Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Ellen White" in Romanian language version.
The Bible presents no clear theological ethic on masturbation, leaving many young unmarried Christians with confusion and guilt around their sexuality.
But liberal scholarship prevailed in one arena: it permanently revised our understanding of Ellen White's historical writings. For decades, a type of verbal inspiration dominated popular Adventism, shaping the church culture to a degree that today's generation of Adventist youth could hardly imagine. Within at least the educated mainstream church, that is no longer the case.
In some cases where a historian has so grouped together events as to afford, in brief, a comprehensive view of the subject, or has summarized details in a convenient manner, his words have been quoted; but in some instances no specific credit has been given, since the quotations are not given for the purpose of citing that writer as authority, but because his statement affords a ready and forcible presentation of the subject. In narrating the experience and views of those carrying forward the work of reform in our own time, similar use has been made of their published works.Cf. The Great Controversy, p. xi.4 1911 edition.
Ellen White followed another well-marked trail when she ventured into the potentially hazardous field of sex. From the appearance of Sylvester Graham's Lecture to Young Men on Chastity in 1834 this subject had played an integral and highly visible role in health-reform literature. Alcott, Coles, Trail, and Jackson, among others, had all spoken out on the dangers of what they regarded as excessive or abnormal sexual activities, particularly masturbation, which was thought to cause a frightening array of pathological conditions ranging from dyspepsia and consumption to insanity and loss of spirituality. By carefully couching their appeal in humanitarian terms, they had largely avoided offending the sensibilities of a prudish public. Theirs was a genuinely moral crusade against what Jackson called "the great, crying sin of our time."
With Adventism's most articulate spokesmen so implacably opposed to the doctrine of the Trinity, it is unsurprising that one researcher was forced to conclude that he was "unable to discover any evidence that 'many were Trinitarians' before 1898, nor has there been found any Trinitarian declaration written, prior to that date, by an Adventist writer other than Ellen G. White."46 But even this is an overstatement. Although not actively anti-Trinitarian, Ellen White always carefully avoided using the term "Trinity," and her husband stated categorically that her visions did not support the Trinitarian creed.47
Strictly speaking, very seldom did Ellen White “do theology.” That is, she did not ordinarily do what professional theologians typically do. She did not produce a book of or about theology. She did not think, speak, and write in theological language. ... She did not elaborate a particular doctrine of the Trinity, atonement, God and time, or free will. She did not explain the precise meaning and broader implications of her own language and ideas, nor did she always use her theological vocabulary consistently. She did not endeavor to explain verbal or conceptual inconsistencies—either those of Scripture or her own—or to reduce the tensions inherent in her overall theological understanding.
but in her version of the event that destroyed the unity of the divine realm—the rebellion of Satan. As White related in the Spirit of Prophecy, the devil's revolt against divine law came about precisely because Satan was unwilling to accept Jesus' position in the heavenly hierarchy. At that time Satan, who was then known as Lucifer, was "a high and exalted angel, next in honor to God's dear Son."13 It was an arrangement with which he had been happy, according to White, until a primordial ceremony formalized the supremacy of Jesus: "The Father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ, his Son, should be equal with himself."14 However, Satan believed that this decision had been taken without prior consultation, and he convened a meeting of the angels to air his grievances. A ruler had now been appointed over them, he said, and "he would no longer submit to this invasion of his rights and theirs."15
Fifty years ago, a child might have been told that masturbation would cause insanity, acne, sterility, or other such nonsense. "Self-abuse," as it was then called, has enjoyed a long and unfortunate history of religious and medical disapproval. The modern view is that masturbation is a normal sexual behavior (Bockting & Coleman, 2003). Enlightened parents are well aware of this fact.
Masturbation: the primary sexual activity of mankind. In the nineteenth century it was a disease; in the twentieth, it's a cure.
The general view today, however, is that masturbation is normal and healthy and thus should be free from guilt feelings.]
Although Onan gives his name to "onanism," usually a synonym for masturbation, Onan was not masturbating but practicing coitus interruptus.
He practiced coitus interruptus whenever he made love to Tamar.
Epiphanius (fourth century) construed the sin of Onan as coitus interruptus.14
The third group includes statements that were widely thought to be true at the time she wrote them, but that have been largely or wholly rejected by current scientific opinion, such as the dynamics of volcanoes, the height of the antediluvians, amalgamation of humans and animals, and the physical effects of masturbation (statements 9-12).
Social change in attitudes toward masturbation has occurred at the professional level only since 1960 and at the popular level since 1970. [133] ... onanism and masturbation erroneously became synonymous... [134] ... there is no legislation in the Bible pertaining to masturbation. [135]
Stengers and Van Neck follow the illness to its fairly abrupt demise; they liken the shift to finally seeing the emperor without clothes as doctors began to doubt masturbation as a cause of illness at the turn of the twentieth century. Once doubt set in, scientists began to accumulate statistics about the practice, finding that a large minority and then a large majority of people masturbated. The implications were clear: if most people masturbated and did not experience insanity, debility, and early death, then masturbation could not be held accountable to the etiology that had been assigned it. Masturbation quickly lost its hold over the medical community, and parents followed in making masturbation an ordinary part of first childhood and then human sexuality.
The Bible presents no clear theological ethic on masturbation, leaving many young unmarried Christians with confusion and guilt around their sexuality.
Ellen G. White was not a plagiarist and her works did not constitute copyright infringement/piracy.
People need to be taught that drugs do not cure disease. [...] Health is recovered in spite of the drug.
The general view today, however, is that masturbation is normal and healthy and thus should be free from guilt feelings.]
Few topics have generated more ridicule from critics than Ellen White’s statements regarding “self-abuse,”57 “solitary vice,”58 “self-indulgence,”59 “secret vice,”60 “moral pollution,”61 etc. Ellen White never used the term “masturbation.”
Social change in attitudes toward masturbation has occurred at the professional level only since 1960 and at the popular level since 1970. [133] ... onanism and masturbation erroneously became synonymous... [134] ... there is no legislation in the Bible pertaining to masturbation. [135]
In the collection's introductory chapter, Eli Coleman describes how Kinsey's research half a century ago was the first in a series of studies to challenge widely prevalent cultural myths relating to the 'harmful' effects of masturbation, revealing the practice to be both common and non-pathological. Subsequent research, outlined by Coleman in this chapter, has shown masturbation to be linked to healthy sexual development, sexual well-being in relationships, self-esteem and bodily integrity (an important sexual right). As such, the promotion and de-stigmatization of the practice continue to be important strategies within sexology for the achievement of healthy sexual development and well-being.
The collection concludes with two surveys among US college students. The first of these was based on limited quantitative questions relating to masturbation. The findings suggest that masturbation is not a substitute for sexual intercourse, as has often been posited, but is associated with increased sexual interest and greater number of partners. The second of these surveys asks whether masturbation could be useful in treating low sexual desire, by examining the relationship between masturbation, libido and sexual fantasy.
Social change in attitudes toward masturbation has occurred at the professional level only since 1960 and at the popular level since 1970. [133] ... onanism and masturbation erroneously became synonymous... [134] ... there is no legislation in the Bible pertaining to masturbation. [135]
The publication of Kinsey's and Masters and Johnson's research revealed that masturbation was both common and harmless. Many studies have since confirmed this basic truth, revealing in addition that masturbation is neither a substitute for "real" sex nor a facilitator of risky sex.
Robert Olson, secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate, said, “The church is not denying the accumulating evidence of White’s copying….
|isbn=
: checksum (ajutor).The general view today, however, is that masturbation is normal and healthy and thus should be free from guilt feelings.]
The general view today, however, is that masturbation is normal and healthy and thus should be free from guilt feelings.]
|titlelink=
(ajutor)But liberal scholarship prevailed in one arena: it permanently revised our understanding of Ellen White's historical writings. For decades, a type of verbal inspiration dominated popular Adventism, shaping the church culture to a degree that today's generation of Adventist youth could hardly imagine. Within at least the educated mainstream church, that is no longer the case.
Social change in attitudes toward masturbation has occurred at the professional level only since 1960 and at the popular level since 1970. [133] ... onanism and masturbation erroneously became synonymous... [134] ... there is no legislation in the Bible pertaining to masturbation. [135]
Stengers and Van Neck follow the illness to its fairly abrupt demise; they liken the shift to finally seeing the emperor without clothes as doctors began to doubt masturbation as a cause of illness at the turn of the twentieth century. Once doubt set in, scientists began to accumulate statistics about the practice, finding that a large minority and then a large majority of people masturbated. The implications were clear: if most people masturbated and did not experience insanity, debility, and early death, then masturbation could not be held accountable to the etiology that had been assigned it. Masturbation quickly lost its hold over the medical community, and parents followed in making masturbation an ordinary part of first childhood and then human sexuality.
In the collection's introductory chapter, Eli Coleman describes how Kinsey's research half a century ago was the first in a series of studies to challenge widely prevalent cultural myths relating to the 'harmful' effects of masturbation, revealing the practice to be both common and non-pathological. Subsequent research, outlined by Coleman in this chapter, has shown masturbation to be linked to healthy sexual development, sexual well-being in relationships, self-esteem and bodily integrity (an important sexual right). As such, the promotion and de-stigmatization of the practice continue to be important strategies within sexology for the achievement of healthy sexual development and well-being.
The collection concludes with two surveys among US college students. The first of these was based on limited quantitative questions relating to masturbation. The findings suggest that masturbation is not a substitute for sexual intercourse, as has often been posited, but is associated with increased sexual interest and greater number of partners. The second of these surveys asks whether masturbation could be useful in treating low sexual desire, by examining the relationship between masturbation, libido and sexual fantasy.
The Bible presents no clear theological ethic on masturbation, leaving many young unmarried Christians with confusion and guilt around their sexuality.
He practiced coitus interruptus whenever he made love to Tamar.
Epiphanius (fourth century) construed the sin of Onan as coitus interruptus.14
Onan’s death is attributed to his refusal to perform this duty of impregnating Er’s widow, Tamar, probably by coitus interruptus (rather than “onanism,” masturbation).
Although Onan did cohabit with Tamar, "he spilled his seed on the ground"; for this he was put to death by God. Onan's effort to avoid impregnating his sister-in-law has given rise to the term "onanism," a synonym for masturbation. This passage is then employed by some to indicate divine condemnation of autoeroticism. This interpretation, however, completely misses the point of the passage. Onan's sin was not sexual. Rather, it was his refusal to fulfill the obligation of levirate marriage, according to which a man was obligated to impregnate the wife of his brother if his brother had died without an heir, thus ensuring the continuation of his brothers line and inheritance. That fulfilling this obligation often raised additional questions regarding the apportioning of the familial inheritance is indicated by passages in Deuteronomy and Ruth. Thus Onan's sexual act, most probably coitus interruptus, was the means whereby he avoided his fraternal duty, in spite of the fact that he seemed to be fulfilling it by cohabiting with Tamar. For this deception he was punished.
This action of Onan probably was a reference to coitus interruptus, but Onan's conduct has produced the word "onanism," which has come to be a reference to masturbation.
The levir in this case is to be Onan, the second born. But he refuses to accept his responsibility. Instead, he practices coitus interruptus with Tamar; that is, instead of impregnating her, he wasted his semen on the ground (lit., “he spoiled [it] groundward”).This is clearly a reference to withdrawal to prevent conception, rather than a reference to masturbation.