Original Sin

[OneSheep]

This is general information gleaned from other CAF threads. There is a tradition that Adam and Eve went to heaven. I am not qualified to verify that information.

Catholic teaching actually goes beyond the issue of forgiveness for Adam.

Adam, like you and me, can repent and receive forgiveness. However, there is a gap or distinction between the status of the pre-Fall of Adam and the status of his post-Fall descendants which needs to be understood correctly in the light of Catholic doctrines.

Well, we can talk about Catholic teaching going beyond forgiveness of Adam, but we must address forgiveness of Adam. Have you forgiven Adam?

The misleading idea of good nature before the Fall; bad nature after the Fall dates to the first Protestant reformers who taught that Adam’s one and only Original Sin had radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom. Unfortunately for all concerned, some of these reformers identified the contracted state of Original Sin with concupiscentia [sic]. (Source: CCC 406 --note smaller print via CCC 20-21) Additional interesting teachings are found in CCC 377 and 2514. We are not “sin machines” as one poster said long ago.

Well, to some degree we are “sin machines” in the sense that our nature’s machinations can lead to sin. For example, when a person desires something very much, say an item in a store that is unaffordable, the person’s empathy toward the shopowner can be blocked. Desire can block our empathy. This is a mechanical blindness, and it is part of our nature. We are called to repent from this aspect of our nature. We can overcome, because we have free will.

CCC 402: All men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as St. Paul affirms: “By one man’s disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners”: “sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned.” The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. “Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.”

Here is my translation of this: All men have a nature that gives us the capacity to sin. When we disobey the call to repentance, we sin. When we fail to repent, we are automatons of our nature: for example, addiction and hanging onto condemnation of others is death. Is the “condemnation” from God? In other words, is there some criteria by which God withholds forgiveness? No. We are “condemned” in the sense that our nature can be enslaving. Jesus’ act of forgiving the unrepentant from the cross is opposite of the behavior of God in the creation story. Jesus showed us that God forgives unconditionally. The creation story is a good story, but it falls short of revealing God’s manner. “Abba” is a better image. Jesus reveals God’s unconditional love. …for all humanity…

In regard to one’s understanding of human spirituality, there is a huge difference between thinking that one’s nature has been totally corrupted and the recognition that one’s nature is *wounded *in the natural powers proper to it. (CCC 405)
However, ignoring the actual Original Sin is not a realistic way to approach the fact that our nature is wounded.

The Catholic Church understands that we cannot tamper with the doctrine of Original Sin without also undermining the mystery of Jesus, bloody, on the Cross. (CCC 389 and 422)

Back to the definition of Original Sin. What is it? Is it a “woundedness”? This implies that man used to be better. Is it necessary that man was “better” before to see that he needs redemption? No, absolutely not. We have plenty of evidence to prove that man needs redemption in our everyday media. Is it that we were somehow condemned by God? That implies that God did not forgive Adam. The only way I can currently make any sense out of “Original Sin” is that it has to do with the aspects of our innate behavior that are good, but problematic.

What is promised to Adam and his descendants is the only way to overcome the effects of Original Sin. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life. And Jesus Christ established His Catholic Church so that we will have His presence with us as we struggle through life.

Yes, repentance is the means to overcome original sin, by any definition.

Jesus Christ, our Messiah, gives life to our spiritual life because He has *restored *Adam’s shattered relationship with our Creator. With Christ’s grace, Baptism erases the contracted state of Original Sin and restores us in friendship with God.

The problem is, again, that if such a relationship was “shattered”, then the implication is that God cut us off to some degree, that we came to be resented by God. Jesus showed us a different image of God.

A big part of “redemption” is Jesus showing us that very fact. God loves us, and loves us unconditionally whether we repent or not. Man, in thinking that God has condemned us or that we are in a bad state because we somehow did not deserve better was not seeing God for who He really is. Thinking aloud here: part of the state of OS is the misperception, the idea that God only loves conditionally.

Please answer, it would be helpful: Did you resent what Adam and Eve did? If so, did you forgive them?

 

[OneSheep]

Man’s nature involves more than a bunch of impulses, more or less selfish. We’re also created with a conscience, which means we’re morally responsible beings. And an aspect of that responsibility is that we’re obligated to be subjugated to God, in a relationship of mutual love. Although the conscience may be dimmed, obscured, compromised by the Fall, we remain obligated to align ourselves with the good, the obligation to know, love, and obey God is still part of our make up.

“Subjugated” and “obligated”, again, are words of coercion.

There is a place for coercion, though. Repentance is so important that it is beneficial to the individual to think that God won’t love them if they don’t behave. For example, if a person intends to hurt their neighbor because of a property squabble, they have done so because either their empathy has been blocked, or their empathy is undeveloped (coupled with an innate drive to possess). If it takes a little fear of God’s wrath to drive the person to repent, in the form of forgiving their neighbor, the result would be that the resentment and the desire to possess come under control. Once our drives are under control, we have taken a crucial step to forgive our drives, to reconcile with our nature.

Here is the crux of the matter: If you were not “obligated” to behave, would you? Can you see that our bad behavior hurts others, and that Jesus Himself is in those others? Do you appreciate this Jesus? It is my estimate that your answer to all these questions is “yes”. So, for you, “obligation” is unnecessary. Empathy has taken its natural course with you. However, as a child, were you aware of the harm you do to others, and the significance of that harm? Probably not. Like the rest of us, you probably needed some sense of obligation in order to behave. You needed someone to force the issue.

 

[grannymh]

Please answer, it would be helpful: Did you resent what Adam and Eve did? If so, did you forgive them?

I learned that Adam was the person who shattered humanity’s relationship with God . In order for Adam to shatter humanity’s relationship with God, he had to deliberately leave, on his own, the divine intimacy of God. This “leaving” was accomplished when Adam disobeyed God’s command. This particular disobedience is now known as Original Sin because the original Adam’s action shattered humanity’s relationship with God.

What is there to resent? Life happens. By the time I was born, Jesus Christ had offered sufficient and efficient recompense for Adam’s action known as Original Sin. The saying in my childhood neighborhood was that “Jesus opened the gates of heaven.”

However, in a few threads back, I did confess that I would like to slap Adam upside the head for his choice . Actually, now that I think about it, that is a tad more than resentment. I should answer yes to your first question: Did you resent what Adam and Eve did? Yes.

Your second question in relationship to my “yes” answer – “If so, did you forgive them?” I think it is Adam who needs to forgive my cranky (feminine of snarky) thoughts.

To be honest, it has never occurred to me that I had the power to forgive Adam’s Original Sin. On the other hand, I should forgive Adam because I contracted the state of Original Sin. You do have a good idea there. However, in order to forgive Adam, I need to understand the Catholic teachings (plural intended) about Original Sin, which, by the way, leads to an understanding of human nature and the divinity of Jesus Christ.

Understanding Catholicism is difficult. Understanding forgiveness toward Adam is reasonable. Because my own spiritual life needs a good kick, I will make it a point to forgive Adam sometime today. I bet that in forgiving Adam, I will find God’s love.

 

[simpleas]

I learned that Adam was the person who shattered humanity’s relationship with God . In order for Adam to shatter humanity’s relationship with God, he had to deliberately leave, on his own, the divine intimacy of God. This “leaving” was accomplished when Adam disobeyed God’s command. This particular disobedience is now known as Original Sin because the original Adam’s action shattered humanity’s relationship with God.

What is there to resent? Life happens. By the time I was born, Jesus Christ had offered sufficient and efficient recompense for Adam’s action known as Original Sin. The saying in my childhood neighborhood was that “Jesus opened the gates of heaven.”

However, in a few threads back, I did confess that I would like to slap Adam upside the head for his choice . Actually, now that I think about it, that is a tad more than resentment. I should answer yes to your first question: Did you resent what Adam and Eve did? Yes.

Your second question in relationship to my “yes” answer – “If so, did you forgive them?” I think it is Adam who needs to forgive my cranky (feminine of snarky) thoughts.

To be honest, it has never occurred to me that I had the power to forgive Adam’s Original Sin. On the other hand, I should forgive Adam because I contracted the state of Original Sin. You do have a good idea there. However, in order to forgive Adam, I need to understand the Catholic teachings (plural intended) about Original Sin, which, by the way, leads to an understanding of human nature and the divinity of Jesus Christ.

Understanding Catholicism is difficult. Understanding forgiveness toward Adam is reasonable. Because my own spiritual life needs a good kick, I will make it a point to forgive Adam sometime today. I bet that in forgiving Adam, I will find God’s love.

The way I see it for my opinion…I’d be more likely to put the blame on the one who tempted Adam and Eve. They were only Human after all, thirsting for more knowledge of God? The world? Themselves? And to have a powerful being tempt them, telling them in what must have been a very convincing way that they would be like God if they chose to go against him would have been very hard not to resist.
So should i forgive satan for in a way causing the whole fall in the first place?
Satan is none human, can we forgive a none human being?

 

[grannymh]

The way I see it for my opinion…I’d be more likely to put the blame on the one who tempted Adam and Eve. They were only Human after all, thirsting for more knowledge of God? The world? Themselves? And to have a powerful being tempt them, telling them in what must have been a very convincing way that they would be like God if they chose to go against him would have been very hard not to resist.
So should i forgive satan for in a way causing the whole fall in the first place?
Satan is none human, can we forgive a none human being?

Briefly, temptation existed from day one in the Garden of Eden. The desire of Satan to divert others from union with God existed from the moment he radically and irrevocably rejected God and His reign. (CCC 391-395) We need to remember that the power of Satan is not infinite.

Adam, from the moment God created him, had the inherent power to resist Satan and anyone else who would tempt him to turn away from his Creator. As the first human individual, Adam was faced with the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil from the moment of Genesis 2: 15-17. This tree, because of the commandment not to eat its fruit, evokes insurmountable limits (Adam could not be God) and, in a sense, the “tree” becomes the dividing point between obedience owed the Creator and disobedience which would result in separation from the Creator. (CCC 396) The essential truth about the first human being is that the whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man.” (CCC 404) The human nature to be transmitted by Adam to all his and Eve’s descendants would be determined by Adam’s free choice to remain in God’s friendship or not.

Where the temptation to disobey comes from is not the issue. The temptation could be as simple as Adam envying the status of God.

 

[fhansen]

“Subjugated” and “obligated”, again, are words of coercion.

An obligation in no way implies force. Adam was obliged to obey God-but God wouldn’t force Adam to do so. We’re obliged to simply do the right thing: “Thou Shalt Love”, perhaps being the most basic Christian obligation, to put it in concise terms. In any case this has to do with the Creator/created distinction and relationship. Man has an obligation to be consciously obedient. Adam essentially rejected this obligation, preferring no limitations whatsoever that his Creator might appear to be placing on him. The means to this obedience is really the crux: and it constitutes the difference between the old and new covenants.

There is a place for coercion, though. Repentance is so important that it is beneficial to the individual to think that God won’t love them if they don’t behave. For example, if a person intends to hurt their neighbor because of a property squabble, they have done so because either their empathy has been blocked, or their empathy is undeveloped (coupled with an innate drive to possess). If it takes a little fear of God’s wrath to drive the person to repent, in the form of forgiving their neighbor, the result would be that the resentment and the desire to possess come under control. Once our drives are under control, we have taken a crucial step to forgive our drives, to reconcile with our nature.

Here is the crux of the matter: If you were not “obligated” to behave, would you? Can you see that our bad behavior hurts others, and that Jesus Himself is in those others? Do you appreciate this Jesus? It is my estimate that your answer to all these questions is “yes”. So, for you, “obligation” is unnecessary. Empathy has taken its natural course with you. However, as a child, were you aware of the harm you do to others, and the significance of that harm? Probably not. Like the rest of us, you probably needed some sense of obligation in order to behave. You needed someone to force the issue.

I think St Basil of Cesarea put it better than I can. His statement clears up the matter pretty well for me anyway:
**“If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children”. **

 

[OneSheep]

However, in a few threads back, I did confess that I would like to slap Adam upside the head for his choice . Actually, now that I think about it, that is a tad more than resentment. I should answer yes to your first question: Did you resent what Adam and Eve did? Yes.

Your second question in relationship to my “yes” answer – “If so, did you forgive them?” I think it is Adam who needs to forgive my cranky (feminine of snarky) thoughts.

To be honest, it has never occurred to me that I had the power to forgive Adam’s Original Sin. On the other hand, I should forgive Adam because I contracted the state of Original Sin. You do have a good idea there. However, in order to forgive Adam, I need to understand the Catholic teachings (plural intended) about Original Sin, which, by the way, leads to an understanding of human nature and the divinity of Jesus Christ.

Understanding Catholicism is difficult. Understanding forgiveness toward Adam is reasonable. Because my own spiritual life needs a good kick, I will make it a point to forgive Adam sometime today. I bet that in forgiving Adam, I will find God’s love.

We have not only the power, but the calling, to forgive anyone we hold something against. There are so many people to resent in history and in the media, in politics and so forth, that it does not occur to people to forgive. But forgiveness is always our calling. Even if we only have the slightest negative feelings. I have posted threads on how to forgive a number of characters. We are all called to forgive Adam and Eve if we hold something against them.

Jesus taught us how to forgive from the cross. “Forgive them, for they know not what they do” can be applied to Adam and Eve. If they had been all-knowing, appreciative of the repercussions of what they were to do, they would not have done it. If they had known they would be causing grief or upset to such a degree, they would not have done it. But my own reflections there may not have anything to do with your own journey. To me, we have to find A & E’s good intent, which was St. Augustine’s exercise. So, we ask ourselves “If I were Adam, why would I have done it?”. Suddenly, the exercise becomes introspective, we go into the process of “forgiving our shadow”. This was Augustine’s exercise in his Confessions. Another help I gleaned from a priest: It is not to condemn or condone, but understand. If when we seek to understand, the answer we come up with is “because (he, she, etc) is evil or partly evil” then we are not done yet.

Did Adam and Eve act on their God-given desire for power and dominance? I think so. Were they temporarily blinded by the God-given mechanism for being blinded when desire is overwhelming? Probably.

Thanks for the thinking aloud on your post. My daughter gives me dope slaps quite often, which may contribute to the lack of congruity in some of my posts.

 

[OneSheep]

The way I see it for my opinion…I’d be more likely to put the blame on the one who tempted Adam and Eve. They were only Human after all, thirsting for more knowledge of God? The world? Themselves? And to have a powerful being tempt them, telling them in what must have been a very convincing way that they would be like God if they chose to go against him would have been very hard not to resist.
So should i forgive satan for in a way causing the whole fall in the first place?
Satan is none human, can we forgive a none human being?

Yes, it is so easy to pass on the blame. The question is, can I take ownership of my own desire for power (to want to be like God)? Can I take ownership of my own capacity for blindness? Can I take ownership of my own capacity to come up with ridiculous ideas?

The way I have taken ownership is by first painfully admitting that I have all of these characteristics, these aspects of my nature. Somehow, with the painful admission comes the revelation that these drives, desires, and capacities come from my God-given nature. Can we forgive God for giving us this nature? Absolutely, and in doing so we can truly learn to love God with all of our heart, mind, and soul.

 

[OneSheep]

An obligation in no way implies force. Adam was obliged to obey God-but God wouldn’t force Adam to do so. We’re obliged to simply do the right thing: “Thou Shalt Love”, perhaps being the most basic Christian obligation, to put it in concise terms. In any case this has to do with the Creator/created distinction and relationship. Man has an obligation to be consciously obedient. Adam essentially rejected this obligation, preferring no limitations whatsoever that his Creator might appear to be placing on him. The means to this obedience is really the crux: and it constitutes the difference between the old and new covenants.

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Now, even if we make that sound like certain death it is not a threat, all doubt about whether or not this is coercive can be found in God’s reaction to A & E’s defiance. Is such a threat what it takes to get the human to be obedient? I think it would be a very rare case for a child to not have to be coerced in order to behave, so yes, the threat has its place. But ultimately, does it reflect God’s forgiveness? That is the new covenant, the second phase of our lives, where we know God’s unconditional forgiveness. Empathy has developed.

I think St Basil of Cesarea put it better than I can. His statement clears up the matter pretty well for me anyway:
**“If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children”. **

I like that. However, being child-like is way over-rated. Ask my wife, who teaches lower primary grades. It is true that children with loving parents go through a phase when the whole world revolves around pleasing their parents, and we parents do take joy in such obedience. But when they get to be about 9 years of age, you can pretty much kiss that phase goodbye. The best grade is when you hit the majority of the phase, 2nd grade. My wife teaches kindergarten. She does a great job keeping her class under strict control, but it is work. Children are not internally compelled to obey. If a person in front of a classroom says something like “It hurts me when you misbehave” the children may find this a reason to misbehave more! Empathy is undeveloped.

 

[simpleas]

Yes, it is so easy to pass on the blame. The question is, can I take ownership of my own desire for power (to want to be like God)? Can I take ownership of my own capacity for blindness? Can I take ownership of my own capacity to come up with ridiculous ideas?

The way I have taken ownership is by first painfully admitting that I have all of these characteristics, these aspects of my nature. Somehow, with the painful admission comes the revelation that these drives, desires, and capacities come from my God-given nature. Can we forgive God for giving us this nature? Absolutely, and in doing so we can truly learn to love God with all of our heart, mind, and soul.

Yes I see how it maybe passing the blame, but as I have been taught to forgive, I don’t blame Adam and Eve for the O.S as they are human just as we are

Satan on the other hand was an angel who turned on God, I surpose I could also forgive him also?
I’m not sure what you mean about forgiving God, he allowed O.S but didn’t cause it from what i’ve learnt so far?
Satan, Adam and Eve gave us the nature we have now.

 

[OneSheep]

Yes I see how it maybe passing the blame, but as I have been taught to forgive, I don’t blame Adam and Eve for the O.S as they are human just as we are

Do you realize the significance of that statement? Your being able to say that is no small feat; you have expressed words of empathy that many, many, would not be able to do. We hear about people doing bad stuff and then we just write them off, not thinking twice about our own ability to do just as they did.

Satan on the other hand was an angel who turned on God, I surpose I could also forgive him also?
I’m not sure what you mean about forgiving God, he allowed O.S but didn’t cause it from what i’ve learnt so far?
Satan, Adam and Eve gave us the nature we have now.

As far as God causing or allowing O.S., we would have to define O.S., that is, what is your definition? What “sin” is passed down through the generations? Or to you is O.S. an “I am condemned” badge that we wear before baptism? People have differing takes on this.

The creation story weighs very heavily in the direction that only God creates. For something to exist, it had to be created. St. Augustine said that to the degree anything exists, it is good. When we do create, i.e. technology, we do it from the power of God.

It is extremely important that we consider every aspect of humanity that we attribute to “sin”, that we carefully analyze what the drives and motives are behind behaviors, for example. As was said earlier in this thread by fhansen, the appetites are all good. So, what we have left is the human as a decision-making entity. Why does man choose to sin? This is the Augustinian exercise. So, if we are going to forgive Satan, we need to first determine what we are forgiving him for. We are not to attribute to Satan what comes from God.

What are we attributing to Satan? Please feel free to give me whatever answer pops into your head. I’ll keep an open mind. I’m not looking for the textbook answer, I am wondering what you personally think.

 

[fhansen]

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Now, even if we make that sound like certain death it is not a threat, all doubt about whether or not this is coercive can be found in God’s reaction to A & E’s defiance. Is such a threat what it takes to get the human to be obedient? I think it would be a very rare case for a child to not have to be coerced in order to behave, so yes, the threat has its place. But ultimately, does it reflect God’s forgiveness? That is the new covenant, the second phase of our lives, where we know God’s unconditional forgiveness. Empathy has developed.

I think we need to look at the “threat” more broadly. When God spoke to A&E, the UNIVERSE is speaking; Truth/Reality, or Nature PLUS, is talking, telling them *how things are *. And so to tell them that they’ll die if they separate themselves from God’s authority, from His godhood, from Him, IOW, is no different in substance from you or me or God telling someone they’ll die if they jump off a 100’ cliff; the law of gravity is unavoidable, a simple fact of life, as is man’s need for God, of his need to know God and recognize his need for Him.

So God didn’t threaten A&E so much as He simply informed them of the facts, including the consequences of being in a disordered state. And forgiveness is futile if it doesn’t also bring about repentance/change, restored order/harmony/justice, which God would naturally want in His universe. Adam most likely wasn’t ready for that after the Fall; humankind needs the separation, perhaps, in order to learn of God’s true worth. Anyway, it’s not that God changes-or needs to- rather its that man needs to change; God probably never withheld forgiveness.

I like that. However, being child-like is way over-rated. Ask my wife, who teaches lower primary grades. It is true that children with loving parents go through a phase when the whole world revolves around pleasing their parents, and we parents do take joy in such obedience. But when they get to be about 9 years of age, you can pretty much kiss that phase goodbye. The best grade is when you hit the majority of the phase, 2nd grade. My wife teaches kindergarten. She does a great job keeping her class under strict control, but it is work. Children are not internally compelled to obey. If a person in front of a classroom says something like “It hurts me when you misbehave” the children may find this a reason to misbehave more! Empathy is undeveloped.

Alright. In any case I think Mr Basil was describing the right relationship between God and man-positionally- more than attempting to characterize the nature of the believer.

 

[grannymh]

We are all conceived/born in the state of Original Sin; the sin of Adam.

Why are we held accountable for something someone did 1000s of years ago?

We are not accountable for Original Sin.

We are born with Adam’s human state of Original Sin which is the state of deprivation of God’s Sanctifying Grace.

We receive, by propagation, Adam’s human state which was no longer in a state of friendship with God. Because Adam freely broke the bond of life between himself and his Creator, his precious state of holiness, that is, the presence of God’s Sanctifying Grace, was lost. The natural result of Original Sin was that Adam’s nature was now in a state of deprivation.

Baptism imparts the life of Christ’s grace that erases the state of Original Sin. Since Christ died for all people and all people are called to the same destiny of being with God in joy eternal, Catholicism holds that the Holy Spirit offers to all people the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery. (CCC 1260)

The good news is that our human nature was not totally corrupted. The human nature transmitted through the centuries is wounded in its natural powers; therefore, all of us are able to respond to God’s invitation to share in His life through knowledge and love.

 

[OneSheep]

I think we need to look at the “threat” more broadly. When God spoke to A&E, the UNIVERSE is speaking; Truth/Reality, or Nature PLUS, is talking, telling them *how things are *. And so to tell them that they’ll die if they separate themselves from God’s authority, from His godhood, from Him, IOW, is no different in substance from you or me or God telling someone they’ll die if they jump off a 100’ cliff; the law of gravity is unavoidable, a simple fact of life, as is man’s need for God, of his need to know God and recognize his need for Him.

So God didn’t threaten A&E so much as He simply informed them of the facts, including the consequences of being in a disordered state. And forgiveness is futile if it doesn’t also bring about repentance/change, restored order/harmony/justice, which God would naturally want in His universe. Adam most likely wasn’t ready for that after the Fall; humankind needs the separation, perhaps, in order to learn of God’s true worth. Anyway, it’s not that God changes-or needs to- rather its that man needs to change; God probably never withheld forgiveness.

I still think that the threat can be easily construed, and has its function. However, we are both coming from the position that God intends the best for us, and that He loves us unconditionally (not probably, but definitely!), so disagreement on the matter is so many angels on the head of a pin.

Again, the perceived separation-from-God story attempts to explain why there is sin in the world, and the story means to point blame, which is exactly what our conscience does. What is distinctly human in the world is the development of conscience, and by our eating of the tree of good and evil, we have this conscience.

What a great story! The irony is incredible, because our conscience, too, is God-given, yet God is disappointed in its acquisition? But no, our conscience is there to balance our nature, to condemn those parts of ourselves (drives, etc.) that we find compel us to sin. We simultaneously experience, as children, wanting stuff that someone else has, and the hurt of having something taken away. We end up condemning our own want for other people’s stuff. It is in our nature that this occurs; it is universal, it is a gift, and it is God-given. Clothing (in context) is meant to control our sexual appetite. This is a function of our consciences.

Granted, if the “tree of knowledge” has also given us the capacity to condemn one another, to become blinded to the goodness of our fellow humans, then this is could be truly seen as leading to death. However, such capacity for blindness can also be shown to be functional in an evolutionary sense. This requires some explanation though.

 

[simpleas]

Do you realize the significance of that statement? Your being able to say that is no small feat; you have expressed words of empathy that many, many, would not be able to do. We hear about people doing bad stuff and then we just write them off, not thinking twice about our own ability to do just as they did.

As far as God causing or allowing O.S., we would have to define O.S., that is, what is your definition? What “sin” is passed down through the generations? Or to you is O.S. an “I am condemned” badge that we wear before baptism? People have differing takes on this.

The creation story weighs very heavily in the direction that only God creates. For something to exist, it had to be created. St. Augustine said that to the degree anything exists, it is good. When we do create, i.e. technology, we do it from the power of God.

It is extremely important that we consider every aspect of humanity that we attribute to “sin”, that we carefully analyze what the drives and motives are behind behaviors, for example. As was said earlier in this thread by fhansen, the appetites are all good. So, what we have left is the human as a decision-making entity. Why does man choose to sin? This is the Augustinian exercise. So, if we are going to forgive Satan, we need to first determine what we are forgiving him for. We are not to attribute to Satan what comes from God.

What are we attributing to Satan? Please feel free to give me whatever answer pops into your head. I’ll keep an open mind. I’m not looking for the textbook answer, I am wondering what you personally think.

No worries about a text book answer from me, i haven’t got a text book brain!

I am in the process of learning!

Ok, from what i’ve learnt I think I see o.s as we are born with it, it’s washed away at baptism, then as we grow and become capable of understanding what is right/good and what is wrong/bad for us, we can then choose to sin or not.

I’m unsure if I’m correct or not in saying that within afew days of Adam and Eve being created they were tempted by satan? This suggest’s to me that they couldn’t have been all that aware of the consequence of their action’s?
Unless God made them with a great intelligence from day one, (although somewhat limited as they would still need the apple from the tree of knowledge)

Satan, he was a angel of God created by God, yet he turn against God. If all in the beginning was created good what made satan turn against God? Power maybe? Most of our problems in the world are to do with power over each other I think. So Adam and Eve being of good and holy nature, but with a weakness as human’s, satan easily lead them astray with idea’s that they could become like God.

Hope i’ve answered ok?

 

[grannymh]

No worries about a text book answer from me, i haven’t got a text book brain!

I am in the process of learning!

Ok, from what i’ve learnt I think I see o.s as we are born with it, it’s washed away at baptism, then as we grow and become capable of understanding what is right/good and what is wrong/bad for us, we can then choose to sin or not.

I’m unsure if I’m correct or not in saying that within a few days of Adam and Eve being created they were tempted by satan? This suggest’s to me that they couldn’t have been all that aware of the consequence of their action’s?

According to real Catholic teaching, it does not matter how long Adam was cultivating the Garden before he scorned his Creator. If a person avoids getting hung up on the tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil*,* common sense will say that Adam was highly intelligent with a well-developed conscience before he went near that forbidden tree. God was Adam’s teacher.

Unless God made them with a great intelligence from day one, (although somewhat limited as they would still need the apple from the tree of knowledge)

Yes, yes, I know about that tasty organic fruit. However, in four years of reading threads about Adam, many, not all, people have serious trouble figuring out that forbidden tree. It seems to me that at least pride in our first ancestor would prevent people from promoting him as some sort of nitwit.

Satan, he was a angel of God created by God, yet he turn against God. If all in the beginning was created good what made satan turn against God? Power maybe? Most of our problems in the world are to do with power over each other I think. So Adam and Eve being of good and holy nature, but with a weakness as human’s, satan easily lead them astray with idea’s that they could become like God.

The speculation that desire for power was Satan’s downfall is worthy of belief. Adam, too, could have envied God’s powerful knowledge. Adam could have wanted God’s knowledge at the same time that he knew full well what his disobedience would cost.

To get a better grip on Original Sin, perhaps it is time to realize that “human” knowledge was not the forbidden fruit.

 

[OneSheep]

Unless God made them with a great intelligence from day one, (although somewhat limited as they would still need the apple from the tree of knowledge)

If you are learning, it is indeed good to “seek” as we are doing, but it is not a substitute for standard Catholic teaching unless you find some dogma (I use that generally) contradictory. Please use the CCC as the fall-back. But yes, when we sin, we do so out of ignorance and blindness. To me, the ignorance is universal, and the blindness is automatic.

Satan, he was a angel of God created by God, yet he turn against God. If all in the beginning was created good what made satan turn against God? Power maybe? Most of our problems in the world are to do with power over each other I think. So Adam and Eve being of good and holy nature, but with a weakness as human’s, satan easily lead them astray with idea’s that they could become like God.

Hope i’ve answered ok?

Please remember, your answer is okay, because you are giving your own understanding… but study the catechism. There have been many references to the CCC on this thread.

But what I am encouraging here is an exercise in introspection. Let us consider the desire for power. Adam had the “appetite” for power before he ate the fruit, so we can certainly attribute that appetite to God. Please correct me if I am missing something.

So, how about the “idea that we can become like God”? People get many, many ridiculous ideas, and that one would be especially appealing because, again, we all have innate drives for power, and not just power but status and dominance. We love to win; we are hardwired to want to be number one. When we win, our brain is showered with feel-good molecules. Is it reasonable to say that God created us with the capacity to have ridiculous ideas? Or are we to attribute that to Satan? Did God provide us with the imagination to come up with ridiculous notions (along with very good ones)?

As you might see, it is not just the idea of “being like God” that we find Satanic; I think it is more the defiance that we find Satanic. Would you agree?

 

[grannymh]

“Our daily walk with Christ (why/how/where to be more spiritual)”
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6400774&postcount=2

Reading about all kinds of ideas and speculations about the simple Catholic doctrines regarding Original Sin, I now wonder if anyone has meditated on the fact that Adam had the capability of walking daily with God. (CCC 356)

If we are burdened with thoughts about how awful our human nature is – we should remind ourselves of Jesus’ love for us as we are. We should remind ourselves that the Sacrament of Reconciliation gives us graces going forward.

So far, I cannot find any evidence in the four Gospels that Original Sin radically perverted human nature per se so that it is naturally (in everyone) totally blind to goodness. Instead, I am learning about the Prodigal Son which was a recent Scripture reading at Sunday Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Obviously, Christ did not consider human nature radically perverted into some kind of sin machine without intellect and will.

Looking at the Gospels, also known as the Good News, we should be learning from Adam’s experience the importance of seeking Jesus Christ, True God and True Man. We should understand that our human nature, like Adam’s, is spiritual and that we should be seeking more spiritual encounters with God through the Holy Eucharist.

We know from Genesis 3: 15 and its important surrounding context that Adam was not abandoned. (CCC 410) We also know from Catholic teaching that our human nature was not totally destroyed by Original Sin. Human nature was good before Adam’s sin and human nature is still *good *after Adam’s sin even though it is now wounded. (CCC 405)

As spiritual beings, we need to raise our eyes up to Jesus, bloody, on the cross.

 

[simpleas]

According to real Catholic teaching, it does not matter how long Adam was cultivating the Garden before he scorned his Creator. If a person avoids getting hung up on the tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil*,* common sense will say that Adam was highly intelligent with a well-developed conscience before he went near that forbidden tree. God was Adam’s teacher.

Yes, yes, I know about that tasty organic fruit. However, in four years of reading threads about Adam, many, not all, people have serious trouble figuring out that forbidden tree. It seems to me that at least pride in our first ancestor would prevent people from promoting him as some sort of nitwit.

The speculation that desire for power was Satan’s downfall is worthy of belief. Adam, too, could have envied God’s powerful knowledge. Adam could have wanted God’s knowledge at the same time that he knew full well what his disobedience would cost.

To get a better grip on Original Sin, perhaps it is time to realize that “human” knowledge was not the forbidden fruit.

Sorry yes i used the tree again, and i don’t even believe it to be the actual cause of the sin, but as i don’t know what it was, temptation yes, and allowing trust in God to die in their hearts, but the out come of some pure evil act that destroyed Adam and Eve’s pure good relationship with God i have no idea.
I then ask myself “do i really need to know what the actual sin was? Why can I not just accept they were tempted by satan to do/take something, and that’s good enough”
Would knowing help me understand and answer all my questions?
If i believe in Christ, why am i even asking this?
But its there.
In the cc (the little book i have anyway) It doesn’t mention the tree, it just say’s about satan tempting them, trust dying in their hearts, disobedience, as they wished to become “like God” but without him, so then they lost the original grace of holiness and justice.
When i read the bible Gen I somehow take it word for word almost put myself back into the garden to try and figure out how it really was and why they wanted or were convinced that they needed to be like God.

ramble time…sorry

 

[simpleas]

If you are learning, it is indeed good to “seek” as we are doing, but it is not a substitute for standard Catholic teaching unless you find some dogma (I use that generally) contradictory. Please use the CCC as the fall-back. But yes, when we sin, we do so out of ignorance and blindness. To me, the ignorance is universal, and the blindness is automatic.

Please remember, your answer is okay, because you are giving your own understanding… but study the catechism. There have been many references to the CCC on this thread.

But what I am encouraging here is an exercise in introspection. Let us consider the desire for power. Adam had the “appetite” for power before he ate the fruit, so we can certainly attribute that appetite to God. Please correct me if I am missing something.

So, how about the “idea that we can become like God”? People get many, many ridiculous ideas, and that one would be especially appealing because, again, we all have innate drives for power, and not just power but status and dominance. We love to win; we are hardwired to want to be number one. When we win, our brain is showered with feel-good molecules. Is it reasonable to say that God created us with the capacity to have ridiculous ideas? Or are we to attribute that to Satan? Did God provide us with the imagination to come up with ridiculous notions (along with very good ones)?

As you might see, it is not just the idea of “being like God” that we find Satanic; I think it is more the defiance that we find Satanic. Would you agree?

I tend to flutter around to hear how other’s describe or interpret the creation story, can one story be the ultimate answer of our creation…

When you say about the idea that “we” can become like God, are you speaking of us now as human beings or Adam?
I wouldn’t want to be like God, although in a way I would, because he is all pure and holy, and that is one of our goal’s in this life to achieve. But as for power etc, I’d leave that to him as I think he’d know best!
I can not image why Adam would want to be like God, because I have never been what Adam once was before the sin. How can we really understand something which we have never experienced. Here i am talking about Adam’s complete union with God, and not what i experience when I feel close to God.
We are sinners and so now have a different relationship with God to the one Adam had once. What some people consider a sin others do not.
I think most sin’s are of the devil, war, murder. But when can we tell if our own sin’s are from the devil, or just our own doing? Not sure if I even understand what I just said!