How could Adam and Eve sin?

[STT]

The root is pride, aversion from God – the sin was to have knowledge but against the command of God.

We do not know when God constituted Adam and Eve with the preternatural and supernatural gifts, however we know that they were sufficient to remain without mortal sin as long as they cooperated. As the Catechism states:

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

They had greed to become God. Why otherwise they should not cooperate?

 

[Vico]

…
They had greed to become God. Why otherwise they should not cooperate?

The scripture actually reveals the motivation. There is the desire to gain food, pleasure, and wisdom, but the actual sin was to oppose the command of God in Gen 3 “God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it”:
Genesis 3:

6 The woman saw that the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes, and the tree was desirable for gaining wisdom. So she took some of its fruit and ate it; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

 

[STT]

STT:

steve-b:

STT:

There is a problems here: There are more than 4000 religions according to wiki so Wager argument does not cut it

As I said previously, what I believe, I’m not guessing at. It comes via revelation (properly referenced) from the one we believe in. That proof is bonafide, it’s been MORE than adequately verified. Through ONE faith, ONE religion, ONE Church.

Can people still reject belief in this? Sure. And they do. Even seeing Jesus many miracles, they still

You could have been a Muslim. They believe in the different things but they believe that Mohammad received revelation.

Yes, Muhammad invented Islam. Is Muhammad still in the ground where he was buried?Yep As for his soul, that’s a question.
Did He raise anyone from the dead including himself? Nope!
He is not the savior of the world, nor did he claim to be.
Why would I follow him?

Jesus lived, died, and resurrected from the dead just as He said He would. THAT, put simply, is St Paul’s entire argument summarized

I make the informed choice to follow Jesus and His Church that He established. I want what He promised.

They believe that Quaran is miracle of Mohammad and Mohammad divided moon in two parts.

STT:

steve-b:

It validates a quote from Aquinas (paraphrased)
To those who have faith no explanation is necessary, to those without faith, no explanation is sufficient.
It puts things in perspective.

You of course should be rationally convinced. A being who cannot rationally convince you is not a God.

I would search the truth and stay agnostic rather than betting and putting all my credits on one spot. I think I can answer God about my choice because it is a rational and honest choice.

The link I previously gave, shows those who were standing in front of Truth, in front of God in the flesh, and they didn’t recognize Him nor obviously accept Him. Why didn’t they accept Him? They had no faith.

AND

Without faith one can’t please nor even know God . That said, re: search for truth while remaining agnostic, I would just caution, given that quote from scripture, good luck finding Him as an atheist or even agnostic. Both are minus faith

I don’t know why they didn’t accept God.

STT:

I am not against anything.

Actually you are

I am not.

STT:

I am not in favor of one thing because I have not been convinced.

And you won’t be convinced without faith

I had faith to different religions before.

 

[STT]

The scripture actually reveals the motivation. There is the desire to gain food, pleasure, and wisdom, but the actual sin was to oppose the command of God in Gen 3 “God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it”:
Genesis 3:

Great. So there was something missing in them. Wisdom for example? They were fooled by Satan too.

 

[OneSheep]

They, however remained free to choose otherwise. Eve, was convinced to go against God even though she knew full well that she should not. In return, she convinced Adam to go against God.

Would you say that Eve was inaccurate in seeing that the fruit was “good to eat”?

 

[steve-b]

I don’t know why they didn’t accept God.

They didn’t have faith.

STT:

I am not against anything.

steve-b:

Actually you are

STT:

I am not.

You’re agnostic. By definition if you choose not to believe, you don’t accept, as in you reject, or don’t accept

STT:

I am not in favor of one thing because I have not been convinced.

And you won’t be convinced without faith

STT:

I had faith to different religions before.

Well, you lost something somewhere.

We don’t believe blindly.

 

[fhansen]

mrsdizzyd:

They, however remained free to choose otherwise. Eve, was convinced to go against God even though she knew full well that she should not. In return, she convinced Adam to go against God.

Would you say that Eve was inaccurate in seeing that the fruit was “good to eat”?

She wasn’t wrong about it. But all evil acts have some good to be gained in committing them.

 

[OneSheep]

She wasn’t wrong about it. But all evil acts have some good to be gained in committing them.

What is the source of Eve’s seeing that the fruit was good to eat? I mean to contrast, for example, that she would surely not see that the bark of the tree was good to eat.

 

[fhansen]

fhansen:

She wasn’t wrong about it. But all evil acts have some good to be gained in committing them.

What is the source of Eve’s seeing that the fruit was good to eat? I mean to contrast, for example, that she would surely not see that the bark of the tree was good to eat.

It was suggested to her, first of all. But, simply, the desire to be like God, to be better than one already is or to somehow increase the overall goodness inherent in oneself, is a powerful attraction. Knowledge was simply the means to fulfillng that desire in her mind.

 

[OneSheep]

Yes. There are however a few problems here:

1. They were fooled so why they were punished?
2. Why did God let Satan into the garden?
3. What caused Satan to sin?

These are really great questions. Have you been able to make sense of the story in a way that reflects God as you know God? Do you have an answer to the questions?

 

[OneSheep]

But, simply, the desire to be like God, to be better than one already is or to somehow increase the overall goodness inherent in oneself, is a powerful attraction.

Would you say that the “desire to be like God” is well-described as the desire for power, status, autonomy, and control, as well as the desire for mercy, love, and inclusion, among other things?

 

[fhansen]

fhansen:

But, simply, the desire to be like God, to be better than one already is or to somehow increase the overall goodness inherent in oneself, is a powerful attraction.

Would you say that the “desire to be like God” is well-described as the desire for power, status, autonomy, and control, as well as the desire for mercy, love, and inclusion, among other things?

It’s the desire for superiorty. This can mean, even, superiority over oneself, over who one is. This is the essence of pride, the source of so much conflict in our world and within our own selves to the extent that it demands of us things contrary to our own natures, and poses requirements we can’t always satisfy, and/or are wrong for us to satisfy.

 

[OneSheep]

it demands of us things contrary to our own natures

For clarification, what is an example of a demand that stems from desire for superiority that is contrary to our own nature? Please try to be specific.

 

[fhansen]

Sheez, it’s rife in our world. Murder to gain not only some physical advantage, money, etc, but also status, overthrowing/ eliminating a political or business opponent, etc. Ugly stuff we see everyday. It’s simy to compromise ones own conscience for gain

 

[OneSheep]

Would you say that it is beneficial to us to resent our own desire for superiority, for the purpose of modifying/controlling these awful acts?

Gotta run. Feel free to take some time to answer.

 

[fhansen]

Yes, we’re here to learn to do that very thing, in fact. It’s to enthrone God to His rightful place to put it another way. It means that there ARE limits we can cross which are harmful. The only good to be gained by crossing the line in this case is to learn why not to do it.

 

[OneSheep]

Yes, we’re here to learn to do that very thing, in fact. It’s to enthrone God to His rightful place to put it another way. It means that there ARE limits we can cross which are harmful. The only good to be gained by crossing the line in this case is to learn why not to do it.

So, when it comes down to it, then, the “knowledge of good and evil” is truly a benefit to man when it means the formation of the conscience, and refers specifically to our own natural human capacity to resent the parts of ourselves that blind us to a more cooperative way of interacting with our fellow man.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

They, however remained free to choose otherwise. Eve, was convinced to go against God even though she knew full well that she should not. In return, she convinced Adam to go against God.

Would you say that Eve was inaccurate in seeing that the fruit was “good to eat”?

It may have been “good” to her, but God had told her that it was not meant for her. Her decision and declaration was self-serving. She put her own desires ahead of God’s.

 

[OneSheep]

It may have been “good” to her, but God had told her that it was not meant for her. Her decision and declaration was self-serving. She put her own desires ahead of God’s.

Would you say that your conscience tells you that when you serve your self at someone else’s expense, then this is something wrong? I know that sounds like a dumb question.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

If your conscience is correctly form, it would.