L
larkin31
Guest
That is why I included the words “in my view.”
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
L
larkin31
Guest
I just don’t see any evidence or argument why disobedience means that “faith dies.” This isn’t true in any other circumstance. If a child disobeys a parent, it is not their “faith” or “trust” dying. No one argues this way. Then, to punish the children’s children, in perpetuity, for this disobedience (which was seeking to join further the world of God’s knowledge placed right in the middle of their life’s garden and plenty) seems an authoritarian over-reaction to insubordination. This kind of extreme response in the world of human affairs is so familiar and extreme that it is even a stereotype now of totalitarian inflexibility, subject to mockery and scorn. What is puzzling to me is why Catholics (and other Christians and Jews who interpret Genesis this way) exempt their God from similar standards of conduct toward the less knowledgeable, the less powerful, and the less fortunate. Even, as it seems, toward God’s own “children” (creations in his likeness).The Catechism states that, with the original sin, faith died in mans heart. By rejecting Gods’ authority, they effectively rejected God as their God, becoming their own “god”.
D
davidv
Guest
What evidence have you examined? What evidence have you dismissed without cause? What arguments have you considered? Which ones have you dismissed because you did not understand them?I just don’t see any evidence or argument why disobedience means that “faith dies.”
How do you know this?This isn’t true in any other circumstance. If a child disobeys a parent, it is not their “faith” or “trust” dying.
I don’t think you understand what you are arguing against. Most of the above is strawman.No one argues this way. Then, to punish the children’s children, in perpetuity, for this disobedience (which was seeking to join further the world of God’s knowledge placed right in the middle of their life’s garden and plenty) seems an authoritarian over-reaction to insubordination. This kind of extreme response in the world of human affairs is so familiar and extreme that it is even a stereotype now of totalitarian inflexibility, subject to mockery and scorn. What is puzzling to me is why Catholics (and other Christians and Jews who interpret Genesis this way) exempt their God from similar standards of conduct toward the less knowledgeable, the less powerful, and the less fortunate. Even, as it seems, toward God’s own “children” (creations in his likeness).
L
larkin31
Guest
Are you disagreeing with my claims? I responded directly to the Catechism quoted to me. There has been no other “evidence” presented to me that I have dismissed, and I explained why I was rejecting the “dying” claim about disobedience. If you wish to argue, against me, that when a child disobeys a parent that their trust and faith in the parent “dies,” then by all means do so. That was my specific claim.What evidence have you examined? What evidence have you dismissed without cause? What arguments have you considered? Which ones have you dismissed because you did not understand them?
How do you know this?
I don’t think you understand what you are arguing against. Most of the above is strawman.
Oh, and I have “considered” EVERY argument presented to me here, and I explained the reason for my response. You did not, however, explain what part of my reply was a “strawman.” I thought that I was responding directly to the Biblical account of Original Sin and to the catechism quoted to me. I don’t see how commenting on those two aspects is a “strawman,” when the thread and our current discussion is about the story of the Fall and Original Sin.
F
fhansen
Guest
It’s directly related. A&E obviously lacked trust in Gods’ opinion, following their own instead, in which case He couldn’t have been much of a god in their eyes. This is the essence of moral relativity and the reason for all moral evil, i.e. “sin”, that followed. And it’s also apparent that all mankind is born without this very faith in God.I just don’t see any evidence or argument why disobedience means that “faith dies.” This isn’t true in any other circumstance. If a child disobeys a parent, it is not their “faith” or “trust” dying. No one argues this way.
D
davidv
Guest
Yes, because you provided no evidence that I should believe them.Are you disagreeing with my claims?
True. However your response was an unproven assertion.I responded directly to the Catechism quoted to me.
There has been no other “evidence” presented to me that I have dismissed, and I explained why I was rejecting the “dying” claim about disobedience. If you wish to argue, against me, that when a child disobeys a parent that their trust and faith in the parent “dies,” then by all means do so. That was my specific claim.
Oh, and I have “considered” EVERY argument presented to me here, and I explained the reason for my response. You did not, however, explain what part of my reply was a “strawman.” I thought that I was responding directly to the Biblical account of Original Sin and to the catechism quoted to me. I don’t see how commenting on those two aspects is a “strawman,” when the thread and our current discussion is about the story of the Fall and Original Sin.
L
larkin31
Guest
Yes, because you provided no evidence that I should believe them.
True. However your response was an unproven assertion.
- I don’t care if you believe them. I am not proselytizing. I don’t expect Catholics to believe as I do.
- I am not trying to “prove” anything. The only assertion I made was that the CCC was irrational and non-empirical. I gave my reasoning for the former assertion, and the absence of evidence provided from Catholics for the latter (that we punish children and later progeny for the wrongs of parents/ancestors) IS the empirical basis of my position. I am arguing that there is NO evidence. There is no requirement that I produce any evidence when I am arguing that there is none.
L
larkin31
Guest
That is a false assumption. Children who disobey are not deciding that their parents “are not much of a parent”.It’s directly related. A&E obviously lacked trust in Gods’ opinion, following their own instead, in which case He couldn’t have been much of a god in their eyes.
No, it is not the “reason” for it. The “reason” for it is that ALL morality is man-made and as independent creatures in a multitude of cultures with a plethora of minds that hold ethics to varying degrees, we end up with a plethora of gods and a good bit of moral relativity.This is the essence of moral relativity and the reason for all moral evil, i.e. “sin”, that followed.
Humans are born without the ability to walk or understand language or feed themselves or understand faith. Same would have been true for Adam and Eve’s children when God said, “Be fruitful and multiply.”And it’s also apparent that all mankind is born without this very faith in God.
D
davidv
Guest
Your reasoning has been shown to be faulty. Therefore your assertion of irrationality is itself irrational.
- I don’t care if you believe them. I am not proselytizing. I don’t expect Catholics to believe as I do.
- I am not trying to “prove” anything. The only assertion I made was that the CCC was irrational and non-empirical. I gave my reasoning for the former assertion, and the absence of evidence provided from Catholics for the latter (that we punish children and later progeny for the wrongs of parents/ancestors) IS the empirical basis of my position. I am arguing that there is NO evidence. There is no requirement that I produce any evidence when I am arguing that there is none.
J
jonfawkes
Guest
exactly - as the creator he is responsibleIn my humble opinion, the blame is being put on God.
D
davidv
Guest
Not exactly. He is not responsible for His creatures’ free choices.exactly - as the creator he is responsible
J
jonfawkes
Guest
why not? He built us that way-He knew what would happen.
D
davidv
Guest
Because “knowing” does not equal “causing”. In His immense love He gave up control over us by giving us free will. In so doing, He also permits our own selfless donation to Him and others. In other words we are free to love.why not? He built us that way-He knew what would happen.
G
grannymh
Guest
I realize that. It doesn’t matter whose view, it isn’t Catholic. My apology if I confused the situation.That is why I included the words “in my view.”
G
grannymh
Guest
This is your view. For a different perspective – Isaiah 55: 6-9I just don’t see any evidence or argument why disobedience means that “faith dies.” This isn’t true in any other circumstance. If a child disobeys a parent, it is not their “faith” or “trust” dying. No one argues this way. Then, to punish the children’s children, in perpetuity, for this disobedience (which was seeking to join further the world of God’s knowledge placed right in the middle of their life’s garden and plenty) seems an authoritarian over-reaction to insubordination. This kind of extreme response in the world of human affairs is so familiar and extreme that it is even a stereotype now of totalitarian inflexibility, subject to mockery and scorn. What is puzzling to me is why Catholics (and other Christians and Jews who interpret Genesis this way) exempt their God from similar standards of conduct toward the less knowledgeable, the less powerful, and the less fortunate. Even, as it seems, toward God’s own “children” (creations in his likeness).
Or try looking at Adam in his relationship with God. This relationship is not a human parent with a human child.
G
grannymh
Guest
The section of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, which I like to reference has many, many claims. It would be most helpful if you would state the particular, individual sentences to which you are responding.Are you disagreeing with my claims? I responded directly to the Catechism quoted to me.
G
grannymh
Guest
The “wrong doing” of the first human person toward his Creator is way different than children disobeying a parent in the 21st century. There is really no way to compare or make equal what happens in the 21st century with what happened once, which is why it is called original, at the beginning of history.
- I don’t care if you believe them. I am not proselytizing. I don’t expect Catholics to believe as I do.
- I am not trying to “prove” anything. The only assertion I made was that the CCC was irrational and non-empirical. I gave my reasoning for the former assertion, and the absence of evidence provided from Catholics for the latter (that we punish children and later progeny for the wrongs of parents/ancestors) IS the empirical basis of my position. I am arguing that there is NO evidence. There is no requirement that I produce any evidence when I am arguing that there is none.
G
grannymh
Guest
Not exactly. Just because humans put the blame on God does not mean that the humans are correct. Sorry, if you took what I thought was obvious in the wrong way.exactly - as the creator he is responsible
C
CEM5
Guest
Hi JTBT,Are people born with sin, as the Roman Catholics, and a lot of Protestants believe?
Or, are people born with a gravity toward sin as the Eastern Orthodox Church believe?
I was always taught the frist but the more I study it the 2nd choice seems to make more sense to me. Any thoughts?
Genesis 3, Sin of Adam - alientation between man and God.
Original sin is a “state”. As such, we are all born into this state of separation from God. Now we have not only alienation from God, but from nature as well. That is why we need God. Only God can (could) restore this lost state.
Because of the sin of Adam, grace was lost to man, and man’s goodness, as God created him, was lost. Nothing evil can reside in God’s presence, thus the banishment. However, we, as God’s children, are so loved, that God planned from the beginning (for He knew the outcome) to bring salvation back to mankind. Adam’s sin of the loss of grace (thus death entered the world) was an eternal sin. No person could negate this eternal sin - only one who is eternal. That is God.
The “stain of original sin” was passed down from generation to generation - this loss of grace. ***You cannot give grace to others when you don’t have it yourself to pass on. ***Thus this is original sin of which all mankind inherited. Adam’s imperfection, because we are born of Adam, is passed onto all men. Because this is a human sin also, it had to be restored by a human. Only one “person” fit the bill of being both divine (eternal) and human (man) – Jesus, God incarnate. Jesus has two natures: Human and Divine. Thus He was the only one to “fix” this eternal sin of the loss of God’s grace. Jesus bore all of the world’s sin upon himself in order that redemption of mankind could be made. This act bore all past, present and future sins. Jesus showed by his death and subsequent resurrection, that He is Lord over life and death - He rose from the dead and with this showed His conquering of sin and death. He is the “Lamb of God”, and redeemer of mankind. (Redeem means to buy back from slavery or one’s debts). As Scripture says, we are no longer slaves to sin - we now have the grace to resist temptations and sin, and accept eternal salvation - our restored place with God. Through the Sacrament of Baptism, we receive the grace we lost, and thus the stain of original sin is washed away.
Furthermore, because we are the offspring of Adam we carry upon ourselves what he passed onto us through him: That is the loss of grace and death of our corporeal bodies.
A wise person spoke in our group in Church about how he saw this loss of grace. I will try to explain it, but forgive me if I don’t do his words and thoughts justice.
It is like someone making a CD without flaws. It is “perfect” and “good”. Then someone comes along and makes a copy of the CD - doesn’t want the original, but their own version of it. This copied CD then has some flaws in it, and whenever someone then makes copies from this flawed version, those flaws will always be there. Nothing can be done to correct these flaws for they no longer have the original - it was discarded. So, copy after copy carries those flaws.
This analogy is what Adam did to humans and all subsequent generations - we are copies of his imperfection. The grace he lost, he no longer had to pass onto us. We are the “flawed” copies of the first fallen humans. Only God created the originals but the originals became “flawed” when they chose to accept death…
Don’t know if this makes sense to you, but it does to me.
Only God has the power to restore the flawed versions to perfection and by baptism we “erase” this flaw.
blessings and peace of Christ,
CEM :heaven:
J
jonfawkes
Guest
By creating the players, creating the rules not just knowing the outcome - it’s like dominoes -I know from my set up that knocking down the first will cause the last to fall.Because “knowing” does not equal “causing”. In His immense love He gave up control over us by giving us free will. In so doing, He also permits our own selfless donation to Him and others. In other words we are free to love.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.