Problems with "no death before the Fall"

[prodigalson2011]

I am going to kindly request any participants in this thread to refrain from any non-Catholic/Christian responses, in keeping with forum rules. This is an area of faith that has been causing me a great deal of frustration. Any insight to these questions would be enormously appreciated.

1.) How are we to understand physical immortality before the Fall in light of the destructability of the body? For instance, suppose Adam, in his immortal state, were beheaded or crushed by a boulder?

2.) God commands Adam and Eve to multiply and fill the Earth before the Fall. This being the case, had they followed his command without sinning, would the Earth not become overpopulated?

3.) How are to reconcile man’s original physical immortality with the finite nature of the universe; that is, the fact that the universe itself will one day die?

 

[tonyrey]

1.) How are we to understand physical immortality before the Fall in light of the destructability of the body? For instance, suppose Adam, in his immortal state, were beheaded or crushed by a boulder?

2.) God commands Adam and Eve to multiply and fill the Earth before the Fall. This being the case, had they followed his command without sinning, would the Earth not become overpopulated?

3.) How are to reconcile man’s original physical immortality with the finite nature of the universe; that is, the fact that the universe itself will one day die?

Jesus told us not to fear those who kill the body but those who kill the soul. The Fall brought spiritual death. Physical death is an essential part of the biocycle…

 

[prodigalson2011]

Jesus told us not to fear those who kill the body but those who kill the soul. The Fall brought spiritual death. Physical death is an essential part of the biocycle…

Hmm… If I’m not mistaken, the Church holds man’s original physical immortality as a dogmatic truth.

 

[Paratroopa]

Im afraid i have no clue how to answer the third question, but as the first two go, i may be able to help. Basically, If it was gods will for Adams body not to die, it simply wouldnt be damaged. Its hard to believe a human body wouldnt be harmed if a boulder fell on it, but if its gods will, well there you go. About the second question, whos to say god would not have altered his commands after the earth had a correct number of inhabitants?

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

1.) How are we to understand physical immortality before the Fall in light of the destructability of the body? For instance, suppose Adam, in his immortal state, were beheaded or crushed by a boulder?

It is not in our nature, or essence, to be immortal but only by the Tree of Life did man have access to immortality in the bodily sense.

2.) God commands Adam and Eve to multiply and fill the Earth before the Fall. This being the case, had they followed his command without sinning, would the Earth not become overpopulated?

Contemplating other possible worlds regarding the fall is sort of ridiculous. He knew we’d fall before creating us, so He created the best world for that condition. If there was a possible world where we’d still have free will and not fall, I’m sure the conditions would be much different and we’d be existing in that world.

 

[tonyrey]

Hmm… If I’m not mistaken, the Church holds man’s original physical immortality as a dogmatic truth.

How is that possible given that the Church accepts evolution?

CCC 403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam’s sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the “death of the soul”.291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292

 

[grannymh]

Hmm… If I’m not mistaken, the Church holds man’s original physical immortality as a dogmatic truth.

Yes, Adam was in the state of original holiness and harmony, i.e., a state of immortality…as long as he lived in free submission to his Creator. There would be no reason for Adam to be beheaded or crushed by a boulder because the Garden is a way of describing Adam’s state of immediate friendship with God. The Catholic teaching is that Adam received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. Unfortunately, during his time in the Garden, Adam yielded to temptation and sinned. This original sin affected himself and his future descendents.

To really understand Adam and us, one should slowly read paragraphs 355 to 421 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Link to this section is scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm One can enter the Catechism here and continue reading.
General link to Catechism is scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Adam and human nature is a fascinating topic. However, one cannot cherry pick paragraphs. One has to take time, maybe a long time, to read everything.

 

[grannymh]

How is that possible given that the Church accepts evolution?

CCC 403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam’s sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the “death of the soul”.291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292

Evolution discussion is banned.

However, when any scientific theory intersects and denies a particular Catholic doctrine, then that particular theory is not acceptable. For example. The Catholic Church has always taught that all humanity descended from Adam and Eve. And it will continue to teach the same doctrine.

The difficulty of citing only one paragraph in regard to Adam, is that one paragraph cannot possibly explain everything. For example, not only was the spiritual soul affected by Original Sin, but the body, too, would experience death.

To really understand Adam and his human nature which is an unique unification of *both *the material *and *spiritual worlds, one needs to spend time reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. One can enter the Catechism here. scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

I would suggest going to paragraph 390, “How to read the Account of the Fall” and then backtracking to paragraph 385 and continue to paragraph 421.

There are some interesting points which are worthy of discussion.

 

[WesleyF]

Hmm… If I’m not mistaken, the Church holds man’s original physical immortality as a dogmatic truth.

Nope. The church holds that man is naturally mortal.

“Even though man’s nature is mortal God had destined him not to die.” (CCC 1008)

I recommend you listen to Tim Staples’ CD called Last Call. In that he describes that the definition of death is this -

“The reduction of a composite being into its composite parts.”

Because man is composed of parts (body and soul), he can therefore die because these parts can be separated.

 

[tonyrey]

Nope. The church holds that man is naturally mortal.

“Even though man’s nature is mortal God had destined him not to die.” (CCC 1008)

I recommend you listen to Tim Staples’ CD called Last Call. In that he describes that the definition of death is this -

“The reduction of a composite being into its composite parts.”

Because man is composed of parts (body and soul), he can therefore die because these parts can be separated.

Jesus accepted **physical **death as a fact of life and never attributed it to sin.

 

[prodigalson2011]

Well, I know for fact that both Augustine and Aquinas taught that man’s pre-Fall nature included physical immortality, and neither of them have been condemned as heretics.

As for the quote provided above (though man’s nature is mortal…), I think that’s a little too ambiguous to be taken out of context of the fuller teaching of the Church. I take it to mean that though the nature of creatures is corruptible, God willed that man’s creaturely form be incorruptible.

I’m going to take grannymh’s advice and read through that section of the Catechism this evening.

 

[prodigalson2011]

Just found this in the Catholic Encyclopedia:

It may be well here to say a few words on the preternatural (relatively supernatural) gifts bestowed on our first parents, which are sometimes confused with the supernatural gifts properly so called. In the beginning God exempted man from the inherent weakness of his nature, i.e. the infirmities of the flesh and the consequent infirmities of the spirit. **He made man immortal, impassible, ** free from concupiscence and ignorance, sinless, and lord of the earth. These privileges are beyond man’s nature, but not beyond that of some higher creature (e.g. the angels naturam).

This follows the discussion of supernatural gifts, and asserts that Christ has restores to us only the supernatural gifts lost in the fall, but not the preternatural (i.e. impassible, immortal bodies).

So, back to those questions.

 

[pnewton]

Well, I know for fact that both Augustine and Aquinas taught that man’s pre-Fall nature included physical immortality, and neither of them have been condemned as heretics.

First, realize that lack of heresy does not equate to dogma, or even correct doctrine. Second, we have to accept that we can learned, and have learned much in the area of both theology and biology since St. Thomas. The quote above from the Catechism *is *within the context of the teaching of the Church.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Just found this in the Catholic Encyclopedia:

This follows the discussion of supernatural gifts, and asserts that Christ has restores to us only the supernatural gifts lost in the fall, but not the preternatural (i.e. impassible, immortal bodies).

So, back to those questions.

My opinion (hopefully not a heretical opinion) is that the Garden of Eden is in a completely different world (e.g. heaven, or a parallel universe) that doesn’t have all the biological problems we have here. Adam and Eve were expelled from that perfect world and sent to live in this universe with its death and disease and other problems.

 

[grannymh]

Jesus accepted **physical **death as a fact of life and never attributed it to sin.

Jesus freely chose human death as a means of atonement for the original sin of the first human.

 

[grannymh]

My opinion (hopefully not a heretical opinion) is that the Garden of Eden is in a completely different world (e.g. heaven, or a parallel universe) that doesn’t have all the biological problems we have here. Adam and Eve were expelled from that perfect world and sent to live in this universe with its death and disease and other problems.

I share your realistic opinion. Realistically, the Garden of Eden would be different from our material/physical world because God was present within it in an unique manner. Wherever Eden was, the key is that Adam, the created creature lived in direct friendship with God our Creator.

 

[prodigalson2011]

My opinion (hopefully not a heretical opinion) is that the Garden of Eden is in a completely different world (e.g. heaven, or a parallel universe) that doesn’t have all the biological problems we have here. Adam and Eve were expelled from that perfect world and sent to live in this universe with its death and disease and other problems.

I actually share this intuition with you, but I also share your uncertainty as to the orthodoxy of that view. I know there’s a long standing tradition that holds Eden to have been located in Iraq. The other-dimensional/parallel universe theory seems to make more sense though. There’s also the notion that the very nature and history of the universe were altered, past, present and future, upon man’s fall, much as Christ’s sacrifice extended back in time as well as forward. It’s quite a theological brambles, however you choose to approach it.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I actually share this intuition with you, but I also share your uncertainty as to the orthodoxy of that view. I know there’s a long standing tradition that holds Eden to have been located in Iraq. The other-dimensional/parallel universe theory seems to make more sense though. There’s also the notion that the very nature and history of the universe were altered, past, present and future, upon man’s fall, much as Christ’s sacrifice extended back in time as well as forward. It’s quite a theological brambles, however you choose to approach it.

Maybe Eden is heaven. Maybe we were meant to live eternally in heaven and never come to this world at all.

 

[prodigalson2011]

Maybe Eden is heaven. Maybe we were meant to live eternally in heaven and never come to this world at all.

How would you reconcile this with the creation account?

 

[Neil_Anthony]

How would you reconcile this with the creation account?

Aren’t there created things in heaven? Isn’t heaven a lot like a perfected earth, with perfected glorified bodies and cities “heavenly Jerusalem” etc., and lions who don’t eat the lambs, etc.