G
grannymh
Guest
Obviously, the universal Catechism of the Catholic , Second Edition, is written for us.
Details regarding Original Sin are found in post 115.
Pre-Fall is in Genesis 1: 26-31.
*CCC *356-358
CCC 374-376
Adam & Logic, Third Edition, Original Relationship between Humanity and Divinity
- Status
Details regarding Original Sin are found in post 115.
Pre-Fall is in Genesis 1: 26-31.
*CCC *356-358
CCC 374-376
S
simpleas
Guest
Gen 1: 26-27 is referring to the earth, not Heaven, thats how I’ve read it to mean.
S
simpleas
Guest
Are we supposed to be discussing O.S or the original relationship between A&E and God.Obviously, the universal Catechism of the Catholic , Second Edition, is written for us.
Details regarding Original Sin are found in post 115.
Pre-Fall is in Genesis 1: 26-31.
*CCC *356-358
CCC 374-376
I think I have probably gotten side tracked and derailed the thread into discussing O.S.
As I said the CCC tells us that A&E needed to stay in this original relationship, trust in God and they would not die, but it does not explain why or how they would choose to distrust God, and prefer themselves over God.
Wouldn’t the logical thing be that they would have chosen the good since they only ever knew good over the evil deed, given that they had knowledge enough to have known the serious consequence not only for themselves but for all humanity, isn’t that logical, or at least a common sense reaction?
The original relationship with God could have only been of goodness. Then it’s logical that only goodness comes from goodness?
W
wmw
Guest
I tend to look at the discussion as “what can we deduce from the teaching of A&E that best explains our current relationships to God” and that this broader topic is inclusive of original sin and largely the “end goal” is what is O. S. and who, what, where, when, and how did we get there. There are two ends of the candle to burn. 1 from the beginning to O.S. and the other from O. S. back to the beginning.
By searching the CCC further I’ve explored the " change in man’s nature" method of transmission of O.S. and am quite amazed at how much the CCC repeats what I’ve said. (I do believe my Catholic School formation was well in line with the CCC and why I tend to echo it.)
The result of original sin according to the CCC is that man’s wounded nature that deprived us of original holiness and justice also weakens us by increased ignorance, suffering, the domination of death, and inclination to sin.
That original sin is “with human nature” and transmitted by inclusion with our human nature.
By searching the CCC further I’ve explored the " change in man’s nature" method of transmission of O.S. and am quite amazed at how much the CCC repeats what I’ve said. (I do believe my Catholic School formation was well in line with the CCC and why I tend to echo it.)
The result of original sin according to the CCC is that man’s wounded nature that deprived us of original holiness and justice also weakens us by increased ignorance, suffering, the domination of death, and inclination to sin.
That original sin is “with human nature” and transmitted by inclusion with our human nature.
S
simpleas
Guest
The thread’s title is about the original relationship between humanity and Divinity, but it will become more about the relationship between humanity and Divinity after sin, because no one has observed what the original relationship with God was like.
to me, we just hit a blank wall, and then repeat the CCC over.
W
wmw
Guest
For me soooo **much **to learn and ponder. The vastness of our relationship to an infinite being.
We are Adam and Adam is us for we are one humanity made male and female. To try to separate original relationships from current ones is like trying to separate humanity. We do a lot of that, but it is false. One article said it makes more sense to divide races of humans by blood type than by skin color or regions of the globe.
We do know Adam’s weaknesses in his relationship to God. They are on display in every news cast. Yet, there is sooo much of the positive side to explore.
[Here in the Archdioceses of Seattle we have a Bishop that uses this “sooo **much” in his addresses to the parishes he visits usually to describe the love of God for us.]
We are Adam and Adam is us for we are one humanity made male and female. To try to separate original relationships from current ones is like trying to separate humanity. We do a lot of that, but it is false. One article said it makes more sense to divide races of humans by blood type than by skin color or regions of the globe.
We do know Adam’s weaknesses in his relationship to God. They are on display in every news cast. Yet, there is sooo much of the positive side to explore.
[Here in the Archdioceses of Seattle we have a Bishop that uses this “sooo **much” in his addresses to the parishes he visits usually to describe the love of God for us.]
S
simpleas
Guest
" in his addresses to the parishes he visits usually to describe the love of God for us.]
Much I agree with here. I would just say that we are always learning, and in a way discovering our relationship with God, rather than trying to separate it. Although the story is one about separation from God through sin.
Have a nice weekend all
G
grannymh
Guest
This comment from post 123 makes me want to cry and laugh at the same time.The thread’s title is about the original relationship between humanity and Divinity, but it will become more about the relationship between humanity and Divinity after sin, because no one has observed what the original relationship with God was like.
to me, we just hit a blank wall, and then repeat the CCC over.
“… no one has observed what the original relationship with God was like.”
Today, I posted this comment in this thread, “Explaining Original Sin” in the Philosophy Forum.
“Personal observation. I am starting to think that the last time the original problem of Original Sin was discussed is in the late 1940’s. No one seems to care these days.”
Silly me. When it comes to Original Sin and pre-Fall and post-Fall, I thought that the difference in status between God the Creator and Adam the creature would be obvious when studying the original relationship between humanity and Divinity.
W
wmw
Guest
Yes, the separation due to sin the one and many that separate humanity from the divinity of God. We humans have been very consistent about it by “going about things our own way” and causing very grisly results. We are one in Adam for we have his nature. Not the created nature that God gave him, but a wounded chosen nature. At least chosen by Adam & Eve; we are simply recipients of it by being born of this self-wounded couple.Much I agree with here. I would just say that we are always learning, and in a way discovering our relationship with God, rather than trying to separate it. Although the story is one about separation from God through sin.
Have a nice weekend all
So we do explore new presentations and here a presentation in logical forms, but using the CCC checks our work. We can review the statements with the CCC and reexamine whether any new statements have not been true to the Holy Spirit that guides the Church in truth. Also, from the CCC we gather further insights to add to our logic presentation to enrich it and give it greater clarity as our feeble efforts may.
S
simpleas
Guest
I meant by no one has observed the original relationship between God and man, because no other was in the garden, not even their own offspring.This comment from post 123 makes me want to cry and laugh at the same time.
“… no one has observed what the original relationship with God was like.”
Today, I posted this comment in this thread, “Explaining Original Sin” in the Philosophy Forum.
“Personal observation. I am starting to think that the last time the original problem of Original Sin was discussed is in the late 1940’s. No one seems to care these days.”
Silly me. When it comes to Original Sin and pre-Fall and post-Fall, I thought that the difference in status between God the Creator and Adam the creature would be obvious when studying the original relationship between humanity and Divinity.
S
simpleas
Guest
Adam did not created the fallen nature, (he was only a human) but he brought that fallen nature into existance. So wouldn’t that fallen nature have already existed?
I don’t understand how a human decides on something, without having the means to know the difference.
We say Adam knew about death, knew right from wrong, but still fell without having a fallen nature…
I just get it…
I don’t understand how a human decides on something, without having the means to know the difference.
We say Adam knew about death, knew right from wrong, but still fell without having a fallen nature…
I just get it…
G
grannymh
Guest
Two Serious Questions.
- Could it be possible that God told someone about His original relationship with Adam?
F
fhansen
Guest
You’re right that our knowledge of Adam & Eve is limited by virtue of the fact that we cannot directly relate to their state in Eden, even if we still share a basic nature in common which should help us identify with them to a great degree. But their original giftedness exceeded ours, of course, even after we’re justified at Baptism.
He didn’t start with a fallen nature, as in a corrupted or wounded nature, lost and separated from His Creator. God didn’t create Adam that way. But, while good, Adam wasn’t perfect either apparently. And, as has been mentioned several times, God did create His universe in a “state of journeying to perfection” according to the catechism. So it can be assumed that Adam was given sufficient knowledge to be held responsible/culpable for his act of disobedience, but perhaps not so perfect in wisdom or knowledge that he should be considered irredeemable by God for his act, Who, after all, knew beforehand that humanity would fall. Culpability varies in worldly crimes as well, with different punishments or penalties imposed accordingly. At any rate in this case God is *producing *something in Adam, and in us, that is perfected by trial.
W
wmw
Guest
(P#) A human’s guilt of a sin is not passed to the descendants of the sinner.
(P#) A human’s State of Holiness and Justice or State of Sin is transmitted to the descendants of the sinner.
(P#) Adam & Eve are humans that were originally created in the state of Original Holiness and Justice.
(P#) Mortal Sin changes the state of the sinner to -]something less than the state of Original Holiness and Justice/-] a State of Mortal Sin.
(P#) Adam & Eve are humans that committed the first Mortal Sin.
(P#) Original Sin is the mortal sin by which the first human beings disobeyed the commandment of God. As a consequence they lost the state of Original Holiness and Justice, and became subject to the law of death.
(C#) if Adam & Eve’s state of Mortal Sin was the first Mortal Sin they are in a State of Original Sin.
(C#) Adam & Eve entered into a State of Original Sin.
(P2) If Adam & Eve are in a State of Original Sin, then all of Adam & Eve’s descendants are in a State of Original Sin
(C1) All of Adam’s descendants are in a State of Original Sin (MP P1, P2)
There are still many corrections to be made, but since there are no others that are making corrections I will try to get the ball rolling again.
(P#) A human’s State of Holiness and Justice or State of Sin is transmitted to the descendants of the sinner.
(P#) Adam & Eve are humans that were originally created in the state of Original Holiness and Justice.
(P#) Mortal Sin changes the state of the sinner to -]something less than the state of Original Holiness and Justice/-] a State of Mortal Sin.
(P#) Adam & Eve are humans that committed the first Mortal Sin.
(P#) Original Sin is the mortal sin by which the first human beings disobeyed the commandment of God. As a consequence they lost the state of Original Holiness and Justice, and became subject to the law of death.
(C#) if Adam & Eve’s state of Mortal Sin was the first Mortal Sin they are in a State of Original Sin.
(C#) Adam & Eve entered into a State of Original Sin.
(P2) If Adam & Eve are in a State of Original Sin, then all of Adam & Eve’s descendants are in a State of Original Sin
(C1) All of Adam’s descendants are in a State of Original Sin (MP P1, P2)
There are still many corrections to be made, but since there are no others that are making corrections I will try to get the ball rolling again.
S
simpleas
Guest
Telling someone about the original relationship is different from a person experiencing that relationship. Bit like someone telling you God exists.
S
simpleas
Guest
This sounds strange to me, why would God gift the first humans, knowing they would sin and send the rest of humanity on what seems like a very very long journey to perfection. Are we the second class citizens? I know you probably didn’t mean it like I have read it.
There are a number of threads discussing Original sin on CAF recently, it is a hot topic!
S
simpleas
Guest
P#) Mortal Sin changes the state of the sinner to something less than the state of Original Holiness and Justice a State of Mortal Sin.
Just pondering this, a person is not a sinner until they commit mortal sin, (separation from God) So I’m thinking how does a person sin mortally unless they are already a sinner? In the case of the first couple for example?
Maybe I’m not making any sense, but it’s fine, I’ll ramble on to myself anyway
G
grannymh
Guest
That may be your perspective. Thank you.
For me, I am delighted, grateful, dancing on the ceiling, all because someone told me that God exists. And I can say the same about someone telling me about the original relationship between humanity and Divinity. Those difficulties in posts 134-135 disappear in the blink of an eye.
Here is a suggestion ----
Write out *CCC *1730 and CCC 396.
Circle the words which pertain to Adam. For example. Circle the words “God created man” and circle these words “by cleaving to Him” which pertain directly to Adam’s original relationship with his Creator God. In fact, once one understands these two sets of words, one is able to fill in the blanks of the original relationship between humanity, Adam, and Divinity, God Himself.
Is there anyone else ready to accept that challenge?
And, of course, post the reasons for their choice of words.
S
simpleas
Guest
Knowing that God exists, rather than someone telling you God exists is the difference I meant.
One could read the bible back to front again and again and still not know God. And the CCC!
I’m also glad I was told about God, although I heard more about Christ and the new creation, the link with Adam was much a blur…
One could read the bible back to front again and again and still not know God. And the CCC!
I’m also glad I was told about God, although I heard more about Christ and the new creation, the link with Adam was much a blur…
- Status