Yeah must of been nice back then,I don’t know about you, but the last bit sounds awfully convenient for the Male species
It shows two changes related to reproduction, better shown in the RSV-CE:I don’t know about you, but the last bit sounds awfully convenient for the Male species
Good morning Bob,
You’ve brought up some excellent points! He did make our"species" bigger… And grumpier…I don’t know about you, but the last bit sounds awfully convenient for the Male species
No.So Adam and Eve already had children before the fall?
Hi PR,
I did not see a reply from Granny. Here is something from the Catechism on how human nature is wounded and inclined to sin, to evil:Hi Granny,
Great to see that you are still kickin’!! I pray you have been well.
Perhaps you could explain the “tendency to sin.”
Blessings!
Would it be inaccurate to say that we are inclined to do what we think is best, but we sometimes sin in the process?
No sin happens by accident. It is always freely willed, whatever the motivation. It often means we are pursuing a lesser good, like money, power or pleasure.
If what is best is defined as what is desirable but that may be contrary to reason. Temptation to sin occurs when what is best is in conflict with what is most desirable. The inclination, susceptibility to temptation, is not sin, but rather what is willed in response to the temptation is the sin. The will determines what is best from the moral character of an act or omission and this moral truth is learned from the Church and from the conscience.
You are incorrect.
No.So Adam and Eve already had children before the fall?
It was not I that made the comment that women ALREADY had pain in childbirth, that is why I questioned the poster.
That was a great rescue, thanks.
Only if such a Catholic wishes to be in unity with the One Faith, and the Church of which they claim to belong.
The two are not contradictory. Our tendency toward evil is interwoven with our desire to do what we think is best.
Yes, I suppose if one thinks of the Apostolic faith as a “house of cards” this is true. But the faith that Jesus left with the Church is a seamless garment, and we are not in aposition to begin unwinding parts of it, an deciding that they are not necessary or relevant. We are not omniscient, so we don’t realize what we need and don’t need.
You might really have stuck your foot in it this time, David. Have you never considered that human beings never knowingly and willingly offend God?
Perhaps it is more accurate to say that, without being preserved by grace, human beings are subject to the way of all nature.
More like a capacity to be able to have pain, and losing the state of justice in which she was created, became subject to more of it.
The original question in post 78 was “So Adam and Eve already had children before the fall?
”I chose a biological approach to the beginning of Genesis 3: 16 as a clarification of my no. This approach is because in the beginning “God created man” … with the specific characteristics that “(II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds;” (CCC 355) The biological approach to human nature is that the anatomy is material. It is the soul which is spiritual. Genesis 1: 27
I agree that today, the beginning of Genesis 3:16 does sound like Eve having previous material childbirth. But that does make sense when one considers the whole context involved with the first two humans. “God blessed them” Genesis 1: 28. No pain, no death is certainly a blessing since Adam and Eve started out with natural human physical/material anatomies. With the inclusion of the spiritual soul, that is the human nature which has been passed on to us.
I call em like I see em.
To which the poster did not reply.The original question in post 78 was “So Adam and Eve already had children before the fall?
The answer was a simple no.
I chose a biological approach to the beginning of Genesis 3: 16 as a clarification of my no. This approach is because in the beginning “God created man” … with the specific characteristics that “(II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds;” (CCC 355) The biological approach to human nature is that the anatomy is material. It is the soul which is spiritual. Genesis 1: 27
Because there were no additional women before the Fall, the comparison to Eve’s material anatomy which gives birth had to be a material animal. I chose a cow because “today, there are veterinarians specially trained to work with female farm animals.”
Both animal anatomies and Adan and Eve’s anatomies, being material, would naturally decompose until death is achieved. This natural change or simple genetics can affect the process of giving birth.
Animals did not receive the preternatural of gift of immortality. Therefore, Adam and Eve could observe pain and death. Going from zero pain to possible childbirth pain could be considered an intense proposition.
I agree that today, the beginning of Genesis 3:16 does sound like Eve having previous material childbirth. But that does make sense when one considers the whole context involved with the first two humans. “God blessed them” Genesis 1: 28. No pain, no death is certainly a blessing since Adam and Eve started out with natural human physical/material anatomies. With the inclusion of the spiritual soul, that is the human nature which has been passed on to us.
A careful reading of CCC IV. Man in Paradise, paragraphs 374-379 and 399-400 will explain the preternatural gifts and their disappearance.
Also try this link. therealpresence.org/archives/God/God_013.htm
"Bodily immortality is the converse of mortality, i.e., the possibility of separation of soul from body. Adam was therefore capable of not dying. Yet the gift was conditional, provided he did not sin; it was gratuitous, since Adam’s nature by itself did not postulate this prerogative but came from the divine bounty; and it was participated, since only God enjoys essential immortality."