Twos ("The Jesus Way", "The Church with no Name", etc)
Unification Church
Unitarian-Universalism
United Pentecostal Church International
Unity Church in Canada
Urantia Book
Worldwide Church of God
The Way International
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As Darkness observes,we all have a different belief structure.My CORE BELIEF is that for every religious belief,there is a person somewhere else who believes that the opposite is the truth.Which is why I don't think it is wise to try and pin down religion to a series of yes/no answers.
Religion is about having faith in your chosen deity,but the more you study religion,the harder this becomes.If you are happy in your faith,I am happy for you,but please don't ask me to prove the truth of my beliefs,because in the end ,beliefs and facts are two entirely different things.

I have to say that it seems possibly you have missed my point. The impression that I was given by some of your earlier posts is that the majority of the bible has been horribly distorted through the ages so much so that it bears no resemblance to Christs teachings. I was only pointing out that this is an often held and ignorant view. I do not state that there has been NO DISTORTION or OMISSION from current biblical text, just that it is one of the best kept documents from a historical point of view - ever. If you lok at famous scholars of History like Herodotus, then you will understand that we only have 2-5% of his estimated written work. Along that path, it makes it hard to understand how the person as the histographer could have distrted the truth through his context and culture. Because the bible was written by so many and many of the state,ments have been independantly verified and recorded simultaneously by so many people because of their incredible and miraculous nature that it is difficult to argue that they didn't happen. I have looked LONG and HARD at what I beleive and why I beleive it. I have often questioned my beleifs/faith system and have a well rounded, thorough understanding of why I beleive the way I do - because I have found it alive and relevant in my own life. Oz.

Ok, I will start by adressing Darkwing:
You claim that the things I feel are true (science based theories) are just as falsifiable (able to be false-ed) as your ides and that my ideas are based solely on what my teacher has told me is true. The only problem with that idea arises when you try to actually think about it instead of repeating what your pastor (or whatever they are called) told you. I simpathize with you because you have such a poor argument currently.
Your main problem coimes from a lack of education (which is not your fault, it is your teacher's fault). See, scientific theories are not based off of magazine articles. There are years (and by years I mean decades) of research behind every scientific claim. That is why they are scientific and not religious. I know I can not change your view point but I wish you to understand how I (or we the scientific comunity) feel about your arguements regarding reality. Quarks exist so that we may explain why particles act in the ways that they do. Someday they may be proven to not exist and the science community will accept that if there is sufficient evidence. However, christians (or hard-core believers in the bible) assume that what was written thousands of years ago (well before any decent scientific method apeared) is the undeniable truth. I pity your ignorance.

Regarding Jesus spanking it:
If he didn't spankit he must have had wet dreams. Biologically speaking it is impossible to not have wet dreams if you never choke the chicken. Your testicles and prostate can only deal with so much fluid until they must burst. So, if Jesus did not rub one off then he at least had wet dreams. The latter I find more amussing :)

Darkwing, regarding my reply to you:
I said some things out of order because I was jumping back and forth between a couple different thigns. I don't mean to be demeaning with my post. I was just trying to show you what I find weak in your argument. I trust you are inteligent enough to realize what those points are, and if you care you will revise them.

There are actually more times Science has proven Christianity to be right rather than wrong. There is more hard core SCIENTIFIC evidence that Jesus existed and performed claimed miracles than there is that Bill Clinton ever existed. Bet you never quesitoned beleif in him, huh? Your above statements are arrogant, unfounded and for the most part unsubstantiated.

somehow I'm not surprised by the typical response. And how was there more evidence that jesus existed then somebody I have seen in person (Clinton). I do know Jesus existed, and he may have been very charismatic, but I don't believe in god, because there is NO evidence that god exists. If you can give a solid peice of evidence (not some backwards proof that is self promoting, ie 'god exisits because there is no way we could be here if he didn't') then I would be impressed and consider looking into the existence of god.

this thread is the reason why i say FUCK religion. i completely have no belief in anything at all whatsoever.

i would if i had a reason. but there is no proof. and i don't care anyway.

sorry if i offend anyone. but thats just my opinion.

you dug up a three month old thread to upload that little gem?:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



Hell, I'm impressed!

hah.. sorry... i must have ran a search for soemthing and that came up and i must have replied w/o looking at the date?

poo

C'mon, if Jesus did exist (And it is a well known fact he didn't) surely he had to realease the testostrone that inhibits males :frog:

Originally posted by Moss1O6GTi
C'mon, if Jesus did exist (And it is a well known fact he didn't) surely he had to realease the testostrone that inhibits males :frog:

shit stirrer.:flipa:

Originally posted by Moss1O6GTi
C'mon, if Jesus did exist (And it is a well known fact he didn't) surely he had to realease the testostrone that inhibits males :frog:

Actually - you can argue the fact that Jesus was not the son of god. But it is a documented fact (outside the bible) that he did exist.

Originally posted by YogsVR4


Actually - you can argue the fact that Jesus was not the son of god. But it is a documented fact (outside the bible) that he did exist.

Did they find his skeleton???:confused:

Originally posted by Moss1O6GTi


Did they find his skeleton???:confused:

No - no remians, just other writings that mention and describe the guy. I think I taped the documentary they did on this a few years ago on National Geographic. I'll try and dig it up to get the specifics again. I dont remember enough details to name all the specifics right now.

Masturbation is a gift of God. Sex is a gift of God to us. Sexual lust is not evil lust, it is God designed human nature. Evil lust is hurtful and harmful to humans. Masturbation is healthy. Masturbation is good. Masturbation is God designed. Masturbation is good for you. Masturbation is for everyone to enjoy.

Major research on masturbation, the Bible, Christianity, sexuality, to clearly show that masturbation is a wonderful gift from God for us to enjoy. God designed every detail for us to enjoy. http://christianmasturbation.homestead.com/index.html

Letter To Anti-masturbation teachers. I can clearly show you that with your anti-masturbation teaching that you are harming and hurting God, others, and yourself. http://inkaboutit.homestead.com/masturbationlettertoanti.html
Major contradiction-- verse used by anti-nudist people. Matt. 5:28 is totally misunderstood and taken out of context. "look at a women with lust...adultery" http://inkaboutit.homestead.com/Lustmt528.html

Masturbation positive talk: many Christian people, Ministers, College Professors, Bible teachers, saying masturbation is not a sin and is very healthy for you. http://inkaboutit.homestead.com/highlight2.html

But how would Jesus ever learn of masturbation?

i've decided i believe in jesus now.

i saw him myself. he works at my local liquor store. he speaks broken english. mostly spanish though. doesn't like it when i call him jesus. says to call him HEY ZUES???

fuck it i'm confused

Maybe that's the alcohol talking:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

Why are we bringing this one out of the closet? I posted whatever I said on here so long ago I probably disagree with what I wrote so strongly I'm a hippocrite. Can we just leave dead threads that way? If you want discussion on that topic, start a new one.

Thats a pretty tough question, but everybody has to clean there pipes now and then ;)

LOL

i go to church and they tell us(me) its a sin and also looking at porn is a sin(sinning can ruin your computer;) )

lol

Assuming he was a human male, either he masturbated, or he had wet dreams. Simple as that.

Originally posted by boingo82
Assuming he was a human male, either he masturbated, or he had wet dreams. Simple as that.

maybe that explains why i wake up with a wood every morning?:rolleyes: ;) :p

I'm not gonna respond to this, it wll send me to hell if I do

I realize that Jesus was a teenager once but to ask if he masturbated? I dont mean to be an ass but does it really matter? If he did, ok then so he did, and if not then thats ok too. It really doesnt bother me either way.

u people are crazy, damn I wonder why Jesus doesnt punish u right now:flipa: :flipa: :finger: :finger:

Originally posted by Genesis3
u people are crazy, damn I wonder why Jesus doesnt punish u right now:flipa: :flipa: :finger: :finger:

Ok mr peace treaty:rolleyes:

REMINDER.

This forum is for serious and reasoned discussion.If you don't have a valid point to make in this thread,please feel free not to post.If you want to flame each other,please feel free to leave AF.

If I were to pick an answer to this question for myself, It would have to be no, and here is why:

Jesus was the son of God, and as being such this made him perfect in the aspects that could be allowed. Masturbation is, I believe anyways, an act of lust in that you are fantasizing within your own mind, or are using possible material to arouse you to the point of satisfaction. Lust, is defined by the bible as a sin. Jesus did not sin, as I can recall(Though I have been wrong from time to time). Jesus was perfect up until he was crucified on the cross at which point he was no longer pure by taking the sins of the future generations. That is my justification and I will stick with it.

please, disregard my prior post, as I have obviously changed my feelings.

good point but I would of thought that since nobody has really taken into account of the life of Jesus until he got baptized in the Jordan River, then nobody would really know. I have come to believe that until then, he was one of human nature. he was a carpenter and lived life normally with his mother Mary until he was called by God to serve as the sacrificial lamb of the world and absolve the people of their sins. so he might have tried it once, but we may never know

1 Cor 7:8-9 "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. (9) But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion." Naw, he didn't struggle with self control. Jesus was fully man, fully God from birth. Society is constantly opposing God's ways. masturbatiuon is just another comprimise to God's word. Oh and this question ain't all that original...search in on the net. cheers!

Ok u might not want my :2cents: because some of you have read my thread on GOD and know what i think but what the hell


Jesus was a crossbreed alien human hybrid with more intelligence and selfcontrol than the averege human so i doubt he did wack it....but you never know.

BTW what the hell do you care if another guy wacks off :loser: :sly: :screwy:

let Old Threads Stay Dead!

let Old Threads Stay Dead!

Agreed.It's not often that threads get locked in this forum,but this one has well and truly run its course.