Question about masturbation

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: That's true reFORMer.........the imaginations of men's hearts/minds are what goes out of his mouth that defiles it, for out of the abundance of the heart/mind the mouth speaks. Which is why we are to renew our minds with the washing of the water of the Word, so that the Word (whether breath or letter) is what is continually in our mouth, because it is continually in our heart.

The flesh is the recipient of the "crop" we plant, and if we are to sow to corruption (things that produce death in the body, soul, or spirit), then we will reap corruption (death), but if we sow to incorruption we will read an incorruptible body, one fashioned like unto His body.

So trying to change what the body does with the imposition of law as in touch not, taste not, only makes the bondage's stronger but if you change from the inside out thru the washing of the Word renewing the heart/mind, the power over the body is also broken. This is why the systems of carnal men cannot change anyone, because they all seek to change man from the outside in, but only the Spirit of God can change man from the inside out. Blessings.....

[CHB]

Unusual topic.  :mshock: :mblush:

After reading the posts I thought about what Paul said in (1Cor. 6:12) All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

It sounds to me like paul is saying all things, which would include masturbation, it is not a sin but it is not profitable. Or maybe it is to a certain extent?  :laughing7:  To be brought under the power of something, I guess would mean an addiction to it.

I guess you could make something wrong out of anything by abusing it, even eating for example. If I ate and ate and ate and made myself sick it would mean eating was not expedient for me. I guess this could apply to almost anything.

CHB

[rosered]

great post CHB! :goodpost:    This made alot of sense to me  :thumbsup:

  :HeartThrob:rose

[martincisneros]

sry for going a bit of topic:

but @ martincisneros

If you're a man, there's a woman that came into this world that was originally created out of you.

do you think every man has such a woman, is it something one might call "soulmate", might you tell me more about that subject? - I think it's very interesting

Wasn't ignoring you on this.  Still in the middle of getting the fullness of the revelation of this.  One thing that He added to it for me today was that each of us is created the exact same way Adam and Eve were created.  I knew that part and might of said as much in a previous post, either on this thread or on another one.  But literally: Genesis 1:26  God said, man was, and if you compare the first couple of chapters, there's perhaps an understood thing about Him restating Genesis 1:26, but instead spoke to the earth of the man's spirit to bring her forth rather than to the dust of the ground.  God says it, Adam falls under the power of God is strongly implicit to me, as when the anointing knocked Abram on his butt when God was making that Covenant eons later.  Adam's overwhelmed with the glory, so that as it says in Chronicles that the priests couldn't stand to minister because the glory of the Lord had come into manifestation. 

So, they kept falling under the power in Chronicles as they'd try to minister at the dedication of Solomon's temple, is what I believe the context of that passage is, without looking at it right now.  A lot of people get all upset and in a frenzy when they see people fall in the presence of the glory in Charismatic and Pentecostal circles and say that there's nothing in the Bible about it.  No, it's all over the Bible.  It's just not in emphasis in the circles it's not happening in.  Saul of Tarsus, obviously fell, but people too easily think that's an isolated instance, when it's all over the Bible with it happening to Adam, Abram, Levitical Priests at the dedication of the temple, and countless other areas. 

Not sure that that's not why Peter fell in the boat, other than having slipped on a fish 'cause Christ's covenant making language immediately followed to him.  That may be a passage missed by some of the books and booklets that'll talk about falling under the power of God and the reasons for that 'cause seems to always imply some new level in God coming after that.  I don't believe Jesus stumbled while carrying the Cross because of what He'd gone thru physically, but because all authority in heaven and in earth was being transfered to Him right then.  And He was gonna need it as He was about to descend into Hell.  Some might prematurely say that's only Catholic tradition that He fell one or more times, but John's Gospel has Him carrying His own Cross while the synoptics bring up Simon of Cyrene.

Anyway, if He spoke the end from the beginning, then He likely Created each of us before Adam and Eve even came along.  So, for anyone to say "Martin, it doesn't work that way. God Created Adam and then everybody else has come out of him ever since." is genuinely a grave oversimplification.  I personally believe that this is one of the reasons for the 10 to 26 dimensions spoken of in Superstring theory that they've got any hints of, mathematically and scientifically, and that God only comes down really hard about the particular conduct, such as sexual in 1Thessalonians 4, that has an impact upon both legacy as well as simply those that are yet unborn but are inhabiting that hyperspace of these other dimensions and will come forth in their due time. 

1Thessalonians 4 specifically states that those that reject the command to sexual purity are emphatically rejecting God and the Holy Spirit, and contextually with the fact that then it goes into the whole thing that people misinterpret as the left behind scenario, you could extrapolate from it bringing up sexual sin before bringing that up, just as 1Corinthians brings up sexual sin before bringing up what it brings up in the 15th chapter, but if you reject sexual purity, along Biblical parameters, then you're rejecting Christ as well.  Obviously, for that to be the case, then there's something grave here in this sexual sin area that has massive, massive impact upon others we can't even see that haven't even come forth yet.  And I'm not saying this with regards to one's own descendants alone, since the commands to sexual purity are universal, but the commands to have physical offspring aren't.  There's something held back and opposed of the plan of God when we engage in things that the Written Word emphatically says are no-nos. 

Every act of obedience to the New Covenant is spiritual resistance to the current world order.  Hence the Bible will simultaneously have 613 commandments in the New Testament, even in St. Paul's writings a perfect 613, yet indicate that you're not under the law.  The Mosaic law was about a nation having national roots and establishing and maintaining a prophetic pattern that foretold the first coming of Christ.  The New Testament is about a Kingdom having international roots and establishing and maintaining a prophetic pattern that foretells and facilitates the manifestation of Christ within us, the hope of glory.  Obedience to Christ, even where it doesn't seem to matter, is the overthrowing of this whole entire current world and it's system. 

Every step of obedience to the Written Word has as one of it's final outcomes in the sowing and reaping department, the destruction of the current world's system.  You want to bring this whole thing crashing down?  Then obey every line of that New Testament 'cause as His High Priestly ministry is able to function in greater and greater dimensions in this earth thru our covenant connection of obedience, then 1Corinthians 15 says He's actively engaged of abolishing all rule, authority, and power, so duh! 

Cooperation with the One you want to overthrow all of these governments seems to ellude so many Christians -- even many that frequent these boards that are scared that if they obey absolutely all of the New Testament, then they're going to sound like Copeland or Wigglesworth 70% of the time. So, then here come the theories of maybe that doesn't really mean that, to get around wholeness and discipleship and prosperity for the whole man as a means of ministering the same to the whole creation, i.e., blessed to be a blessing; all of the religious mess that you die to receive an inheritance that Someone Else died to leave to you.

Thru sexual disobedience, one of the things that obviously comes into peril is your own spiritual travail being frustrated for that one that you're supposed to be with -- that you were created out of or that was created out of you, and Biblically this is a gender issue on which is which.  If your body is frustrated from calling deep unto deep unto the one that you were made with, as a part of the living sacrifice that your spirit and soul are being until they come along, then obviously you're going to be with everyone 'cept for who you're supposed to be with and are going to delay things indefinitely if not thwart your own blessing ultimately in the name of having a bowl of beans, or to prematurely have jumping bean stimulation.  I'm not going to explain that last comment. :mblush:

If someone's not with who they were originally created from or that was created from them, in the Biblical Genesis pattern, doesn't mean you can't still have a successful relationship, if the two of you are humble to live by New Testament principles.  Obviously the New Testament will work 100% of the time when worked 100% in any context, and you're assured of the hundredfold.  But when you're with who you're supposed to be with, that Deuteronomy 1:11 thousandfold blessing is going to be there, and actually beyond since Hebrews says that we have a better covenant established upon much better promises in all realms of life.

Sometimes the relationships where someone's with someone other than who they were formed with, and perhaps by, wind up working better than the relationships where someone's with the one they were created with or perhaps by, if they're walking a tight walk with the New Testament.  Thankfully, I'm not in a rotting apple kind of situation whatsoever, but you can be with the one you were supposed to have always been with, but if someone's a fool walking after the dictates of their own reasoning rather than by chapter and verse of the New Covenant, viz., the sure mercies of David, then there's going to be intolerably horrendously damaging friction 'cause there's one or two fools in that relationship. 

Doesn't mean that moving on is necessarily the best medicine, but just means a whole lot of growth has to take place between people like that, that when you hear of their stories along those lines, you just want to shoot both of them for breaking it off, then coming running back, then breaking it off, then coming running back.  And you just want to grab both of them and shake 'em and say "please make up your stupid minds! is it on again or off again??!!" roflol  This subject of the so-called "soul mate" as you put it, is likely the very reason for the occasional "odd couple" like that. 

It's not necessarily forbidden fruit or them being poison for each other, unless it's that they're forbidden fruit or poison for each other with the current paradigms that they function with, plus it's evident that they've never grown up, if ongoing infidelities are some or all of the reason for them leaving each other and then running back 'cause that infidelity spirit they're both functioning in can't be true to the new covenants they've made and people tend to glamorize what they've moved on from, forgetting the hard cold facts of why originally moving on was best for them. 

Some of the deliverance ministers will scream about soul ties that need to be broken, but perhaps that so-called soul tie is actually an umbilical cord [in a few instances] and what's needing to happen there is for one or both of them to grow up so that it'll work out between them, since not only are kids biproducts of being tied to a mother by an umbilical cord, but spiritually a man is umbilical cord tied to the one and only woman that ever proceeded from him shortly after his own Creation, when God again spoke to the soil of his being and brought her forth and then produced her in the body of her mother to "materialize" in this natural realm.  And obviously the same thing happened for him before it happened to her, around the same season, or later than it happened to her.  As I've previously said, they're seldom automatically born in the same year.  Too many reasons and potential reasons to get into on that one on why they could even be 60yrs apart in age. 

If God spoke the end from the beginning, then you can reverse, [equally as justly,] the statement in Malachi (I'm thinking chapter 2, but no Bible handy) that God produced the two into one so that He could have a godly seed.  God would have likewise produced these godly seeds with the intent of bringing these godly marriage unions together.  If there being no strength to carry a child to term and to have the healthy child is called blasphemy, [perhaps implying a spirit of blasphemy, Hebraically,] in the Old Testament, then I can't be 100% sure, looking at this passage in Malachi this way, that being with the wrong one isn't a type of blasphemy to an equal or lesser extent, though obviously one for which there's not as much accountability 'cause of how tight of a walk it entails with Him to be 100% sure that that one comes forth into one's life, and also because in a fallen world, in some situations it might be more of a miracle than in other cases to be with this one particular person. 

A lot of unexplained deaths where folks were taken before their time, or where inspite of the strongest faith, someone died anyway, may find it's resolution in this subject to where if something happened to the one person this other person was tied to, then their own number may have been up so that while in some battle field in Iraq a soldier may have gotten blown to bits, but you can't explain why someone died of the flu on the opposite side of the world.  Could the two have been linked in this way?  One of 'em died, so God mercifully didn't force the other one to be in this world without their Ephesians 5 counterpart that was either their Christ or their Church.   

Additionally, the opposite is often the case in miraculous comebacks from death's door.  They just couldn't die because of _______ whomever they happen to be that genuinely needed them to come forth into their lives.  Some of these issues are resolved in the mouths of the people involved where someone said for 20yrs that they wouldn't live past a certain age, or in some other way always had death in their confession as a joke or whatever, so as Jesus said in Mark 11:22-26, they had what they said.  But where there is no priestly violations with one's tongue to be accounted for, this issue of one life in two bodies may very likely have a whole lot more to teach us about how life and death works than any of us have ever imagined!

With regards to age discrepancies between two people that were always meant to be together: Proverbs chapter 2 verse 20 thru chapter 20 verse 30, Acts 17, Galatians chapters 3 & 4, Ephesians chapters 3 & 5, 1Peter chapters 2, 3, & 5, and various other passages of Scripture would suggest that developmental issues could be involved with regards to someone's tutelege that God knows when the best time slots are to bring both into the world so that after years of being apart they'd still be the best thing that could have happened to each other.  Occasionally one's the John the Baptist of the other if both lives are beyond the norm in being powerful in Him.  But developmental and the apocalyptic where collections of lives are concerned are only two categories out of all of the potential things going on regarding age discrepancies.

This subject is likely why there's the occasional odd true story about someone marrying someone, divorcing them, marrying someone else, divorcing them, coming back to this first person and remarrying them, divorcing them, marrying someone else, divorcing them, and then coming back to the person they were originally married with.  Folks that lack in humility to the Written Word can know EXACTLY WHO they're supposed to be with, but can't make it work over pride or underdeveloped spiritually issues.

Some people will get into silly reincarnation ideas over this very issue that there's a union with this other person that's undeniable, regardless of the current state of the relationship.  And it's as though we simply always were!  There's a sense of eternity in the relationship and even preexistence in it.  That's not imaginery.  Since the Bible permits remarriage at all, obviously it's allowing for a fallen world where folks aren't always going to hunger and thirst for the walk with who they were with before they were both in this world, where folks prematurely make marital decisions over biological clocks, emotional neediness, their sexuality, and every other reason under the Son that's not related to their mandate from heaven. 

I personally think that a lot of the friction on prayers ever getting answered comes from not being with whom you're supposed to be with, so that there winds up being more legalities to have to walk out with your faith and you wind up taking 20% longer to dot every eye and cross every tea with getting what's rightfully yours of the provisions of God.  Your having to overcome your own prior resistance to the provisions of God, and when it was a marriage with the one you weren't really intended to be with, then you've sorta signed a bit of a heavenly prenuptual that you're forfeiting being made to lie down in green pastures, and are opting for the warfare legalities of the Scriptures where you're getting what you want, often times still, but at such a cost in terms of such a personal straight and narrow walk!

I personally believe a whole lot of people have the sad ending of KNOWING who they were supposed to have been with, but were cut off by circumstances from God's very good [Edenic] will that they simply either weren't sure enough about, early on enough, when they still had some fight in them for all of God's very good [Edenic] will, or they'd both created such an impossible situation for themselves to where for various reasons one or both of them find their current life's lot nonnegotiable, although in their heart of hearts they're a prisoner of this other person that they're not married to.  Histories and biographies are as filled with these hints as romance novels, soaps, novelas, and any other piece of literature in the language of your choice.

[Gab]

Martin, interesting thoughts, but I have two questions that I'm not really sure about:

1. While I think that the idea that one has a soul mate out there whom they are made for is a very romantic idea, I'm curious how you reconcile that idea with the fact that women are beginning to slightly statistically outnumber men, and that men previously statistically outnumbered women?  If what you say is true, ought it not be the case that there would be a precisely equal number of men and women at all times?  How can everyone have a soul mate if, once every soul mate is paired up, there are humans left over?

2. Your argument for the wrongness of masturbation seems to center around the assertions that it is a defilement of sexual purity and that it comes from narcissism, neurosis, or other negative things.  But, I'm not sure what evidence is being presented in favor of these ideas.  It's well-known that just about everyone does it, and it has multiple confirmed health benefits, as well.  The medical community considers it perfectly normal and harmless in itself, cautioning only that it can be something with which one can become overly preoccupied - but that that is something true of anything under the sun.  So, I suppose I'm just curious to know what exactly your argument is in favor of these assertions.  The consensus seems to be in, and it is neither a result of mental illness nor something harmful to one's body, but rather is something that is actually quite normal and healthy.  Some have even gone so far to say that not masturbating is unhealthy.   I could certainly see arguments against masturbation in the context of one doing it out of excessive and destructive lust, but in that case the problem would be the lust, not the masturbation itself.

[martincisneros]

 :mrflo:

[Paul Hazelwood]

Martin, interesting thoughts, but I have two questions that I'm not really sure about:

1. While I think that the idea that one has a soul mate out there whom they are made for is a very romantic idea, I'm curious how you reconcile that idea with the fact that women are beginning to slightly statistically outnumber men, and that men previously statistically outnumbered women?  If what you say is true, ought it not be the case that there would be a precisely equal number of men and women at all times?  How can everyone have a soul mate if, once every soul mate is paired up, there are humans left over?

Theoretically it makes the case supporting gay marriage and celebacy.   The bible appears to contradict itself though.   God commanded us to be fruitful and multiply, so that almost makes the case against celibacy.   But statistically, you could work out the soul mate thing to include Gays and it would work out quite nicely since lesbianism is probably more likely to produce mates staying monogomaous with one another than males whos homosexuality is more prevantly promiscuous which is the actual problem in sexual matters.

2. Your argument for the wrongness of masturbation seems to center around the assertions that it is a defilement of sexual purity and that it comes from narcissism, neurosis, or other negative things.  But, I'm not sure what evidence is being presented in favor of these ideas.  It's well-known that just about everyone does it, and it has multiple confirmed health benefits, as well.  The medical community considers it perfectly normal and harmless in itself, cautioning only that it can be something with which one can become overly preoccupied - but that that is something true of anything under the sun.  So, I suppose I'm just curious to know what exactly your argument is in favor of these assertions.  The consensus seems to be in, and it is neither a result of mental illness nor something harmful to one's body, but rather is something that is actually quite normal and healthy.  Some have even gone so far to say that not masturbating is unhealthy.   I could certainly see arguments against masturbation in the context of one doing it out of excessive and destructive lust, but in that case the problem would be the lust, not the masturbation itself.

Lust in an of itself is misconstrued as sexual attraction.  Lust is actually the act of degrading something to a low level of usefulness.

While it is wonderful if a couple can put some praise music on and have a worship service while having sex if lust is applied as it is incorrectly understood then most married couples are living in sin while they have sex.

Masturbation is normal behavior and it is healthy, it is when it becomes an escape or a compulsion that it becomes a problem, just like anything else that is healthy under moderate use.

However we also have to look at things realistically and case by case.   Murder in moderation doesn't make it good.  But I think we can see when the bible is definatly specific and clear and when religion creates an inference.

[jesushandsarekindhands]

I mean can anyone give it up...really?  Maybe when i reach 90.

[Paul Hazelwood]

I mean can anyone give it up...really?  Maybe when i reach 90.

Well, honestly, that is an emotional aspect,  whether it is right or wrong has nothing to do with whether it is possible to abstain.

It is possible to abstain and there is nothing wrong with doing so if thats what a person is led to do. 

Again though, there are real issues when it comes to proccupation, obsessivness or lack of control (such as those who do not do it frequently, but have been caught in public because they just had to do it then)

Their act of public masturbation is not the problem, the act of masturbation was not the problem,   it is whatever is rooted and caused it to take place under abnormal circumstances.

[Doc]

Unusual topic.  :mshock: :mblush:

After reading the posts I thought about what Paul said in (1Cor. 6:12) All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

It sounds to me like paul is saying all things, which would include masturbation, it is not a sin but it is not profitable. Or maybe it is to a certain extent?  :laughing7:  To be brought under the power of something, I guess would mean an addiction to it.

I guess you could make something wrong out of anything by abusing it, even eating for example. If I ate and ate and ate and made myself sick it would mean eating was not expedient for me. I guess this could apply to almost anything.

CHB

I agree with you, CHB. This is how I view it, through the lens of that verse, but with an extra bit of insight on the "not profitable/ expedient" part.  The reason it's not profitable or expedient is another matter. Actual research has been done on the effect of masturbation on the male physiology, and the results 'aint pretty.

Basically, it's like anything else regarding physical training. Whatever we train our bodies to respond to, they'll respond to. Such is the case with masturbation. Unfortunately, a frequent side effect is that many men end up losing the normal response to vaginal stimulation, and all the things that go along with it, such as true orgasm (as opposed to simple ejaculation). So from a medical perspective, it could technically be considered a self-harming habit.

All things are lawful, but indeed, not all things are profitable! And that's leaving out entirely any potential spiritual or psychological considerations that may be involved on a case by case basis...

[jesushandsarekindhands]

I mean can anyone give it up...really?  Maybe when i reach 90.

Well, honestly, that is an emotional aspect,  whether it is right or wrong has nothing to do with whether it is possible to abstain.

It is possible to abstain and there is nothing wrong with doing so if thats what a person is led to do. 

Again though, there are real issues when it comes to proccupation, obsessivness or lack of control (such as those who do not do it frequently, but have been caught in public because they just had to do it then)

Their act of public masturbation is not the problem, the act of masturbation was not the problem,   it is whatever is rooted and caused it to take place under abnormal circumstances.

I aggree with all you said.
I would like to say though, that i originally made this post because it baffled me why many many Christians were haveing problems with this 'sin' when it isn't really a sin.
It amazed me that people were more preoccupied with the question "To masturbate or not to masturbate", when there are hundreds of CLEAR biblical sins and commandments that people could be practicing and/or avoiding.  Many, without practicing love, or compassion or what have you are more concerned about whether or not they should masturbate rather than love their neighbour, it seems to be a very important subject to many Christians and i just don't feel that it should be given THAT much thought - there are much more important things, but again, each to their own.

[V.I.D.]

Doc verry well said!
I just wonder is there a way that it can be done and not harm and be ok really ?
I  unfortunately did it the wrong way and now i cant do it at all .The hormones durring puberty realy hit me and i just could not stop. Now its as if the skin there has changed to be so unsensitive that i rarely have eny desire to do it . I may aswell call myself * self induced virgine for life * .It sounds stupid ,but if you take my place it would not feel good .

BTW martin ..I must say that your post is the longest post that a Christian ever made about masturbation in history . I could not even read 1/3 of it ,because my eyes could not handle staring at it for so long .
Please make them juuust a bit shorter .

Peace !This topic made my day  :grin:

[Doc]

Doc verry well said!
I just wonder is there a way that it can be done and not harm and be ok really ?
I  unfortunately did it the wrong way and now i cant do it at all .The hormones durring puberty realy hit me and i just could not stop. Now its as if the skin there has changed to be so unsensitive that i rarely have eny desire to do it . I may aswell call myself * self induced virgine for life * .It sounds stupid ,but if you take my place it would not feel good .

BTW martin ..I must say that your post is the longest post that a Christian ever made about masturbation in history . I could not even read 1/3 of it ,because my eyes could not handle staring at it for so long .
Please make them juuust a bit shorter .

Peace !This topic made my day  :grin:

If I remember correctly, no one really knows where the physiological "line" is, and I also suspect that it varies from person to person. It seems to happen with frequent, long term use/ abuse of it though; so I'm sure there is a point up to which it's physiologically "safe". The only problem is that I'm not sure anyone could tell you exactly what that point is. I'm sorry to hear that you're a victim of this.

God's grace is sufficient, though.

[HartleyDamboiseII]

Ask your self this
Am I under the Law of Thou Shalt Not Masturbate???

Transgression of the "Law" IS SIN...

I have never lived under the law ever since My Lord Rose From the DEAD.

AND DID AWAY WITH "ALL" LAW...
Lee Damboise II  sinfreeforever@gmx.ru

[HartleyDamboiseII]

I truly have to say this...
Jesus
hands
are
kind
hands

and are the same hands that touch you when and if you masturbate.
but I conclude that they are truly loving hands too. Because He does understand the human condition and his 5 senses, He is the molder.
Lee Damboise II       sinfreeforever@gmx.ru

[SQ]

I truly have to say this...
Jesus
hands
are
kind
hands

and are the same hands that touch you when and if you masturbate.
but I conclude that they are truly loving hands too. Because He does understand the human condition and his 5 senses, He is the molder.
Lee Damboise II       sinfreeforever@gmx.ru

I am sorry but to me this sounds really perverted.
Those are not Jesus hands they are your hands.
I do agree Jesus understands though.

[Nancy]

hi ya,
Had to answer to this one.
SQ don't you believe that we are to become a Christ. Not to FOLLOW Christ or be LIKE Christ but to BECOME Christ. Mother Teresa said that when she saw the destitute, the leper, the hungry, she was really looking at Christ. The Christ in ALL of us.  When we see the divine in others we can feel the divine in ourselves.
Maybe going off the subject somewhat but what is so perverted about Christ masturbating!  If we touch our bodies, what is so terrible about that. Didn't Jesus go to the toilet.  I was led to believe that sex within marriage is a beautiful thing yet if we think of Jesus having sex, we can't believe it!!
Our bodies aren't sinful.

Godbless
Nancy

[SQ]

hi ya,
Had to answer to this one.
SQ don't you believe that we are to become a Christ. Not to FOLLOW Christ or be LIKE Christ but to BECOME Christ. Mother Teresa said that when she saw the destitute, the leper, the hungry, she was really looking at Christ. The Christ in ALL of us.  When we see the divine in others we can feel the divine in ourselves.
Maybe going off the subject somewhat but what is so perverted about Christ masturbating!  If we touch our bodies, what is so terrible about that. Didn't Jesus go to the toilet.  I was led to believe that sex within marriage is a beautiful thing yet if we think of Jesus having sex, we can't believe it!!
Our bodies aren't sinful.

Godbless
Nancy

Hi Nancy, thanks for the post, I had always believed we were to be more like Christ not become a little christ.
You did make me think about following Christ though it can be hard to follow when we really only know so very little really.
Have you wondered if Jesus snuggled up with Mary Magdalene in the cold desert air?
I do believe he was tempted and never sinned, but what exactly is sin?
I never believed he didn't go to the bathroom but have wondered when he had sexual urges what he did about it if anything.
From human standpoint Jesus was a man on earth and a sinless one at that but what did he do to conquer sin?
It really wouldn't bother me if Jesus masturbated but did he?
If Jesus had sex and wasn't married then he wasn't following his own teachings.
I have more questions than answers and to believe Jesus masturbated would be speculations at best. :dontknow:

[HartleyDamboiseII]

I am saying that when I do any thing in this body I breath air through, it is the moving of all of God, There are only two places in which God exists, where ever there is mass i.e. atoms and space i.e. in between atoms, of course I also believe that there is a Spark of Awareness that these two things have that I call conscientiousness and where ever any mass moves, there is currant.  That is God in mass.

now to the Jesus story told by the Roman Catholic Church, there is so much I don't believe of that system, " the winners write history". or let what "they believe be written".

JC could have had married Mary M. and so on. This would not hurt my belief in Him being the son of God, and died, buried, and Rasied.. By Daddy.
Lee Damboise II