Adam, the Philosophy Professor

[grannymh]

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.

Professor Adam would reply. My dear student, it was not just your old garden variety of apples. Those kind of apples I will probably sell on the street when I retire. The apple I barely tasted packed an unbelievable punch in the gut. You men know how that hurts. That was no stain. That was a transformation.

Professor Adam doubled up, shut his eyes, opened his mouth and yelled to high heaven, so that his current students and future students would get the picture. Fortunately, God hears the cries of the poor, so He promised Adam, and all his students, a Redeemer. This Reconciler of a broken relationship would show, by His beaten body bleeding on a man-made cross, the awful results of disobeying the Creator.

As for Professor Adam bathing in Christian water. If it weren’t for Eve’s nagging, Adam would retain every bit of dirt which came his way while gardening. You men know how fussy a woman can be.

 

[fhansen]

I now see Adam, before the fall, as something like a rough gem, perfect in the way he was created, without flaw, but also still crude, not yet refined, not yet cut, not yet finished or polished in a certain way God had in mind. God wanted Adam,* himself*, to contribute something to his ultimate perfection. Adam’s perfection would only be complete, his justice realized, when he was one in *will *with his Creator.

Our wills are oriented towards that which we perceive to be the greatest good, towards that which we* love*, whatever that may be. Adam hadn’t yet recognized that degree of goodness in God, and therefore didn’t yet know the perfection of His wisdom, the truthfulness and trustworthiness of His word.

When the Redeemer came, when the time was ripe, humanity had experienced a great deal of time spent effectively* exiled* from its Creator, with all the suffering that results from that distancing, from that “freedom”, due to the sin/evil that prevails in creation when lacking its right and proper Lordship. We could be ready, by that time, for something better, far better. Adam could be ready to finally recognize and accept that which Jesus came to demonstrate in dramatic terms: the existence, trustworthiness, goodness, mercy*-the love* -of God. The righteousness of God, as opposed to the “righteousness” of man.

Any baptized human being, for one, who’s turned to God with a degree of sincerity in trust-in faith and hope- and more especially in love, is nearer to perfection/holiness than Adam was prior to the Fall.

 

[fhansen]

I now see Adam, before the fall, as something like a rough gem, perfect in the way he was created, without flaw, but also still crude, perhaps, not yet refined, not yet cut, not yet finished or polished in a certain way God had in mind. God wanted Adam,* himself*, to contribute something to his ultimate perfection. Adam’s perfection would only be complete, his justice realized, when he was one in *will *with his Creator.

Our wills are oriented towards that which we perceive to be the greatest good, towards that which we* love*, whatever that may be. Adam hadn’t yet recognized that degree of goodness in God, and therefore didn’t yet know the perfection of His wisdom, the truthfulness and trustworthiness of His word.

When the Redeemer came, when the time was ripe, humanity had experienced a great deal of time spent effectively* exiled* from its Creator, with all the suffering that results from that distancing, from that “freedom”, due to the sin/evil that prevails in creation when lacking its right and proper Lordship. We could be ready, by that time, for something better, far better. Adam could be ready to finally recognize and accept that which Jesus came to demonstrate in dramatic terms: the existence, trustworthiness, goodness, mercy*-the love* -of God. The righteousness of God, as opposed to the “righteousness” of man.

Any baptized human being, for one, who’s turned to God with a degree of sincerity in trust-in faith and hope- and more especially in love, is nearer to perfection/holiness than Adam was prior to the Fall.

 

[simpleas]

So how then does original sin fit into the idea that Adam and Eve were made “perfect” bodily, but needed to understand what it meant to love God with freewill?

Not forgetting that the O.S caused not only spiritual death, but death of the body, and pain and suffering of the body also?

A&E knowing all that we know and experience in our mortal bodies still didn’t believe God.

 

[fhansen]

So how then does original sin fit into the idea that Adam and Eve were made “perfect” bodily, but needed to understand what it meant to love God with freewill?

Not forgetting that the O.S caused not only spiritual death, but death of the body, and pain and suffering of the body also?

A&E knowing all that we know and experience in our mortal bodies still didn’t believe God.

I’d bet they’re believers by now. Time, together with the knowledge of good and evil, grace, and revelation, is intended to ultimately bring home to us our need for God. Time provides us the medium through which to learn, to change, to work out our salvation. Physical death places a limit on it all, to our allotted time, a finality which should serve to give an importance, an urgency, to our actions- the impetus to get it right while we can. Death most certainly provides or makes necessary the need for faith; we just aren’t privy to the realities of the next life.

Not sure if any of that addressed your questions tho.

 

[simpleas]

I’d bet they’re believers by now. Time, together with the knowledge of good and evil, grace, and revelation, is intended to ultimately bring home to us our need for God. Time provides us the medium through which to learn, to change, to work out our salvation. Physical death places a limit on it all, to our allotted time, a finality which should serve to give an importance, an urgency, to our actions- the impetus to get it right while we can. Death most certainly provides or makes necessary the need for faith; we just aren’t privy to the realities of the next life.

Not sure if any of that addressed your questions tho.

Thanks.

From your post :

I now see Adam, before the fall, as something like a rough gem, perfect in the way he was created, without flaw, but also still crude, perhaps, not yet refined, not yet cut, not yet finished or polished in a certain way God had in mind. God wanted Adam, himself, to contribute something to his ultimate perfection. Adam’s perfection would only be complete, his justice realized, when he was one in will with his Creator.

Not trying to pick out your words or anything, but the word perfect does not fit really. After reading so many different versions of what way Adam and Eve were before their fall, many do not say they were perfect. God uses the word Good when he looks at all he had created, including the first two humans.
I’m not sure how the first two humans could ever have been immortal, if they were only good, not perfect, so like we are thinking, they had to grow in maturity, especially spirituality, and in order to do that, they had to make their own minds up.

They choose to “eat from the tree of Good and Evil” therefore using their freewill. They gain the knowledge of being able to choose Good/Evil.
God stops them from eating from the Tree of Life, so that they will not live forever as humans with knowledge of Good and Evil.

From what sounds like a moment of madness, God does seem angry as he curse’s the ground, gives child baring pain to Eve and hard work to Adam and death to their bodies/spirit.

We say it was because they did not admit their fault and in turn blamed each other and God. So if this is one way to think of it, why would God allow the rest of humanity to be subject to the first two humans fault when they choose their will over Gods?

O.S doesn’t fit in when two people are Good, in a state of holiness, but are still seeking to attain a perfection and can fall away from Gods grace, in my logical thinking

I can think of it more in terms of A&E being almost angel like, turning away from God like satan did, and being cast down to earth to suffer as mere creatures, who then have to suffer the loss of Gods friendship, pain in the body and all the extras that we suffer or see others suffer with.

But then this makes God into the not so friendly, loving creator I have come to know, through Jesus.
In part it all doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[grannymh]

Simpleas, I hope you do not mind … …

When I return from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, I would like to compare your post 105 with
Scripture starting with Genesis 1: 26-27 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition starting
with paragraph 355.

I am confident that our good friend Professor Adam would call my attempt Philosophy 101 because we are philosophically/logically examining the being known as human. On the other hand, it will be necessary to look at some of the theology because there will be nitpicking. In my own experience, I have found that the nitty-gritty
is important because sometimes that makes the difference between understanding a basic, foundational Catholic doctrine and misunderstanding it.

 

[grannymh]

I now see Adam, before the fall, as something like a rough gem, perfect in the way he was created, without flaw, but also still crude, perhaps, not yet refined, not yet cut, not yet finished or polished in a certain way God had in mind.

What God really had in mind when He created Adam is this very simple invitation. Adam, in the state he was created, is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life. (Genesis 1: 26-27) Adam’s human nature is not really a rough gem needing more work. Adam’s human nature is in the State of Original Holiness aka Sanctifying Grace aka bond of friendship between humanity and Divinity.

God wanted Adam, himself, to contribute something to his ultimate perfection.

This is a good thought and it relates to CCC 1733 and CCC 1803. However, to understand God’s basic primary intention for humans, one needs to refer to CCC 356 and CCC 1730-1732.

Adam’s perfection would only be complete, his justice realized, when he was one in will with his Creator.

The difficulty here is that Adam is already in the State of Original Holiness. God has not revealed the means that Adam would use in order to enter heaven without bodily death. Yet, we know that Adam’s complete perfection would not come about until his “freedom” has bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is the Beatific Vision in heaven. The Garden is not the same as heaven.

Not trying to pick out your words or anything, but the word perfect does not fit really. After reading so many different versions of what way Adam and Eve were before their fall, many do not say they were perfect. God uses the word Good when he looks at all he had created, including the first two humans.

Having a simple mind, I prefer the version that Adam’s nature is both spiritual and material.

I’m not sure how the first two humans could ever have been immortal, if they were only good, not perfect, so like we are thinking, they had to grow in maturity, especially spirituality, and in order to do that, they had to make their own minds up.

Adam and Even had material bodies like we do. God gave them a special gift of immortality which was directly connected to their friendship relationship with God.
This special gift of immortality is known as a preternatural gift. The following definition is from this website. catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=35763
Preternatural gifts are
Favors granted by God above and beyond the powers or capacities of the nature that receives them but not beyond those of all created nature. Such gifts perfect nature but do not carry it beyond the limits of created nature. They include three great privileges to which human beings have no title–infused knowledge, absence of concupiscence, and bodily immortality. Adam and Eve possessed these gifts before the Fall.

They choose to “eat from the tree of Good and Evil” therefore using their freewill. They gain the knowledge of being able to choose Good/Evil.

I am going to stop here because of the error. Adam had the knowledge about good and evil before he chose to commit the original mortal sin.

Instead, I pose three general questions.
Where is the Catholic teaching that God created human nature without a conscience?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature was created without a rational intellective soul?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature is so impaired that it could not tell the difference between God the Creator and the creature created by God?

Links to the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

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

 

[fhansen]

What God really had in mind when He created Adam is this very simple invitation. Adam, in the state he was created, is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life. (Genesis 1: 26-27) Adam’s human nature is not really a rough gem needing more work. Adam’s human nature is in the State of Original Holiness aka Sanctifying Grace aka bond of friendship between humanity and Divinity.

Simpleas was quoting me here, in the first part of his post, so I’ll respond. Adam lacked something-or else he wouldn’t have sinned. I think CCC 302 applies here, as well as 310:
310 But why did God not create a world so perfect that no evil could exist in it? With infinite power God could always create something better. But with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world “in a state of journeying” towards its ultimate perfection. In God’s plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection.

The difficulty here is that Adam is already in the State of Original Holiness. God has not revealed the means that Adam would use in order to enter heaven without bodily death. Yet, we know that Adam’s complete perfection would not come about until his “freedom” has bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is the Beatific Vision in heaven. The Garden is not the same as heaven.

Of course. The garden is not the same as heaven. And yet God wants us to decide for heaven now-in* this* life. Our happiness may be complete in heaven but our holiness will be complete or near completion prior to; that’s the reason for purgatory for one thing-and the reason why Jesus tells us to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. A matter of the will-aided by grace.

I am going to stop here because of the error. Adam had the knowledge about good and evil before he chose to commit the original mortal sin.

This was not a response to a quote of mine but I’ll reply anyway. It’s been pretty conclusively demonstrated, IMO, that the knowledge spoken of was not knowledge instilled, as in information given, but rather knowledge gained by direct experience. And this affirms Genesis 3:7, “***Then *the eyes of both of them were opened…”, and Genesis 3:22, “And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” Both of these statements were made after Adam & Eve sinned.

 

[grannymh]

Simpleas was quoting me here, in the first part of his post, so I’ll respond. Adam lacked something-or else he wouldn’t have sinned. I think CCC 302 applies here, as well as 310:
310 But why did God not create a world so perfect that no evil could exist in it? With infinite power God could always create something better. But with infinite wisdom and goodness God freely willed to create a world “in a state of journeying” towards its ultimate perfection. In God’s plan this process of becoming involves the appearance of certain beings and the disappearance of others, the existence of the more perfect alongside the less perfect, both constructive and destructive forces of nature. With physical good there exists also physical evil as long as creation has not reached perfection.

Of course. The garden is not the same as heaven. And yet God wants us to decide for heaven now-in* this* life. Our happiness may be complete in heaven but our holiness will be complete or near completion prior to; that’s the reason for purgatory for one thing-and the reason why Jesus tells us to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. A matter of the will-aided by grace.

This was not a response to a quote of mine but I’ll reply anyway. It’s been pretty conclusively demonstrated, IMO, that the knowledge spoken of was not knowledge instilled, as in information given, but rather knowledge gained by direct experience. And this affirms Genesis 3:7, “***Then *the eyes of both of them were opened…”, and Genesis 3:22, “And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” Both of these statements were made after Adam & Eve sinned.

As I asked in another thread.

Where is the Catholic teaching that God created human nature without a conscience?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature was created without a rational intellective soul?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature is so impaired that it could not tell the difference between God the Creator and the creature created by God?

At the moment, I really prefer not going into expanding situations, that is, at the moment, the three general questions above are center stage.

 

[fhansen]

As I asked in another thread.

Where is the Catholic teaching that God created human nature without a conscience?

Nowhere. And Aquinas, for one, would be the last to make such an assertion.

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature was created without a rational intellective soul?

Nowhere. Now, where does the idea that Adam’s lack of direct experience with evil in Eden conflict with his having a rational intellective soul-with a conscience?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature is so impaired that it could not tell the difference between God the Creator and the creature created by God?

I don’t know. But Adam apparently missed that point somehow. What would you attribute his errant behavior to? If we can’t answwer that question then we have no way of assessing Adam’s degree of culpability, even as we acknowledge that he was culpable.

 

[grannymh]

Nowhere. And Aquinas, for one, would be the last to make such an assertion.

Nowhere. Now, where does the idea that Adam’s lack of direct experience with evil in Eden conflict with his having a rational intellective soul-with a conscience?

I don’t know. But Adam apparently missed that point somehow. What would you attribute his errant behavior to? If we can’t answwer that question then we have no way of assessing Adam’s degree of culpability, even as we acknowledge that he was culpable.

Briefly, our conscience points out the difference between good and evil without experience of evil. Since Catholicism teaches that Adam is a true human, Adam’s conscience would be enough to know the difference between good and evil, including the results, without experiencing evil directly.

In addition, a rational intellective soul has the capability of reasoning the concept of the difference between good and evil without having to experience evil before free will can operate.

Pardon me. It is God Who judged Adam’s culpability and pronounced that disobedience occurred. I do not need to re-trial Adam.

 

[fhansen]

Briefly, our conscience points out the difference between good and evil without experience of evil. Since Catholicism teaches that Adam is a true human, Adam’s conscience would be enough to know the difference between good and evil, including the results, without experiencing evil directly.

In addition, a rational intellective soul has the capability of reasoning the concept of the difference between good and evil without having to experience evil before free will can operate.

Pardon me. It is God Who judged Adam’s culpability and pronounced that disobedience occurred. I do not need to re-trial Adam.

Ok, maybe you’re not interested. How about taking a stab at this? Could the world that Adam found himself in after the Fall have benefited him in any way? Or was it strictly punitive, perhaps?

 

[grannymh]

Ok, maybe you’re not interested. How about taking a stab at this? Could the world that Adam found himself in after the Fall have benefited him in any way? Or was it strictly punitive, perhaps?

The world after the Fall benefited Adam and us by giving Adam and us food and shelter. On the other hand, the world could also produce tornados and serial killers. Adam’s garden, like our gardens, could either be feast or famine.

Perhaps the greatest benefit of the world was that Adam was still living in it. Personally, I picture Professor Adam as being humble as he relates his experiences to his children and grandchildren. He would have a lot to teach us since we could never be in that special garden at the dawn of human history. His first lesson would be on obedience to the Creator.

 

[fhansen]

Not trying to pick out your words or anything, but the word perfect does not fit really. After reading so many different versions of what way Adam and Eve were before their fall, many do not say they were perfect. God uses the word Good when he looks at all he had created, including the first two humans.

What I’m getting at is something like this from the Catechism:

339 Each creature possesses its own particular goodness and perfection.

Adam was perfect in and of himself, as created. He had no flaws; God doesn’t make garbage. But Adam lacked one thing: complete union with God. According to Aquinas, man’s perfection lies in happiness completely realized, which is attained only as he unites with God. “Final and perfect happiness can consist in nothing else than the vision of the Divine Essence.” Adam rejected that which would’ve comprised his complete and unending happiness, in favor of autonomy from that very Source, looking for fulfillment in lesser, created things. Was Adam’s choice, itself, caused by some sort of imperfection? It seems to me that Adam was imperfect only in a relative sense; God, alone, is necessarily perfect in all ways. Perhaps Adam’s imperfection relative to God is the very condition that made it possible to* fail to recognize* His imperfection relative to God. Adam could not be complete-and the happiness he was made for obtained-until he knew his place, until he grasped and submitted to God’s superior, absolute perfection.

I’m not sure how the first two humans could ever have been immortal, if they were only good, not perfect, so like we are thinking, they had to grow in maturity, especially spirituality, and in order to do that, they had to make their own minds up.

They choose to “eat from the tree of Good and Evil” therefore using their freewill. They gain the knowledge of being able to choose Good/Evil.

No, they already had that freedom, and exercised it with the original sin. The knowledge of good and evil would become the norm for humanity from then on as both would be directly experienced in the brave new world -a world free from spiritual union with its loving Master. With the same freedom with which they fell man is called to freely rise again, with the help of grace, as we’re unable to bring God down to us, on our own, so communion can take place again. We don’t even know Him at all now without His self-revelation, in fact.

From what sounds like a moment of madness, God does seem angry as he curse’s the ground, gives child baring pain to Eve and hard work to Adam and death to their bodies/spirit. .

This is meant to underscore and drive home the unhappiness that naturally results when man separates himself from God. Harmony with creation and other humans is lost; even harmony within himself. All humans must admit to this unhappiness if they’re going to be able to find the true source of it.

I can think of it more in terms of A&E being almost angel like, turning away from God like satan did, and being cast down to earth to suffer as mere creatures, who then have to suffer the loss of Gods friendship, pain in the body and all the extras that we suffer or see others suffer with.

But then this makes God into the not so friendly, loving creator I have come to know, through Jesus.
In part it all doesn’t make sense to me…

God is allowing all of us, along with our first parents, to seek perfection and the happiness that results, which He created us for. Part of that seeking includes the struggle with and against sin/evil, and the rejection of that for good, alone, both of which (good and evil) being literally, viscerally, known/experienced/interacted with in this world.

 

[fhansen]

The world after the Fall benefited Adam and us by giving Adam and us food and shelter. On the other hand, the world could also produce tornados and serial killers. Adam’s garden, like our gardens, could either be feast or famine.

Perhaps the greatest benefit of the world was that Adam was still living in it. Personally, I picture Professor Adam as being humble as he relates his experiences to his children and grandchildren. He would have a lot to teach us since we could never be in that special garden at the dawn of human history. His first lesson would be on obedience to the Creator.

Did he need to learn of the need for this obedience?

 

[simpleas]

What I’m getting at is something like this from the Catechism:

339 Each creature possesses its own particular goodness and perfection.

Adam was perfect in and of himself, as created. He had no flaws; God doesn’t make garbage. But Adam lacked one thing: complete union with God. According to Aquinas, man’s perfection lies in happiness completely realized, which is attained only as he unites with God. “Final and perfect happiness can consist in nothing else than the vision of the Divine Essence.” Adam rejected that which would’ve comprised his complete and unending happiness, in favor of autonomy from that very Source, looking for fulfillment in lesser, created things. Was Adam’s choice, itself, caused by some sort of imperfection? It seems to me that Adam was imperfect only in a relative sense; God, alone, is necessarily perfect in all ways. Perhaps Adam’s imperfection relative to God is the very condition that made it possible to* fail to recognize* His imperfection relative to God. Adam could not be complete-and the happiness he was made for obtained-until he knew his place, until he grasped and submitted to God’s superior, absolute perfection.

No, they already had that freedom, and exercised it with the original sin. The knowledge of good and evil would become the norm for humanity from then on as both would be directly experienced in the brave new world -a world free from spiritual union with its loving Master. With the same freedom with which they fell man is called to freely rise again, with the help of grace, as we’re unable to bring God down to us, on our own, so communion can take place again. We don’t even know Him at all now without His self-revelation, in fact.
This is meant to underscore and drive home the unhappiness that naturally results when man separates himself from God. Harmony with creation and other humans is lost; even harmony within himself. All humans must admit to this unhappiness if they’re going to be able to find the true source of it.

God is allowing all of us, along with our first parents, to seek perfection and the happiness that results, which He created us for. Part of that seeking includes the struggle with and against sin/evil, and the rejection of that for good, alone, both of which (good and evil) being literally, viscerally, known/experienced/interacted with in this world.

Did Adam and Eve have spiritual union with God before they fell, no, because this would have made them complete, perfected. They knew what to do and what not to do, they were aware of the deadly consequence of their action for themselves first, and then the whole of the human race.
Yet even if they had spiritual union like the angels had, does not stop them from turning away from God because they have freewill to do so, same with the human creature.
So were does Original sin fit in?
How did they scorn their creator so badly when they were only human creatures, nowhere on a level near the angels or God.
God is a spirit, he gave the human creature a soul, freewill, a conscience, left in the hands of his own council to seek to do goodness, spiritual more than just a mere creature.

So yes, Adam and Eve were to seek perfection and happiness, because they were only made good, they still had to gain union with God. It’s like back to front.

Thanks.

 

[simpleas]

What God really had in mind when He created Adam is this very simple invitation. Adam, in the state he was created, is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life. (Genesis 1: 26-27) Adam’s human nature is not really a rough gem needing more work. Adam’s human nature is in the State of Original Holiness aka Sanctifying Grace aka bond of friendship between humanity and Divinity.

This is a good thought and it relates to CCC 1733 and CCC 1803. However, to understand God’s basic primary intention for humans, one needs to refer to CCC 356 and CCC 1730-1732.

The difficulty here is that Adam is already in the State of Original Holiness. God has not revealed the means that Adam would use in order to enter heaven without bodily death. Yet, we know that Adam’s complete perfection would not come about until his “freedom” has bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is the Beatific Vision in heaven. The Garden is not the same as heaven.

Having a simple mind, I prefer the version that Adam’s nature is both spiritual and material.

Adam and Even had material bodies like we do. God gave them a special gift of immortality which was directly connected to their friendship relationship with God.
This special gift of immortality is known as a preternatural gift. The following definition is from this website. catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=35763
INDENT]Preternatural gifts are
Favors granted by God above and beyond the powers or capacities of the nature that receives them but not beyond those of all created nature. Such gifts perfect nature but do not carry it beyond the limits of created nature. They include three great privileges to which human beings have no title–infused knowledge, absence of concupiscence, and bodily immortality. Adam and Eve possessed these gifts before the Fall.
[/INDENT]
I am going to stop here because of the error. Adam had the knowledge about good and evil before he chose to commit the original mortal sin.

Instead, I pose three general questions.
Where is the Catholic teaching that God created human nature without a conscience?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature was created without a rational intellective soul?

Where is the Catholic teaching that human nature is so impaired that it could not tell the difference between God the Creator and the creature created by God?

Links to the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

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

This says to me that they were more than human, that having these gifts sets then a part from us, maybe in terms of being free from sin, but then losing these gifts for a reason they couldn’t possibly have thought could work if they had the knowledge to begin with.

Thanks.

 

[grannymh]

simpleas:
Did Adam and Eve have spiritual union with God before they fell, no, because this would have made them complete, perfected.

May I respectfully ask if you know the general Catholic definition for Original Holiness aka Sanctifying Grace.

 

[grannymh]

I see that this thread is going in circles regarding the idea of perfection, yes or no, when it comes to the first human. This tells me that it is time for me to move on. In other words, it is time to unsubscribe.

Thank you to all who participated. As I look back, you have given me many interesting ideas. However, it is time to go beyond the current discussion on Adam’s perfection. There is nothing I can do with circular discussions.

Blessings,
granny