Was Adam representitive of the entire human race?

[Karlsruhe]

santodomingo asks:

why does anybody believe that God doesn’t want us to put our brain to use, thinking about Him?<

Nobody believes so. It would be right against Gods will not to use our intellect. Things are quit on the contrary. We need a huge amount of brain, need all our intelligence to believe in God and to understand what we take as truth, and we take no other than we where given by Jesus Christ.
St. Paul taught us just that and several times he wrote: God gave us our intellectual gift just for that; for being able to think about the truth of God. And after we either understood, or denied with all the talents God provided us, we are free to decide to oppose or hypothesize. The further we then go into the matter, the more we’ll apprehend that this alone is the truth and nothing but the truth. Not because we want this too bet true, but because we will be touched by God. God asked us to come in, as we knocked at the door. Matthew 7,8
: For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.
Of course, one will have TO WANT to seek, to knock, to ask – not just casually when we have time and nothing else to do – by the way.
That means, with all mental power we have and God gave us.
Not to think, as far as believe is concerned, would be diametrically countercurrent to God’s word as Jesus manifested it to us.
His word on the other hand in Matthew 18,2-3 doesn’t mean to stay without reason as these children, but with all our reason, intellect and wisdom, to accept the Word of Jesus and believe as these Children do. Belief is, as Pope Benedict pointed out “ever so easy”. All we have to do, I WANTING to believe. The rest will be given to us, as Jesus promised. And when one believes, he is never alone! St. Paul often used the word of Hesekil (Ezekiel 3:27) ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says.’ Whoever will listen let him listen, and whoever will refuse, let him refuse.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

I think the ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil’ in Genesis is representitive of what man would inevitably have to know. While God is the source of all good and there is nothing evil in God, God has a knowledge of evil. It’s not that good depends on evil. Am I making sense?

Yes I think I get your meaning now. And I agree that the forbidden fruit was not meant to remain forbidden. In fact I believe it is the fruit of eternal reward meant to be food when their earthly life was complete. I think it was a gift not yet received and best left unrevealed. The serpent presented it as something God was keeping from them maliciously. Like a parent hiding a birthday present and someone coming along and instead of it being something you will eventually be given it’s presented as something you will never have because your parent doesn’t want you to enjoy it.

Nah, I just can’t buy that God wouldn’t allow man the free will to NOT choose to grab the forbidden munchies.

But, that said, I DO completely believe, with you, that satan did his best to “spoil the surprise”, out of jealousy for man’s more enviable environment given by God.

Man was given an “improved” place-to-be, in that in it man could change his mind (though not sin, of course), like God, which the angels were never allowed to do.

Satan, the proverbial “First Born”, which nearly ALWAYS gets the short shrift, couldn’t handle it, and decided to be “the big perverter” in every and any way possible, just because he (sociopathologically) could.

 

[Karlsruhe]

You are absolutely incorrect. The Bible tells us: with wisdom get understanding. The Bible tells us that scripture is suitable for all things. …

THE BIBLE yes of course. The bible. Of course I was tought by my very religious parents and the church. But a catechism, I never owned until today. Nor would I need one. Believe is less a matter of reading, but of understanding, and this is given to you if you ask God for it.
And by the way, we have hardly any Catholic school: Education is matter of the state - not church - over here anyway.

But: If one reads in the bible open hearted, he will understand. And for further questions, he’s always invited by the church. And whoever thinks he needs one. might buy a catechism.
Belive me, that there are millions, who neither ever could read nor write, but they they are in heaven now, and I dare to doubt if Jesus askd him, if he had ever red a catechism.

 

[fhansen]

Nah, I just can’t buy that God wouldn’t allow man the free will to NOT choose to grab the forbidden munchies.

But, that said, I DO completely believe, with you, that satan did his best to “spoil the surprise”, out of jealousy for man’s more enviable environment given by God.

Man was given an “improved” place-to-be, in that in it man could change his mind (though not sin, of course), like God, which the angels were never allowed to do.

Satan, the proverbial “First Born”, which nearly ALWAYS gets the short shrift, couldn’t handle it, and decided to be “the big perverter” in every and any way possible, just because he (sociopathologically) could.

I’m not sure I understand. Wasn’t the choice of the angels essentially the same as mans’? How could man change his mind and would satan know that man could change it?

 

[minkymurph]

But: If one reads in the bible open hearted, he will understand. And for further questions, he’s always invited by the church. And whoever thinks he needs one. might buy a catechism.
Belive me, that there are millions, who neither ever could read nor write, but they they are in heaven now, and I dare to doubt if Jesus askd him, if he had ever red a catechism.

I agree there are many in heaven who never read the catechism, (it’s not exactly bedtime reading!) and there are many in heaven who probably never read a Bible either. I would disagree that if you read the Bible with an open heart you will understand. Jesus himself said that many would not understand as it is not given to them. Understanding is imparted by the Spirit. As a convert to Catholicism, I would believe my understanding was enhanced by receiving sacraments. I was confused about the person of Christ. I wanted to believe what was true but what was true? I was brought up to believe the doctrine of the Trinity was perpotrated by Saten so no one could ever come to know God and anyone who prays to the Trinity is really praying to Saten and it is Saten who answers their prayer. I believed the Bible would give me the answer. The more I read the more confused I became and eventually, stopped reading the Bible altogether. I believe I came to know who Christ really was through personal revelation.

 

[Benadam]

My turn to have a dumb day. I can’t manage to connect this:

And I agree that the forbidden fruit was not meant to remain forbidden.

with this:

Nah, I just can’t buy that God wouldn’t allow man the free will to NOT choose to grab the forbidden munchies.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs
Nah, I just can’t buy that God wouldn’t allow man the free will to NOT choose to grab the forbidden munchies.

But, that said, I DO completely believe, with you, that satan did his best to “spoil the surprise”, out of jealousy for man’s more enviable environment given by God.

Man was given an “improved” place-to-be, in that in it man could change his mind (though not sin, of course), like God, which the angels were never allowed to do.

Satan, the proverbial “First Born”, which nearly ALWAYS gets the short shrift, couldn’t handle it, and decided to be “the big perverter” in every and any way possible, just because he (sociopathologically) could.

I’m not sure I understand. Wasn’t the choice of the angels essentially the same as mans’? How could man change his mind and would satan know that man could change it?

Men have a “life time” in which they are allowed to “repent”, which is to change one’s mind.

The angels “live” (for want of a better word) in an environment where every decision is final and irrevocable.

The angels choice to mortally sin, thus the 1/3rd eternally falling blah blah blah, was an irrevocable one due to their (the angel’s) very nature, while WE humans get to mortally sin and pay for it through purgation while not suffering for it eternally if we repent and are forgiven.

That annoyed the HECK out of those angels who chose to “vent” instead of “know their place due to their nature”, and was why they are now demons.

Did that answer your quesitons?

 

[CatsAndDogs]

I agree there are many in heaven who never read the catechism, (it’s not exactly bedtime reading!) and there are many in heaven who probably never read a Bible either. I would disagree that if you read the Bible with an open heart you will understand. Jesus himself said that many would not understand as it is not given to them. Understanding is imparted by the Spirit.

As a convert to Catholicism, I would believe my understanding was enhanced by receiving sacraments. I was confused about the person of Christ. I wanted to believe what was true but what was true?

What is true is what the Church says is true. That’s why you go to the catechism, as it is not a book of theology (the REASONS why various truths are true) but a book of Doctrine (a list of truths which ARE true).

The primary act of faith, which means the holding of a belief through time with hope that it is worth holding (aka faith) in expectation of a confirmation that it will be shown to be true, is to believe that Church dogma is true.

We are allowed to not be “comfortable” with having adequate reasons to believe that Church dogma is true, but we must hold that it is true. Church dogma is THE ONLY truth in the area of faith and morals.

I was brought up to believe the doctrine of the Trinity was perpotrated by Saten so no one could ever come to know God and anyone who prays to the Trinity is really praying to Saten and it is Saten who answers their prayer.

Have you repented of this “satanic trinity hoax” belief? If not, I would suggest you do. If you have not, you can’t really call yourself “Catholic” in any meaningful way while holding that belief.

You are simply NOT allowed to believe that.

I believed the Bible would give me the answer. The more I read the more confused I became and eventually, stopped reading the Bible altogether. I believe I came to know who Christ really was through personal revelation.

The bible will do that to you!

If you need help figuring out how to use your catechism, this is a good place to ask about how it is used properly.

 

[fhansen]

Men have a “life time” in which they are allowed to “repent”, which is to change one’s mind.

The angels “live” (for want of a better word) in an environment where every decision is final and irrevocable.

The angels choice to mortally sin, thus the 1/3rd eternally falling blah blah blah, was an irrevocable one due to their (the angel’s) very nature, while WE humans get to mortally sin and pay for it through purgation while not suffering for it eternally if we repent and are forgiven.

That annoyed the HECK out of those angels who chose to “vent” instead of “know their place due to their nature”, and was why they are now demons.

Did that answer your quesitons?

Yes, that’s what I thought you meant, but the confusion came in because I wonder if the serpent would’ve known that man had the chance to change his mind prior to his tempting them in the first place.

 

[minkymurph]

Have you repented of this “satanic trinity hoax” belief? If not, I would suggest you do. If you have not, you can’t really call yourself “Catholic” in any meaningful way while holding that belief.

You are simply NOT allowed to believe that.
.

With all due respect, repentence is between myself and God but as you’ve asked, (or demanded) did I not renounce Saten whan I was baptized into the Catholic Church and did I not profess the Creed? I was asked, do you believe, I answered yes I believed in God the Father, his only begotten Son and the Holy Spirit AND MEANT IT. Did I repent? Repent of what? Not knowing as a child my parents were not teaching me what was true? I was not culpable for that. I had no control over the faith I was raised in. Again with all due respect, the Priest who catechised me was well aware of my background and knew me a lot more personally thatn you. I have been offered a place at a Catholic University to be come a teacher of Religious Studies at Secondary level.
. Don’t tell me I’m not really a Catholic and don’t ‘suggest’ I repent. When I need to repent I’ll go to confession. I don’t need absolution from anyone else and I don’t need to justify myself to anyone else.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Yes, that’s what I thought you meant, but the confusion came in because I wonder if the serpent would’ve known that man had the chance to change his mind prior to his tempting them in the first place.

The angelic intellect would certainly have known that God had just created, at the INSTANT that God created it, a critter much like themselves, with many lesser faculties (being matter-bound), but ALSO with the amazing ability to mortally sin and be forgiven of it!

The “evil-doing” angels put the emphasis on what man got that they didn’t, while the good-doing angels focused on God’s incapability of creating anything “not good” and praised Him for the wonderful creation of man.

Of course satan knew everything knowable about mankind and, in his ever-perverting action, tried and succeeded in persuading man to disobey a simple direct command from God Himself.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

With all due respect, repentence is between myself and God but as you’ve asked, (or demanded) did I not renounce Saten whan I was baptized into the Catholic Church and did I not profess the Creed?

If you have, EXELLENT! If not, better get on that!

Repentence is not only between you and God, but also between you and the Church. This is not “demoting” God. To not be reconciled with the Church, the Body Of Christ, is to be not reconciled with God.

I was asked, do you believe, I answered yes I believed in God the Father, his only begotten Son and the Holy Spirit AND MEANT IT. Did I repent? Repent of what?

Repenting of having once believed the “satanic trinity hoax”.

If you have, great!

Not knowing as a child my parents were not teaching me what was true? I was not culpable for that.

I agree. Therefore, you mustn’t keep bringing up your previous belief as an excuse to “have trouble with” a required present belief.

I had no control over the faith I was raised in. Again with all due respect, the Priest who catechised me was well aware of my background and knew me a lot more personally thatn you. I have been offered a place at a Catholic University to be come a teacher of Religious Studies at Secondary level.

OK…

. Don’t tell me I’m not really a Catholic and don’t ‘suggest’ I repent. When I need to repent I’ll go to confession. I don’t need absolution from anyone else and I don’t need to justify myself to anyone else.

Absolutely true!

But, if you think that the “final reason” for your believing what you believe is from “personal revelation” not checked against the public revelation of the Church, which you may not hold but which I seem to “sense” in your writing, then you may need some help in the area of discernment.

I’m just “smelling” a whiff of “The Holy Spirit talks to me personally and I know perfectly that it’s Him!”, in your writing, which I may perhaps be mistaken about!

Best to you always. I’ll be praying for you and your students with gusto!

 

[minkymurph]

I agree. Therefore, you mustn’t keep bringing up your previous belief as an excuse to “have trouble with” a required present belief.

But, if you think that the “final reason” for your believing what you believe is from “personal revelation” not checked against the public revelation of the Church, which you may not hold but which I seem to “sense” in your writing, then you may need some help in the area of discernment.

I’m just “smelling” a whiff of “The Holy Spirit talks to me personally and I know perfectly that it’s Him!”, in your writing, which I may perhaps be mistaken about!

Best to you always. I’ll be praying for you and your students with gusto!

I wasn’t aware I had trouble with the belief Christ was God. I don’t know where you got that idea as I have not mentioned Trinitarian theology. The Holy Spirit talks to EVERYONE personally. Not all have been chosen to lead in matters of faith however and therefore not everyone had had infalliblility bestowed on them. My ‘personal revelation’ was Christ was God and as far as I know that checks out with the Church. The point I was making was I didn’t learn it from the Bible. I believe God revealed it to me and it is a truth that I believe you cannot know unless it is revealed and your not just told by someone infallible. I always believed in God but from I became Catholic, I now know him. I wasn’t aware I was using my past to make excuses about anything. For a short time I was very passionate about my former faith and now, it fills me with saddness as it was all for nothing. Praying to a God I did not know as his image had been completely distorted, those prayers now seem empty and meaningless. I felt totally separated from God with no way back. Don’t talk to me of repentance. From I’ve become Catholic, I also now what it is to be touched and loved by God. I never felt that before. Maybe at some point I may come to know what it’s like to be loved by other humans. Apart from my children, that one still eludes me.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is straying from the OP. Please refrain from personal commentary about one another’s spirituality and stay on topic, everyone. Thank you.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

I wasn’t aware I had trouble with the belief Christ was God. I don’t know where you got that idea as I have not mentioned Trinitarian theology. The Holy Spirit talks to EVERYONE personally.

Not all have been chosen to lead in matters of faith however and therefore not everyone had had infalliblility bestowed on them.

Have you had infallibility bestowed on you?

My ‘personal revelation’ was Christ was God and as far as I know that checks out with the Church. The point I was making was I didn’t learn it from the Bible.

I believe God revealed it to me and it is a truth that I believe you cannot know unless it is revealed and your not just told by someone infallible.

Do you mean “told by someone INFALLIBLY”, or “told by somene [who is] infallible”?

In as much as your private revelation coincides with that revealed to the Church, your private revelation is valid.

But the reason that you must believe the truth revealed as true to you is NOT because of your private revelation, but because it coincides with the public revelation of the Church.

I always believed in God but from I became Catholic, I now know him. I wasn’t aware I was using my past to make excuses about anything. For a short time I was very passionate about my former faith and now, it fills me with saddness as it was all for nothing. Praying to a God I did not know as his image had been completely distorted, those prayers now seem empty and meaningless. I felt totally separated from God with no way back.

Don’t talk to me of repentance. From I’ve become Catholic, I also now what it is to be touched and loved by God. I never felt that before.

Welcome to the Church!

Maybe at some point I may come to know what it’s like to be loved by other humans. Apart from my children, that one still eludes me.

Welcome to the Church, composed of “other humans”. We are each loved by God utterly as individual priceless creations, and we are tasked with loving each other individually as God loves each of us.

Send love and love will return, greater, augmented by God.

 

[Benadam]

Thanks, Benadam, I think I see what you’re saying-that Gods’ ineffably beyond us and any knowledge we may have of Him comes solely from the revelation He’s graciously stooped to grant.

On the other hand, I’m sure you agree that He’s given us minds with which to ponder His revelation and some of the specific revelations can be vague or maybe require more spiritual maturity to comprehend-so I keep trying in my own feeble way.

I may’ve misunderstood mm but in any case it would definitely be wrong to say that evil is good and right to say that God doesn’t will evil.

I think the situation with man is that he needs to grow in wisdom because he didn’t choose the good –he didn’t recognize or know it as such-even though he experienced it continuously by walking with God in the garden. So the idea in this case would be that man does need to know the “lack of good” in order to be able to appreciate the good he rejected. He needs to learn that his life was already full or perhaps that fullness of life can only be experienced through obedience to God because, with seemingly not much reason, man bought the lie that God was holding something out from him.

But maybe it could also be true to say that, even though all of creation is good, it possesses the one element of evil or potential evil in being inherently less-than-perfect by virtue of being less-than-its-Creator who alone is perfect. Maybe anything God created has one “flaw”-that it’s not Him -and none of that matters unless or until He decides to infuse creation with freewill -as He did with us and angels. In this case, that one flaw-of not being Him-allows for the possibility of a tragic effect-i.e. the fall. I believe that in us, creation can come to the conscious awareness that it is not Him and come to be united in will with Him by agreeing that He’s deserving of our love and obedience-that this has always been our ultimate good.

for us that flaw was that it was possible to have a flaw. I’m reminded of something minkymurph posted that I misunderstood. She said that Adam and Eve represent ‘desire’. Which is the single flaw in us that didn’t exist untill it’s object ( the fruit) was placed outside of the order God established.

A desired object is properly desired if the object exists in the order God established.
A desire is evil if it’s object exists outside of the order God established.

When the fruit existed in the order established by God it wasn’t an object desired by Adam and Eve. Satan had to place it outside of the order God established to make it an object of their desire and paradoxically in a disordered state desire for it became evil and gave birth to sin. The child of evil desire.

 

[minkymurph]

Have you had infallibility bestowed on you?
QUOTE]

I made it very clear in an earlier post I hadn’t. The moderator has just asked us to put a stop to this so I suggest we do.

 

[fhansen]

for us that flaw was that it was possible to have a flaw. I’m reminded of something minkymurph posted that I misunderstood. She said that Adam and Eve represent ‘desire’. Which is the single flaw in us that didn’t exist untill it’s object ( the fruit) was placed outside of the order God established.

A desired object is properly desired if the object exists in the order God established.
A desire is evil if it’s object exists outside of the order God established.

When the fruit existed in the order established by God it wasn’t an object desired by Adam and Eve. Satan had to place it outside of the order God established to make it an object of their desire and paradoxically in a disordered state desire for it became evil and gave birth to sin. The child of evil desire.

I’ve tried to understand this before. If all creation was good, where did evil desire or disordered desire come from? Why did Adam & Eve desire the fruit if it was wrong to do so? How did satan place the fruit outside Gods’ order? I tend to think the flaw was an inherent and unavoidable one in man as well as angels.

 

[Benadam]

The angelic intellect would certainly have known that God had just created, at the INSTANT that God created it, a critter much like themselves, with many lesser faculties (being matter-bound), but ALSO with the amazing ability to mortally sin and be forgiven of it!

The “evil-doing” angels put the emphasis on what man got that they didn’t, while the good-doing angels focused on God’s incapability of creating anything “not good” and praised Him for the wonderful creation of man.

Of course satan knew everything knowable about mankind and, in his ever-perverting action, tried and succeeded in persuading man to disobey a simple direct command from God Himself.

I prefer this version: God is absolutely simple. Creations nearest Him are most like Him and are identicle to Him except for the chasm that divides the uncreated from the created. They possess most of what God has but are not what they possess like God is. As created beings come to exist they move further in further away from resembling God as they increase in complexity and ever more relative to the Absolute of God.

The Angel Michael " who is like God? Seems to be appropriate that this angel expels the Rebel who wants to be dignified as God.

So this order of Angelic creation proceeds to the Angelic beings most complex and farthest removed from God in resemblence untill next on the creative menu, man, must rise like baking bread from the earth to be endowed with the faculties once reserved to angels. Barely more than beast barely less than angel. But In Man the heavens and the earth are united and all is directed to serve the beastspirit.

This is what ignited Satan’s indignation and burst him open in pride. I doubt Satan desired to experience the state of becoming. Desire is attached to objects that pertain to the person that desires. God willed that he serve man who in the sight of Satan is mere flesh. Like an animal compares to us we compare to angels and Satan would not bow down to man in service. The meaning of his life could not be wrapped up in what man means to God. Man meant more to God than the bearer of His light. this is what made Satan jealous and pride would not release him from it.

 

[fhansen]

CatsAndDogs;3786169:

Have you had infallibility bestowed on you?
QUOTE]

I made it very clear in an earlier post I hadn’t. The moderator has just asked us to put a stop to this so I suggest we do.

MM, you sound like a quite sound Catholic to me, for what its’ worth-not that I can judge anyway. At any rate, I’ve got my copy of Revelations of Divine Love ordered from the library and if I can offer anything intelligent in time, or at least vaguely intelligent, I’ll send it your way. Otherwise, thanks again for the tip.