The Sin of Onan

[Timothysis]

You don’t seem to have read them.

Isn’t the heart of theology to understand the incarnation?

Did any theologian ever presume to know the mind of God? Is there anyone who can say that they know why God went about the sanctification of the world in the manner that He did? To say that one does, indeed, know why is the height of arrogance and presumption.

 

[davidv]

Did any theologian ever presume to know the mind of God? Is there anyone who can say that they know why God went about the sanctification of the world in the manner that He did? To say that one does, indeed, know why is the height of arrogance and presumption.

Are you saying that any knowledge of God, or His mysteries are off limits to our understanding?

 

[cfrancis]

As Joe Kelly posted, the punishment for Onan not fulfulling his duty to his brother was (from Dt 25:8-10):

And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders, and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’ 8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak to him: and if he persists, saying, ‘I do not wish to take her,’ 9 then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’ 10 And the name of his house* shall be called in Israel, The house of him that had his sandal pulled off.

You have actually provided the answer yourself, though unwittingly:

Thanks for the replies but this just confirmed my suspicions, that everyone has their own interpretation of this event. Read this verse once again:

*10But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He (I)took his life also. *

What was it that he did that was displeasing? He wasted his seed "in order not to give offspring to his brother."

As we know what the punishment is for not doing as Onan ought; yet Onan received a different punishment, one more severe than that proscribed for not having children with Onan’s brother’s wife; the logical conclusion is the punishment of death was for something beyond not having children with his brother’s wife. And that “something” is spilling his seed on the ground.

Therefore, your reply should actually read:

What was it that he did that was displeasing? "He wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother."

In any event, I still think that it is far fetched to say that Onan’s punishment was due to self abuse. What if scripture said that Onan plied himself with wine each night so that he would fall asleep before he could commit the act? Wouldn’t that still be “displeasing to the Lord” because he tried to NOT raise up sons for his brother?

Your “what if’” is entertaining, but pointless. The Law proscribed one punishment for not providing children via Onan’s brother’s wife; Onan received a different punishment.
The extenuating circumstance is the spilling of his seed on the ground.

 

[Teflon93]

Did any theologian ever presume to know the mind of God? Is there anyone who can say that they know why God went about the sanctification of the world in the manner that He did? To say that one does, indeed, know why is the height of arrogance and presumption.

You can argue with St Paul, then. 1 Corinthians 2:

1: And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2: For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
3: And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
4: And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
5: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
6: Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
7: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9: But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
**10: But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11: For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12: Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13: Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14: But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15: But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16: For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. **

 

[Teflon93]

Are you saying that any knowledge of God, or His mysteries are off limits to our understanding?

Indeed he is, which is why he quarrels with St Paul; indeed, with every saint.

 

[Teflon93]

“But we have the mind of Christ.”

So presumptuous, that Paul, in some eyes.

 

[Timothysis]

Are you saying that any knowledge of God, or His mysteries are off limits to our understanding?

A “mystery” is, by definition, something which we do not understand. Knowledge OF God and knowledge OF His mysteries are one thing; to say that you KNOW God and KNOW His mysteries is quite another.

Do you mean to tell me that you KNOW how Christ becomes truly present, soul and divinity, body and blood in the most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass???

 

[Teflon93]

A “mystery” is, by definition, something which we do not understand. Knowledge OF God and knowledge OF His mysteries are one thing; to say that you KNOW God and KNOW His mysteries is quite another.

Do you mean to tell me that you KNOW how Christ becomes truly present, soul and divinity, body and blood in the most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass???

You’ve now changed questions, having been educated on your error regarding why God died for us on the Cross.

It is good form for you to note you were mistaken before switching gears; otherwise, you give readers whiplash.

 

[Timothysis]

You don’t seem to have read them.

Isn’t the heart of theology to understand the incarnation?

See post #47

Do you mean to tell me that you truly understand how God became Man in the incarnation? Pardon my ignorance but I always understood that things like the incarnation, the resurrection, the bread and wine becoming the body and blood of Christ were sacred mysteries; I was not aware that you Sunday School Honor Students had them all figured out.

 

[Timothysis]

You’ve now changed questions, having been educated on your error regarding why God died for us on the Cross.

It is good form for you to note you were mistaken before switching gears; otherwise, you give readers whiplash.

OK, I’m typing this REAL SLOW so you can understand. One poster asked why the author of sacred scripture chose to use the words “wasted his seed” instead of something else. I responded by saying that it is like asking why Jesus Christ had to suffer and die on a cross to sanctify the world. My point is/ was, THERE IS NO ANSWER!!! YOU are the ones who responded by saying that you had all of the answers!!! If anything, YOU are the ones who changed the direction of the thread!

And I do not “note” that I was mistaken on anything. Opinions on some topics are just as valid as others because there are occasions when we just don’t know the answer.

 

[NotWorthy]

Tim, quick question:

If God was offended with Onan simply because he tried to prevent his brother from having offspring, why didn’t God slay Judah as well. For Judah prevented Tamar from having children through his next son, Shelah.

 

[Timothysis]

Tim, quick question:

If God was offended with Onan simply because he tried to prevent his brother from having offspring, why didn’t God slay Judah as well. For Judah prevented Tamar from having children through his next son, Shelah.

Answer: I have no idea. I do not know the mind of God.

Question: If God slew Onan for masturbating, then why hasn’t he slain the 9 out of 10 men and 7 out of 10 women who admit to doing it? Certainly masturbating is not something of only the modern world, huh???

 

[Teflon93]

OK, I’m typing this REAL SLOW so you can understand. One poster asked why the author of sacred scripture chose to use the words “wasted his seed” instead of something else. I responded by saying that it is like asking why Jesus Christ had to suffer and die on a cross to sanctify the world. My point is/ was, THERE IS NO ANSWER!!! YOU are the ones who responded by saying that you had all of the answers!!! If anything, YOU are the ones who changed the direction of the thread!

And I do not “note” that I was mistaken on anything. Opinions on some topics are just as valid as others because there are occasions when we just don’t know the answer.

I’m going to type this at normal speed and rely that you will understand the difference between “How” and “Why”.

The answer to WHY Christ had to die for our sins is far from unknowable.

You will doubtless recognize this, student of theology as you are:

“…because the wages of sin is death.”

The HOW, by which you no doubt refer to the actual physical mechanics of it, is a mystery beyond what we are told in the Gospel.

 

[Teflon93]

Answer: I have no idea. I do not know the mind of God.

Question: If God slew Onan for masturbating, then why hasn’t he slain the 9 out of 10 men and 7 out of 10 women who admit to doing it? Certainly masturbating is not something of only the modern world, huh???

Why did he not strike men did who complained that the Eucharist was not tasty, as He did the Jews of Exodus 20?

Why does He not strike dead those who approach Him unworthily, as He has done in the past?

The better question is, “Why are you so invested in arguing for masturbation?”

And

“How do I know that those hypothetical 9 of 10 men did not avail themselves of Confession and thus be forgiven by God or die in mortal sin and be condemned for so doing?”

You see mysteries all around you, but are apparently certain enough that masturbation is no sin that you’d bet your soul upon your conviction.

 

[Teflon93]

As for the mind of God, heed St Paul. We (the Church) have the mind of Christ. We are the body of Christ.

Your issue is that you do not heed the Church.

 

[Timothysis]

As for the mind of God, heed St Paul. We (the Church) have the mind of Christ. We are the body of Christ.

Your issue is that you do not heed the Church.

Thank you for the 3 postings. I really liked this one:

The better question is, “Why are you so invested in arguing for masturbation?”

If you followed the train of conversation you will notice that not once was I “arguing for masturbation” nor did I ever offer that I am "apparently certain enough that masturbation is no sin that you’d bet your soul upon your conviction."

Furthermore, I especially appreciate the declaration that my issue is that I “do not heed the Church.”

Unfortunately, you could not be more mistaken.

Have a pleasant evening on top of your pedestal.

 

[Teflon93]

So you are saying he was slain because he masturbated???

Finally, most people masturbate because they don’t have a partner to have sex with. Why would someone who obviously does have a partner choose to masturbate instead?

It is interesting to me, though, that the Church in Humane Vitae nor in the recent cathechism do not mention Onan in regards to the inappropriateness of masturbation. I wonder why???

Question: If God slew Onan for masturbating, then why hasn’t he slain the 9 out of 10 men and 7 out of 10 women who admit to doing it? Certainly masturbating is not something of only the modern world, huh???

So for someone who didn’t want to “go there”, I’m afraid that’s about the only place you’ve gone.

Given your hysterical and rude responses, you’ll surely forgive me for thinking you were very defensive about it. People sometimes bring up teachings of the Church they struggle with because they struggle with the sin the Church teaches against. This is not to claim that you struggle with that particular sin, and indeed, if you do that makes you one sinner in a world full of us (and sinner I am as well).

Here is the Catechism:

2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.” “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” **For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of “the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved.” **

To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

and

2396 Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices

.

The case of Onan therefore is read as the rest of Scripture is read—in light of the teaching of the Church. The reason why so many of us have explained to you in very similar terms how this particular part of Scripture is read in light of Catholic teaching on sexuality is that we have been taught it by the Church. In my case, I am a recent convert, so I can’t be claimed to have picked it up from stern nuns in a Catholic school I never had the privilege to attend.

Indeed, the only evidence you need to know this is true is to reference onanism in the dictionary.

o·nan·ism (ō’nə-nĭz’əm) Pronunciation Key
n.
Masturbation.
Coitus interruptus.

[After Onan, son of Judah (Genesis 38:9).]
o’nan·ist n., o’nan·is’tic adj.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

How do you suppose the “masturbation” definition was acquired if not through Church teaching entering the English language?

 

[Timothysis]

So for someone who didn’t want to “go there”, I’m afraid that’s about the only place you’ve gone.

Given your hysterical and rude responses, you’ll surely forgive me for thinking you were very defensive about it. People sometimes bring up teachings of the Church they struggle with because they struggle with the sin the Church teaches against. This is not to claim that you struggle with that particular sin, and indeed, if you do that makes you one sinner in a world full of us (and sinner I am as well).

Here is the Catechism:

and

.

The case of Onan therefore is read as the rest of Scripture is read—in light of the teaching of the Church. The reason why so many of us have explained to you in very similar terms how this particular part of Scripture is read in light of Catholic teaching on sexuality is that we have been taught it by the Church. In my case, I am a recent convert, so I can’t be claimed to have picked it up from stern nuns in a Catholic school I never had the privilege to attend.

Indeed, the only evidence you need to know this is true is to reference onanism in the dictionary.

How do you suppose the “masturbation” definition was acquired if not through Church teaching entering the English language?

Sigh…last comment…my remarks about masturbation were because the story of Onan is used as an example of why masturbation is wrong. How can one discuss the story of Onan without discussing masturbation?

Onanism in the dictionary is HARDLY another reason that Onan was struck dead because of masturbation. The word “sodomy” comes from the story of Sodom and Gamorrah(sp?) yet try to find where scripture says that the sin of these two cities was homosexual unions. It took many centuries and Christian commentators to come up with that one even though it isn’t supported by the text.

If I made any “hysterical and rude” remarks it is because of the degree of self-righteous intellectualism that runs rampant here. I visit this site less and less because of it and I can’t say that this experience makes me wish to continue.

So goodbye and good luck…I wish I could say it was fun.

 

[Philthy]

Thanks for the replies but this just confirmed my suspicions, that everyone has their own interpretation of this event. Read this verse once again:

*10But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He (I)took his life also. *

What was it that he did that was displeasing? He wasted his seed “in order not to give offspring to his brother.” Once again, I submit that Onan’s punishment was due to his flagrant attempt to NOT produce children for his brother in accordance with the Law in order to secure his brother’s inheritance for himself since he "9 knew that the (H)offspring would not be his."

I think that this is one of those issues where everyone projects their own interpretation onto the subject, much like when some propose that Christ calls us to a life of pacifism when he says “if someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn and offer them the left.” In any event, it is a curious phenomenon.

Hi Tim-

I dont think it is possible to truly understand the Onan sin without having a well-developed theology of the body. I highly recommend Christopher West’s 10 CD set “Naked without Shame” for your in car listening - its only $3.00 for the entire set and its available online here:
giftfoundation.org/naked_without_shame.htm
Human sexuality is an extraordinarily sacred thing to God. It has been speculated that the experience of the marital embrace is the closest experience we may have of the Trinity in this life. Anyone who treats sexuality in a cavalier manner offends God tremendously. Just look at how much of Scripture - Old and New Testament - deals with sexual sin.
You seem strongly convinced that God killed Onan because of his wishing to avoid fathering children for his brother. And you point to the Scripture as being contextually clear on this. I would offer two points of consideration:

1. As has been pointed out, God’s penalty for doing this was being “desandaled” and spit in the face.
2. Read carefully again, what it says: “What he did was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so he put him to death also.” Technically I tend to think of something “visible” (ie in his sight) that resulted in God’s killing him. Wishing to avoid getting her pregnant is not visible, spilling one’s seed is.
   Of course I dont think the intentions of the heart and the actions of the body are meant to be separated here. It’s all wicked, but the specific means that he chose to accomplish his wicked ends seems to be what pushed God over the edge. Just remember - human sexuality is the divine, sovereignly sanctioned means for allowing the creation of human beings - God’s “very good” workmanship made in His own image and likeness; meant to worship Him in time and eternity. You dont go messin’ with that…Onan did and God took him out.

 

[NotWorthy]

Answer: I have no idea. I do not know the mind of God.

Question: If God slew Onan for masturbating, then why hasn’t he slain the 9 out of 10 men and 7 out of 10 women who admit to doing it? Certainly masturbating is not something of only the modern world, huh???

With this question you display a little bit of ignorance on the symbolism of sin in the OT. Or are you just exasperated?

Let’s review. According to your reasoning:
a) God slays Onan explicitly because of deny his dead brother children.
b) God does not slay Judah for the same offense.
c) God sets the law that this sort of crime is not punishable by death.

Hmmmmm…

So what are we supposed to learn from reading the OT?!?!