N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
I have a theory that the Garden of Eden wasn’t on Earth where described (around the tigris and euphrates river) but was in another universe or another dimension, or something like that. Is that heretical?
- Status
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Also another “theory” is that those of us who find ourselves on earth, it’s because when our soul was created in this parallel universe, we chose to sin, so got sent here to be born as babies into this messed-up time-space place. Just a theory, prolly not acceptable. I like to theorize
merry christmas
merry christmas
C
catsrus
Guest
I understand The Garden of Eden as allegory but …
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Does this mean I’m off the track towards the wrong destination?I understand The Garden of Eden as allegory but …
How many cats do you have? we have 4!
D
DanteAlighieri
Guest
If your basis for your “theories” is anything other than Catholic teaching, then yes, you might be bordering on heresy.
Peace,
Dante
Peace,
Dante
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
okay, so if I’m bordering on it, then its okay? As long as I don’t cross that border.
J
Jlcastagna
Guest
Well I don’t recall the bible saying, the day before the first day God created a parallel universe. Maybe I’m wrong
J
Jlcastagna
Guest
I think your theory would be compatable with mormonism, hope you don’t go down that path. Stay strong stay Catholic.
H
hazcompat
Guest
When you turn away from truth you are in error. When you teach error as truth you commit heresy.
Peace
Peace
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Really!!?? It’s Mormon!? Can you give more details?
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Is this an official excommunication? Can it be lifted by my bishop?
N
Not_Sure_1
Guest
THe Garden of Eden was created on Earth, just like everything else. That is doctrine in the bible.
Make of this as you wish.
Make of this as you wish.
S
svid
Guest
You have to publicly burn all your condemned writings.
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Please cite chapter and verse of the papal encyclical
(Unless… this is your own PERSONAL interpretation of scripture?)
N
Neil_Anthony
Guest
Oh oh! Now that its in the internet, I would have to set the internet on fire!You have to publicly burn all your condemned writings.
C
cassini
Guest
Could be Neil, you see in 1459 Pope Pius II condemned the idea that there could be another world than this one. But thanks for the thread that gave me a good laugh after laugh after laugh. Happy Christmas all.
B
buffalo
Guest
I don’t think this will stand. That would mean Adam and Eve were not earthly. It doesn’t fit with creation either.
I
In_Spiration
Guest
OK, I really don’t see the major problem with your interpretation, not on religious grounds. Do we really believe that when God created the heavens and the earth that “earth” refers specifically to the planet? And if not the planet, why must it be this one universe (or, this bubble universe amid a larger material world of many universes)? I’m more apt to think that “earth” is the broadly material world. That includes multiverses. Even the ones they apparently just found suggestive evidence of.
On scientific and logical grounds, however…
Cutting to the chase, if I were, say, sincerely worried about damning my soul for all eternity to the fiery torment of hell for it, then… well… then I guess I’d re-think it – and then, of course, still probably stick with the Multiverse idea. ‘Cuz, dammit, that’s just a freakin’ cool idea!
Seriously though, if anyone’s got a legitimate source from Church Dogma that insists the Garden of Eden had to be on this planet, I’m interested to see it. I’ll gladly go with the infallible doctrine; I can’t claim to have a lot of certainty on its teaching here. But for what it’s worth, my gut tells me that your theory is in the clear, Neil. That is, I wouldn’t say its necessarily heresy. At most, I’d say you’re violating a couple epistemic duties.
On scientific and logical grounds, however…
Cutting to the chase, if I were, say, sincerely worried about damning my soul for all eternity to the fiery torment of hell for it, then… well… then I guess I’d re-think it – and then, of course, still probably stick with the Multiverse idea. ‘Cuz, dammit, that’s just a freakin’ cool idea!
Seriously though, if anyone’s got a legitimate source from Church Dogma that insists the Garden of Eden had to be on this planet, I’m interested to see it. I’ll gladly go with the infallible doctrine; I can’t claim to have a lot of certainty on its teaching here. But for what it’s worth, my gut tells me that your theory is in the clear, Neil. That is, I wouldn’t say its necessarily heresy. At most, I’d say you’re violating a couple epistemic duties.
B
buffalo
Guest
**504 **Jesus is conceived by the Holy Spirit in the Virgin Mary’s womb because he is the New Adam, who inaugurates the new creation: “The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven.” From his conception, Christ’s humanity is filled with the Holy Spirit, for God “gives him the Spirit without measure.” From “his fullness” as the head of redeemed humanity “we have all received, grace upon grace.”
I
In_Spiration
Guest
From the Online Etymology Dictionary on ‘earth’:
O.E. eorþe “ground, soil, dry land,” also used (along with middangeard) for “the (material) world” (as opposed to the heavens or the underworld), from P.Gmc. *ertho (cf. O.Fris. erthe “earth,” O.S. ertha, O.N. jörð, M.Du. eerde, Du. aarde, O.H.G. erda, Ger. Erde, Goth. airþa), from PIE base *er- “earth, ground” (cf. M.Ir. -ert “earth”). The earth considered as a planet was so called from c.1400.
Perhaps when I’m feeling less intellectually lazy, I’ll try to figure out the translated meaning of the author’s actually used word. But for now, I still don’t see much about ‘earth’ that requires it to mean specifically this planet or even this “universe” (that’s an odd term if our universe is more like one among many connected universes in an even larger multiverse… making the multiverse totality the real “universe”/“earth”/material world perhaps.) Why wouldn’t “earth,” what philosophers used to consider a primary building block of the material world, not our planet or solar system or galaxy or, presumably, post-Big Bang universe, just apply to the “dust” which is transient, material existence?
I happen to think it’s most likely that the Garden was on our planet, but I do think there’s “doxastic wiggle room” here. Thank you for providing that source, though. Anyone know what the original Scripture language for these passages meant by “heaven” and “earth”? I mean, wouldn’t excluding multiverses from “earth” make them into heaven, especially since anything pre-Big Bang would better qualify as “in the beginning”?
- Status