Did Adam and Eve know what a spiritual death means?

[grannymh]

Don’t you think its interesting and indicative of Adam’s changed state that after Adam ate the forbidden fruit (tree of knowledge of good & evil)? Genesis 3:22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

So can we agree that Adam had knowledge of good and evil but really only knew good until after he ate the forbidden fruit?

Sorry, no agreement.
You may have written “good” instead of evil after Adam committed the Original Sin of disobedience. In either case, I prefer paragraphs 355-356; 396; and 1730-1732 of the* Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition*. I also like the fact that Adam had a conscience from the beginning since it belongs to human nature. As for the tree, CCC, 396 makes a lot of sense since “obedience” to God is primary.

 

[grannymh]

These are all good points. For one reason or another Adam didn’t yet recognize the supreme goodness of God in Eden; we’re all naturally drawn to that which we authentically perceive to be the greatest good.

May I respectfully suggest an in depth reading of Genesis, chapter two.

 

[fhansen]

May I respectfully suggest an in depth reading of Genesis, chapter two.

OK, I re-read it as “indepthly” as I could-its straightforward, if not a bit terse, which is why so much thought has been put into the first three chapters by thinkers such as Augustine and Aquinas. And since I, in my ineptitude perhaps, could find nothing in my statement which was inconsistent with either Gen 2, the people I mentioned, or Church teachings, maybe you could enlighten me as to where I’ve gone wrong.

To be in the immediate presence of God is to behold the Beatific Vision. Few theologians have taught that Adam & Eve saw or knew God directly, in that manner. The reason is that, with the BV, man has obtained all the good he could desire-he cannot turn away from God from that point because there’s nothing more he could possibly want. God is the ultimate good, the absence of God is the ultimate evil. In Eden Adam knew only goodness, because nothing God creates can be evil, but that doesn’t mean he fully knew the Creator, the greatest good, the good man was designed for, in the direct way which is meant to be mans’ end. God wants us to want that, to want Him, to shun lies and to hunger and thirst for truth and righteousness, for Him-that’s the decision Adam was asked to make in Eden-and that’s the decision we’re all asked to make here on earth. That’s the decision we’re given time to make here on earth, having started out in the same fallen position as Adam, no longer in communion with God. The purpose in all this: to finally see God face-to-face.

 

[fhansen]

By the same token Adam couldn’t know evil at all-he represents humankind in that he could dismiss or ignore his own God-created conscience-we all have the freedom to do that-while the right to do so was expressly denied by God’s command to obey. The Hebrew word for “know” as used in Genesis means to experience, as one knows a married partner with intimacy, or as one knows the city of New York by being there rather than by merely reading about it, for example.

God’s plan for humanity is for us now to gain the knowledge we need to authentically turn back to Him, where we’ll worship in spirit and truth, having come to love Him with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength. This is a process, a work of His we cooperate in. And He gives us the time to do this, He gives Adam the time to do this-that’s the point of our exile, not mere punishment-otherwise He may as well have prevented Adam from sinning to begin with-or exterminated him from existence for his sin. But God thought otherwise- He knew were were salvageable. And, apparently He believes a saved human can be even better in some way than one who was never lost, perhaps because they’ve learned for themselves what Adam apparently didn’t yet know, the true face of goodness. By the Felix Culpa.

 

[MarcoPG]

By the same token Adam couldn’t know evil at all-he represents humankind in that he could dismiss or ignore his own God-created conscience-we all have the freedom to do that-while the right to do so was expressly denied by God’s command to obey. The Hebrew word for “know” as used in Genesis means to experience, as one knows a married partner with intimacy, or as one knows the city of New York by being there rather than by merely reading about it, for example.

I would agree with this

 

[grannymh]

Here is a really, really strange thought.

It seems, heaven forbid, that some, not all, people in general have somehow missed Genesis 1: 26-27. Could it be possible that this is the source of misunderstandings about Adam? Another strange thought considering the idea that Adam was human. Being rational, Adam could have been capable of putting two and two together. If one deliberately ignores the requirements for a relationship, surely there would be some clue (perhaps Genesis 2: 15-17) that the relationship would disappear.

 

[MarcoPG]

Here is a really, really strange thought.

It seems, heaven forbid, that some, not all, people in general have somehow missed Genesis 1: 26-27. Could it be possible that this is the source of misunderstandings about Adam? Another strange thought considering the idea that Adam was human. Being rational, Adam could have been capable of putting two and two together. If one deliberately ignores the requirements for a relationship, surely there would be some clue (perhaps Genesis 2: 15-17) that the relationship would disappear.

I am not saying if he new sinning was bad or not. It is clear it was bad. Eve herself told the Serpent so.
They knew that they had to trust God. Being made in the image of God doesn’t mean to know the difference between good and evil, rather we are made spiritual, intellectual, and free.
But my questions is in the title. I can’t say how he could know what would the end of the relationship bring (spiritual death), since no one had died this way.

It has nothing to do with Adam being capable of intellect. We are capable of intellect, still there are things which are not revealed to us. But the difference is, we know what spiritual death is: absence of God.

 

[fhansen]

Here is a really, really strange thought.

It seems, heaven forbid, that some, not all, people in general have somehow missed Genesis 1: 26-27. Could it be possible that this is the source of misunderstandings about Adam? Another strange thought considering the idea that Adam was human. Being rational, Adam could have been capable of putting two and two together. If one deliberately ignores the requirements for a relationship, surely there would be some clue (perhaps Genesis 2: 15-17) that the relationship would disappear.

Yes, Adam was told what would happen. Do you have any thoughts on why Adam didn’t believe God?

 

[grannymh]

Yes, Adam was told what would happen. Do you have any thoughts on why Adam didn’t believe God?

Nope! I do not attempt to be a mind reader going thousands of years backwards. Knowing the reality of Adam’s Original Sin is sufficient for me.

 

[MarcoPG]

Yes, Adam was told what would happen. Do you have any thoughts on why Adam didn’t believe God?

I don’t think he didn’t believe God, he had to believe Him since he couldn’t give an argument against the fact that God gave him (death) But I think he was seduced and choose to trust the devil who said it wasn’t true.

But myquestion remains: Was Adam aware of what spiritual death means? I cannot see why. I am not asking for a proof of something that can’t be proven, I am asking what you think, opinions

 

[fhansen]

But myquestion remains: Was Adam aware of what spiritual death means?

No, we’re all here to learn what spiritual death means. We’re *born *dead, and Jesus awakens us to that fact, so we can be born again/anew/from above.

 

[MarcoPG]

No, we’re all here to learn what spiritual death means. We’re *born *dead, and Jesus awakens us to that fact, so we can be born again/anew/from above.

That is my view too.

So Adam could choose, but not between good and evil, but between trust and distrust.

 

[fhansen]

Nope! I do not attempt to be a mind reader going thousands of years backwards. Knowing the reality of Adam’s Original Sin is sufficient for me.

OK, but fortunately we’ve had thinkers such as Augustine and Aquinas who didn’t mind seeking to understand the meanings of the words of Gen 1,2, & 3, rather than just regurgitate them. We know that Adam sinned. We know he was culpable, held accountable for that sin. Did God find Adam to be redeemable anyway? Yes-all was not lost! Humankind would take the long way around- back to the Tree of Life.

 

[MarcoPG]

OK, but fortunately we’ve had thinkers such as Augustine and Aquinas who didn’t mind seeking to understand the meanings of the words of Gen 1,2, & 3, rather than just regurgitate them. We know that Adam sinned. We know he was culpable, held accountable for that sin. Did God find Adam to be redeemable anyway? Yes-all was not lost! Humankind would take the long way around- back to the Tree of Life.

That Adam sinned is sufficient to the history of Salvation. That is true. But what you say is music to my ears. and without questioning, we cannot refine our Faith, as it is trust and research.

 

[fhansen]

That is my view too.

So Adam could choose, but not between good and evil, but between trust and distrust.

We all have to learn who to trust, what constitutes true goodness. Is it in getting my way? The way of selfishness? Or is it in following God, the way of Love. It has to do with coming to recognize what’s truly of value.

 

[grannymh]

This may be a surprise – Augustine, Aquinas, and others used Original Sin as the “foundation” for understanding the doctrines which flow from the first three chapters of Genesis. Original Sin, properly understood, changed the course of human history.

Original Sin has not been properly understood for decades.

Original Sin can be described as the first human person’s specific disobedient action which broke apart (separated) the original spiritual living relationship between humankind and its Maker. Since that relationship was no longer living as evinced in the third chapter of Genesis, one can say that there was a spiritual death/separation. Because Original Sin was a free act (God did not order Adam to eat the forbidden fruit), the Catholic doctrines of the rational spiritual soul come into play. This means that Adam knew what constituted the maintenance of a human relationship between himself and God, period.

One of the main doctrines flowing from Original Sin is the Divintiy/Humanity of Jesus Christ. Knock out Original Sin because Adam could not have freely committed it because he didn’t know what spiritual death is, then what becomes of Jesus hanging bloody on His cross? The current answer is that Jesus is a human preacher who made the mistake of talking about the establishment. This is one of the subtle attacks on God. There are only two sides. Which side will be chosen?

 

[fhansen]

This may be a surprise – Augustine, Aquinas, and others used Original Sin as the “foundation” for understanding the doctrines which flow from the first three chapters of Genesis.

That’s the point. The doctrine required their (name removed by moderator)ut in order to understand the meaning of Genesis.

Original Sin is the first human person’s specific disobedient action of shattering the spiritual living relationship between humankind and its Maker. Since that relationship was no longer living as evinced in the third chapter of Genesis, one can say that there was a spiritual death/separation. Because Original Sin was a free act (God did not order Adam to eat the forbidden fruit), the doctrines of the rational spiritual soul come into play. This means that Adam knew what constituted the maintenance of a human relationship between himself and God, period.

One of the main doctrines flowing from Original Sin is the Divintiy/Humanity of Jesus Christ. Knock out Original Sin because Adam could not have freely committed it because he didn’t know what spiritual death is, then what becomes of Jesus hanging bloody on His cross? The current answer is that Jesus is a human preacher who made the mistake of talking about the establishment. This is one of the subtle attacks on God. There are only two sides. Which side will be chosen?

Do you think that Adam may’ve had a change of heart by now, because of God’s work of salvation through Christ? If so, how? What might the difference be between Adam in Eden and Adam now? How does redemption/salvation work in man IOW? What’s God’s purpose in all this, from beginning to end? Adam freely committed the first sin. Was it done out of sheer evil? If Adam possessed the wisdom of God, would’ve he sinned? Do you think he wanted to die? Again, Adam possessed enough knowledge to be culpable-and held accountable. He did not possess perfect wisdom-or at least enough to mean he’d forego committing his foolish sin. That was to be gained later, the hard way. All within God’s plan.

 

[MarcoPG]

Since that relationship was no longer living as evinced in the third chapter of Genesis, one can say that there was a spiritual death/separation. Because Original Sin was a free act (God did not order Adam to eat the forbidden fruit), the Catholic doctrines of the rational spiritual soul come into play. This means that Adam knew what constituted the maintenance of a human relationship between himself and God, period.

I can choose between two things without knowing what one of their consequences will be.

I am not saying there was no spiritual death, but that Adam couldn’t know was that is.
The free act was a desobedience without knowing what this desobedience would bring, even if he heard the Lord say it brings death.

Sin leads to spiritual death. Yes. Adam know what was sin, a disobedience, but did not know what spiritual death was. He knew what physical death was. He was told not to desobey, or he would die. But he didn’t not know what spiritually dying meant.

 

[fhansen]

Did Adam want to die?
Or did he, perhaps, think his choice would somehow bring him more life?

 

[MarcoPG]

Did Adam want to die?
Or did he, perhaps, think his choice would somehow bring him more life?

He didn’t want to die. He was seduced to what he thought would be better I guess.