They shall be saved through child bearing.

Recently, Red Pill truths have put marriage through the ringer as a bed trap.  But there is a little silhouette of hope at the end of the hallway.

Readership: All

Men shall be saved through child bearing

Matthew Cochran at The 96th Thesis wrote a highly controversial post, The Golden Rule Means Having Kids (April 18, 2019), which appeared later on The Federalist, You’re Not Following The Golden Rule If You’re Not Having Children (April 30, 2019).

Basically, he argues that ideally, being obedient to God requires a Christian man to put a white Cross bun in the oven.

hot cross buns

He writes,

“…the growing masses of people who refuse family are not being celibate. They’re fornicating. They’re jerking off to porn every night. They’re constantly falling to temptation – the precise situation for which Paul actually commands marriage rather than celibacy.”

“Whether we admit it or not, the choice we face is this: Do we take the millennia of love that were poured out on us and consume every last drop until it’s gone? Or do we pay it forward by continuing to pass that love along to future generations?

Only one of those choices conforms to the Golden Rule.  Choose wisely.”

Matthew’s article garnered over 400 comments, and got so much kickback that he wrote a follow up article, Answering Some Objections About the Golden Rule (May 1, 2019), which addressed some of the more egregious protestations.

Being a father myself, I tend to agree with Matthew’s Thesis.

Aside from Vagina Worship, we all know how marriage domesticates men.

Perennial Poon is a Prodigious Pacifier.

That’s why God gave woman two mammary glands – one for baby, and one for hubby.

Women shall be saved through child bearing

“Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.” ~ 1st Timothy 2:15 (NKJV)

I’ve always wondered what this verse means.

Pastor Paul Carter at The Gospel Coalition explains three main interpretations of this passage.

  1. Many Roman Catholics interpret it in an allegorical sense. Women (like men) will be saved because Mary “bore” Jesus. Thus we are all saved by the child born to the woman.
  2. Among Protestants who tend to avoid allegorical interpretations, it is common to understand “save” in the fuller sense of the word which includes justification, sanctification and glorification and to focus in verse 15 on the sense of sanctification. Thus women are generally sanctified in the context of child rearing.  Few who have had children would argue with that.
  3. The most grammatically appealing option is to understand Paul as saying that women are “saved from deception” by properly valuing the domestic sphere. That seems to be the meaning that makes the best sense of the immediate context.  Paul has just said that Eve was deceived, now he says that the daughters of Eve will be saved from deception by properly valuing the domestic sphere and continuing on in faith, love and holiness with self-control.

As a Protestant, I’m always suspicious of allegorical interpretations that seem at odds with their immediate context and therefore, I tend to favour more straight forward readings of the Biblical text.  While I admit the possibility and practical reality of option 2, option 3 seems to be the most common sense reading of the passage.  Paul is saying that women are kept safe from deception when they embrace the roles that God gave them, when they properly value and esteem the domestic sphere and when they continue on in faith, love and self-control.

Amen, brother!

There’s this passage in Malachi, indicating that God wants more decent people on the earth.

“But did He not make them one,
Having a remnant of the Spirit?
And why one?
He seeks godly offspring.
Therefore take heed to your spirit,
And let none deal treacherously with the wife of his youth.” ~ Malachi 2:15 (NKJV)

29816663-mother-and-baby-kissing-and-hugging-mom-with-her-child

Then I came across this article. Now science has produced an answer!

Scientific American (feat. Catherine Caruso): Pregnancy Causes Lasting Changes in a Woman’s Brain (December 19, 2016)

“A research team at Autonomous University of Barcelona, led by neuroscientist Elseline Hoekzema of Leiden University, performed brain scans on first-time mothers before and after pregnancy and found significant gray matter changes in brain regions associated with social cognition and theory of mind — the same regions that were activated when women looked at photos of their infants. These changes, which were still present two years after birth, predicted women’s scores on a test of maternal attachment, and were so clear that a computer algorithm could use them to identify which women had been pregnant.”

So, the brains of mothers are fundamentally different from the brains of childless women! Somehow, I’m not surprised. So what is affected?

Social cognition is a level of analysis that aims to understand social psychological phenomena by investigating the cognitive processes that underlie them. The major concerns of the approach are the processes involved in the perception, judgment, and memory of social stimuli; the effects of social and affective factors on information processing; and the behavioral and interpersonal consequences of cognitive processes.

Theory of mind (often abbreviated ToM) is the ability to attribute mental states — beliefs, intents, desires, pretending, knowledge, etc. — to oneself and others and to understand that others have beliefs, desires, intentions, and perspectives that are different from one’s own.

Could motherhood be a natal blow to female solipsism?

“One of the hallmarks of pregnancy is an enormous increase in sex steroid hormones such as progesterone and estrogen, which help a woman’s body prepare for carrying a child. There is only one other time when our bodies produce similarly large quantities of these hormones: puberty. Previous research has shown that during puberty these hormones cause dramatic structural and organizational changes in the brain. Throughout adolescence both boys and girls lose gray matter as the brain connections they don’t need are pruned, and their brains are sculpted into their adult form. […]”

Being pregnant feels like puberty?!? Well I’ll be a son of a mother!

mutant puberty

Puberty is a period of development in which every day life comes to Life. Every petty event exudes a dramatic flair for the marvelousness of living, and decades later, one can still remember the majestic joys of common objects. Is it no wonder that our beliefs, personalities, and tastes are forever locked into the “time we came of age”?

I see a window of opportunity here to restructure a woman’s mind while she is in a dependent state.

“Hoekzema and her colleagues performed detailed anatomical brain scans on a group of women who were trying to get pregnant for the first time. The 25 women who got pregnant were rescanned soon after they gave birth; 11 of them were scanned two years after that. (For comparison, the researchers also scanned men and women who were not trying to have a child as well as first-time fathers). […]”

I was intensely interested in knowing whether women’s brains changed to the same degree if they had obtained an abortion, but there was no mention of this.

“The researchers found that the new mothers experienced gray matter reductions that lasted for at least two years after birth. This loss, however, is not necessarily a bad thing (according to Hoekzema, “the localization was quite remarkable”); it occurred in brain regions involved in social cognition, particularly in the network dedicated to theory of mind, which helps us think about what is going on in someone else’s mind — regions that had the strongest response when mothers looked at photos of their infants. These brain changes could also be used to predict how mothers scored on the attachment scale. In fact, researchers were able to use a computer algorithm to identify which women were new mothers based solely on their patterns of gray matter loss. Gray matter loss was not seen in new fathers or nonparents.”

In other words, it crimps and rewires their socialization processing. From an evo-psych perspective, this bashes the Hive Mind, and reformulates her focus on her new responsibilities as a mother. It might also explain why many women experience post-partum depression – they no longer have the skill and aptitude to navigate their social networks deftly enough to garner those endorphine charged perks of inclusion and affirmation (AKA Idolatry Withdrawal Syndrome).

The most important tenet of attachment theory is that an infant needs to develop a relationship with at least one primary caregiver for the child’s successful social and emotional development, and in particular for learning how to effectively regulate their feelings. This bonding has a direct effect on the child’s future ability to trust and empathize with others.

In case you haven’t yet guessed, the term “Son of a B!tch” has real meaning.

“It is not entirely clear why women lose gray matter during pregnancy, but Hoekzema thinks it may be because their brains are becoming more specialized in ways that will help them adapt to motherhood and respond to the needs of their babies.”

Egg-sackly!

But in addition to the evo-psych explanation, their brains are also becoming more specialized in ways that will improve their worthiness from the spiritual and marital standpoints as well – becoming less selfish, less solipsistic, more emotionally attached, more humble, more empathetic, and more fresh and randy too. In short, more of what Jesus wants for her sanctification, and what baby-daddy needs to retain sanity.

“happy, faithful, grateful, joyful, intelligent, emotionally mature, respectful, reliable, trustworthy wife = happy life

tom selleck baby bottle

Tom Selleck stars in Three Men and a Baby (1987).

“They shall be saved through child bearing.”

Men and women both! It all makes sense now.

Related

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Decision Making, Discernment, Wisdom, Holding Frame, Models of Success, Organization and Structure, Purpose, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Stewardship, The Power of God and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to They shall be saved through child bearing.

  1. blairnaso says:

    Yet she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and love and holiness with propriety. – 1 Timothy 2:15

    Therefore, just as the power which destroys what is born is begotten along with physical birth, so it is clear that the Spirit bestows a lifegiving power upon those born through it. What, then, can be deduced from what we have said? That separating ourselves from life in the flesh, which death normally follows upon, we may seek a kind of life which does not have death as its consequence. This is the spiritual significance of the life of virginity. That this is true will be clearer if we explain a little further. Everyone knows that the function of bodily union is the creation of mortal bodies. But life and incorruptibility are born to those who remain united in their participation in the Spirit. It is not having children as such that is important but this spiritual regeneration. Excellent is the apostolic saying about this, that the mother blessed with such children “will be saved by childbearing,” just as the psalmist utters in the divine hymns, “He establishes in her home the barren wife as the joyful mother of children.”

    Gregory of Nyssa

    Childbearing makes a woman be selfless, and selflessness causes humility, and only the humble can be saved. Therefore, women are literally saved through childbearing (though there are of course other ways).

    There’s a really good Chrysostom quote on this I’ll have to provide later.

    Like

  2. blairnaso says:

    Chrysostom:

    http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/230609.htm

    But how was Adam not deceived? If he was not deceived, he did not then transgress? Attend carefully. The woman said, The serpent beguiled me. But the man did not say, The woman deceived me, but, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. Now it is not the same thing to be deceived by a fellow-creature, one of the same kind, as by an inferior and subordinate animal. This is truly to be deceived. Compared therefore with the woman, he is spoken of as not deceived. For she was beguiled by an inferior and subject, he by an equal. Again, it is not said of the man, that he saw the tree was good for food, but of the woman, and that she did eat, and gave it to her husband: so that he transgressed, not captivated by appetite, but merely from the persuasion of his wife. The woman taught once, and ruined all. On this account therefore he says, let her not teach. But what is it to other women, that she suffered this? It certainly concerns them; for the sex is weak and fickle, and he is speaking of the sex collectively. For he says not Eve, but the woman, which is the common name of the whole sex, not her proper name. Was then the whole sex included in the transgression for her fault? As he said of Adam, After the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come Romans 5:14; so here the female sex transgressed, and not the male. Shall not women then be saved? Yes, by means of children. For it is not of Eve that he says, If they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. What faith? What charity? What holinesswith sobriety? It is as if he had said, You women, be not cast down, because your sex has incurred blame. God has granted you another opportunity of salvation, by the bringing up of children, so that you are saved, not only by yourselves, but by others. See how many questions are involved in this matter. The woman,he says, being deceived was in the transgression.What woman? Eve. Shall she then be saved by child-bearing? He does not say that, but, the race of women shall be saved. Was not it then involved in transgression? Yes, it was, still Eve transgressed, but the whole sex shall be saved, notwithstanding, by childbearing. And why not by their own personal virtue? For has she excluded others from this salvation? And what will be the case with virgins, with the barren, with widows who have lost their husbands, before they had children? will they perish? Is there no hope for them? Yet virgins are held in the highest estimation. What then does he mean to say?

    Some interpret his meaning thus. As what happened to the first woman occasioned the subjection of the whole sex, (for since Eve was formed second and made subject, he says, let the rest of the sex be in subjection,) so because she transgressed, the rest of the sex are also in transgression. But this is not fair reasoning; for at the creation all was the gift of God, but in this case, it is the consequence of the woman’s sin. But this is the amount of what he says. As all men died through one, because that one sinned, so the whole female race transgressed, because the woman was in the transgression. Let her not however grieve. God has given her no small consolation, that of childbearing. And if it be said that this is of nature, so is that also of nature; for not only that which is of nature has been granted, but also the bringing up of children. If they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety; that is, if after childbearing, they keep them in charity and purity. By these means they will have no small reward on their account, because they have trained up wrestlers for the service of Christ. By holiness he means good life, modesty, and sobriety.

    Like

    • Sharkly says:

      Now it is not the same thing to be deceived by a fellow-creature, one of the same kind, as by an inferior and subordinate animal.

      I personally believe she is a fellow creature, yet still created both inferior and subordinate. She is the lesser and subordinated of this kind of creature. Created as a second class of the same creature for the benefit of the first of the class, which was created as the image and glory of God, while the woman is just the glory of man.(1 Corinthians 11) The fellow creatures are not equal, here on earth, as God created them, they are just both heirs of God’s grace, and are both to eventually be conformed more towards the image of Christ. But for now, the husband is already the image of Christ, while the wife is the image of His church.(Ephesians 5) However both should, currently, endeavor to be holy and righteous like Christ, while each having separate roles, to present different images, one the lesser and secondary, one superior and preeminent, one to be subject, one to have dominion.

      In God’s eternal kingdom things may be different:
      Luke 13:30 And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.

      But for now each is to fulfill their purpose, and maintain their intended place.

      Like

  3. Pingback: A New Perspective on Mother’s Day -Christian families 100+ Years Down the Road | All Things Bright and Beautiful

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s