Orignal Sin

[larkin31]

Hi jonfawkes,

Adam and Eve were not children, but adults and were warned of the consequences should they disobey. Thye were blessed with “free will” and “intelligence” so they weren’t ignorant little children. They had EVERYTHING they needed and then some as I explained in an earlier post. When they disobeyed and God questioned them, they did not own up to their sin, but rather, they blamed God and the devil. This is the sin of great pride, and showed no repentence or contrition. They freely chose to believe the words of the devil rather than the words of God who clearly warned them what the consequences of disobedience would be.

When do either Adam or Eve “blame God”? Even when Eve points to the serpent, it is to say that “the serpent deceived me,” which is in answer to God’s question of how this happened and is true: the serpent deceived Eve.

But when does either one blame God?

 

[fhansen]

Why are we to assume that the redeemer is better than the original state of grace?

There are other references, such as in Scripture where it’s alluded that man will end up higher than the angels. Maybe the greater good comes about where a being is tried and tested-where “more” of man’s will is involved in a process of coming to align himself with God.

 

[CEM5]

I think that the story in Genesis of Eden and the Fall clearly shows that God is not omniscient. He is very powerful, but not omnipresent and not omniscient.

Hi larkin31,

The Bible was written over a period of hundreds of years by various inspired men, with God allowing their unique and individual writing styles (genres). The Bible has various genres: allegory, legend, myth, poetry, and such to describe or teach a moral truth among other things.

Understanding literary forms: They are part of our daily experience, which can be true to life but not necessarily historical. Example: Genesis has two stories of creation, both written during different periods in time, with different authors. The older version is 2 Genesis. Understanding that Genesis was not intended to be a scientific factual history of creation, but was based on “legend”, and 1 Genesis was written in the poetical style to state a truth of creation: That all things came to be through God, the Creator, who created all things “good”, and gave an explanation for the cause of sin and death in the world. True science is never in conflict with Christian teaching.

By reading Scriptures properly and reverently, one can get to learn about and know about God. Proper interpretation of Scripture is left to the magesterium of the Church who have been properly instructed. That doesn’t mean people can’t know proper interpretation on their own - they just have to be sure they have not improperly interpreted them, for there are many passages difficult to fully understand without proper explanation. This is even mentioned by St. Peter the Apostle and first Pope, (see 2 Peter 1:20, 2 Peter 3:16).

God is all-knowing, all-powerful, ever-present everywhere, has no beginning and no end, etc…There is only one Creator.

blessings,
CEM

 

[davidv]

When do either Adam or Eve "blame GodEven when Eve points to the serpent, it is to say that “the serpent deceived me,” which is in answer to God’s question of how this happened and is true: the serpent deceived Eve.

But when does either one blame God?

Here

12 The man replied, “The woman whom you put here with me– she gave me fruit from the tree, so I ate it.” (Genesis (NAB) 3)

 

[CEM5]

It’s self referential - the savior was needed to redeem us from the fall - the fall makes the redeemer possible. Circular logic - says nothing

I would just like to clarify:

God is eternal: has no beginning and no end. The “saviour” was always with God, as the Word.

God is One body: Three persons

• God the Father,
• God the Word
• God the Holy Spirit

This is what God did/does

• Creator
• Redeemer
• Sanctifier

The Word, as the Gospel of John states/teaches, was in the beginning, is God, and all things were created through the Word. The Word became flesh (that is Jesus), and so on…

Additionally, in Genesis, when God said, “Let us make man in our image”, the “us” of course is the Trinity.

After the Word (the second “person” of the Trinity) became flesh (God incarnate) He is now known as “Jesus”, the Saviour. Never changed, still the second person of the Trinity, just now, after the incarnation, has two natures: Jesus is fully divine (as God) and fully human (as Jesus), but still never separated from the divinity of God.

 

[CEM5]

When do either Adam or Eve “blame God”? Even when Eve points to the serpent, it is to say that “the serpent deceived me,” which is in answer to God’s question of how this happened and is true: the serpent deceived Eve.

But when does either one blame God?

Genesis 3:12 RHE
And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

 

[grannymh]

412 But why did God not prevent the first man from sinning? St. Leo the Great responds, "Christ’s inexpressible grace gave us blessings better than those the demon’s envy had taken away."307 And St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, “There is nothing to prevent human nature’s being raised up to something greater, even after sin; God permits evil in order to draw forth some greater good. Thus St. Paul says, ‘Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more’; and the Exsultet sings, ‘O happy fault,... which gained for us so great a Redeemer!’”

Why are we to assume that the redeemer is better than the original state of grace?

To understand this paragraph 412, one needs to look at the time line.

CCC paragraphs 355 - 356 describe Adam’s original state of holiness. Adam, at the get-go, is specifically called to share in God’s own life. This is not similar to a parent and child relationship because parent and child are both human beings. God, our Creator is pure spirit. We are not on the same level.

The second point in the time line is CCC paragraph 396. It restates Adam’s prime status but adds the condition for it to continue. “A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God.” Accepting or rejecting this condition is the test that Adam faces. If Adam rejects this condition, he loses his original state of holiness and justice which is part of his created nature. If Adam accepts this condition, then his descendents would be born in the state of original holiness.

The third point in the time line is CCC paragraph 397 when Adam lets his trust in his Creator die in his heart and abusing his freedom, disobeys God. The consequence of Adam’s disobedience is that Adam and Eve immediately lose their state of original holiness. There is an earlier post 119 which describes the necessity of a Redeemer Who could restore the broken friendship.

CEM5 and Fhansen have some excellent posts which should be reread.

The fourth point in the time line is in CCC paragraphs 407-410 which brings us to the 21st century and your question “Why are we to assume that the Redeemer is better than the original state of grace?” At this point in the time line, there is no going back.
What happened happened.

This may or may not be comforting, but in the early Church all the way to the Protestant Reformation learned individuals were asking questions regarding Original Sin. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Divine Revelation was maintained by the Catholic Church.

Nonetheless, sin had entered our world. The consequences of Original Sin and of all our personal sins make our life a battle. No wonder that the question "But why did God not prevent the first man from sinning? keeps being asked. The best answer is found in CCC paragraph 396. God created Adam in His image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can life this friendship only in free submission to God. It is man, as the created material/spiritual being, who is limited and therefore must freely choose to submit to our Creator.

CCC paragraph 412 gives answers to the “why” question by referring to three saints.
In my humble opinion St. Paul is the most logical. But is paragraph 412 teaching us an assumption? Not really. It is recognizing the difficulty of second guessing God.
This is why there is no real answer to your question as to which kind of human life would be better.

It is important to review the history of Adam and the time line. It is easy to get distracted by the non-essentials. That is why I keep saying that all of us need to pray and meditate beginning with CCC 355.

Blessings,
granny

“Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Luke 23: 33-43

 

[CEM5]

Hi jonfawkes,

Please read my earlier post re: evil #124 (in reference to your post of Isaiah)

 

[jonfawkes]

The second point in the time line is CCC paragraph 396. It restates Adam’s prime status but adds the condition for it to continue. “A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God.” Accepting or rejecting this condition is the test that Adam faces. If Adam rejects this condition, he loses his original state of holiness and justice which is part of his created nature. If Adam accepts this condition, then his descendents would be born in the state of original holiness.

This is the part that sticks in my craw-the test. The need for it to be free submission was a qualifier which I guess comes from God - it just seems like a set up. “don’t worry that I tripped you remember who helped you up.” It seems just a way to increase our debt.

 

[CEM5]

The second point in the time line is CCC paragraph 396. It restates Adam’s prime status but adds the condition for it to continue. “A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God.” Accepting or rejecting this condition is the test that Adam faces. If Adam rejects this condition, he loses his original state of holiness and justice which is part of his created nature. If Adam accepts this condition, then his descendents would be born in the state of original holiness.

This is the part that sticks in my craw-the test. The need for it to be free submission was a qualifier which I guess comes from God - it just seems like a set up. “don’t worry that I tripped you remember who helped you up.” It seems just a way to increase our debt.

You see it as a test, I see it as our God given right of Free Will - to freely to choose to love and obey God (obedience is the step that leads us away from harm and death and therefore, leads us to life and happiness).

This is what God allows for us. Not a test, but the freedom of choosing: Free will.

Without choices you have no free will. You are imprisoned. We are not prisoners of God. When you use the analogy of being a parent to a child, do you keep your child locked up and away from EVERYTHING, a prisoner in your home, or do you allow the child choices in life? You teach them right from wrong because you love them and want to see them safe by teaching them what is forbidden and what is permissable. Ultimately, though, you cannot imprison them - they are free to choose to either obey or disobey, and then face the consequences. It is to teach them a lesson when they face the consequences of disobedience. Yet, as a loving parent, you do not abandon your child: you are there to offer comfort and support and help them to realize the wrong they did so as to ensure they will make better choices in life.

That is what all the Old Testament collectively is about: God’s great love for us, and how we keep turning our backs on Him, yet He never stops loving us and showing us the way to eternal salvation. He kept giving us chances, and came to us as Jesus, the greatest sacrifice and demonstration of love that a parent can show!! Dying to save another.

 

[larkin31]

Genesis 3:12 RHE
And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

That doesn’t blame God, any more than God blames Eve when he tells Adam that he is punishing her for listening to her.

Unless you DO feel that God blames Eve for corrupting Adam. I don’t. But you seem to take these words as blame. I do not.

 

[larkin31]

The second point in the time line is CCC paragraph 396. It restates Adam’s prime status but adds the condition for it to continue. “A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God.” Accepting or rejecting this condition is the test that Adam faces. If Adam rejects this condition, he loses his original state of holiness and justice which is part of his created nature. If Adam accepts this condition, then his descendents would be born in the state of original holiness.

This is the part that sticks in my craw-the test. The need for it to be free submission was a qualifier which I guess comes from God - it just seems like a set up. “don’t worry that I tripped you remember who helped you up.” It seems just a way to increase our debt.

Indeed

This very thinking provoked me to read the entire story as a metaphor (projection) of our feeling of dependency and imperfection onto the cosmos and a divine distant past. It is a beautiful and powerful myth. But as theology it is suspect in several ways.

 

[davidv]

That doesn’t blame God, any more than God blames Eve when he tells Adam that he is punishing her for listening to her.

Unless you DO feel that God blames Eve for corrupting Adam. I don’t. But you seem to take these words as blame. I do not.

Why should we trust your interpretation?

 

[larkin31]

Why should we trust your interpretation?

Does the Bible place the blame on Eve?

 

[jonfawkes]

You see it as a test, I see it as our God given right of Free Will - to freely to choose to love and obey God (obedience is the step that leads us away from harm and death and therefore, leads us to life and happiness).

This is what God allows for us. Not a test, but the freedom of choosing: Free will.

Without choices you have no free will. You are imprisoned. We are not prisoners of God. When you use the analogy of being a parent to a child, do you keep your child locked up and away from EVERYTHING, a prisoner in your home, or do you allow the child choices in life? You teach them right from wrong because you love them and want to see them safe by teaching them what is forbidden and what is permissable. Ultimately, though, you cannot imprison them - they are free to choose to either obey or disobey, and then face the consequences. It is to teach them a lesson when they face the consequences of disobedience. Yet, as a loving parent, you do not abandon your child: you are there to offer comfort and support and help them to realize the wrong they did so as to ensure they will make better choices in life

That is what all the Old Testament collectively is about: God’s great love for us, and how we keep turning our backs on Him, yet He never stops loving us and showing us the way to eternal salvation. He kept giving us chances, and came to us as Jesus, the greatest sacrifice and demonstration of love that a parent can show!! Dying to save another.

I don’t see the analogy as valid - I don’t deliberately put things in my childrens way that put them in danger. There was one danger in the garden and God put it there. There was one tempter and God put it there. He knew that even with His guidance they would choose poorly. I can only hope and trust that my children won’t. For your example to be valid God would have been powerless to save us from harm or it’s a malicious act of a set up.

 

[grannymh]

I don’t see the analogy as valid - I don’t deliberately put things in my childrens way that put them in danger. There was one danger in the garden and God put it there. There was one tempter and God put it there. He knew that even with His guidance they would choose poorly. I can only hope and trust that my children won’t. For your example to be valid God would have been powerless to save us from harm or it’s a malicious act of a set up.

Actually, God is a powerful transcendent, supernatural, pure spirit without the limitations of a material anatomy in a restrictive material/physical world.

Furthermore,
a human parent is not as wise as God, though a human may foolishly think that. A human parent can only transmit human life to her or his children and cannot insure eternal life for them. All parents can hope for is an intact body for a respectful cremation or burial.

Dangers exist independently for humans on earth regardless of parental safeguards.
Temptations can override parental advice and guidance. Because a child can willingly drive a car while drunk, does that mean that the parent is at fault for making sure that the child had driving instructions in school?

 

[jonfawkes]

That is my point exactly - I can’t remove all the alcohol in the world to keep my child safe. God could. God put the tree in our path. I don’t put alcohol in my child’s path. I don’t know that my child will drive drunk but God new Adam would eat. It was a set up.

 

[davidv]

That is my point exactly - I can’t remove all the alcohol in the world to keep my child safe. God could.

No, he could not. Man, with his free will would continue making it.

God put the tree in our path.

I believe you misunderstand what the tree in the garden really is. It is a symbol. A symbol of the desire to have what others have. In this case, it was the ability to decide what was good and what was evil. God’s command not to eat from it was an indication that only God has this ability.

I don’t put alcohol in my child’s path.

And neither does God.

I don’t know that my child will drive drunk but God new Adam would eat. It was a set up.

What if you did know? Would that mean you caused it?

 

[grannymh]

That is my point exactly - I can’t remove all the alcohol in the world to keep my child safe. God could. God put the tree in our path. I don’t put alcohol in my child’s path. I don’t know that my child will drive drunk but God new Adam would eat. It was a set up.

The real point is that there are very serious problems when one views God as a human parent.

Jesus used the Prodigal Son’s father to demonstrate God’s love and merciful forgiveness. But this is certainly not the same as saying that God should have skipped the gift of free choice. On the contrary. The Podigal Son’s turning back to his father is an excellent example of human free will.

Making God into a human is the flip side of Satan’s temptation coin. Satan proposed to Adam that a human can be like a god and now his proposition is that God should be like a human and judged accordingly.

God knew that His gift of spiritual intellect and will could be misused. But does that mean one should strip God of His Divinity and His wisdom regarding eternal life. Does one really expect God to make decisions using human reasoning?

Is the real point that one should ignore the opportunity for eternal happiness because God at the beginning of history did not make a decision according to 21st century parents’ wishes?

What is the real point of a human disagreeing with God’s Divine wisdom? What is the real benefit of charging Divinity with a human form of a set up? What is wrong about this picture of God relying on human judgment?

Blessings,
granny

Isaiah 55: 6-9

 

[jonfawkes]

No, he could not. Man, with his free will would continue making it.

I believe you misunderstand what the tree in the garden really is. It is a symbol. A symbol of the desire to have what others have. In this case, it was the ability to decide what was good and what was evil. God’s command not to eat from it was an indication that only God has this ability.

And neither does God.

What if you did know? Would that mean you caused it?

So God is powerless against man’s free will.

The tree was the knowledge of good and evil not who gets to decide.

If I know that my child is in harms way and I placed the harm ther and do nothing to prevent the child from being harmed then yes I am responsible. Likeringing a gun into the house and not safeguarding against it’s missuse. I am as the adult the responsible party for it’s missuse and the consequences that arise.