Why did God create a pleasure organ for Eve but not for Adam?

[billwald]

Don't know if I am permitted to name it. Why do women have an organ whose only known purpose is to produce pleasure?

 

[Mallon]

It's called a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. That's the technical term for it.

 

[Chesterton]

It's called a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. That's the technical term for it.

That wasn't the question, but thanks for bestowing upon us your technical expertise.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Mallon answered the question as to whether you are permitted to name it.

 

[Chesterton]

He didn't ask that question, but I just meant it as a little joke, maybe I should have inserted a .

As for the question asked, Christianity claims that God invented all pleasures, sexual pleasure included, so of course He invented a means to experience sexual pleasure. Both men and women have organs intended for this, it's just that the man's has other functions as well.

 

[Assyrian]

And who says we can't multi task?

 

[crawfish]

The old joke:

A chemical, mechanical and electical engineer are arguing about God. The first says, "God MUST be a chemical engineer! Look at the complex chemistry that makes up our various body functions!"

The second says, "No, God must be a mechanical engineer, because our bodies are such a perfectly tuned machine".

The electrical engineer says, "No, God must be a civil engineer."

The first two just look at him.

The third says, "No, really! Who else would put a sewer line so close to a recreational area?"

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Don't know if I am permitted to name it. Why do women have an organ whose only known purpose is to produce pleasure?

To compensate for the pain of childbirth? In other news, humans were found today with a glans on their penis. The purpose of this is unknown...

 

[Chesterton]

To compensate for the pain of childbirth? In other news, humans were found today with a glans on their penis. The purpose of this is unknown...

In further news, the planet Neptune was discovered. The purpose of this is unknown. Experts say no deduction is possible.

 

[busterdog]

Don't know if I am permitted to name it. Why do women have an organ whose only known purpose is to produce pleasure?

It is hard to imagine why you think this question is helpful. Nor is it clear why you would post it in creationism. What exactly is going on here?

 

[FallingWaters]

That's it's only KNOWN purpose.
It may have other purposes which we have not figured out yet.

And even if it IS only for pleasure, what's wrong with that?
Women should have been created without the ability to experience sexual pleasure?
Maybe having such sensitivity on the inside might have been too excruciating during childbirth.

 

[busterdog]

That's it's only KNOWN purpose.
It may have other purposes which we have not figured out yet.

And even if it IS only for pleasure, what's wrong with that?
Women should have been created without the ability to experience sexual pleasure?
Maybe having such sensitivity on the inside might have been too excruciating during childbirth.

Questions about why God did anything are generally not very good questions, as your first two sentences suggest.

I remember reading how an atheist wrote that there couldn't be a God, or if there was one, he was not as bright as atheists, since he made the sex/reproductive organs also organs for excretion. The OP is not exactly the same question, but it is at the same level of absurdity. Its sort of like asking what was the big idea in making grass green, rather than pink.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Questions about why God did anything are generally not very good questions, as your first two sentences suggest.

I remember reading how an atheist wrote that there couldn't be a God, or if there was one, he was not as bright as atheists, since he made the sex/reproductive organs also organs for excretion. The OP is not exactly the same question, but it is at the same level of absurdity. Its sort of like asking what was the big idea in making grass green, rather than pink.

I think there is a difference between asking why arbitrary things were created the way they were, and why blatant flaws were created. The mammalian eye, for instance, or the human spine.

What I think the atheist was getting at was: if God designed everything, why is everything designed so poorly? Arbitrary designs are another matter altogether.

 

[Chesterton]

...if God designed everything, why is everything designed so poorly?...

Submit design modifications in your response... I'll pray to God and see if I can get authorization for your improvements.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Submit design modifications in your response...

Well, mollusk eyes would be a big improvement. They're the same as ours, except it isn't wired in a convoluted fasion. Oh, and a decent load-bearing skeletal system. Our's is rubbish .

And laser vision.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Well, mollusk eyes would be a big improvement. They're the same as ours, except it isn't wired in a convoluted fasion. Oh, and a decent load-bearing skeletal system. Our's is rubbish .

And laser vision.

I'd like a better tan... and bigger boobs for my girlfriend

 

[busterdog]

I think there is a difference between asking why arbitrary things were created the way they were, and why blatant flaws were created. The mammalian eye, for instance, or the human spine.

What I think the atheist was getting at was: if God designed everything, why is everything designed so poorly? Arbitrary designs are another matter altogether.

Just ask Alfred Kinsey about poor design, like the atheist example, his didnt seem to be getting it done. He resorted to inserting tooth brushes to try to achieve something his disobedient soul could no longer allow.

That is the beauty of a marriage covenant to a wonderful woman. If there is a design flaw, I haven't noticed.

There is no sense speculating about the proper design of a butterfly as one is pulling the wings off.

As for the many design issues, including the OP, isn't it funny how the bodies God made fared so poorly in surgery until surgeons started washing their hands? I just can't imagine how anyone could really believe that there was sufficient understanding of such things to speculate on the "sole purpose" of a particular design or whether a body part was sell designed. I suppose speclation is a allowable, but it ought to be clear that that is what it is.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I'd like a better tan... and bigger boobs for my girlfriend

Ick, bewbs

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Just ask Alfred Kinsey about poor design, like the atheist example, his didnt seem to be getting it done. He resorted to inserting tooth brushes to try to achieve something his disobedient soul could no longer allow.

I honestly have no idea what you saying. Is it sexual? It sounds sexual.

That is the beauty of a marriage covenant to a wonderful woman. If there is a design flaw, I haven't noticed.

Well, I don't know about you, but if I woke up and found myself with a wife, I'd think something was a tad off-kilter.

There is no sense speculating about the proper design of a butterfly as one
is pulling the wings off.

Sure there is: dissection is one of the ways we can determine the function of things. More generally, picking things apart without mercy or remorse is how we find out that there are wings and things in the first place.

As for the many design issues, including the OP, isn't it funny how the bodies God made fared so poorly in surgery until surgeons started washing their hands? I just can't imagine how anyone could really believe that there was sufficient understanding of such things to speculate on the "sole purpose" of a particular design or whether a body part was sell designed.

Sell designed? That's a new one.

I suppose speclation is a allowable, but it ought to be clear that that is what it is.

Why should it? Biological structures didn't evolve with colour-coded labels. To the untrained layman, one squiggly purple thing is indistinguishable from all the other squiggly purple things. Only with detailed analysis can one determine the origin and function of a particular organ.

Besides, speculation and educated guessing are just the first step.

All that said, I don't see how this relates to my post. The imperfections still exist, no?

 

[busterdog]

I honestly have no idea what you saying. Is it sexual? It sounds sexual.

Yes. My thesis is simple. Disobedience robs the disobedient of the ability to enjoy the life given to them. Kinsey is regarded as a revolutionary thinker, yet all he was was a rebel. As evidence of his corruption is the fact instead of freedom, he died like an addict. Trying to get off by circumcising himself with a pocket knife, "catheterizing" himself (actually with a tooth brush) and needing the "pleasure" of being kicked and beaten in the gonads (which might actually have killed him).

Kinsey himself warned his researchers that their work would actually impair their physical senses. Their simple ability to enjoy physical beauty was at risk by "studying" inappropriate contentography. Kinsey betrayed, ever so subtly, his knowledge that he was doing damage to people by his work.

Similarly, what is the result of abortion? Agony. Depression. Nightmares.

The same pattern exists in with other examples of disobedience -- whether heterosexual or otherwise. Hereosexuals who are not following the biblical model tend to have a lousy sex life. Perhaps not at first, but that is the trend. Look it up. Kinsey was a lousy scientist.

Dont blame the designer when the equipment is being misused. That is why the atheist attribution of a poor design sounds nonsensical to a happily married man.

As a scientist, the rebuttal to this entire area is a rather simple evidential rebuttal. I would save you the pain of "speculation". The evidence is in. There is a pattern. The day that it begins to resonate with reality, know that Jesus will make you forgiven and free. He promises more abundant life.

Sell designed? That's a new one.

"well designed".

Besides, speculation and educated guessing are just the first step.

There is a big difference between a humble question and hubris. My question of the OP was a question. I have grave doubts about the intent of the OP. But, I asked a question. Was the OP a question or something more akin to the nonsense critique of God on the basis of design? Havent heard from the guy, so I dont know.

As for the notion that the human body is badly designed, that is not speculation. It is a foolish conclusion. So, lets be clear about what is speculation and what isnt.

All that said, I don't see how this relates to my post. The imperfections still exist, no?

No. They don't exist. Not as design issues. This is a fallen world. It is not as it was designed to be. I am taking God's Word on this. I wasn't there. But, there is no refutation in science. There is only speculation, much of which is proven to be pointless as science advances.


Link to debunk Kinsey: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2061305218446628970&hl=en