Original Sin

[OneSheep]

What is the link between OS and what I wrote earlier about Purgatory, loving our neighbor and the meaning of childbirth pains? The artificial segmentation of our thinking and an unresolved cognitive disonance.

On the one hand, we try to live according to our idea about a good God, to trust and to follow this goodness as Jesus taught us. For example, to curse someone is a sin, to torture someone is a sin, to refuse to forgive someone is a sin, to desire vengeance in order to do evil to someone is a sin, to apply death penalty “if non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor” is a sin. We say that these things are sins because we want to imitate God’s goodness and we know that He can’t do such bad things, right? And we know that man can’t be better and kinder than God, being held to higher moral standards than God, right?

But on the other hand, if we are sincere and read Genesis with fresh eyes, in that text we encounter an unforgiving God, behaving not like a father, but like an ancient tyrant, committing all the sins mentioned above. Such vengeance towards A&E and all humankind surpasses even the ancient law “an eye for an eye”. If we didn’t know anything about Genesis before reading it and if instead of “God” we’d read “an Oriental unknown deity”, we’d simply laugh at the pettiness of such deity. So if we want to reconcile the image of our good God with this image of a vengeful God, we have two options:

1. To cling to the belief that Genesis offers us a true image of God. So we need to deceive ourselves: ignore some verses… justify God’s curse by pretending that A&E were inimaginably bad and ungrateful… deny that what God did was to take revenge against powerless creatures… demean and accuse ourselves and our neighbors (the whole human race) as “fallen” and “broken” and “deserving hell”. Hey, why should I love and forgive my neighbor if God needed such a cruel sacrifice to forgive us and even this sacrifice couldn’t move Him to lift the curse against the whole human race? Why should I care about a woman who dies in childbirth, since all women deserve to pay for what Eve did? “I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing” clearly shows a deity who takes pleasure in torturing people, in applying random punishments (are childbirth pains a JUST REPARATION for the disobedience of Eve?), just because he can. Can we pretend that childbirth pains are just a minor thing? Or a sign of God’s love? Or a sign of God’s justice?
2. To see the text of Genesis for what it is: a primitive explanation about suffering and death by attributing them to a divine curse. But the pressure to accept Genesis as literal truth is strong - if one rejects it as incompatible with everything that we know about God’s fatherly love, it means that he or she is badly catechized, dumb or a heretic. Oh, but we don’t want to become heretics, right? So even if we believe in God’s goodness, deep in our minds there remains a residual fear of a capricious deity who can crush us anytime and who doesn’t hesitate to “greatly increase our pangs”, in this life or in the afterlife. That’s why, for example, my mind clouded by grief could fall prey to those sadistic representations about Purgatory, with souls screaming in pain and imploring a divine mercy that sometimes refuses to come until the end of the earth. Jesus, what Jesus? Burning fire and hundreds of years of torture!

Wow, vames, that was amazing. I never thought of insertion of another god in this story like I had inserted a king into Acts 5:1-10.

Let’s not forget option 3, however, and take a developmental approach, that we have a good God and a well-meaning “vengeful” conscience:

1. The creation story is a metaphor for the workings of our individual and collective consciences. After all, don’t our consciences curse us, punish us, torture us, subject us to hell, and (with the coupled empathy-blocking) even drive us to suicide and punishing others to death? Don’t our consciences create our shadows, giving us parts of ourselves to resent, which in turn guide our behaviors in a carrot-and-stick way?

In this way, the story of Adam and Eve is indeed revelatory, but what the story reveals is not about our creator, but about our God-given consciences. This option reflects our first experience of what we think is God’s voice. This option respects the writer’s insights as valid from this initial introspection; God-equals-our-conscience is a first-half-of-life theology, and it has its place.

Of course, there are a lot of other really great options, and I am not “selling” this one.

The transition to second-half can be a little rough, and I must admit that perhaps the first-half theology could be presented in a way that puts more issues into the “mystery” category, where the mystery’s answers have to be found in the context of each person’s relationship with God. Look at the Gospel, it has a measure of apparent contradictions and mystery, leaving plenty of room for a wide range of followers. "Do you have a dualistic outlook? Here are some verses to support your view. Does God love unconditionally? Here are some verses. Does God love conditionally? Here are some verses. I know, it creates a panic attack for those of us who love the security of doctrine, but the real security, as Pope Francis indicates, is to be found in the loving relationships we have with each other and with our God.

 

[OneSheep]

Be true to thy self: I know what I’m capable of, and I know first hand what original sin has done to humanity. Even when it was removed by Baptism I and the rest of humanity that were Baptized still suffer from its effects. Ignorance of the truth, weakness of will and concupiscience. After looking into my life and observing the lives of others I knew I ,and others needed help.outside ourselves. It led me to admit the following: I am proud, an egoist, self-righteous, despairing , lazy, murderous every time I hate, distrusting, selfish and a thief. In short I am a sinner. Jesus Christ came for people like me and I have all the qualifications Alleluia! I will always be these things in myself and I must never forget it especially when I am tempted to condemn others. In my sickness , I must learn to glory and accept my greatest cross, Me.

I love your humility, and humility is vital to bring us to place of repentance. There is no way, whatsoever, to say that anything in your experience, reflected in your post, is anything other than a real, honest journey with God, and the same can be said for everyone who has posted on this thread. This thread, itself, has been a bit of a journey.

I do, however, encourage a “next step” to take, and you have already stated it. You have already been guided by the Spirit. There is indeed a way to “learn to glory and accept your greatest cross”. To me, the way to do so is the way of the cross itself, from where Jesus forgave the unrepentant. Our self-centeredness (“selfishness”), our capacity to hate, our capacity for blindness (leading to murder), our desire for control, dominance, and autonomy (“pride”), our ego, our self-righteousness, our capacity for despair and resistance to action (“laziness”) and a fistful of other capacities and drives will never go away. We come to resent them, and our resentment helps guide our behaviors.

However, when our empathy has developed, and we have taken on the call to forgive others, we no longer need this self-resentment, it causes a division inside us that is no longer necessary. One at a time, little by little, we can forgive all these aspects of ourselves. To me, it is more than “acceptance”; “glorify” is a better word. “Seeing the beauty” works too. It is reconciliation with our God-given human characteristics.

 

[OneSheep]

When God’s forgiveness is watered down, it is very easy to have confusion with my posts 551 and 599. Don’t worry about it. As far as the question “And what does that have to do with what I know in my relationship with God?” – I have no clue because you are the one in charge of your relationship with God. All I can do is to point out Catholic teachings so you and readers can make your own decisions.

Okay, I would like to understand your viewpoint, but I don’t. If you are unwilling to explain your answers to my questions about your post 599, hopefully someone else can.

But why, granny, did you avoid answering this question?:

1. Let’s say you have a daughter who comes home from school angry at her high school classmate Kate. She tells you what an awful person Kate is, and tells you all the terrible things that Kate did to her. Would you encourage her to forgive Kate?

Why are you so silent on questions of forgiveness? I hope you did not think the question is insulting, it wasn’t meant that way. But I have asked if you forgave Adam when you expressed some resentment toward him, and you don’t answer. I have asked you to forgive me when you have expressed resentment toward things I have written, and you don’t answer. You have jumped behind “that is personal” many times when I have asked you about forgiveness. My question is not unfounded.

If you indeed, granny, have a great deal of difficulty forgiving people, then be honest, the readers need to know that. They, like I, have to consider the source of what you are representing in the way that you represent it.

1. Can you see, granny, that a person who has a great deal of difficulty forgiving others is going to see merit in the idea of a God who withholds forgiveness under certain circumstances?
2. Can you see, granny, that a person who unconditionally loves and forgives is going to want to see some options on the definition and/or doctrine of original sin?

 

[vames]

In this way, the story of Adam and Eve is indeed revelatory, but what the story reveals is not about our creator, but about our God-given consciences. This option reflects our first experience of what we think is God’s voice. This option respects the writer’s insights as valid from this initial introspection; God-equals-our-conscience is a first-half-of-life theology, and it has its place.

Oh, sure! When I said “a primitive explanation”, I implicitly acknowledged that it was necessary, *unavoidable *and doesn’t have to be despised. I don’t despise children when they say “the sun is tired, so he needs to rest and goes to sleep until tomorrow”. I like the Greek and Egyptian tales about their gods, the idea that the sun revolves around the earth, the philosopher’s stone. What’s not to like about human creativity and effort to understand the world?

Our first experience of what we think is God’s voice, yes. It refers to the understanding of moral evil and natural evil as well. It provides us a lesson: “Look at what A&E did! How could they have followed the serpent, when God made them to be so happy in Eden? How could they prefer illusion to reality? If you behave like them, you will lose your Eden, too. If you misuse what God gave you, you will lose it. And you will bitterly regret”. When I was at the “peak” of my self-punishing mode, I tended to remember various instances of human cruelty throughout history, identifying myself with the perpetrators, and I was honestly baffled how God still allows us to live on this earth. I was looking in horror at what they did to Jesus, feeling deeply ashamed myself for their cruelty. How can such things be forgiven?

I doubt that the transition to second-half-of-life theology can be truly smooth. You know that at the beginning, others and maybe even yourself say: but what if everything is an illusion, a product of my mind that simply wants to escape guilt and find consolation? What do I make of the Gospel verses that support the first-half-of-life? Can I pretend that they are interpolations, misinterpretations, that they don’t exist? Do I have to twist them or ignore them until my thirst for coherence will be satisfied? These questions can pop up even if, as you say, we have the awareness that the real security is to be found in the loving relationships we have with each other and with our God.

About the “panic attack for those of us who love the security of doctrine”: in this thread I quoted Pope Francis’ thought about the extent of our punishing conscience. I liked it so much that I will quote it again: “What is the danger? It is that we presume we are righteous and judge others. We also judge God, because we think that he should punish sinners, condemn them to death, instead of forgiving. So yes, then we risk staying outside the Father’s house! Like the older brother in the parable, who rather than being content that his brother has returned, grows angry with the father who welcomes him and celebrates. If in our heart there is no mercy, no joy of forgiveness, we are not in communion with God, even if we observe all of his precepts, for it is love that saves, not the practice of precepts alone. It is love of God and neighbour that brings fulfilment to all the Commandments. And this is the love of God, his joy: forgiveness”.

 

[grannymh]

1. The creation story is a metaphor for the workings of our individual and collective consciences. After all, don’t our consciences curse us, punish us, torture us, subject us to hell, and (with the coupled empathy-blocking) even drive us to suicide and punishing others to death? Don’t our consciences create our shadows, giving us parts of ourselves to resent, which in turn guide our behaviors in a carrot-and-stick way?

No.

 

[grannymh]

What I observe is that the “door” called options swings both ways, both into and out of the Catholic Church.

There is no first half and then a second half of the Catholic Church.

Mortal sins, with their own conditions, freely committed with full knowledge, destroy the divine life in the soul known as Sanctifying Grace. In short, an individual chooses to reject God.

Therefore, because mortal sin is a free act on the part of the individual, it takes a free act on the part of the individual in order to obtain the restoration of God’s presence, which is Sanctifying Grace.

It is the individual who has the free-choice to remove God’s presence in her or his soul. God is God the Creator. Therefore, He has the right to ask for the person’s free-choice to be forgiven

God’s love does not ignore the person’s right to say yes or no.

 

[grannymh]

Why are you so silent on questions of forgiveness?

The word “personal” was left out of that question.

My personal relationship with God includes following His directives contained in the Catholic Church, for example participating in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Having intellect and will, (God-created spiritual soul) I have an obligation to answer God the Creator and not necessarily another human creature.

 

[grannymh]

What I observe is that the “door” called options swings both ways, both into and out of the Catholic Church.

There is no first half and then a second half of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is then, now, and forever.

Mortal sins, with their own conditions, freely committed with full knowledge, destroy the divine life in the soul known as Sanctifying Grace. In short, an individual chooses to reject God. (CCC, Glossary, Mortal Sin, page 889)

Therefore, because mortal sin is a free act on the part of the individual, it takes a free act on the part of the individual in order to obtain the restoration of God’s presence, which is Sanctifying Grace.

It is the individual who has the free-choice to remove God’s presence in her or his soul. God is God the Creator. Therefore, He has the right to ask for the individual’s free-choice to be forgiven

God’s love does not ignore the individual’s right to say yes or no.

 

[OneSheep]

We also have God-given free will which can potentially allow us to override any normal, God-given drives, virtues, etc. And that’s basically what the doctrine of OS maintains. Plain old everyday humdrum human pride is, in essence, the exaltation of self over everything else. It’s a step out of place, a disjunction, a foreign object that, ultimately, is the cause of the greatest-and least-sins in the world and the suffering that ensues.

You mentioned Hitler, an extreme example. His motivation for the holocaust and WW II was more than a desire to improve the lot of his people coupled with a blindness to the humanity of Jews. The primary motivation behind his strange ideas and everything they led to, the main cause of his finding a way to rationalize inhumanity-was blind ambition: the petty desire for power, self-glory.

Yes, the typical antagonist in the James Bond and Superman movies. Can we humbly admit to ourselves that we would love to have great power? I could do a lot to straighten out our government if I had lots of power. In addition, the feelings of elation that adjoin power and control are hard-wired into us, when we win a game, when things are going our way, all the “happy” neurochemicals flood our brains. However, our normal conscience eventually condemns our God-given desires for power and control.

Did you notice the word “blind” before ambition? It was only a few years ago that I realized that desire blinds me. Desire, in addition to condemnation, blocks our empathy. Hitler had both going on. So his “good intent” was to be in control, to destroy what he perceived as evil, and, perhaps, to improve the lot of his people. I am not saying, by any means, that Hitler was a victim or did not make bad choices. He made bad choices, the first of which was to avoid forgiving the Jews and others he resented.
Sure he had “pride”, he desired dominance and power, we all do. Repentance is the antidote to being enslaved by our desires, as Hitler was. Forgiveness is the antidote for condemnation.

Separation from God, made evident by lack of faith in, and, even more importantly lack of hope in, and, most importantly, lack of love for God, as well as neighbor, constitue an injustice in man, regardless of whether or not he’s directly responsible for it. What we are responsible for, the choice we can make, is to come to find God and turn to Him, rectifying this injustice. The reason Jesus emphasized the supreme value of humility in the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere is because its the pathway to God, to peace and harmony, and away from the discord and destructiveness of pride, away from the wedge it seeks to place between us and Him.

By “Injustice” I think you are saying that man is “not right” in these behaviors. I agree, but to me “pride” does not in itself “seek” to separate us from God. God gave us every aspect of the “pride” that I have described (desire for control, dominance, status, autonomy). Our pride is a gift that contributes to our survival.

And yes, humility is part of the repentance from slavery to our appetite for pride as well as all the other appetites. In addition, humility is an essential part of forgiveness.

What I am saying is that we can reconcile with our own “pride”. We can forgive our “pride”, and empathy can guide our behaviors instead of self-condemnation. Nothing separates us from God. We can only perceive such separation, but God is always with us, trying to enlighten us, being there as we suffer the effects of our blindness.

 

[fhansen]

Yes, the typical antagonist in the James Bond and Superman movies. Can we humbly admit to ourselves that we would love to have great power? I could do a lot to straighten out our government if I had lots of power. In addition, the feelings of elation that adjoin power and control are hard-wired into us, when we win a game, when things are going our way, all the “happy” neurochemicals flood our brains. However, our normal conscience eventually condemns our God-given desires for power and control.

Hitler thought he could do a lot to straighten things out-that was the problem. And the “happiness” achieved by winning is fleeting-it’s relative, like all concupiscence-related endeavors - based in this case on pride: beating someone else-and the next guy might beat us and our happiness is gone because we decided that winning determines our worth. As Solomon came to see-and lament about: “Vanity of vanities: everything is vanity”. Jesus gave us just the opposite path, where losing-not playing the worlds game at all- becomes winning. And this is the problem. Apart from God the world is dog-eat-dog, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. We start out “apart from God” in this world-and that is the essence of OS.

Did you notice the word “blind” before ambition? It was only a few years ago that I realized that desire blinds me. Desire, in addition to condemnation, blocks our empathy. Hitler had both going on. So his “good intent” was to be in control, to destroy what he perceived as evil, and, perhaps, to improve the lot of his people. I am not saying, by any means, that Hitler was a victim or did not make bad choices. He made bad choices, the first of which was to avoid forgiving the Jews and others he resented.
Sure he had “pride”, he desired dominance and power, we all do. Repentance is the antidote to being enslaved by our desires, as Hitler was. Forgiveness is the antidote for condemnation.

Yes, and concupiscence is defined as “disordered desire”, a consequence of OS, of man not having control over otherwise normal passions, etc due to his being apart from God. The Atonement has for its purpose the reconciliation and re-communion of man with God.
More later.

 

[OneSheep]

The word “personal” was left out of that question.

My personal relationship with God includes following His directives contained in the Catholic Church, for example participating in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Having intellect and will, (God-created spiritual soul) I have an obligation to answer God the Creator and not necessarily another human creature.

Okay, I’m going to ask again and try to respect your wishes. Feel free to continue guiding me on what is too personal. This time, I am going to modify question number one, so that it is not personal, not in the least. Of course you are not obligated to answer, but your silence takes away from the effectiveness of your message. Questions 2 and 3 ask for your opinion. Are they too personal?

1. Let’s say Jan has a daughter who comes home from school angry at her high school classmate Kate. She tells her mother what an awful person Kate is, and tells her mother all the terrible things that Kate did to her. Should Jan encourage her daughter to forgive Kate (In addition to taking steps to solve the problem)? And I will add another question here, if Jan’s resentment toward Kate is triggered, should Jan also forgive?
2. Can you see, granny, that a person who has a great deal of difficulty forgiving others is going to see merit in the idea of a God who withholds forgiveness under certain circumstances? (Note: all of us, at least sometimes, have difficulty forgiving.) Please explain your answer.
3. Can you see, granny, that a person who unconditionally loves and forgives is going to want to see some options on the definition and/or doctrine of original sin? Please explain your answer. (This is the ex-school teacher coming out.)

Please, answer the questions. Unconditional forgiveness is the key aspect that contradicts the doctrine of Original Sin, and these questions are very pertinent to the topic.

 

[OneSheep]

Hitler thought he could do a lot to straighten things out-that was the problem.

I don’t get it, fhansen. Do you ever think that you could do a lot of things to straighten things out? Is that a problem?

And the “happiness” achieved by winning is fleeting-it’s relative, like all concupiscence-related endeavors - based in this case on pride: beating someone else-and the next guy might beat us and our happiness is gone because we decided that winning determines our worth.

True, it is fleeting. But it is hard-wired.

As Solomon came to see-and lament about: “Vanity of vanities: everything is vanity”. Jesus gave us just the opposite path, where losing-not playing the worlds game at all- becomes winning. And this is the problem. Apart from God the world is dog-eat-dog, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. We start out “apart from God” in this world-and that is the essence of OS.

Jesus actually appeals to our desire to be first. He says “the last shall be first”. Since we all want to be first, we turn our “firstness” into being a servant instead of a king. But even a “king” can be a servant, as you probably know.

Apart from God is non-existence, there is no world at all. We start out ignorant, though. Is our ignorance a “consequence”? I think it is a mystery, but not a consequence. We don’t “deserve” ignorance.

 

[fhansen]

I don’t get it, fhansen. Do you ever think that you could do a lot of things to straighten things out? Is that a problem?

True, it is fleeting. But it is hard-wired.

Jesus actually appeals to our desire to be first. He says “the last shall be first”. Since we all want to be first, we turn our “firstness” into being a servant instead of a king. But even a “king” can be a servant, as you probably know.

Apart from God is non-existence, there is no world at all. We start out ignorant, though. Is our ignorance a “consequence”? I think it is a mystery, but not a consequence. We don’t “deserve” ignorance.

God allows us to be apart from Him, emotionally,spiritually, mentally, however we want to describe it- even though we can’t even exist without Him. That’s what it means to be “lost”. And Jesus tells us that we cannot be separated from Him-once the Good Shepard has found His lost sheep.

 

[fhansen]

I don’t get it, fhansen. Do you ever think that you could do a lot of things to straighten things out? Is that a problem?

It *was *in the case of Hitler. I’m saying that inordinate self-love produces nothing of permanent value-except when we grow jaded enough with it to produce humility.instead.

True, it is fleeting. But it is hard-wired.

Self-love and our appetites are hard-wired. But they’ll dominate-becoming inordinate- unless reined in by “ordinate subjugation” to God.

Jesus actually appeals to our desire to be first. He says “the last shall be first”. Since we all want to be first, we turn our “firstness” into being a servant instead of a king. But even a “king” can be a servant, as you probably know.

Of course God wants us first-He always has-but the world thinks the *first *shall be first-that’s the problem. And that’s why our heroes-the “winners”- are what they are-often of dubious character, or at the least along the same vein as King David-the hero Israel coveted-who could slay their dragons-as contrasted with the Suffering Servant. I’m saying that man’s ways are not Gods ways-they’re radically different, in fact- simply because of detachment from Him. Sin is a radical departure from His will-but He seeks to use it nevertheless, as a teacher, to steer us back to Him as we become tired of it-as we see the “vanity” in it all, like Prodigals turning from the pigsty.

 

[grannymh]

What I am saying is that we can reconcile with our own “pride”. We can forgive our “pride”, and empathy can guide our behaviors instead of self-condemnation.

That is fair advice.

However, when mortal sins are involved, which are a no-no from God’s perspective, an individual is still a creature and not the Creator.

Being a tad different from the transcendent super-natural Pure Spirit without material restrictions – known as God the Creator, we must face the fact that it is the Creator Who forgives creatures and not the reverse. Unfortunately, a creature cannot willy-nilly remove any of the Creator’s conditions for an eternal life designed by the Creator Himself.

Nothing separates us from God. We can only perceive such separation, but God is always with us, trying to enlighten us, being there as we suffer the effects of our blindness.

Yes. Romans 8: 38-39 is great comfort because it speaks of reality. Unfortunately, these two verses cannot be confused with a human perception. In fact, the whole of Romans chapter 8 is not a perception of any kind. Verse 13 directly points to human’s intellect and free will, which are real. Verse 9 proclaims: But you are not in the flesh; on the contrary, you are in the spirit, if only the Spirit of God dwells in you." That is the reality of Sanctifying Grace. In Romans chapter 8, Jesus Christ Who is real is portrayed as the Way, Truth and Life found in the Last Supper discourse,

Obviously, an individual with free will can choose any number of ways to personally interpret verses in Scripture. The Catholic Church, because it is the Church established by Jesus Christ, does not have that human freedom to perceive according to human wishes. The reality of verse 37 is that Him, Jesus Christ, is the conqueror over the real things in verses 38-39.

The only possible way that we can be separated from the abiding love of Jesus is that we freely choose to separate ourselves from God’s love with our direct choice to commit mortal sin.

God the Creator allows and respects each individual’s ability to remain in His Life or to banish His life via mortal sin. As Creator, God can determine the conditions for human creatures to remain in or to return to a relationship with God, which has the goal of perfect happiness in heaven.

Matthew 26: 69-75. “He went out and began to weep bitterly.” is one of the real conditions for God’s forgiveness.

John 21: 15-19. “Yes, Lord, you know that I love You.” and “Follow Me.” are two additional real choices necessary for God’s forgiveness.

 

[grannymh]

Okay, I’m going to ask again and try to respect your wishes. Feel free to continue guiding me on what is too personal. This time, I am going to modify question number one, so that it is not personal, not in the least. Of course you are not obligated to answer, but your silence takes away from the effectiveness of your message. Questions 2 and 3 ask for your opinion. Are they too personal?

1. Let’s say Jan has a daughter who comes home from school angry at her high school classmate Kate. She tells her mother what an awful person Kate is, and tells her mother all the terrible things that Kate did to her. Should Jan encourage her daughter to forgive Kate (In addition to taking steps to solve the problem)? And I will add another question here, if Jan’s resentment toward Kate is triggered, should Jan also forgive?
2. Can you see, granny, that a person who has a great deal of difficulty forgiving others is going to see merit in the idea of a God who withholds forgiveness under certain circumstances? (Note: all of us, at least sometimes, have difficulty forgiving.) Please explain your answer.
3. Can you see, granny, that a person who unconditionally loves and forgives is going to want to see some options on the definition and/or doctrine of original sin? Please explain your answer. (This is the ex-school teacher coming out.)

Please, answer the questions. Unconditional forgiveness is the key aspect that contradicts the doctrine of Original Sin, and these questions are very pertinent to the topic.

I put the key aspect in bold.

What I see are the Catholic teachings regarding the relationship between the Creator and the human creature. I will be delighted to share the Catholic Faith as answers to valid, not personal, questions when there is a proper understanding regarding the difference between God the Creator and an individual person as the creature.

As for “unconditional forgiveness” being the key aspect that contradicts the doctrine of Original Sin, unconditional forgiveness denies that the human creature has a rational spiritual soul created by God at conception. Thus, it becomes unimportant to even consider a spiritual relationship with God since humans are simply prettier rocks minus the conditions needed for the relationship between two different kinds of beings, the Creator and the created.

There is a difference between God and humans.

To explain any situation (like the one involving Jan, her daughter, and Kate), I look to the Our Father prayer and would hope that Jan and her daughter, after venting, would forgive someone who hurt them in some way. Kate, if she had committed a mortal sin, would need to seek forgiveness directly from God through the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

If Kate had committed venial sins, those less than full separation from God, it would be a good idea for Kate to use the Sacrament of Reconciliation as a grace filled means to avoid these sins in the future. Even venial sins require sorrow and repentance which is part of a free will choice to seek forgiveness from God. We want to be our best for God because that shows that we are ready to know Him, love Him, serve Him, and be in His presence in joy eternal.

 

[fhansen]

God’s love and forgiveness are unconditional-in the sense of the father of the prodigal always waiting for the return of his wayward son with open arms. But He won’t *force *us to accept either His unconditional love or forgiveness-He won’t force us to value it at all. IOW, in Catholic teaching, grace is resistible.

 

[grannymh]

Obviously, God as Creator does not have conditions affecting His actions.

It is the human creature who has been given the conditions for living in friendship with our Creator. These conditions are necessary for human creatures because humans are not the Creator nor are they the same as the Creator. The Catholic interpretation of Genesis 2: 15-17 is in CCC, 396 and CCC, 1730.

May I respectfully refer to Luke 11-24 where we observe the conditions that the Prodigal Son has to meet in order to receive his Father’s forgiveness.

Please look carefully at Luke 15: 17-19 and 21. These informative verses present both the conditions for forgiveness and the carrying out of the conditions. These actual conditions are also required for a valid Sacrament of Reconciliation. Kindly consider that Luke 15; 11-24 has more essential information than the fact that the Father is filled with compassion and is waiting with open arms.

Verses17-19 conditions start with coming to one’s senses and thinking. Otherwise, the son would be like a handsome rock minus the abilities of a spiritual soul.

Verse 21 is the acknowledgement of the sin and the acknowledgment that the Prodigal Son is no longer in the father/son relationship because he no longer deserves it.

Verse 24 states that the Prodigal Son was lost, that is he was no longer in Sanctifying Grace. He is found in that he freely chose (a condition) to return to his Father’s graces via the necessary condition of physically leaving the distant country described in verses 13-16. When we commit mortal sins, we, too, are in a “distant country” separated from our Creator.

In the following celebration, the Father shows his Prodigal Son the joy of having him back. The Sacrament of Reconciliation restores the joy of Sanctifying Grace by which we share in God’s divine life here on earth.

 

[ynotzap]

QuWhen I see my neighbor doings things I know are morally wrong, even children disobeying knowing what this could lead to, I had a strong tendency to and actually judged. After striving to correct the situations (unknowingly playing god) I pitted myself against the establishment thinking I was doing Gods’ will. I found myself helplessly frustrated, confused and suffering greatly. I thought that God had abandoned me. I tried every avenue I knew for help to no avail. I had a prayer group pray for me, as well my prayers. Then came the day of “Enlightenment” By Gods’grace I came to know why I experience complete failure, and I mean complete failure. I had to experience this. I took my Faith (a gift) for granted expecting from others what I expected from myself. When I demanded from others what they could not give I frustrated myself and them too. I committed an injustice towards them. I became very judgmental. It was true they did wrong, and so did I. I finally realized that they were handicapped spiritually, I could see their weakness but not my own. What is Jesus all about? He came to redeem us from Powers and Principalities… rebellious angels. God has confirmed this belief for me. He also came to give us a new life of grace. Pride was their downfall and mans’ too. We actually play saviour unintentionally. sometimes in our efforts to do good, we must fail. Salvation of mankind is left to God alone. Nobody in Heaven and earth will take His place . When I learned this then I was confirmed in this truth. We must encounter Jesus, He is the Gate. and when we do our lives will forever,change and we will love God for Himself :and not just for His gifts. Peace to men of good will, not necessarily to those who succeed! Quote: Oh Lord heal my blindness so that I can see

 

[ynotzap]

I add to my post:self-righteousness is spiritual blindness, it is called vainglory, wood worm, moth that consumes. It is the sin of good people. I believe it lies deep in the hidden recesses of our souls. It is hidden pride and no one is exempt. It is due to the effects of original sin This I believe is what Jesus said “As you judge others you shall be judged” I wonder what other creatures of the Id are hidden in my soul, I can understand what St. Paul meant when he said :“I walk in fear and trepidation…”