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

[cfauster]

---

The human person is worthy of profound respect.

Indeed. A Christmas post “All Babies Are Special” is kind of my Christmas card to CAF this year.

Blessings,

cfauster

 

[fhansen]

And this is why, as far as we can tell by the story, the other thief was not saved.

I can’t tell that from the story, and the Church has never said that the man did not go to heaven. And actually, the man who supported Jesus did not “deserve” to be tortured to death, at least not in terms of what we know of the value of humanity. The one man’s call for Jesus to save them was a matter of despair, was it not? Who would not ask the same of God if the possibility seemed to be there?

The “good thief” believed in God, that’s where his justice laid. And why bother relating the story otherwise? Why bother with the gospel and its talk of separating wheat from tares, sheep from goats, etc? If salvation is universal why wouldn’t Jesus just motion to the other thief and say, “And, BTW, he’ll be with Me in paradise today, too”? That would’ve certainly clarified the matter.

 

[OneSheep]

The “good thief” believed in God, that’s where his justice laid. And why bother relating the story otherwise? Why bother with the gospel and its talk of separating wheat from tares, sheep from goats, etc? If salvation is universal why wouldn’t Jesus just motion to the other thief and say, “And, BTW, he’ll be with Me in paradise today, too”? That would’ve certainly clarified the matter.

Hello fhansen,

A really good answer to this could be found in the book Good Goats: Healing Our Image of God by the Linns of Linn Ministries. It’s a great book.

Blessings!

 

[grannymh]

May we all prepare our souls
for the true celebration of Christmas


Lorenzo Lotto, 1523

The Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity

This is the true Mystery of Christ which cannot be undermined. (CCC 389)

---

Each person, young and old, is worthy of profound respect.

 

[grannymh]

The Letters S & T are for the question –

Why is Sacred Scripture, the first three chapters of Genesis,
an important Testament?

Basic answer. The beginning chapters are primary because they recount the dawn of human history. They answer the age old question – Where did we come from? :doh2:

We can forget one popular answer – we fell out of a tree filled with monkeys. Neither are we a monkey’s uncle. Natural science has grown up. Natural science is a gift from God which benefits humankind in many ways, especially in the medical arena.

Please re-read the Christmas link cfauster gave us in post 673. scienceandbelief.org/2016/12/15/5917/

In Genesis 1: 26-27, we find where we came from. usccb.org/bible/genesis/1

26
Then God said: Let Us make* human beings in Our image, after Our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the tame animals, all the wild animals, and all the creatures that crawl on the earth.
27
God created mankind in His image;
in the image of God He created them;
male and female* He created them.

While we have a decomposing material anatomy which is in the realm of natural science, we have a spiritual soul which makes us human. God gives each person a rational spiritual soul so that each person can share in God’s life. (CCC 355-368)

In the painting in post 676, Jesus lifts His tiny arms to all of us. He wants us to hold Him in our hearts. From the first moment of His assumed human nature, Jesus shows us that every moment of our own lives is important to Him. Look closely at the top left of the painting. See the Crucifix.

---

Because of God’s gift of an unique spiritual soul,
each human person is worthy of profound respect.

 

[grannymh]

Some general information for our Gentle Readers

In reality, those first three exciting chapters of Genesis are discussed in a variety of Forums. That is one of the reasons that CAF is great. It can explore Catholic teachings from a variety of positions.

When it comes to the important last sentence of CCC 389, there are abundant ways to approach this major sentence.
CCC 389, last sentence. “The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.”
Important question. Should we consider changing that crazy Original Sin to some kind of easier metaphor especially when that would bring a peaceful state of mind to those people who dismiss annoying Catholic doctrines? For some people “free speech” in Catholicism means that everyone can follow their own personal preferences, like a family, so we can shake hands in communion with each other. Back in the dark ages, Pope Pius XII warned that watering down Catholic doctrines to please everyone can lead to big trouble.

Paragraphs 11 & 12, Humani Generis Encyclical

w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

phrontistery.info/e.html

 

[goout]

Some general information for our Gentle Readers

In reality, those first three exciting chapters of Genesis are discussed in a variety of Forums. That is one of the reasons that CAF is great. It can explore Catholic teachings from a variety of positions.

When it comes to the important last sentence of CCC 389, there are abundant ways to approach this major sentence.
CCC 389, last sentence. “The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.”
Important question. Should we consider changing that crazy Original Sin to some kind of easier metaphor especially when that would bring a peaceful state of mind to those people who dismiss annoying Catholic doctrines? For some people “free speech” in Catholicism means that everyone can follow their own personal preferences, like a family, so we can shake hands in communion with each other. Back in the dark ages, Pope Pius XII warned that watering down Catholic doctrines to please everyone can lead to big trouble.

Paragraphs 11 & 12, Humani Generis Encyclical

w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

phrontistery.info/e.html

It occurs to me that you are afraid of something that is not happening, in this discussion at least.

 

[grannymh]

It occurs to me that you are afraid of something that is not happening, in this discussion at least.

Thank you for your comment.

What all of us need to fear is that there are a few Catholic wolves in sheep’s clothing who are trying to change the Catholic Church from within. Some people may see references to that prospect in this thread. Apparently, CCC 389 is the line in the sand for some Catholics.

In my opinion, what is not happening in this thread is a flat out raging battle. Some may think differently. What I hope will happen is that readers, members and guests, will find bits of Catholic information which can be used in their unique geographical location. For some people, reading that Adam is really real is the needed comfort.

Because we are in the Sacred Scripture area, questions are proper.

Because I personally object to reinventing the wheel, here are three axioms (Genesis 1: 26-27) to be automatically accepted as true. We can use them as building blocks.

1. God as Creator exists.
2. God as Creator interacts personally with each individual human.
3. Every individual human has the inherent capacity to interact with God as Creator.

My geographical location is :snowing:

 

[grannymh]

Does anyone know why the below question turned into small letters in previous posts?

Why is Sacred Scripture, the first three chapters of Genesis,
an important Testament?

The important Testament of Genesis 3: 15 is the promise of a Divine Savior born in a rough stable.
Genesis 3: 15
I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
They will strike at your head,
while you strike at their heel.

Come, let us adore Jesus in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Let us continue our love for Jesus in Eucharistic Adoration.

saintlawrencechurch.org/wp-content/uploads/Pictures/eucharistic-adoration.jpg

“O Sacrament most holy. O Sacrament divine.
All praise and all thanksgiving be every moment Thine.”

 

[grannymh]

Does anyone know why the below question turned into small letters in previous posts?

Why is Sacred Scripture, the first three chapters of Genesis,
an important Testament?

The important Testament of Genesis 3: 15 is the promise of a Divine Savior born in a rough stable.
Genesis 3: 15
I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
They will strike at your head,
while you strike at their heel.

Come, let us adore Jesus in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Let us continue our love for Jesus in Eucharistic Adoration.
saintlawrencechurch.org/wp-content/uploads/Pictures/eucharistic-adoration.jpg

"O Sacrament most holy. O Sacrament divine.

All praise and all thanksgiving be every moment Thine."

7:30 PM and the small type is back to large but in too many lines. Lines changed.
Do not ask me how – except all day I had trouble with some kind of security nonsense. Plus trouble getting a post finished. Looking forward to a new day.

---

The human person is worthy of profound respect.

 

[simpleas]

Is it working now?

 

[grannymh]

Is it working now?

The only way to find out is to continue posting.

 

[grannymh]

Why is Sacred Scripture,
the first three chapters of Genesis,
an important Testament?

From the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Eucharistic Prayer IV,
Magnificat publication
ibreviary.com/m/messale.p…aristica&id=75

"You formed man in Your own image
and entrusted the whole world to his care,
so that in serving You alone, the Creator,
he might have dominion over all creatures.
**And when through disobedience he had lost **
**Your friendship, ******You did not abandon him ********to ****
****the domain of death. ******For You came in mercy **
****to the aid of all, ****so that those who seek might find you."

I put in bold the significant words which refer back to the truth of Original Sin found in the first three Sacred Scripture chapters of Genesis. Please compare Eucharistic Prayer IV with paragraph 389, last sentence, in the universal *Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition *

CCC **389 **The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the “reverse side” of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

Obviously, the word tamper is not a word someone should tamper.

If someone could tamper with the revelation of Original Sin – even a tiny tampering – what else would someone change in Eucharistic Prayer IV or in the Catholic Church itself? That is a worry.

We see on the internet that there are some Catholics who believe, and want others to believe, that everyone’s preference is acceptable. Note that those people, who are annoyed by Original Sin in Sacred Scripture, are not free to cross out the “dumb parts” in Eucharistic Prayer IV.

When someone decides to tamper with the first three essential chapters of Genesis – even a little bit of tampering – there is the risk of losing the deepest meaning of Christmas which completes, by birth, the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. Because the Divine Creator instituted the original friendship relationship between Divinity and humanity, only a Divine Person can restore that relationship. Tampering, even a little bit, with the truths in the first three historical chapters of Genesis lessons the necessity for a Fully-Divine Savior. This is serious in the same way modern Arianism is serious.

---

The human person is worthy of profound respect.

 

[grannymh]

Why is Sacred Scripture,
the first three chapters of Genesis,
an important Testament?

The sad truth in 2017 will be that a few persons, who claim Catholicism, will continue to preach opposition to the salvation truths which follow from the three beginning chapters in Sacred Scripture. Many times, this sad opposition is a serious misinterpretation of Catholic teachings.

The majority of persons, in love with the Fully-Divine Baby Jesus, will continue to teach the “Good News” that the real Catholic Church has not abandoned humankind. The salvation event at the dawn of human history is that a Divine Reconciler was promised. This is the interpretation of Genesis 3:15.

In the painting in post 676, the Baby Reconciler reaches out to all of us. His promise of reconciliation is in the top left corner.

---

In 2017, may all of us remember that each human person
is worthy of profound respect.

 

[grannymh]

http://www.jesus-story.net/images/1622Gerard_van_Honthorst.jpg

The beauty of Adam’s human nature must have been magnificent.

WHY?

Because on Christmas, God Himself has assumed human nature.

 

[simpleas]

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL.

:christmastree1::snowing::winter::grouphug:

 

[grannymh]

From Post 687

The beauty of Adam’s human nature must have been Magnificent.

WHY?

Because on Christmas, God Himself has assumed human nature.

​

In the first three truth-filled chapters of Genesis – T is also for Truth.

Humankind continually seeks truth. It is part of our nature. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, speaks about the human desire for God. CCC 27 and following. vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

I am sure that there are many ways to experience the variety of truths in our universe. One of the basic principles of the Scientific (Inductive) Method is to observe without prejudice. When observing the beauty of Adam’s human nature, we see that beauty in the newborn in the picture in post 687. When we reach heaven, after our bodily death, we will be in the presence of the full beauty of God.

It is often possible to experience truth with a capital T. Truth can be one description of our Creator God. And we can know God as Truth. The surrounding cultures of the Jewish Nation knew the truth of multiple gods. The possibility of one Supreme Creator as Truth and the possibility of individual gods as Truth should automatically alert us that we need to go outside of our own experiences of knowing.

Today, the “knowing” part is defined by the wisdom of the Holy Spirit Who specifically guides the Catholic Church. It is not our job to tamper with the work of the Holy Spirit.

**CCC 389 **The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the “reverse side” of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.
​

I am sure that many CAF members and guests will remember the mantra – When one walks through the door of a Catholic Church, one should not leave one’s brain at the door. Maybe in our current mixed up world, we need to give our brain a rest and simply rest in the arms of the Catholic Church which has defined specific truths about our loving Creator and His role in the first three historic chapters of Sacred Scripture.

For example. When it comes to truths about the full Divinity of Jesus Christ, we cannot tamper with the revelation of the real Original Sin. When one’s own personal experience of God is placed above the Holy Spirit guiding the major Ecumenical Catholic Church Councils, that changes the Catholic Church into a civil democracy without presidential elections.

 

[simpleas]

Just a comment on this :

Originally Posted by grannymh

For example. When it comes to truths about the full Divinity of Jesus Christ, we cannot tamper with the revelation of the real Original Sin. When one’s own personal experience of God is placed above the Holy Spirit guiding the major Ecumenical Catholic Church Councils, that changes the Catholic Church into a civil democracy without presidential elections.

I’m not clear on what you mean about ones own experience of God being placed above the Holy Spirit guiding the Church, mine or someone else’s experience wouldn’t change the church into a civil democracy, we are only lay people, may be someone in the hierarchy could?
Also, we all don’t receive the same sort of Catholic ‘experience’ as each other, I think this is where our observation of life itself is different, yet based on the same teaching.
It seems from what I’ve learnt so far about our faith, it is very much like the big tent idea, not that I mean anything goes, but that everyone is welcome…

 

[grannymh]

Just a comment on this :

I’m not clear on what you mean about ones own experience of God being placed above the Holy Spirit

It means what it says. It is the blunt truth which you will never hear from those few Catholics, including a few public priests, who are changing Catholicism from within. The people who are dancing around the word “tamper” will never say that “tampering” relates to what I said in post 689 – “It is not our job to tamper with the work of the Holy Spirit.”

guiding the Church, mine or someone else’s experience wouldn’t change the church into a civil democracy, we are only lay people, may be someone in the hierarchy could?

Here is a helpful thought which underlines some off base preaching. This preaching about the “fly in the ointment” Original Sin does not treat Genesis chapters 1, 2, and 3, as a historical document. Those readers, members and guests, who search chapters 1, 2, and 3, would automatically know that once people leave those essential first three chapters of Sacred Scripture, the mystery of Christ is undermined. (CCC 389) Undermined would change or outright deny some annoying Catholic doctrines. For example, the requirements for receiving the Real Presence of Jesus Christ during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Think about a civil democracy. That is another description of progressive Christianity which is open to any change in any Catholic doctrine. As in a civil democracy, everyone can either be on one side or the other. No problems.

Also, we all don’t receive the same sort of Catholic ‘experience’ as each other, I think this is where our observation of life itself is different, yet based on the same teaching.

It seems from what I’ve learned so far about our faith, it is very much like the big tent idea, not that I mean anything goes, but that everyone is welcome…

Our observation of life itself is not the same as what Adam observed in the Garden of Eden.

The public meaning of Big Tent proposal is that any version of a doctrine such as the “fly in the ointment” doctrine is acceptable by everyone who wants to accept it. When someone considers the white Host as symbolic of people being in communion with each other – that becomes one of the many Catholic teachings in the Big Tent proposal. If one states that it is impossible to reject God because of universal ignorance, then the Sacrament of Confession/ Reconciliation can be trashed at will.

The Catholic Church proclaims that Jesus died for all descendants of Adam and Eve.
Therefore: all human persons are eligible for heaven. Genesis 1: 27. No Adam and Eve? How does one tell if his own decomposing anatomy can actually choose God when there is so much misunderstanding about God’s love?

 

[simpleas]

Originally Posted by grannymh

It means what it says. It is the blunt truth which you will never hear from those few Catholics, including a few public priests, who are changing Catholicism from within. The people who are dancing around the word “tamper” will never say that “tampering” relates to what I said in post 689 – “It is not our job to tamper with the work of the Holy Spirit.”

Ok, but the holy spirit is supposed to work within all of us too.

Here is a helpful thought which underlines some off base preaching. This preaching about the “fly in the ointment” Original Sin does not treat Genesis chapters 1, 2, and 3, as a historical document. Those readers, members and guests, who search chapters 1, 2, and 3, would automatically know that once people leave those essential first three chapters of Sacred Scripture, the mystery of Christ is undermined. (CCC 389) Undermined would change or outright deny some annoying Catholic doctrines. For example, the requirements for receiving the Real Presence of Jesus Christ during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Think about a civil democracy. That is another description of progressive Christianity which is open to any change in any Catholic doctrine. As in a civil democracy, everyone can either be on one side or the other. No problems.

Again, no-one is going to change anything, even the preachers of the fly in the ointment, which I do think can be interpreted two ways as I think I have said on this thread before.

Our observation of life itself is not the same as what Adam observed in the Garden of Eden.

Very true, Adam didn’t have millions of people around him with various teachings on God, the universe etc, unless this knowledge he is believed to have covered this and he knew everything there was to know, but that’s abit far-fetched as no other a part from Eve existed. But I also think that this thinking throws out the teaching that God is within.

The public meaning of Big Tent proposal is that any version of a doctrine such as the “fly in the ointment” doctrine is acceptable by everyone who wants to accept it. When someone considers the white Host as symbolic of people being in communion with each other – that becomes one of the many Catholic teachings in the Big Tent proposal. If one states that it is impossible to reject God because of universal ignorance, then the Sacrament of Confession/ Reconciliation can be trashed at will.

The Catholic Church proclaims that Jesus died for all descendants of Adam and Eve.
Therefore: all human persons are eligible for heaven. Genesis 1: 27. No Adam and Eve? How does one tell if his own decomposing anatomy can actually choose God when there is so much misunderstanding about God’s love?

Ah, I sort of get what you are saying when you refer to this big tent idea. I’m thinking of the big tent as welcoming sinners from various areas of life, that they are welcome in our church before they even decide to become Catholic.

Thanks.