The creation of dogma - Original sin

[LittleLes]

The fourth century was a productive time for the development of various Catholic dogmas. This may be related to Christianity having become the state religion around this time.

The Perpetual Vrginity of Mary, the Trinity, and Original Sin were three of the biggest.

Perhaps we can examine the evolution of the teaching on Original Sin. This was primarily, but not entirely, developed by St. Augustine (354-430 A.D.)

Of course, since the creation account in Genesis is not considered to be literal history by an increaing number of people, the Original Sin teaching has had to undergo some modification.

LittleLes

[Thy Geekdom Come]

How else do you explain the reason you don't wanna get up in the morning?

We all know it's true. No use trying to convince ourselves that there is no original sin. Common sense should be the default.

[Era Might]

[quote]Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

--Psalm 51:5[/quote]

[quote]In woman was sin's beginning, and because of her we all die.

--Sirach 25:23[/quote]

[Theoketos]

While the science behind the creation account might not be part of the literary scheme of Genisis, the fact that Adam and Eve sinned for the first time is literally true. You can find that interpritation in every authentic Father. I doubt that very many doubt that humans sin. Coincidently, (speaking mainly to Pelagius and Nestorius) they doubted the meaning of original sin, and thus misuderstood God and Man's relationship.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Theoketos' date='Sep 7 2005, 02:53 PM']While the science behind the creation account might not be part of the literary scheme of Genisis, the fact that Adam and Eve sinned for the first time is literally true. You can find that interpritation in every authentic Father. I doubt that very many doubt that humans sin. Coincidently, (speaking mainly to Pelagius and Nestorius) they doubted the meaning of original sin, and thus misuderstood God and Man's relationship.
[right][snapback]714578[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

Were the "authentic" Fathers witnesses to the event?

Or did they merely all interpret a fictional account in a similar manner?

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Sep 7 2005, 02:43 PM']How else do you explain the reason you don't wanna get up in the morning?

We all know it's true.  No use trying to convince ourselves that there is no original sin.  Common sense should be the default.
[right][snapback]714562[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

(1) Sound like a low cortisol level problem.

(2) I don't. So you are now starting with "all" minus 1.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 7 2005, 04:40 PM']RESPONSE:

(1) Sound like a low cortisol level problem.

(2) I don't. So you are now starting with "all" minus 1.
[right][snapback]714614[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

1.

2. While you may argue that you don't know it, it is written into your perception of the world. There really is no way around that. However, I will leave the formal debate to the masters.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Sep 7 2005, 03:55 PM']1.

2.  While you may argue that you don't know it, it is written into your perception of the world.  There really is no way around that.  However, I will leave the formal debate to the masters.
[right][snapback]714631[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE.

How do you know what my perception of the world is?

Oh I get it. It's one of those: "Everybody knows.....," "It's a proven fact".. "I can't help but believe..." things. :

On the other hand, some prefer evidence and analysis of the facts. It's the old fashioned way!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 7 2005, 05:12 PM']RESPONSE.

How do you know what my perception of the world is?

Oh I get it. It's one of those: "Everybody knows.....," "It's a proven fact".. "I can't help but believe..." things. :

On the other hand, some prefer evidence and analysis of the facts. It's the old fashioned way! 
[right][snapback]714652[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Well, actually, since we had infused knowledge before the fall, common sense really is the old-fashioned way.

However, I simply prefer to yield to common sense when I see no point in debating.

Finally, it's obvious that an individual's perception of the world needn't be the reality of the world. Your perception of the world has little to do with the truth that is stamped on your soul.

[Theoketos]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 7 2005, 03:38 PM']RESPONSE:

Were the "authentic" Fathers witnesses to the event?

Or did they merely all interpret a fictional account in a similar manner?
[right][snapback]714612[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

You have said that they were not (at least implicitly with ).

How do you know it was fictional? All that is literary is not fictional. Further to have faith in Christ means to believe in the theology of the begining which he refers to many times. (Part of this assent would be to the theological fact of original sin and God actually being creator of the heavens and earth instead of the heavens and earth being fellow gods).

Though I can see you being possiably an Atheist, at which point it does not matter whether the Bible is accurate to any degree. Also if it is accurate to any degree than I would say the story of the first sin is accurate.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 7 2005, 05:12 PM']On the other hand, some prefer evidence and analysis of the facts. It's the old fashioned way!
[right][snapback]714652[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

If that isn't irony, I don't know what is.

[Paladin D]

[quote name='Theoketos' date='Sep 7 2005, 05:24 PM']Though I can see you being possiably an Atheist, at which point it does not matter whether the Bible is accurate to any degree. Also if it is accurate to any degree than I would say the story of the first sin is accurate.
[right][snapback]714665[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

You're wrong, by his definition (and wild imagination), he's a Catholic. But he can't claim that, because Catholic vs Catholic debate is a major "no no" on Phatmass.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Sep 7 2005, 04:24 PM']Well, actually, since we had infused knowledge before the fall, common sense really is the old-fashioned way.

However, I simply prefer to yield to common sense when I see no point in debating.

Finally, it's obvious that an individual's perception of the world needn't be the reality of the world.  Your perception of the world has little to do with the truth that is stamped on your soul.
[right][snapback]714663[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

(1) Whoa! Aren't you just assuming that there was "infused knowledge" before a "fall? If we evolved, we developed up from the bottom, not down from the top.

(2) Common sense really isn't that common after all. It's usually the reasen given by people wanting to believe what they really want to believe in spite of any evidence.

(3) What "truth" is "stamped" on my soul? Evidence please.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Theoketos' date='Sep 7 2005, 04:24 PM']You have said that they were not (at least implicitly with ).

How do you know it was fictional? All that is literary is not fictional. Further to have faith in Christ means to believe in the theology of the begining which he refers to many times. (Part of this assent would be to the theological fact of original sin and  God actually being creator of the heavens and earth instead of the heavens and earth being fellow gods).

Though I can see you being possiably an Atheist, at which point it does not matter whether the Bible is accurate to any degree. Also if it is accurate to any degree than I would say the story of the first sin is accurate.
[right][snapback]714665[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

(1) No. the writers of the Gospels make references (sometimes erroneously) to the Old Testament .They sometimes attribute these to Jesus. And Jesus might well refer to the legends of his day, such as Jonah being swallowed by a whale. But none of this confirms the historicity of the Creation story.

And doesn't Christ (and Paul) refer to end times being imminent? But we're still here!

(2) No I'm not an atheist. Nor am I very gullible!

The story of the first sin is just that, a story.

[DeeDee]

Yikes, that's some scary stuff!

Well, if ya wanta be literal. . . Adam could have said "No!"


[quote name='Era Might' date='Sep 7 2005, 12:52 PM']
[right][snapback]714577[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[DeeDee]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Sep 7 2005, 12:52 PM']
[right][snapback]714577[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Hey, how come those scary quotes didn't appear????? About the bad woman? bad girl bad girl

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 7 2005, 06:45 PM']RESPONSE:

(1) Whoa!  Aren't you just assuming that there was "infused knowledge" before a "fall? If we evolved, we developed up from the bottom, not down from the top. 

(2) Common sense really isn't that common after all. It's usually the reasen given by people wanting to believe what they really want to believe in spite of any evidence.

(3) What "truth" is "stamped" on my soul? Evidence please.
[right][snapback]714726[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

This is worth a response, as I'm not seriously debating with you, but for the heck of it...

1. I don't believe in evolution. That's right, another Catholic creationist! Oh, whatever shall we do?!

2. No, that's subjectivism, which in fact is a violation of common sense. Rather, common sense is that which immediately strikes us as obvious, which is afterward informed and tested, rather than that which we devise in our own minds until it "makes sense to us."

3. I won't pretend to be able to read hearts, but I'll appeal to contemplative theology on this one. We all have the truth in this matter written on our very being. We need only to search our hearts.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='DeeDee' date='Sep 7 2005, 06:59 PM']Hey, how come those scary quotes didn't appear?????  About the bad woman? bad girl bad girl
[right][snapback]714742[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

DeeDee, the first quote I suspect you're misreading. All it says is that we are conceived with sin on us. That is a well-established and central dogma of Christianity and it's apostasy to deny it.

As for the second, it is true, but put it in context. It's talking about the evil of evil women. One could also say in a verse about the evil of evil men that men began with Adam. In fact, the Church has always referred to Christ as the New Adam precisely because He rejected sin and Mary as the New Eve because she also did. So we see a cooperation between Adam and Eve in the first sin...and a cooperation between Jesus and Mary in restoring mankind.

In fact, as Christopher West says, "Adam sinned first by letting the snake in the Garden"...because man's job is to protect and serve woman as the head of the relationship (and never to lord it over, but only to serve and love), and Adam failed in allowing Eve to be tempted.

[Winchester]

You lost me with the condescending beginning.

You don't debate, Les, you insult and make points based on your assumptions. That's baiting, not debating.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Sep 7 2005, 08:54 PM']
No, that's subjectivism, which in fact is a violation of common sense.  Rather, common sense is that which immediately strikes us as obvious, which is afterward informed and tested, rather than that which we devise in our own minds until it "makes sense to us."


[/quote]

RESPONSE:

Like the obvious common sense fact provable by the senses that the sun revolves around the earth?