Adam & Logic

[grannymh]

From wmw post 251

Prayerful thought, what is “The knowledge of good and evil”?
I think for humans to “know” something means to truly experience it. In contrast, our modern education imparts knowledge to us in a classroom setting. Thus our modern use of the word has been removed from first person experience, but I’d assume this first person experience is the style of “knowledge” to which the name of the tree is referring.

Aside **** I’ve heard it said that the old phrase of carnal knowledge is a good example of a transition many have like this knowing about something and then practicing it later in life. I think this analogous example & terminology has backfired and now folks think the original sin was about carnal knowledge. I feel this is the misunderstood connection between original sin and carnal knowledge.] Now back to academic knowledge and experiential knowledge:

Before sinning Adam had an academic knowledge of evil. After sinning Adam has the experiential knowledge of living through the emotions, etc. of doing evil and being one with it. The consequences are now realized and lived. There is no return, no undoing, no going back to Eden. Great suffering is imparted to all from each act of evil, but the first displays the greatest transformation from all brightly good to the mix of gray in good and evil to which we’ve become accustom. Our experience of Earth is a far cry from the experience of Eden, but God will make us better for it; since, his salvation plan will turn the evils to goods. There is no going back, but if you live within the plan of salvation you will be better for it.

My personal choice for the definition of “academic” is number 5. “based on formal education.” (American Heritage College Dictionary, Fourth Edition) In my granny world, I consider labels on food cans as “academic knowledge” meaning that I do not have to open each can to gain experiential knowledge. That knowledge comes during the experience of mealtime.
I especially like wmw’s comment “After sinning Adam has the experiential knowledge of living through the
emotions, etc. …” Most of the time, at our family meal, the transference from can to plate did result in good emotions. Then there were other times, which bordered on the “sinful”. It was back to the academic cookbook!

wmw’s references to Adam’s academic and experiential knowledge are on target. Nonetheless, this inquiring granny wondered if there were both academic and experiential knowledge before Genesis, chapter three, where verses 2-3 is the example of academic knowledge imparted by God and verses 7-10. Personally, I bet that fear was the prime emotion followed by the experience of sewing fig leaves together to hopefully ease their pain at the loss of the garden of friendship with God.

In my humble opinion, Genesis 1: 26-31 would be similar to academic knowledge in that God is the authority up front. Genesis 1: 15 is where Adam would have experiential knowledge of God. This sentence from post 255, Ignatian Reflections, August 27, 2013, is essential .
“After all it was not merely Adam or Eve who fell in the Garden, nor was it merely they who fell together but rather in them fell all of humanity that was to come.”
All of humanity is in Adam “as one body of one man.” This Catholic doctrine is both before and after the Fall. It is by Revelation that we know that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature which would descend from him. (CCC 404)

Therefore, at the very beginning God places the original Adam, not a population of people, in the garden where God as Creator interacts with the first human creature Adam and his subsequent spouse Eve. (CCC 355)

Link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Additional note. Out of curiosity, I googled CCC knowledge and came up with this.
32 The world: starting from movement, becoming, contingency, and the world’s order and beauty, one can come to a knowledge of God as the origin and the end of the universe.
Here is the link to “Ways of Coming to Know God” CCC 26-49
scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm

Because CCC paragraphs include smaller print – paragraphs 20-21 explain the usage of small print.
**20 **The use of small print in certain passages indicates observations of an historical or apologetic nature, or supplementary doctrinal explanations.
21 The quotations, also in small print, from patristic, liturgical, magisterial or hagiographical sources, are intended to enrich the doctrinal presentations. These texts have often been chosen with a view to direct catechetical use.
Yet, the Genesis writer gives examples of the individual Adam’s direct and immediate knowledge of God. St. Paul confirms the individuality of Adam in 1 Corinthians 15: 20-23 and Romans 5: 12-21. To me, there is a strong connection between an individual Who is True Man and True God and a necessary first individual parent who freely, with full academic knowledge, changed the course of human history.

 

[wmw]

You lost me starting in this small paragraph:

In my humble opinion, Genesis 1: 26-31 would be similar to academic knowledge in that God is the authority up front. Genesis 1: 15 is where Adam would have experiential knowledge of God.

Genesis 1: 26-31:

Then God said: Let us make* human beings in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the tame animals, all the wild animals, and all the creatures that crawl on the earth.

27God created mankind in his image;

in the image of God he created them;

male and female* he created them.

28God blessed them and God said to them: Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.* Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth.m 29* n God also said: See, I give you every seed-bearing plant on all the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food; 30and to all the wild animals, all the birds of the air, and all the living creatures that crawl on the earth, I give all the green plants for food. And so it happened. 31God looked at everything he had made, and found it very good. Evening came, and morning followed—the sixth day.

You must be talking exclusively from Adam’s point of view since we only have our academic reading of the Bible and other Church documents (excluding personal spiritual experiences), but he likely had first hand knowledge of how his image was also the image of God. Also, of what sort of dominion he had over all of creation. These were all good things that he was in harmony with in the garden of Eden. So, I’m confused and don’t see how the rest of what your text and quotes fits into the two knowledge’s.

 

[grannymh]

You lost me starting in this small paragraph:
From granny’s post 256. “In my humble opinion, Genesis 1: 26-31 would be similar to academic knowledge in that God is the authority up front. Genesis 1: 15 is where Adam would have experiential knowledge of God.”
Genesis 1: 26-31:
26. Then God said: Let us make* human beings in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the tame animals, all the wild animals, and all the creatures that crawl on the earth.
27. God created mankind in his image; in the image of God he created them; male and female* he created them.
28. God blessed them and God said to them: Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.* Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that crawl on the earth.
29. God also said: See, I give you every seed-bearing plant on all the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food;
30. and to all the wild animals, all the birds of the air, and all the living creatures that crawl on the earth, I give all the green plants for food. And so it happened.
31God looked at everything he had made, and found it very good. Evening came, and morning followed—the sixth day.

You must be talking exclusively from Adam’s point of view since we only have our academic reading of the Bible and other Church documents (excluding personal spiritual experiences), but he likely had first hand knowledge of how his image was also the image of God.

Yes, indeed. I am talking, actually speculating, exclusively from Adam’s point of view.

There are two axioms or acceptable presuppositions for this thread. 1. God as Creator exists. and 2. God as Creator interacts with humans.

Genesis 1: 1-25 tells about God’s creative acts (axiom 1.). It is not all that important that this initial account is not in contemporary natural science terminology. The important fact is that God is sole Creator. God has the sole authority over the entire material/physical creation. That is what is important to remember in this century.

We can almost hear trumpets when reading verse 27 – it is that dramatic. The Almighty creates a creature who can share in His divine life while on earth (sanctifying grace). Not only that, the human is to have dominion over the rest of the earthly creatures. I like* Roget’s International Thesaurus*, fourth edition, where words related to “dominion” are supremacy, primacy and first place. From a biological species position, the human would be “different in kind” and essentially superior to all other earthly species. This would definitely fit with the concept of harmony in creation.

When we think about academic knowledge , we seek an authority. Verses 26-31 in Genesis 1, is the authority of God. My personal question would be – Did the writer of Genesis know about this authority of God? According to our premise “2. God as Creator interacts with humans,” we can say that Divine Inspiration is practicable.

Frankly, I do not get into discussions about the “Second Story of Creation” in chapter 2 of Genesis. In my humble opinion, the writer of Genesis is making sure that future readers, you and me, realize that the Garden of Eden is a real material place and that Adam is a real material being made to be totally unique because he has God’s own breath of life as part of his nature.

Double yikes!
My apology to wmw and readers. It is not Genesis 1: 15 where Adam would have experiential knowledge of God; it is Genesis 2: 15.
“Genesis 2: 15. The Lord God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden, to cultivate and care for it.”
While we should always keep in mind that the first interaction between God and humans is the powerful creation of the individual first human Adam; yet, there is something so personal, so normal in verse 15. This would be the experiential knowledge of Adam. I remember when, as a child, I would be with my Dad’s cousin George as he worked in his garden. One afternoon, we sifted dirt so as to pull out the white roots of weeds. This dirt was for a type of coldframe box. I wasn’t sure about how this would work; but I sure loved getting my hands in the dirt and seeing George smile as I pulled out a weed root.

Also, of what sort of dominion he had over all of creation. These were all good things that he was in harmony with in the garden of Eden. So, I’m confused and don’t see how the rest of what your text and quotes fits into the two knowledge’s.

Since I found my typo above, I found that Genesis 2:15 is cited in paragraph 378 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. Paragraphs 2415 and 2427 are cross-references in the margin.
**“378 **The sign of man’s familiarity with God is that God places him in the garden. There he lives “to till it and keep it”. Work is not yet a burden, but rather the collaboration of man and woman with God in perfecting the visible creation.”

As for animals, we know that Adam was given the task of naming them. Genesis 2: 20. Often, this is seen as an example of Adam’s intellectual superiority due to his peerless nature that was essentially different from the rest of the critters. There have been threads about animals living the same time as Adam. However, it seems to me that these threads are mostly reasonable speculations. The one thing we do know is that harmony existed.

None of us can presume to know what God and Adam discussed while Adam was being settled in the Garden. (Genesis 2: 15) Still, we know from our own experiences how “gardens” can turn two strangers into friends.

Link to Catechism.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[simpleas]

I know this is probably out of bounds as its Gen. 5, but could i ask what posters think of this question. (sorry if it’s been covered before, if so can you let me know)

In Gen 5 it tells us again how adam was made in the likeness of God, male and female he created them etc. He lived for 930 yrs, became the father of seth. Then he died.Is that all we know of Adam?, being the first created, first to go aganist God, first to procreate, but we have no idea what he may or may not of done to reconcile with his father?
It seems Enosh was first to call on God for help, wouldn’t Adam have aleast tried to win back what he had before the fall.

I think he would have, but why its not recorded, (or i’ve missed it somewhere) intrigues me.

 

[grannymh]

I know this is probably out of bounds as its Gen. 5, but could i ask what posters think of this question. (sorry if it’s been covered before, if so can you let me know)

In Gen 5 it tells us again how adam was made in the likeness of God, male and female he created them etc. He lived for 930 yrs, became the father of seth. Then he died.Is that all we know of Adam?, being the first created, first to go aganist God, first to procreate, but we have no idea what he may or may not of done to reconcile with his father?
It seems Enosh was first to call on God for help, wouldn’t Adam have aleast tried to win back what he had before the fall.

I think he would have, but why its not recorded, (or i’ve missed it somewhere) intrigues me.

Apparently, there is a tradition that Adam and Eve repented and lived holy lives.
“As we have said elsewhere, Adam and Eve are not called saints in ordinary reference, historical or scriptural. But they may be called saints on their feast day, which is the vigil of Christmas, because we know from sound Catholic tradition that they repented of their great sin, lived lives of holiness and are now in Heaven.”
catholicism.org/saint-adam-and-saint-eve-first-age-of-the-world.html

Please note: Not every verse of every chapter of the Bible automatically becomes a Catholic doctrine. In the same manner, not every tradition automatically becomes a Catholic doctrine. Nonetheless, we look to traditions as a means of enriching our lives. The tradition of Adam and Eve tells us that even the greatest of sins can be forgiven. The Good Shepherd continues God’s search for us…in whatever kind of “garden” we find ourselves.

When we look at Adam’s life in the first three chapters of Genesis, we find God seeking him in the Garden.
(Genesis 3: 9) “Where are you?” God calls in spite of the fact that Adam committed the Original Sin. God did not abandon Adam and Eve, and you and me. Genesis 3: 15 is considered the Protoevangelium (“first gospel”) which is the first announcement of the Messiah and Redeemer. (CCC 410)

No matter how we sin, God is still calling us through the Catholic Sacrament of Reconciliation. We share Adam’s wounded nature. Is it not logical that God’s mercy toward us would also have been given to our first human parents? Wounded though we are, we still have the human capability to ask God for His Sanctifying Grace. We “inherited” that free will capability from Adam and Eve. We absolutely know that we inherited Adam’s nature, which was not destroyed, because there are only two possible human parents of humankind. God’s love and mercy was so great, that He gave us Jesus Christ. (John 3:16) The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the gift of Jesus Christ, truly present in Holy Communion.

While Adam did not know all the details of salvation, we can assume that his trust in his Creator was restored to life. He had the personal promise of God – just as today, we, Adam’s descendants, have the personal promise of Jesus Christ Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. (Chapter 14, Gospel of John)

 

[grannymh]

No matter how we sin, God is still calling us through the Catholic Sacrament of Reconciliation. We share Adam’s wounded nature. Is it not logical that God’s mercy toward us would also have been given to our first human parents? Wounded though we are, we still have the human capability to ask God for His Sanctifying Grace. We “inherited” that free will capability from Adam and Eve.

It is our unique free will capability which leads us to the conclusion that we descended from two sole real human parents.

That we “inherited” free will capability from Adam and Eve simply means that our unique human nature, i.e., our basic material body and spiritual soul is the same as theirs. Still, each of us is an unique person with the unique unification of the God-created rational soul (intellect and free will) and our physical body.

In other words, our free will capability did not come from any other kind of creature. Neither did our free will capability emerge somehow from our decomposing anatomy. Our free will capability is ours because we are made in the image of God in the same manner as Adam and Eve. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 365 explains:
**“365 **The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body: i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.”
The first fleshly appearance of Adam was so profound that no other natural material/physical being could imitate it. The human species, alone, is given the free choice of sharing in the super-natural, spiritual transcendent Creator’s life. That being the case, only the super-natural Creator can provide a spiritual soul at human conception. Only the descendants of Adam have the free will capability to choose eternal joy with our Creator as He is in Heaven.

 

[simpleas]

Apparently, there is a tradition that Adam and Eve repented and lived holy lives.
“As we have said elsewhere, Adam and Eve are not called saints in ordinary reference, historical or scriptural. But they may be called saints on their feast day, which is the vigil of Christmas, because we know from sound Catholic tradition that they repented of their great sin, lived lives of holiness and are now in Heaven.”
catholicism.org/saint-adam-and-saint-eve-first-age-of-the-world.html

Please note: Not every verse of every chapter of the Bible automatically becomes a Catholic doctrine. In the same manner, not every tradition automatically becomes a Catholic doctrine. Nonetheless, we look to traditions as a means of enriching our lives. The tradition of Adam and Eve tells us that even the greatest of sins can be forgiven. The Good Shepherd continues God’s search for us…in whatever kind of “garden” we find ourselves.

When we look at Adam’s life in the first three chapters of Genesis, we find God seeking him in the Garden.
(Genesis 3: 9) “Where are you?” God calls in spite of the fact that Adam committed the Original Sin. God did not abandon Adam and Eve, and you and me. Genesis 3: 15 is considered the Protoevangelium (“first gospel”) which is the first announcement of the Messiah and Redeemer. (CCC 410)

No matter how we sin, God is still calling us through the Catholic Sacrament of Reconciliation. We share Adam’s wounded nature. Is it not logical that God’s mercy toward us would also have been given to our first human parents? Wounded though we are, we still have the human capability to ask God for His Sanctifying Grace. We “inherited” that free will capability from Adam and Eve. We absolutely know that we inherited Adam’s nature, which was not destroyed, because there are only two possible human parents of humankind. God’s love and mercy was so great, that He gave us Jesus Christ. (John 3:16) The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the gift of Jesus Christ, truly present in Holy Communion.

While Adam did not know all the details of salvation, we can assume that his trust in his Creator was restored to life. He had the personal promise of God – just as today, we, Adam’s descendants, have the personal promise of Jesus Christ Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. (Chapter 14, Gospel of John)

Thanks, learnt more yet again!

Could you explain what Gen:3.15 means, I don’t understand it clearly.

 

[wmw]

My thought of 2 kinds of knowledge were in reference to sin. The fancy name of the apple tree is figuratively saying, “eat here and really get to know about good and evil first hand”.

Yet, Adam had to understand the grave matter that he was commiting to make eating an apple a mortal sin. It seems that Eve had less of a grasp of this acedemic teaching from God; therefore, her sin warrented the great pain of childbirth of all mothers of humanity etc., but not death. This is not to say Eve was slower on the grasp, maybe she had a less capable teacher in Adam. Again note the order of the verses 2:15 to 18:

15
The LORD God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden, to cultivate and care for it.h
16
The LORD God gave the man this order: You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden i
17
except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. From that tree you shall not eat; when you eat from it you shall die.* j
18
The LORD God said: It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suited to him.* k

You have moved to the experiential knowledge that Adam had of God. Yes I agree Adam’s life in Eden afforded him an immediate experience of God one that Moses only got a shadow of; yet, was almost more than he could bear and the voice of God was such a force of power that the people could not bear it at all. It seems we all need quite a bit of growth and seperation from sin before we will be ready for the new Earth.

The sin of Adam was a poor trade sold by the chief of lying. The trade seems to be immediate experience of sin for the immediate experience of God. That this trade involves all the people after the fall is plain in that once sin is a choice God has allowed it’s appearence by his disappearence.

I think it is also part of the function of the tree that it took a very out of the ordinary act to cause the first sin. God made Eden and it’s people unable to simply stumble into sin as we so often do as a matter of course.

Still, just as we are allowed to privately confess and have our sins blotted out I think there is a part of the story untold about what Adam and Eve were thinking beyond the simple verses given. Yes, they ate, but the why’s are hardly touched upon.

 

[StrawberryJam]

My thought of 2 kinds of knowledge were in reference to sin. The fancy name of the apple tree is figuratively saying, “eat here and really get to know about good and evil first hand”.

Yet, Adam had to understand the grave matter that he was commiting to make eating an apple a mortal sin. It seems that Eve had less of a grasp of this acedemic teaching from God; therefore, her sin warrented the great pain of childbirth of all mothers of humanity etc., but not death. This is not to say Eve was slower on the grasp, maybe she had a less capable teacher in Adam. Again note the order of the verses 2:15 to 18:

You have moved to the experiential knowledge that Adam had of God. Yes I agree Adam’s life in Eden afforded him an immediate experience of God one that Moses only got a shadow of; yet, was almost more than he could bear and the voice of God was such a force of power that the people could not bear it at all. It seems we all need quite a bit of growth and seperation from sin before we will be ready for the new Earth.

The sin of Adam was a poor trade sold by the chief of lying. The trade seems to be immediate experience of sin for the immediate experience of God. That this trade involves all the people after the fall is plain in that once sin is a choice God has allowed it’s appearence by his disappearence.

I think it is also part of the function of the tree that it took a very out of the ordinary act to cause the first sin. God made Eden and it’s people unable to simply stumble into sin as we so often do as a matter of course.

Still, just as we are allowed to privately confess and have our sins blotted out I think there is a part of the story untold about what Adam and Eve were thinking beyond the simple verses given. Yes, they ate, but the why’s are hardly touched upon.

So was the real sin eating the fruit a metaphor or was it literal?

 

[grannymh]

So was the real sin eating the fruit a metaphor or was it literal?

The real sin is Adam’s disobedience. In other words, Adam’s disobedience was serious because by freely disobeying God’s direct command, Adam scorned God and scorned the requirement (submission to God) of his status as creature in relationship with his Creator. (CCC 396-400)

With all that in mind, the question is “So was the real sin eating the fruit a metaphor or was it literal?”

Adam was real, body and soul. Adam needed real food which was abundant in his environment. Adam was given a direct command not to eat the fruit of one real tree regardless of its name. Adam’s disobedience is real. Adam’s Original Sin is real.

With all that in mind, Adam’s eating the forbidden fruit can be seen as literal. On the other hand, there is the possibillity of some " figurative language" which is different from today’s concept of metaphor.

In today’s culture “metaphor” is often used to hide the actual truth by substituting something less drastic than the real Original Sin. Today, we hear that the Original Sin was simply a description of people (plural intended) discovering that bad things happen. Or we hear that Original Sin was Adam’s and should have nothing to do with future humanity and therefore should have nothing to do with the reason that Christ hung bloody on the cross. (CCC 389) “Metaphor” can be used in denying Romans 5: 12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15: 21-22 and denying Christ’s purpose. (John 3:16) Granted that there are still wonderful metaphors in literature. But when it comes to the reality of who we are as humans, we look to Catholicism for the bare truth.

CCC 390, How to read the account of the Fall says:
**“390 **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.”
In other words, Adam’s actual disobedience is affirmed as a literal event by Divine Revelation. The description of the actual deed may be secondary because the Fall is truly real. In this case, figurative language, when used, helps explain the seriousness of Original Sin. Disobedience so as to be equal or better than God is serious and had serious consequences. Satan was deadly serious regardless of the figurative language used to describe a being without a material body.

We know the evil in the world. We know the evil which resulted from Adam’s Original Sin. We know that we need the Good Shepherd – that is why we turn to the Catholic Church.

Link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[wmw]

How figurative the story is really doesn’t matter, but the teaching it gives is true:

One God, One Adam, One Original Sin, One Savior, One Baptism, One death on the cross.

I find this paragraph very telling for we see both errors very much today:

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

The first is very obvious, but the idea of insurmountable sin isn’t as clear. Yet, just 7 months ago I was talking with an athiest or rather he felt he had to tell me a few things about his athiesm once I started countering his pronouncements with Catholic teaching. One that I didn’t understand then that came clear just now from reading CCC 406 (quoted above) and remembering his rejected Protestant upbringing. He said, “that he could choose to do good things” and that “athiests can lead good moral lives”. This so confused me that I asked if he was claiming to be sinless? He replied that he doen’t want to get trapped into a formal definition of sin, but essentually no. I never got out of him why he though these two statements were important. I couldn’t even form a question to try to ask him. I think I may understand his false idea of christianity better now and the reason the Catholic Church was guided away from concupiscentia.

 

[simpleas]

Apparently, there is a tradition that Adam and Eve repented and lived holy lives.
“As we have said elsewhere, Adam and Eve are not called saints in ordinary reference, historical or scriptural. But they may be called saints on their feast day, which is the vigil of Christmas, because we know from sound Catholic tradition that they repented of their great sin, lived lives of holiness and are now in Heaven.”
catholicism.org/saint-adam-and-saint-eve-first-age-of-the-world.html

Please note: Not every verse of every chapter of the Bible automatically becomes a Catholic doctrine. In the same manner, not every tradition automatically becomes a Catholic doctrine. Nonetheless, we look to traditions as a means of enriching our lives. The tradition of Adam and Eve tells us that even the greatest of sins can be forgiven. The Good Shepherd continues God’s search for us…in whatever kind of “garden” we find ourselves.

When we look at Adam’s life in the first three chapters of Genesis, we find God seeking him in the Garden.
(Genesis 3: 9) “Where are you?” God calls in spite of the fact that Adam committed the Original Sin. God did not abandon Adam and Eve, and you and me. Genesis 3: 15 is considered the Protoevangelium (“first gospel”) which is the first announcement of the Messiah and Redeemer. (CCC 410)

No matter how we sin, God is still calling us through the Catholic Sacrament of Reconciliation. We share Adam’s wounded nature. Is it not logical that God’s mercy toward us would also have been given to our first human parents? Wounded though we are, we still have the human capability to ask God for His Sanctifying Grace. We “inherited” that free will capability from Adam and Eve. We absolutely know that we inherited Adam’s nature, which was not destroyed, because there are only two possible human parents of humankind. God’s love and mercy was so great, that He gave us Jesus Christ. (John 3:16) The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the gift of Jesus Christ, truly present in Holy Communion.

While Adam did not know all the details of salvation, we can assume that his trust in his Creator was restored to life. He had the personal promise of God – just as today, we, Adam’s descendants, have the personal promise of Jesus Christ Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. (Chapter 14, Gospel of John)

Yes i think its logical that God would have shown mercy to Adam and Eve, just that it’s not mentioned in Genesis, although when eve conceives a son, she declares it was the help of God, so mercy may well have been shown here.

 

[grannymh]

Yes i think its logical that God would have shown mercy to Adam and Eve, just that it’s not mentioned in Genesis, although when eve conceives a son, she declares it was the help of God, so mercy may well have been shown here.

I agree with your evaluation about God’s mercy to Eve. Genesis 4: 1. Maybe that is because I believe that God is merciful on a daily basis. This cranky (feminine of snarky) granny does do dumb things.

Please note that I have your request from post 262 – “Could you explain what Gen:3.15 means, I don’t understand it clearly.”

I learned that God promised a Savior without a reference to Scripture. Thus, it was interesting to me when I heard that Genesis 3:15 somehow reflected that promise. That immediate promise would be logical considering God’s great love for us who are Adam’s descendants.

At times, my posts are relatively easy to think through because I am familiar with the material. Regarding Genesis 3:15, CCC 410 has basic information; however I want to follow up the cross-references in the margin and check the notes in my Bible. I need to “stop the world so I can get off”

 

[grannymh]

Could you explain what Gen:3.15 means, I don’t understand it clearly.

Genesis 3: 14: Then the Lord God said to the serpent …

Genesis 3: 15: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”

To understand this, my suggestion is to start with the phrase "God’s Economy of Salvation (Divine Economy). This refers to God’s activity in creating and governing the world, particularly with regard to His plan for the salvation of humankind in the person and work of Jesus Christ. (See Economy of Salvation in both Glossary and Index, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition) Within this economy the mystery of Christ is “revealed and fulfilled in history.” (CCC 1066)

Basically what this “economy” terminology refers to is that after Original Sin, God at once sought to bring humanity back into His friendship. God specifically calls out to Adam (Genesis 3:9) and in* hindsight*, we find that God gives the first announcement (verse 15) of our Savior, known at the *Protoevangelium *or “first gospel”.
(CCC 410-412)

That moment is retold today. In the Eucharistic Prayer IV, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we hear:
“We give you praise, Father most holy, … You formed man in Your own image … And when through disobedience he had lost your friendship, You did not abandon him to the domain of death. For You came in mercy to the aid of all, so that those who seek might find you. Time and again You offered them covenants and through the prophets taught them to look forward to salvation. And you so loved the world, …”
In Scripture, both Old and New Testaments, God reveals His Divine plan, bit by bit. The promise (covenant) made to Abraham inaugurates the Economy of Salvation. (CCC 705-706) “In reality it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear.” (CCC 359)

I truly admire the Genesis writer because he was faced with the difficulty of portraying Satan who did not have a material anatomy. A talking, cunning serpent proved a good choice for Satan.

Obviously, the Genesis writer accepted the two philosophical positions. 1. God as Creator exists. and 2. God as Creator interacts with humans. The interesting thing is that Satan is deliberately portrayed as a creature and not as some powerful being/spirit who had the freedom to radically and irrevocably reject God. (CCC 391-395) As a “creature”, it is emphasized that, despite his original status, Satan is limited in his power. Catholicism recognizes the great mystery that Divine Providence should permit Satan’s activity. At the same time, Catholicism repeats St. Paul’s teaching. He is assuring those who choose the ways of God even though others will freely choose to reject God’s love.
“For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor present things, nor future things, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
Romans 8: 28-38
In Genesis 3: 15, God talks directly to the serpent, knowing that He is talking directly to Satan. God foretells that a battle (enmity) will occur. While this involves a future unknown (at the moment) offspring, this person will have the power to strike at Satan’s head because He is both True Man and True God. The “heal” of Christ’s love will conquer and nothing, as St. Paul says, “will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” At the beginning of Romans 8: 28-38, St. Paul says; “We know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.”

The writer of Genesis knew that axiom 2.“God as Creator interacts with humans” was absolutely true as he wrote about Adam and Eve. He knew that being in the image of God meant that Adam walked in friendship with God. When Adam sinned, that did not change God. While the writer reported the effects of Original Sin, he also reported God’s interacting love with humans which was part of the “instructions” to Satan. The writer was inspired by God as to the outline, but not the details of the reconciliation between God and humanity. The writer knew the evil which surrounded him and he also knew that God interacted with humans for their eternal good. He recognized the battle between good and evil. This dramatic situation of “the whole world [which] is in the power of the evil one” makes man’s life a battle:" (CCC 409)

In Genesis 3: 15, God gave Adam and Eve hope for human’s future.

With the obedience of Jesus unto death, the Catholic Church assures us that reparation for Original Sin has been accomplished and Jesus, Himself, is present as the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[Aloysium]

Gen 3:14 Then Yahweh God said to the snake, ‘Because you have done this, Accursed be you of all animals wild and tame! On your belly you will go and on dust you will feed as long as you live.
15 I shall put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; it will bruise your head and you will strike its heel.’

:twocents::

Satan, in losing his limbs, is powerless to create. Existing in the dust, that from which we were made and will return, he derives his power from death.

There is the ever-present reality of sin, which we can either crush or allow to strike and destroy us.

Satan, like any tyrant, is powerful only to the degree to which we do his will. Through the Cross the debt has been paid and we can dwell with God in eternal life; that or choose death.

 

[simpleas]

Genesis 3: 14: Then the Lord God said to the serpent …

Genesis 3: 15: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”

To understand this, my suggestion is to start with the phrase "God’s Economy of Salvation (Divine Economy). This refers to God’s activity in creating and governing the world, particularly with regard to His plan for the salvation of humankind in the person and work of Jesus Christ. (See Economy of Salvation in both Glossary and Index, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition) Within this economy the mystery of Christ is “revealed and fulfilled in history.” (CCC 1066)

Basically what this “economy” terminology refers to is that after Original Sin, God at once sought to bring humanity back into His friendship. God specifically calls out to Adam (Genesis 3:9) and in* hindsight*, we find that God gives the first announcement (verse 15) of our Savior, known at the *Protoevangelium *or “first gospel”.
(CCC 410-412)

That moment is retold today. In the Eucharistic Prayer IV, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we hear:
“We give you praise, Father most holy, … You formed man in Your own image … And when through disobedience he had lost your friendship, You did not abandon him to the domain of death. For You came in mercy to the aid of all, so that those who seek might find you. Time and again You offered them covenants and through the prophets taught them to look forward to salvation. And you so loved the world, …”
In Scripture, both Old and New Testaments, God reveals His Divine plan, bit by bit. The promise (covenant) made to Abraham inaugurates the Economy of Salvation. (CCC 705-706) “In reality it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear.” (CCC 359)

I truly admire the Genesis writer because he was faced with the difficulty of portraying Satan who did not have a material anatomy. A talking, cunning serpent proved a good choice for Satan.

Obviously, the Genesis writer accepted the two philosophical positions. 1. God as Creator exists. and 2. God as Creator interacts with humans. The interesting thing is that Satan is deliberately portrayed as a creature and not as some powerful being/spirit who had the freedom to radically and irrevocably reject God. (CCC 391-395) As a “creature”, it is emphasized that, despite his original status, Satan is limited in his power. Catholicism recognizes the great mystery that Divine Providence should permit Satan’s activity. At the same time, Catholicism repeats St. Paul’s teaching. He is assuring those who choose the ways of God even though others will freely choose to reject God’s love.
“For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor present things, nor future things, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
Romans 8: 28-38
In Genesis 3: 15, God talks directly to the serpent, knowing that He is talking directly to Satan. God foretells that a battle (enmity) will occur. While this involves a future unknown (at the moment) offspring, this person will have the power to strike at Satan’s head because He is both True Man and True God. The “heal” of Christ’s love will conquer and nothing, as St. Paul says, “will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” At the beginning of Romans 8: 28-38, St. Paul says; “We know that all things work for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose.”

The writer of Genesis knew that axiom 2.“God as Creator interacts with humans” was absolutely true as he wrote about Adam and Eve. He knew that being in the image of God meant that Adam walked in friendship with God. When Adam sinned, that did not change God. While the writer reported the effects of Original Sin, he also reported God’s interacting love with humans which was part of the “instructions” to Satan. The writer was inspired by God as to the outline, but not the details of the reconciliation between God and humanity. The writer knew the evil which surrounded him and he also knew that God interacted with humans for their eternal good. He recognized the battle between good and evil. This dramatic situation of “the whole world [which] is in the power of the evil one” makes man’s life a battle:" (CCC 409)

In Genesis 3: 15, God gave Adam and Eve hope for human’s future.

With the obedience of Jesus unto death, the Catholic Church assures us that reparation for Original Sin has been accomplished and Jesus, Himself, is present as the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Thankyou.
Gen 3:15 tells about how jesus will overcome satan. But then in Gen 3:19 “for dust you are and to dust you shall return.” so didn’t Adam and Eve just return to dust, therefore their bodies couldn’t be resurrected?

I read somewhere when I was digging into the Jewish faith, that Genesis was written because people had question’s about who/what they were, why women had pain in child birth etc.
Could this be why genesis was written? (well obviously its an account of creation, but seems the jewish people at that time needed more answers, since i also heeard that exodus was written first?)
Like we said before the writer didn’t know what exactly was said to Adam and Eve, so it’s the writer’s own words and not Gods?

alittle bit of humor…we don’t know the writer of genesis was male do we? could have been a female? haha, but then, did women write in those days? ha

 

[grannymh]

Thankyou.
Gen 3:15 tells about how jesus will overcome satan. But then in Gen 3:19 “for dust you are and to dust you shall return.” so didn’t Adam and Eve just return to dust, therefore their bodies couldn’t be resurrected?

I read somewhere when I was digging into the Jewish faith, that Genesis was written because people had question’s about who/what they were, why women had pain in child birth etc.
Could this be why genesis was written? (well obviously its an account of creation, but seems the jewish people at that time needed more answers, since i also heeard that exodus was written first?)
Like we said before the writer didn’t know what exactly was said to Adam and Eve, so it’s the writer’s own words and not Gods?

a little bit of humor…we don’t know the writer of genesis was male do we? could have been a female? haha, but then, did women write in those days? ha

A little bit of humor… This reminds me of the question – What would happen if Shakespeare were a girl?

You have presented a tough post.

For the moment, I am going to ignore the realistic comment regarding the Jewish Faith because there is a similar concept among our Christian contemporaries. For now, Genesis 3: 19 is the most important. Here God is directly talking to an obvious individual, not a philosophical group. Verse 17. “To the man He said:”

My memory bank was gracious enough to remind me that currently that phrase “for dust you are and to dust you shall return.” is being spoken to an individual. In some translations dirt is used for dust which reminds me that our anatomy is material and will return to dirt when I die. Thank heaven our souls are immortal.

It has taken all this time for my memory bank to cough up that it is on Ash Wednesday when we, as individuals, have the sign of ashes on our foreheads, reminding us that we are mortal; yet, at the same time we look forward to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, reminding us that we belong with Him in eternal heaven.

Because we are treated as individuals beginning the Lenten journey, and Adam was spoken to as an individual, that should naturally affirm the Catholic teaching that Adam was not only the first human individual, he was also the only human being parent of all humanity.

Thoughts need to be continued …

 

[Aloysium]

11180709:

Thankyou. Gen 3:15 tells about how jesus will overcome satan . . . could have been a female? haha, but then, did women write in those days? ha

I’ll give you some brief(?) feed back.

Your view suggests that Genesis has its origins solely in and speaks to a reality of just this fallen and sinful world:

• Pain (childbirth)
• Ignorance (ancient Jews conjuring explanations of the unknown abyss of existence)
• Power, Honour, Injustice (the role/plight of women and others suffering injustice through the ages)

If one is to make sense of scripture one must understand how it comes from and relates to what is outside the mundane.

Just as this world is part of the physical universe with the infinity of space around us and the gaping depths of the microcosm within, we dwell within the realm of the spirit.
In that sphere this world is contested territory. The world, as described in your post, is the outcome of our choices from the time of our creation.
At the Centre, this universe is eternally created, emerging in all its wondrous beauty and goodness. This vision is our ultimate home. We were created matter and spirit and our destiny is the New Jerusalem - CCC:1042 At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. the universe itself will be renewed.

As to the pain of childbirth, this is a very interesting point. Taking this to the universal, we can interpret it as describing how any new life comes with pain. Is there any doubt that growth comes with sacrifice and some degree of suffering. The only ones to doubt this would be those who have not striven to achieve in life.
What is the symbol of Christian tanscendence ? A man alone, hanging in pain, humiliated, naked, without possessions, having even His life taken from Him.
It speaks to the transitoriness of all life; we will in a way all meet that physical end, the good and the bad, even those who hope that assisted suicide will spare them. But it is through the Cross that sin and death are conquered. We have the possibility of life with God, when our stay here is at an end.

The humour of your “joke” escapes me.
It is a statement related to injustices committed against women, simply because they were women. This makes laughter an inconguous and inappropriate IMHO emotional reaction.
Going beyond history, which is basically a litany of sinful acts, if I look at the world about me, what do I see:

• the OP is female
• the majority of participants in the daily mass are women
• with 99% certainty, since I cannot possibly remember, I can say that first I heard the story of Adam and the nature of God described to me in a female voice.
• it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the story of Adam was revealed to a woman and, if only men learned how to write at the time of it’s being put to parchment(?), that it had been women who had passed on the knowledge.

Just some thoughts.

 

[simpleas]

I’ll give you some brief(?) feed back.

Your view suggests that Genesis has its origins solely in and speaks to a reality of just this fallen and sinful world:

• Pain (childbirth)
• Ignorance (ancient Jews conjuring explanations of the unknown abyss of existence)
• Power, Honour, Injustice (the role/plight of women and others suffering injustice through the ages)

If one is to make sense of scripture one must understand how it comes from and relates to what is outside the mundane.

Just as this world is part of the physical universe with the infinity of space around us and the gaping depths of the microcosm within, we dwell within the realm of the spirit.
In that sphere this world is contested territory. The world, as described in your post, is the outcome of our choices from the time of our creation.
At the Centre, this universe is eternally created, emerging in all its wondrous beauty and goodness. This vision is our ultimate home. We were created matter and spirit and our destiny is the New Jerusalem - CCC:1042 At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. the universe itself will be renewed.

As to the pain of childbirth, this is a very interesting point. Taking this to the universal, we can interpret it as describing how any new life comes with pain. Is there any doubt that growth comes with sacrifice and some degree of suffering. The only ones to doubt this would be those who have not striven to achieve in life.
What is the symbol of Christian tanscendence ? A man alone, hanging in pain, humiliated, naked, without possessions, having even His life taken from Him.
It speaks to the transitoriness of all life; we will in a way all meet that physical end, the good and the bad, even those who hope that assisted suicide will spare them. But it is through the Cross that sin and death are conquered. We have the possibility of life with God, when our stay here is at an end.

The humour of your “joke” escapes me.
It is a statement related to injustices committed against women, simply because they were women. This makes laughter an inconguous and inappropriate IMHO emotional reaction.
Going beyond history, which is basically a litany of sinful acts, if I look at the world about me, what do I see:

• the OP is female
• the majority of participants in the daily mass are women
• with 99% certainty, since I cannot possibly remember, I can say that first I heard the story of Adam and the nature of God described to me in a female voice.
• it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the story of Adam was revealed to a woman and, if only men learned how to write at the time of it’s being put to parchment(?), that it had been women who had passed on the knowledge.

Just some thoughts.

Hi Aloysium,
Thanks for your thoughts, thats what i was aiming to achieve, as i am learning more and more from other posters and the OP.
My question’s don’t reflect my personal views, they are my questions that i need to ask in order to teach myself about my religion, beliefs, why i believe etc.

My comment about who wrote genesis, was probably more sarcastic than humorist, now that i reread it. When reading what the OP previous thoughts were, having he written down as the writer made me think why do we always assume the person was male! Could well have been a female, so really i was quite serious, but being cauious as i’m not that well read and know little about who wrote what when and where, i thought i’d put that i was only joking in case i got some sort of clever response about why it would have been a male.
Sort of the same when it comes to women priests, people say Jesus choose the apostles all male, therefore we couldn’t have female priests. ( am i right?)
I then read material that points out in the early stages of the church women did preach, i don’t know if they were priestess, or just teachers.
As for did women write in those days, from what i know and i maybe wrong, it was only males that worshipped/taught/learnt in the temples, so maybe women did/did not write.

Funny you should list that its mostly women who attend daily mass, i was thinking the same last tuesday as our church is having an extra tuesday evening mass once a month for the year of faith, there was about 20-25 people all barr the priest and 1 man all were female!
Thanks

 

[grannymh]

My question’s don’t reflect my personal views, they are my questions that i need to ask in order to teach myself about my religion, beliefs, why i believe etc.

I have known that from the beginning.

My comment about who wrote genesis, was probably more sarcastic than humorist, now that i reread it.

Because this cranky granny was a free spirit, I can laugh. Not at what was happening, mind you, but at the “ways” a few of us beat “some” of the “system”.

Nonetheless, I need to point to the serious question of who wrote the first three chapters of Genesis. That question goes to the heart of the matter which is the transmission of truth from the time of Adam to the time of the writer(s).

The transmission of truth from Adam was the responsibility of his descendants who remained faithful to the first truth given to us by God which is Genesis 1: 1. This “beginning” includes the appearance of our species, Genesis 1: 26. Genesis 2: 15-17 aptly describes the human condition of submission in relationship to a Divine Creator.
Because the Hebrew Scriptures, the four Gospels, and the additional writings are seen as a whole, we can use later writings as a guide to understanding the earliest writings. God is the definitive source of all Catholic doctrines regardless of where or how they appear in Biblical print.

CCC 66 has a point which can be easily forgotten – “Yet, even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.” This is based on the Holy Spirit’s presence at Pentecost and His presence today.

As someone once said. The Catholic Church has the guts to define and declare Divine Revelation.