Is being bisexual a sin?

Originally posted by Alliance
AHHH!

Someone finally found it. Romans 1:27.

1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Heres what I say to that.

1. Its clear the New Testement is full of hatred, jsut like the OT.
1.5. Off of that...the homosexuals are condemned to death. Get out your guns Christians!

2. Paul also explains that "the natural use" of women is to act as sexual objects for the pleasure of men.

Christians seem to convienently ignore that part. There was once a time when Heterosexuals were oppressed, Early Victorian Era...

BRB I will copy n paste info.

The Early Victorian Era, the Ideal was "True Love" a type of male-female romances that LACKED the aspect of sexuality. Sex was seen as a bad thing in general, sexual pleasure was a forbidden sin, and sex's only purpose was to pro create. They were not allowed to have sex for any other reason, and men and women were punished for even masturbating !

This occured between years 1820-1860.

Think about it for a second: Men and Women could not have sex in PEACE, they had the constant fear that what they were doing was demonic and they were taught to feel guilty for enjoying orgasms and sexual pleasure in general.

Any sex that occured without the intention OR result of pro creation not only warranted a "bad reputation" among men and women, but could have also gotten them punished by Law !

In the LATE Victorian Era, sex started to become defined differently. Over time the body began to be seen as something to gain pleasure from, instead of just something to create the next generation. "The Pursuit of Happiness" became the acceptable justification for embarking on sexual pleasure.

There was a time, a short time, where the erotic industy emerged and ALL KINDS of sexual explosions occured: "normal" sexual stimuli as well as "abnormal" or "kinki" sexual stimuli, all in the name of pleasure. There was no "natural" or standard" sex in this tiny era, sex was seen for pleasure.

Then the rise of Medical Doctors and Aristocratic influence began to define sexuality into a dichomoty: The Heterosexual and the Homosexual.

At first the Heterosexual was used to define a person who had sexual impulses for both sexes, and the Homosexual was meant to define a person "with the mentality of the opposite sex"

THEN, as scientific and religious debate occurred, Heterosexual began to be defined as a person who only desired the opposite sex....while homosexual was RE defined as a person who craved the SAME SEX...any person who was attracted to both sexes was labeled "psycho-sexual hermaphrodite" only to be called Bisexual about a century later.

Finally, due to religious and personal scientific bias, the idea of a "MASTER SEX" began to emerge. This occured after the idea of a "MASTER RACE" was shunned from social acceptance. To create a "Master Sex" was an easier way to keep one class down and the other upward, because sex is universal among all races.

Around 1901, the HETEROSEXUAL became the MASTER SEX, the privelaged, the "Norm". Different from the Victorian ideal, the one time "PERVERT" archetype became the "Healthy" ideal, and the Homosexual became the NEW PERVERT.

Side note:

In the EArly Victorian Era, Heterosexuality was not a term that yet existed, but the idea of a heterosexual....a man and woman having sex for the sake of pleasure was seen as disgusting.

The ideal was to be a NON-SEXUAL being. Due to religious justification, men and women were supposed to become "TRUE MEN" and "TRUE WOMEN", men and women who loved eachother WITHOUT Sexual encounter.

The only goal for sex was to pro-create, and even still it was looked down upon. If you had sex without bearing a child, you would be seen as unclean, ungodly, and susceptible to some sort of social punishment by Law !

Just so you bigots know that your "ideal" sexual orientation is NOT historically eternal or as powerful as you'd imagine it to have been.

It's not that Christian's ignore it, it depends on what type of Christian you are. A Fundamentalist Christian would certainly not ignore Romans, where as a Liberal Christian would take a more lighter approach to the subject, which is why Homosexuality has been allowed in the Church Of England

Heterosexuality is more power because it can have a lasting effect, children.
Homosexuality = gratification of sinful lust Romans 1:26-27.

God's will for marriage and sex = "be united to his WIFE, and they will become one flesh" Genesis 2:24.
Sin = against God's will, therefore, drumbeat, bisexuality = sin.

No. Any male can knock up a woman and have kids.

Any sexuality is about love.

All those passages clearly degrade women and show that they are nothing more than sexual objects. You can't pick and choose which parts of the bible you take literlly and which parts you dont.

"Any sexuality is about love."
Yes rapists are full of love and respect for the woman they are raping. You are messed if you think that.

"Clearly degrade women."
Wrong, in fact Romans 1:26 shows that women are less likely to commit these sins of perversion, therefore putting them, in some ways higher than man. And Genesis saying that they become united with their wife has no sexism in it whatsoever.

And ultimately:
God's will for marriage and sex = "be united to his WIFE, and they will become one flesh" Genesis 2:24.
Sin = against God's will, therefore, bisexuality = sin.

Originally posted by Nellinator
"Any sexuality is about love."
Yes rapists are full of love and respect for the woman they are raping. You are messed if you think that.

Originally posted by Nellinator
"Clearly degrade women."
Wrong, in fact Romans 1:26 shows that women are less likely to commit these sins of perversion, therefore putting them, in some ways higher than man. And Genesis saying that they become united with their wife has no sexism in it whatsoever.

Wake up and use the whole passage. ROMANS 1:27 "And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Woman are CLEARLY to be USED as sexual objects. They are nothing more.

Its also funny that you should say "women are less likely to commit these sins of perversion" as ROMANS 1:26 says 1:26 "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature"

This is the only reference to lesbianism in the bible, and clarly states teh oppostie of what you just claimed.

A matter of interpretation, and it is the only example of lesbianism that I can remember.

BTW, better translation is "In the same way men also abandoned natural relations with women...." not sexist. I don't know what you are trying to prove, but I definitely view women as my equals, even if they are different in many ways. God loves men and women the same and therefore, so must I.

😆 God hates women. Read the bible.

What am I trying to prove. The Bible is not to be taken literally, ESPECIALLY on social issues. A little thing happened called the Enlightenment....you must have mised that era.

I used the KJV of the Bible. I consider that to be the standard. You can rephrase it all you want. The point remains.

God did not hate women. Deborah was a women and one of the greatest judges in the OT. Figure that out. Also, Paul commends the faith of women and their affect on others' lives when he talks to Timothy of Timothy's mother and his grandmother. Jesus had many women in his following. God does not hate women. He created them in his image and therefore loves them.

😆 I give up. Pointless.

Originally posted by Nellinator
"Any sexuality is about love."
Yes rapists are full of love and respect for the woman they are raping. You are messed if you think that.

"Clearly degrade women."
Wrong, in fact Romans 1:26 shows that women are less likely to commit these sins of perversion, therefore putting them, in some ways higher than man. And Genesis saying that they become united with their wife has no sexism in it whatsoever.

And ultimately:
God's will for marriage and sex = "be united to his WIFE, and they will become one flesh" Genesis 2:24.
Sin = against God's will, therefore, bisexuality = sin.

I feel bad for you. It must be sad and frustrating having such a limited view of Life.

Your religious perspective leaves much to be questioned. You obviously have no idea what Homosexuality actually Is if you say that no love is involved, or that this kind of love is of any lesser value than Heterosexual love.

You should know that there was an era when Heterosexuality was considered sinful and disgusting.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Heterosexuality is more power because it can have a lasting effect, children.
Homosexuality = gratification of sinful lust Romans 1:26-27.

God's will for marriage and sex = "be united to his WIFE, and they will become one flesh" Genesis 2:24.
Sin = against God's will, therefore, drumbeat, bisexuality = sin.

WRONG 👇

FACT # 1- not all heterosexual couples want to have children, nor do they all have any. Many homosexual couples and singles WANT to adopt children. This throws your whole value of children idea in the garbage, so give it up.

Fact # 2- Homosexuality is just as lustful as heterosexuality, no less or no more. Lust is simply sexual desire, which is present in ALL Sexualities not just homo. Most gay and lesbian couples DO LOVE eachother, and sex is not the only issue involved.

It is self evident that your knowledge of Homosexuality and Bisexuality, and EVEN HETEROSEXUALITY is minimum.

Read a book...ask people questions..open your mind to knowledge before you go making close minded, ignorant, and FALSE statements the way you do now.

😆 👆

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
WRONG 👇

FACT # 1- not all heterosexual couples want to have children, nor do they all have any. Many homosexual couples and singles WANT to adopt children. This throws your whole value of children idea in the garbage, so give it up.

Fact # 2- Homosexuality is just as lustful as heterosexuality, no less or no more. Lust is simply sexual desire, which is present in ALL Sexualities not just homo. Most gay and lesbian couples DO LOVE eachother, and sex is not the only issue involved.

It is self evident that your knowledge of Homosexuality and Bisexuality, and EVEN HETEROSEXUALITY is minimum.

Read a book...ask people questions..open your mind to knowledge before you go making close minded, ignorant, and FALSE statements the way you do now.

Of course I realize that not all straight couples do not have children, but the ones that do have a lasting legacy in their descendants.

Homosexuals raising children is horribly wrong because it is in opposition to the teachings of the Bible. You may not like that, but that is the way it is for Christian believers. This is not close minded because the ultimate point is that homosexuality IS a sin whether you like or not. YOU do not choose what is a sin and what is not. God commanded us not to give into lust, which yes, many heterosexuals do (though not all), but every homosexual has according to Romans 1:26-27. Therefore a holy heterosexual life would involve no lust, only obedience to God and sex within marriage to one's wife who is a woman. Any other form of sex is a sin. Lust is a sin, and is why the Bible teaches that a wife, should never be picked on aesthtic value. You can choose not to believe the Bible and follow the ways that liberal humanism teach you and, therefore, make sin irrelevant to you, but in the end the truth does not change. The truth is this: God makes the rules and homosexuality is against his rules.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Of course I realize that not all straight couples do not have children, but the ones that do have a lasting legacy in their descendants.

Homosexuals raising children is horribly wrong because it is in opposition to the teachings of the Bible. You may not like that, but that is the way it is for Christian believers.

No. Normal Christians don't take the bible literally.

What is wrong is spreading hate out of ignorance.

Real Christians take the Bible as it was meant to be interpretated.

God's commands are very literal, other words are not always. This is an important understanding that must be reached.

Liberal Christians who disregard the very teachings that make them Christians don't take the Bible literally. This is ignorance of their heritage and identity. These people will judged more harshly than non-believers on Judgement Day. True Christians are not normal. They are called to a better way of life that is pleasing to God.

Hate? There was no hate. You just ignored my last paragraph. Hatred is much different rebuking and instructing in righteousness. I try not hate or judge homosexuals and if I do I am sorry and repent. In fact I hate lying and unfaithfulness [marital and otherwise] far more than I hate homosexuality because they cause hurt and pain like homosexuality never can or will. Notice that I hate the act not the person. This is also an important understanding that must be reached.

To the OP:

No, just as homosexuality in and of itself is not a sin (where 'homosexuality' refers to same-sex attraction versus the homosexual lifestyle).

Hate? There was no hate. You just ignored my last paragraph. Hatred is much different rebuking and instructing in righteousness. I try not hate or judge homosexuals and if I do I am sorry and repent. In fact I hate lying and unfaithfulness [marital and otherwise] far more than I hate homosexuality because they cause hurt and pain like homosexuality never can or will. Notice that I hate the act not the person. This is also an important understanding that must be reached.

My good sir, you deserve a cookie. Taken the words right out of my mouth, you have.

Real People realize that there are many ways to interpret even literal statements.

"Commands" Tell me...is your shirt made from two different type of threads?

Just because people are more "liberal" than you does not mean they are Liberal. You are totally right...."true" (though amazingly you consider yourself one) Christians are NOT normal.

I did not ignore your pareagraph. God does not make rules. Go di not write that book. You hate an judge constantly and unlike how you percieve your god to be, I am not "ever patient" and "all forgiving." You say you dont' hate and say you hate something the next fricking sentance. Please. You are all over the place. Homosexuality is a lifestyle...no different than atheism. You hate nonbelievers...but not homosexuals? Yout cant hate a defining aspect of a person and not the person themselves.