Was Adam representitive of the entire human race?

[minkymurph]

I am currently studying philosophy and Christian Spirituality and am in the process of writing essays on Julian of Norwich and Thomas Aquinas in relation to their contribution to spirituality. The Church teaches Adam was a real person, made in the image of God’ no problem there. The Bible teaches through one man sin entered the world and through one man it was taken away. No problems there either. My question is though, in relation to the writings of Julian of Norwich, was Adam representitive of a group of individuals who sinned and was he somehow the one ultimately responsible being first created? What does anyone else think?

 

[nablaise]

Hi the way I make sens of how original sin affect everyone is by using examples like this:

• Suppose a man fell into a deep pit with his wife. If they have childreen, their childreen will be in born in the pit and all their descendent until someone come and get them out.

God bless

 

[fhansen]

;3767066:

I am currently studying philosophy and Christian Spirituality and am in the process of writing essays on Julian of Norwich and Thomas Aquinas in relation to their contribution to spirituality. The Church teaches Adam was a real person, made in the image of God’ no problem there. The Bible teaches through one man sin entered the world and through one man it was taken away. No problems there either. My question is though, in relation to the writings of Julian of Norwich, was Adam representitive of a group of individuals who sinned and was he somehow the one ultimately responsible being first created? What does anyone else think?

I tend to think that, from before creation, God intended to use the fall to bring about greater good in the end than the evil which resulted. In fact, many Catholic thinkers have a certain praise for the fall of man due to this belief. Along with this I speculate that any of us probably would’ve fell in the same manner anyway before eternity was over , so Adam is possibly no more responsible than the rest of us even though it was his sin and not ours. Maybe, in general terms, God simply used the inevitability of the fall and Adams’ role in it to “kickstart” His plan of salvation. Just some thoughts.

 

[repo_man]

I tend to think that, from before creation, God intended to use the fall to bring about greater good in the end than the evil which resulted. In fact, many Catholic thinkers have a certain praise for the fall of man due to this belief.

ah, felix culpa.

and nablaise, that is the best analogy for original sin i’ve ever heard.

 

[minkymurph]

ah, felix culpa.

and nablaise, that is the best analogy for original sin i’ve ever heard.

Ditto. Yes, it’s all pretty fascinating stuff. Another question though, if the fall was not Adam’s fault alone, are we all guilty of the original sin but not in the same sense?

 

[huckleberry]

Most Catholics that I know understand the Adam and Eve story to be allegorical. It is so obvious, that I find it painful and embarrassing to the human race, that anyone would think otherwise. Grow up people!! You do a disservice to the beauty of the minds that created the stories in the bible, when you take them so literally.

 

[fhansen]

Most Catholics that I know understand the Adam and Eve story to be allegorical. It is so obvious, that I find it painful and embarrassing to the human race, that anyone would think otherwise. Grow up people!! You do a disservice to the beauty of the minds that created the stories in the bible, when you take them so literally.

But either way, the question still remains-what meaning does the story intend to convey? What is the drama allegorical to?

 

[minkymurph]

But either way, the question still remains-what meaning does the story intend to convey? What is the drama allegorical to?

Yes, this is exactly what I am trying to delve into. I also find myself irritated by those who take the Genesis account of the fall so literally. I think it destroys the deep significance of it all and it think it destroys faith as well as in this day and age, people are not going to accept that it is literal, when as said it is so obvious it is not, and they are left that they cannot believe due to literal interpretations.

 

[huckleberry]

But either way, the question still remains-what meaning does the story intend to convey? What is the drama allegorical to?

Beautiful question. It seems like a reworking of basic origin myths; like a tidy little story that addresses questions of “how did we get here?” and “why is there hardship if god is nice?” and “how does one reconcile free will with the existence of an omniscient diety?” and “is the female responsible for mankind’s pains?”

 

[Mister_De]

Beautiful question. It seems like a reworking of basic origin myths; like a tidy little story that addresses questions of “how did we get here?” and “why is there hardship if god is nice?” and “how does one reconcile free will with the existence of an omniscient diety?” and “is the female responsible for mankind’s pains?”

So according to you, God just took a bunch of old myths and lied to us, in order to get His point across? I guess Adam & Eve was a myth too. As a matter of fact, maybe the whole needing a savior thing is a myth too. Maybe there was no Jesus.

 

[fhansen]

Ditto. Yes, it’s all pretty fascinating stuff. Another question though, if the fall was not Adam’s fault alone, are we all guilty of the original sin but not in the same sense?

Maybe it doesn’t matter in the end. In any event, we’re not held to be at fault for the commission of the act but through Adam all mankind fell anyway- in us, the term “Original Sin” is used to describe the effect of Adams’ sin. So even though it was Adams’ sin, and is acknowledged as such, the whole human race nonetheless suffered the consequences and was held to be complicit in some sense anyway by virtue of being members of the one race. Maybe it could be said that Adam “did the falling for us”. But the nature of the “stain” or “mark” of OS can seem vague because it’s really a lack of something, a lack of grace. However, the older I get the more obvious the “identifiers” and the effects of OS in myself and others appear- “that OS exists” is more apparent than “how or why OS exists”.

Yet I believe that the consequences of the fall are an integral and essential ingredient of Gods’ recipe for bringing about a good-the perfecting of man. St Augustines’ statement, "This is the very perfection of a man, to find out his own imperfections”, relates to this plan, I think. The ultimate imperfection that man needs to learn of and that led to all his other imperfections was the one that Adam wouldn’t recognize-that man is not- and cannot be- God. By recognizing that single imperfection and coming to believe in God-as the only God-again, and obeying Him as such, man can rid himself of all other imperfections and attain worthiness, with the help of grace won back at Calvary.

 

[Chaldean_Rite]

Romans 5:12

Therefore, just as through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all, inasmuch as all sinned

 

[edwest2]

Most Catholics that I know understand the Adam and Eve story to be allegorical. It is so obvious, that I find it painful and embarrassing to the human race, that anyone would think otherwise. Grow up people!! You do a disservice to the beauty of the minds that created the stories in the bible, when you take them so literally.

“allegorical” “obvious”? According to who?

From the Library of this web site:

catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp

Scroll down to the heading “Adam and Eve: Real People” This is what the Church teaches. This is what the Church has always taught.

God bless,
Ed

 

[huckleberry]

So according to you, God just took a bunch of old myths and lied to us, in order to get His point across? I guess Adam & Eve was a myth too. As a matter of fact, maybe the whole needing a savior thing is a myth too. Maybe there was no Jesus.

Why do you put words in my mouth?. I never claimed to know if any gods existed. Only a pompous god-like genius would ever claim to know if gods existed. Take a cue from Abraham Lincoln and realize that all of the supernatural claims of the bible are most likely just myths.​

Also, don’t forget that the Jesus myth is couched in a biblical paradigm that seems to push for literal truth. Whereas the Adam and eve story is transparently allegorical.

 

[minkymurph]

Take a cue from Abraham Lincoln and realize that all of the supernatural claims of the bible are most likely just myths.

I would agree that the Genesis account is mythological in nature. However in the ancient world, myths served a very important purpose and where not pure fantasy. It is argued that the only ‘real’ story is Jack and the Beanstalk as all other stories are borrowed from someone or something else and all stories are based on an actual event or happening. Take for example Dickens ‘Oliver Twist.’ The characteres are fictional but characters in literature are often based on someone known to the author and there storyline, like in Dickens novels, are not pure fantasy but based on the realities of the time and there is always therefore, a degree of truth even in fiction. To me, it would therefore be an error even for an atheist, to assume there is absolutely no truth in the Genesis accounts at all. To the Christian world, the truth of Genesis account has great meaning and I would be of the opnion that various interpretations of Genesis miss the true meaning of the account.

 

[huckleberry]

“allegorical” “obvious”? According to who?

From the Library of this web site:

catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp

Scroll down to the heading “Adam and Eve: Real People” This is what the Church teaches. This is what the Church has always taught.

God bless,
Ed

I was not talking about “the church”. What is “the church”? One decides what one believes on their own, not from some pronouncements from some group that calls itself “the church”. If some group pronounces that a story is literally true, this does not mean that you must believe it. Use your brain. How the hell could Adam or Eve be real people? Explain that. It is so obviously a creation myth. Only children and the delusional would believe it literally.

 

[oneseeker]

Ignore Huckleberry. Don’t feed the troll. All he wants is to insult people and get a rise out of you, not have intelligent debate. For all his talk of “use your brain”, he doesn’t seem to want to tax his own much beyond flinging insults.

oneseeker

 

[edwest2]

I was not talking about “the church”. What is “the church”? One decides what one believes on their own, not from some pronouncements from some group that calls itself “the church”. If some group pronounces that a story is literally true, this does not mean that you must believe it. Use your brain. How the hell could Adam or Eve be real people? Explain that. It is so obviously a creation myth. Only children and the delusional would believe it literally.

Why are you here? Just to insult people? “children and the delusional”? The Catholic Church believes it.

As far as believing things on your own, who invents your thoughts? Don’t you rely on men to tell you something? Why do you trust them?

God bless,
Ed

 

[huckleberry]

huckleberry;3770185:

Take a cue from Abraham Lincoln and realize that all of the supernatural claims of the bible are most likely just myths.

I would agree that the Genesis account is mythological in nature. However in the ancient world, myths served a very important purpose and where not pure fantasy. It is argued that the only ‘real’ story is Jack and the Beanstalk as all other stories are borrowed from someone or something else and all stories are based on an actual event or happening. Take for example Dickens ‘Oliver Twist.’ The characteres are fictional but characters in literature are often based on someone known to the author and there storyline, like in Dickens novels, are not pure fantasy but based on the realities of the time and there is always therefore, a degree of truth even in fiction. To me, it would therefore be an error even for an atheist, to assume there is absolutely no truth in the Genesis accounts at all. To the Christian world, the truth of Genesis account has great meaning and I would be of the opnion that various interpretations of Genesis miss the true meaning of the account.

You basically just outlined the definition of “myths”. So what? It would in fact NOT be an error to BET that the Genesis story was in fact a complete fabrication. Do you not agree that SOME myths can be based upon the imagination of creative minds?

 

[huckleberry]

Ignore Huckleberry. Don’t feed the troll. All he wants is to insult people and get a rise out of you, not have intelligent debate. For all his talk of “use your brain”, he doesn’t seem to want to tax his own much beyond flinging insults.

oneseeker

You characterize me as a “troll”. Debate me or don’t debate me. Do you think that “using your brain” is advisable or not? Perhaps my phrasing was not gentle enough for you. I will try to not go ad-hominem. I thank you for calling my attention to that.