K
Khalfan
Guest
Why Bible teaches both, No one will be questioned for others sin in Eze 18:20, and then the consequenses of sin affecting other people?
- Status
K
Khalfan
Guest
I believe, this knowledge is the components that gives us the power of free will. This knowledge helps us to undersatnd our choices.
What do you think it is?
K
Khalfan
Guest
I don’t find any logic in that. You are assuming, Adam must have been culpable. Unless you are sure Adam is culpable, how can you say what God did is just?
D
davidmammola
Guest
There is a difference between the consequences of one man’s sin affecting another person and God holding a person ACCOUNTABLE for another person’s sins.
God holds us accountable only for our own sins (Ezekiel 18). The eternal guilt of our own personal sins is wiped away by Christ’s forgiveness.
BUT sins have negative consequences for innocent people all the time, as when an expectant mother takes drugs and hurts her innocent baby or a suicide bomber kills an innocent child with an explosion. In these examples, the sin of one person has a negative effect for someone else. This is illustrated countless times in the Bible. In fact, there would be no mention of the 5th Commandment (Thou Shalt Not Kill) if people did not sometimes kill innocent victims.
“Original Sin” (as inherited by all the descendants of Adam and Eve) does not mean God holds us accountable (guilty) for Adam’s sin. It is an expression that means we have all inherited the negative effects of Adam’s sin. In other words, we’re not born guilty, but we are born having to deal with some consequences from someone else’s sin. This is the Catholic teaching on the subject. St. Paul affirms this in Romans and 1 Corinthians, as I mentioned before.
God holds us accountable only for our own sins (Ezekiel 18). The eternal guilt of our own personal sins is wiped away by Christ’s forgiveness.
BUT sins have negative consequences for innocent people all the time, as when an expectant mother takes drugs and hurts her innocent baby or a suicide bomber kills an innocent child with an explosion. In these examples, the sin of one person has a negative effect for someone else. This is illustrated countless times in the Bible. In fact, there would be no mention of the 5th Commandment (Thou Shalt Not Kill) if people did not sometimes kill innocent victims.
“Original Sin” (as inherited by all the descendants of Adam and Eve) does not mean God holds us accountable (guilty) for Adam’s sin. It is an expression that means we have all inherited the negative effects of Adam’s sin. In other words, we’re not born guilty, but we are born having to deal with some consequences from someone else’s sin. This is the Catholic teaching on the subject. St. Paul affirms this in Romans and 1 Corinthians, as I mentioned before.
D
davidmammola
Guest
Khalfan, you said:
“I don’t find any logic in that. You are assuming, Adam must have been culpable. Unless you are sure Adam is culpable, how can you say what God did is just?”
Incorrect. If you simply follow the proof I laid out, it never assumes Adam is culpable. It proves that idea by stating that God is just, which is a truth that has been revealed to us by God in the Scriptures.
My four-step proof is set up to prove Adam is culpable. It does not begin by assuming Adam is culpable. That would be called “begging the question.”
1.) GIVEN: by definition, a just being would not punish someone who is not culpable.
2.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God is just (Eze 18).
3.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God punished Adam (Gen 3:17).
4.) CONCLUSION: THEREFORE, Adam must have been culpable for his disobedient action (sin).
“I don’t find any logic in that. You are assuming, Adam must have been culpable. Unless you are sure Adam is culpable, how can you say what God did is just?”
Incorrect. If you simply follow the proof I laid out, it never assumes Adam is culpable. It proves that idea by stating that God is just, which is a truth that has been revealed to us by God in the Scriptures.
My four-step proof is set up to prove Adam is culpable. It does not begin by assuming Adam is culpable. That would be called “begging the question.”
1.) GIVEN: by definition, a just being would not punish someone who is not culpable.
2.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God is just (Eze 18).
3.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God punished Adam (Gen 3:17).
4.) CONCLUSION: THEREFORE, Adam must have been culpable for his disobedient action (sin).
K
Khalfan
Guest
The reference numbers you gave is wrong. It is 1-31. No problem.
Let me say just one thing on this. Jesus was not quoting scripture in Lk 22:42, Mat 26:39, Mk 14:36. Jesus was not willing to die on the cross. When such a man says ‘Why have you forsaken me?’ I can understand what he must have felt about God.
I think I should not continue on this, because it is not our topic.
K
Khalfan
Guest
You are assuming Adam must have done something wrong, otherwise the just God wouldn’t claim the sin. From the begenning I am triying to get into the details given in scripture of that sin and it’s situation. You are still at the begenning and the discussion gone so far from that point. Now, I am about to conclude this discussion. Before that, do you agree the catholic teachigs MHalsey quoted?
D
davidmammola
Guest
Khalfan, you said:
“I don’t find any logic in that. You are assuming, Adam must have been culpable. Unless you are sure Adam is culpable, how can you say what God did is just?”
Incorrect. If you simply follow the proof I laid out, it never assumes Adam is culpable. It proves that idea by stating that God is just, which is a truth that has been revealed to us by God in the Scriptures.
My four-step proof is set up to prove Adam is culpable. It does not begin by assuming Adam is culpable. That would be called “begging the question.”
1.) GIVEN: by definition, a just being would not punish someone who is not culpable.
2.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God is just (Eze 18).
3.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God punished Adam (Gen 3:17).
4.) CONCLUSION: THEREFORE, Adam must have been culpable for his disobedient action (sin).
“I don’t find any logic in that. You are assuming, Adam must have been culpable. Unless you are sure Adam is culpable, how can you say what God did is just?”
Incorrect. If you simply follow the proof I laid out, it never assumes Adam is culpable. It proves that idea by stating that God is just, which is a truth that has been revealed to us by God in the Scriptures.
My four-step proof is set up to prove Adam is culpable. It does not begin by assuming Adam is culpable. That would be called “begging the question.”
1.) GIVEN: by definition, a just being would not punish someone who is not culpable.
2.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God is just (Eze 18).
3.) The Scriptures and the Church teach that God punished Adam (Gen 3:17).
4.) CONCLUSION: THEREFORE, Adam must have been culpable for his disobedient action (sin).
D
davidmammola
Guest
Again, you must read through the proof slowly and carefully.
It does not assume Adam did something wrong. After laying out the evidence, it proves that he was culpable for doing something wrong. You are confusing what the proof assumes and what it proves.
Here’s how how the proof operates. It states that we know for a fact that (a) God is just and that (b) God punished Adam. From this, we conclude that Adam must have done something wrong.
Yes, I agree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church about original sin. Why do you ask?
It does not assume Adam did something wrong. After laying out the evidence, it proves that he was culpable for doing something wrong. You are confusing what the proof assumes and what it proves.
Here’s how how the proof operates. It states that we know for a fact that (a) God is just and that (b) God punished Adam. From this, we conclude that Adam must have done something wrong.
Yes, I agree with the Catechism of the Catholic Church about original sin. Why do you ask?
S
son_of_Our_Lady
Guest
Adam and Eve had free will (obey or die) before they knew evil. Thats why God gave them guidance; and they chose death. Thats what I believe.
Peace be with you
S
son_of_Our_Lady
Guest
Forgive me if I messed up the verses, it sometimes happens when I search scripture online
I understand if you do not wish to discuss it further, but the topic is important (esp for Muslims) because it reinforces that Jesus was God and man. He did not want to die because He was man, but He wanted to die because He is also God and knew mankind needed Him for redemption. Hence why Christians believe he died on the cross and Muslims do not believe it. We believe He is the one mankind has been waiting for since Adam and Eve’ fall from grace.
God be with you in your search for the Truth.
Peace be with you
K
Khalfan
Guest
I think you have done enough. I agree what all you said.
I am a Muslim. Let me tell you what I understand from the same event. Adam and Eve were perfect with their knowledge of good and evil. Their doing was their own choice. They were responsible for it. What actually God wanted is a test of loyalty, of faith and trust. But Adam and Eve failed. God created Adam and Eve so he knew their positives and negetives. Adam and Eve repented and God forgiven their sin. Not only that, God guided them how to remain good, how to avoid temptations and evil deeds. According to Bible, God punished them. Why did God punish them, if it was to be paid by Jesus? God didn’t punish them, but forgave.
The point is, we are responsible for our sin as they were responsible for their sin. We don’t have to pay for their sin and Jesus don’t have to pay for our sin. The only condition to get forgiven is repenting. The very same idea is mentioned in Ezekiel 18:20-23.
Eze:18:20: The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Eze:18:21: But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
Eze:18:22: All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
Eze:18:23: Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
This is what was the law of God untill Jesus. But I dont know how God changed his mind to kill Jesus for us.
K
Khalfan
Guest
You said, mankind needed him for redemption. Scripture says Jesus was not willing to die on the cross. Was it like, God killed him for you? I don’t think so. God must have planned better for Jesus than cross.Forgive me if I messed up the verses, it sometimes happens when I search scripture online
I understand if you do not wish to discuss it further, but the topic is important (esp for Muslims) because it reinforces that Jesus was God and man. He did not want to die because He was man, but He wanted to die because He is also God and knew mankind needed Him for redemption. Hence why Christians believe he died on the cross and Muslims do not believe it. We believe He is the one mankind has been waiting for since Adam and Eve’ fall from grace.
God be with you in your search for the Truth.
Peace be with you
K
Khalfan
Guest
My question was what you understand by ‘knowledge of good and evil’? I gave my answer. it is your turn now.
K
Khalfan
Guest
This is where we are. You concluded by ‘ADAM MUST HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG’. And I am analizing what he did.
No problem I can agree with you. Since God is just. Do you agree, Scripture doesn’t give enough details on it?
I will tell you. Wait until every one agree.
K
Khalfan
Guest
**I agree to conclude. But before that let me make sure no one have to say anything other than this. **
Do all of you in this forum, agree on these teachings above?
D
davidmammola
Guest
Scripture and Tradition give us all the raw data we need. The Church interprets divine revelation like the book of Genesis and teaches us all that we need to know about it in order for us to know, love, and serve God properly in this life.
Would it satisfy our curiosity to know more? Of course. Is it fun to speculate about what else happened in the “Garden”? Yes. But should we become too attached to our individual speculations? No. We must hold to the truths in the story defined by the Church and realize that the language used in the story may be largely figurative. The story teaches us in a poetic way the truth of man’s primordial sin.
I agree with the Catechism about original sin, and by the sound of what you wrote, Khalfan, you agree with much of it too. For instance, you agree that Adam and Eve disobeyed, and (you may not know this) but also that God forgave them.
Just because God forgives, however, does not mean that He takes away all the “temporal” consequences of sin immediately. For instance, God might forgive me for stealing something. But I will still have to replace the item I stole and go to jail while I am here on earth. When I die I will be able to go to heaven eventually because I have been forgiven of the guilt, but I must first make restitution and reparation for the evil I have done.
So we agree that God forgave Adam and Eve. We just disagree on the means God used to forgive them and the rest of us who sin. Suffering is a means of glory. Suffering for another person reveals the depths of one’s love. Suffering is a means of purification. Put these ideas all together, and it makes a lot of sense that a loving self-sacrificing God would suffer on our behalf in order to show His love for us, purify us, and to reconcile us to Himself. Catholics believe that all forgiveness and salvation comes through Christ. God could have just pronounced forgiveness on all men and made it so by an act of His sovereign will, but God freely chose to forgive humanity through Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. It’s His way, not ours.
In ones sense, Christ did not have to come. But we would still be “dead” in our sins if He did not. In another sense, it was destined from the beginning that He would come because it was predicted by the prophets of the Old Testament and God Himself beginning in Genesis 3:15.
God could have saved us another way, perhaps. Still, it is proper that Christ came and sacrificed Himself the way He did in order to save us because these actions in history more clearly and perfectly demonstrate to us the love our God has for every human being.
Would it satisfy our curiosity to know more? Of course. Is it fun to speculate about what else happened in the “Garden”? Yes. But should we become too attached to our individual speculations? No. We must hold to the truths in the story defined by the Church and realize that the language used in the story may be largely figurative. The story teaches us in a poetic way the truth of man’s primordial sin.
I agree with the Catechism about original sin, and by the sound of what you wrote, Khalfan, you agree with much of it too. For instance, you agree that Adam and Eve disobeyed, and (you may not know this) but also that God forgave them.
Just because God forgives, however, does not mean that He takes away all the “temporal” consequences of sin immediately. For instance, God might forgive me for stealing something. But I will still have to replace the item I stole and go to jail while I am here on earth. When I die I will be able to go to heaven eventually because I have been forgiven of the guilt, but I must first make restitution and reparation for the evil I have done.
So we agree that God forgave Adam and Eve. We just disagree on the means God used to forgive them and the rest of us who sin. Suffering is a means of glory. Suffering for another person reveals the depths of one’s love. Suffering is a means of purification. Put these ideas all together, and it makes a lot of sense that a loving self-sacrificing God would suffer on our behalf in order to show His love for us, purify us, and to reconcile us to Himself. Catholics believe that all forgiveness and salvation comes through Christ. God could have just pronounced forgiveness on all men and made it so by an act of His sovereign will, but God freely chose to forgive humanity through Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. It’s His way, not ours.
In ones sense, Christ did not have to come. But we would still be “dead” in our sins if He did not. In another sense, it was destined from the beginning that He would come because it was predicted by the prophets of the Old Testament and God Himself beginning in Genesis 3:15.
God could have saved us another way, perhaps. Still, it is proper that Christ came and sacrificed Himself the way He did in order to save us because these actions in history more clearly and perfectly demonstrate to us the love our God has for every human being.
B
Benadam
Guest
yes, thank you for clarifying how you understand what I wrote. “That” in my post was a reference , as you underlined and reposted, to Adam and Eve’s possession of everything good and necessary to remain united to God. I used the word provided because the bible reveals the Father as a great provider. Now if God is the source of what is good and what we need it doesn’t make sense that Adam and Eve lacked these in regards of their choice to disobey. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
Jesus knew what He needed to know in order to fulfill His purpose. He knew in as much as it was proper to His purpose and state of being on earth. When God took on flesh it wouldn’t be reasonable nor serve a purpose for that flesh not to limit Him in the ways it limits all of flesh. Ultimately, no God cannot foresake Himself that’s why Jesus by laying His life down could by the Power of His Holy Spirit raise it up again. God could experience human death but death has only the grip God allows in order to fulfill His purpose. I understand your question and how your understanding of God causes difficulties in exchanging ideas with someone who understands God in the way I do.
The knowledge of wrong was given to Adam and Eve. “to eat of’ The knowledge of right. " Don’t eat of” In this way they would not know evil in it’s deepest sense, in the way they knew good.
Knowledge in it’s deepest sense is a union of likeness. To know is to be like. To be like is to know. We are made in the likeness of God. In that likeness we are united to Him. Adam and Ev’e’s knowing of good was in that they were good. Evil means the lack of good. Adam and Eve didn’t lack good in any way.
Eating of the tree brought knowledge in it’s deepest spiritual sense. It brought an image of likeness. The likeness they were created in became the likeness that lacked it.
is this what you believe? That Adam and Eve were excused for what they did?
S
son_of_Our_Lady
Guest
Scripture records that Jesus died on the cross. In the passages Lk 22:42, Mat 26:39, Mk 14:36 Jesus did ask the Father if there was another way, but obviously Jesus willingly died for us all. If you believe He said Lk 22:42, Mat 26:39, Mk 14:36, then you should believe he died on the cross which is detailed later in the Gospel. You can’t believe only part of scripture and reject the rest of it to suit your argument; that weakens your argument.
The Father did not kill Jesus for me, God (the Father) allowed mankind to kill His Son (who is also the same God in the Son) so that mankind would be reconciled with God by His sacrifice (we believe Jesus is God and man and without sin). I don’t know why He did that, no one knows the mind of God.
The whole concept makes more sense if you believe in One God in the Holy Trinity.
As St. Anselem says “I don’t understand so that I may believe, I believe so that I may understand”. This line of thinking applies to most (if not all) religions, so take it for what it is worth.
Peace be with you
D
dessert
Guest
We are taught the catechism, which is based on scripture. I believe it is a good guidelines but does not stand on it’s own because add tradition, apostolic succesion, the Church teachings interpretation.
You could say Adam and Eve were like children but even with children you don’t punish accidents, severely, or not at all. The choice Adam and Eve did was not an accident they were told not to do a certain thing and they chose to do it. If you tell your child not to do something, give them specific instructions and they do it then you are not doing service to the child if you don’t punish, in a way of merits the crime. You would be proclaiming that you don’t care if you don’t do anything.
I would have like to think there was no evil in the garden at all, no bad fruit, but the devil showed it. The angels had a choice to chose God or reject Him and some rejected wanted to be greater,so they had no redemption, man will some day be above the angels.
Isn’t knowledge a form of revelation?
God is just and merciful to those who seek Him and Adam and Eve hid, second mistake, read the entire thing because their hiding is a real issue also.
I pray you will see the truth to what you are seeking.
Dessert
- Status