Adam & Logic, 2nd Edition

[grannymh]

So there was evil in the garden then, Adam having a knowledge of both Good and Evil would mean he in some way experienced them both, not just Good.

You the “super” gran is giving up???:bigyikes:

I am giving up on the “experience is necessary in order to know evil” issue. I have run out of ways to tell people that understanding evil is part of original human nature. (Genesis 1: 26-27; Genesis 2: 15-17) Personally, it is my observation that denying Adam’s knowledge of evil is one of many ways to attack a number of basic Catholic doctrines.

 

[simpleas]

Adam needed the serpent before he would sin. We do very well on our own.

We do have the fruit of the tree of eternal life available to us - the Eucharist.
There was no going back to Eden - it was forward to Christ.

We did not actually gain knowledge - we became ignorant in fact.
We followed our own will rather than God’s in eating of the fruit. We committed the first human evil act: Adam took the first blow on the nail that prierced the hand of our Lord and Saviour
To determine what is moral is not our prerogative. They are God’s laws, based on He Himself who is Love.

What favour did Adam do for us? What knowledge specifically do you have that you believe was granted through Adam’s sin?

I didn’t say we don’t have the fruit of the tree of eternal life, I was referring to at the time of Adams fall, God stopped him from eating of the tree of eternal life, because he had become like God, knowing good and evil and was prevented from being immortal.

Just the basic knowledge of what is Good and what is Evil. Looking through our human history, we have thirst for knowledge, I’m doing it now. Adam if he was of the same human made up stuff as me, did the same thing. But he somehow learnt too much.

 

[davidv]

I didn’t say we don’t have the fruit of the tree of eternal life, I was referring to at the time of Adams fall, God stopped him from eating of the tree of eternal life, because he had become like God, knowing good and evil and was prevented from being immortal.

I believe this is gross mis-interpretation of Genesis. Satan lied when he said they would be like God. In fact they did not become like God. Instead the became less than fully human. God’s preventing them from eating from the tree of life was a merciful act that prevented them from being in this less than fully human state forever.

Just the basic knowledge of what is Good and what is Evil. Looking through our human history, we have thirst for knowledge, I’m doing it now. Adam if he was of the same human made up stuff as me, did the same thing. But he somehow learnt too much.

He did not learn too much. He got to experience what he already knew. He gave up the good for a counterfeit.

 

[simpleas]

I am giving up on the “experience is necessary in order to know evil” issue. I have run out of ways to tell people that understanding evil is part of original human nature. (Genesis 1: 26-27; Genesis 2: 15-17) Personally, it is my observation that denying Adam’s knowledge of evil is one of many ways to attack a number of basic Catholic doctrines.

Ok my bad…

Change my wording from experience to understanding. I don’t think I denied his knowledge, my “investigation” was more about souls and ordered nature… So he had an understanding of evil, I have an understanding of what evil is, and so I avoid what I believe is an evil. Adam did not. Adam had a friendship with God, I believe I do too. Both of us can still fall away, both can loose SG. Adam to me was the same, no more no less.

My turn to “give up” (for now)

 

[simpleas]

I believe this is gross mis-interpretation of Genesis. Satan lied when he said they would be like God. In fact they did not become like God. Instead the became less than fully human. God’s preventing them from eating from the tree of life was a merciful act that prevented them from being in this less than fully human state forever.

He did not learn too much. He got to experience what he already knew. He gave up the good for a counterfeit.

I refer to what is written in Genesis 3 : 22 about becoming like one of us (God?) with his knowledge of good and evil.

 

[ynotzap]

When Adam disobeyed God, he lost sanctifying grace, and when he did, then he experienced guilt, and experienced the disorder within himself. this is the reason he hid, because he was naked Later God made covering for him and Eve. At this point Adam had knowledge of good (the grace of God, and its effects) and he had knowledge of the absence of Grace and it’s effects on his nature, evil is the absence of good it is nothing positive.

 

[davidv]

I refer to what is written in Genesis 3 : 22 about becoming like one of us (God?) with his knowledge of good and evil.

Since Adam already had intellectual knowledge of the evil of eating from the tree prior sinning, the only knowledge he gained from the sin was experiential knowledge.

 

[grannymh]

Since Adam already had intellectual knowledge of the evil of eating from the tree prior sinning, the only knowledge he gained from the sin was experiential knowledge.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[simpleas]

Since Adam already had intellectual knowledge of the evil of eating from the tree prior sinning, the only knowledge he gained from the sin was experiential knowledge.

Gen 3 : 22
And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

That is what I was referring to. Yes we know that when he did eat of the tree he knew/experienced what Good/Evil actually was. Now he could no longer live forever.

 

[simpleas]

:twocents:

God plants various trees in the garden, one the tree of Life and one the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil.
He tells A&E to eat from any, but not from the knowledge.
We know that evil isn’t a good thing, but we can’t live in this world without both being observed or even experienced.
I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil. Because I thought that all A&E knew and experienced was Good (God) all three in union. A&E having an understanding of what Evil could be, but not experiencing evil until they ate from the tree, they knew what Good was because they were made Good and shared life with God? Unless they didn’t experience what Good was before the sin, they only had a understanding of both?

 

[grannymh]

:twocents:

God plants various trees in the garden, one the tree of Life and one the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil.
He tells A&E to eat from any, but not from the knowledge.
We know that evil isn’t a good thing, but we can’t live in this world without both being observed or even experienced.
I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil. Because I thought that all A&E knew and experienced was Good (God) all three in union. A&E having an understanding of what Evil could be, but not experiencing evil until they ate from the tree, they knew what Good was because they were made Good and shared life with God? Unless they didn’t experience what Good was before the sin, they only had a understanding of both?

In answer to the good question – “I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil.”

What other knowledge is there besides good and evil?

Does a created human creature have the capability to know all good and all evil? Does God have to experience evil in order to understand His own absence?

These questions are difficult because the tree’s name is being interpreted on a human basis. Is it valid to interpret the forbidden tree’s name on a human basis? Of course that is not valid because a human did not make that tree. (Information source. CCC 396)

Note: Since this is the Philosophy Forum, the question – " Does God have to experience evil in order to understand His own absence?’’ is invalid because of the principle of non-contradiction. God is eternal existence; therefore His presence cannot be absent.

Take about a five minute break and be grateful that God is eternal existence.

I am grateful because when I get out of Purgatory, I will have joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision. I do remember the time when I thought heaven meant having all the ice cream possible.

Going back to the beginning – Does a created human creature have the capability to know all good and all evil? The operative word is capability. Is our human nature capable of omniscience? Is our nature omnipotent?

Do recall that we are discussing the name of the forbidden tree and not its fruit.

 

[grannymh]

:twocents:

God plants various trees in the garden, one the tree of Life and one the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil.
He tells A&E to eat from any, but not from the knowledge.
We know that evil isn’t a good thing, but we can’t live in this world without both being observed or even experienced.
I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil. Because I thought that all A&E knew and experienced was Good (God) all three in union. A&E having an understanding of what Evil could be, but not experiencing evil until they ate from the tree, they knew what Good was because they were made Good and shared life with God? Unless they didn’t experience what Good was before the sin, they only had a understanding of both?

While I am giving up the “experience is necessary in order to know evil” issue; it so happens that there is this interesting twist to Simpleas post.
“I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil.”

Bingo!
It is the name of the tree, not the fruit, which is the key to understanding Adam’s disobedient action.
In contrast to Shakespeare.
“A rose by any other name would smell as sweet” is a commonly quoted part of a dialogue in William Shakespeare’s play Romeo and Juliet, in which Juliet argues that the names of things do not matter, only what things “are”. (from Google)
The unique name of the tree does matter. And Adam recognized the logic of the name.

I would like to slowly present some ideas so that there can be time for deep thinking. My guess is that others have wondered about the weird name.

 

[grannymh]

:twocents:

God plants various trees in the garden, one the tree of Life and one the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil.
He tells A&E to eat from any, but not from the knowledge.
We know that evil isn’t a good thing, but we can’t live in this world without both being observed or even experienced.
I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil. Because I thought that all A&E knew and experienced was Good (God) all three in union. A&E having an understanding of what Evil could be, but not experiencing evil until they ate from the tree, they knew what Good was because they were made Good and shared life with God? Unless they didn’t experience what Good was before the sin, they only had a understanding of both?

In answer to the good question – “I wondered then why the tree is called Good and Evil, and not just evil.”

What other knowledge is there besides good and evil? Does a created human creature have the capability to know all good and all evil? Does God have to experience evil in order to understand His own absence?

These questions are difficult because the tree’s name is being interpreted on a human basis. Is it valid to interpret the forbidden tree’s name on a human basis? Of course, that is not valid because a human did not make that tree. (Information source. CCC 396)

Note: Since this is the Philosophy Forum, the question – " Does God have to experience evil in order to understand His own absence?’’ is invalid because of the principle of non-contradiction. God is eternal existence; therefore His presence cannot be absent in human words.

Take about a five minute break and be grateful that God is eternal existence.

I am grateful because when I get out of Purgatory, I will have joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision. I do remember the time when I thought heaven meant having all the ice cream possible.

Going back to the beginning – Does a created human creature have the capability to know all good and all evil? The operative word is capability. Is our human nature capable of omniscience? Is our nature omnipotent?

Do recall that we are discussing the name of the forbidden tree and not its fruit.

 

[davidv]

Gen 3 : 22
And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

That is what I was referring to. Yes we know that when he did eat of the tree he knew/experienced what Good/Evil actually was. Now he could no longer live forever.

So how does this support what I called faulty claims made in your post #81?

 

[grannymh]

I believe this is gross mis-interpretation of Genesis. Satan lied when he said they would be like God. In fact they did not become like God. Instead the became less than fully human. God’s preventing them from eating from the tree of life was a merciful act that prevented them from being in this less than fully human state forever.

He did not learn too much. He got to experience what he already knew. He gave up the good for a counterfeit.

I am curious. A fully human person is spiritual soul and material anatomy. So how does one describe a less than fully human Adam?

 

[ynotzap]

It is my understanding that just knowing is part of our experience, so it can’t. be treated as something apart from our experience I can only assume that they didn’t have the understanding of the difference between good and evil, as they never had this experience before The tree represented the experience of the difference., what it is to have good, and what it is to have evil, or the absence of good (you never miss the water till the well runs dry)

 

[davidv]

I am curious. A fully human person is spiritual soul and material anatomy. So how does one describe a less than fully human Adam?

When Adam chose to go his own way rather than God’s way he gave up something, and was no longer the best he could be. This is the sense of less human that I intended, not that he became another kind of being.

 

[ynotzap]

I am curious. A fully human person is spiritual soul and material anatomy. So how does one describe a less than fully human Adam?/QUOTE

The union of body and soul constitutes a complete human in his nature, but it does not mean that all his potentials are fulfilled. For one of the conditions of being human is that we have as part of our nature Potency and Act, that is we have the capacity to become(Potency) to becoming(Act) eg. I have the capacity to know (Potency) and when I know the capacity is realized (act) So to be fully human means I have experienced the fulfillment of my potentials to some degree. This condition varies, with each individual. Many times this expression is used eg.: When we are too intellectual in our spirituality, and don’t experience the affections when, contemplating the passion of Christ , we may not be very sympathetic, or empathetic, we are lacking in any human emotion which involves both the mind, and the heart, or feelings and convictions. Our prayer becomes "angelized ’ and not humanized and we are not angels.

 

[grannymh]

Thank you DavidV and Ynotzap for answering my question about human nature. The more I learn about human nature, the more sure I am that Adam was individually created. Handmade, we could say.

Sometimes, I find it hard to think of Adam as having limitations. That is why I brought up the topic of the forbidden tree’s name, not its fruits which some people refer to as good knowledge and bad knowledge. Here is *CCC *396 which demands study time.
**396 **God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” spells this out: “for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die.” The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.

 

[davidv]

Thank you DavidV and Ynotzap for answering my question about human nature. The more I learn about human nature, the more sure I am that Adam was individually created. Handmade, we could say.

Sometimes, I find it hard to think of Adam as having limitations. That is why I brought up the topic of the forbidden tree’s name, not its fruits which some people refer to as good knowledge and bad knowledge. Here is *CCC *396 which demands study time.**396 **God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” spells this out: “for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die.” The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.

Since Adam was a creature he obviously had limitations as he was not equal to his creator. Also, since he was placed in the garden and not in heaven, he also needed to grow in holiness. This growth would have included his unwavering obedience.