Adam, the Philosophy Professor

[simpleas]

Re-reading post 38, I noticed that I used “ever notice …?” quite often. Now I really feel like Adam, the Philosophy Professor because all he could do is notice. There were no scientific manuals, no Google on mobile devices, and no smart granny to tell Adam what is what. For him, both the scientific method and the philosophical method would have the same first principle – “Observe without prejudice.”

Can you imagine how Adam must have felt, finding himself in the middle of a rather wild garden since there was no previous gardener? Not only that, but there was this Spiritual Being, not like him in size and shape, Who was giving him orders about cultivating and caring for this unique garden. And then, there were the instructions about what he could eat and not eat. At that point, Adam most likely felt hungry. Scientifically, one can reason that Professor Adam observed that he had a material anatomy which needed nourishment in order to live. Philosophically, one can reason that Professor Adam observed that the Spiritual Being Who was with him did not have a limited human nature such as his own.

In my humble observation, I consider the author of the first three chapters of Genesis as being more philosophical than scientific. Also, the author had 20-20-hindsight about the differences between humans and God. Adam may not have immediately figured out one of those strange sounding scientific names for God Who was being observed as one Who was not only in charge of the garden, but also was in charge of Adam. However, being innately curious like his offspring scientists, Adam understood the difference between his nature and the super-natural God Who was his Creator. In this beginning of the story, Adam may not have received his philosophy Ph.D. degree; yet, he figured out that he did not create himself. If he had the power to create, Adam, being naturally intelligent, would have first created a bevy of gardeners to do his work while he had a cool one from the nearby microbrewery.

Returning to Professor Adam’s biography, we find that God, on a sunny day, found Adam being grumpy. God took one look at the cloud-filled face of Adam and observed that it was not good for him to be alone. This would also turn into an opportunity to demonstrate philosophical species. Long run this understanding would be necessary for those who would be researching the intelligence of Border Collies and Apes.
**Sidebar: The “Significance of Recent Ape-Language Studies” is Chapter Five in the book, Origin of the Human Species, Expanded Third Edition by Dr. Dennis Bonnette. Those readers who appreciate both Catholic teachings *and *natural science will both learn and enjoy the book’s Appendix One: The Myth of the “Myth” of Adam and Eve.

Seeing the loneliness of Adam, God formed various animals and birds and brought them to Adam. Interestingly, Adam named these animals which would be necessary so that his progeny living on both sides of the pond could discuss the animals’ characteristics without having them in the backyard. Even more interesting, philosophically, Adam identified this whole group of different scientific-type material/physical species as one natural species which could not form a family unit with his own rather different natural species. We all know what happened when Eve, the love of Adam’s life, appeared.

Who was this spiritual being he could see?

The animals were created before Adam.

Adam was lonely because he had no other human like him.

But if he had the spiritual being teaching him, why was he lonely?

Would it be because he was created by God, and some part of him was missing, unlike us being born of our human parents?

Yet being created by God first, God was his “parent” so why would he pine of any other, God would have been enough.

Just throwing some thoughts and questions into the mix

 

[grannymh]

Who was this spiritual being he could see?

God, of course.

As is said in post 42 – “there was this Spiritual Being, not like him in size and shape…” As to what Adam saw with his human eyes, I am not going to speculate God’s power to make Himself known.

The animals were created before Adam

.
So? Obviously, God has the power to form animals whenever He wants.

Adam was lonely because he had no other human like him.

That sounds reasonable.

But if he had the spiritual being teaching him, why was he lonely?

Because God is not human like Adam.

Would it be because he was created by God, and some part of him was missing, unlike us being born of our human parents?

In my humble opinion, that is an embarrassing question.

Yet being created by God first, God was his “parent” so why would he pine of any other, God would have been enough.

Excuse me. A human spouse is needed for human procreation.

Just throwing some thoughts and questions into the mix

Thoughts and questions are certainly welcomed.

However, this is the first time I find that the total purpose of Genesis 1: 26-31 is not considered.

Adam, the Philosophy Professor, certainly had human nature’s desire for a family. If he didn’t, the rest of the Bible would not have been written …

 

[simpleas]

God, of course.

As is said in post 42 – “there was this Spiritual Being, not like him in size and shape…” As to what Adam saw with his human eyes, I am not going to speculate God’s power to make Himself known.

.
So? Obviously, God has the power to form animals whenever He wants.

That sounds reasonable.

Because God is not human like Adam.

In my humble opinion, that is an embarrassing question.

Excuse me. A human spouse is needed for human procreation.

Thoughts and questions are certainly welcomed.

However, this is the first time I find that the total purpose of Genesis 1: 26-31 is not considered.

Adam, the Philosophy Professor, certainly had human nature’s desire for a family. If he didn’t, the rest of the Bible would not have been written …

OK, Adam was only aware of God, he did not “see” him… good because then he would have seen the Beautific vision.

I prefer the first account of creation, it sounds more 21st century, the second seems to put Adam way above all creation, including his Eve.

Yeah my Adam being created rather than born question was abit crazy

Rather than asking why Adam pined for another, I should correct that, with why did A&E want more if they were spiritually satisfied. I mean we are only at peace when we have God, our human relations are supposed to come second. They were living in the “Paradise” as the bible puts it, yet they hungered for more knowledge.

The purpose of Gen 1 26-31 apparently was not fulfilled until they sinned.
I can understand why some believed that intercourse was the cause of the fall. I know it’s not what we believe.…just to be clear!

 

[grannymh]

OK, Adam was only aware of God, he did not “see” him… good because then he would have seen the Beautific vision.

SNIP

Rather than asking why Adam pined for another, I should correct that, with why did A&E want more if they were spiritually satisfied.

If Adam were spiritually satisfied?

Adam, as a successful Philosophy Professor and being professionally successful, could have been intellectually satisfied. But, Adam was not spiritually satisfied because he was not in the presence of the Beatific Vision.

The purpose of Gen 1 26-31 apparently was not fulfilled until they sinned.

And how would you describe the purpose of Genesis 1: 26-31?

At this point, we need to recognize that not all Catholic teachings are contained in the first three chapters of Genesis. For example, one can use *CCC *1730, including small print, to explain Genesis 1: 26-31. We can also use the scientific observation that the human species is peerless.

 

[fhansen]

OK, Adam was only aware of God, he did not “see” him… good because then he would have seen the Beautific vision.

I prefer the first account of creation, it sounds more 21st century, the second seems to put Adam way above all creation, including his Eve.

Yeah my Adam being created rather than born question was abit crazy

Rather than asking why Adam pined for another, I should correct that, with why did A&E want more if they were spiritually satisfied. I mean we are only at peace when we have God, our human relations are supposed to come second. They were living in the “Paradise” as the bible puts it, yet they hungered for more knowledge.

The purpose of Gen 1 26-31 apparently was not fulfilled until they sinned.
I can understand why some believed that intercourse was the cause of the fall. I know it’s not what we believe.…just to be clear!

In a world largely lacking in Love, even between spouses, God wants us to develop a taste for it, to recognize our need for it, to acknowledge it’s supremacy, it’s unparalleled goodness, to hunger and thirst for this goodness, for Him, the source of it-and to begin to do this before we “see” Him fully, “face to face”. In this way He draws us towards righteousness or justice; He makes us a participant in obtaining it.

 

[simpleas]

SNIP

If Adam were spiritually satisfied?

Adam, as a successful Philosophy Professor and being professionally successful, could have been intellectually satisfied. But, Adam was not spiritually satisfied because he was not in the presence of the Beatific Vision.

And how would you describe the purpose of Genesis 1: 26-31?

At this point, we need to recognize that not all Catholic teachings are contained in the first three chapters of Genesis. For example, one can use *CCC *1730, including small print, to explain Genesis 1: 26-31. We can also use the scientific observation that the human species is peerless.

So Adam was only intellectually satisfied, if his soul was a peace with God, creation etc, this is quite the opposite to what way some, not all of us as a people are now, and that is not Adam being spiritually satisfied?
What of Adam having O.H and O.J of his ability to control his desire if he stayed in union with God, his soul’s connection if you like. He can’t just have known of God, and never felt in union spiritually with him or else there was no connection with God that was broken in the first place.

The purpose of genesis 1 : 26-31 is how I read it, God encouraging his children made in his own image and likeness to produce more. But this doesn’t accure until after sin, or then we’d have some people born without O.S.

I’ll check out your CCC quote later.

Thanks.

 

[grannymh]

So Adam was only intellectually satisfied, … (continued below)

Only? Please, where did I say that Adam was only intellectually satisfied in post 45?

… if his soul was a peace with God, creation etc, this is quite the opposite to what way some, not all of us as a people are now, and that is not Adam being spiritually satisfied?

Our journey to heaven happens because we continually seek *more *of the Presence of God. This is the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Our soul is not satisfied until we are in the Presence of the Beatific Vision after our bodily death.

What of Adam having O.H and O.J of his ability to control his desire if he stayed in union with God, his soul’s connection if you like. He can’t just have known of God, and never felt in union spiritually with him or else there was no connection with God that was broken in the first place.

Original Holiness is union with God, that is, Adam was in a friendship state/union with his Creator. Adam deliberately broke his friendship union with God, that is, he lost his state of Original Holiness.

Gentle reminder.
One has to accept Adam’s fully-complete human nature, that is, one cannot deny any part of Adam’s fully-complete human nature which includes the rational mind (intellective capability) which exists because of the spiritual principle (spiritual soul). There has to be an end to dividing Adam into bits and pieces in order to make him conform to personal interpretations.

The purpose of genesis 1 : 26-31 is how I read it, God encouraging his children made in his own image and likeness to produce more. But this doesn’t accure until after sin, or then we’d have some people born without O.S.

Professor Adam, come quick!
Please, please help us with one of the first Catholic doctrines which flows from Genesis 1: 26-31.

 

[simpleas]

Only? Please, where did I say that Adam was only intellectually satisfied in post 45?

Our journey to heaven happens because we continually seek *more *of the Presence of God. This is the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Our soul is not satisfied until we are in the Presence of the Beatific Vision after our bodily death.

Original Holiness is union with God, that is, Adam was in a friendship state/union with his Creator. Adam deliberately broke his friendship union with God, that is, he lost his state of Original Holiness.

Gentle reminder.
One has to accept Adam’s fully-complete human nature, that is, one cannot deny any part of Adam’s fully-complete human nature which includes the rational mind (intellective capability) which exists because of the spiritual principle (spiritual soul). There has to be an end to dividing Adam into bits and pieces in order to make him conform to personal interpretations.



Professor Adam, come quick!
Please, please help us with one of the first Catholic doctrines which flows from Genesis 1: 26-31.

You didn’t say he was only intellectually satisfied about God, the only was my word, but you did say :

But, Adam was not spiritually satisfied because he was not in the presence of the Beatific Vision.

I understand we are not completely spiritually satisfied in this life, and that Mass is of course a source of the supernatural connection we have been given in order to help us remain with Christ.

I never thought that Adam being in his state of O.H could be compared to our state, that being the first created in union with God, Eve and creation he needed to seek God, he had God, and when he disobeyed, the union was broken.

I’m not denying Adam’s nature, in fact I’m trying to say he was as the first person alive, the one who had what God had intended us all to have, = O.H and O.J.

Adam need not help with Genesis 1 it’s all very straight forward. Genesis 3, now he’d need to do abit more explaining…
But I’ll call on Christ’s help for that.

 

[grannymh]

From post 47
“The purpose of genesis 1 : 26-31 is how I read it, God encouraging his children made in his own image and likeness to produce more. But this doesn’t accure until after sin, or then we’d have some people born without O.S.”
The help of Professor Adam is truly needed so that we can go deeper into the purpose of Genesis 1: 26-31. Since Adam was the first human being, in whom the entire human race exists “as one body of one man” – of course procreation would receive a blessing. Thank you.

At this point, we need to recognize that not all Catholic teachings are completed in the first three chapters of Genesis. For example, one can use *CCC *1730, including small print, to explain Genesis 1: 26-31. We can also use the scientific observation that the human species is peerless. And we can go back to when children were taught that the purpose of ourselves is to Know God, Love God, Serve God and be happy with Him in heaven. Note: there are some different words for the second half of this teaching. Interestingly, the common words, Know, Love, and Serve are normally in the first half.

So, how does Know, Love, and Serve relate to Genesis 1: 26-31? Professor Adam would smile and say: “Know, Love, and Serve pertains to the fact that we can do all this because …”

Professor Adam’s students would also smile and with a wink, they answer “…because our spiritual soul is in the image of God’s spirituality. We creatures have a decomposing anatomy which certainly God does not have. What we have is a spirituality so different from anything material, that we can only be amazed at this great gift. God calls us to share in His life because being in His image we have the spiritual capability to Know, Love, and Serve God on this earth and forever in joy eternal.”

Professor Adam nods his head and asks: “Where do we go from Genesis 1: 26-31?”

 

[grannymh]

Like Sir Isaac Newton, his grandson, he taught us that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

Since I am old enough to have been in Professor Adam’s Philosophy 101 course, I most likely would have asked: “What is this bit about a bite of an apple?” And Professor Adam would slyly smile and direct me to his grandson Isaac’s class in physics. One thing about Professor Adam, he sure knew how to get out of an embarrassing question like when he blamed Eve for the first apple event.

However, as we all know, the first three chapters of Genesis are not a physics science textbook.

Perhaps, Professor Adam was simply referring to the fact that like those apples, all humans would descend from his and Eve’s “tree”. Yet, philosophy is never that simple. For example – the word “perfect” compared to the word “perfect” when applied to the human creature Adam and his Creator God.

However, as we all know, the first three chapters of Genesis contain the roots of some very basic Catholic doctrines.

Perhaps, another important truth about Genesis 1: 26-31 is that we need to look deeper than individual perfection. Perhaps, we need to study the true perfect relationship between humanity and Divinity.

Thoughts?

 

[simpleas]

Since I am old enough to have been in Professor Adam’s Philosophy 101 course, I most likely would have asked: “What is this bit about a bite of an apple?” And Professor Adam would slyly smile and direct me to his grandson Isaac’s class in physics. One thing about Professor Adam, he sure knew how to get out of an embarrassing question like when he blamed Eve for the first apple event.

However, as we all know, the first three chapters of Genesis are not a physics science textbook.

Perhaps, Professor Adam was simply referring to the fact that like those apples, all humans would descend from his and Eve’s “tree”. Yet, philosophy is never that simple. For example – the word “perfect” compared to the word “perfect” when applied to the human creature Adam and his Creator God.

However, as we all know, the first three chapters of Genesis contain the roots of some very basic Catholic doctrines.

Perhaps, another important truth about Genesis 1: 26-31 is that we need to look deeper than individual perfection. Perhaps, we need to study the true perfect relationship between humanity and Divinity.

Thoughts?

Perhaps, we need to study the true perfect relationship between humanity and Divinity.

Can you explain what you mean by true perfect relationship?

 

[fhansen]

Since I am old enough to have been in Professor Adam’s Philosophy 101 course, I most likely would have asked: “What is this bit about a bite of an apple?” And Professor Adam would slyly smile and direct me to his grandson Isaac’s class in physics. One thing about Professor Adam, he sure knew how to get out of an embarrassing question like when he blamed Eve for the first apple event.

However, as we all know, the first three chapters of Genesis are not a physics science textbook.

Perhaps, Professor Adam was simply referring to the fact that like those apples, all humans would descend from his and Eve’s “tree”. Yet, philosophy is never that simple. For example – the word “perfect” compared to the word “perfect” when applied to the human creature Adam and his Creator God.

However, as we all know, the first three chapters of Genesis contain the roots of some very basic Catholic doctrines.

Perhaps, another important truth about Genesis 1: 26-31 is that we need to look deeper than individual perfection. Perhaps, we need to study the true perfect relationship between humanity and Divinity.

Thoughts?

One comment. The perfect relationship between humanity and divinity is the source of individual human perfection. God created humans with a perfection proper to their nature, but, it seems, that perfection-physically, morally, spiritually-cannot be realized or maintained apart from its source, apart from a relationship of obedience of the creature to his Creator based on mutual love between the two.

 

[wittgenstein]

Adam can teach us about existential angst. Angst is the fear of our own freedom. Suppose you are standing 2 inches from a 800 foot cliff. You are not suicidal. However, you fear knowing that you can decide to jump. Kierkregaard said that Adam knowing that he could eat the apple and be condemned filled him with such unbearable angst that he ate. Similarly, a person that must stand next to a cliff for hours might experience such intense angst that they will jump.
I am not suicidal. However I do experience angst when driving over the Mackinaw bridge (the bridge that connects Michigan’s two peninsulas.) I am afraid of my freedom. I could will myself to drive off the bridge!
Rather than something rare,angst is the human condition. Almost everyone I talk to has experienced it.

 

[tdgesq]

Now if Adam had only read Sartre.

 

[grannymh]

Perhaps, we need to study the true perfect relationship between humanity and Divinity.

Can you explain what you mean by true perfect relationship?

The true perfect relationship between an individual person and God is explained as being in the State of Sanctifying Grace, that is, sharing in the life of God.

 

[grannymh]

One comment. The perfect relationship between humanity and divinity is the source of individual human perfection. God created humans with a perfection proper to their nature, but, it seems, that perfection-physically, morally, spiritually-cannot be realized or maintained apart from its source, apart from a relationship of obedience of the creature to his Creator based on mutual love between the two.

This is an excellent explanation of the State of Sanctifying Grace.

 

[grannymh]

Adam can teach us about existential angst. Angst is the fear of our own freedom. Suppose you are standing 2 inches from a 800 foot cliff. You are not suicidal. However, you fear knowing that you can decide to jump. Kierkregaard said that Adam knowing that he could eat the apple and be condemned filled him with such unbearable angst that he ate. Similarly, a person that must stand next to a cliff for hours might experience such intense angst that they will jump.
I am not suicidal. However I do experience angst when driving over the Mackinaw bridge (the bridge that connects Michigan’s two peninsulas.) I am afraid of my freedom. I could will myself to drive off the bridge!
Rather than something rare,angst is the human condition. Almost everyone I talk to has experienced it.

Kierkregaard’s concept of existential angst is intriguing considering the possibility that Adam, being human, could have experienced it. However, no form of angst per se could force Adam to commit the Original Sin. Adam, being human, had the intellectual free will to say no.

 

[simpleas]

The true perfect relationship between an individual person and God is explained as being in the State of Sanctifying Grace, that is, sharing in the life of God.

Adam in a state of sanctifying grace still chose to go against Gods command, we can be in a state of sanctifying grace and still choose to sin. There is no true perfect relationship between a person and God, even in the beginning.

 

[simpleas]

Kierkregaard’s concept of existential angst is intriguing considering the possibility that Adam, being human, could have experienced it. However, no form of angst per se could force Adam to commit the Original Sin. Adam, being human, had the intellectual free will to say no.

Just because Adam had intellectual free will to obey or not does not mean he did not experience fear. He would not sound very human like if he did not have the emotions of a typical human I don’t think.

 

[grannymh]

Adam in a state of sanctifying grace still chose to go against Gods command, we can be in a state of sanctifying grace and still choose to sin. There is no true perfect relationship between a person and God, even in the beginning.

In the beginning …
Adam was created in the State of Sanctifying Grace aka Original Holiness. There is nothing more perfect than being in the State of Sanctifying Grace because Sanctifying Grace means that we are sharing in the life of God while we live on planet earth.
(Information source. The beginning chapter of the book of Genesis)

We need to recognize that God does not remove our free will to sin even when we are in the perfect relationship with Him. The concept that Adam did not have natural free will, as we do, directly denies Catholic teachings on the human person.

Adam did sin mortally. Mortally means the destruction of the State of Sanctifying Grace. Adam had to have Original Holiness aka Sanctifying Grace in the beginning; otherwise how could the Catholic Church teach its loss was due to the Original Sin?
(Information source. CCC 399)

I don’t know if common sense is cited in a philosophy course; but, it sure comes in handy.