Is Genesis 2: 15-17 an explanation of Original Sin?

[simpleas]

Here is an early morning challenge. We know that God loved Adam. Did Adam love God? Remember that we are looking at Genesis 2:15 which is way before Adam let his trust in God die in his heart. (CCC 396-398) Adam, being in the State of Original Holiness, aka State of Sanctifying Grace, is a good start.

Links to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

Did Adam love God.

There is probably a few ways of pondering this.

Maybe some would say no, because if he did then he would have obeyed God. But from my own experience of God and the world around me, I can say Adam could have loved God even when he disobeyed.

It does not sound quite right, but I know I love God, but I’m still a sinner.

I think love comes from relationship, when you love someone you want to please them, could the way a human loves be different to how a pure spiritual being loves? God coming as Jesus suggest no, but at the time of Adam, God was not in the form of a human (at least I don’t believe he was) But again would that make any difference?

The word love is interesting, Adam never uses it, nor does God in the first three chapters of Genesis.

Just for a little more thought : from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agape

Agape (Ancient Greek: ἀγάπη, agápē) is “love: the highest form of love, charity; the love of God for man and of man for God.”[1] Not to be confused with “philēo” - brotherly love - agápē embraces a universal, unconditional love that transcends that and serves regardless of circumstances. The noun form first occurs in the Septuagint, but the verb form goes as far back as Homer, translated literally as affection, as in “greet with affection” and “show affection for the dead.”[2] Other ancient authors have used forms of the word to denote love of a spouse or family, or affection for a particular activity, in contrast to philia (an affection that could denote friendship, brotherhood or generally non-sexual affection) and eros, an affection of a sexual nature.

Christianity developed Agape as the love originating from God or Christ for humankind. In the New Testament, it refers to the covenant love of God for humans, as well as the human reciprocal love for God; the term necessarily extends to the love of one’s fellow man.[3] Although the word did not have a specific religious connotation, it has been used by a variety of contemporary and ancient sources, including biblical authors and Christian authors.[4]

The notion of agape has been examined as to traditions, whether Judeo-Christian[5] or other world religions,[6] religious ethics,[7] and science.[8]

 

[grannymh]

Did Adam love God.

There is probably a few ways of pondering this.

Maybe some would say no, because if he did then he would have obeyed God. But from my own experience of God and the world around me, I can say Adam could have loved God even when he disobeyed.

It does not sound quite right, but I know I love God, but I’m still a sinner.

I think love comes from relationship, when you love someone you want to please them, could the way a human loves be different to how a pure spiritual being loves? God coming as Jesus suggest no, but at the time of Adam, God was not in the form of a human (at least I don’t believe he was) But again would that make any difference?

The word love is interesting, Adam never uses it, nor does God in the first three chapters of Genesis.

Just for a little more thought : from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agape

Agape (Ancient Greek: ἀγάπη, agápē) is “love: the highest form of love, charity; the love of God for man and of man for God.”[1] Not to be confused with “philēo” - brotherly love - agápē embraces a universal, unconditional love that transcends that and serves regardless of circumstances. The noun form first occurs in the Septuagint, but the verb form goes as far back as Homer, translated literally as affection, as in “greet with affection” and “show affection for the dead.”[2] Other ancient authors have used forms of the word to denote love of a spouse or family, or affection for a particular activity, in contrast to philia (an affection that could denote friendship, brotherhood or generally non-sexual affection) and eros, an affection of a sexual nature.

Christianity developed Agape as the love originating from God or Christ for humankind. In the New Testament, it refers to the covenant love of God for humans, as well as the human reciprocal love for God; the term necessarily extends to the love of one’s fellow man.[3] Although the word did not have a specific religious connotation, it has been used by a variety of contemporary and ancient sources, including biblical authors and Christian authors.[4]

The notion of agape has been examined as to traditions, whether Judeo-Christian[5] or other world religions,[6] religious ethics,[7] and science.[8]

This excellent post brings to mind many of the essentials of love. Love comes from and exists in a relationship. Even a sinner can deeply love. The way a human loves and the way God, a Pure Spirit, loves is different because human nature is different from divine nature. Yet, there is a likeness in that each can love completely according to their nature. The Incarnation is an example of God’s complete love for humans. A human martyr loves completely in dying for her or his Faith.

Personally, it was good to see Agape explained. That brought back pleasant memories from when I first heard the word.

As Simpleas says: “The word love is interesting, Adam never uses it, nor does God in the first three chapters of Genesis.”

On the other hand, love is demonstrated in the first three chapters of Genesis. However, we often have to look to other sources in order to understand a particular demonstration of love.

In my humble opinion, it would be a good idea to speculate about Adam loving God. Note: Since there are no direct Catholic teachings on which kind of “love”, we can offer opinions as long as they do not contradict some other Catholic teachings. For example: Often Adam’s human rational nature is denied when some people say he had to eat the fruit of the forbidden tree in order to experience right from wrong. Obviously, Adam, a rational human (spiritual soul) with a conscience can know right from wrong because God was extremely clear on that point in Genesis 2: 15-17.

While we know that Adam “tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart …” (CCC 397) we do not know all that Adam thought and did in the Garden. Did he love God? We certainly can find reasons why he would.

 

[grannymh]

It is easy to attack God and the Catholic beliefs in God by attacking the first three chapters of Genesis.

In reply to the many various attacks, I sincerely propose that the desire/intention of the author of those valuable chapters was to Praise God For His Goodness.

When we explore Genesis 2: 15-17, we cannot miss God’s offer of joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision.

 

[cargau]

To the question of Adam loving God…“Peter, do you love me? Tend my sheep”. Peter was the one to whom God had revealed the divinity of Christ. Yet, Peter managed to deny Jesus three times. Loving someone does not mean we never offend them. Though I think love leads to regret when we do offend.

 

[fisherman_carl]

Yes, indeed, but look at the later development in Genesis and Exodus. Does it seem to us any better to be quite ‘fair’ that Jacob and his sons were driven by famine into Egypt, to eventually be enslaved for over 400 years? The Old Testament raves about how God brought the Israelites OUT of the “furnace” of slavery in Egypt, but God put them there, too.

Joseph’s brothers bound him and sold him into slavery and then lied to Jacob and told him he was killed by a wild animal. That is why their descendants ended up in slavery to Egypt. They were reaping what they sowed. Since out of envy they sold Joseph to slavery. But, God used this even for good. As Joseph saved his brothers from starvation.

In addition the Israelites became less faithful to God and were seduced by the Egyptian gods over time. And over time the Egyptians forgot about Joseph and felt threatened by the number of Israelites. They wanted to keep their numbers from getting too high. But, God had promised many descendants.

The Exodus showed them that God is more powerful than the Egyptian false gods. And actually this is the first time that God walked with his people since the garden of Eden. Since God was present to them in the tabernacle as a pillar of fire at night and smoke during the day. God was trying to bring them back into a relationship with him, not seen since the garden.

And, of course God’s promised seed would come through this line. That is Jesus. So you have to look at the bigger picture. And only God sees the entire thing and his actions are ultimately for our good.

“For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” (Jeremiah 29:11).

 

[fisherman_carl]

While it may be tempting to see the original sin as merely just the disobedience of some rule. It actually is about the heart of Adam and Eve being swayed away from God. It wasn’t God who created the distance between God and man. The human heart is a fickle thing. By Adam choosing to disobey it shows how his heart had been already swayed away from God such that he could choose something else. And ultimately, could lead him down an evil path for which ultimately there is no return. Thus, God wants to bring us all back to the right path, where we can walk with God, where our hearts are not drawn away from God and his righteousness and love. There are worse things than suffering or death. Suffering can be a tutor. If a man should be given over to an evil heart is worse than death. For he corrupts his very soul which is created in God’s image.

 

[grannymh]

While it may be tempting to see the original sin as merely just the disobedience of some rule. It actually is about the heart of Adam and Eve being swayed away from God. It wasn’t God who created the distance between God and man. The human heart is a fickle thing.

Very interesting view. Sounds like the heart of Adam truly loved his Creator in the beginning.

When we follow the points made by the author of Genesis, we find that Adam had to make a physical decision about seeking union with his first love Who is God. Eating is a physical decision based on the fact that a physical material anatomy needs nourishment in order to live. We notice that God says: “You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except …” Genesis 2: 16-17. Sometimes, some people are so busy denying the historical Adam that they miss the simple fact that Adam had to eat real food just like us. If Adam was just someone’s figurative symbol, then it becomes rather interesting that the author included the necessity of real food.

In the Garden, God provided the path to joy eternal. Eat this and not that. Obedience according to one’s status is one of the keys to understanding the depth of Original Sin.
Today, the path to joy eternal continues to be obedience according to our material/spiritual status in relationship to our Creator. Do notice that Genesis 1: 26-27 applies to Adam and Eve’s descendants. God continues to provide the path to joy eternal. It is known as “actual grace.”

Like the hungry Adam --hungry having many desires besides eating–we have to make a real, not figurative, choice to obey or disobey, go to God or go from God. We need to take charge of our “heart.”

**CCC 1730 **God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.”

Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.

 

[grannymh]

While it may be tempting to see the original sin as merely just the disobedience of some rule. It actually is about the heart of Adam and Eve being swayed away from God. It wasn’t God who created the distance between God and man. The human heart is a fickle thing. By Adam choosing to disobey it shows how his heart had been already swayed away from God such that he could choose something else. And ultimately, could lead him down an evil path for which ultimately there is no return. Thus, God wants to bring us all back to the right path, where we can walk with God, where our hearts are not drawn away from God and his righteousness and love. There are worse things than suffering or death. Suffering can be a tutor. If a man should be given over to an evil heart is worse than death. For he corrupts his very soul which is created in God’s image.

Very interesting view. Sounds like the heart of Adam truly loved his Creator in the beginning.

When we follow the points made by the author of Genesis, we find that Adam had to make a physical decision about seeking union with his first love Who is God. Eating is a physical decision based on the fact that a physical material anatomy needs nourishment in order to live. We notice that God says: “You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except …” Genesis 2: 16-17. Sometimes, some people are so busy denying the historical Adam that they miss the simple fact that Adam had to eat real food just like us. If Adam were someone’s figurative symbol, then it becomes rather interesting that the author included the necessity of real food.

In the Garden, God provided the path to joy eternal. Eat this and not that. Obedience according to one’s status is one of the keys to understanding the depth of Original Sin. Today, the path to joy eternal continues to be obedience according to our material/spiritual status in relationship to our Creator. Do notice that Genesis 1: 26-27 applies to Adam and Eve’s descendants. God continues to provide the path to joy eternal. It is known as the Catholic Church with its seven Sacraments.

Like the hungry Adam --hungry having many desires besides eating–we have to make a real, not figurative, choice to obey or disobey, go to God or go from God. We need to take charge of our “heart.”
**CCC 1730 **God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to Him.”

Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.
​

 

[grannymh]

**CCC 1730 **God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to Him.”

Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.
​

As I think further about the Adam loving God question, I also think about other emotions of humans. Perhaps the real clue are the simple words in CCC 1730: “freely attain his (Adam’s) full and blessed perfection by cleaving to Him” (God). In our time, we see God as infinite love. In my humble opinion, it takes love on our part to gain “blessed perfection” by cleaving to our Beloved.

Sometimes, we can say that true love begets true love. Still, we cannot deny Adam’s intellective free will. He could leave God’s love by choosing himself over and against God. (CCC 397-399) Maybe it is our direct act of choosing God which signifies our deep love for God.

 

[grannymh]

One more thought about the love between God and Adam. In modern times, it is important to understand this love relationship because it directly leads to the Divinity of Jesus Christ and the institution of the Catholic Church.
John 3: 16

I have always wondered about the background for these verses.
Genesis 3: 8-10 usccb.org/bible/genesis/3

8
When they heard the sound of the LORD God walking about in the garden at the breezy time of the day,* the man and his wife hid themselves from the LORD God among the trees of the garden.d
9
The LORD God then called to the man and asked him: Where are you?
10
He answered, “I heard you in the garden; but I was afraid, because I was naked, so I hid.”

At first reading, this passage is the recognition of Original Sin shattering humanity’s relationship with Divinity. Still, Adam and Eve knew the sound of their Creator walking about in the Garden at the breezy time of the day as if this happened regularly. Perhaps they called out to God and God answered in love. It is my opinion – and yes, I am a romantic always choosing good explanations – that God called out to Adam because during the breezy time of the day was when Adam especially loved God. This also occurs at the Sunday Holy Sacrifice of the Mass when we set aside time to especially demonstrate our love of God.

 

[grannymh]

Going back to Genesis 2: 15
“The Lord God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden, to cultivate and care for it.”

If I were a teacher, I would challenge my students to point out the most important fact in that verse.
A fact even more important than Adam loving God. A fact which would change human life forever. A fact often missed when we try to use an allegory to explain what happened in that Garden. A fact which the author gave us in the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26.

 

[simpleas]

I’m thinking when the garden is thought of, maybe sometimes we think only of the vegetation, you know by growing food, planting, and caring for it so a human can eat well, be healthy, but sometimes caring for the animals isn’t much thought of. If all creatures were free from ill health and death, then they wouldn’t need caring for, yet I’m not sure if animals were free from illness and death.

Thinking further though, all what happened/described in Genesis 1-3 still stands today, Adam wasn’t the only one to which God speaks his instruction to. The text speaks to us all, Adam may be the unique example of human behaviour, and Eve too.
We are still to care for the garden (earth).

 

[grannymh]

I’m thinking when the garden is thought of, maybe sometimes we think only of the vegetation, you know by growing food, planting, and caring for it so a human can eat well, be healthy, but sometimes caring for the animals isn’t much thought of. If all creatures were free from ill health and death, then they wouldn’t need caring for, yet I’m not sure if animals were free from illness and death.

This is how I look at animals during the time of the Garden of Eden. Animals, not being in the image of God, would have strictly physical/material anatomies which would eventually die. Maybe animals would be free from illness, maybe not. However, I picture Adam caring for animals especially when one was giving birth. Animal birth can run into difficulties.

I have seen pictures of Adam in the midst of peaceful animals. Both Adam and animals give glory to God. Earlier, this thread talked about Adam loving God. It is reasonable that Adam would also love the creatures created by God.

Thinking further though, all what happened/described in Genesis 1-3 still stands today, Adam wasn’t the only one to which God speaks his instruction to. The text speaks to us all, Adam may be the unique example of human behaviour, and Eve too.
We are still to care for the garden (earth).

Regarding last comment. “We are still to care for the garden (earth).” I have always considered that the Garden of Eden did exist some how, some place on planet earth.

Yes, “The text speaks to us all,” That is the foundation for this thread.

 

[grannymh]

What has been recognized in this thread is that God loved Adam and Adam loved God. Adam, being human, is not as perfect as Divinity. God, in perfect Divinity, does not back off from loving both Adam and his descendants. We inherited Adam’s human nature, therefore, we, in a sense, inherited God’s love for we humans.

Genesis 3: 15 is interpreted by John 3: 16-17.
Link to Catholic Bible
usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/index.cfm

CCC 356 is an amazing simple approach.
**356 **Of all visible creatures only man is “able to know and love his creator”. He is “the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake”, and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life. It was for this end that he was created, and this is the fundamental reason for his dignity:

What made you establish man in so great a dignity? Certainly the incalculable love by which you have looked on your creature in yourself! You are taken with love for her; for by love indeed you created her, by love you have given her a being capable of tasting your eternal Good.

​

Here we are deep in the love between God and Adam in the Garden. The next question is what did that forbidden tree with the weird name have which was so appealing to Adam that he let “his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command.” (CCC 397)

 

[grannymh]

I’m thinking when the garden is thought of, maybe sometimes we think only of the vegetation, you know by growing food, planting, and caring for it so a human can eat well, be healthy, but sometimes caring for the animals isn’t much thought of. If all creatures were free from ill health and death, then they wouldn’t need caring for, yet I’m not sure if animals were free from illness and death.

Thinking further though, all what happened/described in Genesis 1-3 still stands today, Adam wasn’t the only one to which God speaks his instruction to. The text speaks to us all, Adam may be the unique example of human behaviour, and Eve too.
We are still to care for the garden (earth).

Definitely, the text of the first three chapters of Genesis speaks to us all.

I have been thinking about Adam as the unique example of human behaviour. Certainly the weird forbidden tree has an unique name indicating it is a mortal sin, that is, eating from that tree shatters the original relationship between humanity and Divinity. (Genesis 2: 17; CCC 396)

At first glance, that name, Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil sounds like a textbook in a course that Adam has to pass in order to be a real human. The truth is that Adam is already a real human according to the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26-27 and CCC 355-357.

I am curious, Simpleas as to what makes Adam unique.

 

[simpleas]

Definitely, the text of the first three chapters of Genesis speaks to us all.

I have been thinking about Adam as the unique example of human behaviour. Certainly the weird forbidden tree has an unique name indicating it is a mortal sin, that is, eating from that tree shatters the original relationship between humanity and Divinity. (Genesis 2: 17; CCC 396)

At first glance, that name, Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil sounds like a textbook in a course that Adam has to pass in order to be a real human. The truth is that Adam is already a real human according to the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26-27 and CCC 355-357.

I am curious, Simpleas as to what makes Adam unique.

Before I might ramble to much, is the last line a question to me or a statement or such?

 

[grannymh]

Before I might ramble to much, is the last line a question to me or a statement or such?

It is a statement about my curiosity. I am interested in what you find unique.

And it is a question to you asking you to share your thoughts, maybe speculations, about Adam being unique. If you wish to do that. We both understand that there are some things about Adam that we will never find in Catholic teachings. Yet, Adam remains a very interesting individual.

 

[simpleas]

It is a statement about my curiosity. I am interested in what you find unique.

And it is a question to you asking you to share your thoughts, maybe speculations, about Adam being unique. If you wish to do that. We both understand that there are some things about Adam that we will never find in Catholic teachings. Yet, Adam remains a very interesting individual.

Unique means being the only one of a particular type. I think we can say Adam was unique because he would be the first ever of his kind, the first ever human to think, feel, taste, to know much about God etc.
When I wrote that Adam maybe the unique example of human behavior, it was because I was thinking there was too much focus on Adam as the one told to do this and don’t do that etc, when I’m reading the text as speaking to all humans, not just the first human.

Also I realised that Adam is no longer unique when God makes Eve. Because now there is an equal, one who would have had to understand Gen 2 15-17 as well as Adam did in order to be able to make a choice.
But their choice was unique, because it was the first choice to be made by the first humans.

:whacky:

 

[grannymh]

Unique means being the only one of a particular type. I think we can say Adam was unique because he would be the first ever of his kind, the first ever human to think, feel, taste, to know much about God etc.
When I wrote that Adam maybe the unique example of human behavior, it was because I was thinking there was too much focus on Adam as the one told to do this and don’t do that etc, when I’m reading the text as speaking to all humans, not just the first human.

Also I realised that Adam is no longer unique when God makes Eve. Because now there is an equal, one who would have had to understand Gen 2 15-17 as well as Adam did in order to be able to make a choice.
But their choice was unique, because it was the first choice to be made by the first humans.

:whacky:

I especially admire this post because 1. Adam is indeed unique and 2. the text does speak to all humans not just the first human.

When we read Genesis 2:15, we learn about God’s loving relationship with a human. Genesis 1: 27 is being repeated in a real life “Adam” example. Real life? Real life in that we humans need physical nourishment. Being in the image of God is definitely not the same as being totally divine.

The science of agriculture in the Garden is an example. Genesis 1: 27 reminds us that in addition to physical nourishment, we humans need spiritual nourishment which comes from our own unique relationship with God. Yes, our own relationship with Divinity is unique because it is based on our own intellective free choices. Like Adam, we face both good and evil in our world.

 

[grannymh]

The main reason for emphasizing – “Real life in that we humans need physical nourishment. Being in the image of God is definitely not the same as being totally divine.” from post 156 – is that the difference between human Adam and the Divine Creator is the actual base for Original Sin. While it is true that Adam was dependent on his Creator for life itself, Genesis 2: 15-16, he was also subject to the “moral norms that govern the use of freedom.” Genesis 2: 17 (CCC 396)

This governing norm can be seen in the beginning of CCC 396 and following.
**CCC 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.

It is the free submission to God which is key to understanding Adam and not the popular interpretation that Adam has to first eat the tree’s truth (fruit) so that he can understand good and evil and thus choose. Please note that CCC 397 refers to “abusing his freedom” and not to first eating from the forbidden tree so that Adam could become a real human with intellective free choice.
**CCC 397 **Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.

The action of Original Sin is explained in CCC 398.

**CCC 398 **In that sin man *preferred *himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully “divinized” by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to “be like God”, but “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God”.

All those attacks against the mean God/parent are empty when one takes to heart that Adam “chose himself over and against God.” He did this knowing that disobedience was “against his own good.” (CCC 398; especially Genesis 2: 15-17)

Note that in all the allegories which feature a human parent etc., there is the missing information that God is extremely different from a human. Also equally ignored are the facts in CCC 396.