Adam & Logic

[Aloysium]

. . . Yet not all the angels Fell with Lucifer.
Free choice to be “individuals” (to break solidarity) operated within all the angels
This in itself is not the sin - it is a good freedom given by angelic nature (as it is in humans). The sin is to choose personal or species-solidarity over Divine solidarity. . .

We miraculously exist as ourselves. At the same time, we are each an embodiment of a basic humanity, which includes this individual, irreplaceable uniqueness.

My sense is that the individual first human, Adam expressed the desire of mankind in his decision. It’s not so much solidarity, as it is that he revealed what we all want.

We want what we want. If it is good, why should we not have it? Shouldn’t we be able to decide for ourself what is good for us? Who dares stand in our way? Greatness awaits us, if we go out and grab it. Stuff like that. I haven’t read Nietzsche in a very long while, but it’s the sort of stuff that would go into making a “superman”.

It takes a certain amount of prayer, love and education before, through God’s grace (Baptism?) we are able to say, “What do You ask of me? Your will be done.”

God did not create us with the purpose of having us fall any more than He created Lucifer to bring about hell.
As did each angel, humanity chose what it chose. God becoming one of us, takes on humanity’s sins to bring those who seek Him to everlasting life in His presence.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

May I gently point out that your original scenario had the time frame both before and after the Fall. Now you have changed to Adam obeying God; therefore, there would be no Fall, no Original Sin.

GM The Scenario is still the same, but I did confuse you below.

What I really meant to say was that the basis for my scenario is Adam first doing what God actually asked him to do - GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY (before he himself sinned).

 

[Blue_Horizon]

My sense is that the individual first human, Adam expressed the desire of mankind in his decision. It’s not so much solidarity, as it is that he revealed what we all want. .

Yes I believe everything hinges on how we explain this - how Adam is a free individual (which means Eve and their descendants are also) yet somehow all his descendants make (or would make) the exact same choice as him.

To say that “Adam expressed the desire of all mankind” doesn’t seem to get us much further in resolving the apparant contradiction. “Mankind” is not a single entity or will for Adam (or any human individual) to express. … unless we see Adam as a mere metaphor or Type or personification of a tendancy inhernet in the whole human race. Which is not a Catholic position.

The only model we currently have for the way that “all men sin in Adam” is that of biological generation (Augustine). If we maintain that all pre-Fall progeny would have joined Adam in a fruit picnic (as you succintly put it) then there must be a more subtle mechanism other than biological generation to explain the causality of this blind lemming-like reaction in the face of what should be individual free will .

Or…perhaps the pre-Fall progeny may not necessarily have Fallen with Adam.

 

[grannymh]

GM The Scenario is still the same, but I did confuse you below.

What I really meant to say was that the basis for my scenario is Adam first doing what God actually asked him to do - GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY (before he himself sinned).

In the Catholic Church, does Holy Scripture end with verse 28, chapter 1 of the book of Genesis?

Think about that. Are we to go forth and multiply with no responsibilities? No need for morals like honesty and love as long as we are multiplying. What would be the worth of women after they stop multiplying?

And what about the verse which precedes verse 28? How did Adam know he was created in God’s image if his only function was to go forth and multiply?

How do we know that we are in the image of God without a logical understanding of Adam?

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

In the Catholic Church, does Holy Scripture end with verse 28, chapter 1 of the book of Genesis?

Think about that. Are we to go forth and multiply with no responsibilities? No need for morals like honesty and love as long as we are multiplying. What would be the worth of women after they stop multiplying?

And what about the verse which precedes verse 28? How did Adam know he was created in God’s image if his only function was to go forth and multiply?

How do we know that we are in the image of God without a logical understanding of Adam?

An alternate view:

From Joseph Campbell power of Myth

“In the Old Testament story God points out the one forbidden thing. Now, God must have known very well that man was going to eat the forbidden fruit. But it was by doing that that man became the initiator of his own life. Life really began with that act of disobedience.”

 

[fhansen]

An alternate view:

From Joseph Campbell power of Myth

“In the Old Testament story God points out the one forbidden thing. Now, God must have known very well that man was going to eat the forbidden fruit. But it was by doing that that man became the initiator of his own life. Life really began with that act of disobedience.”

I was never impressed with Campbell’s speculations; they often seemed contrived-and consistent in their anti-Catholicism as well. Anyway his thought on man’s disobedience as being a positive step-into life rather than death-is nothing new, and lack’s understanding of the concept, of man, of God, even lack’s imagination IMO.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

I was never impressed with Campbell’s speculations; they often seemed contrived-and consistent in their anti-Catholicism as well. Anyway his thought on man’s disobedience as being a positive step-into life rather than death-is nothing new, and lack’s understanding of the concept, of man, of God, even lack’s imagination IMO.

Can you be more specific on how you see his lack of understanding. He did grow up Catholic and studied religion for decades. Lack of faith isn’t lack of understanding, imo.

 

[fhansen]

Can you be more specific on how you see his lack of understanding. He did grow up Catholic and studied religion for decades. Lack of faith isn’t lack of understanding, imo.

No, but faith can lead to understanding IMO. And its obvious by his statements that he threw that out the door -as one more angry ex cradle-Catholic.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

No, but faith can lead to understanding IMO. And its obvious by his statements that he threw that out the door -as one more angry ex cradle-Catholic.

It’s not as obvious as you think , that’s why I ask.

 

[fhansen]

It’s not as obvious as you think , that’s why I ask.

I watched him for years-read a book or two-and shared some of his perspectives earlier in my own life, having left the CC myself and later entertaining a variety of beliefs/philosophies. Campbell really has nothing to offer and so often anti-Catholicism would come out-almost to the point that it seemed it might be at the foundation of his beliefs at times. Anyway, he often ended up coming off to me as a wounded little boy underneath it all.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

I watched him for years-read a book or two-and shared some of his perspectives earlier in my own life, having left the CC myself and later entertaining a variety of beliefs/philosophies. Campbell really has nothing to offer and so often anti-Catholicism would come out-almost to the point that it seemed it might be at the foundation of his beliefs at times. Anyway, he often ended up coming off to me as a wounded little boy underneath it all.

I’m sorry. I’m asking about the ideas, not the man.

 

[fhansen]

I’m sorry. I’m asking about the ideas, not the man.

Well, the man affects the ideas; as with all of us our ideas don’t necessarily spring forth from a purely uncluttered background. What would you like to know?-it’s been a very long time since I heard anything from him.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

Well, the man affects the ideas; as with all of us our ideas don’t necessarily spring forth from a purely uncluttered background. What would you like to know?-it’s been a very long time since I heard anything from him.

He’s been dead since '87, so I hope not. Critiquing the man as his ideas is classic ad hominem.

The idea that the disobedience brought us to a fuller more mature experience of life. Before the fall we were like infants, lacking the understanding. The fall thrust us into life with it’s adult difficulties and understanding that we are active participants not just passive wards. A cosmic bar mitzvah.

 

[Aloysium]

Joseph Campbell:

A couple of years ago, I had a very amusing experience. I was in the New York Athletic Club swimming pool, where I was introduced to a priest who was a professor at one of our Catholic universities. So after I had had my swim, I came and sat in a lounging chair in what we call the “horizontal athlete” position, and the priest, who was beside me, asked,
“Now, Mr. Campbell, are you a priest?”
I answered, “No, Father.”
He asked, “Are you a Catholic?”
answered, “I was, Father.”
Then he asked — and I think it interesting that he phrased the question in this way — “Do you believe in a personal god?”
“No, Father,” I said.
And he replied, “Well, I suppose there is no way to prove by logic the existence of a personal god.”
“If there were, Father,” said I, “what then would be the value of faith?”
“Well, Mr. Campbell,” said the priest quickly, “it’s nice to have met you.” And he was off.
I felt I had executed a jujitsu throw.
But that was an illuminating conversation to me. The fact that a Catholic father had asked, “Do you believe in a personal god?” meant to me that he also recognized the possibility of an impersonal god, namely, a transcendent ground or energy in itself. The idea of Buddha consciousness is of an immanent, luminous consciousness that informs all things and all lives. We unthinkingly live by fragments of that consciousness, fragments of that energy. But the religious way of life is to live not in terms of the self-interested intentions of this particular body at this particular time but in terms of the insight of that larger consciousness.

. . . meh . . . He has some nice stories but he doesn’t quite get it, IMHO.

 

[fhansen]

He’s been dead since '87, so I hope not.

Yes?-well he’s still being heard from anyway.

Critiquing the man as his ideas is classic ad hominem.

Was there something untrue about my statement-that none of us are purely objective in our positions? My analysis of Campbell is not for the purpose of attack-I’ve always appreciated his education-never his conclusions…

The idea that the disobedience brought us to a fuller more mature experience of life. Before the fall we were like infants, lacking the understanding. The fall thrust us into life with it’s adult difficulties and understanding that we are active participants not just passive wards. A cosmic bar mitzvah.

I understand the concept but the teaching on original sin, et al takes us further than that IMO. Experience/knowledge would’ve been gained by Adam in any case.The knowledge of evil OTOH, does nothing positive in making us active participants in life;other than demonstrating what to reject-not worthless knowledge in itself from that standpoint but a different concept about Adam’s act in any case. Was the creator of Genesis 1-3 just describing the passage from childhood through adolescence to adulthood, the transition to self-awareness? I don’t think so-I believe the message to be more profound-an explanation, for one thing, for the existence of evil in our world, an explanation for why people don’t grow up, don’t gain complete self-mastery, with all that implies in terms of harm done to each other.

 

[grannymh]

I’m sorry. I’m asking about the ideas, not the man.

I, too, am interested in the ideas and how they relate to this thread.

Post 617 begins with a reference to an Old Testament story. That is fair.

Post 625 offers this idea.
The idea that the disobedience brought us to a fuller more mature experience of life. Before the fall we were like infants, lacking the understanding. The fall thrust us into life with it’s adult difficulties and understanding that we are active participants not just passive wards. A cosmic bar mitzvah.

I certainly agree that this idea presents an alternate view to the teachings of the Catholic Church as stipulated in the opening post. Therefore, the question which needs to be asked is – How does a person use the first three chapters of Genesis to logically substantiate the idea that before the Fall the lead character was like an infant, lacking the understanding???

Interestingly, the second axiom of this thread is “God as Creator interacts with humans.” Therefore, a person needs to demonstrate how God interacted with the infant in those first three chapters.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . How does a person use the first three chapters of Genesis to logically substantiate the idea that before the Fall the lead character was like an infant, lacking the understanding??? . . . )

For Campbell, there is no God, there was no Adam.
Genesis would a psycho-spiritual myth, an archetypal story about how we come to maturity. It would not be about what actually happened in time, but what happens to each of us in life.
There’s not much depth, IMHO, to that sort of analysis.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

Yes?-well he’s still being heard from anyway.

Was there something untrue about my statement-that none of us are purely objective in our positions? My analysis of Campbell is not for the purpose of attack-I’ve always appreciated his education-never his conclusions…

I understand the concept but the teaching on original sin, et al takes us further than that IMO. Experience/knowledge would’ve been gained by Adam in any case.The knowledge of evil OTOH, does nothing positive in making us active participants in life;other than demonstrating what to reject-not worthless knowledge in itself from that standpoint but a different concept about Adam’s act in any case. Was the creator of Genesis 1-3 just describing the passage from childhood through adolescence to adulthood, the transition to self-awareness? I don’t think so-I believe the message to be more profound-an explanation, for one thing, for the existence of evil in our world, an explanation for why people don’t grow up, don’t gain complete self-mastery, with all that implies in terms of harm done to each other.

While I’ll agree who we are influences our ideas, it doesn’t speak to the validity of those ideas. Calling him “wounded little boy” doesn’t speak to his idea but rather “to the man.” We’ve moved past it.

I don’t think he’s speaking to it as physical infancy but rather intellectual and spiritually. The refusal to “grow up” I think accounts for much of the human evil in the world. The disobedience threw us into self awareness, the realm of consequences, spiritually. It prepared us for the work we of being human. It was our first dip in the deep waters. Now we have to learn to swim.

He later states that the tree(s) in the garden and the cross are symbolically the same tree, one leads us out, one leads us back.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

For Campbell, there is no God, there was no Adam.
Genesis would a psycho-spiritual myth, an archetypal story about how we come to maturity. It would not be about what actually happened in time, but what happens to each of us in life.
There’s not much depth, IMHO, to that sort of analysis.

It’s not a personal god, but god is part of the myth. It’s more of a deist or taoist concept of a god. There is an Adam, just as there is a good Samaritan. I see it as perhaps more profound. If we look at Adam as separate and distant it doesn’t communicate how we participate in our responsibility for our spirituality as if we see it as our own story as well. If it’s simply an ancestral burden how can we be culpable. If we “just are” how can that be seen as just.

 

[simpleas]

I watched him for years-read a book or two-and shared some of his perspectives earlier in my own life, having left the CC myself and later entertaining a variety of beliefs/philosophies. Campbell really has nothing to offer and so often anti-Catholicism would come out-almost to the point that it seemed it might be at the foundation of his beliefs at times. Anyway, he often ended up coming off to me as a wounded little boy underneath it all.

Fhansen,
It’s very weird how this thread has touched on another form of understanding Adam, I’ve just started to read a book on spirituality today and it’s mentioned something known as Kabbalah (tree of life) which in turn lead me to the website below.

If I could ask
Would the link below be one of the variety of beliefs you entertain?
Thanks

spiritofthescripture.com/id2347-what-does-the-garden-of-eden-represent.html