P
Paul_theApostle
Guest
What wouldve happened if only Eve ate the forbidden fruit and Adam said no to eating it?
Would Eve have died and God created another women?
Would Eve have died and God created another women?
- Status
S
Saburo
Guest
Eve would have noticed that she was indecent and spent the rest of her life shopping for clothes, while Adam would have continued to walk around the house naked, scratching obnoxiously, and puzzled that Eve had not yet made lunch. Also wondering how to approach God about making a few other women, similar, but different from Eve.
In short, pretty much the same outcome. We still get born into sin and need baptizing.
In short, pretty much the same outcome. We still get born into sin and need baptizing.
I
Insight
Guest
The moral of the story is that Adam’s first mistake was listening to his wife (lol).
However, on a very sad note, the Vatican website now teaches us that there was never an Adam and Eve; “However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution.”
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html
“While apes evolved naturally into pre-human creatures, it was the will and desire of God that turned them into humans, an article in the Vatican newspaper said. “The formation of human beings necessitated a particular contribution by God, though it remains that their emergence was brought about by natural causes” of evolution, it said.” The Vatican now embraces that there was no apple, no Adam, no Eve, no serpent, etc.
catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0802496.htm
Yet this is all derived from very partial bone fragments, teeth, etc. No one has ever produced a skull progression of humans, notwithstanding this can be done with even dinosaurs that lived many millions of years ago. Notwithstanding that both X and Y chromosome studies lead us back to one man and one woman.
The Real Eve: 5 Billion People From One Woman (Discovery Channel):
amazon.com/Real-Eve-Billion-Discovery-Channel/dp/B00006AUKZ
arguingwithatheists.com/Pages/Evolution.htm
The Vatican is ignoring real science on this one.
God Bless
T
thistle
Guest
What’s the point in speculating about something that did not happen??
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Sorry, that is incorrect: “For Adam, the first man, was a type of him who was to come, Christ the Lord.”
This is a misinterpretation of the article. The article (written by an evolutionary biologist, not any member of the magisterium) does not deny an Adam or an Eve.
G
Garyjohn2
Guest
Likewise…I do not see anything in the above quotes that says there was no Adam and Eve.
I
Insight
Guest
No kidding, every Bible believing Catholic knows that, but why does the Vatican website say differently. God fearing Catholics don’t think he was a monkey.
God Bless
A
Ahimsa
Guest
This is what that Vatican website says: "“For Adam, the first man, was a type of him who was to come, Christ the Lord.”
G
Garyjohn2
Guest
The Vatican website does not say differently…that previous post was a quote from the Vatican website. No where does it say that Adam was a monkey.
F
FCEGM
Guest
No Fall. Adam is the exclusive head of the human family with particular responsibilities (Gen. 2:15) beyond that of his mate. It is from Adam’s sin that Our Lord as the New Adam comes to redeem us. Adam’s choice to join his wife in sin broke the final link in the Covenant between humanity and God. The Son of God mirrors the type of Adam; as the New Adam, He is the priest of the New Covenant. Adam in his human perfection could have made an acceptable sacrifice for his wife to be admitted back into friendship with God.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
If Adam had sacrificed his life, then with whom would have Eve mated?
S
shocktrooper
Guest
Why would he have had to sacrifice his life? He may have just had to discipline his wife appropriately and all would have been well. Adam was given dominion. We see this with him naming all the animals and even his wife.
Pax Christi.
I
Insight
Guest
Sorry about that, re-read and found it. Still, the article on the Vatican website deviates from the Bible:
“While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage.”
What happened to God creating Adam from dust and Eve from Adam’s rib. Here we have a picture being painted of Adam and Eve as some kind of humaniods decending from apes.
God Bless
J
JJ59
Guest
Perhaps Genesis was never supposed to be a literal history.
Science will never differ from the Bible. Science may, however, differ from our fallible interpretations of the Bible.
God bless
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Notice that the quote doesn’t say that this scientific picture of human origins is “absolutely certain and definitive”, but that it “convincing” and yet “subject to revision”.
Secondly, both John Paul II and Pius XII stressed that evolution and Catholicism are not incompatible, as long as certain conditions are met. Here is John Paul II speaking, in 1996, on this issue, referring to Pius XII’s writings on this issue as well:
John Paul II makes several points: (1) Evolution explains a lot of what we see in the biological world, so much so that evolution can no longer be considered a “guess”, but a well-developed, well-supported explanation of how life’s diversity came about; (2) this does not mean that all currently accepted ideas associated with evolution are necessarily totally correct; but (3) even if evolutionary theory is broadly accurate, that would not be inconsistent with Catholic teaching – as long as evolutionary theory does not explicitly deny the idea that man’s spiritual soul was directly created by God; and (4) many scientists interpret evolution to mean that the spiritual soul evolved from the mind of lower life forms, but that interpretation of evolution is neither obvious from the evidence, nor consistent with Catholic teaching.
In short, evolution of the physical body is not denied by the Church. What is denied, is the evolution of the spiritual soul. Genesis is not to be read, and was never meant to be read, in a totally literalistic fashion.
I
Insight
Guest
"Adam and Eve: Real People
It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).
In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).
The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390)."
catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp
God Bless
A
Ahimsa
Guest
And see the phrase in bold.
I
Insight
Guest
Interesting. One of the most influential Catholic Theologians, Saint Augustine (Bishop of Hippo) argued that original sin had its beginning in sexual desire, and that the Eden account should be taken both literally and symbolically.
thesinofadamandeve-augustine.blogspot.com
suite101.com/content/augustine-and-original-sin-a171404
God Bless
N
Neildown
Guest
rotfl!
A
Ahimsa
Guest
I’m glad Augustine is not infallible.
- Status