Can you sin in your dreams?

[Idolfan]

Many religions regard excessive sinful thoughts as being, well, sinful. So, lets use lust as the obvious example. Let's say you are a highly religious person and you are abstinent, but you dream of having a great big homo gangbang. Since you have acted out your fantasy and even in the dream you may have knowingly 'sinned', from a religious perspective would this really be regarded as a sin? I am quite interested to hear your ideas on this.

[metcalfracing]

well, for that you have to ask on simple question. Lucid or non-lucid? A big homo gangbang in your head is just as bad as any, so long as you CHOSE to participate. Non-lucid homo gangbangs are just attempts by the devil to pursuade you against god. To give proof of this.... You are considered an adulterer even if you only imagine it, same principle

[JustSoSick]

well, for that you have to ask on simple question. Lucid or non-lucid? A big homo gangbang in your head is just as bad as any, so long as you CHOSE to participate. Non-lucid homo gangbangs are just attempts by the devil to pursuade you against god. To give proof of this.... You are considered an adulterer even if you only imagine it, same principle Did you imagine a big homo gangbang while writing this, SINNER!!?

[Marvo]

I did :3

[Needcatscan]

Just lusting after another man/woman is considered adultery according to Jesus, so I would think that dreaming of it would be the same case. As far as regular dreaming goes, it's a little bit of a fuzzy area (for a fundie that is). Amazing how terrified fundies are of vag and penis, isn't it?

[guitarboy]

I guess it depends on exactly what religion you are. I doubt that you would have a dream like that unless you were thinking about it, so it may be considered a sin.

[Needcatscan]

I guess it depends on exactly what religion you are. I doubt that you would have a dream like that unless you were thinking about it, so it may be considered a sin. I beg to differ; I've had dreams of me doing things that would be the exact opposite of what I would do if I was conscious.

[TimeStopper]

They'd probably consider if it was your free will. And something your will in dreams change. The real question is does it count if you don't remember it?

[sephiroth clock]

Well if you want to live life free from sin you must have pure thoughts, pure actions, and pure words. Dreams to me represent our deep subconscious thoughts. For me, non-lucid dreams are something that I don't really have control over so it's just sort of an observation of my subconscious. In real life you can become more aware of your thoughts and filter out the negative ones. So since dreams are more passive, I find that they are a good indicator of whether your core being has any sinful habits/behaviors. As you begin to grow and change, the actions you take in your dreams are good indicators of your progress. If you are kind and generous in your dreams than that virtue has become well integrated into your subconscious.

[metcalfracing]

Did you imagine a big homo gangbang while writing this, SINNER!!? Actually yes, I'm an atheist... idiot

[metcalfracing]

So since dreams are more passive, I find that they are a good indicator of whether your core being has any sinful habits/behaviors. As you begin to grow and change, the actions you take in your dreams are good indicators of your progress. If you are kind and generous in your dreams than that virtue has become well integrated into your subconscious. I'm obligated to mention that the views and opinions held by this individual do not in any way reflect the views and opinions held by the majority of Dream Views subscribers and may be considered "loony", "nutty", or "just plain ignorant"... Dreams are the result of the Random firing of neurons inside your brain and your morality has no bearing on the content of your dreams, unless you are lucid... Thank you and please enjoy your movie...

[JustSoSick]

Actually yes, I'm an atheist... idiot Did I say anything else perhaps? I was pretending to be the angry fundie. idiot

[Kushna Mufeed]

Being Muslim, I go with the following hadith: Ibn Abbas said: A lunatic woman passed by Ali ibn AbuTalib. He then mentioned the rest of the tradition to the same effect as Uthman mentioned. This version has: Do you not remember that the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) has said: There are three whose actions are not recorded: a lunatic whose mind is deranged till he is restored to consciousness, a sleeper till he awakes, and a boy till he reaches puberty? So, the only question is whether or not being lucid constitutes being awake. Personally, I'd say no.

[metcalfracing]

Did I say anything else perhaps? I was pretending to be the angry fundie. idiot ah my bad, I though you were calling me out on my knowledge of the rules surrounding when one can perform a homo gang bang. Sorry bout that... idiot

[Idolfan]

Being Muslim, I go with the following hadith: So, the only question is whether or not being lucid constitutes being awake. Personally, I'd say no. HELL YEAH!

[ClassyElf]

idiots

[metcalfracing]

^ idiot

[grasshoppa]

Well, when you look at the teachings in grasshoppism it says that there is no such thing as sin. It is a barrier the mind creates due to imposed conditioning. So, I would say no, you cannot sin in your dreams, because you cannot sin in real life either. Don't put yourself down, enjoy the gangbang, you are not a sinner. Hail Eris.

[JustSoSick]

idiots idiots idiots idiots idiots!!

[Kushna Mufeed]

Actually yes, I'm an atheist... idiot Did I say anything else perhaps? I was pretending to be the angry fundie. idiot ah my bad, I though you were calling me out on my knowledge of the rules surrounding when one can perform a homo gang bang. Sorry bout that... idiot idiots ^ idiot idiots idiots idiots idiots idiots!! I love where this is going. Keep up the intelligent discussion guys.

[Rakjavik]

Being Muslim, I go with the following hadith: Quote: Ibn Abbas said: A lunatic woman passed by Ali ibn AbuTalib. He then mentioned the rest of the tradition to the same effect as Uthman mentioned. This version has: Do you not remember that the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) has said: There are three whose actions are not recorded: a lunatic whose mind is deranged till he is restored to consciousness, a sleeper till he awakes, and a boy till he reaches puberty? So, the only question is whether or not being lucid constitutes being awake. Personally, I'd say no. That's probably the most sense that I've heard from the hadith. I have to notice that you said a BOY until he reaches puberty. Does that not include girls?

[Kushna Mufeed]

Yes it does. The nature of the Arabic language is different. Usually when there is something said about men or boys, it'll apply to women as well.

[LUST]

well, for that you have to ask on simple question. Lucid or non-lucid? A big homo gangbang in your head is just as bad as any, so long as you CHOSE to participate. Non-lucid homo gangbangs are just attempts by the devil to pursuade you against god. To give proof of this.... You are considered an adulterer even if you only imagine it, same principle Jesus lusted or coveted for his disciples as in the Bible it says. Lusting and coveting is like desiring and longing. There is nothing wrong for Jesus to long for his disciples, wanted and planned an action to meet them. So it is alright in his mind to think of a way to meet them. In law, if you plot to murder someone, you are liable of that crime, if it can be proven. But you know you have already sinned the sin of murder when you hated so much as to plot. If you lust after a married woman and plot in your mind to have her, and because it is a sin to have sex with a married woman, a sin God called adultery, then you have committed adultery. Jesus is very clear about the sin, and know that those who tried to test him had had minds with plots for adultery, and He was giving it to them. The 'lust after' is actively directed at a clearly defined sin of adultery. That is why those testers started going away from Jesus after he commented on the sin. This principle is balance. Jesus lusted after non-sin relationship of meeting his disciples, his lusting was not related to and not sin. If however Jesus lusted after the power that Satan tempted him, then Jesus would have sinned. He turn Satan's offer away, and did not for a moment thought of a way to have it. Thinking, dreaming, fantasy, do not necessarily have the active plotting to get the object thought about. Fantasizing of bashing someone on the face with a car is not the same as plotting a murder. If one hates the brother so much as to plot a murder, he already committed the sin without actually doing it. If however he is tempted with the fantasy of murdering, he has not gone to the side of hating to a point of active plotting, and he can just say, that was a thought but no thanks. Therefore in dreams, I will not conclude the person has sinned, no matter what was dreamt about. However, if he wakes up and remembers the dream and starts to plot out how to make the dream come through of something that is clearly sinful, then he would have sinned. Therefore again, the real questions is, what are considered sin and what are not. For this, do not speculate, but simply read the Bible for a clearly defined list of sins that God calls abominations. Now if God does not clearly say an item in our world is sinful, please do not impose. For instance sex is not sin. Rape is sin. Rape is immorality. Do not use the word immorality for anything that is related to sex. By the way, temple prostitution is sin. Prostitution itself has never been called sin in the Bible. If you see the word Harlot, Whore, etc, they are always related to the idol-worship-whoredom, as clearly across the Bible as in Revelation relating to the great whore the satanic idolator-er and idol, anti-Christ. It refers to unfaithfulness to God to turn to worshiping of other gods. That is why idolatry and adultery are all lumped together as immorality. The sex itself is neutral. Food offered to idol is neutral too, but the worshiping of the idol, food or no food is sin. Contemporary conventional Christians simply accept some general preacher's reading of the word lust without getting deeper into the words and original meanings in Hebrew and Greek, and do not do justice to the Word, causing confusion for many. It was even worse in the earlier times when Catholics say sex is sin, and husband and wife can have sex only to made babies, no condoms. The teaching has never change, but today many contemporary Christian teaching teach that sex is not sin by itself. However, someday, they will also know that many types of sex are not sin, and some types of sex are definitely sin, listed by God clearly. Incest, bestiality, homosexuality, rape, temple prostitution, and only a few others; and it is a limited short list. Please do not simply call anything you are uncomfortable or not used to sexual sin if God did not say so. Your inhibition could be culturally tuned so differently from others; please do not impose on others. Some cannot take the look of bikinis, others are alright with them. Both not sin.

[JoannaB]

I think there are several differences to consider. lucid versus non-lucid is one. If the dream is lucid, it may be a conscious choice, whereas a non-lucid dream is not a choice. Can a non-lucid dream be sinful? I would argue a qualified no - qualified because if you dream of having sex with your neigbor's spouse, chances are high you actually desire her or him in real life, and the dream may reflect this desire, showing you your sin. However, a dream which is unconscious is often uninhibited and you cannot choose not to do it, if in waking life your free will is to not engage in sinful behavior and even sinful thought surely that counts, and then that ought to override/outweigh the sin of secretly deep down uninhibited desire. Also the dream may not be based on desire at all but it may be a moral lesson designed to shock one, and as long as upon waking up one still knows what would be right or wrong, and is shocked/disturbed, surely that is no sin but a reaffirmation of what is immoral versus moral. Even when lucid dreaming, I believe intensions count. A person who "kills" in a lucid dream knowing fully well that the dream character is not real and not actually intending to kill a human being, I believe such a person is not committing any more sin than if they were to rip up a paper representation of someone. And if the ripping up the paper representation or killing the not real dream character helps the person get rid of their anger at someone, so that in the end they are less likely to kill the real person in real life, and if then in waking life after having gotten rid of their anger they forgive their enemy. Surely then this was not sin. In contrast, if someone secretly desires to become a serial killer, but they first wish to perfect their technique in lucid dreams before killing anyone in real life. If this person is run over by a bus, before they actually killed anyone in waking life but with the full intension of doing so. I would say this person has sinned, even if in actual life they were a model citizen.

[anderj101]

Please don't necro-post in a 4+ year old thread.