The myth of Adam and Eve

[guanophore]

We humans see ourselves as victims of something,

I am curious how you came to such a conclusion. Do you believe all humans have a victim perspective on life?

and the human looks for a cause.  We see our suffering, we experience our suffering, and we cannot escape the notion that whatever created us had leanings toward cruelty.  Fate leads us to depression, fear, despair.

No wonder you reject the Teaching on concupiscence!

Of course, there are some trade-offs.  The biggest trade-off in the creation story is the image of a God who punishes his creation, but we have that corrected in Christ, do we not?   And let's face it, "punishment", like victimhood, is in the eye of the beholder.  Actions have their own natural consequences, then we suffer, and then we learn. The important part is that we learn... albeit slowly...[/quot]

I agree with you, “punishment” is in the eye of the beholder. Characterization of the consequences of the Fall as the unloving, unforgiving punishment of humankind says perhaps more about the beholder. In any case, it is a significant departure from Catholic Teaching.

What was it that you thought needed to be “corrected”?
OneSheep;13889638:

   It means taking a look at what it means to be human and embracing all that we are, seeing our humanity as a gift, every aspect, every capacity, every compulsion.  It is through such seeing that we can ultimately Reconcile.

Somehow the jettison of concupiscence makes this possible?

And before I make it sound too much like my mind is far into the clouds (I am doing this while listening to the latest Radiohead album, which is not helping in that regard), …

Too late for that, I fear!

  Are you a victim of the creation story?  Or, instead, can you see its beauty?  Are we victims of life itself?  I am not.  Does God want us to be victims, or does He call us to follow Christ, in a daily resurrection from the ashes of our fate?

I think anyone who perceives the consequences of the Fall as the vengeful, unloving, unforgiving “punishment” of a wrathful God will be a victim of that perception.

 

[Bahman]

Good Morning, Bahman, nice to hear from you.

Victims?

You’ve got it, Bahman. Yes, of course! I did not consider that item of Truth.

We humans see ourselves as victims of something, and the human looks for a cause. We see our suffering, we experience our suffering, and we cannot escape the notion that whatever created us had leanings toward cruelty. Fate leads us to depression, fear, despair.

Just “thinking aloud” here… with my fingers again…

In the process of reconciliation with other humans, it behooves us to take responsibility for our own role in creating the discord in the first place. It’s the hardest part, is it not? So look at what we have, we have the human condition, and for all objective consideration it is no fault of our own. We were put here, and we suffer. So, does it not serve a purpose to have a creation story that depicts us as playing a role in our own suffering, such that it is our fault? The story serves the Greater Purpose of Reconciliation, to be able to love our Creator, and life itself. When considering the harsh realities of tribal survival, do you see how vital the story is for the empowerment of the people? After all, the underlying Truth is that we are never abandoned by God even when it really seems not to be the case. Isn’t it the ultimate incarnation that God, on the cross, experiences an abandonment by Himself?

Of course, there are some trade-offs. The biggest trade-off in the creation story is the image of a God who punishes his creation, but we have that corrected in Christ, do we not? And let’s face it, “punishment”, like victimhood, is in the eye of the beholder. Actions have their own natural consequences, then we suffer, and then we learn. The important part is that we learn… albeit slowly…

We can learn through Christ that the answer to victimhood is not necessarily ability to overpower our oppressors (from wherever they come), but through a deeper Reconciliation and through Repentance. And what does that Repentance look like? It means taking a look at what it means to be human and embracing all that we are, seeing our humanity as a gift, every aspect, every capacity, every compulsion. It is through such seeing that we can ultimately Reconcile.

And before I make it sound too much like my mind is far into the clouds (I am doing this while listening to the latest Radiohead album, which is not helping in that regard), I must say that repentance is important at all levels. Of course repentance initially has to be centered on turning from sin, a prayerful relationship rather depends on it.

Are you a victim of the creation story? Or, instead, can you see its beauty? Are we victims of life itself? I am not. Does God want us to be victims, or does He call us to follow Christ, in a daily resurrection from the ashes of our fate?

Oh, I am lost in their newest version of “True love waits”… I cannot see my computer screen…

Peace be with you

So your conclusion is that that was God plan that we sin and fall. That sounds evil to me.

 

[Bahman]

Victims… if God will grant us what is often thought of as Heaven, and grant us unbelievable power in a sense, then isn’t it reasonable to “earn” it. If you were a king appointing noblemen, would you not vet them? The main is to eat the fruit to become like God… because you are trying to subvert Him. Why would he then grant you a place at his side? Basically eating the fruit is a suggestion that humans were inclined to try the same rebellion as satan. So we are sent to become humbled and vetted to be God’s noblemen… LOYAL AND WORTHY noblemen.

We are talking about the fact that creation of Adam and Eve, leaving them in the Garden with the tree, giving access to Satan to temp them is in fact an evil act. Hence either the story is a myth or God is evil.

 

[OneSheep]

So your conclusion is that that was God plan that we sin and fall. That sounds evil to me.

Good Morning,

Well, think of it this way. First of all, I personally have opinions about the “Fall” that Catholic trolls (those that seek me out to put me down, and rather point and criticize than discuss issues at any depth ) do not like, so you may see some reaction to this. What I am saying about the Fall is that I agree with CCC399, which I posted earlier:

They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.

What I am saying is that the “trade-off” I mentioned. The literal interpretation of the creation story compromises the image of our unconditionally loving God, which “sounds evil” to you. I don’t agree that such a God “sounds evil” but certainly “sounds human”.

Can you relate to the following?

You have created a program that initiates creation of the universe. Many species will be created, and these are all part of creating a human species, which may or may not be the goal. You know that you will have to program in all species the means to survive and thrive.

The human is the species that will have the greatest autonomy. He will have the freest of will, but he will be born ignorant, and a capacity for blindness will be one of the survival instincts. Humans will do great harm to one another (as well as their planet) and be subject to the activities of creation, the terrible acts of disease, natural disasters, etc.

In addition, humans will come to conceive of you, their creator, in a distorted way. They will suffer and think that you must be a cruel God. Deep inside the human, they do not want to believe this; they have an inner relationship with you, they know deep-down that you care about them. So in order to make sense of it all, the human will be inspired to write a story in which they are punished for doing something wrong. The story will serve a purpose, it empowers the human and emphasizes the importance of obedience, but it will create a fear of you, because it will contain the conception of a distorted image of you. Some humans will certainly and understandably think of you as “evil” because of the story, but again, there is a trade-off, the story itself will enhance the survival of the human.

These are all of what will happen, but you know that everything will turn out okay, you know that it is all worthwhile. At the right time in history, you plan an incarnation to remedy the distorted image and in effect change the nature of the relationship. (though change happens very slowly)

So, would you hit the “create” button, or would you not? If not, why not?

Feel free to disagree with the opinion that the story empowers the human, but if so, please explain why it does not, and I will try to address your points.

It is nice to be in charitable discussion with you.

 

[OneSheep]

Bahman:

In reference to “trolls” in that last post, I must add that trolls are good, well-intended people who are not to be stereotyped. They do not deserve a negative label, so do not take it as such. They are to be forgiven.

Thanks

 

[LethalMouse]

Good Morning,

Well, think of it this way. First of all, I personally have opinions about the “Fall” that Catholic trolls (those that seek me out to put me down, and rather point and criticize than discuss issues at any depth ) do not like, so you may see some reaction to this. What I am saying about the Fall is that I agree with CCC399, which I posted earlier:

They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.

What I am saying is that the “trade-off” I mentioned. The literal interpretation of the creation story compromises the image of our unconditionally loving God, which “sounds evil” to you. I don’t agree that such a God “sounds evil” but certainly “sounds human”.

Can you relate to the following?

You have created a program that initiates creation of the universe. Many species will be created, and these are all part of creating a human species, which may or may not be the goal. You know that you will have to program in all species the means to survive and thrive.

The human is the species that will have the greatest autonomy. He will have the freest of will, but he will be born ignorant, and a capacity for blindness will be one of the survival instincts. Humans will do great harm to one another (as well as their planet) and be subject to the activities of creation, the terrible acts of disease, natural disasters, etc.

In addition, humans will come to conceive of you, their creator, in a distorted way. They will suffer and think that you must be a cruel God. Deep inside the human, they do not want to believe this; they have an inner relationship with you, they know deep-down that you care about them. So in order to make sense of it all, the human will be inspired to write a story in which they are punished for doing something wrong. The story will serve a purpose, it empowers the human and emphasizes the importance of obedience, but it will create a fear of you, because it will contain the conception of a distorted image of you. Some humans will certainly and understandably think of you as “evil” because of the story, but again, there is a trade-off, the story itself will enhance the survival of the human.

These are all of what will happen, but you know that everything will turn out okay, you know that it is all worthwhile. At the right time in history, you plan an incarnation to remedy the distorted image and in effect change the nature of the relationship. (though change happens very slowly)

So, would you hit the “create” button, or would you not? If not, why not?

Feel free to disagree with the opinion that the story empowers the human, but if so, please explain why it does not, and I will try to address your points.

It is nice to be in charitable discussion with you.

I think this is a decent point. For a human example I am reminded of my ex wife. Basically anytime I did something “off” there was a reason ie: romantic surprise lurking behind my actions etc…

Now she several times would apologize for not trusting me and thinking the worst each time. It was so insane she would call herself a “*****” for acting well… insane over things that were mindblowing for a person to act as she did to see just around the corner of some oddity was a great gesture of love and benifit. I would at times have to near ruin a plan to point out “remmeber that time…” which would still often fail to satiate her reactions to what was happening.

This shows that no matter how clear my image was, no matter how much I was presented consitently… her image of me was a distorted one grounded in no purpose.

 

[guanophore]

Well, think of it this way. First of all, I personally have opinions about the “Fall” that Catholic trolls (those that seek me out to put me down, and rather point and criticize than discuss issues at any depth ) do not like, so you may see some reaction to this.

OS, who could that be? Are there Catholic trolls? It is curious that you would experience someone observing that your ideas are not consistent with Catholic faith “put me downs”.



Is characterizing other participants in the discussion threads as “trolls” charitable?

What I am saying about the Fall is that I agree with CCC399, which I posted earlier:

They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.

What I am saying is that the “trade-off” I mentioned. The literal interpretation of the creation story compromises the image of our unconditionally loving God, which “sounds evil” to you. I don’t agree that such a God “sounds evil” but certainly “sounds human”.

It sounds like you are saying that the God of Adam and Eve is really a “human” God (anthropomorphized).

I think taking this reference out of context and disregarding everything else regarding the Fall that is in the catechism is like the practice of scriptural fundamentalists, who cherry pick parts of verses around which a theology can be built that excludes all with which they do not agree.

There are consequences from the Fall, even if we do not suffer from an image of God that is punitive. It seems like you consider concupiscence as “punitive”, coming from a distorted image of God. While the idea that Adam and Eve had a distorted image of God can be supported, I don’t think jettison of the concept of concupiscence can be.

The human is the species that will have the greatest autonomy. He will have the freest of will, but he will be born ignorant, and a capacity for blindness will be one of the survival instincts. Humans will do great harm to one another (as well as their planet) and be subject to the activities of creation, the terrible acts of disease, natural disasters, etc.

It makes a nice fantasy, but it is not consistent with what God has revealed about Himself, and about humanity.

I can see how such a formulation would support Humanism, though.

  So in order to make sense of it all, the human will be inspired to write a story in which they are punished for doing something wrong.  The story will serve a purpose, it empowers the human and emphasizes the importance of obedience, but it will create a fear of you, because it will contain the conception of a distorted image of you.  Some humans will certainly and understandably think of you as "evil" because of the story, but again, there is a trade-off, *the story itself will enhance the survival of the human*.

I think what you are saying here is that the Scriptures are not inspired by the Holy Spirit, but by the imagination of human beings “trying to make sense of it all”.

Feel free to disagree with the opinion that the story empowers the human, but if so, please explain why it does not, and I will try to address your points.

A Humanistic perspective always empowers the Human. That is the nature of Humanism. By, for, and about Humans.

 

[OneSheep]

This shows that no matter how clear my image was, no matter how much I was presented consitently… her image of me was a distorted one grounded in no purpose.

Yes, here is a quote that puts some light on the subject, I think:

“If you want to change the world, you have to change the metaphor.”

― Joseph Campbell

Christ was (is) very active in changing metaphors.

 

[guanophore]

Yes, here is a quote that puts some light on the subject, I think:

“If you want to change the world, you have to change the metaphor.”

― Joseph Campbell

Christ was (is) very active in changing metaphors.

Joseph Campbell! A Humanist for the Ages !

You are right, changing one’s perspective is what changes ourselves and will best influence the world around us.

The difference is, for a Catholic, the metaphors we engage will fall within wha. t has been revealed by God as True. A Humanist may go outside of what God has revealed, and rely on Human Imagination. Such a person will usually end up departing from the One Faith, if indeed they were ever a part of it.

 

[Bahman]

Good Morning,

Well, think of it this way. First of all, I personally have opinions about the “Fall” that Catholic trolls (those that seek me out to put me down, and rather point and criticize than discuss issues at any depth ) do not like, so you may see some reaction to this. What I am saying about the Fall is that I agree with CCC399, which I posted earlier:

They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.

What I am saying is that the “trade-off” I mentioned. The literal interpretation of the creation story compromises the image of our unconditionally loving God, which “sounds evil” to you. I don’t agree that such a God “sounds evil” but certainly “sounds human”.

Can you relate to the following?

You have created a program that initiates creation of the universe. Many species will be created, and these are all part of creating a human species, which may or may not be the goal. You know that you will have to program in all species the means to survive and thrive.

The human is the species that will have the greatest autonomy. He will have the freest of will, but he will be born ignorant, and a capacity for blindness will be one of the survival instincts. Humans will do great harm to one another (as well as their planet) and be subject to the activities of creation, the terrible acts of disease, natural disasters, etc.

In addition, humans will come to conceive of you, their creator, in a distorted way. They will suffer and think that you must be a cruel God. Deep inside the human, they do not want to believe this; they have an inner relationship with you, they know deep-down that you care about them. So in order to make sense of it all, the human will be inspired to write a story in which they are punished for doing something wrong. The story will serve a purpose, it empowers the human and emphasizes the importance of obedience, but it will create a fear of you, because it will contain the conception of a distorted image of you. Some humans will certainly and understandably think of you as “evil” because of the story, but again, there is a trade-off, the story itself will enhance the survival of the human.

These are all of what will happen, but you know that everything will turn out okay, you know that it is all worthwhile. At the right time in history, you plan an incarnation to remedy the distorted image and in effect change the nature of the relationship. (though change happens very slowly)

So, would you hit the “create” button, or would you not? If not, why not?

Feel free to disagree with the opinion that the story empowers the human, but if so, please explain why it does not, and I will try to address your points.

It is nice to be in charitable discussion with you.

I wouldn’t hit the create button when I can create much better universe.

 

[SilverShadow22]

And how do you know what we’re living now isn’t the best possible scenario? How can we even dare compare it when there’s nothing to compare it against, except for a totally theoretical alternative?

 

[LethalMouse]

I wouldn’t hit the create button when I can create much better universe.

So if you could have a child and that child would eventually turn out to be horrible gang member, drug addict etc…, but before than he would be your beloved son and you can feel every moment of love you would have for him… even after his atrocities you would gladly turn him over to authorities for jailing but plead for mercy for you love your son completely…

You are seeing this but also FEELING the love as if you already did it all… would you cancel the conception of your beloved son?

 

[Bahman]

And how do you know what we’re living now isn’t the best possible scenario? How can we even dare compare it when there’s nothing to compare it against, except for a totally theoretical alternative?

Heaven is apparently better than here and God wants all of us there! So the current creation cannot be the best.

 

[Bahman]

So if you could have a child and that child would eventually turn out to be horrible gang member, drug addict etc…, but before than he would be your beloved son and you can feel every moment of love you would have for him… even after his atrocities you would gladly turn him over to authorities for jailing but plead for mercy for you love your son completely…

You are seeing this but also FEELING the love as if you already did it all… would you cancel the conception of your beloved son?

I of course cancel the conception of my son. This is rational, isn’t it?

 

[PRmerger]

I wouldn’t hit the create button when I can create much better universe.

It was created, but then we messed it up.

 

[Bahman]

It was created, but then we messed it up.

Fall means that there was something wrong with creation. Couldn’t God create a universe that we could not fall? Of course he could. It is as simple as removing the tree of knowledge from the Garden!

 

[PRmerger]

Fall means that there was something wrong with creation.

It just means that creatures, given their free will, chose something wrong.

Not something wrong with creation.

Unless you find free will to be “wrong”?

 

[Vico]

Fall means that there was something wrong with creation. Couldn’t God create a universe that we could not fall? Of course he could. It is as simple as removing the tree of knowledge from the Garden!

God created man in His image and likeness. That means there can be expression of love which could not happen without free will. Free will means that God permits opposition to good as well as good.

 

[Bahman]

It just means that creatures, given their free will, chose something wrong.

Not something wrong with creation.

Unless you find free will to be “wrong”?

Free will is an illusion. I have a thread on this. We are rational being deciding on a situation based on prioritized options.

 

[Bahman]

God created man in His image and likeness. That means there can be expression of love which could not happen without free will. Free will means that God permits opposition to good as well as good.

There is no free will. Free will is an excuse to punish people.