Wet Dream Forum

I meant circumcision, not foreskin restoration Squeeze.... If circumcising your children causes you to stumble, then don't do it...

And wait a minute, I didn't say anything about prohibiting marriage, didn't I mention that I wanted to rely totally on WD and sex in marriage for sexual pleasure? And yes there is more to marriage than just sex... What I'm trying to clear out is CIRCUMCISION; CIRCUMCISION is nothing and UNCIRCUMCISION is nothing if all you live for your life is pleasure (1 Tim 5:6)... and what I'm trying to say is, if possible, try not to use your genitals for anything (except urination) else until marriage comes (sinning against the body; If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off!; Fleeing fornication) And why did you think Jesus mentioned Eunuchs in Matthew?.... The penis or vagina was never intended for masturbation or fornication (1 Cor 7:9, 1 Cor 6:12) it was intended for the union of two bodies in marriage... And I agree that thinking about sex in general is not a sin, as long as it doesn't condemn you --- (Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. --- Romans 14:22)



Look, I know that it wasn't your choice to be circumcised, but you just have to consider that maybe it was God's calling for you... Or maybe I should bring 1 Cor 7:18 back into this. It's a nullification of God's word don't you think? And I don't think circumcision was man's idea, it was God's covenant to Abraham and his descendants... whether Gentile or not circumcision was introduced by God not men...And abt women and circumcsion... Why do you think God didn't require it? Just think about, women had enough already, the pains of childbirth, menstruation, wouldn't it be too much for them to bear if they too were to be circumcised? This is a heathen tradition. And plus women masturbate less frequently than men...

And whatever happened in the past, is to be forgotten if you now walk with Christ....

"All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any." -- 1 Cor 6:12

Peace

_________________
"I noticed that even though your whole world stops turning, the world will refuse to the same. So I figured that the best thing you could do is keep walking, keep your head up high, move forward; move on."

I hear what you are saying, Wolf, but I think you are taking some things out of context.

Re: circ causing me to stumble. What does that term mean? To cause to stumble means to make another person sin. That verse, I Cor. 9 is about doing things with another person that you feel is ok, but their conscience might feel is wrong, like drinking or eating meat that was offered to idols, in front of them even though they are offended by it. If when you do that, they decide to do it, too, even though they feel it is wrong, then you are essentially causing them to stumble. Whether I circumcised my son or not, I don't see how that would make ME cause to stumble. That's a different type of situation that I don't think applies exactly. I guess it would violate my own conscience, but people don't usually talk about causing themselves to stumble, ha. But is that what you meant essentially?

Circumcision and uncircumcision are nothing before the Lord as far as spiritual standing or salvation are concerned. That is all that verse is talking about, please don't make it say things it doesn't. That verse isn't talking about sexual pleasure or the lack thereof on any level, that is not the issue there. Its context is entirely about whether one needs to keep the Jewish law or not to be saved. Period. Though it matters whether one lives one's life for pleasure, sure. But who said I am doing that? How is wanting my penis to be as whole as possible, for me to enjoy what God designed for me, HIS good gift to me, how is that living my life for pleasure? I don't spend all day thinking about it. It is just one component to my life, like eating and sleeping and working and going to the bathroom and running errands. I think you are jumping to conclusions here. Like I said before, sure, I want that aspect of my life to be all that it is supposed to be, but it is just one aspect of my life and I don't think I am basing my life on that, nor is it hurting my ministry and relationship with God.

Re: fornication/sinning against the body. I think we just disagree here. I think you are making an interpretive jump to say that "porneia," the Greek work for fornication, includes masturbation and that to masturbate = "sinning against one's body." Why do you believe that? Yes, porneia is a broad word and means more than penis-in-vagina intercourse, but as far as I can tell, it refers to activity done with another person. It doesn't include masturbation. Any Biblical scholar, liberal or conservative (and I'm conservative, though not a scholar, ha), will tell you that the Bible is silent on the topic of masturbation. Silent. Regardless of one's position on the issue, we can't grab a verse and say, here--the Bible says don't jerk off. It doesn't. That is something that one has to work out between himself and God, informed by other related Scriptures, etc. What I see here for "gray area" issues like this is Romans 14. The whole chapter speaks to that type of issue, but starts out by saying " 5One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God." Paul actually says it's ok to disagree on certain matters and practices! As long as you do whatever the thing is with a clean conscience before God and do it with thanksgiving, and don't cause your brother to stumble by it OR judge them for having different convictions than you. I don't judge you for feeling that all masturbation is wrong. I disagree with your position bec I haven't been convinced that the Bible teaches that, but you certainly aren't sinning by not masturbating!

Re: the eunichs in Matthew. I know what you are talking about. But again, what was the context? Jesus was talking with his disciples about divorce, and how God really does not like it. The disciples, who lived in a culture where divorce had become rather easy to get (kind of like ours), thought that was a bit tough, if God is saying we shouldn't get divorced, what if the marriage doesn't work out? Should we even risk it at all then and get married in the first place was what they were wondering.
"  10The disciples said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” 11But He said to them, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. 12“For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it.”

Jesus was talking abt marriage vs singleness. He said that some men stay single bec they have some physical deformity down there, some (in that culture) were made eunichs as slaves, and some made themselves eunichs meaning that they have chosen to intentionally remain single for the purpose of ministry. Like the apostle Paul did, like Catholic priests do, etc. He wasn't talking about masturbation, he was talking about marriage, which includes a whole lot of distractions and time constraints and kids and all of that. This passage isn't about masturbation, it's abt faithfulness in marriage and whether one can serve God better whether married or single. Jesus seems to be saying you can serve God both ways, some are called to this, and some to that. Accept the calling God has given to you and walk faithfully in that state, whether married or single. (And Paul clarifies in 1 Cor. that walking faithfully as a single person does not mean that you can't ever marry. Be faithful to Him in whatever state you are in, for as long as you are in that state.) Again, if you understanding is that masturbation is always forbidden by God, than cool, don't masturbate. You can totally disagree with me, but likewise, don't judge those who feel like they can do that w/a clean conscience before God, without crossing into lust and without compulsion. That is between them and God.

Re: circumcision and calling. Again, context--let's look at that passage together: "7:17 Nevertheless, 14  as the Lord has assigned to each one, as God has called each person, so must he live. I give this sort of direction in all the churches. 7:18 Was anyone called after he had been circumcised? He should not try to undo his circumcision. 15  Was anyone called who is uncircumcised? He should not get circumcised. 7:19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Instead, keeping God’s commandments is what counts. 7:20 Let each one remain in that situation in life 16  in which he was called. 7:21 Were you called as a slave? 17  Do not worry about it. But if indeed you are able to be free, make the most of the opportunity. 7:22 For the one who was called in the Lord as a slave is the Lord’s freedman. In the same way, the one who was called as a free person is Christ’s slave. 7:23 You were bought with a price. Do not become slaves of men. 7:24 In whatever situation someone was called, brothers and sisters, 18  let him remain in it with God."

We can't take the Bible and just cut-and-paste it into our contemporary world without looking first at what it meant to its original hearers. There is a cultural context and specific situations it was addressing, especially in the epistles/letters written to the churches. Corinth as you probably know, was a very metropolitan, multicultural port city. The church there was made of Jews and Gentiles alike, so people are coming from a lot of different cultures and traditions. When Paul talks about "calling" here, he is referring to when one was called by God to believe in a follow Jesus. I think we both agree with that! One can safely assume here (because it happened in other places in the New Testament, think of the Jerusalem Decree in Acts), that the Jewish believers and Gentile believers in Jesus were fighting over circumcision. The Jews saw it as the ultimate symbol of their special covenant with God as a people. The Greeks and Romans both looked down on the practice. Some Jews wanted to be hip and more accepted by the secular Greeks and so they would try to restore their foreskins, so they would look less Jewish. Some gentiles believed those Jews who said they had to be circumcised and keep the Jewish law, that the work of Christ was enough. Their debate was about spiritual and in some cases, social matters. It had nothing to do with medical type reasons. Paul was saying to the Jews, look circumcision doesn't affect your relationship with God now, one way or the other. He was saying to the Gentiles, no you don't have to be circumcised. He was also saying to the Jews, don't be ashamed of the fact that you are Jewish, God brought his gospel first to us! Instead, serve God as a Jew or as a Gentile believer in Jesus. You don't have to become someone else. Likewise, if you came to Christ as a slave, don't think that you can't faithfully serve him in your current position, sucky as it is. But he also says in vs. 17 that if they can become free of their slavery, then they should do so--he doesn't say that we should stay in a crappy situation and think we are holy because of it. His point is we can serve God wherever we are at. For me, my attempt at foreskin restoration has nothing to do with my spirituality or my calling to follow Christ, and one can follow him well whether cur or uncut, I believe that. It doesn't dominate my life and I don't look down on people who believe differently than I do, so I don't see how that verse applies to my situation. My circ or restoring status doesn't affect my calling to follow Christ, I am not a Jew. It's interesting how that passage falls right in-between two sections on marriage and singleness! 

Re: circumcision being God's idea. Yes, God gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision. (There is a great little article on Wikipedia called "History of Male Circumcision") It was a symbolic sacrifice to God, a surrendering of one's self to him, an offering of blood. Those men who were circumcised were marked as being a party to his special covenant with Abraham and his descendents. But the Hebrew word that is used to describe circumcision is "brit milah," The word indicates to just cut off the overhanging tip of a baby's foreskin. It was only a little bit of skin that was removed, and so it was largely symbolic in nature, and that little amount of skin that was removed wouldn't have gotten rid of the positive sexual benefits of having most of his foreskin left, and it certainly didn't involve the removal of his frenulum. It wasn't until centuries later, after the Old Testament was written, that Jewish rabbis got upset that some Jews tried to restore their foreskin fully so they could hang out in the gymnasia (like health clubs for men, but everyone was nude), and not be made fun of by the Greeks for being different, and so they could compete in the Olympics (again, naked), etc. They thought they needed to be proud of their Jewishness and not try to cover that up. So, to help prevent that, they changed the procedure to something called brit peri'ah. This would remove all of the foreskin, the frenulum, and lots of the sensitive pink skin. This happened around 140 AD (so after Jesus--he wasn't circumcised this way), and with the exception of removal of the pink skin (in most cases), is what has remained the practice. So, modern day, removal of the entire foreskin type circumcision, was NEVER God's idea, and the minor, only removing the tip kind was only his idea for Jewish people before Jesus. (In that article you will see that Jewish thinkers then acknowledged that circumcision reduced both a man's and a woman's sexual pleasure, and there is nothing in Scripture that says that should be done.)

As far as Paul's attitude towards it goes, yes, in 1 Cor. 7 he says it doesn't matter one way or the other. But as some Jewish leaders in the church kept on insisting that Gentile Christians get cut, Paul got increasingly angry and frustrated with them, and Paul, a Jew himself and a former Pharisee, says some really strong things against them and against the practice in Galatians 6:11-13 -- "11 See with what large letters I am writing to you (V)with my own hand. 12 (W)It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh (X)who would force you to be circumcised, and only (Y)in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 For even those who are circumcised do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. 14 But far be it from me to boast (Z)except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which[b] the world (AA)has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 "

And then in Philippians 3:2, probably Paul's last letter, written when he was in house arrest in Rome, he writes, "2 Look out for (C)the dogs, look out for (D)the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh. 3 For (E)we are the circumcision, (F)who worship (G)by the Spirit of God[b] and (H)glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh" Again, his focus on this issue are spiritual reasons and the OT law, but he, a Jew, calls circumcisers "mutilators of the flesh"!! He is over it. He says it hinders them bec they begin to trust in that rather than in Jesus for their salvation. But for him to use the word "mutilator" also indicates that he no longer sees it as a physical benefit either. And this is when they still only did the more moderate form of circumcision. He sees the practice as destructive and as no aid against sin. He doesn't then go on to say, "Well, you should still circumcise your kids anyway, bec then they will be less likelly to masturbate, and we all know that is sinful. In fact, later on the Catholic Church, in 1442 condemned the practice of circumcision as a mortal sin at the Counsel of Basel-Florence. (I'm not Catholic, but I think that is interesting.) Perhaps a bit of an extreme reaction, and I don't think they still hold that extreme view, but they do speak against it.

So, for whatever it's worth (sorry, I am just watching one kid take a test this morning at work so I have nothing to do really, ha), that is my opinion on the spiritual side of it all. Much love to you, W_o_B.

Goodness Squeeze i just couldnt bring myself to reading what you just wrote. TOO LONG. But lets all just give it a rest and do what we feel is right for ourselves and God.

sorry, MM, yeah that was probably my longest post ever. I had waaay too much free time this morning and was kind of stuck where I was at and couldn't do much. And I am very passionate both abt this issue and the importance of careful Biblical exegesis (interpreting a text in the Bible), so it kind of struck a chord in me amd set me off on a research and writing rampage (which I also love to do bec I am a geek)!

If I could summarize two points that I would want to share with anyone: 1.) be very careful with Bible verses on human sexuality, bec all too often we get tempted to read them through the lens of our own cultural biases and upbringing, and don't take the time to learn abt the cultural context in which it was written, or only look at a few verses and build our opinion on that without stoping to see all that the Bible says abt an issue first so we can gather the whole counsel of God on an issue.

2.) I would encourage anyone to read the "History of male circumcision" article on Wikipedia to learn abt the topic. That way they can understand it better. (That's where I first learned that the circ the old testament commanded Jewish men to have was only the removal of the overhanging tip, not the whole foreskin, and that that changed after even the New Testament was written.) It also shares why it started to become popular in America in the 1900s, mostly for reasons that doctors don't agree with. And one should also research what exactly circumcision is and what it removes and how an intact vs a cut penis functions, this info is also easily found online. For us cut at birth guys, we are talking abt why we don't need something we've never had. That's like someone who lost their arms at birth saying as an adult that they don't need them anyway, that they can get along fine without them, that now they don't have to keep them clean or worry abt getting them injured, and that they want their sons to look like them amd so they are going to cut theirs off, too. Plus, it will male it tougher for them to masturbate without hands! Ha.

That is an extreme example, but the more I've studied this issue over the past few years, and the more I've been able to restore my own foreskin and experience, first hand, positive changes, the more I find it difficult not to speak out. I want other people to have "arms," too! Why would we want to cut them off?! That's a question I want to hear answered by the other side on this issue.

I would hope that no one would make a decision to either circumcise or keep their son intact based solely on how they "feel" abt the issue, bec most people's feelings on it aren't based on any real knowledge of the issue. They just go with the flow and follow tradition, a tradition that is less than 100 years old for most in the US! I just don't get it. I don't get why people still do it to healthy boys. Many health insurance companies aren't even covering it anymore bec they are realizong that it's not medically necessary.

Anyway, I'll shut up now...

Anyway Squeeze, it's your body, and you can do whatever you want with it,

I only felt that it was my duty to admonish you as a brother in Christ that the body is not a temple for lust but a temple for the Lord's Spirit...

_________________
"I noticed that even though your whole world stops turning, the world will refuse to the same. So I figured that the best thing you could do is keep walking, keep your head up high, move forward; move on."

I appreciate your concern, Wolf, but I don't see how restoring a foreskin (or being intact in the first place) makes one's body "a temple of lust," and I don't understand why people still support circumcision. Why do you think it's a good thing? If you have a son, do you think you would circumcise him, and if so, why?

I don't know Squeeze, I bet you know the answer to your question... And I don't care whether a person is circumcised or uncircumcised because a man is known by his integrity and not by the cut on his member...

_________________
"I noticed that even though your whole world stops turning, the world will refuse to the same. So I figured that the best thing you could do is keep walking, keep your head up high, move forward; move on."

I wouldn't want to put my child through the mockery and ridicle of other kids or people because where I come from about 99% of boys are cut and he would just be out of place esp in school and other place. Even ladies here find it disgusting and would probably laugh at him. Yes that's how things around here work.
That alone is enough to make me cut him, looking back if my parent left me intact I would have go get cut and I wouldn't have been happy with the decision of them leaving me intact. I am just thinking how awkward it would have been for me in school and locker rooms good lord!

And I get your sentiments Squeeze and I agree with you, in as much as circ isn't really necessary, of no spiritual benefit and decreasess sensitivity I accept and am very okay with my level of sensitivity and also the level experienced by my friends I have spoken to, so I would save my son from being a laughing stock among his peers, females and people etc.

What part of the country do you live in, MM?
How often do you guys take showers together? Schools around here (SoCal) pretty much don't shower together anymore. I hear you abt being teased but fact is kids will tease you abt anything that is different. Teased bec skinny (my case), teased for being fat, teased for being cut or uncut, teased for javing a smaller than avg penis, teased for having a larger than avg penis! Being a different race, skin color, having different interests, etc. the amnt of tes kids see ea other's penises is pretty rare. How often were you butt naked w/ur friends? And yet for all these other reasons that ppl get teased, and probably teased way more often for, we don't tell them to get surgery or change their personality or hide or whatever. We tell people to love who they are and stand up for themselves and people who will actually matter in life will like you for you. I don't know anyone who wasn't teased abt something, I'm just saying. Learning to rise above it makes you a stronger person. But having a surgery to avoid possible teasing, when that surgiry won't serve to improve his health or sexual experience, that sounds like "the fear of man."

Plus, circumcision rates are declining across the US. That's why I am wondering where you live. Circ rates are currently highest in the South, but in South Carolina, for instance, the state passed a law where health insurance programs will no longer cover it, so not as many babies there are being cut bec you now have to pay out of pocket.

It's also kind of a racial/ethnic thing. (I don't know your race.) Circ in US is most common among white ppl. Blacks and Latinos rarely circ, so I'm assuming you live in a mostly white area? But who's to say that a future son will stay where you live, most ppl today like to go off to college somewhere, and also who's to say that social attitudes abt that won't be different 15 years from now. When i was growing up, the worst thing you could call a guy was "fag." i work with high schoolers and it's more common to hear them talk abt supporting gay rights than making fun of gay people, and I work at evangelical Christian schools! That is a HUGE social change, and one that I never thought would happen so quickly.

Just some food for thought. ;-)

Oh, PS--on the penile sensitivity thing--mine was fine at age 25, too. Def not as sensitive as when I was a teen, but still pretty good. I knew abt foreskin restoration by my late 20s but didn't see the need bec no real problems. My libido dropped some in my early 30s which is pretty normal, but it wasn't until abt 35 that I really noticed a significant decrease in penile sensitivity. That's when I got concerned (I'm not even married yet!) and decided to try restoring. Over time I have noticed regains in sensitivity and am quite happy with it. I just wish the process happened more quickly, I still have a LOt more skin to grow to have normal coverage. i wish I did it when younger bec younger guys seem to grow their skin back a lot quicker. More hGH, I bet.

Hi guys! I thought it was important to let any of you who have been following this thread know that Mylesmyles and I have kissed and made up (his words) and we are now good buds. See, disagreements encourage growth! So although we can both be saucy bitches, at the heart of it we are just two guys here for the same reasons as the rest of you.
Cheers, Myles!
Mikey

_________________
"I noticed that even though your whole world stops turning, the world will refuse to the same. So I figured that the best thing you could do is keep walking, keep your head up high, move forward; move on."

I'm cut and restoring too!

_________________
Longest AB: 17 Days
SEs Experienced: 0
WDs Experienced: 0
Day of Last MB of AB with Infrequent MB: December 1, 2012

LOL, I had my foreskin for 11 years, then at 12 I was cut. At least for all Filipinos out there, we still have our foreskin. The doctor doesn't totally remove the foreskin but just cut it to show the glans. But in my case, the doctor had to remove some. hehe So technically I was cut twice. I'm not taking any sides here but, get over it.

_________________
Rey~

Patience is Virtue

Restored

_________________
Current Day of Abstaining: ---
Longest Abstaining Record: 36 Days November 2011-December 2011
Date of Last Wet Dream: 04/28/2015
Total # of Wet Dreams: 16; First WD 07/21/2010

The return of shadow_flare!!!!

Oh, I'm always in the shadows... ever watching. I just don't feel like posting or interacting. I tend to only come on now if I get a pm or if I have a wd.

_________________
Current Day of Abstaining: ---
Longest Abstaining Record: 36 Days November 2011-December 2011
Date of Last Wet Dream: 04/28/2015
Total # of Wet Dreams: 16; First WD 07/21/2010

I am uncut and happy

I'm also uncut, but I don't have lots of foreskin. My glans is always half outside from foreskin, and when I'm super hard, my penis almost looks like being cut.

_________________
"God, please don't hate me, because I'll die if you do.".

Uncut guy and I love my foreskin!

I'm uncut.

I'm uncut and gotta say I love my foreskin. I have quite a lot, enough to more than cover the head of my dick even when hard (I still have enough to make a little tip) but no problems rolling it back and forward. When I was a kid I tried rolling it back and leaving my uncut head exposed in my briefs and just walked around, the sensation was so intense it was kinda painful! I've no idea how you guys can put up with it :S
In terms of sex I love the feeling of sliding inside a girls vagina as it gently pushes your foreskin back and then my head rubs along her walls once you're inside. Pulling out and a little hood comes back over your penis just to keep you wet haha ^_^ the gliding is an awesome feeling and I think how most uncut guys MB. Downside is I tend to be a bit too sensative during sex and that can make me ejaculate really quickly, but some guys are different: more control/less sensative. I'm not sure how long is "normal" but I get the feeling nature likes a guy who cums quick... Not gonna get whacked over the head by a rival male during sex lol

I'm currently restoring, and believe me, all that sensitivity you have through being covered 24/7, you lose when you get cut. You also regain it back over time as you are covered all the time, and the skin on the glans begins to thin to its original width.


Over time, I become more and more of the opinion that actual intercourse isn't meant to last a long time. Foreplay, petting, kissing, fondling, groping etc, yeah sure. But actual sex I truly believe is best served reasonably hot and quick. If you're going to spend ages at it, I find the sensation and novelty both wear off over time. Leave it too long, and it can be difficult to achieve any kind of climax at all. I'm not talking about 2 minutes or anything, but anything over 10 minutes is starting to stretch out imho.

_________________
Leader board:
Personal Best: 44 days (26 May 2013)
2nd: 33 days (2 Feb 2013)
3rd: 20 days (1 Mar 2013)
4th: 15 days (23 Mar 2013)

I hope you get some of the feeling back with your resorting buddy, best of luck and I get it's tough! I always wondered if I tried the same techniques you guys do (restoring), just how long could my foreskin get? Kinda curious now...

On sex: hey! 2 minutes for some of us guys is all we can manage
I totally agree with you though; sex is what you do when you're ready to cum, after lots of foreplay and stuff. Then it's natural that you, rather than stop-go-stop-go, just let nature take it's course and squirt when you need to squirt. Think boys gotta unload when they gotta unload, for some of us that's a few thrusts, others a few hours! lol
All the foreplay is like one huge edging session anyway! With girls there's so much build up before the actual sex (making out, touching, oral) that I can't even get more than a few good pumps when we finally get down to it. just too excited I guess. BUT, I really doubt that I'm the only dude here who cums "quick" though... More buddies have to be honest .

Uncut here and I put my glans uncovered to wash it everyday. I think it's hygiene matter, don't you think?

_________________
I'm latino. Excuse my english

Used to be. Had to get cut cause of phimosis.

_________________
Please excuse my English. Icelandic is my first language, so my English is not very good.

Yes, I am uncut. I dont think my parents even considered circumcision. Thankfully.