Was Death Present in the Garden of Eden, before the fall?

[JM3]

Scientifically educated people leave the church not because of science, but because of the fundamtentalisms of the scientifically illiterate.

So, pride makes them leave?

(happy to be illiterate )

 

[grannymh]

Scientifically educated people leave the church not because of science, but because of the fundamtentalisms of the scientifically illiterate.

Scientifically educated people leave Catholicism because they freely choose to ignore Divine Revelation, God’s plan for humanity. Non-scientifically educated people leave Catholicism because they freely choose to ignore Divine Revelation, God’s plan for humanity. To put it bluntly. People leave Catholicism because they freely choose to ignore God.

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16-17

 

[grannymh]

I recommend many of the books by my colleagues in the Internationl Society for Science and religoin.

For those interested in the purpose of human life, I recommend the following.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4

Blessings
granny

Bible means Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth

 

[larkin31]

Yes, I’m referring to human sapience and symbolic language, because that’s the only kind of sapience and symbolic language! We perform certain activities – in language, reason, argument, art – which lie with sapience and are quite entirely foreign to all lower forms of life.

No, it’s not a religious argument; it’s a philosophical one. It is not a conclusion of faith, but a conclusion of reason (which includes science but is not limited to it).

Are you claiming that your idea (word that you used) of “ensoulment” is NOT a religious idea?

 

[larkin31]

For those interested in the purpose of human life, I recommend the following.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4

Blessings
granny

Bible means Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth

Who asked about purpose of life? Isn’t this thread about whether any life forms or cells had been dying before death is introduced via the Fall?

My answer is yes, death clearly existed in both the flora and the fauna before the presence of first human pair on this planet. Your answer?

 

[grannymh]

The idea of an “immortal soul” is not a scientific idea, but rather a theological one.

This is not an excuse to leave the Catholic Church. It is not an excuse to look for “the theological tools to interpret their ancient faith within the new cultural context we inhabit in 2010.” mentioned in Post 146.

The OP was asking about death in the Garden of Eden before the fall without giving a lot of particulars beyond the composition of hair. Consequently, there have been various interpretations of death’s meanings.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey.

 

[grannymh]

My answer is yes, death clearly existed in both the flora and the fauna before the presence of first human pair on this planet. Your answer?

My answer is: Death of living cells clearly existed in both the flora and the fauna which were living before the presence of the first human pair on this planet.

Technically, Scripture refers to human nature as that which descended from two people who originally were in God’s friendship. Because human nature, in itself, unites the material and spiritual worlds, death takes on additional meanings for the real human person as described in Scripture.

Blessings,
granny

Bible means Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth

 

[StAnastasia]

This is not an excuse to leave the Catholic Church. It is not an excuse to look for “the theological tools to interpret their ancient faith within the new cultural context we inhabit in 2010.” mentioned in Post 146.

Of course it is not an excuse to leave the Church. But Granny, the refusal to consider “theological tools to interpret their ancient faith within the new cultural context” reminds me of the refusal of some kindergartners to move beyond the coloring books and songs of kindergarten into the rigors of arithmetic and writing. Kindergarten is comfortable. But when we adjust to the rigors of the higher grades, we find them ultimately more satisfying.

A naively literal faith is comforting. But when we adjust to the fact that the progress of human scientific knowledge did not stop in the thirteenth century, we find the engagement with the world – including that scientific theory forbidden by the moderators – ultimately more satisfying. I encourage you to read John Haught’s essay on “Darwin’s Gift to Theology.” Here is a precis: counterbalance.org/ctns-vo/haugh-body.html

Blessings,
StAnastasia

 

[grannymh]

Of course it is not an excuse to leave the Church. But Granny, the refusal to consider “theological tools to interpret their ancient faith within the new cultural context” reminds me of the refusal of some kindergartners to move beyond the coloring books and songs of kindergarten into the rigors of arithmetic and writing. Kindergarten is comfortable. But when we adjust to the rigors of the higher grades, we find them ultimately more satisfying.

If you are referring to the Catholic Church, an apology would be appreciated.

A naively literal faith is comforting. But when we adjust to the fact that the progress of human scientific knowledge did not stop in the thirteenth century, we find the engagement with the world – including that scientific theory forbidden by the moderators – ultimately more satisfying. I encourage you to read John Haught’s essay on “Darwin’s Gift to Theology.” Here is a precis: counterbalance.org/ctns-vo/haugh-body.html

Blessings,
StAnastasia

On my part, I apologize to the OP. However, the difficulty with “Garden of Eden” in the title is that there is a huge split between interpretations of the Garden of Eden account.

Blessings,
granny

Basic Catholic teaching regarding The Garden of Eden and Human Life
is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421.

The good news of Jesus Christ follows in Paragraph 422, etc.

One can put the word paragraph and its number in the Catechism’s search bar in link
www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Entering topics is also very useful since the Catechism does expand on the basics and implications. Do check out the Index.

When one enters a paragraph number, like “paragraph 355”, and then clicks on the opening line, CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 355 the following is under the paragraph:

»Enter the Catechism at this paragraph
»Table of Contents
»Index

 

[StAnastasia]

Iowever, the difficulty with “Garden of Eden” in the title is that there is a huge split between interpretations of the Garden of Eden account.

There are many interpretations of the garden/

 

[grannymh]

There are many interpretations of the garden/

My appology to you StAnastasia. My post 168 has a serious error in quoting. I am going to redo this post.

Blessings,
granny

 

[grannymh]

Please note that this is the corrected copy of my post 168.

Of course it is not an excuse to leave the Church. But Granny, the refusal to consider “theological tools to interpret their ancient faith within the new cultural context” reminds me of the refusal of some kindergartners to move beyond the coloring books and songs of kindergarten into the rigors of arithmetic and writing. Kindergarten is comfortable. But when we adjust to the rigors of the higher grades, we find them ultimately more satisfying.

If you are referring to the Catholic Church, an apology would be appreciated.

Originally Posted by StAnastasia forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
A naively literal faith is comforting. But when we adjust to the fact that the progress of human scientific knowledge did not stop in the thirteenth century, we find the engagement with the world – including that scientific theory forbidden by the moderators – ultimately more satisfying. I encourage you to read John Haught’s essay on “Darwin’s Gift to Theology.” Here is a precis: counterbalance.org/ctns-vo/haugh-body.html

Blessings,
StAnastasia

On my part, I apologize to the OP. However, the difficulty with “Garden of Eden” in the title is that there is a huge split between interpretations of the Garden of Eden account.

Blessings,
granny

Basic Catholic teaching regarding The Garden of Eden and Human Life
is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421.

The good news of Jesus Christ follows in Paragraph 422, etc.

One can put the word paragraph and its number in the Catechism’s search bar in link
www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Entering topics is also very useful since the Catechism does expand on the basics and implications. Do check out the Index.

When one enters a paragraph number, like “paragraph 355”, and then clicks on the opening line, CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 355 the following is under the paragraph:

»Enter the Catechism at this paragraph
»Table of Contents
»Index

 

[davidv]

Yes, science can determine that.

(1) Death has existed for 3.5 billion years, since the origin of life on earth.
(2) Animal predation has existed at least since the Cambrian Period, 540 million years ago.
(3) Humans have emerged over the last 5-7 million years.
(4) The “Fall” refers to human sin.
(5) Seven million is less than 540 million, by several orders of magnitude.
(6) Therefore, death existed long before the “Fall.”

False - non sequitur. You didn’t identify the date of the fall. If A is the date of the fall and B is the date of the first death and A is unspecified, the truth of
A>B, or
A<B is unknown and no valid claim can be made that the fall occured after death.

If “death” refers to the physical cessation of life, it antedated the fall, and science is therefore relevant. If “death” refers to a spiritual state, science is not relevant.

StAnastasia

Non sequitur - see above. Please note that I didn’t specify whether the death indicated in Genesis was phyiscal death. So it seems that a strawman is also involved.

 

[StAnastasia]

False - non sequitur.

Wrong.

You didn’t identify the date of the fall. If A is the date of the fall and B is the date of the first death and A is unspecified, the truth of

You seem unfamiliar with both basic science and basic logic.

Death has existed for 3.5 billion years, and predation at least for 540 million years.

Humans did not appear until 200,000 years ago.

The “Fall” (whatever that involved) occurred after humans were already here.

Therefore death antedated the Fall.

 

[larkin31]

My answer is: Death of living cells clearly existed in both the flora and the fauna which were living before the presence of the first human pair on this planet.

Thanks, but your mention of death in cells is somewhat suggestive (in its limitation).

Do you mean ONLY in cells? Do you think that* whole organisms* (in flora or fauna) lived and died prior to the first humans on the planet?

 

[larkin31]

False - non sequitur. You didn’t identify the date of the fall. If A is the date of the fall and B is the date of the first death and A is unspecified, the truth of
A>B, or
A<B is unknown…

Why are you focusing on a claim about “first death”? One does not have to know the date of the “first death” to have a rational and persuasive argument on whether plants and/or animals died prior to the presence of humans on this planet.

David, are you claiming that you think that no animals or plants physically died prior to the existence of humans on this planet?

A corollary question is, of course, do you deny the fossil record which very strongly indicates that thousands of entire species of plants and animals both came into and out of existence on this planet prior to the existence of homo sapiens?

 

[davidv]

Why are you focusing on a claim about “first death”? One does not have to know the date of the “first death” to have a rational and persuasive argument on whether plants and/or animals died prior to the presence of humans on this planet.

David, are you claiming that you think that no animals or plants physically died prior to the existence of humans on this planet?

No. I am not claiming that at all. None of the dates presented are factual. All of them are estimates based on scientific theories and hypotheses and measurements made based on them. As such, any claim denying truth (such as the existance of Adam and Eve) based on these supposed facts is speculative.

A corollary question is, of course, do you deny the fossil record which very strongly indicates that thousands of entire species of plants and animals both came into and out of existence on this planet prior to the existence of homo sapiens?

I don’t know enough to support or deny that claim as it is not material to my original defense of Church teaching regarding the introduction of “death” by the first sin. See post #157.

 

[grannymh]

Thanks, but your mention of death in cells is somewhat suggestive (in its limitation).

Do you mean ONLY in cells? Do you think that* whole organisms* (in flora or fauna) lived and died prior to the first humans on the planet?

My answer was in reply to the mention of cells in the OP…

Was Death Present in the Garden of Eden, before the fall?

I ask this question, because hair is made up of dead cells, and Adam was naming animals, many of which I am sure had hair, as I am sure he had hair. So cells were dying, and multiplying,.

The time frame of when flora or fauna lived is not all that important to me. Sorry about that.

Blessings,
granny
:winter:

 

[larkin31]

well, there’s two intelligent persons who won’t say yes or no or even “maybe.”

What would you tell children who ask if dinosaurs lived before humans?

 

[davidv]

well, there’s two intelligent persons who won’t say yes or no or even “maybe.”

What would you tell children who ask if dinosaurs lived before humans?

Why isn’t “I don’t know.” an acceptable answer?