Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mazz@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au (Richard Mazzaferri) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Masturbation, Wet Dreams, and keeping your eyes to yourself Message-ID: Date: 7 May 91 04:46:03 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Uni of Newcastle, Australia Lines: 35 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu Two points in relation to this topic. Robert Johnson in his original article stated that wet dreams ( along with masturbation ) were unclean ( according to Lev., I think ) and therefore unholy. What exactly he means by unholy is not known to me, but I have a problem with his viewpoint. I am under the impression ( someone with medical knowledge please correct me if I am wrong ) that wet dreams occur naturally if semen is not released in some other fashion. This means that chaste men who do not masturbate, will still become unclean and therefore unholy. It seems that if you do not masturbate, your body does something fairly similar for you. Either way, if unclean-ness is to be interpreted as unholiness or even sin, I cannot avoid it, just as women who menstuate cannot avoid it. What I am concerned about is the attitude that i perceive that these laws of uncleanliness seem to be equated with sin, or at least unholiness, when people cannot avoid violating them. I do not see wet dreams as sinful, or even undesirable, bat rather a biological necessity. Masturbation is a grayer area, but I still don't see it of itself as being inherently sinful, but it is open to abuse. Secondly, I have heard other interpretations of the passage quoted, saying that looking at a women in lust is equivalent to adultery with that women. I have no knowledge of Greek or Aramaic nor do I possess extensive knowledge of Jewish culture, but this passage has been explained to me in the following manner - what Jesus meant by looking at a women in lust was in effect plotting how to commit adultery with her, ie the intent to commit adultery is equivalent to the act itself, which is a slightly different interpretation than Robert's. Anyone else know more on this? Again, this leads me to a different viewpoint than Robert, who will not look at other women. I don't see that as inherently sinful either, but just as for masturbation, the possibility for abuse is there. Mazz. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Mazzaferri Ph.D. student Uni. of Newcastle Ph (049) 602574 mazz@nucs.newcastle.edu.au Australia. -----------------------------------------------------------------