Was Adam representitive of the entire human race?

[Benadam]

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.

Satan reorders all that God has created with deception. That’s what makes deception so powerfull.

God established the proper order in the beginning. In our Original inocense every emotion is good if it is a response to reality properly ordered. Any act is good and moral if done in response to reality in the order God established. The meaning of the forbidden fruit had to be changed it had to be taken out of the order God established and placed in the order Satan established. The fruit was good to eat it was an object of desire but Adam and Eve were not subjected to that desire as long as it and they remained in the order established by God. The fruit as food to eat disd not pertain to them in the order God established. Satan reordered it’s meaning and it became something that did pertain to them. Their natural desire for it didn’t exist untill it’s meaning was changed in the disordered reality presented by Satan.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

CatsAndDogs;3786169:

Have you had infallibility bestowed on you?

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.

I was just clarifying, and that was not a “shot” at you.

I’m just curious as to whether in your opinion the Church’s interpretation of revelation overides personal interpretation, or not.

Should you choose not to answer, that’s fine.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Satan reorders all that God has created with deception. That’s what makes deception so powerfull.

God established the proper order in the beginning. In our Original inocense every emotion is good if it is a response to reality properly ordered. Any act is good and moral if done in response to reality in the order God established. The meaning of the forbidden fruit had to be changed it had to be taken out of the order God established and placed in the order Satan established. The fruit was good to eat it was an object of desire but Adam and Eve were not subjected to that desire as long as it and they remained in the order established by God. The fruit as food to eat disd not pertain to them in the order God established. Satan reordered it’s meaning and it became something that did pertain to them. Their natural desire for it didn’t exist untill it’s meaning was changed in the disordered reality presented by Satan.

Bravo!

 

[CatsAndDogs]

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. …

The problem with this is that man was created after the animals. It’s not a straight line time progression, apparently.

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. …

Not sure what you meant by that last line. Thanks in advance for an explanation.

I’m not fond of a “smooth” progression of creation.

God created our environment, the non-“angelic”/non-“god” realm, before He created us. Then He created us as the second of two creatures with “full” free will.

We were not created to be in any way like angels, other than we possess both have free will and intellect.

The distinguishing characteristic of our “realm” is time. We do not exist in an “eternity” while on earth, unlike angels who live in their version of eternity, which is nothing like but “similar to” God’s eternity. Our environment, even in Eden, allows (allowed) us to “persist” even after making mistakes. In Eden, if anyone ever did the “extensive research necessary” (!?) they’d most likely find that Adam and Eve did do little venial sins all the time, for which they were forgiven by God during their daily walks with Him, and the ONLY mortal sin available for them to do was to be “inappropriate” with the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil.

When God was creating man’s environment, satan (being the “brightest” of the bunch capable of observing God’s doings) quickly figured out that this “material persistence” quality of the stuff that man would eventually be made from would allow them to disobey God and LIVE with an opportunity to repent and be forgiven that which they (the angels) would eternally be “damned”!

That ANYTHING should have an opportunity to do such SACRILEGE and not have to “pay for it”, as is demanded of him, was too much for him to bear!

And thus, satan in his brilliance THOUGHT his way into his very nasty job, and eventual hell.

This is what ignited Satan’s indignation and burst him open in pride. I doubt Satan desired to experience the state of becoming.

I have ho idea what you mean by this, but it sounds interesting. Please explain. Thankies!

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.

I don’t think (but then, what do I know!) that God TOLD satan that he must “serve man”. Satan simply figured out that what was coming (man) would be able to do “mortal sin” and not be eternally damned, which in satan’s eyes amounted to a critter given more “rights” than he had.

Why would God say that angels would serve man, when angels simply serve God? Satan’s “rationalization” that he was being asked to “serve man” was his untrue protestation, after he’d already done his mortal sin of pride, that he used to gather up like minded angels for his nasty posse.

In the “really old days” a military force was considered to be unbeatable if it was more than twice the size of it’s enemy. Satan gathered up the “border condition” where it wasn’t certain that God’s forces would prevail, being at exactly 2 to 1 against Satan.

This makes it a “toss up” as to whether God would win, which is silly of course, since God is God, but this was satan’s “delusional rationalization” of his chances, and the same chance of we humans being affected by demonic forces on earth.

It’s a toss up as to whether we can “fend off the devil” if we don’t have more assistance than only the heavenly host to help us.

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.

Satan’s nature as a creature of the angelic eternity prohibits him from the ability to repent and be forgiven.

Man and angels are equally beloved by God. But while the angels are more like God in their intellect, man is more like Him in their free will.

The two great gifts of God, given only to two of His creations: Free will and intellect. Neither is greater, but intellect will ALWAYS trip itself up and be surprised when free will finishes the race first.

So, beware intellectuals!

 

[CatsAndDogs]

minkymurph;3786191:

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.

You know, a great read I’ve found is “The Craft of Catechesis”.

Check it out. That and the “Fr. Dubay” books.

Any so-called “wisdom” I seem to spout is just regurgitations from the Catechism and other Church teachings.

I ain’t NEARLY smart enough to be particularly bright, though I am smart enough to know that my being an inellectual is a major hinderance to my spiritual development!

Best to you!

 

[Benadam]

I tend to think the flaw was an inherent and unavoidable one in man as well as angels.

I think you’re right . I think The flaw , the flaw doesn’t even exist untill it’s meaning is changed hmm I think. The flaw only exists potentialy. It’s a potential flaw . Is that a flaw?

 

[fhansen]

Man and angels are equally beloved by God. But while the angels are more like God in their intellect, man is more like Him in their free will.

This is an interesting quote which makes some sense to me but I don’t know where the notion comes from of fallen angels being jealous of mans’ prerogative to repent and return to Gods’ favor. I’m not saying it’s not true, I just hadn’t heard it before, especially as a motive for satans’ jealousy. Is there some source material out there for this?

 

[fhansen]

I think you’re right . I think The flaw , the flaw doesn’t even exist untill it’s meaning is changed hmm I think. The flaw only exists potentialy. It’s a potential flaw . Is that a flaw?

The “flaw”, I believe, is simply the relative imperfection of anything outside of God. He determined that it was still worth it to create knowing that evil would result from combining freewill with flawed creation in the form of us and angels.

 

[Benadam]

The problem with this is that man was created after the animals. It’s not a straight line time progression, apparently.
Interesting view

 

[Lief_Erikson]

I thought I’d give my view on Adam’s sin and our inheritance of it. Please comment, folks .

The Headship Principle

You know, when a child is born, his father is to a large extent like God to him. He believes whatever his father teaches him. This continues until his adult life, and most of the time, even when he’s an adult, he still adheres to his father’s teachings most of the way. The father is the “head” of his household, the one in charge. The child is to a certain extent like an organic part of his body, as it follows the direction of the head and approves of the actions of the head, almost no matter what they are. The father can train his child to be evil or to be righteous. Thus Joshua could justly say, in scripture, “As for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord.” And when Paul and Silas converted their jailer, him and his entire family were baptized. And as Ruth said to her husband, her chosen head, “Where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God.” Of course, in a Christian household, God himself is a higher head to a wife than her husband is, yet the headship principle still remains, for Paul teaches “wives, submit to your husbands.” So the wife should obey so long as the man doesn’t demand that she sin. They should, of course, work together as a team and a single unit, him not bossing her around, but this submission occurs when there’s a major disagreement.

To a large extent, this happens naturally. I’ve seen this very, very frequently in marriages I’ve observed, women submitting to their husbands’ will and fulfilling their roles as helpmates entirely naturally and spontaneously, never even thinking about it, and both them and their husbands have loved one another deeply and had excellent relationships. It’s not like the husband leaves the wife with all the work or anything- they work together as a team, but the wife tends to look up to and submit to the husband automatically.

As regards children and their living head, their father, we ought at this point to remember how a father with anger problems can pass those on to his child, or if he has great respect for other humans, he can pass that on to his child. Children mirror their parents’ ideologies, behaviors or mannerisms, and their moral codes, a great deal, and the father especially tends to usually be the head in a family. This also is part of the reason why children in the Bible are sometimes judged with their parents. They are connected to their parents’ sins automatically, because their father is their absolute leader and they applaud whatever bad or good things he does, as he teaches them to.

This concept certainly runs counter to the individualism of today, but it tends to ring true from a sociological standpoint. Everyone is responsible for his own sins, yet everyone automatically sins with his father because he upholds the same principles from the moment he understands his father’s beliefs. He will remain guilty of willingly embracing his father’s sins until he breaks from his father’s path. And in Ezekiel, God says that such a person who abandons his father’s sins will not be judged for them. Until he does that, though, he is guilty of those sins. This headship principle appears many times in the Bible, New Testament as well as Old.

Concluded in the next post . . .

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Now, this also rings true from a national standpoint. Just as a father is the head of his children, a king is often the head of his nation. The king’s subjects serve the king, so they become, to a certain extent, appendages of his person. When he sins in his use of them, they sin in their obedience to him, for they should never transgress God’s Law for the will of their king. Thus when he is judged, these his appendages are often guilty of the same crimes and so are judged with him.

Also, in a monarchical system, there tends to be a lot of unity around the leader. This is partly because there isn’t a free press, so whatever the king believes is true and releases for public knowledge, his subjects also believe is true. Sometimes the king has more information than his subjects, though, so he is more responsible than they are. But you see, I hope, how subjects are often justly judged with their king because they become unified with his sins in their service to him, or in their righteous acts that he commands them to do and that they obey. They are responsible for both. So the people are often judged with their ruler, as families are often judged with their parents, both with blessings or with curses, unless the children or wife break from their normal head.

One can see this principle also in the child who witnesses his mother collapse into alcohol addiction and his father become an angry and cruel crack addict. His siblings follow in their parents’ footsteps, as they’ve been brought up to do, but he is determined to make something better of himself, so he works very hard, gets cleaned up, escapes from street life and manages to get a college education and a job, and begins to live a civilized life. He has broken from the destructive cycle of his parents, has broken from the headship principle by rejecting their sins and refusing to pursue them himself. So he is blessed, whereas they and their children and their children’s children will inherit the same curses unless their children can escape from them.

Then, the man who got cleaned up, a job and an education raises his children. They will grow up in his household, and inherit what he teaches them about life. They will grow up in a better environment and will probably become better people than the ruthless addicts who were their grandparents. They have inherited the blessing of their father.

Blessings and curses both travel down family lines. We inherited Adam’s curse, because he was the head of all humanity, and he passed his wicked ways down to his children, and they to their children, and so on until Christ. Now, we reject Adam as our head in order to embrace Christ as our head, so just as in Adam, all were slain, in Christ, all are made alive. Because we now inherit the blessings of our new head, our new father, just as Adam’s children continue to receive the curses of their father.

You see, there is responsibility in the children who inherit the sins of their fathers. They are responsible for the fact that they follow in their fathers’ footsteps. And subjects are responsible for the fact that they obey their monarch. And we are responsible for the fact that we obey Adam. We inherit his sins and make them our own, like a kid born of an alcoholic Mom might grow up with a propensity to alcohol addiction. But Christ has saved us from this cycle of death.

 

[minkymurph]

I was just clarifying, and that was not a “shot” at you.

I’m just curious as to whether in your opinion the Church’s interpretation of revelation overides personal interpretation, or not.

Should you choose not to answer, that’s fine.

Firstly I would say why are you curious to know? I’m sorry I mentioned any personal revelation as you seem to have taken great exception to that fact. Call me a heretic or not really a Catholic if you want. Accuse me of believing I don’t need the Church, thinking I’m better than everyone else or whatever your reading into what I said if you choose. It’s not the first time someone has taken 2+2 from one of my posts and come up with 10. I’ve said what I have said and I’m not going to enlarge on it. I’m not going to degrade something I greatly treasure by subjecting it to an argumentative dissection in an internet forum. Forget I said it and come back to the thread.

 

[Karlsruhe]

Someone wrote here:

I have been offered a place at a Catholic University to be come a teacher of Religious Studies at Secondary level<<
Now, I made clear, that over here in Germany religious education is not a matter of state and ministry of education, but one of the Church. Teachers for Catholicism within have to be appointed by the church. If the person doesn’t understand this or that of the Bible, he can’t teach religion and definitely couldn’t be appointed for teaching Catholizism. In other words, he must be – if not a priest, at least a theologian.
We here, in 1992 had been very much surprised, when an American friend of our son, did not know any details about the passion of Jesus Christ, nor that Jesus was/is God and always had been (long before Abraham was) in the Holy Trinity, in spite of the fact that this young friends father was a preacher and teacher for Christian religion (can’t remember which denomination – not catholic anyhow). So we puzzled around over this to us unbelievable thing and how this could be. Now we know.
Let my try an answer: As far as the Holy Trinity is concerned, I myself found it a great help to read Ignatius of Loyola. As mostly priest are teachers in school for the „school subject Religion“ Children can’t be tought wrong. At least when I was young, and in our town in the years 1946 to 53, instruction and education of religion was subject to cath. Priests only. Nowadays, nonpriest theologian give lessons in religion in schools, but they must have the approbation from church first and only secondly from the ministry of education. I admit; there are some unworthy ones among them (but then we have unworthy priest too – don’t we).
When I said it’s ever so easy to understand the Holy Bible, then I repeated the word of Pope Benedict, who said it’s so simple to believe.
The Holy Trinity, human race never will really understand, as God himself can not ever be understood. Why should we want to understand God? In fact it’s even a sin, wanting to apprehend God. „A“ God who would be „ available“ to our little mind and understanding, woluld at the same time be subject of manipulation, and sowith nod GOD. We “know” God ever since God spoke to Adam and since Moses, the Prophets and finally Jesus revealed God to us. We know that Jesus himself, as He in his own words several times pointed out, that those who saw Jesus, saw God – so he is God in the Holy Trinity, and we know from what happened at the Christening of Jesus and what had occurred at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles and gave them understanding which they passed on to us, - we now know for sure, God is the Holy Trinity who is not three but one in spite as there is God Father, God Son, God Holy Spirit.
We will not understand this (as there are many everyday-things we use but never understand >I’ll never understand a computer ;-)< ) and we will not even understand God when we are in heaven and see Him, but we know Him and then will see Him. So – where is he problem?

 

[minkymurph]

the wife tends to look up to and submit to the husband automatically…

They do? Well, yes years of male oppression would develop that tendency which is exactly what God said would happen: ‘your craving will be for your husband and he will dominate you.’ That was a consequence of original sin. Men would think it would be natural to be the ‘head’ and women would submit as Sin completely disrupted the divine union of the man and woman. They where ‘one flesh.’ Their head was God. Originally, man did not need to be a head as both man and woman were in the presence of God, he communicated with both directly and in God’s presence, there is no head other than God. The idea that women need to submit to men for a marriage to work to me is another distortion of the divine union caused by sin. There is no need for submission in a perfect union.

 

[minkymurph]

Someone wrote here:

I have been offered a place at a Catholic University to be come a teacher of Religious Studies at Secondary level<<
Now, I made clear, that over here in Germany religious education is not a matter of state and ministry of education, but one of the Church. Teachers for Catholicism within have to be appointed by the church. If the person doesn’t understand this or that of the Bible, he can’t teach religion and definitely couldn’t be appointed for teaching Catholizism. In other words, he must be – if not a priest, at least a theologian.

I was the one who said I had been offered a place at a Catholic University. I live in Northern Ireland and things work very differently here. There are a great many Catholic schools and the vast majority of Catholics attend Catholic schools. Some non-Catholic children attend Catholic schools as well due to the fact they have such a good reputation. Non-Catholic schools are called ‘controlled’ schools as they are funded by the State. Few Catholics if any would attend a state school here. Catholic schools are called ‘maintained’ schools as they are partly funded by the state and partly by the Church. To teach in a Catholic school you must complete what they call the Catholic Certificate of Education irrespective of your subject. You cannot teach in a Catholic school without one. There are very few Priests here who actually teach. One’s who do teach at University level. To teach religious studies you must complete what is called a Bachelor of Education degree which is actually two degrees, one in education and one in your specialist subject. You also need to take what is called a subsidary subject, mine will be history. To enter what is called ‘teacher training,’ studying for a BEd, which is what I will be doing come September, you need exams in English and Maths and a qualification in a Science subject as well as straight A’s in the subjects you want to study at higher level. The University also has an entrance exam. Getting a place to train as a teacher is therefore pretty stiff here. We also have integraded schools which are interdenominational and they are funded by the State. But there are not many of those. There are pressure groups here that want all schools to become integraded and faith schools done away with since peace broke out here.

 

[Karlsruhe]

thank’s a lot old chum. However, when I lived in England 1958/59 I never understood their system of education - well all ways lead to Rome. But then Ireland (which is the most beloved country to must Germans ranging right after Spain) is a completely CATHOLIC Country. Over here it’s 50% Catholics in the west, but around zero in the former eastern “GDR” he whole thing anyway changing, as we get millions of Moslems pooring in too. All the more happy we are about our Christian leaders - on top Angela Merkel who said
WE BELIEVE IN GOD AND WE HAVE JESUS CHRIST AND THAT GIVES ME STRENGTH
However; I was trying to explain the Holy Trinity and the fact, that the Holy Trinity can’t be explained but simply believed to.
SIMPLY (as Pope Benedict says

CU

 

[minkymurph]

thank’s a lot old chum. I was trying to explain the Holy Trinity and the fact, that the Holy Trinity can’t be explained but simply believed

We can never understand all about it but we can understand something about it but as you say, it needs to be believed. To be honest I have no idea how we got onto the Trinity. I think someone misunderstood one of my previous posts and mistakenly concluded I did not believe in the Trinity. I was trying to explain I was raised in a faith that rejects the Trinity and I came to know Christ was God because I believe God revealed to me that is who he is and it was something I couldn’t learn by intellect alone. I think there was great exception taken at the idea God would reveal anything to me personally. I was under the impression he reveals himself to everyone personally but hey, what would I know?

 

[Karlsruhe]

I think someone misunderstood one of my previous posts and mistakenly concluded I did not believe in the Trinity.

Oh that was me alright. I’m the world-champion of misunderstanders
We ought to open up another thread
HOLY TRINITY
Can anyone tell me HOW that is done (or do it)?

By the way: When I was in the age of 18
1958/59 working in Birmingham/England, (and picking up my bit of humble English) I was the f… German (ok 't was 13 years after the war). As Irishmen where there too, we grew friends right away, because they where the f… Irish too. We where in the same boat so to speak.
(I know that’s off topic let’s go back to the theme

 

[minkymurph]

Oh that was me alright. I’m the world-champion of misunderstanders
We ought to open up another thread
HOLY TRINITY
Can anyone tell me HOW that is done (or do it)?

By the way: When I was in the age of 18
1958/59 working in Birmingham/England, (and picking up my bit of humble English) I was the f… German (ok 't was 13 years after the war). As Irishmen where there too, we grew friends right away, because they where the f… Irish too. We where in the same boat so to speak.
(I know that’s off topic let’s go back to the theme

Lets face it. The English have had a troubled relationship with most Nationalities. Comes from the fact that they don’t understand why Nations would prefer to govern themselves as opposed to having them do it for them and pay for the priviledge.
I would do a search before starting a thread on the Holy Trinity as I’ll bet there are any amount of threads on the topic! Click search on the orange bar and type in your question. All threads relating to that topic will come up. It’s a bit tedious searching but it saves starting identical threads.

 

[Karlsruhe]

It’s a bit tedious searching but it saves starting identical threads.

Ha, blinking well Ha (just good for 2 Ha’s)
I spend most of my time in this forum searching, as the topics have odd names nonunderstandable to broken English speakers.
So, I’ll fall right in love to the one who finds the thing - I give up seeking here and therefor stuck to the three I found