Original Sin affects innocent child

  • Thread starter Thread starter Whit_Dupree
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
**Whit: Love-for-All gives a wonderful description of the principles of Original Sin. The Original Sin was a desire for Life, for the Tree of Life, and for the Tree of Knowledge.

Response: I agree LFA gave a fine account. I like it. Yep, God could have made mankind with the ability to always opt for good, even with freewill, by use of reason, checking the book of right/wrong acts to accomplish good/bad practical and moral consequences or by giving mankind a strong inner moral compass. But he made mankind a little bit naive & stupid and gave enough free will to make error, small and large. The creation story is brief; the OT is long; and the NT is about the correct size to say what needs to be said, but it gets duplicated. Yep, I agree the Gospels are channeling the word of God through man qua authors, but likewise for the breakthroughs of science and art.

This led to the fall of the angels into the bodies of men – for the fertilization of Nature. The Father God tempts the angels to fall: “Be fruitful and multiply.” This was a command of the Father God, the Fertility God. But hidden in this command was the implicit punishment, mortality. Children are also cursed with mortality. Life, the gift of light in Youth, turns into Death, the curse of darkness in Maturity. But there is a happy ending, in that angels who become sinful men also rebecome pure angels again. When the empire falls, man returns to a purer state again.
Response: Interesting story about angels and a return; but you don’t put in a filtering of those angels returning home, in the form of Judgment. Some may have truly been traitors and criminals and spies for evil.

Cousin John the Baptist is an interesting person in the NT. What was the source of his knowledge of Jesus that He was divine? Revelation while living in the desert away from people? Intuitively from experience while in an extra-ordinary womb?
 
The Twin Tower attack in 2001 is a wonderful graphic image of God’s splitting the United proud man into two, the Tower of Babel experience. Clearly God is still alive, and giving signs for those who wish to read them.)
No one should listen to you ever again. I’ve reported your post.
 
In discussion, Fr. gave this explanation for how best to view a child born into a state of original sin: the world is one of a broken relation with God due to acts by first parents; the new born child of 2013 has not sinned nor has an intent to act in such a way; and thus should not be punished for first parents’ actions. Rather, says, Fr., the child suffers from an “ontological wound”. I raised the objection that being is unaffected by the relation between God and man. Fr. did not understand my comment. A group member mentioned that God was the ground of being, thus if He has a broken relation with a creature or class of creatures, then in that way being is affected. I objected that God may well be being + more (to include some ilk of personhood), but that being just is; does not have characteristics; and thus is neutral in a moral debate. I think of being as a substratum, a ground. The description by Fr. involves a category mistake: not useful to conflate being with morality. Please comment and set me straight according to Catholic tradition and teaching. Thank you.
The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man.”
Source: Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 396-405
 
No one should listen to you ever again. I’ve reported your post.
I’m suggesting that America (and all nations) as all inddividuals, are imperfect, and go through inflations, which are periods of sin, periods of empire, periods of self-worship. They also go through Tower of Babel experience, when God strikes them. This begins the dark side of their experience. The decline of the deflated Ego. And the re-approach to God again.

America is proud, like the Roman Empire was proud. The New Jesus will have nothing to do with the American Empire, as the last Jesus had nothing to do with the Roman Empire. He will turn his back on the American Empire.

You may be seeing only the light side of the American Empire, which I know exists, and is bright and beautiful. But there is a shadow side also, which is less exemplary.

I love America. But I don’t love the American Empire. We spend billions every year on new massive weapons of destruction, and then scream and shout about providing food for the weak and the poor in America. We spend billions every year for the largest military in the history of the planet, to keep the world free we are told, and there is some truth in this – but the shadow of this truth is that our military keeps the world free for our super-rich corporations to make exhorbitant profits of most of the nations of the Earth. Our worhip of the Money God is appalling. Clearly this is not what Jesus espoused. If Jesus had wanted to become a rich warrior for the Empire, he would have become a Roman Legionaire, instead of taking the path he did take.

Worship of the Money God is destroying America. That is my view.
 
Response: Interesting story about angels and a return; but you don’t put in a filtering of those angels returning home, in the form of Judgment. Some may have truly been traitors and criminals and spies for evil.

Cousin John the Baptist is an interesting person in the NT. What was the source of his knowledge of Jesus that He was divine? Revelation while living in the desert away from people? Intuitively from experience while in an extra-ordinary womb?
When we are alone we are visited by spirits. They come into our minds and into our souls as ideas, images. If we listen to them, play with them, they show us how the world works. They won’t approach us unless we are alone. The spirits want to teach us about the world and about our own nature. They also want to help us to understand why we are here.

John the Baptist spent a lot of time alone and a lot of time communicating with the spirits. The Greeks believed that our highest Principle was our daimon, or are gurdian angel, or our Genius. When we are alone, if we reach the highest Principle, we can visit the court of the Highest Guardian Angel, and learn from him.
 
When we are alone we are visited by spirits. They come into our minds and into our souls as ideas, images. If we listen to them, play with them, they show us how the world works. They won’t approach us unless we are alone. The spirits want to teach us about the world and about our own nature. They also want to help us to understand why we are here.

John the Baptist spent a lot of time alone and a lot of time communicating with the spirits. The Greeks believed that our highest Principle was our daimon, or are gurdian angel, or our Genius. When we are alone, if we reach the highest Principle, we can visit the court of the Highest Guardian Angel, and learn from him.
I have not read where the Greeks of Plato’s era believed that the set of highest Principles, I assume you refer to Platonic Forms, was per se Socrates’ daimon; so, you might tell me where to go research that point. I’ve experienced the daimon, or Holy Spirit, or Guide, or Guardian Angle, Old Souls, spirits, when with others and not alone, only. Otherwise, I tend to agree with your above statement. We are assuming John the Baptist knew who Jesus was by this method, which I would call some ilk of revealed knowledge, but I wonder if there is any canonical gospel or historical account of how John knew. And, while I would tend to believe the ideas and images that come – apparently from off the wall – into our mind, I do not know if this view is coherent with experts who have experienced revealed knowledge. I wonder if William James’ book on religious experiences mentions this point.
 
“this world can certainly be looked upon as formative, rather than merely reformative/punitive, but in any case here is where the choice faces us: good over evil, life over death, God over no God. God is in the business of perfecting His creation, having created it “in statu viae”, in a state of journeying, as the Catholic faith puts it.”

Very good: I agree. To me it does not matter if – 1) There are up to four reincarnations allowed, hopefully with each increasing in the cumulative “soul making” that is the apparent purpose of mankind’s life on Earth, or 2) After death of body on Earth, and if granted entrance past the Gates of Heaven, then one’s body is glorified, whatever that may mean. Apparently it means perfection as to function, health, aesthetics, and other characteristics, as illustrated by shinning white light or white halo emanating from the body or head. Having a resurrected or second body seems to imply that it is in some sense corporeal like the body on Earth. That is to say, soul would not be pure spirit alone. But if a body, then one has the onus of describing it, indeed, if spirit only, then that too is difficult to fully describe.

Now, that gets us to mystery. Mystery is a wave of the hand, as an explanation. We have incomplete knowledge. If allowed into Heaven, presumedly, we would have direct knowledge of the body/spirit distinction.
 
Adam and Eve eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge (of Good and Evil) represents what? Biblical writing is metaphorical. What is it we do (the allegorical Adam and Eve did) that separates us from God? What is Knowledge of Good and Evil, and how do we gain this knowledge?
Of course, we know that Adam and Eve were more than allegories. They were flesh and blood people. We even celebrate their feast day on December 24. Before sin, there was only love, communion with God. In disobeying God, whatever that sin consisted of, man suddenly was aware of good and evil. This contrast did not exist except in the mind of God before Eve and then Adam sinned. We should not wish to gain it, but to flee it, to seek to immerse ourselves in God’s love, to never consider evil again. God gives us that power to avoid evil, to focus our hearts and minds on him, doing his will, becoming like him, becoming love again, as we once were in Paradise. It is communion with him that we seek, the soul does not rest, as Augustine says, until it rests in him. Life is preparation for death, for only in death and the new life that follows can we come to the beatific vision, which is the final port of our seafaring souls.
Isn’t it birth, itself, that separates us from God? Coming in to this world?
No, birth does not separate us from God. We do not exist until he forms us in our mother’s womb, infusing us with a human soul at the moment of our conception. We are born in separation, but it is not by virtue of our birth, for to be born of Adam and Eve prior to their disobedience would have been birth into communion with Almighty God. It is by virtue of Adam’s sin that separation exists at our birth, not by sin that we have committed, but by sin that we have contracted. But praise be to Jesus Christ, the Light, who came into the world to save us from this unhappy plight. He came through a Virgin, who herself was without sin by dispensation according to his future merits gained on the Cross, and he himself was born with no separation between himself and his Father, God.
Incarnating or reincarnating?
You know as a Catholic that it is written once to die and once to come unto judgment.
This world, the Earthly world, exists to show us the difference between right and wrong?
The earthly world is God’s gift to us. By our sin (I am speaking of mankind in general) we have also brought upon ourselves suffering and death.
Jesus came down to the Earth to show humans on Earth the ‘way’ back to heaven. He became the path that humans needed to walk to get back to heaven.
He did come to show us the way back to the Father, and more than that, to open the gates of heaven, by his sacrificial death on our behalf, which satisfied God’s demand for justice. And guess what? He did not take away suffering and death. No, he showed us that it was our just due and that the way back through the now reopened gates of heaven was to accept that suffering and that death and to united it with his own suffering and death as part of this great offering to the Father and sign of our obedience to his divine will. It is our gift of love back to him who first loved us. It is the meaning of “take up your cross and follow me.”
All the values the Earth celebrates – wealth, power, success, glory, pride, glamor most of all – these are sinful values in the eye of Heaven.
Wealth, power, and success are lesser goods. They are not evil in themselves. Glorying in oneself, pride in oneself, these are sins. A humble spirit and a contrite heart God will not spurn. Glamor is but the attraction of things that sometimes turn our attention away from him. The Christian detaches himself from lesser goods to embrace greater goods, and in the end to embrace only one good, God himself.
This suggests the idea that Life is evil, life is a fall.
Life is not evil. Life is God’s gift to us. And to make it more perfect, he sent his Son into the world to bring us unto life everlasting by showing us how to receive his Spirit and to live godly lives, so that we could be with him forever in heaven.
The Original Sin was choosing to be born or reborn.
The original sin was disobeying God. Adam and Eve were already created, neither of them “born” as Adam was created from the dust of the earth and Eve was created from out of Adam. They had no choice in the matter, nor do we have a choice, but praise God that he imagined us and allowed us to be born into the world.
 
Choosing Life. Then one wonders why we have that choice; or do we really have that choice? If it is not a choice, and simply something we experience, like a wave of water in the ocean – and then we are tested on Earth to see if we can find our way back home, then life is less a SIN than it is a TEST, which we all pass when we die and rejoin our God in heaven – or which we don’t all pass. Why would God tempt us to fall, tempt us to eat of this outlawed Tree?
Life is a test. Because of concupiscence that we acquired due to original sin, we are inclined to sin. Sin leads us to the death of the soul. You might say that the world conspires to keep us in sin, but praise God, Jesus came to show us the way back to God, the way to overcome sin, the way to pass the tests that our lives are strewn with, the way to love, which is to say, follow his example, follow in his footsteps, and unite ourselves to him who has overcome the world.
The East views rebirth, reincarnation as an evil to be avoided – because it necessitates death in the future, a painful sense of loss and hopelessness and empty experience. The West views resurrection as a gift from God, a return to heeaven. But is this resurrection permanent? Or does it end again in death and alienation? Those seem like important questions.
What a hopeless hellish thought that is! But of course resurrection is permanent. There is no question in the minds of those who follow Jesus Christ with all their hearts and believe in his words, and believe in God’s sacred scriptures. It is given to us to die once and then to come unto judgment, and us Catholics who live godly lives, led by the Spirit, who eat the Body of Christ and drink the Blood of Christ as he offers to us in the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, we are assured of acquittal at that last day.
 
Thank you for clarity on the Catholic teaching of this point, in particular, reincarnation vs. resurrection.

Can you please give us readers background and context in epistemological grounding for the certainty of Catholic Church teaching and acceptance of the canonical gospels as being the word of God and the only channel for God’s knowledge to be given to mankind? – perhaps a citation of secondary sources on the original debate in a Church council or a pronouncement by a Vatican document for purposes of my further understanding.

While I accept that this body of Catholic religious thought has been developing and accumulating into a treasury of ideas and set of individual, family, and church best practice for many persons over a long term and set to elegant writing by smart theologians and churchmen, I am – as an auditor – concerned with completeness and also with adequacy of the warrant.

E.g., as to the notion of reincarnation: I would not like to accept reincarnation as an endless eternal return that is futile to the human individual or worse to humankind, but I see no objection to a few incarnations or re-incarnations, especially if each exhibits hope that the end product will be the satisfaction of God’s objective for man, and then have a resurrected body in Heaven.

Can the wisdom or ideas of the East have no influence upon the ideas accepted by the Church into its teaching?-- as apparently happened with Plato on this topic. Ideas that seem in error by the Church are taken to be heretical, and eventually anathema. Reincarnation of any type is anathema? The one life with one corresponding judgment is all that is available to a person, without appeal or reconsideration? – with resurrection of that exact body down to the atomic level that is glorified evermore. It seems that resurrection cannot be stated in a well formed sentence that conveys meaning and with a minimum of description and explanation that could be taken as sufficient to the understanding.

Reincarnation is known by a single passage in one accepted gospel and also through a long history of translations through several languages? – discussed and adopted into doctrine without the possibility of allowing further future evidence into the debate, because that debate is closed, by an appeal to the authority of the vote of a Church Council, whose members, through prayer, are guided by the Holy Spirit.

If that is the case, then is this description one of folk psychology that may be so determined by a future science, enlightened by empirical facts, and at that point this particular point within the Church doctrine will get modified due to the equivalent of a religious paradigm shift or else this tenant of the religion doctrine dies out.

Suppose that mankind becomes in the future, moral, among many salutary effects of learning, and such individuals become like saints and do not die but are assumed straight into Heaven. Then with more time and practice of the new understanding, many individual persons no longer die. Would that then count as new evidence such as to amend the doctrine?

I use the term doctrine to mean “the revealed teaching of Christ *** by authority of the Church’s Magisterium”, which the faithful are obligated to believe – I take it to mean qua truth (T), where T means correspondence between the saying and the fact. The creed is a summary statement of Christian faith, and the Nicene Creed says in part “We look for the resurrection of the dead”. And you then bring the “one life w. one judgment” to the discussion, and the conclusion is your original article. I don’t take your article as incorrect, as I am merely learning, but the implication is that case is closed, never to be opened again, even if it were in error when debated and even if new evidence is found that speaks against it.

Thank you for the consideration.
 
Thank you for clarity on the Catholic teaching of this point, in particular, reincarnation vs. resurrection…

… I don’t take your article as incorrect, as I am merely learning, but the implication is that case is closed, never to be opened again, even if it were in error when debated and even if new evidence is found that speaks against it.

Thank you for the consideration.
[Whit, I cut out a lot of what you wrote to conserve space.]

To summarize what you said, if you’ll allow me the liberty of reading between the lines and making judgments into your mind that might well be fallacious (so correct me if I’m wrong), you yourself are intrigued by the notion of reincarnation, you politely infer that the Church has little basis on which to found its teaching on the subject, a scant single line of text, it should be more open to the wisdom of Eastern cultures where reincarnation is believed, it appears to be unreasoning, arbitrary, close-minded, and to hide behind a cloak of infallibility, and likely will not change its opinion even when confronted with evidence to the contrary, although you hope this is not true.

You may be right, but I don’t believe so. There is no evidence for the debate, although you hold out for evidence that may appear someday in the future. Jesus certainly did not teach reincarnation. He did teach about hell, however, and so does the Bible in many places, a teaching that is incompatible with the Eastern idea of reincarnation. He taught about heaven, too. Also, if you recall, he descended into the netherworld where he freed the souls of the just who had been waiting for the gates of heaven to be reopened. They were not busy reincarnating, no, they were waiting in this place between earth and heaven for the Messiah to appear and free them.

On the resurrection of the dead, yes, the case is closed.

Here is how the one Catholic source puts it:

The creeds and professions of faith and conciliar definitions do not leave it doubtful that the resurrection of the body is a dogma or an article of faith. We may appeal, for instance, to the Apostles’ Creed, the so-called Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, the Creed of the Eleventh Council of Toledo, the Creed of Leo IX, subscribed by Bishop Peter and still in use at the consecration of bishops the profession of faith subscribed by Michael Palaeologus in the Second Council of Lyons, the Creed of Pius IV, and the Decree of the Fourth Lateran Council (c. “Firmiter”) against the Albigenses. This article of faith is based on the belief of the Old Testament, on the teaching of the New Testament, and on Christian tradition. newadvent.org/library/almanac_thisrock94.htm

I found you a little article (below) in the Catholic Encyclopedia that talks briefly about Nirvana, Karma and reincarnation. The Catholic Church does not ignore Eastern thought. Catholic scholars have studied the belief systems of others and have formed very clear critiques of them in light of the revelation of Jesus Christ. I’m sure you can find plenty of material on Eastern thought from a Catholic perspective. Oh, and by the way, I, too, am an auditor, or was in my past life (that is to say, before I retired). 🙂 Peace.

In Buddhism, nirvana is the final state the soul reaches on its journey through different lifetimes. These lifetimes are pictured as a series of lamps, one being lit by another, until the final lamp goes out. The word “nirvana” means “going out” or “extinguishing.”

According to Buddhists, our desires and cravings are what keep the process of reincarnation going. By eliminating all desires it is possible to escape the cycle of rebirth. When a person manages to extinguish all his desires, he reaches a state of nirvana and is said to be a saint.

When a saint dies he enters nirvana proper, in which he loses his identity as a distinct individual. Buddha compared the question “Does a saint survive his death?” to the question “Where does a flame go when it is blown out?” Both questions are thought to be intrinsically unanswerable. Neither a dead saint nor a blown-out flame have individual identities anymore.

Nirvana is different from the Christian idea of heaven. Nirvana is a state of desirelessness; heaven is a state of havings one’s most fundamental desire (for God) fulfilled. Nirvana is a state of ultimate apathy and indifference, heaven of ultimate joy and fulfillment. Paradoxically, Buddhists regard nirvana, the state of desirelessness, as the most desirable state.

Nirvana also differs from heaven because it suggests one will eternally lose his body and his individual identity, while Christians claim they will keep both of them eternally. newadvent.org/cathen/12792a.htm
 
What God knows is that anything which lies outside of His will is ipso facto evil. The very act of rebellion-eating of the fruit-was the first instance of such a state for man. Evil was already known by that act, which is why shame and guilt also entered simultaneously. From then on man would continue to know the evil of being separated from God, especially as he would now exist in a world where other fellow humans were likewise separated, going their own ways, “doing what is right in their own eyes”, as scripture tells us, with sin very often the result. All humans know good and evil in this life; all human beings suffer from separation from their Creator. .
You said, “Jesus came to restore faith in God, ultimately to effect communion with Him, where order and man’s justice are realized- the only way they can be realized”
That is incorrect theology! Jesus did not come to restore faith in God! By His death and resurrection (being the 2. Adam), he provided a way for human beings to have a chance for life, life eternal and in God’s presence (in Heaven). The first Adam had by his sin and high treason severed the relationship that humans had with God. Had it not been for Jesus’s coming, His willingness to go through His excedingly painful death and then His ressurection, we would have had to face eternal death. By Adam’s action we all died! One for all. By Jesus’ action, we all have the opportunity to choose life. Aganin - one for all! We come to Him by faith, but that is our choice! That is how a relationship and thus communion with God is established. Man’s order and justice has nothing to do with this issue!
 
You said, “Jesus came to restore faith in God, ultimately to effect communion with Him, where order and man’s justice are realized- the only way they can be realized”
That is incorrect theology! Jesus did not come to restore faith in God! By His death and resurrection (being the 2. Adam), he provided a way for human beings to have a chance for life, life eternal and in God’s presence (in Heaven). The first Adam had by his sin and high treason severed the relationship that humans had with God. Had it not been for Jesus’s coming, His willingness to go through His excedingly painful death and then His ressurection, we would have had to face eternal death. By Adam’s action we all died! One for all. By Jesus’ action, we all have the opportunity to choose life. Aganin - one for all! We come to Him by faith, but that is our choice! That is how a relationship and thus communion with God is established. Man’s order and justice has nothing to do with this issue!
I don’t know where to start. I’ll try backing up a bit.* Of course* faith is a choice-one man isn’t forced to make. However God makes us the offer, via the Incarnation, in which Jesus reveals the face of the Father as never before. He demonstrates the existence of God, the power of God, His trustworthiness in spite of man’s mistrust (trust having died in man’s heart with his first sin according to the Catechism), His forgiveness, His mercy, most importantly His unconditional boundless love for man despite man’s hatred for Him. When we see Jesus we see the Father. But man doesn’t have to even admit that he has a father besides his natural one. Man is lost whether he knows it or not, born separated from his Creator, without even faith in, let alone love for God-a prodigal in need of being woken to the fact that he’s living in a pigsty so he can run back to the open arms of his Father. And this separation constitutes an injustice, a disorder in God’s universe-something which was not meant to be. It constitutes a death, what theologians sometimes call the ‘death of the soul’, and is the principle characteristic of the Original Sin which all men inherit. And this is why man must be ‘born again’, or ‘born from above’. When communion with God is restored, justice is restored. IOW this relationship with God is the source of man’s righteousness- the only source of it.
 
Of course, we know that Adam and Eve were more than allegories. They were flesh and blood people. We even celebrate their feast day on December 24. Before sin, there was only love, communion with God. In disobeying God, whatever that sin consisted of, man suddenly was aware of good and evil. This contrast did not exist except in the mind of God before Eve and then Adam sinned. We should not wish to gain it, but to flee it, to seek to immerse ourselves in God’s love, to never consider evil again. God gives us that power to avoid evil, to focus our hearts and minds on him, doing his will, becoming like him, becoming love again, as we once were in Paradise. It is communion with him that we seek, the soul does not rest, as Augustine says, until it rests in him. Life is preparation for death, for only in death and the new life that follows can we come to the beatific vision, which is the final port of our seafaring souls.

No, birth does not separate us from God. We do not exist until he forms us in our mother’s womb, infusing us with a human soul at the moment of our conception. We are born in separation, but it is not by virtue of our birth, for to be born of Adam and Eve prior to their disobedience would have been birth into communion with Almighty God. It is by virtue of Adam’s sin that separation exists at our birth, not by sin that we have committed, but by sin that we have contracted. But praise be to Jesus Christ, the Light, who came into the world to save us from this unhappy plight. He came through a Virgin, who herself was without sin by dispensation according to his future merits gained on the Cross, and he himself was born with no separation between himself and his Father, God.

You know as a Catholic that it is written once to die and once to come unto judgment.

The earthly world is God’s gift to us. By our sin (I am speaking of mankind in general) we have also brought upon ourselves suffering and death.

He did come to show us the way back to the Father, and more than that, to open the gates of heaven, by his sacrificial death on our behalf, which satisfied God’s demand for justice. And guess what? He did not take away suffering and death. No, he showed us that it was our just due and that the way back through the now reopened gates of heaven was to accept that suffering and that death and to united it with his own suffering and death as part of this great offering to the Father and sign of our obedience to his divine will. It is our gift of love back to him who first loved us. It is the meaning of “take up your cross and follow me.”

Wealth, power, and success are lesser goods. They are not evil in themselves. Glorying in oneself, pride in oneself, these are sins. A humble spirit and a contrite heart God will not spurn. Glamor is but the attraction of things that sometimes turn our attention away from him. The Christian detaches himself from lesser goods to embrace greater goods, and in the end to embrace only one good, God himself.

Life is not evil. Life is God’s gift to us. And to make it more perfect, he sent his Son into the world to bring us unto life everlasting by showing us how to receive his Spirit and to live godly lives, so that we could be with him forever in heaven.

The original sin was disobeying God. Adam and Eve were already created, neither of them “born” as Adam was created from the dust of the earth and Eve was created from out of Adam. They had no choice in the matter, nor do we have a choice, but praise God that he imagined us and allowed us to be born into the world.
John the Baptist came to baptize the faithful with water. Water is the element of Faith. But he told his followers to await Jesus’ baptism, which would be greater still, with Fire.

Fire is the element of Mind. God wants us to see him with our minds. Do you see Adam and Eve with your mind or just repeat the catechism faithfully? There is a difference. Ask Jewish scholars and they will tell you Adam and Eve are symbols, archetypes. None of them will tell you that Adam and Eve were flesh and blood people in the world. They are IDEAS. Jewish mysticism believes that the Bible teaches evolution. The Bible is allegorical writing. There is no proof that King Solomon even existed literally; but he exists as an archetype, a pattern of ideas.

Noah is not literal. Why the need to make Noah literal? He has just as much potency as an Idea; he represents a truth as an archetype. The concrete mind is so obsessed with the literal, as if proving there was a Great Flood (there were many Great Floods) will prove (to the literal mind and to the scientific skeptics) that a literal reading of the Bible is historically true. It is not. The Bible is not literal history. It is figurative, poetic history: dream and reality interwoven; life is the same.
 
Would it help, if Original Sin only affected evil people and those who are not liked for whatever reason?
 
John the Baptist came to baptize the faithful with water. Water is the element of Faith. But he told his followers to await Jesus’ baptism, which would be greater still, with Fire.

Fire is the element of Mind. God wants us to see him with our minds. Do you see Adam and Eve with your mind or just repeat the catechism faithfully? There is a difference. Ask Jewish scholars and they will tell you Adam and Eve are symbols, archetypes. None of them will tell you that Adam and Eve were flesh and blood people in the world. They are IDEAS. Jewish mysticism believes that the Bible teaches evolution. The Bible is allegorical writing. There is no proof that King Solomon even existed literally; but he exists as an archetype, a pattern of ideas.

Noah is not literal. Why the need to make Noah literal? He has just as much potency as an Idea; he represents a truth as an archetype. The concrete mind is so obsessed with the literal, as if proving there was a Great Flood (there were many Great Floods) will prove (to the literal mind and to the scientific skeptics) that a literal reading of the Bible is historically true. It is not. The Bible is not literal history. It is figurative, poetic history: dream and reality interwoven; life is the same.
I am not Jewish, so what they believe or do not believe has no bearing on what I believe. I believe the Holy Spirit enlightens the Catholic Church in its interpretation of the sacred texts, something I do not attribute to Judaism. If Jewish Rabbis could properly discern the Bible texts, they would accept Jesus as the messiah, which they do not.

One does not have to be a fundamentalist to construe parts of the Bible literally, as indeed some parts are meant to be taken literally. Such, I believe, is the case regarding the existence of Adam and Eve. That is not to say that their creation was not over a long period of time through an evolutionary process to a point at which God breathed into them a human soul. That is also not to deny the possibility that their creation was on the spot and not evolutionary. If anyone knows with certitude, let them step forward. The Church apparently also believes they were two specific people, and has appointed December 24 for their feast day as saints in the Church.

Be careful that just because a story in the Bible makes a good moral tale to automatically believe that it is just that, a tale, a fiction, to teach some truth or other. I believe a real Noah existed. I think the Church shares this belief.
 
Because you are not Jewish you can’t learn from the Jews. Do you not accept the Old Testatment as God’s word? Even Jesus said he did not come to overthrow the Old Law but to update it…

I don’t think the Bible is devaluated because it…simply makes a good moral tale. The Bible is filled with truths about life and about man’s history and his future history. Our scientific mind wants to draw a division between a fact (something that REALLY HAPPENED) and philsoophy/myth, something that didn’t happen and is just a story. Spiritual writing, and spiritual cultures, do not make that differentiation. Dreams are real. The are real in a different way that a freight train is real; but one must understand the difference to understand the meanings of these two different but equal realities.

I’m copying a web site below that talks about the Noahs and the Great Floods that are embedded in many religions previous to Judaism. The Great Flood is an archetype. A pattern in the human unconscious that helps explain th enature of our shared lives/life.

Nuah in Chaldean meant ‘spirit’. In Hinduism the Monad (Spirit-Soul, Atma-Buddhi) is the only Principle (2 in 1) that survives the Great Flood, the Pralaya, the Night-Cycle of dissolution of the world. Think of 1929-1947 as a Pralaya, a Night-Cycle: depression, social unheaval, world war, genocide: that is the nature of a Pralaya. They come every 36 years, in fact. Atma-Buddhi, Spirit-Soul, survives this Dark Night of the Soul. Nuah is the Spirit name that survives the Flood in his ark, his moon – Sun and Moon – Husband and Wife – this is the monad that survives the dark holocaust, that we are encountering again today, in fact: 2001-2019. Inflation, the Mundane World expands and the material world experiences evolution and progress; Deflation, the Flood sweeps that world away again. Think of the world created from 1911-1929. Then think what happened to that world from 1929-1947. That was the Flood. It comes back and is an eternal archetype.

Every culture has a story about the man who survived the Great Flood. Vaivasvata Manu, Deucalion, Xisuthrus…
 
theosophytrust.org/tlodocs/articlesSymbol.php?d=ArkThe-0375.htm&p=13

The Ark
Code:
The ark floating upon the waters of the deep is a symbol to be found in the traditional wisdom of peoples all over the world. The marks of great floods are embedded in the stratigraphic records of buried cities in all lands, and their elements have been combined in myriad ways with ancient seed ideas handed down like the flame in the ark from the earliest days of the human race.

In ancient Sumeria, Xisuthrus escaped the destruction of a great deluge in an ark. After seven days and nights during which the flood raged over the land and the huge boat was tossed on the waters, the Sun-God arose, shedding light on heaven and earth. Seeing this, Xisuthrus made an opening in the side of the great ship and let in the light. In ancient Greek mythology, Deucalion, son of Prometheus, built a chest or ark in which he floated for nine days during a flood sent by Zeus to destroy the men of the Bronze Age. The Biblical flood describes Noah building an ark in which he placed animals two by two, the progenitors of future animal life. After unceasing rain for forty days and forty nights, the ark came to rest on Mount Ararat.

Different elements are stressed in these myths: the idea of the ark transporting the Sun-God, Deucalion's flood referring to the fall of Atlantis, and the Biblical tradition conveying the concept of preserving life. Taken singly, these accounts focus attention upon the drama of the hero and the great flood. But in examining the meaning of the ark as a symbol and as a word, a deeper meaning emerges.

In Egyptian mythology, Isis set her son Osiris afloat in an ark or chest which was called argo. The cyclic pattern of birth, death and revivification is symbolized by Osiris floating within the ark upon the abyss of the world - the Nile. Osiris represents the soul or sun cyclically manifesting to the world. The Nile, flooding and subsiding every year, symbolized the cyclic pattern of the emergence of the earth between periods of submersion into non-manifestation or night. Argo is also the name of a constellation which signified for the ancient Egyptians the infant Osiris floating in the Ocean of Space.

The sun in Egyptian symbolism was depicted as sailing upon a solar barque called the 'Barque of Millions of Years' or the Boat of Ra. Ra arose from the East each morning and began his journey through the watery abyss of the sky. This Manjet-Boat was manned by a number of gods who acted as crew, the personifications of various aspects of the sun's power. On his night voyage, Ra sailed in another barque, the Mesektet-Boat, which was a serpent with a head at either end. He was again accompanied by a crew of gods and confronted always by the hostile serpent Apep who lived in the celestial waters. During the night Ra would pass the barque through twelve dangerous provinces where the souls of the dead were tried on their journey to a new life. The night of the soul is the night of death between light, lives and worlds. The 'Barque of Millions of Years' is the vehicle of the daily sun, but also the ark which carries soul-wisdom across the waters of cyclic manifestation and non-manifestation.

The ark also represents the moon, the argha or symbol of Diana. In the Hebrew Kabbalah it is in the crescent argha that "the germ of nature and of mankind floats or broods on the great abyss during the intervals which take place after every great mundane cycle." The name given to the city of Thebes or Th-aba is another word for the ark as a vessel of mankind. Kartha or Tyre, Astu or Athens, Urbs or Rome, are all names of cities reflecting this same idea. In more mystical language, arghya in Sanskrit refers to the libation cup, and Arghya Varsha is the Land of Libations or the place of the gods which stretches from Mount Kailas to the Schamo Desert. This sacred place is the birthplace of lo, the mother of physical humanity. It is the same place that is indicated by the Greek Argos which, in its deepest sense, does not refer to a place in Greece but to the birthplace of a Kingly Race, presumably that from which the tenth or Kalki Avatar will issue. The word also refers to arg or arca, the female generative power symbolized in the moon. lo, which also means moon, indicates the Divine Androgyne symbolized by the number 10. Ark is the mystic name of the divine spirit of life which broods over chaos; the Holy of Holies, the Ark of the Covenant.

In ancient Egypt the ark was a beautiful and chaste sarcophagus, the symbol of the matrix of nature and resurrection. During initiation in the King's Chamber of the Pyramid of Cheops, the Candidate, representing the Solar God, descended into the sarcophagus, re-enacting the entry of the Life Ray into the womb of nature. The Candidate emerged on the third morning as the resurrection of life after death. This magnificent mystery was intimated in the Sumerian myth where the Sun-God penetrated into the ark.

In Isis Unveiled the ark is related to the survival of life and the supremacy of spirit over matter through the conflict of the opposing forces in nature. The name Noah or Nuah, The Secret Doctrine tells us, indicates spirit falling into matter. The flood itself represents the Old Serpent or the Great Deep of matter over which the ark passes on its way to the Mount of Salvation. Often the flood is called the Dragon over which the Lunar Goddesses reign. The water is the feminine principle, and as the deluge is chaotic, unsettled matter. The word 'ark' also refers to the navel, the umbilicus connected with the receptacle in which are fructified the germs of the race. The mountain is the sacred place of new birth where the ark finds refuge at the center of the world. In Hindu tradition it is known as Mount Meru, the navel of the world. Clearly the cycle of the ark indicates the process of transmission of life and wisdom.
 
Because you are not Jewish you can’t learn from the Jews. Do you not accept the Old Testatment as God’s word? Even Jesus said he did not come to overthrow the Old Law but to update it…
You are putting words in my mouth, sir or madam. I never said I cannot learn from the Jews; my wife is Jewish, and I have learned plenty from her. The Jewish scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit, but the Jewish interpreters are not as reliable in my opinion with regards to the Scriptures as evidenced by their complete ignorance that their Scriptures prefigure the life of Jesus Christ, his birth, his ministry, and his passion and death, Mary and her role in salvation, and the Catholic Church. The Church may get it wrong on matters not related to faith and morals, but I still trust their scholarship over that of the Jews, especially because it correctly gets the meaning of the “inspired” message contained in the texts.
 
Because you are not Jewish you can’t learn from the Jews. Do you not accept the Old Testatment as God’s word? Even Jesus said he did not come to overthrow the Old Law but to update it…

I don’t think the Bible is devaluated because it…simply makes a good moral tale.
If that’s all it does, it is completely devalued. Either it is the Word of God, or it simply makes a good moral tale-- which is it?
The Bible is filled with truths about life and about man’s history and his future history. Our scientific mind wants to draw a division between a fact (something that REALLY HAPPENED) and philsoophy/myth, something that didn’t happen and is just a story. Spiritual writing, and spiritual cultures, do not make that differentiation. Dreams are real. The are real in a different way that a freight train is real; but one must understand the difference to understand the meanings of these two different but equal realities.
I agree that truth can be taught by actual events as well as by stories, such as the parables of Jesus. Where I differ from you is where you draw the line between fact and fiction. You seem to favor a near wholesale reduction of the Bible to fiction and myth, albeit that reveals eternal truths. I, and the Catholic Church, disagree with that premise. And, BTW, I don’t have trouble understanding the difference between dreams and freight trains, or how they are both real. I don’t think that will present a problem past the age of seven.
I’m copying a web site below that talks about the Noahs and the Great Floods that are embedded in many religions previous to Judaism. The Great Flood is an archetype. A pattern in the human unconscious that helps explain th enature of our shared lives/life.
I studied the ancient myths and stories years ago in college. How do you know they have anything at all to do with patterns in the human unconscious? At the bottom I have an excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia regarding the ancient flood stories.
Nuah in Chaldean meant ‘spirit’. In Hinduism the Monad (Spirit-Soul, Atma-Buddhi) is the only Principle (2 in 1) that survives the Great Flood, the Pralaya, the Night-Cycle of dissolution of the world. Think of 1929-1947 as a Pralaya, a Night-Cycle: depression, social unheaval, world war, genocide: that is the nature of a Pralaya. They come every 36 years, in fact. Atma-Buddhi, Spirit-Soul, survives this Dark Night of the Soul. Nuah is the Spirit name that survives the Flood in his ark, his moon – Sun and Moon – Husband and Wife – this is the monad that survives the dark holocaust, that we are encountering again today, in fact: 2001-2019. Inflation, the Mundane World expands and the material world experiences evolution and progress; Deflation, the Flood sweeps that world away again. Think of the world created from 1911-1929. Then think what happened to that world from 1929-1947. That was the Flood. It comes back and is an eternal archetype.
What you just said is that cycles occur. The rest appears to be superstition, charlatanry and gobbledygook. Christians believe that societies misbehave and either reform/repent or God sends chastisement. Is that just a Christian myth?

To link actual floods to economic cycles is nuts. There actually were great cataclysmic flood in ancient times, there is scientific evidence of this, some of it caused by the melting of the glaciers, and that is why we have flood stories. How a culture explained these ancient tsunamis and floods depends on the superstitions and religious beliefs of those people.
Every culture has a story about the man who survived the Great Flood. Vaivasvata Manu, Deucalion, Xisuthrus…
Every culture attempts to explain cataclysmic events with its own superstitions or religious beliefs.

Following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The Babylonian account of the Deluge in many points closely resembles that of the Bible. Four cuneiform recensions of it have been discovered, of which, however, three are only short fragments. The complete story is found in the Gilgamesh epic (Tablet 11) discovered by G. Smith among the ruins of the library of Assurbanipal in 1872. Another version is given by Berosus. In the Gilgamesh poem the hero of the story is Ut-napishtim (or Sit-napishti, as some read it, surnamed Atra-hasis “the very clever”; in two of the fragments he is simply styled Atra-hasis, which name is also found in Berosus under the Greek form Xisuthros. The story in brief is as follows: A council of the gods having decreed to destroy men by a flood, the god Ea warns Ut-napishtim, and bids him build a ship in which to save himself and the seed of all kinds of life. Ut-napishtim builds the ship (of which, according to one version, Ea traces the plan on the ground), and places in it his family, his dependents, artisans, and domestic as well as wild animals, after which he shuts the door. The storm lasts six days; on the seventh the flood begins to subside. The ship steered by the helmsman Puzur-Bel lands on Mt. Nisir. After seven days Ut-napishtim sends forth a dove and a swallow, which, finding no resting-place for their feet return to the ark, and then a raven, which feeds on dead bodies and does not return. On leaving the ship, Ut-napishtim offers a sacrifice to the gods, who smell the godly odour and gather like flies over the sacrificer. He and his wife are then admitted among the gods. The story as given by Berosus comes somewhat nearer to the Biblical narrative. Because of the striking resemblances between the two many maintain that the Biblical account is derived from the Babylonian. But the differences are so many and so important that this view must be pronounced untenable. The Scriptural story is a parallel and independent form of a common tradition. newadvent.org/cathen/01720a.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top