Adam & Logic, 2nd Edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter grannymh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
simpleas;12771753:
Gary Sheldrake;12766307:
Good evening Simpleas: Just to be clear, I want to make sure that it’s understood that the ideas that I post are my own, and I offer them as something to think about. It is never my intent to sell anyone on any of these ideas. I do think you could worship anything as God, but I don’t think worship is helpful in the first place. I personally don’t worship anything. I think it would be better just to handle everything with care and treat everything as though it was sacred, and that includes ourselves (if we can do that). This is something I work on every day, with varying degrees of success.

As for God being everything, I would offer the following explanation. We take it that we are something separate, because the experiences that we have seem personal. In tis regard, I think we confuse sentience with consciousness. Consciousness is something far more vast. I think consciousness is transpersonal and there is really only one consciousness that pervades everything - rocks, trees, planets, birds, animas and you and I of course. And I think God is consciousness rather than a deity, and our minds are simply an interface between sentient experience and consciousness. To find God, I am offering the idea that you have to lose the idea of “self,” because there is only one “self” and that is what we call God. This is what I think Jesus meant when he said "“Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.” So, I believe that as long as we hold on to the idea of an individual or personal self, we are missing the point. We can clearly look around us and see that all things are fractal in nature, and being fractal in nature, all things are visible in the source and the source is visible in all things. It is all “the source” building on itself and growing in size and complexity. This is an intrinsic truth that can be seen and demonstrated mathematically in the Mandelbrot Set, which is usually of more interest to mathematicians than spiritualists, but you can clearly see what I mean:

youtube.com/watch?v=0jGaio87u3A
The Spiritus Mundi is not an alien word to Christianity. It is said to be the soul of the world, and we are of course part of it (in my opinion).

This is also a reply to Bahman in post 680.

Again, I always remind anyone I converse with on these matters that I have absolutely no credentials with regard to spiritual matters, and I in no way invite anyone to believe the things I believe. This is simply my reasoning and I just enjoy the conversations.

All the best,
Gary

Thanks. Yes I enjoy the conversation too, trying to keep up with what some posters write is sometimes a struggle for my tiny brain! 😃

I can’t quite understand why we believe we are to think of ourselves as separate from God, Adam and Eve were created with the intent to become one with God, to see God. We are taught that noone has seen God, even Adam and Eve did not see God, yet they and we believe we have a relationship with God through our thoughts first and foremost and then by our actions. Jesus tells his followers that he who has seen him sees the father, but is he speaking of visual seeing, the human person, son of God, or seeing the father by his word/actions, and we can become like him? He say’s somewhere else also that men can become Gods.

Thanks.
 
It is also very important to understand Adam, himself, before he freely chose to sever his relationship with his Creator.

As we read Genesis, chapter 2, we find an expansion of Genesis 1: 26-27. I am not sure the why some, not all, people get hung up on two “creation accounts”. :eek:

My Bible uses the heading “Second Story of Creation”. That does not mean that we have to choose between chapter 1 and chapter 2. He means that the author had the intelligence to continue exploration of creation. I really doubt that the Creator was limited to a one-time-only creation of animals.

Chapter 2 has some intriguing details about Adam’s use of his intelligence. One could almost say that Adam had a scientific streak because he practiced the scientific method which is to observe without prejudice. I can picture Adam taking notes of the various differences between trees. Knowing scientists, I am sure Adam was extremely curious about the “forbidden” tree.

I can picture God watching Adam and then deciding to give Adam the task of naming the non-human creatures. Genesis 2: 19
I got alittle “hung up” on the two accounts of creation a while back. My bible has the second account of creation. Paradise.
So it’s no wonder when the word Paradise is used to describe a place that one can think of it as a perfect place, where no sin would be committed.
Also reading that the second account was to inform people how man was created first and then the animals, and then woman, so man is the head of everything…🤷

He means that the author had the intelligence to continue exploration of creation. I really doubt that the Creator was limited to a one-time-only creation of animals.

Yes but in account one it is the opposite way round, Humans made in God’s image male and female come after the animals, not before, and isn’t that how we now, would say we believe our world developed?
And we still are exploring our world and it’s creation, it didn’t stop with the first and second accounts in Genesis, though they were far advanced in their knowledge, we keep adding to it.

PS I don’t get hung up anymore 😃
 
Thanks for the links. The video was interesting…bit too intelligent for my brain waves, but I understood some parts of it.
🙂
 
Gary Sheldrake;12775468:
simpleas;12771753:
Thanks. Yes I enjoy the conversation too, trying to keep up with what some posters write is sometimes a struggle for my tiny brain! 😃

I can’t quite understand why we believe we are to think of ourselves as separate from God, Adam and Eve were created with the intent to become one with God, to see God. We are taught that noone has seen God, even Adam and Eve did not see God, yet they and we believe we have a relationship with God through our thoughts first and foremost and then by our actions. Jesus tells his followers that he who has seen him sees the father, but is he speaking of visual seeing, the human person, son of God, or seeing the father by his word/actions, and we can become like him? He say’s somewhere else also that men can become Gods.

Thanks.
Good evening Simpleas: I think we see ourselves as being separate from God because that’s how we’re trained to see it. Mindsets that are developed and reinforced over a lifetime are hard to overcome. You make a good reference to Jesus saying that we are Gods. It’s a passage that you won’t hear much from pulpits. The situation was that he was being questioned for telling people he was God. When they asked how he responded to the charge his answer was “Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods”’? Basically, he didn’t deny the charge but reminded them that the scriptures said that we all are that which he claimed to be.

As far as trying to be like Jesus, well that wouldn’t be a bad thing I suppose, but I have never met him so I couldn’t say. I rather think my life is about being like me.

All the best,
Gary
 
Good Morning Aloysium - I hope you are well today. What you are saying would be true if it had been written by Christians, however it was written by Hindus, and the central theme of all Hindu or Vedic philosophy is that you are in fact God, living under the delusion that you are not. So, what you are positing above is in fact not the meaning of the Isha Upanishad.

Now, as a Catholic, whether or not I see a common truth between what the people of the Subcontinent have said for 4 or 5 thousand years and what we have been saying for 2,000 years is largely a matter of our ability to comprehend. Which is not to say that your ability to comprehend is not greater than mine. It may well be. I am simply letting you know what I think, and I am not suggesting that you change what you think.

All the best,
Gary
Hey Gary,

Actually woke up with vertigo, but it cleared up during the day.
The Truth is the Truth. There are different perspectives, realizations and revelations.
Love is the Central Reality - the Trinity. There is no love in there just being one supreme identity.
People gotta stop meditating if it interferes with their being of service to one another.

Regards, Louis
 
grannymh,

I went to the source of wmw’s post of quotes on grace, Charles Journet’s talks titled The Meaning of Grace. The first paragraph of the first chapter of Part One is worth quoting in full:
The very first thing, one which must never be forgotten, which we shall never adequately grasp, is that the Judaeo-Christian revelation is the revelation of the love of God for us, of a love which will never cease to astonish us here below because it surpasses all we could possibly conceive, and of which we can never plumb the depths. To know the depths of God’s love for us, we should have to be God. And the effects of this love are disconcerting and surprising to us, precisely because we are unable to comprehend its Source. They are disconcerting to the purely rationalistic reason, even to reason pure and simple. [emphasis added]
ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/MNGGRACE.HTM

We need to keep this firmly in mind, that what we are dealing with is revelation. We are trying to understand what God has shown us about Himself and about how He sees His creation. Our ideas have to stay in harmony with what He has shown us.
 
Hey Gary,

Actually woke up with vertigo, but it cleared up during the day.
Good Evening Louis: I’m glad you’re feeling better.
The Truth is the Truth. There are different perspectives, realizations and revelations.
I agree there are different perspectives, realizations and revelations.
Love is the Central Reality - the Trinity.
That is certainly a perspective to vector in on. Love is very good.
There is no love in there just being one supreme identity.
I don’t understand what you are saying. Can you give some more detail?
People gotta stop meditating if it interferes with their being of service to one another.
I’m note sure that meditation or lack of it has a link to how much a person helps another person. Can you talk a bit about why you think that would be the case? I’m not saying it does or doesn’t, but I’m not seeing the connection.

All the best,
Gary
 
simpleas;12779228:
Gary Sheldrake;12775468:
Good evening Simpleas: I think we see ourselves as being separate from God because that’s how we’re trained to see it. Mindsets that are developed and reinforced over a lifetime are hard to overcome. You make a good reference to Jesus saying that we are Gods. It’s a passage that you won’t hear much from pulpits. The situation was that he was being questioned for telling people he was God. When they asked how he responded to the charge his answer was “Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods”’? Basically, he didn’t deny the charge but reminded them that the scriptures said that we all are that which he claimed to be.

As far as trying to be like Jesus, well that wouldn’t be a bad thing I suppose, but I have never met him so I couldn’t say. I rather think my life is about being like me.

All the best,
Gary
Thanks, just for reference here are the passages :

Psalm 82

God presides in the great assembly;
he renders judgment among the “gods”:

2 “How long will you[a] defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?**
3 Defend the weak and the fatherless;
uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

5 “The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”

8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.

John 10:33-35**

33The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” 34Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS '? 35"If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),…

:hmmm:

Jesus makes a reference to himself and man being “Gods” and for that people wanted to kill him. The Psalm was written to the “Judges” who were thought of as Gods I think, so we aren’t GOD, but “Gods”. We are to think of the bible as speaking to us here in the present and not just to the people of that time.

But what about Genesis 3:2-5

2The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ ”

4“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5“For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

While we can not become GOD, were Adam and Eve as “Gods” knowing the spritual knowledge of good and evil. The serpent doesn’t say they would become Gods, but God. Trying to become GOD by the temptation of all that, that holds what is God.

If they were not “Gods”, why would Jesus say what he did in John, and quote the Psalm?
I’m trying to think of a time I did here this scripture read at church, it is interesting to learn.

Thanks 🙂
 
Hey Gary,

Actually woke up with vertigo, but it cleared up during the day.
The Truth is the Truth. There are different perspectives, realizations and revelations.
Love is the Central Reality - the Trinity. There is no love in there just being one supreme identity.
People gotta stop meditating if it interferes with their being of service to one another.Regards, Louis
Please can you explain what you mean?

Thanks 🙂
 
grannymh,

I went to the source of wmw’s post of quotes on grace, Charles Journet’s talks titled The Meaning of Grace. The first paragraph of the first chapter of Part One is worth quoting in full:
The very first thing, one which must never be forgotten, which we shall never adequately grasp, is that the Judaeo-Christian revelation
Absolutely, we need to keep our focus on Divine Revelation. That is one of the reasons, I can understand the logic of Adam being the first human. Revelation tells us that there are only two sole parents of humankind. Logic tells us that the best way to insure that Revelation is transmitted properly is to have only two people as the source of humanity. 😃
 
Please can you explain what you mean?

Thanks 🙂
God is Love. If you want to know God you must love.

The Triune Godhead has not only been revealed, but is the only logical way to conceptualize God as Love.
God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He not only creates and maintains the universe but is the living Dialogue between His creation and Himself.

It seems to me that by simply meditating, many fall into the illusion that God is within as a supreme identity or the beingness of creation.
God is other to us. And, as even eastern religions on careful reading state, it is in surrendering ourselves that we commune with Him.

How do we surrender to God? By doing His will - to love.
 
God is Love. If you want to know God you must love.

The Triune Godhead has not only been revealed, but is the only logical way to conceptualize God as Love.
God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He not only creates and maintains the universe but is the living Dialogue between His creation and Himself.

It seems to me that by simply meditating, many fall into the illusion that God is within as a supreme identity or the beingness of creation.
God is other to us. And, as even eastern religions on careful reading state, it is in surrendering ourselves that we commune with Him.

How do we surrender to God? By doing His will - to love.
Ok thanks.

So you think that people who meditate believe God is within them, but somehow wouldn’t be able to love? I’m thinking that someone who can meditate usually has peace within them and can project that peace/love to other people. I have never sat in any form of meditation like a buddist or someone, I have sat in the quiet of a church in prayer/thought or out in the countryside (where I feel more closeness to God).

God is within us though?

Although I can think God is my creator, if we believe we are made in the image and likeness of the creator, we have a part of our creator within us. Like if I created something and put a part of myself into it, it doesn’t become me, but it has a part of me in it, there is a connection, a communication.
 
More logic. 🍿

When we follow the fact that God does not have physical/material restrictions like we humans, then we can easily accept the fact that God interacts with us. This is not something like “God of the Gaps” theory; this is real personal interaction.

Please do not jump on me because I see science in the first chapter in Genesis. Children find science all the time in nature because science requires one to observe without prejudice. What the Genesis author childishly observed was the difference in kind between animals and humans. That is basic. At the same time, this simple observation of animals and humans also serves as a base for a materialistic approach that animals and humans are essentially the same material. The difference is in degrees. Some say humans are very smart. 😉 Others say animals are just as smart in their own way. :rolleyes: Catholicism says that humans are smart enough to seek joy eternal. 😃 (*CCC *1730-1732)

Back to the idea that God personally interacts with us. With a dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26-27, the author observes the difference between the material creation and the human creation . Since the dawn of human history, humans have an inherent sense of the super-natural. (CCC 28) Throughout the history of the author’s people, listening to the super-natural God was essential.

Listening requires open ears and open heart. It was the human actions at the dawn of human history which spoke of real comnunication based on a real relationship with the super-natural Creator. The first humans, Adam and his spouse Eve, have a spiritual soul, in the image of God, which is why they could have a sincere loving relationship with their Creator. They shared in God’s life in their State of Original Holiness, aka, State of Sanctifying Grace. (*CCC *Glossary, Sanctifying Grace, page 898)

First there is the existence of God.

Second.God creates the human species in His image so that there is a real relationship between God and humans. But as *CCC *paragraphs 29-30 point out, humans can freely and deliberately reject God.

Third. Because all humankind is in Adam “as one body of one man” (CCC 404), each one of us has the power to have a real relationship with God where He personally interacts with us via our spiritual soul. We know that the graces of Jesus Christ come to each one of us so that we can accept God via our personal interaction. In addition, we can personally choose the State of Mortal Sin. (CCC Glossary, Mortal Sin, page 889) Because we are all descendants of Adam and Eve, we are included in John 3: 16-17; Romans 5: 12-21;
and 1 Corinthians 15: 21-22.

As we follow the fact that God does not have physical/material restrictions like we humans, we find that personal interactions between God and us exist. We see that personal interaction between God and the first individual human. This gives us complete assurance that God loves us as individuals. It also explains our own nature in that we are free to choose God or reject God.

The basic science of Genesis 2: 20 is a start. Genesis 1: 27 demonstrates the we are peerless. Catholicism assures us that we are more than a material animal because our heritage comes from a population of two. God is smarter than us.
 
More logic. 🍿

When we follow the fact that God does not have physical/material restrictions like we humans, then we can easily accept the fact that God interacts with us. This is not something like “God of the Gaps” theory; this is real personal interaction.

Please do not jump on me because I see science in the first chapter in Genesis. Children find science all the time in nature because science requires one to observe without prejudice. What the Genesis author childishly observed was the difference in kind between animals and humans. That is basic. At the same time, this simple observation of animals and humans also serves as a base for a materialistic approach that animals and humans are essentially the same material. The difference is in degrees. Some say humans are very smart. 😉 Others say animals are just as smart in their own way. :rolleyes: Catholicism says that humans are smart enough to seek joy eternal. 😃 (*CCC *1730-1732)

Back to the idea that God personally interacts with us. With a dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26-27, the author observes the difference between the material creation and the human creation . Since the dawn of human history, humans have an inherent sense of the super-natural. (CCC 28) Throughout the history of the author’s people, listening to the super-natural God was essential.

Listening requires open ears and open heart. It was the human actions at the dawn of human history which spoke of real comnunication based on a real relationship with the super-natural Creator. The first humans, Adam and his spouse Eve, have a spiritual soul, in the image of God, which is why they could have a sincere loving relationship with their Creator. They shared in God’s life in their State of Original Holiness, aka, State of Sanctifying Grace. (*CCC *Glossary, Sanctifying Grace, page 898)

First there is the existence of God.

Second.God creates the human species in His image so that there is a real relationship between God and humans. But as *CCC *paragraphs 29-30 point out, humans can freely and deliberately reject God.

Third. Because all humankind is in Adam “as one body of one man” (CCC 404), each one of us has the power to have a real relationship with God where He personally interacts with us via our spiritual soul. We know that the graces of Jesus Christ come to each one of us so that we can accept God via our personal interaction. In addition, we can personally choose the State of Mortal Sin. (CCC Glossary, Mortal Sin, page 889) Because we are all descendants of Adam and Eve, we are included in John 3: 16-17; Romans 5: 12-21;
and 1 Corinthians 15: 21-22.

As we follow the fact that God does not have physical/material restrictions like we humans, we find that personal interactions between God and us exist. We see that personal interaction between God and the first individual human. This gives us complete assurance that God loves us as individuals. It also explains our own nature in that we are free to choose God or reject God.

The basic science of Genesis 2: 20 is a start. Genesis 1: 27 demonstrates the we are peerless. Catholicism assures us that we are more than a material animal because our heritage comes from a population of two. God is smarter than us.
I think Augustine can contribute here too:
**“I found thee not, O Lord, without, because I erred in seeking thee without that wert within.” **

And from Confessions:
"No, my God, I would not exist, I would not be at all, if you were not in me."

And also from Acts 17:28:
"For in him we live and move and have our being."
 
I think Augustine can contribute here too:
**“I found thee not, O Lord, without, because I erred in seeking thee without that wert within.” **

And from Confessions:
"No, my God, I would not exist, I would not be at all, if you were not in me."

And also from Acts 17:28:
"For in him we live and move and have our being."
👍
Thank you. 😃
 
Is it logical then that the first two humans who had a loving relationship with the creator, an intelligence to know what their actions would do to the rest of their children, and decide to go it alone?

I can not see the logic in that.
 
Is it silly to concentrate on our beginning? What is the benefit of understanding someone’s actions at the dawn of human history?
I do not know how readers will answer those questions. I do not know if any readers care about those questions. I do know that there are times when some people wonder why life seems so mechanical? And why does the gift of beauty brighten our lives? Could it be that beauty is a forgotten part of our human nature?

Going back to our beginning as a human species, we, because of the first three chapters of Genesis, can find logical clues in the life of the first human fondly known as Adam. The first clue is obvious. Genesis 1: 1 refers to God Himself creating the universe and its creatures. In our present lives, we see beauty as good. God sees the goodness in His creation. We see the beauty in our universe because of God’s goodness. The beautiful harmony of creation is intelligible.

In the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26, we find that a single element of creation (a human) is actually created in the image of God. Being in the image of God, this first human shares in God’s spiritual nature. Adam did not become God. Our decomposing anatomy definitely tells us that humans are not God. Regarding Adam’s original beauty, the Catholic Church teaches that Adam received the extra gift of not having to suffer or die. This did not make Adam perfect. It was more like a preservation of Adam’s original material beauty in addition to making life easier without suffering and dying. Besides Adam’s material beauty, his spiritual beauty existed because he was in a loving relationship with his Creator.

Returning to today’s world, we can wonder about the original beauty of the Garden and its first two real human inhabitants. Actually, we do not have to “wonder” because the first human was there and the first three chapters describe the life of the first two humans and, more importantly, why the beauty of Adam’s soul was lost.

Knowing what changed Adam is very important because we do not want to make the same mistake.
It is not silly to contemplate our beginnings. On the other hand, it is silly to put all our faith-eggs in that one basket. What I mean is allowing our faith come crashing down like a house of cards if some point or other becomes questionable in our minds or is contrasted with seemingly reasonable counter argument.

For example, I need look no further than my evening news to see, first hand, the concupiscence of mankind. It is great to have an explanation for original sin but even without that, the evidence of my own eyes in the here and now testifies to its reality.

What is it about humbly admitting, “I don’t know,” that ruffles so many peoples feathers? Why is it so hard to say, “I don’t know if Creation took place in seven days or over the course of millions of years. I see the magnificent hand of God everywhere I look and that is enough for me.”
 
Is it logical then that the first two humans who had a loving relationship with the creator, an intelligence to know what their actions would do to the rest of their children, and decide to go it alone?

I can not see the logic in that.
That is correct when we examine the devastating action of Adam.

The logic of this thread is directed to the sole existence of Adam and his spouse as the first parents of humankind. We need to remind ourselves that Adam had received Original Holiness and Justice for all human nature, including all his descendants. Adam’s disobedience wounded human nature so that his discendants would be born in a state of deprivation of Original Holiness and Justice.

The freedom to seek God is an essential part of the first human’s nature. We did not lose that important freedom. Even if Adam had done the right thing, we would still have to face Satan’s temptations. We would still have to obey God. When I am in the mood to slap Adam upside the head, I try to remember that because of Adam’s existence I have the opporuntiy for joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision. If Adam never existed, then I would be some archaic fossil without a speck of hope for joy eternal.
 
It is not silly to contemplate our beginnings. On the other hand, it is silly to put all our faith-eggs in that one basket. What I mean is allowing our faith come crashing down like a house of cards if some point or other becomes questionable in our minds or is contrasted with seemingly reasonable counter argument.

For example, I need look no further than my evening news to see, first hand, the concupiscence of mankind. It is great to have an explanation for original sin but even without that, the evidence of my own eyes in the here and now testifies to its reality.

What is it about humbly admitting, “I don’t know,” that ruffles so many peoples feathers? Why is it so hard to say, “I don’t know if Creation took place in seven days or over the course of millions of years. I see the magnificent hand of God everywhere I look and that is enough for me.”
My first thought in answer to the question – “What is it about humbly admitting, “I don’t know,” that ruffles so many peoples feathers?” – is to imagine Adam with ruffled feathers looking at the forbidden tree. That tree symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that Adam needed to respect in his relationship with his Creator. Those limits meant that Adam needed to live in free submission to his Creator.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top