The Instigator
Pro (for)
8 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

the bible teaches masturbation is a sin

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/13/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,348 times Debate No: 35579
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)




all I have to do is prove there is a passage or action relevant to
masturbation (i.e, a type of sin) and that the Bible does indeed claim that
action to be sin. con must refute all arguments or concede the debate.

I would like to ask that only the King James be used so that we have a standard
of comparison.

I assume we are speaking of solo, self masturbation in this debate. But what is
masturbation really? I submit that masturbation is the imagining of carnal
situations and sexually pleasuring oneself. It is inclusive both of fantasizing
and the physical act. I can prove that both actions are sinful and therefore,
the act of masturbating is sin.

My first bit of evidence is Ephesians, Chapter 4:

17 This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,

18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:

19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

20 But ye have not so learned Christ;

21 If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:

22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;

23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;

24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

Some words I would like to pull out of this text and define: Conversation, lasciviousness,
lust, and vanity. I would also like to define imagination now for future reference.
I will be using Webster"s 1st Edition 1828 Dictionary per


1. General course of manners; behavior; deportment;
especially as it respects morals.

Let your conversation be as becometh the gospel. Philippians
1. Be ye holy in all manner of conversation. 1 Peter 1.

2. A keeping company; familiar intercourse; intimate
fellowship or association; commerce in social life. Knowledge of men and
manners is best acquired by conversation with the best company.

3. Intimate and familiar acquaintance; as a conversation
with books, or other object.

4. Familiar discourse; general intercourse of sentiments;
chat; unrestrained talk; opposed to a formal conference.


1. Looseness; irregular indulgence of animal desires;
wantonness; lustfulness.

2. Tendency to excite lust, and promote irregular

LUST, n.

1. Longing desire; eagerness to possess or enjoy; as the
lust of gain.

2. Concupiscence; carnal appetite; unlawful desire of carnal
pleasure. Romans 1. 2Peter 2.

3. Evil propensity; depraved affections and desires. James
1. Ps. 81.

4. Vigor; active power. [Not used.]

imaginatio.] The power or faculty of the mind by which it conceives and forms
ideas of things communicated to it by the organs of sense.

1. Conception; image in the mind; idea.

2. Contrivance; scheme formed in the mind; device.

3. Conceit; an unsolid or fanciful opinion.

4. First motion or purpose of the mind. Gen.6.

VAN'ITY, n. [L. vanitas, from vanus, vain.]

1. Emptiness; want of substance to satisfy desire;
uncertainty; inanity.

2. Fruitless desire or endeavor.

3. Trifling labor that produces no good.

4. Emptiness; untruth

5. Empty pleasure; vain pursuit; idle show; unsubstantial

6. Ostentation; arrogance.

7. Inflation of mind upon slight grounds; empty pride,
inspired by an overweening conceit of one's personal attainments or
decorations. Fops cannot be cured of their vanity.

Ephesians 4 speaks of not walking as other Gentiles in the vanity of their mind, vanity
meaning emptiness, fruitlessness, pointlessness. II Corinthians 10:5 states we
are to cast down imaginations. I admit the context implies not being puffed up
in arrogance, but if you continue the verse, you find a very interesting
commandment: Bringing every thought into obedience. Obedience to what? Christ.

I Corinthians 6:

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of
the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

This passage is speaking to Christians, specifically, but it still shows the
expectation of God, to glorify him in body and spirit, your spirit being your
mind. This sentiment is echoed in Ecclesiastes 12:13 where it claims the whole
duty of man is to serve God and keep his commandments.

James 4:

17 Therefore to him that
knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

So the vain thoughts leading to or involved in masturbation are clearly sin. What
about the act itself? As I said, masturbation is also the action, the physical
pleasuring of self.

As defined, lasciviousness would easily encompass the act of masturbation. It is an indulgence
of animal desires, a primal need for sexual release. Lasciviousness is called
out in many places as a sin. Some references are:

Mark 7:22
II Corinthians 12:21
Galatians 5:19
Ephesians 4:19
I Peter 4:3
And others.

Therefore, there are many, many areas in the
Bible that state in no uncertain terms that it is indeed a sin, an indulgence
of the flesh and a vanity of mind. The Bible calls for us to make NO provision
for the flesh (Romans 13:14) and to bring our every thought into obedience to
Christ (II Corinthians 10:5). How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer

I await any refutations of my arguments.


Don't act like you don't masturbate. I love masturbating. A master masturbator and master debater
Debate Round No. 1


i will mass debate, the issue of master baiting. but that is another issue, for an other argument.


Very well then, I've underestimated you.

All I need to do is prove that a single act of masturbation is not a sin because claiming it as a sin is claiming that all masturbation is a sin.

Conversation: you don't need to have a dirty conversation to masturbate. You can masturbate in complete silence. This is why this argument of conversation doesn't hold.

Lasciviousness: this argument doesn't hold, because masturbating once in a year would not be regularly indulging, and if you had no lustful thoughts while manually stimulating yourself, then it is not lustful.

Lust/imagination are not required to masturbate. Therefore masturbating without lust/dirty imagination is not a sin. Trust me it helps, but it is not required.

Vanity is the love of worldy pleasures. We regularly indulge in pleasures, a hot cup of coffee in the morning for instance. If I do not have a love of masturbation for the sake of pleasure, but to give a sperm sample, then it is not a sin.

Therefore masturbation can be, but is not always a sin. Therefore the argument that it is a sin is false.
Debate Round No. 2


i would like to help you out on one point. that is, lust can be used similarly to 'covet'. as i said in previous debates where i took your position. one does not covet they neighbors goods or wife, simply by desiring them, or wanting them, it has to be something inordinate.
i do not wish people to use this lust point for or against me or con.

as to the other points, the other definitions are not as srong and id wish for others to not hold him or hopefully me to them. but they to some degree, and particularly lasciviousness as the definiition is defined, is broad enough to include masturbation. whence, masturbation is a sin.


I think I've made my arguments pretty clear. Masturbation can be, but not is, a sin. I've said that if someone masturbated for the purpose of a sperm sample, while not having any lustful thoughts, and did not do so often, it would not be a sin because it doesn't go against what constitutes as sin.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by ruthpumarejo 4 years ago
it's also a sin in the quran
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 5 years ago
again i'll give u the masturbation debate. i vaguely remember that verse from once quite awhile ago. it's not like you even brought it up up front, probably just got lucky at the last minute and found it for later. it's not like it necessarily refers to masturbation but it's hard to argue against it.
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 5 years ago
i do debates more than once cause most debates against me are terrible. i want the good stuff. my win ratio is low because i do not worry too much about formality, grammar punctuation sources etc, unless it really impacts the argument. i also do a lot of controversial topics, and have a lot of repeat offenders against me when i do the same debate or generally. i also do a lot of senseless debates for kicks like "your mom should have aborted you" etc.

i did the debate on this topic as pro cause i wanted to see if the argument would work for me as it did that past debater. i cannot see why lavictiousness being broad enough to include masturbation makes it "clearly" true that masturbation is a sin as pro said in that debate, and he won that debate. curious if i would win, it'd seem most here would be pro masturbation.
didnt like this debate cause he tried to use too many technical points that went against the essence of the debate "what if it's for sperm donation" "what if you dont fantisize while masturbating etc". i dont think i should have won this debate but con was terrible in arguing against me it really dont mean much.
this is another example of a debate that would normally cost me points, just experimenting etc. yes i understand why so much suspicion hangs over my head.
also if you notice, my percentile rank is pretty high. that's cause i can win or tie even with some high ranked people. i am actually not bad at complex issue debates in terms of substance.
as for tiller, i only wrote in block letters as headings for each section. you didnt respond to the two year old hypotheticals. your lack of remembering this stuff makes you look bad. you read too much into what i argued "it's all about revenge" when i said nothing of the sort. it was one of the worst debates against me on that topic. you had a decent point about jail etc is optimal, but lacked decent response when i showed it wasnt going to happen any time soon if at all. i will give u the 'unusua
Posted by Duncan 5 years ago
No, my point was that you did both debates more than once. Surely, once on both sides would be enough. But even playing from both sides, you have a win ratio of 10% and half of those are from accounts that are closed. Even you should be able to see why so much suspicion hangs over your actions.

Furthermore on Tiller, I did address your damn hypotheticals. Don't say you gave a rational response when you wrote in block capitals. You've done this debate before.
And stop with the "it's for a reason" excuse; if you have a reason, out with it.
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 5 years ago
i admit you may have beaten me in the masturbation debate duncan. i am arguing the pro postion for other reasons though, and not including your points.

i do not admit anything in regards to the tiller debate. i gave a rational response, with two year old hypotheticals invovled that you nor anyone else could or would address. plus a general lack of responsiveness to points, by you and the others. it was, at best, emotional responses to my well formed reason, and logic. it ain't politically popular, my stance on that issue, but it's irrefutable. (minus some concessions that vigilantism has some issues with it, but that's about it)
Posted by donald.keller 5 years ago
I love how well your Profile Picture fits into the topic...
Posted by Duncan 5 years ago
What the hell!? Not even 24 hours since you did "The bible does not teach masturbation is a sin" and lost to me and now you just pretend that didn't happen? Pathetic. Truly pathetic. Then again, you did this with the Tiller debate too.
Posted by gordonjames 5 years ago
I would suggest the NASB version of the Bible.

It is the most literal "word for word" English translation and that would be helpful on this subject where the English of 1611 is very likely to use euphemisms around sexual subjects.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Jegory 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:51 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G: PRO seemed to forget about capital letters. Arguments: PRO's arguments were stronger and held together better. Sources: PRO used a wide variety of sources in their argument.
Vote Placed by rross 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: It's true that Pro had a lot of sources and they were interesting. I've never seen the biblical arguments against masturbation broken down like this before. Thank you, Pro. However, I thought Con's argument about masturbation not being sinful in some circumstances (such as sperm donation - although maybe it could be classed as vanity) was strong and Pro did not answer it. That's why I gave arguments to Con.
Vote Placed by Inductivelogic 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had sources and argued better