Adam & Logic

[grannymh]

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.

Thank you for the clarification. We are back in agreement.

In addition, as usual with posts, my granny mind grabs a new thought…

This time, it is the concept that “we are able to be injured and heal.” This is a needed approach to Adam’s pre-Fall life and our post-Fall lives. Long range, it appears to me that being able to be injured is why God did not create any kind of group as first parents. We needed two sole parents as progenitors of either what human life could be or what human life turned out to be after the “point” of their choice. (from wmw post 373) I am also seeing a good use for the word “followers”. Thank you.

 

[grannymh]

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!

I would like to add to the original suggestion.

Originally Posted by Aloysium forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
*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.

In my humble opinion, knowing that Catholic doctrines are in the area of Faith and Morals helps when dealing with all kinds of possible questions in the first three chapters of Genesis.

Also, it helps to remember that Church protocol for declaring a Catholic doctrine demands an exhaustive study starting with Scripture and continuing with an examination of all subsequent writings pertaining to the proposed doctrine. Divine Revelation, protected by the Holy Spirit (chapter 14, Gospel of John), is the solid base for Catholic doctrines.

This protocol is so apparent when one checks the footnotes and the “Index of Citations”, page 689, in the* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.*

Speaking of the Catechism…It is essential that readers go first to CCC, Practical Directions for Using this Catechism, page 11, paragraphs 18-22.

When one is fascinated by a particular “description” in those mysterious first three chapters, it will be helpful to use a Catholic doctrine as a base in order to grasp the important and valuable Divine Revelation. Sometimes what is important is the Truth which the writer was attempting to describe in human language. This Truth usually is made clearer when one looks up at Jesus bleeding on His cross.

Links to Catechism
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

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

 

[simpleas]

consciouslifenews.com/catholic-cardinal-adam-eve-didnt-exist/#

And then I read something like this from a catholic cardinal?

 

[D_Martin]

My suggestion is to begin with the human nature that you and I have. It is observable that human persons have the tools of reason, self-reflection, logical evaluation, abstract concepts, and analytical thought. These rational tools are part of human nature – the human being one sees in the mirror. It is observable that other living organisms, elephants and plants, bacteria and insects are not rational in the same manner as humans. Obviously, we do not consider plants, bacteria, and insects on the same level as ourselves. Still they and we share life.

Non-human animals and ourselves also share life. Yet, there is still the difference between being rational and highly sentient. Apparently, there is an additional something inherent in human nature which places us at the pinnacle of creation. This something is not necessarily seen. Comparing our decomposing anatomy with the anatomies of other similar creatures, we find similarities within our vertebrate group. Thus, we humans tend to wax philosophically.

Over the centuries, the art of “determining how many angels can dance on the heard of a pin” has developed successfully. However, rather than declaring that this or that philosophical system has all the answers, it seems that a both-and approach is more useful. By both-and, I am referring to both the Divine Revelation contained in the Catholic Deposit of Faith and what we have learned from the important and very valuable discipline of philosophy.

Is that a fair start?

By the way, eating a piece of organic fruit is the outward sign of Adam’s disobedience. What wounded, definitely not corrupted, human nature was the shattering of the relationship between humanity and divinity.

If human nature is so wonderful, then why is the result of human nature death? Why doesn’t the world see the glory of God in His Heaven? If human nature is so great, then why is it angels that see the face of God, and not mankind? Just what is it you are honoring here? It surly ain’t the virtues of God.

 

[grannymh]

consciouslifenews.com/catholic-cardinal-adam-eve-didnt-exist/#

And then I read something like this from a catholic cardinal?

The heart of this particular section of the Dawkins/Pell 2012 debate is “evolution” which happens to be a banned topic in this Forum.
Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/multipage.gif 1 2)

I do not want to see this thread closed because we violated the Forum’s ban on evolution discussion.

I will comment that the news story by Nicolas Perpitch for the Australian paper is easier to follow because Perpitch used quotation marks appropriately and did not insert a personal comment about explosive comments.

Going over the debate transcript, it seemed to me that the Cardinal’s answers were fast paced and rather disjointed. I have the same impression from the link to the Yahoo.com news story. Therefore, I will give the Cardinal the benefit of the doubt because there is no real way to determine his actual doctrinal beliefs based on a few minutes in a long debate.

What makes the “media” Cardinal Pell difficult to understand is that I am not sure if his religious terminology used in Australia is the same as in other countries. If mythology is another way of describing ancient figurative language handed down, in story form, from generation to generation … or could religious purposes be a reference to the goals of Divine Revelation. No real context or appropriate foundation is given for some of the Cardinal’s very brief answers. We should not assume that the Cardinal is giving a Catechism lesson.

My simple advice is to charitably ignore the Cardinal’s references to Adam and Eve.

 

[grannymh]

If human nature is so wonderful, then why is the result of human nature death? Why doesn’t the world see the glory of God in His Heaven? If human nature is so great, then why is it angels that see the face of God, and not mankind? Just what is it you are honoring here? It surly ain’t the virtues of God.

These are interesting questions which can have various answers. Here are some examples which popped into the space between my ears.

We experience death because we have a physical/material decomposing anatomy. Some people, around the 17th century, did see the glory of God’s creation. For example, there is some marvelous poetry which is still being read. According to Catholicism, the angels who declared their allegiance to God immediately earned the privilege of seeing God “face to face”. We are not angels…dang! I am a tad prejudiced, so I like to honor human nature because we are the pinnacle of all the living creatures on our planet. And you are right that post 3 barely nods to God in the reference to Divine Revelation.

From the Catholic viewpoint, our human nature is wonderful because we understand that God created our nature in His image. This means that we are an unique unification of both the material world (body) and the spiritual world (soul).

 

[D_Martin]

From the Catholic viewpoint, our human nature is wonderful because we understand that God created our nature in His image. This means that we are an unique unification of both the material world (body) and the spiritual world (soul).

So what you are saying here is the wicked are in God’s image also, correct? Adam and Eve where made in His image, true, but doesn’t it say after they left the garden:

Gen:5:3: And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Doesn’t say God’s likeness does it?

And since Jesus is the Son of God, from God and there was and is no man like Him, how is it that there would be any true fulfillment in the flesh of the image of God in the flesh other than Jesus Christ? After the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Because it does say in:

Luke 3:38: Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Of which God’s Word says that Adam died. Therefore we receive the life Adam had which results in death, which can’t be of God, because the Life of God never dies.

Besides this view seems delusional (not to be insulting) when anyone that has been at the receiving end of human nature knows that human nature is cruel and wicked in the taking of opportunities to fulfill a heart’s desire of which God Himself attests:

Gen:8:21: And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

That is not a acurate description of God’s nature is it? But is absolutly true about human nature.

It is God’s nature that is to be honored, praised and respected, which was fulfilled in the flesh to God’s satisfaction by His only begotten and Beloved Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, in the Hope that the same is fulfilled in us.

 

[wmw]

D_M:
There is much here to disagree with, but let’s get to the bottom conclusion.

We all agree that God is holy, holy, holy. There is no evil in Him. Jesus and the Father are one and Holy Spirit.

Man was made holy from the Holy Trinity, but the corruption of evil is in all of us. Rather than use our power of creation to build upon holyness we sometimes have built evil and this evil has clouded the pure holyness that was made into Adam & Eve before the fall. Through the sacrements we can have our souls cleared while our bodies remain clouded in wounds.

Still, the foundation of the image of God remains within each of us. True we inherit the wounds of sin from Adam, but we also retain the image of God that passes down through the generation of our ansestors and the soul that God makes at the moment of conseption.

There is an abundance of good in man; very much because the sinfulness is rank and ugly it is good to focus our attentions to the positive image sometimes hidden by the scars and wounds.

 

[grannymh]

So what you are saying here is the wicked are in God’s image also, correct? Adam and Eve where made in His image, true, but doesn’t it say after they left the garden:

Gen:5:3: And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Doesn’t say God’s likeness does it?

And since Jesus is the Son of God, from God and there was and is no man like Him, how is it that there would be any true fulfillment in the flesh of the image of God in the flesh other than Jesus Christ? After the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Because it does say in:

Luke 3:38: Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Of which God’s Word says that Adam died. Therefore we receive the life Adam had which results in death, which can’t be of God, because the Life of God never dies.

Besides this view seems delusional (not to be insulting) when anyone that has been at the receiving end of human nature knows that human nature is cruel and wicked in the taking of opportunities to fulfill a heart’s desire of which God Himself attests:

Gen:8:21: And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

That is not a acurate description of God’s nature is it? But is absolutly true about human nature.

It is God’s nature that is to be honored, praised and respected, which was fulfilled in the flesh to God’s satisfaction by His only begotten and Beloved Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, in the Hope that the same is fulfilled in us.

This ending sentence in post 381 is the most important of all.
“It is God’s nature that is to be honored, praised and respected, which was fulfilled in the flesh to God’s satisfaction by His only begotten and Beloved Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, in the Hope that the same is fulfilled in us.”
The first sentence in post 381 poses this question to me.
“So what you are saying here is the wicked are in God’s image also, correct?
In answering, I am thinking about Jesus and the Lepers, Jesus and the Woman caught in adultery, and about Jesus’ words: " Your sins are forgiven.” (Luke 7: 44-50) The answer to that first question is found in our Lord Jesus the Christ.

 

[D_Martin]

This ending sentence in post 381 is the most important of all.
“It is God’s nature that is to be honored, praised and respected, which was fulfilled in the flesh to God’s satisfaction by His only begotten and Beloved Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, in the Hope that the same is fulfilled in us.”
The first sentence in post 381 poses this question to me.
“So what you are saying here is the wicked are in God’s image also, correct?
In answering, I am thinking about Jesus and the Lepers, Jesus and the Woman caught in adultery, and about Jesus’ words: " Your sins are forgiven.” (Luke 7: 44-50) The answer to that first question is found in our Lord Jesus the Christ.

No! I’m talking about what God says here, not some (make me feel guilty of condemnation) here. Condemnation and forgiveness is a whole different subject, though you may not agree in the desire to win your argument.

What we are talking about here is simply human nature, man’s likeness, image, and God’s nature, hence likeness, image, and the difference thereof. If man without Christ is in the satisfactory image, and or likeness of God, according to God, in God’s sight then there would be no need for what is of Christ that is of God in men that men be acceptable in the Presence of God.

 

[simpleas]

The heart of this particular section of the Dawkins/Pell 2012 debate is “evolution” which happens to be a banned topic in this Forum.
Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/multipage.gif 1 2)

I do not want to see this thread closed because we violated the Forum’s ban on evolution discussion.

I will comment that the news story by Nicolas Perpitch for the Australian paper is easier to follow because Perpitch used quotation marks appropriately and did not insert a personal comment about explosive comments.

Going over the debate transcript, it seemed to me that the Cardinal’s answers were fast paced and rather disjointed. I have the same impression from the link to the Yahoo.com news story. Therefore, I will give the Cardinal the benefit of the doubt because there is no real way to determine his actual doctrinal beliefs based on a few minutes in a long debate.

What makes the “media” Cardinal Pell difficult to understand is that I am not sure if his religious terminology used in Australia is the same as in other countries. If mythology is another way of describing ancient figurative language handed down, in story form, from generation to generation … or could religious purposes be a reference to the goals of Divine Revelation. No real context or appropriate foundation is given for some of the Cardinal’s very brief answers. We should not assume that the Cardinal is giving a Catechism lesson.

My simple advice is to charitably ignore the Cardinal’s references to Adam and Eve.

My apologies, I didn’t realise the link could cause a ban on your thread

As its a catholic cardinal saying things like this, well, its not in line with what he professed to believe, but then it seems everyone has their own opinion as to how they think we were created and evolved, catholic or not.

 

[grannymh]

No! I’m talking about what God says here, not some (make me feel guilty of condemnation) here. Condemnation and forgiveness is a whole different subject, though you may not agree in the desire to win your argument.

What we are talking about here is simply human nature, man’s likeness, image, and God’s nature, hence likeness, image, and the difference thereof. If man without Christ is in the satisfactory image, and or likeness of God, according to God, in God’s sight then there would be no need for what is of Christ that is of God in men that men be acceptable in the Presence of God.

Yes, we are talking about the same simple human nature which Jesus healed and forgave.

However, because of some family situations, I will have to continue this discussion another time.

As OP, I made it clear in post 1, that I would be explaining Adam according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. My source for information is the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. Over the centuries, the Holy Spirit’s wisdom continually guided the Catholic Church so that in this century we have a comprehensive understanding of Divine Revelation in regard to human nature. (chapter 14, Gospel of John)

This Catholic understanding of human nature is not necessarily accepted by every Christian religion. All I can do is to present Catholicism and then let the readers, CAF members and guests, decide for themselves.

Links to the Catechism

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

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[grannymh]

In my humble opinion, it is logical, given the human nature that you and I possess, that Adam existed as explained by the Catholic Church.
Source:* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*.

Because the Catholic Church holds that a transcendent Pure Spirit without restrictions (simplified description) does in fact exist–the presupposition for this thread is God as Creator exists.

The reality of the One Adam is the Creator’s way of teaching all humans that the One Way to complete happiness is found in a sincere relationship between the human creature and the Creator God.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

The reality of the One Adam is the Creator’s way of teaching all humans that the One Way to complete happiness is found in a sincere relationship between the human creature and the Creator God.

I don’t know why Adam isn’t the most reviled person in human history. He screwed up the whole party. We should be Burning him in effigy in a yearly celebration.

 

[D_Martin]

The reality of the One Adam is the Creator’s way of teaching all humans that the One Way to complete happiness is found in a sincere relationship between the human creature and the Creator God.

God hates death, and how is it that death is to teach anyone Life that is of God? That sounds like hang-um, that ll teach him a lesson. Or maybe, don’t step in front of that bus, if he steps in front of that bus, where’s the lesson that would give life to the soul it was spoken to? Catholic theology may say something else but scripture teaches that by one Adam all receive the life and death of sin, and by One the Lord Jesus Christ all receive the Life everlasting in the Presence of God. Though that’s not a quote.

 

[simpleas]

The body and soul are one. By receiving the sacraments only the soul is cleansed. The soul controls the body, so if the soul is cleansed each time, why is it so easy to fall into a sin?
We are never restored back to the original grace and justice once givin to A&E.
Christ helps us, I know this, I still don’t understand why we have to suffer many trials as beloved humans of God on this planet, which is of much beauty in itself. We have to hope for a better, eternal life when we die.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I don’t know why Adam isn’t the most reviled person in human history. He screwed up the whole party. We should be Burning him in effigy in a yearly celebration.

Who is we?

Burning an effigy is usually restricted to those who are unaware of expression of displeasure in socially acceptable ways.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

Who is we?

Burning an effigy is usually restricted to those who are unaware of expression of displeasure in socially acceptable ways.

Ever heard of Guy Fawkes Night?

 

[grannymh]

I don’t know why Adam isn’t the most reviled person in human history. He screwed up the whole party. We should be Burning him in effigy in a yearly celebration.

I checked Guy Fawkes Night with my good friend Google and found out that Guy was not the very first human alive on planet earth.

Seriously, the difference between Guy and Adam demands consideration.

Logically, there has to be a first human before there can be a second human and on and on until we find Guy, and ourselves, in human history. Catholics refer to the first human as “Adam” and affirm that all humans descend from Adam and his spouse Eve. When we look at our nature, we find that we have a rational mind and an anatomy which eventually decomposes in some way like the rest of living organisms. Catholicism points out that Adam’s nature was fully complete like ours. It is Adam’s spiritual soul which made him, and subsequently ourselves, the pinnacle of creation. I am not sure if we would be an insect or an elephant without Adam as our beginning. We know for sure that we are not dinosaurs.

My point is that while Adam freely made a huge error which impacted his descendants, his descendants have the opportunity to live in eternal joy with the Creator.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

My point is that while Adam freely made a huge error which impacted his descendants, his descendants have the opportunity to leave in eternal joy with the Creator.

The Guy Fawkes reference was to show that burning someone in effigy isn’t restricted to those that lack communication skills.

My point is Adam made not just a huge error, but the largest error. He seems to get a pass. If we are to accept that there was an actual Adam, he should be reviled and hated.

Then again if we just take A&E as an allegory it would seem silly to waste the effort.