Adam and Eve and Original Sin

[kildare]

While I dont doubt that Adam and Eve existed in some form, as the first evolved humans, I think we have to see the story of them attaining original sin in the same way as one of Jesus’ parables. Its truth, which carries the important message, does not imply that it is factually true in every detail.

All life decays. I often wondered why, but it seems obvious to me, from a solo-materia point of view, that if we didnt die off we would not make way for the next generation and indeed with progress or with evolution, teh succeeding generations should be an improvement. Now from science we also know that the big bang occurred 16 billion years ago and that our sun and earth are about 6 billion years, formed apprantely out of the dust of the first generation of stars which finally died or exploded between 10 and 6 billion years. Originally, and srtaight after the big bang, the only element in the universe was hydrogen. In teh great massive furnaces of teh stars, the other elements were fused and so when gravity collected the dust from the previous star, it collected not just hydrigen, but silicon, iron and among other things carbon and so our planet formed with all the important ingredients to make life on earth.

Now the point of all that scientific history is that the old Star had to DIE for us to live. This seems to be a basic law in the universe and through cosmology, through evolution and through Jesus’s death on the cross to save our sins, the law has a clear metaphsyical component.

As to original sin and the reason for the fall, which is basically down to disobedience, I cannot but surmise that it arises from the freedom to err. If it wasnt for freedom we wouldnt sin, but if it wasnt for freedom we wouldnt even exist.

Jesus is the New Adam, the one that has “evolved” over the old adam, to finally conquer this dilemma. His victory comes from not only his great powers but mainly from his incredible love which flies in the face of the natural order.

 

[Cachonga]

Evolution is a fascinating bed-time story, but a poor substitute for God’s Word and His truth as revealed to us in the Scriptures. Consider the complexity of the simplest life form and compare that with the “complexity” of a simple pocket watch. It’s like comparing the space shuttle (life form) with a horse-drawn buggy (pocket watch), and yet nobody ever found a pocket watch on the ground and thought “Oh. What a wonderful example of evolution!” Of course, watches don’t evolve, but a pocket watch would have been far easier to create by random chance over a very long period of time than a simple life form (even a virus, which is basically little more than a shell and a strand of DNA). I have discovered, over the years, that the word “evolution” is being used more and more in place of a far more appropriate word - “adaptation”. Even Darwins finches were merely adaptations within the species (after all, they were still finches, right?). It seems that, at it’s core, the goal is to eliminate God and exalt nature (which God created).

I am a bit concerned about your “idea” that Jesus, as the new Adam, is ‘the one that has “evolved” over the old adam’. Do you think Jesus was just an “evolved” human, or do you believe Jesus is who He claimed to be, the very Son of God? It does seem clear that you believe Adam and Eve were little more than early, evolved, humans. If you believe man is simply a product of evolution, then how and when did God bless man with a soul? Do other animals have a soul? If you say yes, please provide Scriptural support for this belief (or maybe something from the CCC). On the other hand, if man is simply a product of evolution, then how are we better off, spiritually speaking, than other animals?

 

[JEANMAC]

Jesus “had” to die to redeem us from the punishment due to sin. If Adam and Eve had not sinned, He would not have had to die.
If the first couple had remained sinless, and immortal, is it not possible they could have reproduced indefinitely, with their progeny also reproducing indefinitely? In this case, a universe would be necessary to contain all of humanity.
Our Earth is unique. Its size and position in relation to the sun, and the size and position of the other planets, is what holds us in exactly the right place. The liquid iron core of earth generates a magnetic field which shields us from solar winds. Our earth has everything needed for life to exist.
Who knows but that what the Father has prepared for those who love him, may involve our exploration of the universe and beyond into other dimensions? A great adventure awaits us.

 

[kildare]

Evolution is a fascinating bed-time story, but a poor substitute for God’s Word and His truth as revealed to us in the Scriptures.

Evolution is not a substitute for God’s Word, but an observed explanation of probably how his universe grows, develops etc.

I am a bit concerned about your “idea” that Jesus, as the new Adam, is ‘the one that has “evolved” over the old adam’. Do you think Jesus was just an “evolved” human, or do you believe Jesus is who He claimed to be, the very Son of God?

You noticed the quotes around Evolved I hope! Remember, according to the councils which condemned the arian and monophysist heresies and concluded that Jesus was fully man and fully god and that is what I believe. I’m actually trying to understand what occurred using modern language. It is of course a mystery but we have accepted that Christ is known as the New Adam. In his fully human form he has conquered the faults of the human condition. Thats one of teh great aspects of the victory, and something we are called to emulate.

It does seem clear that you believe Adam and Eve were little more than early, evolved, humans. If you believe man is simply a product of evolution, then how and when did God bless man with a soul? Do other animals have a soul? If you say yes, please provide Scriptural support for this belief (or maybe something from the CCC). On the other hand, if man is simply a product of evolution, then how are we better off, spiritually speaking, than other animals?

Ah but do you really, or does anyone really understand evolution? All it is is our most logical and most reasonable observation of what occurred. Natural Selection explains a lot but even if it could explain all the physical developments it, as humans have documented it, would prove insufficient to explain the spiritual development.

As for animals and souls, I think that even if animals have some kind of spirit/soul there is obviously a difference, but I dont think the starting points are as clear as humans would like, with their limited intelligence, to order it. We are really very limited mentally, which is why the much of the Bible has come down to us in a more literary, easy to understand form

 

[FCEGM]

While I dont doubt that Adam and Eve existed in some form, as the first evolved humans, I think we have to see the story of them attaining original sin in the same way as one of Jesus’ parables. Its truth, which carries the important message, does not imply that it is factually true in every detail.

All life decays. I often wondered why, but it seems obvious to me, from a solo-materia point of view, that if we didnt die off we would not make way for the next generation and indeed with progress or with evolution, teh succeeding generations should be an improvement… …

Unfallen man was not meant to dwell eternally on earth, according to St. Thomas Aquinas:

Reply to Objection 1. The empyrean heaven is the highest of corporeal places, and is outside the region of change. By the first of these two conditions, it is a fitting abode for the angelic nature: for, as Augustine says (De Trin. ii), “God rules corporeal creatures through spiritual creatures.” Hence it is fitting that the spiritual nature should be established above the entire corporeal nature, as presiding over it. By the second condition, it is a fitting abode for the state of beatitude, which is endowed with the highest degree of stability. Thus the abode of beatitude was suited to the very nature of the angel; therefore he was created there. But it is not suited to man’s nature, since man is not set as a ruler over the entire corporeal creation: it is a fitting abode for man in regard only to his beatitude. Wherefore he was not placed from the beginning in the empyrean heaven, but was destined to be transferred thither in the state of his final beatitude, *Summa theologica, Prima Pars, q. 102. *

 

[edwest2]

There is a temporary ban on talking about Evolution in Apologetics.

Adam and Eve were our first parents and the parents of all. There is no conjecture and no opinion. If you read the Bible, you will read that by one man, sin entered the world. It’s quite clear.

God bless,
Ed

 

[grannymh]

Basic Catholic teaching regarding Adam and Eve and Original Sin
is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421.

The good news of Jesus Christ follows in Paragraph 422, etc.

One can put the word paragraph and its number in the Catechism’s search bar in link www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Entering topics, like Adam, is also very useful.

When you enter a paragraph number, like “paragraph 355”, and then click on the opening line, CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 355 you will see the following under the paragraph:

»
»
»
»

 

[buffalo]

Evolution is not a substitute for God’s Word, but an observed explanation of probably how his universe grows, develops etc.

You noticed the quotes around Evolved I hope! Remember, according to the councils which condemned the arian and monophysist heresies and concluded that Jesus was fully man and fully god and that is what I believe. I’m actually trying to understand what occurred using modern language. It is of course a mystery but we have accepted that Christ is known as the New Adam. In his fully human form he has conquered the faults of the human condition. Thats one of teh great aspects of the victory, and something we are called to emulate.

Ah but do you really, or does anyone really understand evolution? All it is is our most logical and most reasonable observation of what occurred. Natural Selection explains a lot but even if it could explain all the physical developments it, as humans have documented it, would prove insufficient to explain the spiritual development.

As for animals and souls, I think that even if animals have some kind of spirit/soul there is obviously a difference, but I dont think the starting points are as clear as humans would like, with their limited intelligence, to order it. We are really very limited mentally, which is why the much of the Bible has come down to us in a more literary, easy to understand form

Start thinking about IDvolution - the total solution.

 

[rocketrob]

As to original sin and the reason for the fall, which is basically down to disobedience, I cannot but surmise that it arises from the freedom to err…

The original sin involved more than just disobedience. Among other things, it involved a lack of trust in God, and a desire to be like God, but without God. The ‘created’ put himself on par with the Creator by attempting to rely on himself rather than the Creator. This same sinful and spiritually dangerous attitude permeates science that is not informed by Faith.

Catechism Paragraphs 397-398
Man’s first sin

397
Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.

398
In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully “divinized” by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to “be like God,” but “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God.”

---

Jesus is the New Adam, the one that has “evolved” over the old adam, to finally conquer this dilemma…

This idea is incorrect and contradicts the teaching of Scripture and the Church. Jesus, always part of the Holy Trinity and sharing the one divine nature of that Trinity, **condescended **Himself to take on the human nature in order to raise it **back **up to the pre-fallen state. In other words, Jesus lowered Himself in order to raise the human state back to the original condition and Trinitarian relationship for which it was originally created.

CCC Paragraph 457
The Word became flesh for us in order to save us by reconciling us with God, who “loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins”…

      Sick, our nature demanded to be healed; fallen, to be raised up; dead, to rise again...it was necessary to bring us the light; captives, we awaited a Savior; prisoners, help; slaves, a liberator. Are these things minor or insignificant? Did they not move God to **descend **to human nature and visit it, since humanity was in so miserable and unhappy a state?

Phil 2:5-8
…Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but **emptied **himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he **humbled **himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross.

CCC Paragraph 460
The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”: “For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God.” “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.”

rocketrob