V
Vico
Guest
And they could eat from any of the other trees, including the tree of eternal life.
- Status
J
joseie
Guest
There is a school of thought that the original sin of Adam and Eve was having sex! A somewhat intelligent reading of Genesis would show that it is indeed so.The forbidden tree in the midst of the garden could mean the sex organs which are in the midst of the body.Feeling naked after eating,relating the sin to conception and birth(GE.3-16) ,acquiring the sin by birth(no other sins of any body are acquired by birth) etc. clearly show that the original sin has got every thing to do with birth which means it was nothing but having sex.The serpent (devil) saying that on eating you will be as gods means that by the act(sex) you will be involved in creation ( of humans) which was exclusively God’s prerogative .The serpent may have ,probably accidently ,caused a feeling of sexual pleasure to eve who was naked and the enticing of the serpent to eat the fruit which eve found to be good and pleasent (Ge:3-6) may be the invoking of this feeling in eve which then prompted eve to try with Adam resulting in their becoming shy and feeling naked and tying to cover themselves with leaves. Simple eating the fruit of a tree could not have resulted in such specific reactions,consequences, curses etc.
Was there ever any thinking in the church in the above lines?
Was there ever any thinking in the church in the above lines?
V
Vico
Guest
It remains that their sin was pride.
Modern Catholic Dictionary has this on the gift of integrity:
Total exemption from the sway of concupiscence, whereby man’s whole sensitive and imaginative life and activity are completely under control and ruled by reason. This preternatural gift was possessed by Adam and Eve before the Fall. It rendered their enjoyment of the pleasures of sensitive life more intense than ours because their natural faculties, being purer, were therefore keener.
G
grannymh
Guest
None of the above is taught by the Catholic Church.
J
joseie
Guest
My point is that if the original sin was something else why they should feel naked and should try to cover up with leaves,why you are ‘born with’ this sin etc.Once you put the real meaning (that is having sex) see how clear and meaningful everything becoms.
V
Vico
Guest
St. John of Damascus wrote:
Chapter XXIV.—Concerning Virginity.
Carnal men abuse virginity 2666 , and the pleasure-loving bring forward the following verse in proof, Cursed be every one that raiseth not up seed in Israel 2667 . But we, made confident by God the Word that was made flesh of the Virgin, answer that virginity was implanted in man’s nature from above and in the beginning. For man was formed of virgin soil. From Adam alone was Eve created. In Paradise virginity held sway. Indeed, Divine Scripture tells that both Adam and Eve were naked and were not ashamed 2668 . But after their transgression they knew that they were naked, and in their shame they sewed aprons for themselves 2669 . And when, after the transgression, Adam heard, dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return 2670 , when death entered into the world by reason of the transgression, then Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bare seed 2671 . So that to prevent the wearing out and destruction of the race by death, marriage was devised that the race of men may be preserved through the procreation of children 2672 .
But they will perhaps ask, what then is the meaning of “male and female 2673 ,” and “Be fruitful and multiply?” In answer we shall say that “Be fruitful and multiply 2674 ” does not p. 97b altogether refer to the multiplying by the marriage connection. For God had power to multiply the race also in different ways, if they kept the precept unbroken 2675 to the end 2676 . But God, Who knoweth all things before they have existence, knowing in His foreknowledge that they would fall into transgression in the future and be condemned to death, anticipated this and made “male and female,” and bade them “be fruitful and multiply.” Let us, then, proceed on our way and see the glories 2677 of virginity: and this also includes chastity.
sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/209/2090136.htm
G
grannymh
Guest
Before you can figure out what feeling naked refers to, you must acknowledge that God the Creator (Genesis 1: 1) exists. And you must acknowledge that Adam, the creature, had a relationship, State of Sanctifying Grace aka State of Original Holiness, with his Creator God.
S
simpleas
Guest
The CCC describes the fall as a deed that took place at the being of mankind. It does not go into detail because Genesis does not go into detail either, so any amount of possibilities could be brought forward by the imagination as to what the sin was.
The CC holds that Adam and Eve disobeyed the command of God and that is enough to know why they became fallen. No description of what the actual sin was is relevant.
To me it has to be a sin like no other that we could ever commit, because they were sinless to begin with, their sin, this break in relation with God that can never be fully put right in this life only in the next must be very different from the sins we now experience.(by this I do not mean we can not receive grace in order to resist sin, I mean that we will never be sinless in this life, unless God decides otherwise)
So going back to the OP, I still don’t think Gen 15-17 is an explanation of Original sin, it is the command, the warning against sinning, not the explanation of it.
The CC holds that Adam and Eve disobeyed the command of God and that is enough to know why they became fallen. No description of what the actual sin was is relevant.
To me it has to be a sin like no other that we could ever commit, because they were sinless to begin with, their sin, this break in relation with God that can never be fully put right in this life only in the next must be very different from the sins we now experience.(by this I do not mean we can not receive grace in order to resist sin, I mean that we will never be sinless in this life, unless God decides otherwise)
So going back to the OP, I still don’t think Gen 15-17 is an explanation of Original sin, it is the command, the warning against sinning, not the explanation of it.
G
grannymh
Guest
The reason Original Sin is “like no other that we could ever commit” is because there is only one original Adam.
And only one original relationship between the creature Adam and the Creator God.Yes, Genesis 2: 15-17 contains a specific warning. Some things to think about. – God loved Adam so much that He gave him this specific warning. We also need to know what exactly does this “sinning” do? Why is Adam’s obedience to God so important that Adam needs a very strong warning?
S
simpleas
Guest
The first part of your post above is where I’mThe reason Original Sin is “like no other that we could ever commit” is because there is only one original Adam.
Yes, Genesis 2: 15-17 contains a specific warning. Some things to think about. – God loved Adam so much that He gave him this specific warning. We also need to know what exactly does this “sinning” do? Why is Adam’s obedience to God so important that Adam needs a very strong warning?
The one original relationship with Adam and God…not sure what this means. Did Eve have an original relationship with God too, yes. And as God is the one who gives each human a soul, each human has their own original relationship with God.I don’t see the importance of only Adam’s original relationship, which might be an error in how to understand the complete Original sin explanation that I continue to question. No one can break our souls connection to God other than our self.
The second part I’d need to think about too.
V
Vico
Guest
Eve’s fall began by prideful thinking, and then prideful indulgence in “the apple”. Adam, however being more perfect, bears a greater sin by condition (per Aquinas) by still through pride, but somehow less than Eve’s in that regard. Since God is omniscient, He knows Eve will sin and that Adam will sin after, and He knows that Eve will also know not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. We are told in Genesis 3:17 that Adam had “hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree”. So we are told that Adam listened carefully to Eve, and then dismissed the command of God.The reason Original Sin is “like no other that we could ever commit” is because there is only one original Adam.
Yes, Genesis 2: 15-17 contains a specific warning. Some things to think about. – God loved Adam so much that He gave him this specific warning. We also need to know what exactly does this “sinning” do? Why is Adam’s obedience to God so important that Adam needs a very strong warning?
Eve claimed deception by the Serpent, and receives the judgement that she will in future “thou shalt be under thy husband’s power, and he shall have dominion over thee”. Eve knew of the command which is told in Genesis 3:3 “But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die.” Yet there it is worded “perhaps” not as in Genesis 2:17 which states “shalt”: “But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.”
P
PJM
Guest
I agree with Granny, your position is not that of the RCC.
As to why they were “feeling’ naked”
This was a a feeling of SHAME for having sinned. They were as God told them that they would be IF [as they choose to do] violated His Trust in them and they, there tust in God.
Blessings,
PJM
S
steve49
Guest
This is true but it has an even deeper affect than this. In St. Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body he talks about man losing sight of who he is because he does not understand the true meaning in the act of procreation. I believe the same is true about original creation. If we have an invalid or tainted view of either original creation or procreation it will impact our understanding of who man is.
A corrupt understanding of the process often leads to a corrupt understanding of the result, which in this case is humanity.
G
grannymh
Guest
That is a very interesting “school of thought that the Original
Sin of Adam and Eve was having sex!” (From the beginning of post 42)
I assume that these sentences from post 45 refer to that interesting school of thought.
“My point is that if the original sin was something else why they should feel naked and should try to cover up with leaves, why you are ‘born with’ this sin etc.Once you put the real meaning (that is having sex) see how clear and meaningful everything becoms.”
Let’s see if I have this right. Once we accept the real meaning (that is having sex) then everything is clear and meaningful. And checking back to post 42, there we find an interesting tree and symbolic sex organs in the midst. Plus, that the original sin has got every thing to do with birth which means it was nothing but having sex.
With all that emphasis on the Original Sin of having sex, what does that “school” – from the beginning of post 42 – say about rape?
S
steve49
Guest
Some have believed that the original sin was an act of contraception during sex. I would say who suggested it privately but I don’t know if he still promotes this idea so I don’t want to say who the individual was.
I disagree with this theory for a few reasons. (1) The further you get from the literal meaning of Scripture the more likely you are to get into error. (2) It is not credible that prior to original sin Adam and Eve would be susceptible to using the design of their bodies in a selfish way. All they knew was their design as it was created.
In original sin, Satan took what is natural to their bodies, eating and used the truth and a lie to get Eve and then Adam to disobey God with their wills, not by doing something unnatural with their bodies. He had to attack the human will first. The sins of the body followed, I think in later generations like the killing of Abel. I do not believe there would be any motivation for Adam and Eve to misuse the bodies God gave them in their perfect original state.
My own personal theory is that the fruit of the tree was being reserved to become what Christ would Consecrate when we would eat His Flesh and Drink His Blood. Once the “sacrilege”, (this is my theory) of Adam and Eve occurred in original sin the tree had to become the cross and the material used prior to Consecration of the Eucharist became bread that is broken and grapes that are crushed. The theology of the fruit of the tree being used for our communion with Christ (again, my theory) is lost because it did not and could not happened that way after original sin.
When we eat Christ’s Flesh and drink His Blood we undo the original sin of Adam and Eve eating and disobeying God. The literal has more meaning today than people tend to believe.
G
grannymh
Guest
Technically, the first words in this post which caught my eye are these.
“Augustine tells us that human nature changed as a result of the Fall, was corrupted by it, and is now inclined to sin.”
Wikipedia uses these words. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin
“Augustine held that the effects of Adam’s sin are transmitted to his descendants not by example but by the very fact of generation from that ancestor. A wounded nature comes to the soul and body of the new person from his/her parents, who experience libido (or concupiscence).”
From the Catholic Church position, over time, the difference between corrupted and wounded became a major theological issue. The final decision, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit at a Major Ecumenical Church Council, was that human nature has not been totally corrupted, it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it.
I wonder if the difference between totally corrupted and wounded would change some parts of this comment which does follow logically. I think it would. What are you thoughts?
“But what was the nature during the Fall? It seems to me that human nature must have been already inclined to sin during the Fall. If corruption is the effect of the Fall, the Original Sin, then Augustine’s doctrine must hold that sin is both the cause and the effect of our fallen nature; but an effect cannot be its own cause. Therefore, the corruption preceded the sin. If the corrupted nature was antecedent, incident and subsequent to the Fall, then human nature did not change.”
**CCC 405 **
Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.
**CCC 406 **The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529) and at the Council of Trent (1546).
G
grannymh
Guest
Briefly. Considering that God gave the forbidden tree its name, what did the name in Genesis 2: 17 refer to? I know you referred to the fruit of the tree and the Eucharist. I am asking specifically about the name in accord with the thread title. (CCC 396, CCC 1730-1732; CCC 311; CCC 301)
S
steve49
Guest
There are two ways to learn about good and evil. There is the hard way, our typical way, and there is God’s way, which is leaning through communion with Him. We originally chose the hard way and the way of death, death that lead to more death.
One last thing about the Eucharist. When you receive bring Mary with you. Let her help you present yourself worthily to her Son. She is the first true yes to God that took Him into her body. We must do the same, say yes as she did and take God into our bodies. Mary’s yes also undid Eve’s no. We follow by doing the same. Mary knew good and evil also but she didn’t have to say no to get that knowledge as she pondered things in her heart.
G
grannymh
Guest
When we use Genesis 2: 15-17 as an explanation of Original Sin, we look to the Person of God first. God in the first three chapters is the Divine Almighty Transcendent super-natural pure spirit Who is the Creator. Before all else, we find homage to God.
Genesis 1:1
1
In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the eartha—
Personally, I like to check the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition which is why I often post paragraph numbers which can be helpful.
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.
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.
The words in bold are clearly evinced in Genesis 2: 15-17. This is one of the reasons we can use Genesis 2: 15-17 as an explanation for Original Sin?
Any questions?
Genesis 1:1
1
In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the eartha—
Personally, I like to check the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition which is why I often post paragraph numbers which can be helpful.
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.
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.
The words in bold are clearly evinced in Genesis 2: 15-17. This is one of the reasons we can use Genesis 2: 15-17 as an explanation for Original Sin?
Any questions?
G
grannymh
Guest
The words “original relationship with Adam and God” is not limited to only one way they can be used. Sorry about that; but, there is nothing I can do to get rid of the different ways.The first part of your post above is where I’m
I don’t see the importance of only Adam’s original relationship, which might be an error in how to understand the complete Original sin explanation that I continue to question. No one can break our souls connection to God other than our self.
The second part I’d need to think about too.
For example: Eve is the second individual on planet earth. Because she is a true human person, her relationship with God is basically fundamentally equal to the first human’s relationship with God. Both females and males are in the image of God.
Genesis, chapter 1. usccb.org/bible/genesis/1
27
God created mankind in His image;
in the image of God He created them;
male and female* He created them.
Because Eve is a human individual, we can say that her own relationship with with God is original with her. Because Adam is a human individual, he, too, has an relationship which is original to him. We need to apply CCC 396 and CCC 1730 to both Eve and Adam.
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.
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.
The importance of Adam’s individual original relationship with God is seen in God’s timing for bringing Adam into the Garden. Eve is not present. She comes after Genesis 2: 15-17.
Genesis, chapter 2
18
The LORD God said: It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suited to him.* k
The good thing about Eve not being present is that she is not responsible for the Original Sin.
Comments?
- Status