Why did it take soooo long for God to show up?

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Please point to the rules inf you know exactly where they are so we can all be sure to conform to them. Anyone who does not conform to the rules, should be banned from the forum, but that is of course the moderator’s decision. At least, if everyone sees the rule, we know that it is no mistake if the offending posts continue. Meanwhile, I am looking for them. but I have a bit of trouble navigation around the board. Thank you for making me aware of the rule.

The Forum rules Section: forums.catholic-questions.org/forumdisplay.php?f=91

And the specific Ban:forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=408684

 

[JamesCaruso]

I was speaking truthfully when I said you want to silence me.
You do want me to be silent about evolution, correct?

I think deliberate argumentation will get us closed quicker than anything. Obviously, if we are breaking the rules, rule-abiding members would want to silence us. That is not a bad thing. They are looking out for all of us. One thing you could do if the rules don’t allow certain discussions is to have them offline, such as, by personal email. I am a firm believer in honoring the rules of any board I am on. It only makes sense that they can establish the rules they want for their own board.

 

[dshix]

The Forum rules Section: forums.catholic-questions.org/forumdisplay.php?f=91

Actually, the thread you cited doesn’t have it.

Look here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=408684

 

[Azygos]

If you don’t like my post and it’s against the rules to debate about it then don’t respond to it. I wasn’t looking for a debate but to add some information into this forum which is overflowing with an ideology that is false. In fact, I am not going to debate about it. Like I said I put the information out there it is up to the people whether they accept it or reject it. If this offends you then I apologize for not being able to apologize.

 

[JamesCaruso]

The Forum rules Section: forums.catholic-questions.org/forumdisplay.php?f=91

And the specific Ban:forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=408684

I searched the general rules, including the list of banned subjects, and there was nothing I could find on the subject of evolution. The second link you gave me had this statement:

For the foreseeable future, there shall be no discussion in the Philosophy Forum of evolution or atheism. Anyone who starts such a thread or revives an old thread on those topics will be banned. This ban is planned to be temporary, but there are to be no public or private petitions that the ban be lifted. It will be lifted only when the mod (yours truly) discerns that the atmosphere in this forum has sufficiently cooled.

There is no way that I can see to determine if and when the ban is lifted or has been lifted .and the “temporary ban” dates back to 2005. Maybe a moderator will weigh in and bring us all up to date. It’s not that I am even interested in discussing the forbidden topic, but it would be good to know how these things are handled, especially since I cannot find any reference in the general rules. Am I missing something?

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

I searched the general rules, including the list of banned subjects, and there was nothing I could find on the subject of evolution. The second link you gave me had this statement:

For the foreseeable future, there shall be no discussion in the Philosophy Forum of evolution or atheism. Anyone who starts such a thread or revives an old thread on those topics will be banned. This ban is planned to be temporary, but there are to be no public or private petitions that the ban be lifted. It will be lifted only when the mod (yours truly) discerns that the atmosphere in this forum has sufficiently cooled.

There is no way that I can see to determine if and when the ban is lifted or has been lifted .and the “temporary ban” dates back to 2005. Maybe a moderator will weigh in and bring us all up to date. It’s not that I am even interested in discussing the forbidden topic, but it would be good to know how these things are handled, especially since I cannot find any reference in the general rules. Am I missing something?

The second thread states that the ban will be in force for as long as it is stickied. I also know from comparatively recent personal experience that it i still enforced.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Jo Benedict:

For the foreseeable future, there shall be no discussion in the Philosophy Forum of evolution or atheism. Anyone who starts such a thread or revives an old thread on those topics will be banned. This ban is planned to be temporary, but there are to be no public or private petitions that the ban be lifted. It will be lifted only when the mod (yours truly) discerns that the atmosphere in this forum has sufficiently cooled.

Jo Benedict:

(Note: This thread will be made a sticky during the duration of the ban. Members are responsible for reading all such stickies in forums in which they participate before posting to the forum.)

Also the ban was placed in '09.

 

[JamesCaruso]

The second thread states that the ban will be in force for as long as it is stickied. I also know from comparatively recent personal experience that it i still enforced.

Thank you. I found the sticky reference and then the fact that it is indeed a sticky in the Philosophy section. Also, my mistake on the date; I was looking at the “join date.”

 

[BrunoMaria]

I. The image and likeness of God refers to our spiritual souls and not to our physical body.

What makes you translate the Bible (Gen 1,27) in this very private way?

 

[Dolezal]

Hey,

This question bothers me a lot: We know now that the human race is between 100’000-200’000 years old. Why did it take SOOOO LONG for God to show up and finally speak with Adam and Eve or Abraham? Why did he just watch for 10’000s of years how humans kill each other without knowing Him?

First, we can know God without revelation. Second, God did reveal himself to Adam, the first rational animal. I do not believe that other homos were rational animals. But suppose they were, then your question is like asking, why is the universe so big? Of course, the universe cannot be said to be big, or small, because we have nothing to compare it to. The same goes for time passed before divine revelation, what can we compare it to?

And why doesn’t the bible explain all that?

Why should it?

 

[copernicus]

When I first reverted back to the faith and I wrestled with the generation and the procreation of man, I speculated that the children of Adam and Eve inter-married given that the entire human race comes from Adam and Eve (i.e., Adam and Eve probably had many daughters and sons beyond just the 3 that are named, i.e., Cain, Able, Seth, as Adam lived some 900 years).

Regarding souls, I think some distinctions should be noted. First, St. Thomas Aquinas taught that all life forms have a soul, i.e., an invisible “living principle”, that interacts with visible matter. Plants have a vegetative soul, capaciting plants to subsist, grow, and reproduce, i.e., “vegetative” faculties. Animals souls have this vegetative capacity, but their souls are also endowed with ability to move matter, (i.e. an “animative faculty”), and the ability to sense their surroundings, (i.e., “sensitive faculties or appetite”). I believe St. Thomas taught that upon death, the souls of plants and animals ceased to exist.

Adam and Eve were special-- not only did their souls have both vegetative and animative faculties, integrated with sensitive appetites, but their souls were also endowed with the crowning faculties of Intellect and Will-- which in the state of Original Justice, were perfectly integrated and goverened the lower faculties of the soul (vegetative, animative, sensitive). According to GOD’s good pleasure, the souls of Adam and Eve are IMMORTAL, just as ours are. However, after Original Sin, the higher faculties of Adam and Eve souls (i.e., intellect and will) no longer perfectly govern the lower faculites, particularly the vegetative (bodily death is now possible) and sensitive (concupiscence reigns in the flesh of man) faculties. After Original sin, the higher faculties also suffer loss, i.e., the INTELLECT is dimmed, and the WILL is weakened.

Only by GOD’s grace is our communion with GOD restored (sanctifying grace), and GOD capacitates us to reign in concupiscence, to know, love, and serve Him-- but with difficulty (a consequence of the fall). It will only be in heaven (and Christ’s 2nd coming) when our souls will be perfectly united with GOD, and thus capacitated to perfectly integrate all of our faculties, in union with a glorified body.

I wanted to interject some of St. Thomas’s ideas regarding what a soul or animating principle is. Thus, I did not address the question above. I believe some previous responses have addressed this question reasonably well (i.e., relatively early time in human civilization, compared to the number of people today that exist today, and needed development of culture/infrastructure to spread the good news to the ends of the earth). I am always in awe of GOD’s ways. HE very much likes to start out small. Then, with much time (with respect to our finite lives), HIS love, and willing helpers, HE cultivates that which HE has created. HIS creation grows immensely large in the space of time, until Christ’s 2nd coming.

 

[Gorgias]

Inego de Loyola
I. The image and likeness of God refers to our spiritual souls and not to our physical body.

What, in our bodies, is ‘like’ God? What, in our physical selves images a totally spiritual God?

 

[JamesCaruso]

What, in our bodies, is ‘like’ God? What, in our physical selves images a totally spiritual God?

Our likeness to Jesus Christ for starters. Please don’t cut Him in half.

I receive His physical Body and Blood in the Eucharist, why not just His spiritual Body and Blood?

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

What makes you translate the Bible (Gen 1,27) in this very private way?

I. God is pure spirit.
II. Man is is at once spirit and matter.
III. God the son has assumed humanity to himself in Jesus.
IV. So we can see that as Jesus took humanity to himself rather than already having that form we cannot say that his humanity is how we are in Gods image, for however we were created is how Jesus’ humanity would have been assumed.
V. Having ruled out the one physical nature that could be said to be part of God we can reasonably conclude that we are in his image in our spiritual soul.

 

[JamesCaruso]

This was interesting from the Catholic Catechism:

41 All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures" perfections as our starting point, “for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator”.15

42 God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God–“the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable”–with our human representations.16 Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God.

43 Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that “between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude”;17 and that "concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him."18

 

[JamesCaruso]

And this from Summa Theologica:

The Apostle says (Ephesians 4:23-24): “Be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man.” Whence we are given to understand that our renewal which consists in putting on the new man, belongs to the mind. Now, he says (Colossians 3:10): “Putting on the new” man; “him who is renewed unto knowledge” of God, “according to the image of Him that created him,” where the renewal which consists in putting on the new man is ascribed to the image of God. Therefore to be to the image of God belongs to the mind only. [Emphasis added.]

And further:

Man is called to the image of God; not that he is essentially an image; but that the image of God is impressed on his mind; as a coin is an image of the king, as having the image of the king. Wherefore there is no need to consider the image of God as existing in every part of man.

 

[JamesCaruso]

It had always been taught to me that man was made in the image and likeness of God, but that he lost the likeness of God by sin.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

It had always been taught to me that man was made in the image and likeness of God, but that he lost the likeness of God by sin.

I hadn’t heard that.

 

[D_Martin]

yes, the human biological species has been around for 100,000 years or so. But these humans, until God put an imortal soul into two of them, were just really intelligent animals. They were not spiritually human until Adam and Eve.

Where did you get that at? I never read that in the Bible. You do know that if you are Christian that you are supposed to believe what the Bible says don’t you?

 

[D_Martin]

Hey,

This question bothers me a lot: We know now that the human race is between 100’000-200’000 years old. Why did it take SOOOO LONG for God to show up and finally speak with Adam and Eve or Abraham? Why did he just watch for 10’000s of years how humans kill each other without knowing Him? And why doesn’t the bible explain all that?

Which god are you talking about? If you are talking about the God of Israel, then you are mistaken, He showed up before there was light or any form in His creation.