Adam, the Philosophy Professor

  • Thread starter Thread starter grannymh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
simpleas said:
And Mary in the supernatural sense. Being full of Grace and saying yes to God. But I would say as a child Mary would have learnt right from wrong by making some mistakes?
Not mortal ones, but “human” ones.
Click to expand...
Mary is pure goodness as proper for the Mother of Jesus Christ.

Speculating about some “human” mistakes learning right from wrong in her childhood is not appropriate in this thread.

catholic.com/tracts/immaculate-conception-and-assumption
 
davidv said:
Mary was human not supernatural. So, it is in an natual sense not a supernatual sense. Her yes was a human yes. All of us have sufficient grace to declare and carry out the same yes.

What do mistakes have to do with this? Sins are purposeful, not mistakes.
Click to expand...
Yes Marys yes was human, a human in a state of sanctifying grace. The supernatural was what happen to her is what I meant.

not all sins are purposeful.
 
simpleas said:
Yes Marys yes was human, a human in a state of sanctifying grace. The supernatural was what happen to her is what I meant.

not all sins are purposeful.
Click to expand...
The Church teaches that in order for an act or ommision to be sinful is must be an act of the will, deliberately chosen. There can be no accidental sin.
 
davidv said:
The Church teaches that in order for an act or ommision to be sinful is must be an act of the will, deliberately chosen. There can be no accidental sin.
Click to expand...
A person could sin and not know they are sinning, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act in a certain way they just do because they have not known it is sin.

Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin. So I don’t think He would be a good teacher after all,unless we just admit none of us are born perfect, we’ll chose our will over God’s at some point, but then hopefully see, admit our fault and choose what God wants over ourselves.
 
simpleas said:
A person could sin and not know they are sinning, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act in a certain way they just do because they have not known it is sin.

Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin. So I don’t think He would be a good teacher after all,unless we just admit none of us are born perfect, we’ll chose our will over God’s at some point, but then hopefully see, admit our fault and choose what God wants over ourselves.
Click to expand...
I am positive that the gentle Philosophy Professor Adam would hold up his hand, saying stop, stop. I explained human nature in one of my first classes. We humans, even though we do some dumb crazy things, still have our rational intellective soul. It is only when our anatomy is not functioning correctly, that it could be possible that we blindly do not know what we are doing. When we humans are acting as true humans, we know when we sin and when we do good.

Let us, teacher and student, unravel this sentence:
“A person could sin and not know they are sinning, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act in a certain way they just do because they have not known it is sin.”

Granted we do a number of actions by habit. We get up off the couch and head for the kitchen without deliberately making separate decisions that we will move each leg forward one at a time. Showing our appreciation for good food can also be a habit. However, we don’t kill the cook because we “have not known it is sin.”

In real life, humans generally know what a bad action is. When there is doubt, most times, a reasonable human will use her or his intellect to think about the action and compare it to the teachings of the Ten Commandments, etc. Some humans ask questions on CAF. As for unreasonable humans, those whose normal faculties are inhibited, it is God, not us, who understands whether or not that human could differentiate right from wrong.

The inherent ability of humans to differentiate between right from wrong is why a human can only sin when there is the correct knowledge about the choice. Can a four-year old human sinfully kill the cook when a parent leaves a loaded gun within reach of an athletic four-year old human?

Regarding the flat out statement – Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin.

Please, present the evidence for this assertion. Even a Full Professor of Philosophy is interested in this new information about Adam.
 
grannymh said:
I am positive that the gentle Philosophy Professor Adam would hold up his hand, saying stop, stop. I explained human nature in one of my first classes. We humans, even though we do some dumb crazy things, still have our rational intellective soul. It is only when our anatomy is not functioning correctly, that it could be possible that we blindly do not know what we are doing. When we humans are acting as true humans, we know when we sin and when we do good.

Let us, teacher and student, unravel this sentence:
“A person could sin and not know they are sinning, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act in a certain way they just do because they have not known it is sin.”

Granted we do a number of actions by habit. We get up off the couch and head for the kitchen without deliberately making separate decisions that we will move each leg forward one at a time. Showing our appreciation for good food can also be a habit. However, we don’t kill the cook because we “have not known it is sin.”

In real life, humans generally know what a bad action is. When there is doubt, most times, a reasonable human will use her or his intellect to think about the action and compare it to the teachings of the Ten Commandments, etc. Some humans ask questions on CAF. As for unreasonable humans, those whose normal faculties are inhibited, it is God, not us, who understands whether or not that human could differentiate right from wrong.

The inherent ability of humans to differentiate between right from wrong is why a human can only sin when there is the correct knowledge about the choice. Can a four-year old human sinfully kill the cook when a parent leaves a loaded gun within reach of an athletic four-year old human?

Regarding the flat out statement – Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin.

Please, present the evidence for this assertion. Even a Full Professor of Philosophy is interested in this new information about Adam.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure why you have used an example of “killing the cook” seem’s alittle extreme to me. Millions of people in our world know instinctively that killing a person is wrong, even those not brought up with the Ten Commandments.

The child too? Of course the child is not responsible for their action.

I was thinking more on issues were children are brought up not aware that something they are doing is sinful to God, and could continue into adult hood, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act upon a certain sin, they aren’t aware of the consequences of it.

I think there are many post’s around CAF were it is stating that Adam knew he was sinning, if he deliberately disobeyed God then he knew what the consequences of his disobedience would be for himself, his wife and children.

If he was not aware of the consequences of his action, then he could not be held responsible for O.S.
 
simpleas said:
I think there are many post’s around CAF were it is stating that Adam knew he was sinning, if he deliberately disobeyed God then he knew what the consequences of his disobedience would be for himself, his wife and children.

If he was not aware of the consequences of his action, then he could not be held responsible for O.S.
Click to expand...
Please kindly compare this simple statement from post 85 with the above words in bold.
“Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin.”

The situation of Adam knowing he was going to sin is dramatically different from Genesis 2: 16-17. One might conclude that knowing he was going to sin indicates that Adam did not have a free choice. This is a beautiful Sunday morning. I really do not want to think about the idea of knowing that he would sin. That idea would remove Adam’s choice to obey God and remain in His friendship.

Most likely, the problem is the “time factor”. If the importance of timing in the Garden is not clear, please continue to ask questions.
 
grannymh said:
Please kindly compare this simple statement from post 85 with the above words in bold.
“Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin.”

The situation of Adam knowing he was going to sin is dramatically different from Genesis 2: 16-17. One might conclude that knowing he was going to sin indicates that Adam did not have a free choice. This is a beautiful Sunday morning. I really do not want to think about the idea of knowing that he would sin. That idea would remove Adam’s choice to obey God and remain in His friendship.

Most likely, the problem is the “time factor”. If the importance of timing in the Garden is not clear, please continue to ask questions.
Click to expand...
How would knowing he would sin remove his choice? It should make it easier to choose to obey rather than disobey.
Knowing he would die, as he was told, we say he knew what death meant, yet he disobeyed God’s word and went with what the devil told him. His own free choice.

But his eyes were only opened after the sin, and he knew then that he had seriously sinned.

Yet he was aware before of what that sin would do.
 
grannymh said:
Please kindly compare this simple statement from post 85 with the above words in bold.
“Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin.”

The situation of Adam knowing he was going to sin is dramatically different from Genesis 2: 16-17. One might conclude that knowing he was going to sin indicates that Adam did not have a free choice. This is a beautiful Sunday morning. I really do not want to think about the idea of knowing that he would sin. That idea would remove Adam’s choice to obey God and remain in His friendship.

Most likely, the problem is the “time factor”. If the importance of timing in the Garden is not clear, please continue to ask questions.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that this is the very definition of a mortal sin, granny. Without full knowledge Adam wouldn’t be culpable.
 
fhansen said:
It seems to me that this is the very definition of a mortal sin, granny. Without full knowledge Adam wouldn’t be culpable.
Click to expand...
From post 85. I put the key sentence in bold.
A person could sin and not know they are sinning, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act in a certain way they just do because they have not known it is sin.

Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin. So I don’t think He would be a good teacher after all, unless we just admit none of us are born perfect, we’ll chose our will over God’s at some point, but then hopefully see, admit our fault and choose what God wants over ourselves.

The sentence in bold refers to full knowledge of sin because Adam actually knew without a doubt that he was going to actually sin.

Was Adam’s nature created with that specific knowledge of knowing that he would sin? If yes, there is no necessity for Genesis 2: 16.

Perhaps, the better way to look at **Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin **is to simply ask **-- **When and how did Adam have his specific knowledge that he was going to sin? As I look at this sentence from different angles, I find that in any case, that sentence needs a bit of clarification based on the first three chapters of Genesis.😃
 
grannymh said:
From post 85. I put the key sentence in bold.
A person could sin and not know they are sinning, they haven’t deliberately chosen to act in a certain way they just do because they have not known it is sin.

Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin. So I don’t think He would be a good teacher after all, unless we just admit none of us are born perfect, we’ll chose our will over God’s at some point, but then hopefully see, admit our fault and choose what God wants over ourselves.

The sentence in bold refers to full knowledge of sin because Adam actually knew without a doubt that he was going to actually sin.

Was Adam’s nature created with that specific knowledge of knowing that he would sin? If yes, there is no necessity for Genesis 2: 16.

Perhaps, the better way to look at **Adam on the other hand knew he was going to sin **is to simply ask **-- **When and how did Adam have his specific knowledge that he was going to sin? As I look at this sentence from different angles, I find that in any case, that sentence needs a bit of clarification based on the first three chapters of Genesis.😃
Click to expand...
The alternative then, again, would be that he didn’t believe God it seems to me.
 
fhansen said:
The alternative then, again, would be that he didn’t believe God it seems to me.
Click to expand...
Seems to me that there are a lot of alternatives. 😉

I like the alternative that Adam had a fully-complete nature when he was put in charge of a Garden. He would have to mull over Genesis 2: 16-17 before he could accept or reject an enticing proposal in Genesis chapter 3. That sounds like what you originally said about full knowledge.
 
grannymh said:
Seems to me that there are a lot of alternatives. 😉

I like the alternative that Adam had a fully-complete nature when he was put in charge of a Garden. He would have to mull over Genesis 2: 16-17 before he could accept or reject an enticing proposal in Genesis chapter 3. That sounds like what you originally said about full knowledge before a sin. .
Click to expand...
 
grannymh said:
Seems to me that there are a lot of alternatives. 😉

I like the alternative that Adam had a fully-complete nature when he was put in charge of a Garden. He would have to mull over Genesis 2: 16-17 before he could accept or reject an enticing proposal in Genesis chapter 3. That sounds like what you originally said about full knowledge.
Click to expand...
OK? He was given the knowledge but didn’t believe it. But there was still a choice involved. He had enough knowledge to believe but *chose not to believe anyway. *This was the injustice, the scorning of God, which in any case hurt man far more than God.
 
fhansen said:
OK? He was given the knowledge but didn’t believe it. But there was still a choice involved. He had enough knowledge to believe but *chose not to believe anyway. *This was the injustice, the scorning of God, which in any case hurt man far more than God.
Click to expand...
OK!
:D:thumbsup:😃
 
Since the document gives permission to distribute as long as the source credits are retained (at the bottom of the document), please see attached.
 
An apple a day causes a stain upon the soul of humanity which could not be cleansed until a crucifixion and the bathing of Christians in water.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top