Its not voluntary we don’t want OS.It is inherited.Like you inherit blue eyes from your mother.When Adam sin his nature became sinful.We inherited this sinful nature.OS is a loss of innocence and right morals.We are separated from God.God can’t beunited with anything less pure than Himself.In baptizm this sin is gone and if a baby were to die he or she would go straight to Heaven.Even thhough this OS is gone our bodies still retain in themselves this concupiscence(tendency to evil).With sin all around us from our births we commit actual sins.God’s said"you will surely die" When OS is taken away babies go straight to heaven but they still haave to undergo the death of the sinful flesh body here on earth.Remember soul is clean flesh body still corrupted.Why is original sin voluntary? I’ve heard that it is because the will of a father is like the will of his sons but doesn’t this apply only to his existing sons?
Finally, if original sin is taken way, then why should death remain?
It is voluntary since no sin can be involuntary.Its not voluntary we don’t want OS.It is inherited.Like you inherit blue eyes from your mother.When Adam sin his nature became sinful.We inherited this sinful nature.OS is a loss of innocence and right morals.We are separated from God.God can’t beunited with anything less pure than Himself.In baptizm this sin is gone and if a baby were to die he or she would go straight to Heaven.Even thhough this OS is gone our bodies still retain in themselves this concupiscence(tendency to evil).With sin all around us from our births we commit actual sins.God’s said"you will surely die" When OS is taken away babies go straight to heaven but they still haave to undergo the death of the sinful flesh body here on earth.Remember soul is clean flesh body still corrupted.
The sin didn’t corrupt his body it corrupted his soul.when the soul is corrupted its separates from God.God is all pure,holy,rightest.As man separates from God he loses moral inclinations.He becomes more animalistic.His baser instincts take over.He lusts after the flesh.He looses respect for woman and sees her more as an object to fulfill his baser need.His moral concience is deadened.He becomes greedy.Self serving.His moral values become less and resistance is lowered.God didn’t owe man to restore him back automatically after he sinned.All he owed man was what he said.We don’t inherit the sins of our ancestors just OS and concupiscence(which is the tendency to commit sin).We’ve become blinded (or better our vision has become dimmed)to right and wrong.Our flesh is now stronger than our moral conscience.without God’s intervention we give into the flesh.It is voluntary since no sin can be involuntary.
newadvent.org/cathen/11312a.htm
This link is about Original Sin from Catholic Encyclopedia. The point is, I just don’t see how their explanation of the voluntariness of the sin squares with the definition of voluntary.
I’ve hypothesized that somehow, the sin is voluntary in that Adam’s sin corrupted his body which corruption affected the will and was inherited by other generations as a defect in their wills. This was all a result of God refusing automatic sanctifying grace upon birth and it applies to soul and body. But I don’t think this solution is w/o objections -the first being that it would imply that we inherit the sins of our ancestors even though it is true that we can only receive the Original Sin by generation.
But how does this solve the voluntary problem? I think that somehow the fact that the flesh is now stronger,and since the will is based on the flesh, then the will is now directed easier to sins. But original sin is a sin so people share in the voluntary nature of original sin…or something, my ideas break down and I was wondering if anyone had a better account.The sin didn’t corrupt his body it corrupted his soul.when the soul is corrupted its separates from God.God is all pure,holy,rightest.As man separates from God he loses moral inclinations.He becomes more animalistic.His baser instincts take over.He lusts after the flesh.He looses respect for woman and sees her more as an object to fulfill his baser need.His moral concience is deadened.He becomes greedy.Self serving.His moral values become less and resistance is lowered.God didn’t owe man to restore him back automatically after he sinned.All he owed man was what he said.We don’t inherit the sins of our ancestors just OS and concupiscence(which is the tendency to commit sin).We’ve become blinded (or better our vision has become dimmed)to right and wrong.Our flesh is now stronger than our moral conscience.without God’s intervention we give into the flesh.
I think that one can inherit other’s sins but not in the same way that OS is inherited -in OS the sin inherited is an actual sin and is voluntary but in the other way you inherit a potency towards a particular sin or virtue, not an actual sin.I think I know the answer: Original Sin is voluntary because whatever is done by the cause of anything is communicated to the effects -( like if the mind tells the hand to do something, so the hand is said to have done it). But the will of Adam is the cause of a sin and of the generation of mankind and so, it seems, that mankind is animated by and so shares in, the will of Adam by means of Adam being a generative cause of humanity, just as an organ shares in the volition of the mind.
Again, though, why don’t people inherit the sins of their more immediate parents? That’s one I’ll have to think about harder -any thoughts?
Immediate parents do have a lot to do with their children’s sin.Even though no one can make another person sin IMO children look to their parents as if they were God.In other words children have no knowledge of God unless they are taught.A parent’s bad behavoir is picked up by a child and children copy their parent’s behaviors.If a child can’t see that a parent believes in God or sees no moral values in him(her) he will most likely have no morals either.I believe he is more likely to commit more deadly sins than a child who is reared differently.I think I know the answer: Original Sin is voluntary because whatever is done by the cause of anything is communicated to the effects -( like if the mind tells the hand to do something, so the hand is said to have done it). But the will of Adam is the cause of a sin and of the generation of mankind and so, it seems, that mankind is animated by and so shares in, the will of Adam by means of Adam being a generative cause of humanity, just as an organ shares in the volition of the mind.
Again, though, why don’t people inherit the sins of their more immediate parents? That’s one I’ll have to think about harder -any thoughts?
As has already been said, Original Sin was only voluntary for our First Parents; this addresses the nature of Original Sin:Why is original sin voluntary? I’ve heard that it is because the will of a father is like the will of his sons but doesn’t this apply only to his existing sons?
Finally, if original sin is taken way, then why should death remain?
I think the Church teaches that there was no suffering pre-fall:While there’s nothing wrong in believing suffering is connected with original sin, personally, I follow a belief similar to Agustine’s (I think). Essentially, the belief is that whether we had sinned in the beginning or not, we would die, we would get sick, there would be suffering, and the world would be filled with earthquakes and the like. I think that God wants a world in which we have suffering. Not because He likes us to suffer but because we learn through it. Why does a parent have a kid jump into the pool even though they are terrified? Because they know that they will one way or another come out on the other side. However, while most will come out and learn to swim others will come out wishing to never swim again. Likewise, God sends us through life and while we all will come out of it, many of us will come out heroically, knowing the values of love compassion, while others will come out of life with hatred and fear. This is their personal choice but no matter what unless they go through this, they have no chance of changing at all. We can not grow at all spiritually unless we experience this life which is filled with suffering and worry and uncertainty. How else could we learn the values of trust without worry, how could we learn the value of hope unless there is suffering here and something better later on, and how can we learn faith unless there is uncertainty. So, for us to grow up spiritually and to learn the values of faith, hope, and love there needs to be a world that also contains the opposite.
Well another place we see this that I just remembered was that God said that the day you eat that fruit you shall truly die. Now we know they did not immediately die. Either God lied or he did not mean they literally would die. There are 2 types of death, the physical and the spiritual. I prefer to believe God meant the spiritual and that God was right when he said, you will truly die the day you eat that fruit. When they ate that fruit they lost their lives, they lost their spiritual life. While they physically carried on humanity lost a part of themselves which died. The church also has a phrase “you did not abandon them to the power of death” This seems to imply that the death of sin refers to spiritual death and not physical because as we know everyone dies.I think the Church teaches that there was no suffering pre-fall:
From the Baltimore Catechism: A. We know the name of another tree in the Garden called the “tree of life.” Its fruit kept the bodies of our first parents in a state of perfect health.
Now perfect means impeccable, so perfect health must be health that is not possibly corrupted.
Also, St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that our first parents suffered no passions such as suffering precisely since they had perfect bodies.
I think that the prohibition from eating the apple is suffering. I mean, God gave us curiosity. I know we all can say that we never would have disobeyed God and would have not eaten the apple. But think about it? I personally think that curiosity would have got the best of the vast majority of us. I for one will admit that I’m not so sure I would not have at some point committed that sin which brings me to my original point.I think the Church teaches that there was no suffering pre-fall:
From the Baltimore Catechism: A. We know the name of another tree in the Garden called the “tree of life.” Its fruit kept the bodies of our first parents in a state of perfect health.
Now perfect means impeccable, so perfect health must be health that is not possibly corrupted.
Also, St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that our first parents suffered no passions such as suffering precisely since they had perfect bodies.
I looked it up and the reason why it is voluntary is because everyone was in Adam and so we share in his sin.I think Original Sin is voluntary because we can choose whether or not to be baptized. Well most of us were fortunate to have parents that had us baptized but the choice still remains. For the rest, those who are educated and choose not to be baptized are voluntarily choosing to reject God and remain in a state of sin.
God’s warning was given in the “day”/s of Genesis - where “day” meant a period of light. (cf Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, …) This “light” did not refer to the light from our sun, as it had not yet been made. Scripture does not even clarify if “light” means physical light.Well another place we see this that I just remembered was that God said that the day you eat that fruit you shall truly die. Now we know they did not immediately die. Either God lied or he did not mean they literally would die.
Re your “I prefer…”:There are 2 types of death, the physical and the spiritual. I prefer to believe God meant the spiritual and that God was right when he said, you will truly die the day you eat that fruit.
The Church also teaches that they lost the supernatural life of grace in their souls. (cf CCC #403-405)When they ate that fruit they lost their lives, they lost their spiritual life.
Do you have any sort of a reference for this. I do not think Augustine or any other Church doctor held such a view. I think you may be confusing it with the belief of some that God would have become incarnate (become man) even if man had not sinned.While there’s nothing wrong in believing suffering is connected with original sin, personally, I follow a belief similar to Agustine’s (I think). Essentially, the belief is that whether we had sinned in the beginning or not, we would die, we would get sick, there would be suffering, and the world would be filled with earthquakes and the like. …
I’m not sure just which part from the Summa you don’t understand. If you can quote the part, or give the reference so I can look it up, that would help.I looked it up and the reason why it is voluntary is because everyone was in Adam and so we share in his sin.
But how does this work is my next question -how specifically is one man’s sin communicated to other men? The answer is in the Summa but I can’t fully understand it.