Epidural/Medication Being Viewed as Sinful in the Eyes of Some Believers

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jonathan95

Puritan Board Sophomore
I know a few Christians who are against certain types of meds from Aspirin to Xanax to Epidural. I've heard plenty of arguments against the use of these things but recently I was told by a friend that Epidural, in particular, should be seen as wrong due to trying to subvert the curse that God has put on the woman. And then it was mentioned that even the puritans were against dulling the pain of a woman in birth? I've never seen a source for that. What's the general history of anti-medication thought in Christian circles? How is it changing or evolving? How has it remained essentially the same over the years. Just curious about the topic is all.

Thanks,
Jonathan
 
All I can say is that appeal to nature can be a fallacy. It certainly is in this case.
 
Last edited:
Yes, let's make them women hurt as much as possible during childbirth because they deserve it due to Eve.

Every toothache is also due to the Fall, so those awful Dentists are just fighting God, too. Even Beano is a devious plot to undo the effects of mankind's Fall into sin. Christians should never take Beano.
 
What I am about to say is going to sound arrogant. I don't mean it to be. It might offend some people. I do intend that. This is one of the reasons I read a lot. While I don't think I am that smart, one of the benefits of being knowledgeable is that if some weirdo comes to you with an idea like that, and tries to guilt trip you, you can tell him where to get off.
 
I know a few Christians who are against certain types of meds from Aspirin to Xanax to Epidural. I've heard plenty of arguments against the use of these things but recently I was told by a friend that Epidural, in particular, should be seen as wrong due to trying to subvert the curse that God has put on the woman. And then it was mentioned that even the puritans were against dulling the pain of a woman in birth? I've never seen a source for that. What's the general history of anti-medication thought in Christian circles? How is it changing or evolving? How has it remained essentially the same over the years. Just curious about the topic is all.

Thanks,
Jonathan
I suppose by the same logic, it would be sinful for a farmer to use a tractor or combine, since it reduces the toil in working the ground.
 
Anyone claiming that pain relief is sinful should cite chapter and verse why it is sinful. If they cannot do so then we may assume it is not sinful and is therefore left up to the believer whether to take pain relievers or not. I would note though that Proverbs 31:6 says to give strong drink to those perishing, which implies that pain relief is not forbidden.
 
That is simply idiotic. There are a lot of dumb people, including Christians, in this world. Doesn't mean you should treat him (I am assuming the friend is a he, based on what was said...lol) any differently, but I'd take what this guy says with a grain of salt.
 
I will go a step further and say that it is not only okay to alleviate pain, but it is anti-gospel to say we should not.

The gospel declares that Jesus overcomes the curse for us. He has taken the pain so we don't have to. In his wisdom, we still live for a while in this world and are still subject to many of its pains. But he graciously provides some reliefs from those pains already in this life, and his larger purpose is all about saving us from those pains. To say we should willingly endure more of those pains than necessary just for the sake of pain is a slap in the face to our Savior, whose design for us is in the other direction. Sure, we often willingly endure many pains for godly purposes like a Christian witness, but pain for pain's sake is no different from self-flagellation. It means a person is unwilling to accept the redemption Jesus has won for them.

Besides, if you forbid your wife from getting an epidural, or even if you only discourage it to the point where she decides against it, she will curse you when she gets near the end of her labor. Yes, you can be sure she will curse you loudly and mercilessly. You don't need that. (My wife had epidurals when our kids were born. To this day, she speaks more fondly of the anesthesiologists than she does of me—and I was fully on board with her getting the medication.)
 
To follow on Jack's reply, we see Jesus directly intervening in the physical woes of the people he encounters, even to the point of raising the dead. Be merciful. (And yes, I've heard this argument before. It started when pain relief during birth was developing in the mid-1800s, about the same time as the holiness movement and other aberrant doctrines.)
 
Not only that, but men should never work in air conditioning either, because the curse mandated we must toil by the sweat of our brow. :rolleyes:
 
What's the general history of anti-medication thought in Christian circles?

Well, as for John Calvin:

If we regard the Spirit of God as the sole fountain of truth, we shall neither reject the truth itself, nor despise it wherever it shall appear, unless we wish to dishonor the Spirit of God. For by holding the gifts of the Spirit in slight esteem, we contemn and reproach the Spirit himself. What then? Shall we deny that the truth shone upon the ancient jurists who established civic order and discipline with such great equity? Shall we say that the philosophers were blind in their fine observation and artful description of nature? Shall we say that those men were devoid of understanding who conceived the art of disputation and taught us to speak reasonably? Shall we say that they are insane who developed medicine, devoting their labor to our benefit? But shall we count anything praiseworthy or noble without recognizing at the same time that it comes from God? Let us be ashamed of such ingratitude... (Institutes, 2.2.15)​
 
What I am about to say is going to sound arrogant. I don't mean it to be. It might offend some people. I do intend that. This is one of the reasons I read a lot. While I don't think I am that smart, one of the benefits of being knowledgeable is that if some weirdo comes to you with an idea like that, and tries to guilt trip you, you can tell him where to get off.
I’d tell him the same thing and I’m bone ignorant!
 
Not only that, but men should never work in air conditioning either, because the curse mandated we must toil by the sweat of our brow. :rolleyes:
Right. Talk about curse. Some, like me, sweat on relatively cool days while sedentary.
 
There's another aspect to this - not an explicit condemnation of pain-relief measures, but a glorification of "all-natural" childbirth, combined with a competitive spirit between women, with some looking down on others in various subtle ways for being "less of a woman" if epidurals, pitocin, hospitals, C-sections, etc. are involved.
 
Back in Puritan days people used laudanum, made from opium, for pain. I would assume if they were against using it in childbirth it may be that the babies were born sluggish or limp or in some way not healthy and normal.

Back when I had my four babies all natural, twice I wanted an epidural. At that time it was a common consensus that epidurals slowed labor and were potentially bad for the baby and the doctors urged me to suffer and not risk any harm to the baby. So I suffered. But the babies pushed out quickly and were perky and just fine, and it is true that you forget the pain for joy that a baby has been born.

Studies today are conflicted about if epidurals slow labor, and they can give pitocin now when a women has an epidural to speed up contractions. But you may hear opinions against things that are rooted in the idea that it is better to suffer than to risk harm to a baby. I agree with that if at all possible. Suffering unnecessarily is certainly not required to submit to the curse ( Jesus took all the curse upon himself. Would your friend get a cavity filled and not submit to the curse of decay that lies upon the world?) But I know Christian women who chose the bottle of formula over breastfeeding despite all the evidence of how much better Mama's milk is. That is not putting the well being of the baby first. Women these days can be very self centered. Its a matter of conscience, but first and foremost should be the well being of those around us, especially your baby.

Xanax......I took it once before a real bad root canal on doctors orders so I would be relaxed. I was so tense at the first visit. Amazing little pill- I was so loopy I felt like he could pull all my teeth out and I wouldn't care. Is that a good way to be? The command to be sober for the purpose of prayer....can you obey that on xanax? Not me, I was higher than I ever got on my pre salvation days smoking pot. Agonizing pain? Well, maybe if it comes to that, but as little as possible until recovery. Mental and emotional problems? Use it to keep from jumping off a bridge on the way to serious counseling if you must, but it should be a stop gap measure while dealing ruthlessly with heart and mind issues. Just my opinion.

My youngest sister had two dead babies...modern word of faith teaching and if you have faith you will confess that Jesus healed you and never turn to medicine or doctors. Its a cult, and they feel superior. Most of them eventually go through something and soften, but not always. I very much doubt the Puritans were "off" though, I would guess it was their observations that opium and alcohol are bad for babies.
 
Back in Puritan days people used laudanum, made from opium, for pain. I would assume if they were against using it in childbirth it may be that the babies were born sluggish or limp or in some way not healthy and normal.

Back when I had my four babies all natural, twice I wanted an epidural. At that time it was a common consensus that epidurals slowed labor and were potentially bad for the baby and the doctors urged me to suffer and not risk any harm to the baby. So I suffered. But the babies pushed out quickly and were perky and just fine, and it is true that you forget the pain for joy that a baby has been born.

Studies today are conflicted about if epidurals slow labor, and they can give pitocin now when a women has an epidural to speed up contractions. But you may hear opinions against things that are rooted in the idea that it is better to suffer than to risk harm to a baby. I agree with that if at all possible. Suffering unnecessarily is certainly not required to submit to the curse ( Jesus took all the curse upon himself. Would your friend get a cavity filled and not submit to the curse of decay that lies upon the world?) But I know Christian women who chose the bottle of formula over breastfeeding despite all the evidence of how much better Mama's milk is. That is not putting the well being of the baby first. Women these days can be very self centered. Its a matter of conscience, but first and foremost should be the well being of those around us, especially your baby.

Xanax......I took it once before a real bad root canal on doctors orders so I would be relaxed. I was so tense at the first visit. Amazing little pill- I was so loopy I felt like he could pull all my teeth out and I wouldn't care. Is that a good way to be? The command to be sober for the purpose of prayer....can you obey that on xanax? Not me, I was higher than I ever got on my pre salvation days smoking pot. Agonizing pain? Well, maybe if it comes to that, but as little as possible until recovery. Mental and emotional problems? Use it to keep from jumping off a bridge on the way to serious counseling if you must, but it should be a stop gap measure while dealing ruthlessly with heart and mind issues. Just my opinion.

My youngest sister had two dead babies...modern word of faith teaching and if you have faith you will confess that Jesus healed you and never turn to medicine or doctors. Its a cult, and they feel superior. Most of them eventually go through something and soften, but not always. I very much doubt the Puritans were "off" though, I would guess it was their observations that opium and alcohol are bad for babies.
I just told my wife that at least one of us was having an epidural. That settled it.
 
@Jonathan95 - If I were Pentecostal, I'd probably get a 'word of knowledge' that your friend is male. Is that correct?

There weren't many pain killers available to the Puritans. The opium trade with China was probably 100 years out, although it was beginning to appear in Europe in the 1600s (Morphine wasn't extracted until the 1800s. Anesthesia was a couple of hundred years away. Modern pain killers such as Bayer's aspirin and heroin were another 50 years beyond that. Available in the Puritan era would have been alcohol, willow bark, and maybe hemp.
 
@Jonathan95 - If I were Pentecostal, I'd probably get a 'word of knowledge' that your friend is male. Is that correct?

There weren't many pain killers available to the Puritans. The opium trade with China was probably 100 years out, although it was beginning to appear in Europe in the 1600s (Morphine wasn't extracted until the 1800s. Anesthesia was a couple of hundred years away. Modern pain killers such as Bayer's aspirin and heroin were another 50 years beyond that. Available in the Puritan era would have been alcohol, willow bark, and maybe hemp.
Sir, you would be a false prophet! It was actually a female haha.
 
I'm in whole hearted agreement with what everyone has posted thus far.

Does anyone see any similarities among Christians who are anti-medicine (i.e. aspirin, epidural, xanax, etc.) and those who are anti-vaccine (i.e. flu, COVID, etc.)?
 
I suppose by the same logic, it would be sinful for a farmer to use a tractor or combine, since it reduces the toil in working the ground.

I will go a step further and say that it is not only okay to alleviate pain, but it is anti-gospel to say we should not.

The gospel declares that Jesus overcomes the curse for us. He has taken the pain so we don't have to. In his wisdom, we still live for a while in this world and are still subject to many of its pains. But he graciously provides some reliefs from those pains already in this life, and his larger purpose is all about saving us from those pains. To say we should willingly endure more of those pains than necessary just for the sake of pain is a slap in the face to our Savior, whose design for us is in the other direction. Sure, we often willingly endure many pains for godly purposes like a Christian witness, but pain for pain's sake is no different from self-flagellation. It means a person is unwilling to accept the redemption Jesus has won for them.
Exactly! Good to see this connection to the Gospel was brought up. By that same logic then that Paul refers to, you would have to reject Jesus too since his purpose is to subvert the curse (or bring about its reversal; too early in the morning for me to know if that's the same meaning as subvert; it seems to carry a different connotation). It is just sad to see how many are taught incorrectly and it gives the non-believing world more reason to reject Bible-based Christianity (because of the foolishness brought out in these teachings, not the foolishness of the cross).

Just had the idea that these people who teach this may not understand God's absolute Sovereignty. They may see these modern comforts as evil somehow and deceptions from Satan. Not sure why they would see it that way except perhaps to associate temporal comfort with spiritual dullness, as is often (almost always it would seem) the case. If this is where they are in their line of thinking, it is too bad that the merciful gifts of the Lord are abused by us all. Still, the correct way to view modern comforts is as a gift from the Lord, and all and every such gift of his is abused by us so modern comforts would be no different. Instead of abusing them we should glorify God in our use of them.

Xanax......I took it once before a real bad root canal on doctors orders so I would be relaxed. I was so tense at the first visit. Amazing little pill- I was so loopy I felt like he could pull all my teeth out and I wouldn't care. Is that a good way to be? The command to be sober for the purpose of prayer....can you obey that on xanax? Not me, I was higher than I ever got on my pre salvation days smoking pot. Agonizing pain? Well, maybe if it comes to that, but as little as possible until recovery. Mental and emotional problems? Use it to keep from jumping off a bridge on the way to serious counseling if you must, but it should be a stop gap measure while dealing ruthlessly with heart and mind issues. Just my opinion.
I've not had that experience with Xanax, but it is my impression that there would be a good many that do (seeing how it is abused). A quarter tablet (even less sometimes) of the 0.25mg puts me right to bed if I'm anxious and can't get to sleep. And it doesn't leave me with being tired the next day as some other meds for sleep (benadryl for example) do! I actually took a higher dose when I first moved to North Carolina and was really in a bad state of anxiety (0.5mg); I was concerned about taking it because of some of its purported effects, (and possible addictive property) but it didn't have any effect on me with that larger dose either except just to give me a good night's sleep.
 
Last edited:
I remember way back in the 80s, and birthing my four. Natural childbirth was the thing, but I didn't give birth without drugs due to that. I did without the epidural as the idea of getting into a ball, while they inserted a needle into my spine made me feel sick.

I'm a small-boned woman, and even the nine-pounder came out fine. Also, here's the thing: the pain of childbirth is different from, say, the pain of a broken leg. It's purposeful, and one feels the difference while in labor. One's body is doing what it is supposed to do. I think you'd have to go through it to see what I mean when I say that.

And we have to be honest that there are ramifications/potential side-effects to medicines, procedures and such. To bear pain, if one has weighed those possible issues, is no 'self-flagellation'. We're not meant to go through life on a 'pain-free' cloud. Sometimes life hurts and is hard work. Our Savior is not slapped in the face by reasonably looking at risks vs benefit with any medical care.

Nevertheless, taking medications is fine, and no sin, if one finds the experience unbearable. To say it is sinful is as silly as saying one MUST take medication, or our Lord is dishonored.
 
I'm in whole hearted agreement with what everyone has posted thus far.

Does anyone see any similarities among Christians who are anti-medicine (i.e. aspirin, epidural, xanax, etc.) and those who are anti-vaccine (i.e. flu, COVID, etc.)?
Way too much nuance to try and generalize people with those categories. I think vaccines are their own thing. I have gotten vaccines for deadly diseases. I draw the line at unapproved, no liability, disease with 99% survival rate ones though.
 
Back in Puritan days people used laudanum, made from opium, for pain. I would assume if they were against using it in childbirth it may be that the babies were born sluggish or limp or in some way not healthy and normal.

Back when I had my four babies all natural, twice I wanted an epidural. At that time it was a common consensus that epidurals slowed labor and were potentially bad for the baby and the doctors urged me to suffer and not risk any harm to the baby. So I suffered. But the babies pushed out quickly and were perky and just fine, and it is true that you forget the pain for joy that a baby has been born.

Studies today are conflicted about if epidurals slow labor, and they can give pitocin now when a women has an epidural to speed up contractions. But you may hear opinions against things that are rooted in the idea that it is better to suffer than to risk harm to a baby. I agree with that if at all possible. Suffering unnecessarily is certainly not required to submit to the curse ( Jesus took all the curse upon himself. Would your friend get a cavity filled and not submit to the curse of decay that lies upon the world?) But I know Christian women who chose the bottle of formula over breastfeeding despite all the evidence of how much better Mama's milk is. That is not putting the well being of the baby first. Women these days can be very self centered. Its a matter of conscience, but first and foremost should be the well being of those around us, especially your baby.

Xanax......I took it once before a real bad root canal on doctors orders so I would be relaxed. I was so tense at the first visit. Amazing little pill- I was so loopy I felt like he could pull all my teeth out and I wouldn't care. Is that a good way to be? The command to be sober for the purpose of prayer....can you obey that on xanax? Not me, I was higher than I ever got on my pre salvation days smoking pot. Agonizing pain? Well, maybe if it comes to that, but as little as possible until recovery. Mental and emotional problems? Use it to keep from jumping off a bridge on the way to serious counseling if you must, but it should be a stop gap measure while dealing ruthlessly with heart and mind issues. Just my opinion.

My youngest sister had two dead babies...modern word of faith teaching and if you have faith you will confess that Jesus healed you and never turn to medicine or doctors. Its a cult, and they feel superior. Most of them eventually go through something and soften, but not always. I very much doubt the Puritans were "off" though, I would guess it was their observations that opium and alcohol are bad for babies.

Agree completely. On Xanax particularly that seems a rather extreme form of anaesthetic for root canal. Over here in the UK we get an injection of something or other into our gums, usually a couple either side of the tooth, and that numbs the mouth to allow the dentist to work. However the rest of me remains compos mentis. As a child, at the Dentist, I used to get the nitrous oxide/air combo which was very trippy. Just reading up on it now it seems nitrous oxide is used for adults too for those who are particularly anxious about pain during dental work, even if they have the anaesthetic.

When it comes to medication more generally my view would be that it is, overall, a good thing which the Lord has provided for us. However, there are medications which wander into ethically murky grounds. Most vaccines used today in the West have been developed using cells taken from aborted babies (whether in the production of the vaccine, or the testing). And there is the over-medication which has had a truly deleterious effect on physical and mental health, whilst filling the pockets of mercenary and immoral pharmaceutical companies and their share holders. The current crisis in our collective mental health and stability, the hysteria gripping our societies over things like sexuality, I believe, is a direct result of the psychopathologising of our societies which was done to encourage the ever greater use of chemical treatments of physical and mental pain. Drugs are too often the first resort when dealing with anything we don't like. This is not healthy. Personally I think one should avoid drugs as much as possible. Even with things like a headache: why rush for the paracetamol unless the pain is particularly intense or lasting for a significant period of time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top