Father Robert Barron said that Adam was a figurative figure not a literal one? Help!

[JamesTheJust]

When I was in seminary, we had one guy that brought forth the idea that Adam(was a tribe) and Eve(was a tribe) and everyone got into a frenzy over it. I calmly reminded them that we have no clue if they were tribes or singles but the MORAL of the story still rings true.

Example: There was a boy Johnny that loved to play outside. Every night when the sun was going down, his mother would call for him to come in. One dusk he did not listen to her call and continued to play. The sun set and the moon and stars were out before he decided to go home. On his way home, a boogieman jumped out of the woods and snatched him. No one ever heard from Johnny again.

This is a story that my grandmother would tell us. The moral of the story was to listen to your parents. Was Johnny real and was the boogieman really going to get me if I stayed out after dark? Who cares! lol Listen and obey your parents is what one should get out of that story. lol

I just want to point out, again, that a belief in a figurative Adam and Eve is not allowed by the Catholic Church.

 

[FishyPete]

When I was in seminary, we had one guy that brought forth the idea that Adam(was a tribe) and Eve(was a tribe) and everyone got into a frenzy over it. I calmly reminded them that we have no clue if they were tribes or singles but the MORAL of the story still rings true.

Example: There was a boy Johnny that loved to play outside. Every night when the sun was going down, his mother would call for him to come in. One dusk he did not listen to her call and continued to play. The sun set and the moon and stars were out before he decided to go home. On his way home, a boogieman jumped out of the woods and snatched him. No one ever heard from Johnny again.

This is a story that my grandmother would tell us. The moral of the story was to listen to your parents. Was Johnny real and was the boogieman really going to get me if I stayed out after dark? Who cares! lol Listen and obey your parents is what one should get out of that story. lol

Agreed, but there was in fact an ACTUAL original sin, for our Lord Jesus had clearly come into the world to defeat, correct?

 

[FishyPete]

I just want to point out, again, that a belief in a figurative Adam and Eve is not allowed by the Catholic Church.

And this again is my point where Father Barron’s words are not careful, and I wish I could get a resolution on this.

Yes, the account of Genesis is figurative, in that i’m sure Adam did not name each and every animal in his lifetime, but he HAD to exist, a single HUMAN man and woman had to exist with a soul to be parents of you and me, and have sinned, otherwise no original sin!

Am i right here?

 

[aidanbradypop]

Agreed, but there was in fact an ACTUAL original sin, for our Lord Jesus had clearly come into the world to defeat, correct?

Correct! It is clearly evident that our world was damned by someone. Who? but yes there was a sin that caused such.

Many acient cultures had similar stories of a “tree” and someone causing death. Maybe the Adam and Eve story was simply a Hebrew version of that. Humans have the mind of…why…how…when…etc. The creation story in the first book of the Holy Scriptures could simply be a myth but with every myth there is a truth. That truth is that sin was brought into the world by man and Christ came to wash us clean!

 

[FishyPete]

Correct! It is clearly evident that our world was damned by someone. Who? but yes there was a sin that caused such.

Many acient cultures had similar stories of a “tree” and someone causing death. Maybe the Adam and Eve story was simply a Hebrew version of that. Humans have the mind of…why…how…when…etc. The creation story in the first book of the Holy Scriptures could simply be a myth but with every myth there is a truth. That truth is that sin was brought into the world by man and Christ came to wash us clean!

But that “who” had to be the first man and first woman, for we inherit the sickness of original sin from the first Humans. Correct?

 

[aidanbradypop]

I just want to point out, again, that a belief in a figurative Adam and Eve is not allowed by the Catholic Church.

Well then good thing I am not Roman Catholic right?

You and I must have talked to two different Bishops then. When I spoke with the Catholic Bishop of East Tennessee, he said that NO ONE knows if Adam was Adam and Eve was Eve. What we do know is that there was a man and there was a woman. Sounds pretty simple to me.

 

[aidanbradypop]

But that “who” had to be the first man and first woman, for we inherit the sickness of original sin from the first Humans. Correct?

Right. There was a first man and a first woman.

The Book of Common Prayer states: Q. What is sin? A. Sin is the seeking of our own will instead of the will of God, thus distorting our relationship with God, with other people, and with all creation

 

[RedCaves]

To make a long story short, every Catholic is required by Holy Mother Church to believe that Adam and Eve were REAL PEOPLE.

Anyone who says otherwise is a liar or had poor catechesis.

Without them being real, Original Sin would not make sense and there would be no need for a Savior.

Awhile ago, Richard Dawkins and Cardinal Pell had a discussion about it and it was Dawkins who expressed surprise that Pell called Adam and Eve “myths” and replied back by saying that “if they never existed, where did Original Sin come from?” Cardinal Pell was left speechless and did not answer back!

The whole question of our First Parents has been difficult for me to accept since, as a scientist, I realize that while I believe in their existence simply out of “following orders”, I am still wondering how is it possible that Adam and Eve existed. Sadly, Rome has not spoken clearly on this issue.

The only person I know that at least attempts to answer it with regard to philosophy and science is Edward Feser. Beyond that, it’s either Creationism that denies biological evolution or a Modernist interpretation that will gradually lead to Nonbelief.

 

[JamesTheJust]

And this again is my point where Father Barron’s words are not careful, and I wish I could get a resolution on this.

Yes, the account of Genesis is figurative, in that i’m sure Adam did not name each and every animal in his lifetime, but he HAD to exist, a single HUMAN man and woman had to exist with a soul to be parents of you and me, and have sinned, otherwise no original sin!

Am i right here?

The Catholic position is as follows:
-A man named Adam and a woman named Eve definitely did exist.
-They were the first humans.
-They are the parents of the entire human race.
-They sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, causing original sin to stain all future generations (except Jesus and Mary, of course).

I assure you that, if you need clarification, you should read Humani Generis. It deals with all these issues quite in depth and eloquently. If you doubt that Adam could have named all the animals, remember that he lived 930 years. One can do A LOT in that amount of time.

 

[FishyPete]

Further, not being clear that there was a historical Adam, along with the theology, leads one down a slippery slope towards original sin, you know what i’m saying?

 

[JamesTheJust]

Well then good thing I am not Roman Catholic right?

You and I must have talked to two different Bishops then. When I spoke with the Catholic Bishop of East Tennessee, he said that NO ONE knows if Adam was Adam and Eve was Eve. What we do know is that there was a man and there was a woman. Sounds pretty simple to me.

I guess the subject of whether their names were really Adam and Eve is up for debate (?), but that has little bearing on the historicity of the narrative. I have never met the Bishop of whom you speak, but please remember that an individual Bishop is not infallible.

 

[johnnyc176]

As far as Fr. Barron goes, he is a good evangelist and stays within the bounds of orthodoxy. He does have some opinions (which the Church allows us to have) which I think he is dead wrong on (e.g. his promotion of universalism) but i wouldn’t avoid listening to him or reading him because of that. Michelle Arnold had an article in Catholic Answers Magazine, or maybe a blog post here on Catholic.com, that dealt with reading with a filter rather than avoiding certain authors. Someone might be able to find a link. God bless. Have a Happy Thanksgiving!!

His Catholicism dvd was very good but too often he needs clarification. There are other Catholic evangelist/speakers out there that you don’t have to find out what they really mean or filter at all so I don’t listen to Fr. Barron any more.

 

[FishyPete]

His Catholicism dvd was very good but too often he needs clarification. There are other Catholic evangelist/speakers out there that you don’t have to find out what they really mean or filter at all so I don’t listen to Fr. Barron any more.

I agree with this. Me too…

 

[JamesTheJust]

Further, not being clear that there was a historical Adam, along with the theology, leads one down a slippery slope towards original sin, you know what i’m saying?

I’m sorry Fr Barron has made you feel confused. The Church clearly teaches a literal Adam and Eve, and if Fr Barron contradicts that, he is in error.

 

[aidanbradypop]

The Catholic position is as follows:
-A man named Adam and a woman named Eve definitely did exist.
-They were the first humans.
-They are the parents of the entire human race.
-They sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, causing original sin to stain all future generations (except Jesus and Mary, of course).

I assure you that, if you need clarification, you should read Humani Generis. It deals with all these issues quite in depth and eloquently. If you doubt that Adam could have named all the animals, remember that he lived 930 years. One can do A LOT in that amount of time.

Adam simply means “man.” In the Hebrew Scriptures human is spelled adm since there are no vowels.

 

[aidanbradypop]

I guess the subject of whether their names were really Adam and Eve is up for debate (?), but that has little bearing on the historicity of the narrative. I have never met the Bishop of whom you speak, but please remember that an individual Bishop is not infallible.

I am not saying there were not TWO people but rather it may not have been Adam and Eve as fundamentalist like to assume. That’s all.

I am glad we agree that Bishops are not infallible!

 

[FishyPete]

Adam simply means “man.” In the Hebrew Scriptures human is spelled adm since there are no vowels.

Again, the name may not be important, but there had to be the following:

1. Original man (one man) - Our first ancestor
2. Original woman (one woman) - Our first ancestor
3. They commited an original sin
4. We therefore, logically inherit it.

Now when they enter into history is not important and depends on how you read the “six days”, what is important is that they actually existed, were loved by God, and turned their back on God.

Am I right?

 

[JamesTheJust]

Adam simply means “man.” In the Hebrew Scriptures human is spelled adm since there are no vowels.

See my later post, where I say that their names could (I’m not sure) be up for debate. Would it be implausible, though, for the first man to have the name “man”?

PS. I know that Scriptural Hebrew had no vowels. But does that mean we have to call Moses “Mss”, or David “Dvd”, or Malachi “Mlch”? Of course not!

 

[JamesTheJust]

Again, the name may not be important, but there had to be the following:

1. Original man (one man) - Our first ancestor
2. Original woman (one woman) - Our first ancestor
3. They commited an original sin
4. We therefore, logically inherit it.

Now when they enter into history is not important and depends on how you read the “six days”, what is important is that they actually existed, were loved by God, and turned their back on God.

Am I right?

Yes, you seem to have it right.

 

[JamesTheJust]

I am not saying there were not TWO people but rather it may not have been Adam and Eve as fundamentalist like to assume. That’s all.

I am glad we agree that Bishops are not infallible!

Individual Bishops were never believed to be infallible. Only an ecumenical council of them, or the Pope, are.