S
simpleas
Guest
I was referring to Aloysium’s thought of “with Adam’s guidence, eve repenting could have eaten of the tree of life”
- Status
I was referring to Aloysium’s thought of “with Adam’s guidence, eve repenting could have eaten of the tree of life”
A
Aloysium
Guest
Just following up on previous posts (maybe I should stop):
There are differnet ways in which we understand and connect to the world.
While the CCC is explanatory, scripture is written in a variety of fashions.
Where people are involved it is of great interest to approach them in an empathic manner.
Let us take the story of Jonah. To me it is as real as the next person I meet, in that it is possible to put oneself into every aspect of that story. Whether it is the bone-chilling coldness and thin veil of life of existing within the fish for three days or the single-mindedness of the fish itself on its God-sent mission, it is possible to identify with, transform oneself into every person, every particular.
Not surprisingly, this is impossible to do with Jesus as His compassion contains the reader rather than vice versa.
I have found it interesting, that although there were two original parents, they seem so unreal.
I until I read about Eve’s having been deceived and the considered possibiulity that Adam, in full knowledge of the truth, sinned, and why he would do so, I could not connect with them.
Eternal separation is pretty much the only thing worthy of fear.
I find it ironic and typical of human nature that trying to follow one’s own will, against that of God, brings about the very situation one was trying to avoid.
Perhaps I am making them less than who they were; perhaps they too, contain me, and that this is the reason for my inability to empathize.
I just wanted to share some thoughts, that may sound out-there , but they haven’t appeared to be heretical.
There are differnet ways in which we understand and connect to the world.
While the CCC is explanatory, scripture is written in a variety of fashions.
Where people are involved it is of great interest to approach them in an empathic manner.
Let us take the story of Jonah. To me it is as real as the next person I meet, in that it is possible to put oneself into every aspect of that story. Whether it is the bone-chilling coldness and thin veil of life of existing within the fish for three days or the single-mindedness of the fish itself on its God-sent mission, it is possible to identify with, transform oneself into every person, every particular.
Not surprisingly, this is impossible to do with Jesus as His compassion contains the reader rather than vice versa.
I have found it interesting, that although there were two original parents, they seem so unreal.
I until I read about Eve’s having been deceived and the considered possibiulity that Adam, in full knowledge of the truth, sinned, and why he would do so, I could not connect with them.
Eternal separation is pretty much the only thing worthy of fear.
I find it ironic and typical of human nature that trying to follow one’s own will, against that of God, brings about the very situation one was trying to avoid.
Perhaps I am making them less than who they were; perhaps they too, contain me, and that this is the reason for my inability to empathize.
I just wanted to share some thoughts, that may sound out-there , but they haven’t appeared to be heretical.
G
grannymh
Guest
Your thoughts do make our parents more real. Thank you for sharing.
If we keep Adam and Eve within the Catholic doctrines, we may find more ways to get to know them and understand them.
I have a thought that I have had for a long time. The story of Satan’s temptation sounds too cut and dried. I like to think that this rendering of the event is the final temptation. I think that Satan was tempting Adam for some time. Maybe telling Adam how smart he was and then adding that Adam could even be as smart as God. Maybe telling him that being a god would really impress Eve. Or maybe Adam became bored cultivating the Garden.
I really liked your comment.
“I find it ironic and typical of human nature that trying to follow one’s own will, against that of God, brings about the very situation one was trying to avoid.”
If Adam were bored with his task of caring for the Garden, by choosing to go against the obedience requirement of his creaturely status, he ended up with thorns and thistles.
S
simpleas
Guest
Does it say somewhere in the ccc that Eve was the first to fall to satan’s temptation, I’m sure it does, but I can’t find it. I don’t remember if the ccc explains why satan tempts eve first.
Are there other catholic books that go alittle deeper into the creation story, because most write up’s I come across are non catholic.
Thanks.
Are there other catholic books that go alittle deeper into the creation story, because most write up’s I come across are non catholic.
Thanks.
S
simpleas
Guest
Here is my thought on Adam and Eve gaining knowledge of good and evil.
Maybe they didn’t gain knowledge of good and evil, they lost this knowledge along with holiness/grace/self mastery.
Gen 3 : 22, states that man has become like one of us with his knowledge of good and evil, it doesn’t say he lost anything…
Revelation explains it as losing holiness/grace.
For me it makes alittle more sense, that they may have already had knowledge of good and evil and were able to live in harmony with God.
God makes them the first humans, who walk with God, so they must have had full knowledge to begin with, so that they could choose God or their own way. Choosing the latter they lost this knowledge along with everything else.
Maybe they didn’t gain knowledge of good and evil, they lost this knowledge along with holiness/grace/self mastery.
Gen 3 : 22, states that man has become like one of us with his knowledge of good and evil, it doesn’t say he lost anything…
Revelation explains it as losing holiness/grace.
For me it makes alittle more sense, that they may have already had knowledge of good and evil and were able to live in harmony with God.
God makes them the first humans, who walk with God, so they must have had full knowledge to begin with, so that they could choose God or their own way. Choosing the latter they lost this knowledge along with everything else.
F
fhansen
Guest
IMO, all humanity gained the knowledge of good and evil at the Fall. From then on both the good inherent in God’s creation, along with the evil which is inherent in rebellion against God’s created order, would be experienced-would be literally known- as we continue to know both to this day. Rebellion against God, opposition to His will, is evil, and evil does nothing but to continue and to flourish in that state of separation from Him.
G
grannymh
Guest
Do you see a difference between knowing how to do something and actually doing it?
We know how to jump off a bridge …
This difference is why Simpleas makes sense in post 734.
"For me it makes a little more sense, that they may have already had knowledge of good and evil and were able to live in harmony with God. God makes them the first humans, who walk with God, so they must have had full knowledge to begin with, so that they could choose God or their own way. Choosing the latter they lost this knowledge along with everything else. "
F
fhansen
Guest
They had no need of the knowledge of evil in their innocence; no use for it whatsoever, no experience with it because God created nothing evil. The only way to know it is to join the rebellion against God, already begun by satan and his minions; at that point evil is known because at that point one is standing outside God’s will themselves, that separation is the very essence of evil, the essence of OS. Being commanded to obey, having the law written in one’s conscience, is not the same as knowing good and evil. Those commands, those consciences, existed before A&E ate the fruit, after which they gained the knowledge. That knowledge was immediate and integral with disobedience of God. It was to gain the very knowledge of that which lies outside God’s will with all that implies. Disobedience of God is ipso facto evil, and so by their disobedience alone A&E knew evil.
S
simpleas
Guest
Adam and Eve walked with God. I’m not sure how this is interpreted, but I think it means they had full knowledge of God. Which would only be of holiness and goodness. But by knowing God, having full knowledge, they may have been able to understand what was right by God and what would be wrong by god. They could still be innocent in this knowledge because we are told Eve is deceived by satan.
If there was commands before the fall (which we know there was:thumbsup
then theres got to be a knowledge there too and not just free will.When I said they may have lost knowledge of good and evil, maybe instead of lost, the word distorted might be better.
Knowledge of good and evil becomes distorted, when they decided to believe satan, holiness and grace is lost and man falls away from God.
G
grannymh
Guest
When one studies Catholicism, one can see the truth of the axiom that “God as Creator personally interacts with each individual human.” In the secular world, we can get lost in the crowd. In Catholicism, each one of us is precious to God. This is demonstrated by the Seven Sacraments, especially the Holy Eucharist whereby we personally and freely receive Jesus Christ. In order to personally interact with God, each of us has been given the freedom to do so.
When we examine our own human nature in the light of Catholic teachings, we learn that God willed that we should be left in the hand of own counsel so that we might of our own accord seek our Creator and freely attain full and blessed perfection in union with Him, that is, we are able to share in God’s divine life. (CCC, 1730 and CCC, 356) What is interesting is that when the Catholic Church teaches about Adam’s Original Sin, it refers to Adam’s freedom. CCC, 397 states: “Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart, and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command.”
We talk about Adam’s freedom to choose God, because our freedom is part of our human nature. When we look at our first ancestor Adam, do we consider his human nature less than ours? By less, I mean that Adam’s human nature did not have the freedom to choose God. Or maybe Adam’s original freedom was restricted in some way. Sometimes, we lessen Adam’s freedom by saying that evil was not present in the original Garden. God did not create evil. What we fail to consider is that with freedom comes the pre-Fall possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. (CCC, 1731-1734)
Evil was not a thing in the Garden. Evil was the known possible consequence of Adam’s freedom to obey or disobey God’s command. Adam’s shattering of humanity’s relationship with Divinity resulted in the loss of his original holiness and justice and therefore he was no longer in a friendship relationship with his Creator. That is the meaning of the evil which was possible in the Garden because Adam was “master” over his acts in the same way that we are master or responsible for our voluntary actions. (CCC,1733-1734)
What is interesting is that the author of the first three chapters of Genesis was firm on the pre-Fall possibility of an evil choice in Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 3: 11. In both citations, God personally interacted with the individual Adam.
With the appearance of the first human on earth, there is the 3rd axiom that God personally interacts with individual humans. Because there is only one Adam, we can be sure that our human nature contains Adam’s individual freedom to seek and love our Creator or we can freely choose our self over and against God and against the requirement of our obedience and therefore against our own good. (CCC, 398)
When we examine our own human nature in the light of Catholic teachings, we learn that God willed that we should be left in the hand of own counsel so that we might of our own accord seek our Creator and freely attain full and blessed perfection in union with Him, that is, we are able to share in God’s divine life. (CCC, 1730 and CCC, 356) What is interesting is that when the Catholic Church teaches about Adam’s Original Sin, it refers to Adam’s freedom. CCC, 397 states: “Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart, and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command.”
We talk about Adam’s freedom to choose God, because our freedom is part of our human nature. When we look at our first ancestor Adam, do we consider his human nature less than ours? By less, I mean that Adam’s human nature did not have the freedom to choose God. Or maybe Adam’s original freedom was restricted in some way. Sometimes, we lessen Adam’s freedom by saying that evil was not present in the original Garden. God did not create evil. What we fail to consider is that with freedom comes the pre-Fall possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. (CCC, 1731-1734)
Evil was not a thing in the Garden. Evil was the known possible consequence of Adam’s freedom to obey or disobey God’s command. Adam’s shattering of humanity’s relationship with Divinity resulted in the loss of his original holiness and justice and therefore he was no longer in a friendship relationship with his Creator. That is the meaning of the evil which was possible in the Garden because Adam was “master” over his acts in the same way that we are master or responsible for our voluntary actions. (CCC,1733-1734)
What is interesting is that the author of the first three chapters of Genesis was firm on the pre-Fall possibility of an evil choice in Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 3: 11. In both citations, God personally interacted with the individual Adam.
With the appearance of the first human on earth, there is the 3rd axiom that God personally interacts with individual humans. Because there is only one Adam, we can be sure that our human nature contains Adam’s individual freedom to seek and love our Creator or we can freely choose our self over and against God and against the requirement of our obedience and therefore against our own good. (CCC, 398)
S
simpleas
Guest
To me, Adam and Eve’s nature was not less than ours or even more than ours in a way. A&E could have always chosen God because being the first Human’s created they had the Knowledge of God. Holiness, grace, mastery, goodness, freedom to choose. If there was no freedom to choose good or evil then the fall may never have happened.
I think of them as we are now, in as much as we are always seeking God, wanting to stay in the light if you like. They too probably did this, but I would say they had a better ability to do it, but that doesn’t stop us from trying and hopefully walking with God as they once did.
If I think of it as they were just innocent human’s living in a state of holiness/grace without the ability to know how to choose which is good/bad, when the devil tempts them he does so very easily because they wouldn’t have known what evil could be, and then it makes God out to be unloving as he allows his children to fall without any knowledge…
Just thinking out loud
W
wmw
Guest
Eve was deceived; so, I do find there is some excuse for her. Yet, for Adam there is none. We should not take some idea of a lack of understanding or experience of evil as any excuse. A mortal sin takes full knowledge of what you are doing and the sentance given by God is very mortal. We go against God’s judgement when we try to diminish the degree of the sin that Adam commited and part of that degree is his understanding or knowledge of what he was doing. There is no excusing, but we do need very much forgiving in what Adam and Eve wrought upon all the generations of humanity.
A
aragonjohn1
Guest
i think they were imperfect humans who know what Good is and what evil is but, they did not know death. so, they were naturally curious about this.To me, Adam and Eve’s nature was not less than ours or even more than ours in a way. A&E could have always chosen God because being the first Human’s created they had the Knowledge of God. Holiness, grace, mastery, goodness, freedom to choose. If there was no freedom to choose good or evil then the fall may never have happened.
I think of them as we are now, in as much as we are always seeking God, wanting to stay in the light if you like. They too probably did this, but I would say they had a better ability to do it, but that doesn’t stop us from trying and hopefully walking with God as they once did.
If I think of it as they were just innocent human’s living in a state of holiness/grace without the ability to know how to choose which is good/bad, when the devil tempts them he does so very easily because they wouldn’t have known what evil could be, and then it makes God out to be unloving as he allows his children to fall without any knowledge…
Just thinking out loud
Code:
Gn 3:4Gn 3:3
3 ἀπὸ δὲ καρποῦ τοῦ ξύλου ὅ ἐστιν ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ παραδείσου εἶπεν ὁ θεός οὐ φάγεσθε ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ οὐδὲ μὴ ἅψησθε αὐτοῦ ἵνα μὴ ἀποθάνητε
but of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” Gn 3:6
¶When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit, and ate; and she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate.
God bless
F
fhansen
Guest
I think there are parallels between Adam’s first sin and all other sin in that with either we’re drawn away from an internal command that says “no” to some particular desire for something that appears good but isn’t. We innately “know” certain things are wrong and should be repulsed by lying, cheating, stealing, pedophilia, incest, gluttony, etc, because they’re harmful to ourselves and others. And yet humans do this stuff all the time, ignoring the voice, not necessarily believing in its wisdom until the voice may become completely drowned out.Adam and Eve walked with God. I’m not sure how this is interpreted, but I think it means they had full knowledge of God. Which would only be of holiness and goodness. But by knowing God, having full knowledge, they may have been able to understand what was right by God and what would be wrong by god. They could still be innocent in this knowledge because we are told Eve is deceived by satan.
If there was commands before the fall (which we know there was:thumbsup
When I said they may have lost knowledge of good and evil, maybe instead of lost, the word distorted might be better.
Knowledge of good and evil becomes distorted, when they decided to believe satan, holiness and grace is lost and man falls away from God.
Adam & Eve knew God more immediately than we do; they possessed complete self-control in the beginning, and yet they wanted more control-they wanted it all-they felt it’d be better to be in control over who controls; presumably they lacked the wisdom themselves, the wisdom that lies behind the “voice”, to ensure they’d remain in compliance with it and not do something foolish. We do it every day.
If Adam & Eve already possessed the knowledge of good and evil, then what does it mean to eat of the tree’s fruit? IMO they “knew” evil only in the sense of it being a forbidden zone that they’d never entered; it was a “no”, the other side of which could be known only by experiencing it by saying “yes”, opening the door and walking though. This is the knowledge they’d never had. And God apparently considered it better that they’d be allowed to walk through the door than be denied access or be destroyed for doing so.
G
grannymh
Guest
From the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
**396 **God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” spells this out: “for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die.” The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.
Satan’s actual temptation is in these simple words – “you will be like gods”.
Adam’s human nature, by definition, cannot change into the supernatural nature of God. Therefore, he must live in free submission to his Creator. Obedience is the sign of free submission. The obedience required by God is found in Genesis 2: 15-17. God orders Adam not to eat the fruit of a specific tree, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Even the name refers to God’s infinite attributes which Satin offers to Adam. What other knowledge is there besides the knowledge of good and evil? (CCC, 1732) God’s command demonstrates creature limitations because it denies the acquisition of God’s omniscience.
Note that the creature limitations refer both to the nature of God and the nature of Adam plus the relationship between humanity and Divinity. (CCC, 396) Because Adam cannot possess God’s knowledge does not mean that he is stupid. As others have pointed out, Adam “walked with God” in the Garden of Eden. Examples of this include God choosing Adam to cultivate and care for the Garden. (Genesis 2: 15) and when God asked him to name the various wild animals and various birds of the air. (Genesis 2: 19)
From the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
**397 **Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.
398 In that sin man *preferred *himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully “divinized” by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to “be like God”, but “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God”.
415 “Although set by God in a state of rectitude man, enticed by the evil one, abused his freedom at the very start of history. He lifted himself up against God, and sought to attain his goal apart from him (GS 13 § 1).”
F
fhansen
Guest
I understand why they shouldn’t eat of it, but I asked, "If Adam & Eve already possessed the knowledge of good and evil, then what does it* mean to eat of the tree’s fruit?" If, IOW, as simpleas proposes, they already possessed whatever is meant by the term “the knowledge of good and evil”, did they really lose* the knowledge being referred to by eating of the tree, or did they gain knowledge, however undesirable that knowledge may end up being?
A
Aloysium
Guest
Perhaps to truly know good and evil one must know death.
There is no such thing as courage without a risk of some sort of self sacrifice. How would you know about cowardice?
Everything in the garden was good including God’s warning to us. The serpent was the opportunity to choose God. We didn’t, but in creating something even more wondrous out of the situation, God reveals His goodness and love for us.
There is no such thing as courage without a risk of some sort of self sacrifice. How would you know about cowardice?
Everything in the garden was good including God’s warning to us. The serpent was the opportunity to choose God. We didn’t, but in creating something even more wondrous out of the situation, God reveals His goodness and love for us.
G
grannymh
Guest
It means
- Adam did not possess God’s omniscience.
- Adam possessed human knowledge because he was human.
- God gave Adam the freedom to remain in His friendship.
Because Adam was in the garden and not in heaven, there existed the
possibility of freely choosing between good and evil. - The term “Knowledge of Good and Evil” does not refer to
human knowledge.
It refers to Satan’s temptation that the fruit had God’s omniscience within it. - Adam let his trust in God’s words die in his heart.
Instead, he freely chose to accept Satan’s temptation that the fruit
would make him like a God. - When Adam preferred himself over God and against God’s commandment,
he freely chose to disobey his Creator. - Adam deliberately, with knowledge of God’s command, disobeyed God.
This extremely serious disobedience is known as Original Sin. - Whether or not Adam lost or gained God’s omniscience does not apply to his
human nature.
What does apply to the wounded human nature that Adam and Eve transmitted to
descendants would be a separate topic.
F
fhansen
Guest
Any idea why Adam, in possession of full knowledge and being part of God’s good creation, would commit such a serious act of disobedience?
G
grannymh
Guest
Could it be that Adam, the human creature, considered that Satan’s invitation to be a God was “too good” to resist?
- Status