Concupiscence

[NoxSineStellae]

Is this the Catholic teaching? I’ve been struggling to wrap my mind around this and it’s a HUGE stumbling block for me as I try to learn more about Catholicism/Christianity.

1 - God knew everything that was going to happen in the Garden before he created Adam & Eve, knew they would disobey him, and eat of the tree, created them anyway, because of free will, even though he knew what their decision would be ahead of time. He also knows Satan is roaming about, but sits back and watches the fall unfold instead of protecting his innocent children from the manipulative, seasoned evil they know nothing about.

How this is unlike me having a sheltered young daughter, telling her once not to do something, then wandering off while I know a sauve and diabolical child predator will attempt to convince her otherwise, I do not know. And then when my daughter gives in, I’ll throw her out of the house and take no responsibility, even though I’m the one with all the knowledge about the situation.

1. God created Adam & Eve without the propensity to sin. Their wills were perfectly in line with his. He couldn’t have created them with the propensity to sin, because God doesn’t do bad stuff. So it should have been impossible for them to choose to disobey him, even with their free will. Without original sin, without the propensity to sin, shouldn’t their exercise of free will be limited to choosing between what is good, and what is better?

If they were created in God’s image, with pure souls that knew nothing of sin, and they couldn’t even conceive of sin, how were they suddenly able to sin so gravely? I’ve been told it’s an Official Mystery of the Church (ie, they don’t know either), but it’s driving me nuts!

Also, I get that the RCC explains God referring to himself as “we” and “us” in Genesis as a reference to the trinity. I can accept that (even though I can think of more logical explantations). But my whole life I’ve heard that Adam and Eve were cast out for disobedience and eating the tree of knowledge. But I’m looking at a Catholic Bible (new experience still and it says:

22
Then the LORD God said: “See! The man has become like one of us, knowing what is good and what is bad! Therefore, he must not be allowed to put out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life also, and thus eat of it and live forever.”
23
The LORD God therefore banished him from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he had been taken.

Adam and Eve were cast out because if they weren’t, they’d also eat of the other tree, and become immortal gods themselves? That sounds very close to Eastern beliefs I’ve been told have absolutely nothing in common with Christianity (believing we can all become a part of “God”).

Is this an official Mystery? Or is there a simple explanation that doesn’t make it seem as though God were setting us up to fail, and then kicked us out lest we gain power and threaten his?

 

[Pete_1]

Adam and Eve were cast out because if they weren’t, they’d also eat of the other tree, and become immortal gods themselves? That sounds very close to Eastern beliefs I’ve been told have absolutely nothing in common with Christianity (believing we can all become a part of “God”).

I don’t think gods just immortal, because man had become sinfull he could not be in the presence of God, untill christ made the way?

2 Timothy 1:10 but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

Also God made man with free will not sinfullness, it was man that chose to disobay god by doing something contrary to what he commanded. If we did not have free will we would not be made in Gods image?

Possibly God allowed the evil in order to derive from it a greater good, and respect mans free will by allowing only those who choose him to be with him forever

22 I saw no temple in the city, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 And the city has no need of sun or moon, for the glory of God illuminates the city, and the Lamb is its light. 24 The nations will walk in its light, and the kings of the world will enter the city in all their glory. 25 Its gates will never be closed at the end of day because there is no night there. 26 And all the nations will bring their glory and honor into the city. 27 Nothing evilf] will be allowed to enter, nor anyone who practices shameful idolatry and dishonesty—but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.

maybe i am not right but if i am give the praise to God

 

[RobNY]

1 - God knew everything that was going to happen in the Garden before he created Adam & Eve, knew they would disobey him, and eat of the tree, created them anyway, because of free will, even though he knew what their decision would be ahead of time. He also knows Satan is roaming about, but sits back and watches the fall unfold instead of protecting his innocent children from the manipulative, seasoned evil they know nothing about.

How this is unlike me having a sheltered young daughter, telling her once not to do something, then wandering off while I know a sauve and diabolical child predator will attempt to convince her otherwise, I do not know. And then when my daughter gives in, I’ll throw her out of the house and take no responsibility, even though I’m the one with all the knowledge about the situation.

1. God created Adam & Eve without the propensity to sin. Their wills were perfectly in line with his. He couldn’t have created them with the propensity to sin, because God doesn’t do bad stuff. So it should have been impossible for them to choose to disobey him, even with their free will. Without original sin, without the propensity to sin, shouldn’t their exercise of free will be limited to choosing between what is good, and what is better?

If they were created in God’s image, with pure souls that knew nothing of sin, and they couldn’t even conceive of sin, how were they suddenly able to sin so gravely? I’ve been told it’s an Official Mystery of the Church (ie, they don’t know either), but it’s driving me nuts!

It comes from a misunderstanding of concupiscence. Adam and Eve were created with original justice and holiness, which included the proper ordering of the bodies to their souls. That is to say, their sensual appetite was subordinated to their reason. The fall caused a serious disordering in their souls, due to the consequent privation of original justice and holiness-- no longer were their sensual appetites subordinated properly to reason. This is what we call concupiscence.

Note how I specified the sensual appetite. The original sin was a sin of pride and disobedience, it was not a sin of the sensual appetite. Therefore, there is no contradiction.

Also, I get that the RCC explains God referring to himself as “we” and “us” in Genesis as a reference to the trinity. I can accept that (even though I can think of more logical explantations). But my whole life I’ve heard that Adam and Eve were cast out for disobedience and eating the tree of knowledge. But I’m looking at a Catholic Bible (new experience still and it says:

22
Then the LORD God said: “See! The man has become like one of us, knowing what is good and what is bad! Therefore, he must not be allowed to put out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life also, and thus eat of it and live forever.”
23
The LORD God therefore banished him from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he had been taken.

Adam and Eve were cast out because if they weren’t, they’d also eat of the other tree, and become immortal gods themselves? That sounds very close to Eastern beliefs I’ve been told have absolutely nothing in common with Christianity (believing we can all become a part of “God”).

Is this an official Mystery? Or is there a simple explanation that doesn’t make it seem as though God were setting us up to fail, and then kicked us out lest we gain power and threaten his?

Remember that the creation story is being told for a purpose. Don’t get too hung up on the details, but look for what the story is trying to convey. The problem is that Adam and Eve pridefully wanted to be God but without God. Their sin consisted in forgetting that they were creatures, and as such, could only be fulfilled with God and in accord with His will.

The Catechism says:

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”.279

See-- the problem isn’t that man wanted to be like God. God created us like Him (in His very image and likeness), as the catechism says, “to be divinized with Him in glory.” Our destiny is to become gods, as it were. The sin is trying to achieve that with an evil, radical autonomy, which denies our contingent, creaturely state, and tries to make ourselves superior to the Creator.

-Rob

 

[Keikiolu]

Is this the Catholic teaching? I’ve been struggling to wrap my mind around this and it’s a HUGE stumbling block for me as I try to learn more about Catholicism/Christianity.

1 - God knew everything that was going to happen in the Garden before he created Adam & Eve, knew they would disobey him, and eat of the tree, created them anyway, because of free will, even though he knew what their decision would be ahead of time. He also knows Satan is roaming about, but sits back and watches the fall unfold instead of protecting his innocent children from the manipulative, seasoned evil they know nothing about.

You don’t understand that God’s omniscience and His creation’s (our) free will are mysteries that are NOT SOLVABLE in human terms, and are not to be attempted (at - tempted) to solve.

Once you accept that God’s omniscience does NOT destroy man’s free will, your “problem” with this situation is overcome.

How this is unlike me having a sheltered young daughter, telling her once not to do something, then wandering off while I know a sauve and diabolical child predator will attempt to convince her otherwise, I do not know. And then when my daughter gives in, I’ll throw her out of the house and take no responsibility, even though I’m the one with all the knowledge about the situation.

1. God created Adam & Eve without the propensity to sin. Their wills were perfectly in line with his. He couldn’t have created them with the propensity to sin, because God doesn’t do bad stuff. So it should have been impossible for them to choose to disobey him, even with their free will. Without original sin, without the propensity to sin, shouldn’t their exercise of free will be limited to choosing between what is good, and what is better?

Adam/Eve’s will was NOT “perfectly in line” with God’s will.

It was simply “tending toward” God’s will.

They sinned because they were scandalized by Satan. They had the choice to do what they wished. They chose as they did.

If they were created in God’s image, with pure souls that knew nothing of sin, and they couldn’t even conceive of sin, how were they suddenly able to sin so gravely? I’ve been told it’s an Official Mystery of the Church (ie, they don’t know either), but it’s driving me nuts!

Also, I get that the RCC explains God referring to himself as “we” and “us” in Genesis as a reference to the trinity. I can accept that (even though I can think of more logical explantations). But my whole life I’ve heard that Adam and Eve were cast out for disobedience and eating the tree of knowledge. But I’m looking at a Catholic Bible (new experience still and it says:

22
Then the LORD God said: “See! The man has become like one of us, knowing what is good and what is bad! Therefore, he must not be allowed to put out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life also, and thus eat of it and live forever.”
23
The LORD God therefore banished him from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he had been taken.

Adam and Eve were cast out because if they weren’t, they’d also eat of the other tree, and become immortal gods themselves? That sounds very close to Eastern beliefs I’ve been told have absolutely nothing in common with Christianity (believing we can all become a part of “God”).

The “children of God”, man, had a few things to learn, such as the consequences of their acts as born out by our history (salvation history), before we could eat of the Tree of Life, which is Christ Jesus.

The idea is that God reveals things through time, and not “all at once”, and that God, as our Father, will show us what we need to learn in a way that we mere men can understand.

Is this an official Mystery? Or is there a simple explanation that doesn’t make it seem as though God were setting us up to fail, and then kicked us out lest we gain power and threaten his?

His creation, man, was given what only the angels were also given, which was free will.

Free will without the ability to use it is not to have it at all.

Man chose as he did. God thenceforth dealt with the results of what He gave us.

Did He know that that would happen? Yes.

Does that eliminate our having had free will at that time? No.

Why? That’s the mystery,… it’s not for us to know until we see Him directly.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[NoxSineStellae]

Thank you all for the responses - given me a lot more to think about, some bits make more sense alreadt. I’m still puzzled by God’s apparent logic, but I’m starting get that that’s part and parcel of having faith

 

[blessedtoo]

Think of it this way. They had a choice between God and not-God. Evil is the absence of good just as darkness is the absence of light. Our first parents were given everything they required and the directive from God to refrain from just one thing. Rather than choosing to follow God’s guidance, they chose against Him.

How this is unlike me having a sheltered young daughter,

First, it is not like you and it never will be. God’s actions, motives, mercy, justice and love will never be comparable to that of humankind. It is important for us all to realize that trying to draw such comparisons is pointless. This does not mean that it’s “all a mystery”. It’s not. If we fully comprehend that we are talking about God, the Creator of us all, we can recognize how silly it is to try and draw such comparisons.

telling her once not to do something, then wandering off while I know a sauve and diabolical child predator will attempt to convince her otherwise, I do not know.

No. Imagine you provide your child with every single thing they could ever dream of or imagine and that they are bathed constantly in the light of your unconditional love. They are in possession of every thing they could ever need or want for all eternity. You tell your child there is just one thing they can’t have, should not have, because it will not be good for them, it will cause them harm. Your child decides, with his free will, that he wants that thing above all the other riches he has. He has chosen not-you. He has chosen not-the riches you have blessed him with. And the result is that the consequences will befall him. This is the natural order of all things. If we don’t follow the owner’s manual God so graciously provided for us, we end up with brokenness.

And then when my daughter gives in, I’ll throw her out of the house and take no responsibility, even though I’m the one with all the knowledge about the situation.

But God did take responsibility. His name is Jesus Christ. He came to redeem the sins of our fallen parents and extend His endless mercy to all.

 

[LuxDei]

blessedtoo, what an awesome response. Especially the part about Adam and Eve’s choice!

 

[NoxSineStellae]

No. Imagine you provide your child with every single thing they could ever dream of or imagine and that they are bathed constantly in the light of your unconditional love. They are in possession of every thing they could ever need or want for all eternity. You tell your child there is just one thing they can’t have, should not have, because it will not be good for them, it will cause them harm. Your child decides, with his free will, that he wants that thing above all the other riches he has. He has chosen not-you. He has chosen not-the riches you have blessed him with. And the result is that the consequences will befall him. This is the natural order of all things. If we don’t follow the owner’s manual God so graciously provided for us, we end up with brokenness.

blessedtoo…this paragraph has helped me more than anything else I have ever read - suddenly, the Judeo-Christian God does not seem as capricious and sadistic as He once did. Thank you. Sincerely. I can’t tell you what this means to me. I still have big, big problems to resolve if I’m going to become Christian, but I feel as though the first roadblock has been removed :heaven:

I’ve had other people tell me essentially the same thing, but in a different way, and it fell on deaf ears. Save this wording and use it on others in the future

Do you think God did warn Adam & Eve that bad stuff could happen if they ate it, and its just not recorded in the Bible? That would make it even easier to comprehend. I understand free will, and letting people make their own choices, but at the same time, I’d want to give a shout of warning and reasons other than “because I say so” if I see them about to make a terrible mistake.

But God did take responsibility. His name is Jesus Christ. He came to redeem the sins of our fallen parents and extend His endless mercy to all.

Probably for another thread, but if Jesus/God did this, why is their eternal Hell? I understand and totally agree with the concept of purgatory (my personal beliefs at this time is that “God” is all that is good and harmonic in the universe, and if we’re causing harm to others, we are is disharmony with that, and so it is impossible to be absorbed by it unless changed/purified) but ETERNAL, permanent hell seems so…inordinate and arbitrary. I get that we have to make up for the sin, even though it’s been forgiven (like restitution), but I don’t understand what humans are capable of that deserves an ETERNITY of hell. Honestly, if heaven exists, I eventually even want the guy who sexually abused me there, once he’s been purified.

The church teaches that you “send yourself” to hell, right, by deliberately turning your back on God? And that negates what Jesus did, because you’re rejecting the gift of salvation? Why do so many people who love God fear they’re going to hell then - the countless threads here worrying that they’re in a state of mortal sin? I have an anxious personality, and I can’t imagine living a life where I felt my salvation was constantly moving back and forth across the line of ‘saved’ and ‘burning forever’. If our sould exist before and after death, and God knows us, why do we not get a chance to bring ourselves into line with God after we die?

A Catholic told me once that you can be in a state of grace, love God with everything you have, your whole life, become curious about masturbation, give in once, die on the way to confession, and go straight to hell That TERRIFIES me - not the hell part so much even, as the idea of a God that loves us totally, yet views that as just.

 

[Chancellare]

Premise 1.
God gave man freewill - for a purpose. By our faith in God, we believe this purpose is for the ultimate good.
Premise 2.
Although God knows who will fall and who will not fall, by virtue of Premise 1, He does not intervene because He also knows the ultimte outcome which is the ultimate good.
Therefore, it does not matter so much if Adam and Eve failed the test because the purpose was written in God’s mind ahead of the fall. If we cannot question the ultimate purpose (which is good), on what ground do we question the events leading to the ultimate purpose?

 

[blessedtoo]

I really believe that we often get locked into a child’s understanding of God and don’t “grow up” our faith. As youngsters, we may have viewed God as an angry and vengeful parent and rather than allowing our understanding and concepts to mature, we remain stuck with this picture. It’s a process we all go through. I find it interesting that we spend vast amounts of time and energy in “maturing” our understanding of love, money, sex (most of the time!), relationships, marriage, employment, etc. But when it comes to how we see God, we still envision Him as we did in childhood.

I’ve had other people tell me essentially the same thing, but in a different way, and it fell on deaf ears.

God has blessed you with clear vision and hearing now!

Do you think God did warn Adam & Eve that bad stuff could happen if they ate it, and its just not recorded in the Bible?

I don’t know the answer to that question. I would have to read Genesis again. But I will say that if we look to the book of Job, which in it’s poetic and brilliant way answers this question, then perhaps He did not give detailed explanations of the consequences. To be honest, when I grew up (stone ages), it was fairly common for mom and dad to simply say “because I said so” as the reason for obedience. So I don’t have any problem with that because I recognize that as my parents, as the adults, they actually did know better. And really, had they explained it, I can’t say it would have made much difference. We can look at examples in our world today and wonder the same thing. Children are taught the consequences of premarital sex. Today’s youth knows more about the mechanics of fornication and pregnancy and STD’s than my mom and dad could have ever imagined. One could argue: has that made them choose more wisely? With an out of wedlock birthrate of 35%, is wouldn’t seem so.

Probably for another thread, but if Jesus/God did this, why is their eternal Hell? I understand and totally agree with the concept of purgatory (my personal beliefs at this time is that “God” is all that is good and harmonic in the universe, and if we’re causing harm to others, we are is disharmony with that, and so it is impossible to be absorbed by it unless changed/purified) but ETERNAL, permanent hell seems so…inordinate and arbitrary.

Again, we can’t really comprehend what “eternal” means. It’s futile to try and work that one out in our little brains. We will always default to the concept of eternal withing the framework of time. Yet we know God is outside of time. So “eternal” really has no meaning for us.

If we go back to the concept that “evil” is the absence of good, then it follows that hell is the absence of God. To me, as a believer, that means it might just be hellfire and devils because the thought of being without my Lord would be permanent torture. But for those who disdain God, who truly turn from Him with hardened hearts, being in His presence might be their hell. If they hate Him so much here on this earth, spending eternity with Him would be a horror. So in that respect, they choose not-God, not-heaven, because to be with Him there would be the torment.

Honestly, if heaven exists, I eventually even want the guy who sexually abused me there, once he’s been purified.

Purification begins with repentence. If the molester has turned from sin and repented, then perhaps he shall see God. The fact that YOU have forgiven him is just a tiny mirror of the kind of mercy God has for us all. It shows compassion, which is in the image of God. However, mercy without justice is meaningless. Assuming unrepentence, then there must be a place where the Hitlers and the Dhamer’s and the truly evil go or else God is not just. For the righteous man who strives his whole life to do God’s will to end up in the same place as an unrepentent mass murderer - that would be arbitrary and completely unjust.

Why do so many people who love God fear they’re going to hell then - the countless threads here worrying that they’re in a state of mortal sin?

I don’t think it’s something we should worry about if we are walking with Christ. We should, however, be careful not to become complacent and convince ourselves that we are destined for heaven absolutely. God makes the final judgement and knowing that, we must always strive to follow His will. There are folks who are scrupulous and worry about every little thing. Often, when folks return to the Church after an absence, they become aware of how sinful their lifestyles were and worry that they may inadvertanly fall into sin again. As I said above, we must strive to mature our faith by learning all we can and praying for guidance. There are two prayers I say every night before sleep: “Don’t let me go,” and “Give me all you got.”

 

[blessedtoo]

If our sould exist before and after death, and God knows us, why do we not get a chance to bring ourselves into line with God after we die?

Human nature being what it is, we will always want “just one more chance”. God has given us many, many chances to get it right while we are here. We are fully prepared and armed for the battle and yet we still want more. Our first parents were not satisfied with what they were given. The Israelites were not satisfied when Moses gave them the Law. The Jews and gentiles were not satisfied with the miracles that Christ performed, the Gospel He preached, His resurrection from the dead. We are here, alive and breathing, because of His love. Everything we need is available to us from Him for the asking. The one thing we can’t have is “another chance” after we leave this earth. It’s not unlike Adam and Eve all over again. They too wanted the one thing they could not have.

A Catholic told me once that you can be in a state of grace, love God with everything you have, your whole life, become curious about masturbation, give in once, die on the way to confession, and go straight to hell That TERRIFIES me - not the hell part so much even, as the idea of a God that loves us totally, yet views that as just.

Read and reflect on what the Catechism teaches about mortal sin. Your Catholic friend left out some very important information when telling that tale. Someone who is “curious” about a sin might not be fully aware of the gravity of the situation. Someone who doesn’t fully understand Catholic teaching, or who suffers with an addiction, or who has a mental illness, etc, would probably not be fully culpable. And even in the worst case scenario, a person who commits a mortal sin with full knowledge still has the opportunity to repent up until he draws his last breath. This is why we will never know who is in hell until we pass from this world. So don’t be terrified. Keep learning, keep praying, and keep striving to do your heavenly Father’s will.

 

[Chancellare]

Read and reflect on what the Catechism teaches about mortal sin. Your Catholic friend left out some very important information when telling that tale. Someone who is “curious” about a sin might not be fully aware of the gravity of the situation. Someone who doesn’t fully understand Catholic teaching, or who suffers with an addiction, or who has a mental illness, etc, would probably not be fully culpable. And even in the worst case scenario, a person who commits a mortal sin with full knowledge still has the opportunity to repent up until he draws his last breath. This is why we will never know who is in hell until we pass from this world. So don’t be terrified. Keep learning, keep praying, and keep striving to do your heavenly Father’s will.

Well said!

 

[Hubriss]

Well in my perspective the whole original sin thing is totally illogical.

In addition to the whole God is omniscient and knew that Adam and Eve would disobey him part, there is another inconsistency. Supposedly the tree was the tree of knowledge. Catholics say that eating of the tree of knowledge gave humans knowledge of good and evil. This is stupid and untrue even with a faith or religious perspective on the situation because the act of eating the fruit was already an act of disobeyance to God, in other words evil. So the eating of the fruit, in fact, did absolutely nothing as they were already totally aware and capable of sin. The idea that it took away their immortality is rubbish as life was born and died millions of years before we came along.

But if you want to take it on faith go ahead. It’s your only choice because it has no reasonable, logical or historical basis.

 

[blessedtoo]

Catholics say that eating of the tree of knowledge gave humans knowledge of good and evil. This is stupid and untrue even with a faith or religious perspective on the situation because the act of eating the fruit was already an act of disobeyance to God, in other words evil. So the eating of the fruit, in fact, did absolutely nothing as they were already totally aware and capable of sin.

Free will. They chose against God. Call it whatever you want: disobedience, sin, evil. Doesn’t matter. They chose the opposite of God. The knowlege of good and evil was the complete understanding of the consequences of that choice. It was the revelation of what was to come to them having chosen the opposite of God. Sin entered the world because they did not choose God.

If a child is told not to touch the hot stove because he will then have the knowledge of fire and burnt flesh, but he does so anyway, then a whole avalanche of consequences will befall him. He will finally understand what happens when he chooses something other than what dad tells him. He will fully understand the danger of heat. He will suffer the pain of physical burns. He was be punished by dad for his disobedience. He will, hopefully, learn from his experience and not repeat it.

 

[Hubriss]

Free will. They chose against God. Call it whatever you want: disobedience, sin, evil. Doesn’t matter. They chose the opposite of God. The knowlege of good and evil was the complete understanding of the consequences of that choice. It was the revelation of what was to come to them having chosen the opposite of God. Sin entered the world because they did not choose God.

If a child is told not to touch the hot stove because he will then have the knowledge of fire and burnt flesh, but he does so anyway, then a whole avalanche of consequences will befall him. He will finally understand what happens when he chooses something other than what dad tells him. He will fully understand the danger of heat. He will suffer the pain of physical burns. He was be punished by dad for his disobedience. He will, hopefully, learn from his experience and not repeat it.

But sin didn’t enter the world when they made that choice. They already had the knowledge of good and evil, the sin was already there.

A father can tell a child not to touch a hot stove, but the child will undoubtedly touch it either on purpose or due to carelessness warned by the father or whatnot. So when the child does touch the stove, the father should throw the kid out of the house right? You’re analogy was incomplete. And once we have good and evil revealed to us and are banished out, where is the hope that we will learn from the experience and never repeat an act of evil again?

It’s totally illogical. No weak analogy can explain it.

 

[Keikiolu]

But sin didn’t enter the world when they made that choice. They already had the knowledge of good and evil, the sin was already there.

Sin entered the world AS they made that choice.

The ability to choose pre-existed the choice, but choosing wrongly (sinning) existed only AFTER making that choice.

Do you see the sequence here?

A father can tell a child not to touch a hot stove, but the child will undoubtedly touch it either on purpose or due to carelessness warned by the father or whatnot. So when the child does touch the stove, the father should throw the kid out of the house right?

God’s will is ALWAYS the best thing for His creatures. That is axiomatic.

Making man, through the “education” of man’s history, come to understand the consequences of that original choice is THE WISEST thing God could have done, simply because God did it.

You are confusing “punishment” with “education”.

God’s actions may SEEM like punishment, when in fact they are ALWAYS the wisest course of action to our best benefit.

You’re analogy was incomplete. And once we have good and evil revealed to us and are banished out, where is the hope that we will learn from the experience and never repeat an act of evil again?

So, what is your question here again?

We were banished from “perfection” so that we would learn what the actual consequences of sin were.

We CHOOSE to learn (or not) that sin is not a good thing to do, and has cosequences.

We have hope, in fact certain knowledge, that God will always forgive us if we truly want it and act on that want.

Since we will always have free will (on earth), we always have the choice to sin or not, so there is NO “mechanism” by which to “never sin again” other than simply choosing to never sin again intentionally in each instance.

It’s totally illogical. No weak analogy can explain it.

What is illogical about “If you want not to sin, don’t. If you do sin, due to concupiscence, forgiveness is available if you choose it.”…?

Best to 'ya…!

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[not_a_theist]

Well in my perspective the whole original sin thing is totally illogical.

I prefer to say that it simply doesn’t make any sense. The story was good enough for the original tribals thousands of years ago, but once you figure in the postulated all-knowing, all-can-do, being-everywhere-at-once, know-it-all deity, all I’m left with is “yeah, right”. Free will doesn’t help either. It’s not obvious to me that we have free will at all. If you’re into computer science, consider the difference between random numbers and pseudo-random numbers. We’re running on pseudo-random numbers.

Calling something as incredible as original sin a mystery doesn’t help, either. But then I’m not trying to convince myself that there’s any veracity to the Christian myth.

 

[Keikiolu]

I prefer to say that it simply doesn’t make any sense {original sin}. The story was good enough for the original tribals thousands of years ago, but once you figure in the postulated all-knowing, all-can-do, being-everywhere-at-once, know-it-all deity, all I’m left with is “yeah, right”.

You simply reject, out of hand, the very concept of God.

You do that because you have an overiding religion, which is materialism. Our two religions are inherently incompatible, as they should be and must be.

The question is how our respective religions deal with the problem of why man fails to do what is most wise.

Free will doesn’t help either. It’s not obvious to me that we have free will at all.

If we have no free will, then what is it that we do? Who is it that does it? Why is it done?

The materialist answers: Those are nonsensical questions, and have nothing to do with me observing as much of the universe as I can to try to figure out what I SHOULD be doing to make myself most happy.

But, why is “happiness” important? And what IS happiness?

To that the materialist answers: Whatever I want it to be.

Let the “kill or be killed” circus begin…

If you’re into computer science, consider the difference between random numbers and pseudo-random numbers. We’re running on pseudo-random numbers.

Where did the machine come from? And why?

Calling something as incredible as original sin a mystery doesn’t help, either. But then I’m not trying to convince myself that there’s any veracity to the Christian myth.

You misunderstand the meaning of the word “mystery” as Christians use it.

It’s very similar to the mathematical use of the word “limit”.

How can a function approach a limit (hyperbolic, let’s say) forever?

It does approach forever, but you can’t “visually” comprehend that in it’s totality.

You CAN “mathematically” comprehend it though. Just as the Christian can “faithfully” comprehend the Christian mysteries without being able to “visually” comprehend them.

You simply don’t understand the Christian “notation” used to comprehend them.

…and the reason is because you have no NEED to do so.

Eventually, all men WILL have need to understand those mysteries,… and when they do, they will be either more or less practiced in the use of the tools to understand them with.

(( Sorry about the dangling participle! ))

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[clmowry]

But sin didn’t enter the world when they made that choice. They already had the knowledge of good and evil, the sin was already there.

Care to prove this silly assertion?

Chuck

 

[not_a_theist]

You simply reject, out of hand, the very concept of God.

That’s an oversimplification.

I reject the gods of all religions out of hand. They’re self-evidently man-made and not even worth a fleeting thought. I don’t buy the philosophical god word games, either. They’re nothing but mind-numbing exercises in sophistry, although it’s amusing to pick them apart once in a while. There’s the remote possibility that the universe as we know it was created, but it doesn’t follow that it was created by anything sentient, with or for a purpose, or for a purpose that flatters us. The origins of the universe are an interesting scientific question, but pending hard evidence to the contrary, not a spiritual one.

You do that because you have an overiding religion, which is materialism. Our two religions are inherently incompatible, as they should be and must be.

The question is how our respective religions deal with the problem of why man fails to do what is most wise.

I am a philosophical materialist, but calling this a religion is more than a stretch, it’s a play from the Tu Quoque Ministry of Apologetics.

I don’t have a religion that addresses questions of wisdom. Nobody seems to claim that we’re perfect, so man failing to be wise is a tautology.

If we have no free will, then what is it that we do? Who is it that does it? Why is it done?

The materialist answers: Those are nonsensical questions, and have nothing to do with me observing as much of the universe as I can to try to figure out what I SHOULD be doing to make myself most happy.

But, why is “happiness” important? And what IS happiness?

To that the materialist answers: Whatever I want it to be.

Let the “kill or be killed” circus begin…

Since you’re presumptuous enough to put words into my mouth, I won’t enlighten you and tell you what I really think.

Where did the machine come from? And why?

Big Bang, abiogenesis, evolution. Why? Because.

You misunderstand the meaning of the word “mystery” as Christians use it.

I don’t misunderstand the word myth. I used it very deliberately to voice my conviction about Christianity as a representative of all religions. Calling it a mystery tells me that you’re making stuff up and have backed yourself into a corner.