The 'fall'

[brendan0]

Hello,

I am trying to reconcile evolution with the fall. Is it that we did evolve towards a perfect world, and then the fall brought us down as we are now, with sin, suffering and evil etc? Because certainly in nature, the theme of a sort of ‘pride’ is present throughout creation, from species competing with eachother, to trees competing for sunlight, and flowers in a meadow ‘advertising’ themselves to attract bees, and some birds? It’s everywhere…

Or did we just evolve, and this is the furthest we’ve come, and God came to meet us once we could know him (faith) and observe his laws, drawing us towards him.

Anyone got any better theories?

 

[tonyrey]

Evolution is a banned topic but we are entitled to say that at some point in history our ancestors recognised evil for the first time, acted against their conscience and caused moral disruption of which we are the victims - as we can see from the bloodstained history of mankind. Natural evil has natural causes:

CCC 385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil.

 

[Gods_Peace]

Hello,

I am trying to reconcile evolution with the fall. Is it that we did evolve towards a perfect world, and then the fall brought us down as we are now, with sin, suffering and evil etc? Because certainly in nature, the theme of a sort of ‘pride’ is present throughout creation, from species competing with eachother, to trees competing for sunlight, and flowers in a meadow ‘advertising’ themselves to attract bees, and some birds? It’s everywhere…

Or did we just evolve, and this is the furthest we’ve come, and God came to meet us once we could know him (faith) and observe his laws, drawing us towards him.

Anyone got any better theories?

Your missing the fact that everything was created GOOD, not bad, GOOD.

 

[tabycat]

 

[edwest2]

"Real History

"The argument is that all of this is real history, it is simply ordered topically rather than chronologically, and the ancient audience of Genesis, it is argued, would have understood it as such.

"Even if Genesis 1 records God’s work in a topical fashion, it still records God’s work—things God really did.

"The Catechism explains that “Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine ‘work,’ concluded by the ‘rest’ of the seventh day” (CCC 337), but “nothing exists that does not owe its existence to God the Creator. The world began when God’s word drew it out of nothingness; all existent beings, all of nature, and all human history is rooted in this primordial event, the very genesis by which the world was constituted and time begun” (CCC 338).

“It is impossible to dismiss the events of Genesis 1 as a mere legend. They are accounts of real history, even if they are told in a style of historical writing that Westerners do not typically use.”

"Adam and Eve: Real People

“It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).”

Source: Catholic Answers archives.

Peace,
Ed

 

[belorg]

Your missing the fact that everything was created GOOD, not bad, GOOD.

Apparently not good enough.

 

[belorg]

Evolution is a banned topic but we are entitled to say that at some point in history our ancestors recognised evil for the first time, acted against their conscience and caused moral disruption of which we are the victims - as we can see from the bloodstained history of mankind. Natural evil has natural causes:

I have nothing to do with anything my ancestors did.

 

[tonyrey]

I have nothing to do with anything my ancestors did.

Are you absolutely sure? I’ll give you chance to modify that statement…

 

[empther]

I have nothing to do with anything my ancestors did.

Only true if you’ve never done anything your ancestors did wrong.

We are all in this together. We bear responsibility for each other, even if we disagree with that others have done, because we cooperate in making the society in which others operate.

Go raise your kids on Mars, and they will have no responsibility for what’s going on on Earth.

 

[Sam_777]

Because certainly in nature, the theme of a sort of ‘pride’ is present throughout creation, from species competing with eachother, to trees competing for sunlight, and flowers in a meadow ‘advertising’ themselves to attract bees, and some birds? It’s everywhere…

Interesting concept, is that your thought or someone else theory?, and what about “lust” in both animals and humans, how do you explain that?

 

[belorg]

Only true if you’ve never done anything your ancestors did wrong.

I have dodne things my ancestors did wrong, but that has nothing to do with my ancestors.
I am supposed to have free will, aren’t I?
So to suggest that because of something one of my ancestors has done, I am somehow predeterimined to a life as a ‘fallen’ person that needs to be ‘saved’ is one of the many major flaws in Christian teaching.

We are all in this together. We bear responsibility for each other, even if we disagree with that others have done, because we cooperate in making the society in which others operate.

I have resposibility for my children and for other people I can possibly influence in some way. I have no resonsibility towards my ancestrors, since I cannot influnece them in any sort of way. And if my ancestors influnce me in such a way that I cannot escape making the same mistakes they did, that means I have no free will.

Go raise your kids on Mars, and they will have no responsibility for what’s going on on Earth.

So, if I raise my children on Mars, they will not be fallen anymore? When is the next flight?

 

[belorg]

Are you absolutely sure? I’ll give you chance to modify that statement…

Of course if my ancestors didn’t exist, I wouldn’t either. Point is, as I told empther, that if the actions of my ancestors determine my fate, that destroys free will.

 

[empther]

Of course if my ancestors didn’t exist, I wouldn’t either. Point is, as I told empther, that if the actions of my ancestors determine my fate, that destroys free will.

The actions of ancestors do not determine your fate, but only your state of being. Free will has nothing to do with it.

Adam was created in the State of Innocence. This means that he had no concupiscience, weakness of the body and and will for the body’s urgings. In Innocence, his soul had full control of the body.
When Adam chose to sin, he knew what he was doing, and like the bad angels he would never repent.
To give Adam another chance, God reduced his State to the Fallen State. He had concupiscience, weakness of mind, soul, and body,

**but this also meant that he could repent again and again and again and still be saved. **

It is this latter point that the A-team always ignores.

 

[belorg]

The actions of ancestors do not determine your fate, but only your state of being. Free will has nothing to do with it.

It has everything to do with it. Since my state of being is what determines my fate, you have just added a redundant notion.

Adam was created in the State of Innocence. This means that he had no concupiscience, weakness of the body and and will for the body’s urgings. In Innocence, his soul had full control of the body.
When Adam chose to sin, he knew what he was doing, and like the bad angels he would never repent.

How can an innocent being choose to sin?

To give Adam another chance, God reduced his State to the Fallen State. He had concupiscience, weakness of mind, soul, and body,

I am not Adam, empther, and neither are you. We should all be in this ‘state of innocence’ and if we are not, then the ‘guilty’ party is the one who took away our state of innocence.

**but this also meant that he could repent again and again and again and still be saved. **

It is this latter point that the A-team always ignores.

‘The A-team’ does not ignore this, ‘the A-team’ correctly assesses this as a weak attempt to get God off the hook by blaming poor old Adam for things God did wrong. At least that’s my assessment, other A-team members may have different ideas about this.

 

[DPMartin]

Hello,

I am trying to reconcile evolution with the fall. Is it that we did evolve towards a perfect world, and then the fall brought us down as we are now, with sin, suffering and evil etc? Because certainly in nature, the theme of a sort of ‘pride’ is present throughout creation, from species competing with eachother, to trees competing for sunlight, and flowers in a meadow ‘advertising’ themselves to attract bees, and some birds? It’s everywhere…

Or did we just evolve, and this is the furthest we’ve come, and God came to meet us once we could know him (faith) and observe his laws, drawing us towards him.

Anyone got any better theories?

brendan

What is it that you have to know, how God did this or that, or what is it that Adam and Eve fell from? And as far as I know, there is no scripture stating they fell from anything, I believe its more about what was lost.

 

[tonyrey]

Of course if my ancestors didn’t exist, I wouldn’t either. Point is, as I told empther, that if the actions of my ancestors determine my fate, that destroys free will.

There is a big difference between determining your fate and having an influence on you and your moral environment.

 

[belorg]

There is a big difference between determining your fate and having an influence on you and your moral environment.

My fate is to be a ‘fallen creature’, although I never used my free will to choose this. That’s not merely an influence.

 

[tonyrey]

My fate is to be a ‘fallen creature’, although I never used my free will to choose this. That’s not merely an influence.

Your complaint presupposes the ability to be born in a fallible human society without being personally and adversely affected in the slightest by our moral and cultural environment for which our ancestors are largely responsible.

 

[belorg]

Your complaint presupposes the ability to be born in a fallible human society without being personally and adversely affected in the slightest by our moral and cultural environment for which our ancestors are largely responsible.

If I truly have free will, then this ability must be real.
And the fall is not about a moral and cultural environment, it’s about being born ‘guilty’ because some ancestor made a mistake.
Of course my ancerstor’s decisions create a certain environment that may influence me (but against which I can use my free will, if I possess such a thing), but there s no logically possible way for any of my ancestor’s decisions to change my very nature.
And that’s what the whole idea of ‘fallen’ is about.

 

[tonyrey]

If I truly have free will, then this ability must be real.

Incorrect:

It was not a mistake but a deliberate decision:

CCC 405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants.

Of course my ancestor’s decisions create a certain environment that may influence me (but against which I can use my free will, if I possess such a thing), but there is no logically possible way for any of my ancestor’s decisions to change my very nature.
And that’s what the whole idea of ‘fallen’ is about.

Our nature is deeply affected by our physical, intellectual, psychological, moral, social, economic, aesthetic and spiritual heritage - both favourably and unfavourably.

We are not born with a tabula rasa…