Adam and Eve and the Tree of Life

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jerry-Jet
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jerry-Jet

Guest
Does anyone know what would have happened to man if Adam and Eve had refused the devils temptation and had later eaten of the Tree of Life?
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Does anyone know what would have happened to man if Adam and Eve had refused the devils temptation and had later eaten of the Tree of Life?
Click to expand...
With all due respect what’s the point in speculating on something that did not happen and can never happen now.
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Does anyone know what would have happened to man if Adam and Eve had refused the devils temptation and had later eaten of the Tree of Life?
Click to expand...
The Adam and Eve story is fiction authored by God the Holy Spirit to teach theology.

In effect you are asking, “Suppose God had altered the story; what else would He have written, given the change?”
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Does anyone know what would have happened to man if Adam and Eve had refused the devils temptation and had later eaten of the Tree of Life?
Click to expand...
I wonder whether they would have actually eaten regularly from the Tree of Life before the Fall? They were never forbidden to eat of it, were they? Perhaps it represents a continual recognizing of their finiteness, and God wanted them to eat of it, like a kind of communion with him.
 
Spirithound said:
They were never forbidden to eat of it, were they?
Click to expand...
Well, they were banished from the garden ‘specifically’ to prevent them from eating it. So they were not ‘commanded’ not to eat it but were removed the possibility of eating it. I don’t know if that equals ‘forbidden.’

Peter K
 
Peter_Dawson said:
The Adam and Eve story is fiction authored by God the Holy Spirit to teach theology.

In effect you are asking, “Suppose God had altered the story; what else would He have written, given the change?”
Click to expand...
Two parents of the human race are real. Their story is preserved because it involves original sin and the salvation of mankind.

For further information about Catholic teaching on this subject, read Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4

Or use this handy link
 
The reason I asked the question is I don’t think that the Fall was the will of God.

God never wants sin.

Now I’m sure that God knew that the Fall would happen and I’m sure that God aready had a plan for man’s salvation.

I think the Tree of Life was the possibility that never occurred that God would have preferred to the Fall.

Jesus could be the Tree of Life.

Though never realized–Jesus symbolized by the Tree of Life was the better course for Adam and Eve.

But it makes me wonder–if Adam and Eve had eaten of the Tree of Life would they have been immune to falling to sin?

If they had later had children would those children be immune to sin or could they have fallen while Adam and Eve didn’t?

I think there must be significance to God having an angel guard the Garden of Eden to prohibit anyone of eating of the Tree of Life.

The Tree of Life–Jesus–wquld be eaten in the eucharist and would come later.

What think you all?
 
Peter_Dawson said:
The Adam and Eve story is fiction authored by God the Holy Spirit to teach theology.

In effect you are asking, “Suppose God had altered the story; what else would He have written, given the change?”
Click to expand...
That is not Catholic teaching - as you well know.
 
grannymh said:
Two parents of the human race are real. Their story is preserved because it involves original sin and the salvation of mankind.

For further information about Catholic teaching on this subject, read Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4

Or use this handy link
Click to expand...
Take a stand, Granny. DID THEIR CHILDREN COMMIT INCEST IN ORDER TO OBEY THE COMMAND TO BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY?

If you can’t answer that one, then I can’t be convinced by you.
 
If there was no law against incest then yes their children could have married one another.

In that case it wouldn’t be incest because it wouldn’t be unlawful.

What’s the big problem with that?

At one time marriage to more than one wife was permitted and later it wasn’t.

It is possible for an act to be permitted and not be a sin yet later not be permitted and and be a sin.

Pork was forbidden in the Old Testament and allowed in the New Testament.

Things can change–the Sabbath day even changed–I don’t see what the big problem is.
 
Peter_Dawson said:
Take a stand, Granny. DID THEIR CHILDREN COMMIT INCEST IN ORDER TO OBEY THE COMMAND TO BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY?

If you can’t answer that one, then I can’t be convinced by you.
Click to expand...
I may be older than dirt, but I wasn’t around during the time of the real Adam and Eve.

:rotfl:
 
bookgirl32 said:
How many people have said that before? :hmmm:
Click to expand...
St. Athanasius, after he was condemned by Pope Liberius.

And then Pope Liberius condemned his own teaching, and changed the Church’s position on the Trinity to one opposed to Arianism but in accord with the Athanasian Creed.
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Does anyone know what would have happened to man if Adam and Eve had refused the devils temptation and had later eaten of the Tree of Life?
Click to expand...
The author who composed this symbolic myth would have come up with a different story to explain the truth that things go badly when one disobeys God. There is no requirement to hold the literalistic view of this being a “historical” event.
 
patg said:
The author who composed this symbolic myth would have come up with a different story to explain the truth that things go badly when one disobeys God. There is no requirement to hold the literalistic view of this being a “historical” event.
Click to expand...
Granted that there is some symbolic language in Genesis.

But, in the Catholic Church the event of the founder of the human race who committed original sin is not a symbolic myth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top