GhostWriter16
Deity
Not out of spite, as punishment for the Fall.
Look, I know you don't like Evangelical theology. I get that already.
Look, I know you don't like Evangelical theology. I get that already.
Ask an Evangelical IV
- Thread starter GhostWriter16
- Start date
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
And now Science has armed women to defeat this holy curse!
Science & women 1 : God 0
Science & women 1 : God 0
GhostWriter16
Deity
The childbearing pain wasn't a command of "Don't make this better", it was just a punishment. It would never have been that way, ever, had it not been for the Fall.
I'd be interested to see a hypothesis on how Eve would have given birth painlessly, given that everything we now about human anatomy suggests that childbirth has always been difficult and painful.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Yeah, that's what I mean.
If there hadn't been any Science, women would still be facing God's punishment. Science "made it better". "It" being "removing the pain so lovingly bestowed on women by God".
It's like being grounded, sneaking out and waving at your parents through the window.
GhostWriter16
Deity
That's irrelevant to a pre-Fall world.
Different endorphin levels
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Not so. As I mentioned earlier, the phenomenon of pain arises from the brain's interpretation of sensory stimuli, not from the stimuli themselves. The same stimulus can be interpreted as either pain or pleasure. There are many documented cases of modern childbirths where no drugs were used and the woman reported feeling no pain. When a woman has the right mindset and the proper hormone/endorphin levels, then childbirth is an entirely enjoyable experience. The contractions of labor are fundamentally the same as the contractions of a powerful orgasm, and can be experienced as such.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
You may be right (I honestly have no idea). But I wouldn't let a woman hear you say so, if I was you.
As for re-interpreting your own pain as pleasure - good luck. It's certainly worth a try. But the obverse would also have to be true. So that's a bit of a bummer.
You'd be stuck in some perpetual no-man's land of exquisite agony and painful delight.
As for re-interpreting your own pain as pleasure - good luck. It's certainly worth a try. But the obverse would also have to be true. So that's a bit of a bummer.
You'd be stuck in some perpetual no-man's land of exquisite agony and painful delight.
IMO, it doesn't really matter. There're only a few subtle tweaks - which would be scientifically invisible - for ancient women to have no experienced pain during childbirth. The story raises other, more important, questions regarding the Evangelical view of God. Why allow Satan to run amok? Why punish the offspring for the sins of the parents? These are more "Problem of Evil" type questions, but need to be specifically addressed if one believes Genesis to be fairly accurate.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
Does not the free market system also give men an escape clause? It seems that those who accept there is no God, do so from an angle that God is a monster. I can accept that God gives life and takes it away, but not that he is constantly out to do me harm. There is a difference. One can always feel at odds to God, and that makes me sad.
It seems from the Biblical account that Eve was formed different from all other females of that age. She was taken from Adam. That probably already pre-disposed her to the biological condition to have pain. From a physiological view, there are some women who cannot even carry a child to term, much less use a birth canal. Even in this condition there are some who have no pain in childbirth today. I don't think that a woman would lie about that fact, but then again, I am not a woman.
Satan is still running amok today, what is your point? Some people are are able to resist him and others are not. That has always been the theological division, that even a perfect human can make the wrong choice. To avoid that would be to take away all choices and everything would be pre-determined.
Adam's choice did not punish all offspring, that would be fatalism. 1500 years after Adam made that choice, it was the evil imagination of mankind that that once again changed human history. Adam had nothing to do with that. Every human has the ability to change history, even in harmful ways. There have only been a small percentage of humans who have attempted to change the way humans do things. We would not even have science if humans had not stepped up and went against the status quo.
How can one deny that firearms were needed for human survival at one point in time. Now it seems they are a curse for some individuals, who use them for evil intent. Can we justly condemn the men who invented them, or the people who misuse them?
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
No, that is not what it seems like, since you've been told many times it's because of lack of evidence.
The would-be God being a monster is just making the decision very reassuring.
It's a 'why question'? The question of "why allow Satan to run amok?" is similar to the question "why allow a rapid pitbull into a school yard?" It strains the definition of goodness.
The conversation was regarding the pain of childbirth, which I believe is something that continues to exist today. Accepting the sacrifice of Jesus does very little to hinder the pain of childbirth.
This point allows us to perform a 'natural experiment'! Do women who have accepted Jesus Christ and the other two gods as their personal savior and yadda yadda yadda suffer less pain or complications in childbirth than the heathen women who have never been introduced to the Word of God and Light of The World?
I'm guessing the answer is a big, fat, painful, and sometimes deadly, NO.
Let's prove me wrong, Evangelicals! Show me the data that your gods are either more or less influential regarding the births of your children.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
The blessings of God fall on the just and the unjust. There would be no way to single out any one particular social culture that is "more blessed". There is a people group, that has that potential, but a relationship with God is a personal choice outside of culture, not one dictated by culture. Ziggy has already pointed out that science trumps God, but that does not negate an evangelical from using science to make life easier. If people do not use the tools that God has provided, including scientific advancements, they are as foolish as those who deny that God exist. BTW, IMO, there is a difference in denying God and lacking a knowledge of God. I don't think that one can deny something they are lacking knowledge in.
You may get your chance one day to be proven wrong, but in the age of grace, being proven wrong takes just as much faith as being proven right. We were warned that people would be constantantly seeking after knowledge but never satisfied with the knowledge they do have.
bestrfcplayer
Steppin' up!
For GW: what is your opinion on the Roman Catholic teaching that everybody has a chance to get into heaven, or just those who believe in the Christian God.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
After a year, it seems that this question was forgotten.
Everybody has a chance to get to heaven. It would seem to me that even Catholics accept that there is only one God. If a person does not accept there is a God, then they have convinced themselves that a chance does not even exist. The Catholics believe that praying for someone even after death, gives that person a chance. But that does not have any thing to do with the dead person's belief system.
Calvinist and perhaps others believe that there are only a limited amount of people pre-destined by God that will go to heaven.
Jehoshua
Catholic
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 7,248
Catholic teaching also states the necessity of baptism and the sacraments for salvation* that outside of the Church there is no salvation and emphasises the fewness of those who end up being saved (Catholic or otherwise) as expressed in this sermon which was spoken by St Leonard. Everyone has a chance to get to heaven only inasmuch as they accept the graces offered by the Lord that lead them to conversion and no one is predestined from the moment of their existence to go to hell (since the Saviour desires that all men be saved)
Also the Catholic Church timtofly does not teach that praying for people after death "gives them a chance" to be saved. The Church teaches that a souls personal judgement happens immediately after their physical death. Prayer for the faithful departed is considered useful only for those in purgatory (those who are saved already, but are undergoing purification before they can enter the perfection of the beatific vision) to hasten their purification through the merciful conciliation of the Lord. Prayer for those in hell is of course utterly futile as is made clear in scripture (which is why prayer for the dead is to "the faithful departed'), albeit no one on earth can know whether any individual is damned or not with certainty.
-
*"If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema (excommunicated)." (Council of Trent, Session 7)
Also the Catholic Church timtofly does not teach that praying for people after death "gives them a chance" to be saved. The Church teaches that a souls personal judgement happens immediately after their physical death. Prayer for the faithful departed is considered useful only for those in purgatory (those who are saved already, but are undergoing purification before they can enter the perfection of the beatific vision) to hasten their purification through the merciful conciliation of the Lord. Prayer for those in hell is of course utterly futile as is made clear in scripture (which is why prayer for the dead is to "the faithful departed'), albeit no one on earth can know whether any individual is damned or not with certainty.
-
*"If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema (excommunicated)." (Council of Trent, Session 7)
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
Then Catholics do not teach that every one has a chance, seeing as how there is the need for baptism. If one is in purgatory then they do not need prayers either, that is what the "suffering" is for. You seem to indicate that prayers do not provide a better chance at all.
So, most protestants are the only one's who teach or believe that every one has a chance. It would seem that Catholics are as exclusive as Calvinist.
So, most protestants are the only one's who teach or believe that every one has a chance. It would seem that Catholics are as exclusive as Calvinist.
