Adam & Logic, 2nd Edition

[grannymh]

I understand what you are saying and agree with much of it. But A&E had the gifts of O.H and O.J. How can we think that, if they “walked with God” they still needed to grow in wisdom etc of God? Thinking they had this, and all the comforts of a peaceful garden, but still desired to be their own God’s is hard.
We have to work very hard in the world we are born into, some people more than others, yes we can do the good that helps one another and ask God always for his help and mercy.
To think that the first two humans had it “easy” and lost it all, the way it should have been is like a fairy tale of sorts.

This has been an unresolved question for ages. Thus, how can it logically demonstrate the existence of Adam?

 

[grannymh]

Really, Can you show me the scripture when Adam said Yes God I disobeyed you and ate the Apple knowing quite clear that I would disobey you but I did it anyway, And I am sorry, I was wrong to disobey you. Please forgive me for what I have done.

You claim if they felt the (death of the soul, separation from God) that they would have repented. So what do you call the I heard you, but I was afraid, because I was naked. Did Adam wear clothes before?? Don’t you agree that being afraid would indeed be a separation from God, If not why did they not hide from him before they ate, Why were they not afraid from God before they ate?

No, that is not at all what happened.

God said who told you that your were naked? You have eaten, then from the tree which I have forbidden you to eat. (Do you really think God did not know it before he approached Adam?) But he gave him a chance to repent. Why else did he ask who told you that you were naked?

He gave him 2 chances to repent. But how is repenting saying to God, The women YOU put here, she gave me fruit from the tree so I ate it.

So who was a fault God, Adam or Eve? What is your opinion.

Next if you steal from you neighbor with the neighbor kids, and your Dad approaches you because he finds out. And you say it is your fault, because you let me play with the neighbor kids??Really?

God said to Adam because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree which I HAVE forbidden you to eat…

You see God never said, your are right Adam, its my bad, I should not have put her here, its my fault. No God said you listen to your wife and did what I have forbidden you to do. Anotherward God said you will be responsible for your sin, not me, nor Eve, nor the devil.

Just like the Father will tell the child, you know that yu are not to steal, but you choose to do so, it is not my fault or the other children, you know I have forbidden you not to steal.

If the Child would have said Father I am sorry, I knew better but I was wrong and I deserve my punishment, do you not agree the Father would go easier on the Child?

Do you not think God would have accepted the apology of Adam and not gone easier on him?

But we will never know, because it never happened.

But we do know that no matter what sin we do, God will forgive us if we repent.

Thank you for lots of interesting thoughts. Do any of them demonstrate the existence
of Adam?

 

[grannymh]

So God created non-innocent people? Do you really think Adam & Eve would’ve known -or had reason to know-all the evils that would come to transpire if they disoebeyed God? That they lived with that knoweldge- in Eden? That’s conjecture, specualtion. We read in Genesis that they were simply told not to disobey by eating of the fruit-and that in so doing they would die. Only afterwards were their eyes opened-they had changed. And more consequences were related to them at that time-immediately after the Fall.

Don’t you think that A&E lost something they previously had, including an original innocence, by directly experiencing evil in a manner they never before conceived that it could be known? Don’t you think they may’ve* learned* something in the ensuing years-that would’ve taught them of the perfection of God’s will-and the foolishness of disobeying it? What might’ve they learned? What did they come to know, that God already knew?

Innocence is not a bad word; naivete regarding evil should be prized; the pride of fallen man may make us repulesd by innocence in some way but in God’s will we’re to come to Him like little children. The experience of evil may play its part in robbing us of our innocence but also, hopefully, it can play its role in making us covet it again, and with the help of grace we can ultimately regain it.

What in innocence and experience demonstrates the existence of two first sole parents biblically known as Adam and Eve?,

 

[fhansen]

---

What in innocence and experience demonstrates the existence of two first sole parents biblically known as Adam and Eve?,

Probably nothing, but maybe since no one seems to have contested that two first sole parents existed the conversation keeps turning to other matters-or stopping altogether.

I’ll take a stab at answering your question anyway. Its critically important that only two first parents existed-and committed the first sin- in order to make sense out of our experiences in this world which includes our apparent lack of innocence as a birthright.

 

[rinnie]

Ok thankyou for the correction of God to Gods.

I think its when I read :

*And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. *

Which sounds like he became like God, rather than like Gods, because there is only one God. But of course A&E thought they would become Gods themselves.

Thanks for your replies

Remember gods no capital God. But they indeed wanted to become God. Get it, how sly the devil is. He never lied to them either.

He said you won’t die if you eat. They didn’t die a physical death, but a spiritual one. Then he said you could become gods. Get it? Read in the bible how he said gods not Capital God.

That is what makes the devil so good, he always has some truth to his lies. That is how he works. Even as evil as he is, knows no one can become God. And that gods are false.

But their biggest sin in my personal opinion was not disobeying God, although indeed that was a sin, it was trying to be him.

See one of our Commandments are this. I AM the LORD your GOD have no gods before me.

Now we are told not to disobey God and sin, but we do. But when we sin God knows the extent of that sin.

Remember this also, if you can, and try not to forget it, (it helps me alot), Don’t ever let anyone, rather they reject or accept God,ever Judge him.

Always remember God knows everything, and judges fairly.

Like people say Adam and Eve were innocent and were tricked by the devil. No, If Adam and Eve were innocent and truly ONLY tricked by the devil and regretted what they did, God would know this, because he knows a heart.

God knew what was in A&E heart, and he judged them justly.

To many on the outside it looks like poor Adam and Eve, so good and pure and tricked by the wicked devil. Oh the devil play his part, and quite well I may add, but they also did their own part also. And paid a price that God felt was right.

If God threw them out it was Justified, Period. We do not question God, we have no right. We Love and Trust him that much.

 

[rinnie]

These words The ultimate goal is to demonstrate the real existence of Adam and his spouse Eve, which in turn is the foundation for some necessary Catholic doctrines. are the heart of this thread.

Shall we return to the topic and discuss the Catholic teachings which can be used to demonstrate the real existence of Adam and his spouse Eve?

While I must apologize because I have been quite busy and I am in and out of a lot of these posts, and have not read all of them through, who is questioning the existence of Adam and Eve?

It is simply the true word of God. We came from Adam and Eve. They were our parents. They gave to us death of the soul, sin. What we call as Catholics Original Sin.

Jesus Christ is the new Adam and the Blessed Mother the new Eve, for they were the opposite of the old and completely loyal to God and gave us back Life. Life of the soul, and eternal life in Christ.

The first gave us sin that we inherited, the second took it away, both by obeying God.

It is by the death on the cross that we are born again in Christ by Baptism. Baptism wipes the slate clean, we are once again sin free.

That is why Catholics baptize their Children as fast as they can, Baptism wipes out Original Sin.

 

[rinnie]

Thank you for lots of interesting thoughts. Do any of them demonstrate the existence
of Adam?

MY bad I think, I thought we were defending God on his Judgement.

Sure in the beginning God made man, then he took out his rib, then he built up into a woman the rib had taken from man.

Once in awhile my husband will say I want my rib back!!

Proof of Adam and Eve I guess you could use me. I am the Proof living Proof. They are my Parents. the not too good ones.

But my true Mother and Father are the good ones God the Father and Blessed Mother.

Although I do love with all my being my Mom and Dad here on earth also.

 

[grannymh]

Probably nothing, but maybe since no one seems to have contested that two first sole parents existed the conversation keeps turning to other matters-or stopping altogether.

If you will kindly take a look at my number of posts, then consider that the majority of them have dealt with the non-existence of Adam and Eve – which I learned when I first landed on CAF – it will be easy to understand the large number of people who do contest the Catholic doctrine of two first sole parents of humankind.

I’ll take a stab at answering your question anyway. Its critically important that only two first parents existed-and committed the first sin- in order to make sense out of our experiences in this world which includes our apparent lack of innocence as a birthright.

This could well be one of the subsequent demonstrations of Adam’s existence. However, coming from the Catholic position, I would offer that the first need is to demonstrate that the Catholic doctrines (plural intended) of Original Sin necessitated one original sinner. A good reference is* Humani Generis*, sections 35, 36, 37.

 

[grannymh]

While I must apologize because I have been quite busy and I am in and out of a lot of these posts, and have not read all of them through, who is questioning the existence of Adam and Eve?

The original Adam & Logic thread,
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=785994
closed because it reached the 1,000 posts limit, now has 54, 099 views. This thread, like the original, is meant to inform readers, including guests who cannot post, that the Catholic Church still teaches Divine Revelation regarding Adam. In addition, it is important to give readers the means for both defending and understanding our basic doctrines.

This link is an updated approach to the reality of Adam and Eve as taught by the Catholic Church.

hprweb.com/2014/07/time-to-abandon-the-genesis-story/

 

[simpleas]

This has been an unresolved question for ages. Thus, how can it logically demonstrate the existence of Adam?

If I think of God creating the first two parents, giving them a soul and living in holiness. Both are rational beings, and all they do is of goodness and pleasing to God. They have no other humans in which to interact with. Sounds like the paradise it is described as.
So then it’s logical that, they being the first two humans, have to be the ones that sinned in a way that broke a relationship with God.

They only procreated after they broke the union with God, so then all their offspring will be born with this broken union, yet all are given a soul directly from God, which in some cases can have union with God even if O.S isn’t wiped away.

What if A&E were just human/spiritual beings, that with freewill could be good or bad, rational or irrational, holy or unholy, abit like us now, that no O.S happened as such, that none of us are born without union with God until we are washed clean of O.S.

God left man to his own counsel, left him to live life the way he saw fit, and much of the time man has been good I think, but when mankind is bad, they are really bad.

 

[grannymh]

When demonstrating the existence of Adam, one can start from different view points.

God as Creator exists.

In my humble opinion, a good starting point is the existence of God as Creator. Immediately establishing God as Creator has a number of advantages. Obviously, this eliminates having to prove God’s existence.

Creator points to the fact that God is in charge. Being the Creator gives God the freedom to create the material universe and all its material inhabitants from ants to dinosaurs.

In addition, God has the freedom to create a being who is spiritual as well as material. This being is biblically known as Adam, the first human person on earth. Having a material anatomy, Adam needs nourishment and thus, we find Adam in a Garden. If humankind is to come about, Adam also needs a spouse.

God as Creator interacts with humans by bringing them into existence and maintaining their existence.

What is truly interesting is that the Creator chooses the single human Adam out of all the existing species, to share in His divine life. This “sharing” is possible because Adam is in the image of God. Adam has a two-fold existence, that is, Adam’s nature is an unique unification of both the material world and the spiritual world. Not only does God bring humans into existence and maintains their existence, He sets a goal for all human beings, that of eternal joy in the presence of God aka in the presence of the Beatific Vision.

** God as Creator interacts personally with each individual human.**

The beginning chapters of Genesis are written as if there is one God and one individual creature Adam. From Catholic teachings, we know that God creates an individual soul as the essential feature of the human species. There is no common ancestor population in the Garden, just one Adam and one spouse Eve who will the first sole parents of all humankind.

If we depend on only the first three chapters of Genesis for our demonstration, we will find some difficulty with understanding how Adam is one person. Going forward, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the necessary understanding of Adam is given by St. Thomas Aquinas. In Adam, is all humankind as one body in one man. In other words, all humankind will descend from one man and his spouse. Therefore, humankind will receive Adam’s nature. Because God creates individual souls, God, beginning with Adam, will interact personally with each individual human being.

It seems to me that God interacts with each of us because we descend from one individual set of parents who gave us our human nature.

 

[grannymh]

Proof of Adam and Eve I guess you could use me. I am the Proof living Proof. They are my Parents. the not too good ones.

Please think about post 287. In a real way, we are the proof of Adam and Eve’s existence.

 

[fhansen]

I understand what you are saying and agree with much of it. But A&E had the gifts of O.H and O.J. How can we think that, if they “walked with God” they still needed to grow in wisdom etc of God?
Thinking they had this, and all the comforts of a peaceful garden, but still desired to be their own God’s is hard.

Well, first of all they did* not* possess the Beatifc Vision, the immediate, direct knowledge of God. Secondly, if something wasn’t missing, then why do you think they sinned? Again, the Catechism teaches that God could always have created a more perfect world but instead made this one in a “state of journeying” to perfection.

 

[fhansen]

If you will kindly take a look at my number of posts, then consider that the majority of them have dealt with the non-existence of Adam and Eve – which I learned when I first landed on CAF – it will be easy to understand the large number of people who do contest the Catholic doctrine of two first sole parents of humankind.

Yes, there are large number of people who contest that doctrine-just not on this thread to any great degree from what I’ve read.

This could well be one of the subsequent demonstrations of Adam’s existence. However, coming from the Catholic position, I would offer that the first need is to demonstrate that the Catholic doctrines (plural intended) of Original Sin necessitated one original sinner. A good reference is* Humani Generis*, sections 35, 36, 37.

Yes, that’s a good reference. However, I thought I’d follow the OP’s suggestion to use deductive reasoning to prove Adam’s existence.

 

[grannymh]

I’ll take a stab at answering your question anyway. Its critically important that only two first parents existed-and committed the first sin- in order to make sense out of our experiences in this world which includes our apparent lack of innocence as a birthright.

Yes, that’s a good reference. However, I thought I’d follow the OP’s suggestion to use deductive reasoning to prove Adam’s existence.

I now understand the direction you are using. Looking at current life, it would be possible to use deductive reasoning to go back to previous human history. Is that thought accurate?

It is my observation that in order to make deductive reasoning profitable, there has to be specific observations. And yes, this sounds like the first principle of the scientific method – observe without prejudice.

In addition, for our own sanity, we need to make sense out of our experiences. That is critical.

Thoughts about wording?

 

[grannymh]

Gentle Readers,

I just had a :doh2: moment.

Because this is a Philosophy Forum, we can explore all kinds of philosophies and in a sense choose one philosophy as our appeal to authority. Therefore, my choice of Catholicism (philosophy spelled out in Catholic doctrines) is proper. Obviously, we need to follow correct Catholic teachings.

Because some Catholics no longer accept Adam as a blood and guts individual, it becomes important to understand the Catholic logic of Adam.

I bet you all knew this already.

 

[fhansen]

I now understand the direction you are using. Looking at current life, it would be possible to use deductive reasoning to go back to previous human history. Is that thought accurate?

It is my observation that in order to make deductive reasoning profitable, there has to be specific observations. And yes, this sounds like the first principle of the scientific method – observe without prejudice.

In addition, for our own sanity, we need to make sense out of our experiences. That is critical.

Thoughts about wording?

One reason the doctrine of original sin makes sense to me is that I’m continuously witness to, in myself as well as in the world around me, an unreasonable behavior, the ability of people to not only act selfishly but to justify selfish acts by twisting the truth to be what they prefer it to be: to play God IOW. This can be subtle until we’re sensitive to it, but we’re all affected by it in any case. It’s simply human self-righteousness, a “righteousness” or moral position not necessarily based on truth but rather on my desires, not on God’s righteousness IOW, thinking of Phil 3. This means that the world of human affairs, unlike the rest of creation, isn’t necessarily aligned with God’s will, aligned with Reality. as our newspapers should attest to daily. And this unreasonableness manifests itself in everyone eventually, and is known as “sin”, or “moral evil”. The universality of this apparent anomaly-and the pain and harm it causes- brings me to the conclusion me that there would’ve originally been a “better way”, a time where truth was abided by, even if it may not as yet have been consciously valued. The doctrine of OS, where a single set of parents committed the first breach with Reality, stepping away from Truth, causing all of the humanity that followed to likewise fall from a greater height, makes sense to me in light of the crazy world I find myself in, filled with both good and evil, truth and untruth. Here I can experience both the need for love, and the lack of that very virtue that results when humans run the show, when we are effectively in control of our own morality.

 

[simpleas]

Well, first of all they did* not* possess the Beatifc Vision, the immediate, direct knowledge of God. Secondly, if something wasn’t missing, then why do you think they sinned? Again, the Catechism teaches that God could always have created a more perfect world but instead made this one in a “state of journeying” to perfection.

Nothing was missing, that is why they could choose to sin?

Oh, are you saying that because they didn’t possess the beatific vision , that is why they sinned? But that would be like someone saying that because they don’t actually “see” God, they have no need to obey God. This brings me back to They “walked” with God
How was that exactly? They were in friendship also. We walk with God, have a friendship to a degree, either the same as they did and use of freewill, or they had a more powerful “walk” and friendship with God, that was “broken” upon sinning.

I know that no mortal can actually “see” the beatific vision, only when we are in the form of our soul, A&E were immortal humans, so perhaps they did “walk” “see” God?

 

[simpleas]

Gentle Readers,

I just had a :doh2: moment.

Because this is a Philosophy Forum, we can explore all kinds of philosophies and in a sense choose one philosophy as our appeal to authority. Therefore, my choice of Catholicism (philosophy spelled out in Catholic doctrines) is proper. Obviously, we need to follow correct Catholic teachings.

Because some Catholics no longer accept Adam as a blood and guts individual, it becomes important to understand the Catholic logic of Adam.

I bet you all knew this already.

So some people think we came from a tribe of people rather than two individuals, some from evolution, and some believe what the bible says about being formed from the earth.

The second one we are allowed to believe aren’t we?

The first not, but I was thinking alittle about the first the other day. I could imagine God creating more than one set of first parents, only because it would cut out incest…because this became a very bad sin for the jewish people, as though it was something that should never happen, so why would God allow it to happen to his earlier children?

Just some thoughts

 

[Aloysium]

Luke 1:34 - And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?

A young woman knew the central truth that science describes.
Although our knowledge has multiplied a million-fold perhaps, the essential truth is the same. Carve a marble block in ever more intricate patterns and shapes, it remains a marble block.
We know the world behaves in given ways: things don’t pop up out of nowhere, there is cause and effect, new life requires sexual intercourse.

While God makes Himself known in the totality that is this one huge, totally amazing, utterly astounding miracle of existence, He also reveals Himself in history, outside the natural order He created, as is the case in the story of the creation of man.

You cannot expect science to explain miracles. What is important for us to know about how we were created has been revealed by God to His Holy Church.