Does God "TEST" us....?

[BobCatholic]

The Garden of Eden no longer exists.

Can I get a citation for this? Scripture? Tradition? Church documents?

From what I read, the entrance was closed off and we cannot access it. It still exists but we can’t get to it.

We are the victims of our ancestors’ sins and we are not responsible in any way whatsoever for what they have done because we didn’t even exist…

Again, you misread what I said.

I never said we are responsible for Adam and Eve’s sin.
I said we are BEING TEMPORALLY HELD responsible for Adam and Eve’s sin.

 

[tonyrey]

The Garden of Eden no longer exists.

It is a mistake to interpret Genesis literally like the Fundamentalists. In the Catechism the Garden of Eden is seen as a metaphorical description of the world as it was before man chose to sin:

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.

396 God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” spells this out: “for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die.” The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” **symbolically **evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom

We are the victims

of our ancestors’ sins and we are not responsible in any way whatsoever for what they have done because we didn’t even exist… Again, you misread what I said.

I never said we are responsible for Adam and Eve’s sin.
I said we are BEING TEMPORALLY HELD responsible for Adam and Eve’s sin.

Can you produce a citation for this in Scripture, Tradition or Church documents?

On the contrary:

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

The most important fact to remember, particularly at Easter, is that Jesus has liberated us from evil:

420 The victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us: “where sin increased, grace abounded all the more” ( Rom 5:20).

421 Christians believe that “the world has been established and kept in being by the Creator’s love; has fallen into slavery to sin but has been set free by Christ, crucified and risen to break the power of the evil one. . .” (GS 2 # 2).

We should live with hope and confidence in the power of His love to help us overcome our temptations and even when we fail not to despair but ask for forgiveness. If He died for us surely He will forgive our weakness and give us more strength. Remember the parable of the lost sheep… Just to admit we are sinners is a sign that we are heading for heaven. Amen…

 

[BobCatholic]

On the contrary:

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants.

Yet again, you misrepresent what I said.

I 100% agree, WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM for Adam and Eve’s sin.

I totally am in agreement with the Church!

What I said is we are HELD TEMPORALLY responsible for the sin of Adam and Eve. We are suffering the same penalty they are, temporally speaking.
Not spiritually! Jesus Christ took care of the Spiritual penalty. I agree with CCC420-421!

Now, instead of misinterpreting what I said, will you actually address what I ACTUALLY said? Instead like pretty much everyone else - misword what I said then attack the miswording!

 

[BobCatholic]

It is a mistake to interpret Genesis literally like the Fundamentalists.

I agree with you. Fundamentalists use the false dichotomy of either/or, while the Catholic faith is both/and. And you did the same thing.

You interpreted CCC 390 and CCC 396 to mean that the Garden of Eden did not really exist, it was just a metaphor only.

Unfortunately, this view of yours contradicts this section which is part of the context:
CCC 378 The sign of man’s familiarity with God is that God places him in the garden. There he lives “to till it and keep it”. Work is not yet a burden, but rather the collaboration of man and woman with God in perfecting the visible creation.

Clearly there WAS a Garden of Eden, and it represented man’s familiarity with God. This is the “Both/And” of Catholicism, not the “either/or” of fundamentalism.

 

[JapaneseKappa]

420 The victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us: “where sin increased, grace abounded all the more” ( Rom 5:20).

421 Christians believe that “the world has been established and kept in being by the Creator’s love; has fallen into slavery to sin but has been set free by Christ, crucified and risen to break the power of the evil one. . .” (GS 2 # 2).

We should live with hope and confidence in the power of His love to help us overcome our temptations and even when we fail not to despair but ask for forgiveness. If He died for us surely He will forgive our weakness and give us more strength. Remember the parable of the lost sheep… Just to admit we are sinners is a sign that we are heading for heaven. Amen…

Look, the sacrament of baptism exists for a reason, and it’s not because the Catholic Church think’s it’s cute to pour water on babies. It is to wash us clean of the fallen state we’re born into. The question we must ask is “why are we born in some sort of state which requires washing?” We’ve established that as babies we’re not guilty of anything so God can’t be withholding something from babies due to their own personal shortcomings.

So, why are we born in a state that requires fixing? The sole arbiter of the state we’re born into is God. Therefore, the reason we’re born into a state that requires fixing is because God decided to make us that way. Why did God decide to make us in a state which requires fixing? The only answer I’ve ever seen is that God decided to make us in a state which requires fixing as a direct consequence of the sins of Adam and Eve.

Now, is God capable of creating people in a clean state? Yes, Adam and Eve did not need to be baptized (at first) and Mary was famously created “immaculately.” So why doesn’t God create us all in an immaculate state? Again, the only answer I’ve heard is one that references Adam and Eve.

So how can this be. If God withholds things he both wants us to have and **is **capable of giving us because of the sins of Adam and Eve, how is he not holding us responsible for their sins?

 

[Aloysium]

As just another random idiot on the internets :twocents::

There is nothing in this world preventing us from being loving persons but ourselves.
Mother Mary was a new Eve who chose to do God’s will rather than her own.
Jesus Christ is our saviour and our redeemer. He is the living Way by which we grow into loving relation with our Father.
We are all blessed with sufficient graces to know Him. None of us needs more than our blessings.
We needed God in the garden and we need Him now.
Let’s pray that we become more charitable, accepting and thankful.

 

[BobCatholic]

There is nothing in this world preventing us from being loving persons but ourselves.

Because the self is evil.

We are all blessed with sufficient graces to know Him. None of us needs more than our blessings.

If that were true, I’d know God, but since God doesn’t want to talk to me, he doesn’t want to know me.

 

[davidv]

Because the self is evil.

What Catholic teaching states this?

If that were true, I’d know God, but since God doesn’t want to talk to me, he doesn’t want to know me.

You could not be more wrong. Jesus established His Church to speak to you for Him.

 

[BobCatholic]

What Catholic teaching states this?

Jesus Himself says so.

If we want to follow him, he must DENY ourselves first.

Why deny something unless it is evil?

In addition, I’m reading the Diary of St. Faustina. The only thing we have in ourselves is evil and misery. Nothing else.

If all Good comes from God that means that the self is evil because that is all we have.

You could not be more wrong. Jesus established His Church to speak to you for Him.

Unfortunately, I cannot find any mystics who speak with God on a regular basis. Padre Pio is in his reward for a long time now.

 

[davidv]

Jesus Himself says so.

If we want to follow him, he must DENY ourselves first.

Why deny something unless it is evil?

Because it is to be replaced by a greater good.
Food is good.
Fasting gives up a good for a great good of strengthened virtue.

In addition, I’m reading the Diary of St. Faustina. The only thing we have in ourselves is evil and misery. Nothing else.

I believe you have misinterpreted her. Besides she is not the Church.

If all Good comes from God that means that the self is evil because that is all we have.

No it does not. Your soul came directly from God.

366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not “produced” by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection.235

Unfortunately, I cannot find any mystics who speak with God on a regular basis. Padre Pio is in his reward for a long time now.

 

[BobCatholic]

Because it is to be replaced by a greater good.
Food is good.
Fasting gives up a good for a great good of strengthened virtue.

Why does God want us to give up a guaranteed good for a NOT guaranteed greater good?
I have a bird in the hand, why give up for two in the bush, unless God guarantees I’ll get it.

How do I know that after I go through all this horrific suffering that God will want me to be with him?

I believe you have misinterpreted her. Besides she is not the Church.

Then please prove that I’m going through a Dark Night then. Especially when I never had those wonderful consolations to begin with.

No it does not. Your soul came directly from God.

You misinterpreted me.

I didn’t say soul. I said self.

 

[davidv]

Why does God want us to give up a guaranteed good

What good is that?

for a NOT guaranteed greater good?
I have a bird in the hand, why give up for two in the bush, unless God guarantees I’ll get it.

How do I know that after I go through all this horrific suffering that God will want me to be with him?

How? By believing what He has said through Scripture and His Church.

Then please prove that I’m going through a Dark Night then. Especially when I never had those wonderful consolations to begin with.

I have no capability, nor desire to prove this to you as it makes no difference to the OP. Whether you should be consoled is not mine to determine. My first reaction is that one reason is that the consolations are being demanded, rather than waited for, patiently.

You misinterpreted me.

I didn’t say soul. I said self.

How are they different?

I say that your self comes from you soul. The self is a direct creation of God, therefore good.

 

[tonyrey]

Look, the sacrament of baptism exists for a reason, and it’s not because the Catholic Church think’s it’s cute to pour water on babies. It is to wash us clean of the fallen state we’re born into. The question we must ask is “why are we born in some sort of state which requires washing?” We’ve established that as babies we’re not guilty of anything so God can’t be withholding something from babies due to their own personal shortcomings.

Babies are not guilty of anything but they are born into a morally polluted society and they need to be brought up as members of the spiritual body of Christ so that when they reach the age of reason they have already been educated and strengthened in the struggle against temptation in all its forms. It is absurd to think they should be left in a spiritual vacuum until they can fully understand the teaching of Jesus.

So, why are we born in a state that requires fixing? The sole arbiter of the state we’re born into is God.

God is not the sole arbiter of the state we’re born into because our moral environment has been affected adversely by the sins of our ancestors.

Therefore, the reason we’re born into a state that requires fixing is because God decided to make us that way. Why did God decide to make us in a state which requires fixing? The only answer I’ve ever seen is that God decided to make us in a state which requires fixing as a direct consequence of the sins of Adam and Eve.

The real reason is that we have been given free will without which we would be incapable of love. We are not isolated individuals but members of the human family who are deeply affected for better or for worse by the behaviour of others. For one reason or another not everyone in the world has the opportunity to be baptised nor is anyone deprived of life with God unjustly. Only those who choose to live for themselves and fail to love others obtain what they deserve: a state of isolation in which they have their own kingdom and total independence which fails to satisfy them because their lust for power leads inevitably to frustration and misery.

Now, is God capable of creating people in a clean state? Yes, Adam and Eve did not need to be baptized (at first) and Mary was famously created “immaculately.” So why doesn’t God create us all in an immaculate state? Again, the only answer I’ve heard is one that references Adam and Eve.

Mary was not created in a state of grace gratuitously but because she would become the mother of the Saviour of mankind. It is hardly surprising that God should give her a a singular privilege which distinguishes her for everyone else when she was to share the suffering of her own son at the foot of the Cross.

So how can this be. If God withholds things he both wants us to have and **is **capable of giving us because of the sins of Adam and Eve, how is he not holding us responsible for their sins?

God is not holding us responsible for their sins: we are the** victims** of our ancestors’ sins as well as our own. Moreover baptism is a gift because none of us has the right to share eternal life in heaven with God and with those we love. It is only because Jesus suffered and died for us that we have that miraculous opportunity.

 

[tonyrey]

I agree with you. Fundamentalists use the false dichotomy of either/or, while the Catholic faith is both/and. And you did the same thing.

You interpreted CCC 390 and CCC 396 to mean that the Garden of Eden did not really exist, it was just a metaphor only.

Unfortunately, this view of yours contradicts this section which is part of the context:
CCC 378 The sign of man’s familiarity with God is that God places him in the garden. There he lives “to till it and keep it”. Work is not yet a burden, but rather the collaboration of man and woman with God in perfecting the visible creation.

Clearly there WAS a Garden of Eden, and it represented man’s familiarity with God. This is the “Both/And” of Catholicism, not the “either/or” of fundamentalism.

It is impossible to have it both ways. Either there was a “garden” or there wasn’t. Paragraphs 390 and 396 are clarifications of the previous paragraph 378, explaining that the term is a metaphor. The world has never been and can never be a physical paradise:

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil.

It is unrealistic and unscientific to imagine that there was a period on this planet when there were no earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters that maimed and killed living beings.

 

[Methos]

It is impossible to have it both ways. Either there was a “garden” or there wasn’t. Paragraphs 390 and 396 are clarifications of the previous paragraph 378, explaining that the term is a metaphor. The world has never been and can never be a physical paradise:

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil.

It is unrealistic and unscientific to imagine that there was a period on this planet when there were no earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters that maimed and killed living beings.

“And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” --Genesis 3:24

Why would He place guards at a metaphor?

 

[tonyrey]

“And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” --Genesis 3:24

Why would He place guards at a metaphor?

The guards are a part of the metaphor. Genesis is not an eye-witness account of Creation!

 

[BobCatholic]

What good is that?

ANY good.

I have a meal in front of me. Why shouldn’t I save it for another day and fast today, offering up that sacrifice?

I have a good job, I quit it for a different job paying less, but it is “better” in Christ’s view. Why?

How? By believing what He has said through Scripture and His Church.

So Scripture and the Church teach OSAS and the prosperity gospel? I had no idea!
of course, that’s not true at all.

My first reaction is that one reason is that the consolations are being demanded, rather than waited for, patiently.

Waiting for them how long? Waiting for them assumes that they’ll come, and at this point I’m not assuming they are going to come. And I’m not “demanding” them, I’m begging for them.

I say that your self comes from you soul. The self is a direct creation of God, therefore good.

Then if we are to give up our SOUL that means we enter afterlife without a soul. Sorry, that’s not how it works.

 

[BobCatholic]

It is impossible to have it both ways. Either there was a “garden” or there wasn’t.

I maintain there was a Garden. Otherwise, what were we kicked out of? Friendship with God, yes. But there was more. And why were there cherubim guarding a metaphor?

Paragraphs 390 and 396 are clarifications of the previous paragraph 378, explaining that the term is a metaphor. The world has never been and can never be a physical paradise:

No, it does not say anywhere that the Garden is a metaphor. It says that
“The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event,”

Using your reasoning, Adam and eve were just figurative, not real people. Contradicts Humanae Generis.

The world WAS a physical paradise, but Adam and Eve ruined it. (Human) death came into the world, it wasn’t there before.

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil.

It is unrealistic and unscientific to imagine that there was a period on this planet when there were no earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters that maimed and killed living beings.

That’s because we are held temporally responsible for the sin of Adam and Eve.

 

[BobCatholic]

The guards are a part of the metaphor. Genesis is not an eye-witness account of Creation!

And what do the guards mean? They are a metaphor meaning…what?

It means God is holding us temporally responsible for Adam and Eve’s sin.

 

[davidv]

ANY good.

I have a meal in front of me. Why shouldn’t I save it for another day and fast today, offering up that sacrifice?

Will you get a greater good from the fasting?

I have a good job, I quit it for a different job paying less, but it is “better” in Christ’s view. Why?

Why is it better to give up you job?

So Scripture and the Church teach OSAS and the prosperity gospel? I had no idea!

Where did I say this? Please address what I write.

of course, that’s not true at all.

Waiting for them how long?

As long as it takes. St. Monica waited over 30 years for the conversion of Augustine.

Waiting for them assumes that they’ll come, and at this point I’m not assuming they are going to come. And I’m not “demanding” them, I’m begging for them.

Then if we are to give up our SOUL that means we enter afterlife without a soul. Sorry, that’s not how it works.

How do you give up your soul?