We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

Is it okay to masturbate?

When I as a new struggling Christian raised this topic with my pastor, I was told in no uncertain terms that God struck Onan dead for masturbating. At some point I read the passage for myself (Gen. 38:1-10) and discovered my pastor had mislead me.

It’s true that Onan was punished by God because he “spilled his semen on the ground” (Gen. 38:9). But he didn’t do this by masturbating. He was engaged in sexual intercourse whenever he would do this. At the last minute, the text says, Onan would pull out and spill his semen. Not only this, but the reason he was punished had nothing to do with the mere fact that he spilled his semen on the ground. He was punished because he was violating his ancient duty to procreate with his deceased brother’s wife.

The Bible actually says nothing specifically about masturbation – which itself is pretty interesting, since the Bible addresses just about every other aspect of sex. Not only this, but it’s not like masturbation is a recent invention. As a matter of fact, it’s frequently mentioned in ancient writings.

Does the Bible’s silence mean that masturbation is okay? Not necessarily. There are other considerations that come to bear on this.

For example, Jesus taught that lusting after someone in your mind is as sinful as actually having sex outside of marriage – though, of course, the social consequences of the latter are much worse than the former. This means that people who have committed to surrendering their lives – and therefore their minds – to the Kingdom must strive to purge their minds of fantasies of sex outside of marriage. And this clearly rules out masturbating the way most people usually masturbate – escaping into their own fantasy world where “anything goes.”

But what if someone was disciplined about what they fantasized about when they masturbated? What if they only envisioned sex within the context of the marriage covenant? Is that permissible?

Many notable Christian authorities — including (to my surprise) James Dobson — say yes. This is perfectly natural, they argue, and is the right way to relieve sexual tension prior to marriage, thereby helping single people stay chaste. Others, however, would say no, for even if one’s mind is fantasizing about marriage, the reality is that the person is expressing their sexuality outside of an actual marriage covenant.

I weigh in on the side of the first school of thought. But I would give three words of caution.

First, as in all areas that are ethically and morally ambiguous, it’s important that each person seeks God’s will for them on this matter. Just because something is permissible doesn’t mean it’s God’s will for your life. Out of his infinite wisdom, the Lord forbids for some what he allows for others. On matters such as this, therefore, every person must answer to God on their own (Rom. 14).

Second, I believe it’s important single people not allow masturbation to become habitual. Among other problems, habitual masturbation sets a precedent that can never be realized in marriage. Sexual tension is part of married life, for a couple’s sex life is affected by a multitude of practical factors. So, even if it’s permissible for single people to sometimes relieve sexual tension as they dream about a future marriage relationship, I encourage them to not fall into the trap of habitual instant gratification.

Finally, I believe it’s important married people refrain from masturbation, except perhaps in exceptional circumstances such as being separated from each other for long periods of time. The purpose of sexual tension is to motivate couples to pursue one another. When one partner relieves sexual tension through masturbation, it obviously undermines this motivation to some degree. As Paul puts it, people who have entered into the “one flesh” covenant have a duty to regularly have sexual relations – that is, to regularly re-experience the sign of the covenant. And anything that works against this is not beneficial (I Cor. 7: 1-5).

Related Reading

The Nature of Human Rebellion

God placed Adam in the Garden and instructed him to “protect” it (Gen. 2:15). The word is often translated “till” or “keep,” implying that Adam’s main responsibility was to protect the pristine Garden from weeds. This is certainly a possible interpretation of this word, but in light of the cunning serpent that shows up in…

What is the significance of Hosea 8:5?

The Lord asks, “How long will they [Israel] be incapable of innocence?” The Lord’s continual striving with Israel regarding their lack of innocence suggests that this question was not merely rhetorical. If God knows the future to be eternally settled, however, he could not in earnest ask this (or any other) question about the future.…

Topics:

Is the open view the only view that is compatible with the Incarnation?

Question: You have said that the Open view of God is the only view that squares with the Incarnation and the only view that truly exalts God’s greatness. On what basis do you say this? Answer: The revelation of God in the Incarnation is the ultimate expression of God’s willingness and ability to change that…

What is the significance of Jeremiah 32:35?

As in Jeremiah 19:5, the Lord expresses his dismay over Israel’s paganism by saying they did this “though I did not command them, nor did it enter my mind that they should do this abomination.” If this abomination was eternally foreknown to God, it’s impossible to attribute any clear meaning to his confession that this…

Topics:

What is the significance of 2 Chronicles 7:12–14?

The Lord says to Solomon, “When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command the locust to devour the land, or send pestilence among my people, if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, pray, seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will…

Topics:

How do you respond to Ruth 1:13?

Because her husband and two sons had died, Naomi says to her two daughter-in-laws (Ruth and Orpah), “[I]t has been far more bitter for me than for you, because the hand of the Lord has turned against me” (1:13, cf. vs. 20). Some compatibilists cite this passage to support the conclusion that all misfortune is…