[John O]

"Onan's sin was not that he spilled his seed but that he disobeyed God by not raising up children to his brother. (He could have spilled all the seed he wanted AFTER he impregnated his brothers widow.)"

Not so. Violation of the Levirate law was not a capital offense.

It is in some places (homosexuality for example). But the point I was making is that masturbation is not a sin in and of itself. Also what Onan did is not masturbation. He had sex with his brother's widow but refused to impregnate her. He disobeyed his father.

(And of course Tamar later gave birth to Phares who is in Christ's line)

Yet Onan received, not a humiliating public rebuke, but a death sentence. Why? Because he sinned not only by violating the Levirate law, but also by the way in which he did so.

Disagree. Onan was not killed for any sexual sin. He was killed for disobedience

The kind of act he committed was so despicable that, in the Old Testament context, it was punishable by death.

Again, I disagree. As we see from Leviticus 15:16 and 17, and Levitucus 15:18 it doesn't matter if he is with a woman or not. Spilling the seed is not sinful. If it was a death sentence it would have stated it here. Since Lev15:18 doesn't even call it a sin (no sin offering) we can also state that it's not an offense worthy of death

Incidentally, Protestants like Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Wesley, Melancthon Jacobus, Matthew Henry and many others saw the act of "wasting the seed" as being morally abhorrent in the eyes of God, as you can see at the link.

And yet Heb 13:4 tells us that marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled. What a man and his wife choose to do with just themselves is fine as long as they are married and it doens't violate any other law of God, it does not defile the bed.

while on the other hand the desire that leads to defective acts, whether by yourelf, with your spouse,

interesting concept. I can't find "defective acts" or any scripture that can be translate that way, in the bible. What are you referring to?

But then nevermind as we are getting way off topic. It remains that there is no biblical injunction against the spilling of seed. which was the only point I wanted to make. have a great day.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I think perhaps you didn't read the article I linked, because it refutes the idea that God killed Onan only because of his disobedience, and without reference to his specific perverse act.

In a study of Genesis 38, "The Sin of Onan," Brian Harrison looked into the Jewish understanding of this passage. "The classical Jewish commentators - who can scarcely be accused of ignorance regarding Hebrew language, customs, law, and biblical literary genres - certainly saw in this passage of Scripture a condemnation of both unnatural intercourse and masturbation as such.

A typical traditional Jewish commentary puts it thus: "Onan misused the organs God gave him for propagating the race to unnaturally satisfy his own lust, and he was therefore deserving death."

Harrison is quoting The Encyclopedia Judaica (Vol.4,p.1054, article "Birth Control"), which also states: "Jewish tradition ascribed the practice of birth control to the depraved humanity before Noah (Gen. R. 23:2,4; Rashi to Gen. 4:19,23)."

The Encyclopedia article adds that on the basis of Gen. 38:9-10, "the Talmud sternly inveighs against 'bringing forth the seed in vain', considering it a cardinal sin (Nid. 13a). . . .Strictly Orthodox [Jews, . . . . for religious reasons, refuse to resort to birth control."

In the same Encyclopedia, under "Onanism" (Vol. 12, p.1495), it is stated that the act of Onan "is taken . . . by the Talmud (Yev. 34b) to refer either to unnatural intercourse or to masturbation. The Zohar [a traditional Jewish commentary] expands on the evil of onanism in the second sense."

Thus, not only do we have a united Christianity seeing Onan as being condemned for bringing forth seed in vain (whether as masturbation of birth control), but the historical Jewish outlook concurs with this view.

In 3500 years of Judaism+Christianity, nobody --- not Jews nor Protestants nor Catholics nor Orthodox--- ever condoned deliberately sterile forms of intercourse or said that it was OK in the marriage bed. And this, even though it would have been a handy thing to OK because it would be an always-available and low-tech form of contraception, wouldn't it?

Yet openly counseling anal intercourse as a way to limit childbirth, or approving it as a way to connect with your spouse, didn't occur to anybody, anywhere, ever, until maybe the late 20th century. Hmm.

At the same time that exactly the same acts were being mainstreamed by the gays and blessed by the successful sexual revolutionaries.

And you think it's OK by Biblical morality? Chapter and verse, please.

Good day to you.