Adam & Logic

[grannymh]

Originally Posted by wmw forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
When we accept that God is infinite we have to also accept that we will never know all the why’s. We understand some better than others. Some are more straightforwardly stated in the Bible. These seem as layers of understanding to us. Each more difficult to grasp. Is the first we know the more important? To some people’s faith and understanding it would seem that way, but in the eye’s of God none of us will know if the 2 millionth reason of God is the most important or the 3rd.

More to the point of your question the thinking in the last 4 or 5 posts of mine are working on the point of view of the Genesis early Chapters. Independent of who took reed in ink or stylus to clay the View of the first story is God the Father’s and the second as Adam saw it.

When we read the Gospels in the NT we are seeing view points of different apostles and accept that each saw it in their own way. Some of the events are told differently and in slightly different orders. This seems a disater to those who are fixated on literal perfection, but to those seeing the writting as an account of witnesses memories they are stunningly accurate, detailed, and complementary.

*When we look at the second creation story of Adam do we then say Adam saw his own making? No, but we can see Adam’s understanding in how he and Eve came to be. That this was first and paramount in his story is quite natural and has Thelogical reasons. Then he adds that God made all the other things too in the place of Eden where God brings them together. *

The modern scientific mind wants to parce, disect, and re-assemble the two stories into one full understanding, but they are made to be seperate, to be two views that are complemetary. Also, neither fits our modern format of an unbiased news report or scientific journal. Yet, with full conviction of faith, in total union with rational fact we can say both are true and that either one without the other is a much lesser truth than having both as truthful cannon of scripture.

For a more complete answer with references to Authoritative Church documents go to this ask as apologist answer:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=12966

I started to read this excellent link… then it hit me that different does not necessarily mean contradiction of Catholic doctrines.

What verses in the first three chapters of Genesis actually contradict Catholic Doctrines?

Figurative language would not necessarily contradict a Catholic doctrine.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 390
**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.
Do any of the verses contradict

1. God as Creator exists.?
2. God as Creator interacts with humans.?

 

[grannymh]

What verses in the first three chapters of Genesis actually contradict Catholic Doctrines?

Figurative language would not necessarily contradict a Catholic doctrine.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 390
**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.
Do any of the verses contradict

1. God as Creator exists.?
2. God as Creator interacts with humans.?

Since this thread has been quiet, we can assume that the first three chapters in Genesis do not actually contradict Catholic doctrines.

Here is another question. Does anything in the New Testament contradict the fact that Catholicism is meant for all people?

Please note that because Jesus was a Jewish Preacher, that fact does not exclude the universality of His message.

At His birth, Jesus received the homage of the world, from humble shepherds to wise kings. In turn, Jesus hung bloody on His cross so that all people, from humble shepherds to wise kings, would be reconciled with God.

Starting with the life of Jesus Christ, does anything in Scripture contradict the fact that Catholicism is meant for all people?

From paragraph 1260, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
“Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.”

From the* CCC*, Glossary.
PASCHAL MYSTERY/SACRIFICE: Christ’s work of redemption accomplished principally by his Passion, death, Resurrection, and glorious Ascension, whereby “dying he destroyed our death, rising he restored our life” (1067; cf. 654). The Paschal Mystery is celebrated and made present in the liturgy of the Church, and its saving effects are communicated through the sacraments
(1076), especially the Eucharist, which renews the paschal sacrifice of Christ as the sacrifice offered by the Church (571, 1362–1372).

What Catholic fact insures that really all persons can be made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery?

Links to the Catechism

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[wmw]

I’m following along and then wandering in my own maze of thought. Your speaking about everyone having the choice. That he is available to all though his body and blood sacrifice.

Then I go into Adam’s choice. God is going to walk into the garden at any moment. How different his choosing was. Then was it Adam’s complaint that God was smothering him? Did God agree to not smother us with his great howling wind of a voice as the Jews heard in the Sinai?

I think he demands a free choice, one where He is not imposing Himself. So much so that he allows that there always be other reasonable explainations. That non-believers are also rational thinking and capable of not choosing Him just as logically and rationally as any other human. It is wonderful to connect the dots that His reality is logical, but I never want to go as far as ever saying that it is not resonable to also chose logically the other way, but for love. Love is the only difference. God is Love.

 

[simpleas]

I’m following along and then wandering in my own maze of thought. Your speaking about everyone having the choice. That he is available to all though his body and blood sacrifice.

Then I go into Adam’s choice. God is going to walk into the garden at any moment. How different his choosing was. Then was it Adam’s complaint that God was smothering him? Did God agree to not smother us with his great howling wind of a voice as the Jews heard in the Sinai?

I think he demands a free choice, one where He is not imposing Himself. So much so that he allows that there always be other reasonable explainations. That non-believers are also rational thinking and capable of not choosing Him just as logically and rationally as any other human. It is wonderful to connect the dots that His reality is logical, but I never want to go as far as ever saying that it is not resonable to also chose logically the other way, but for love. Love is the only difference. God is Love.

What could God smother Adam with? Love?
As we know we can give much love to others and have it thrown back in our faces, but could that be the same from God to his creatures the human?

I think you are right about free choice, God allowing humans to choose him, but should it be only in our faith, many believe in God, but should only believe through his son Jesus, noone can come to the father except through me.

 

[grannymh]

What could God smother Adam with? Love?
As we know we can give much love to others and have it thrown back in our faces, but could that be the same from God to his creatures the human?

I think you are right about free choice, God allowing humans to choose him, but should it be only in our faith, many believe in God, but should only believe through his son Jesus, noone can come to the father except through me.

The Last Supper Discourses, Chapter 14, Gospel of John. “No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

Please try looking at Jesus Christ as a historical person. Next, search history for a similar person who conquered his own death and his burial by his own resurrection. Then, please share your results.

 

[simpleas]

The Last Supper Discourses, Chapter 14, Gospel of John. “No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

Please try looking at Jesus Christ as a historical person. Next, search history for a similar person who conquered his own death and his burial by his own resurrection. Then, please share your results.

I don’t think I need to look up history for any other person who rose from the dead, I know this was christ.
You know me, I’m stuck in Genesis, and when I think of Adam and God, I don’t see the man Christ at that point in history.
I see God as a spirit he was described to be when he made Adam. Not the man God we now know in christ.
So thinking of God as spirit, with Adam the man, could love have felt different between them, compared to the human feelings of love we experience?

 

[grannymh]

What could God smother Adam with? Love?
As we know we can give much love to others and have it thrown back in our faces, but could that be the same from God to his creatures the human?

I think you are right about free choice, God allowing humans to choose him, but should it be only in our faith, many believe in God, but should only believe through his son Jesus, no one can come to the father except through me.

In response to this section in bold from post 358, “**I think you are right about free choice, God allowing humans to choose him, but should it be only in our faith, …” **I suggested searching history for a similar person to Jesus Christ.

When there is agreement that there is only one person, Jesus Christ, we recognize the essential truth that salvation only comes through the actions of the One Person, True Man and True God. The simple fact that there are no other saviors is why Jesus said “No one comes to the Father except through Me.” In clarification of His singular salvific mission, Jesus also said “I am the way and the truth and the life.” (Gospel of John, chapter 14)

Later in chapter 14, Gospel of John, Jesus promises the Holy Spirit Who will teach the Church everything by reminding us of all that Jesus taught. At the end of the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 28, there is the “Great Commission” Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations… In reality, “Our Faith” becomes the universal, very important, means of guidance and grace for all people. We must continually remember that Christ, as the only Savior, obediently gave up His life for all people regardless of their geographical location or their knowledge of the visible Catholic Church on planet earth. Therefore, the Catholic Church holds that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, in the Salvation which comes from only one Savior. (CCC, 1260)

There is one Savior, but there are a variety of situations in which humans find themselves. We know that regardless of the human situation, God continually loves each individual and in some manner offers the individual the possibility of sharing in God’s own life. (CCC, 356) Then, it follows that the individual makes a free choice to love God or not. This is why priests often ask us to pray for conversions. And we need to pray for ourselves, since it is often the example of our lives which brings others into Our Faith.

Thinking about the topic of this thread.

When we praise God by learning about our first two parents – we find that God started the human species with two people so that there would be no doubt that every human, from the largest desert to the highest mountain, is eligible for God’s eternal love.

 

[simpleas]

I’m not sure how much can be learnt about our first parents, only that they had grace and justice, walked with God, but then decided to prefer pain and suffering for some reason.

If they had knowledge enough they surely would have chosen Gods way to their own way.

They were tempted. Promised a reward from the devil if they did whatever he said to do.

Would God allow something as easy as temption to destroy his plan for his beloved creatures?

I accept Jesus as saviour. I have much difficulty understanding A&E.
Maybe I’m just crazy to think that anyone who believes in God should believe in Christ if they accept the A&E story.
If they only believe in the Holy spirit and God but do not accept Jesus, I wonder if God is ok with this…

Thanks

 

[Aloysium]

I’m not sure how much can be learnt about our first parents, . . . I accept Jesus as saviour. I have much difficulty understanding A&E. . . .

Sounds like you’ve reached an impasse.
I would suggest: like when you’re writing an exam and the next question stumps you, move on and it will come to you as you answer the others.
Try meditating on the NT for a while. When you return to Genesis, you might find things you never saw before.
That’s how it works for me, anyways.

 

[grannymh]

I’m not sure how much can be learnt about our first parents, only that they had grace and justice, walked with God, but then decided to prefer pain and suffering for some reason.

This slips away from Catholic teaching. Adam’s choice, which does not mention preferring pain and suffering, is in Genesis, Chapter 3 and CCC, 415.

Would God allow something as easy as temptation to destroy his plan for his beloved creatures?

This also slips away from Catholic teaching because temptation is not the Original Sin. CCC, 398

 

[simpleas]

This slips away from Catholic teaching. Adam’s choice, which does not mention preferring pain and suffering, is in Genesis, Chapter 3 and CCC, 415.

This also slips away from Catholic teaching because temptation is not the Original Sin. CCC, 398

Ok, no it doesn’t mention pain and suffering, but don’t we believe that Adam was intelligent enough to know that choosing to become like God, would cause some sort of effect?
I wonder now did A&E even know God all that well. I mean they must have thought differently from us, or maybe I just can’t understand why they would want to go against God.
God shows us who he is in Christ, maybe A&E didn’t realise this…

 

[simpleas]

Sounds like you’ve reached an impasse.
I would suggest: like when you’re writing an exam and the next question stumps you, move on and it will come to you as you answer the others.
Try meditating on the NT for a while. When you return to Genesis, you might find things you never saw before.
That’s how it works for me, anyways.

Hi,
Thanks for your suggestion.
I get stuck in thinking I need to understand the beginning in order to fully understand the ending, but people, and like you say start at the end in order to understand the beginning!

 

[grannymh]

May all of you have a Merry Christmas
as we celebrate the joy of Christ’s birth.



Lorenzo Lotto, 1523

 

[wmw]

On “Smothering” - It is in the nature of sentient beings (ourselves and the angels) to seperate from God to be our own “top of the heap, master of our own destiny”. Lucifer and Adam each reach this point of decision where God is in the way, preventing what they think is in thier best interest. This is one supposed reason why Adam chose logically and emotionally to sin. Adam willfully desires the seperation from God not just falling to some simple tempation of the senses or the flesh. It is a deep cooperation with the act where Adam wills a seperation with God in his mind and heart. I do presume too much, no one but God whould know the heart of Adam, but I agree it has to be a sin of this depth and nature. The word “smothering” takes Adams errant view point that God is “holding him back from his whole potential” and incorpoates this whole idea in the shorthand of this one word.

Angels and humans two very different creatures one primarily designed to at once follow God’s will or be forever lost to heaven. The other primarily designed to fall away from God and then crawl back through the narrow gate made by God’s only begotten son.

This begoten child of God is the Christ child that is our only hope our only way; so, we celebrate his birth to us, for us.

It was God’s plan that Adam would fall. God had to make it easy enough for it to happen and yet make no flaw in Adam or any part of creation. Just as Lucifer was made the highest and most perfect angel that fell to the lowest parts of hell so too was Adam made and made to fall hard and fast into the arms of Jesus’ power to forgive.

 

[grannymh]

On “Smothering” - It is in the nature of sentient beings (ourselves and the angels) to seperate from God to be our own “top of the heap, master of our own destiny”. Lucifer and Adam each reach this point of decision where God is in the way, preventing what they think is in thier best interest. This is one supposed reason why Adam chose logically and emotionally to sin. Adam willfully desires the seperation from God not just falling to some simple tempation of the senses or the flesh. It is a deep cooperation with the act where Adam wills a seperation with God in his mind and heart. I do presume too much, no one but God whould know the heart of Adam, but I agree it has to be a sin of this depth and nature. The word “smothering” takes Adams errant view point that God is “holding him back from his whole potential” and incorpoates this whole idea in the shorthand of this one word.

On smothering… Adam’s errant view point that God is “holding him back from his whole potential” is a good point because Adam definitely knew his current limits.

Angels and humans two very different creatures one primarily designed to at once follow God’s will or be forever lost to heaven. The other primarily designed to fall away from God and then crawl back through the narrow gate made by God’s only begotten son.

This begoten child of God is the Christ child that is our only hope our only way; so, we celebrate his birth to us, for us.

It was God’s plan that Adam would fall. God had to make it easy enough for it to happen and yet make no flaw in Adam or any part of creation. Just as Lucifer was made the highest and most perfect angel that fell to the lowest parts of hell so too was Adam made and made to fall hard and fast into the arms of Jesus’ power to forgive.

Pardon me,
but it was not God’s plan that Adam would fall. It was God’s plan that Adam would be “master over his acts” so that he could freely attain his full blessed perfection by remaining in God’s friendship. (CCC, 1730)

This approach that Adam was “primarily designed to fall away from God” and “so too was Adam made and made to fall hard and fast into the arms of Jesus’ power to forgive.” runs into trouble because Adam was made a human person destined from the beginning to be in the presence of the Beatific Vision. (CCC, 355- 357)

I am not sure, but I think the trouble occurs because Adam and we have a human nature which includes the freedom to act or not to act. This means that Adam was given the freedom of choosing between good and evil. Therefore, he could choose growing in perfection or choose failing and sinning. Adam had the possibility to fall, which is not the same as being made to fall hard.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 1730-1732
**1731 **Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.
Catholicism does not teach that Adam was designed to fall. On the contrary, Catholicism teaches that Adam was created in the state of original holiness. (CCC, 375-379, IV. Man in Paradise) He and we are created in the image of God and neither he nor we are designed to fall away from God.

 

[simpleas]

On “Smothering” - It is in the nature of sentient beings (ourselves and the angels) to seperate from God to be our own “top of the heap, master of our own destiny”. Lucifer and Adam each reach this point of decision where God is in the way, preventing what they think is in thier best interest. This is one supposed reason why Adam chose logically and emotionally to sin. Adam willfully desires the seperation from God not just falling to some simple tempation of the senses or the flesh. It is a deep cooperation with the act where Adam wills a seperation with God in his mind and heart. I do presume too much, no one but God whould know the heart of Adam, but I agree it has to be a sin of this depth and nature. The word “smothering” takes Adams errant view point that God is “holding him back from his whole potential” and incorpoates this whole idea in the shorthand of this one word.

Angels and humans two very different creatures one primarily designed to at once follow God’s will or be forever lost to heaven. The other primarily designed to fall away from God and then crawl back through the narrow gate made by God’s only begotten son.

This begoten child of God is the Christ child that is our only hope our only way; so, we celebrate his birth to us, for us.

It was God’s plan that Adam would fall. God had to make it easy enough for it to happen and yet make no flaw in Adam or any part of creation. Just as Lucifer was made the highest and most perfect angel that fell to the lowest parts of hell so too was Adam made and made to fall hard and fast into the arms of Jesus’ power to forgive.

What could his whole potential have been though? Some sort of power (being like God) as satan promised Eve first?

Having Justice and grace wasn’t enough for them.

A&E lived by themselves, possibly seeing angels, yet satan appears as a serpent to offer them more than they are.
God would have been the only one to give them more.

*Lucifer and Adam each reach this point of decision where God is in the way, preventing what they think is in thier best interest. *

Are you saying humans and angels have a very similar intellect?

 

[Paddy_Walker]

…today is, I think, the feast day of Sts. Adam and Eve.

 

[wmw]

I’m not convinced that I’ve said anything contrary to these catechism paragraphs. Man is fallen, God need not plan anything, but for recovery of man from sin. Man is designed to be forever in the beatific vision as well and we are not truly home apart from it. I see no conflict in these statements.

In God there is no contingencies, no plan B, all of plan A is known and already done.

I think you derive more from “primarily designed to fall away from God” than I meant.

 

[wmw]

Are you saying humans and angels have a very similar intellect?

Similar enough that both tend to covet being their own god at the points in their creation where they choose to be followers of God or not, for us during our lives here on earth, for angels immediately at their creation.

 

[wmw]

The phrase “made to fall hard” may have two meanings and this may be our divergence of agreement. I meant it in the sense that we are able to be injured and heal. God made us able to heal our soul through His Son. While angels once lost are always lost. I don’t mean God Incorporated any necessity that we must sin or it is forced by the nature he put into us. He just knew it would be.