What If...

[Vincent Vega]

Hi everyone,
I've been around for about two weeks or more now, I guess. But, I've stayed kinda quiet until this point. However, I've got something (that I think) is worthwhile to ask now.
I was reading last week, and this thought popped into my head:
[i]If there was no original sin, would Christ still have come to Earth?[/i]
If Eve had not gave in to temptation and eaten the apple, would the human race be 'perfect'? Would there have been the great flood? Would Christ have still needed to come to earth and redeem mankind?
Just some things to ponder and discuss.
In Christ,
Mitch

[Resurrexi]

Nope. The Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ would not have occurred had man not fallen.

[Vincent Vega]

So, this brings me to ask this (this may be basic stuff, I don't know. If it is, sorry, I'm new to all of this):
Has the trinity always been? Or prior to Christ's coming, was it only the Father and the Holy Spirit?

[Resurrexi]

The three Persons of the Blessed Trinity are co-equal and co-eternal.

BTW, If you want a great source for the doctrine of the Trinity, read the Athanasian Creed (Denzinger Nos. 39-40).

[quote name='D 39-40']THE CREED "QUICUMQUE"

[Which is called "Athanasian"] *

39 Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity. -But the Catholic faith is this, that we venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance; for there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, (and) another of the Holy Spirit; but the divine nature of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one, their glory is equal, their majesty is coeternal. Of such a nature as the Father is, so is the Son, so (also) is the Holy Spirit; the Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, (and) the Holy Spirit is uncreated; the Father is immense, the Son is immense, (and) the Holy Spirit is immense; the Father is eternal, the Son is eternal, (and) the Holy Spirit is eternal: and nevertheless there are not three eternals, but one eternal; just as there are not three uncreated beings, nor three infinite beings, but one uncreated, and one infinite; similarly the Father is omnipotent, the Son is omnipotent, (and) the Holy Spirit is omnipotent: and yet there are not three omnipotents, but one omnipotent; thus the Father is God, the Son is God, (and) the Holy Spirit is God; and nevertheless there are not three gods, but there is one God; so the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, (and) the Holy Spirit is Lord: and yet there are not three lords, but there is one Lord; because just as we are compelled by Christian truth to confess singly each one person as God and [and also] Lord, so we are forbidden by the Catholic religion to say there are three gods or lords. The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding. There is therefore one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits; and in this Trinity there is nothing first or later, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal with one another, so that in every respect, as has already been said above, both unity in Trinity, and Trinity in unity must be venerated. Therefore let him who wishes to be saved, think thus concerning the Trinity.

40 But it is necessary for eternal salvation that he faithfully believe also the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Accordingly it is the right faith, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God is God and man. He is God begotten of the substance of the Father before time, and he is man born of the substance of his mother in time: perfect God, perfect man, consisting of a rational soul and a human body, equal to the Father according to his Godhead, less than the Father according to humanity. Although he is God and man, yet he is not two, but he is one Christ; one, however, not by the conversion of the Divinity into a human body, but by the assumption of humanity in the Godhead; one absolutely not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For just as the rational soul and body are one man, so God and man are one Christ. He suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, on the third day arose again from the dead, ascended to heaven, sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty; thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead; .at his coming all men have to arise again with their bodies and will render an account of their own deeds: and those who have done good, will go into life everlasting, but those who have done evil, into eternal fire.-This is the Catholic faith; unless every one believes this faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.[/quote]

Edited August 7, 2007 by StThomasMore

[Sojourner]

Yes the Trinity has always been.

We get that from reading the opening verses of Genesis in concert with the opening verses of the Gospel of John. We have the Father who creates, the Spirit of God who moves, and the Word who is Spoken.

There are actually some strains of teaching that suggest the Incarnation could have been intended regardless of sin, that this was the plan of God all along. We've discussed that here before ... I think it was in a post about incarnation in open mic. I'll see if I can find it.

[Brigid]

I always thought that if Eve hadn't done it, someone along the line would have. I remember realizing this at a pretty young age, though, (like first or second grade) so I'm not sure how right or wrong it is. it just seems like we wouldn't be able to resist temptation very long.

actually, I remember thinking that George Washington would have eaten the fruit, since he gave in to cutting down the cherry tree. no idea why I connected those two things - maybe because they're both trees? like I said, I was pretty young.

[Vincent Vega]

So, STM, is it to say then, that although the Trinity has always been, it's just that Jesus wouldn't have incarnated?
Terra Firma,
In the case that this was God's will all along, is that to suggest that Christ wouldn't have been given up on the cross, had man not fallen?
Brigid,
I've thought about this too. Even if Eve hadn't listened to the snake, I wonder if someone else wouldn't have just been naive enough to eat, just basically delaying the inevitable. If it lasted that long, I probably would have been the one to ruin it for all of us

Edited August 7, 2007 by USAirwaysIHS

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Brigid' post='1351842' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:23 AM']I always thought that if Eve hadn't done it, someone along the line would have. I remember realizing this at a pretty young age, though, (like first or second grade) so I'm not sure how right or wrong it is. it just seems like we wouldn't be able to resist temptation very long.[/quote]

BTW, Brigid, if I recall in the Baltimore Catechism, if our First Parents would have obeyed, then their original innocence which they had would have been transmitted to us from which I inferred that none of their descendants would have lost

Edited August 7, 2007 by StThomasMore

[Sojourner]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1351844' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:27 AM']So, STM, is it to say then, that although the Trinity has always been, it's just that Jesus wouldn't have incarnated?
Terra Firma,
In the case that this was God's will all along, is that to suggest that Christ wouldn't have been given up on the cross, had man not fallen?[/quote]
If I remember right that is the case.

The lame-o search is returning way too many threads and I am too tired to search through them. Raphael is really the guy who knows this stuff, or Laudate Dominum. Maybe they'll chime in and correct me later.

But the idea is that the fault of Adam was not a necessary corollary to the Incarnation; that God's plan all along was union with man, and that this was to occur by means of the Incarnation regardless. Sin made the suffering and death necessary, but not the Incarnation. If I remember right. Others can correct me.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1351847' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:30 AM']BTW, Brigid, if I recall in the Baltimore Catechism, if our First Parents would have obeyed, then their original innocence which they had would have been transmitted to us from which I inferred that none of their descendants would have lost [/quote]
So, you contest that basically, the original innocence, as you put it, would've been handed down similiarly to how the original sin did, in reality...that's an interesting thought. In this case, would be not have strife, violence, or suffering? Would be all inhabit Eden?

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1351850' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:32 AM']But the idea is that the fault of Adam was not a necessary corollary to the Incarnation; that God's plan all along was union with man, and that this was to occur by means of the Incarnation regardless. Sin made the suffering and death necessary, but not the Incarnation. If I remember right. Others can correct me.[/quote]
Great, thanks!

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1351844' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:27 AM']So, STM, is it to say then, that although the Trinity has always been, it's just that Jesus wouldn't have incarnated?[/quote]

I'm not sure what you mean. The Son was and is the only Person of the Trinity who was or ever will be incarnated. The Incarnation would not have been necessary had the Fall not occurred

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1351851' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:33 AM']So, you contest that basically, the original innocence, as you put it, would've been handed down similiarly to how the original sin did, in reality...that's an interesting thought. In this case, would be not have strife, violence, or suffering? Would be all inhabit Eden?[/quote]

Yes.

[Resurrexi]

BTW, if you'd really like to understand all this better, I'd recommend Baltimore Catechism No. 3 which can be purchased here: [url="http://www.tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/71/keywords/Baltimore+Catechism+/"]http://www.tanbooks.com/index.php/page/sho...ore+Catechism+/[/url]

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1351857' date='Aug 7 2007, 12:39 AM']BTW, if you'd really like to understand all this better, I'd recommend Baltimore Catechism No. 3 which can be purchased here: [url="http://www.tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/71/keywords/Baltimore+Catechism+/"]http://www.tanbooks.com/index.php/page/sho...ore+Catechism+/[/url][/quote]
Although attractive, I don't have a credit card, and I know my mom would [i]definitely[/i] not order that on my behalf.
Thanks, though, and I'll keep it in mind.

[kateri05]

[quote]The Incarnation would not have been necessary had the Fall not occurred[/quote]

incorrect!! God did not become man because of sin, God had to die on the cross because of sin.

the Incarnation was always part of the deal, because the Divine Plan always intended that we should become one with God through Christ. some say this is what Satan objected to, that men "should be like God," and "higher than the angels." the only way to be higher than angels, would be through Christ, as His Body.

in otherwords, we were always intended to be even better than we started out.

Edited August 7, 2007 by kateri05

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='kateri05' post='1351871' date='Aug 7 2007, 01:10 AM']incorrect!! God did not become man because of sin, God had to die on the cross because of sin.

the Incarnation was always part of the deal, because the Divine Plan always intended that we should become one with God through Christ. some say this is what Satan objected to, that men "should be like God," and "higher than the angels." the only way to be higher than angels, would be through Christ, as His Body.

in otherwords, we were always intended to be even better than we started out. [/quote]

Well, here's what St. Aquinas has to say:

[quote name='Summa Theologica' date=' Tertia Pars, Q. 1, Art. 3']Article 3. Whether, if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate?

Objection 1. It would seem that if man had not sinned, God would still have become incarnate. For the cause remaining, the effect also remains. But as Augustine says (De Trin. xiii, 17): "Many other things are to be considered in Incarnation of Christ besides absolution from sin"; and these were discussed above (2). Therefore if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate.

Objection 2. Further, it belongs to the omnipotence of the Divine power to perfect His works, and to manifest Himself by some infinite effect. But no mere creature can be called an infinite effect, since it is finite of its very essence. Now, seemingly, in the work of Incarnation alone is an infinite effect of the Divine power manifested in a special manner by which power things infinitely distant are united, inasmuch as it has been brought about that man is God. And in this work especially the universe would seem to be perfected, inasmuch as the last creature--viz. man--is united to the first principle--viz. God. Therefore, even if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate.

Objection 3. Further, human nature has not been made more capable of grace by sin. But after sin it is capable of the grace of union, which is the greatest grace. Therefore, if man had not sinned, human nature would have been capable of this grace; nor would God have withheld from human nature any good it was capable of. Therefore, if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate.

Objection 4. Further, God's predestination is eternal. But it is said of Christ (Romans 1:4): "Who was predestined the Son of God in power." Therefore, even before sin, it was necessary that the Son of God should become incarnate, in order to fulfil God's predestination.

Objection 5. Further, the mystery of Incarnation was revealed to the first man, as is plain from Gn. 2:23. "This now is bone of my bones," etc. which the Apostle says is "a great sacrament . . . in Christ and in the Church," as is plain from Eph. 5:32. But man could not be fore-conscious of his fall, for the same reason that the angels could not, as Augustine proves (Gen. ad lit. xi, 18). Therefore, even if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate.

On the contrary, Augustine says (De Verb. Apost. viii, 2), expounding what is set down in Lk. 19:10, "For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost"; "Therefore, if man had not sinned, the Son of Man would not have come." And on 1 Tim. 1:15, "Christ Jesus came into this world to save sinners," a gloss says, "There was no cause of Christ's coming into the world, except to save sinners. Take away diseases, take away wounds, and there is no need of medicine."

I answer that, There are different opinions about this question. For some say that even if man had not sinned, the Son of Man would have become incarnate. Others assert the contrary, and seemingly our assent ought rather to be given to this opinion.

For such things as spring from God's will, and beyond the creature's due, can be made known to us only through being revealed in the Sacred Scripture, in which the Divine Will is made known to us. Hence, since everywhere in the Sacred Scripture the sin of the first man is assigned as the reason of Incarnation, it is more in accordance with this to say that the work of Incarnation was ordained by God as a remedy for sin; so that, had sin not existed, Incarnation would not have been. And yet the power of God is not limited to this; even had sin not existed, God could have become incarnate.

Reply to Objection 1. All the other causes which are assigned in the preceding article have to do with a remedy for sin. For if man had not sinned, he would have been endowed with the light of Divine wisdom, and would have been perfected by God with the righteousness of justice in order to know and carry out everything needful. But because man, on deserting God, had stooped to corporeal things, it was necessary that God should take flesh, and by corporeal things should afford him the remedy of salvation. Hence, on John 1:14, "And the Word was made flesh," St. Augustine says (Tract. ii): "Flesh had blinded thee, flesh heals thee; for Christ came and overthrew the vices of the flesh."

Reply to Objection 2. The infinity of Divine power is shown in the mode of production of things from nothing. Again, it suffices for the perfection of the universe that the creature be ordained in a natural manner to God as to an end. But that a creature should be united to God in person exceeds the limits of the perfection of nature.

Reply to Objection 3. A double capability may be remarked in human nature: one, in respect of the order of natural power, and this is always fulfilled by God, Who apportions to each according to its natural capability; the other in respect to the order of the Divine power, which all creatures implicitly obey; and the capability we speak of pertains to this. But God does not fulfil all such capabilities, otherwise God could do only what He has done in creatures, and this is false, as stated above (I, 105, 6). But there is no reason why human nature should not have been raised to something greater after sin. For God allows evils to happen in order to bring a greater good therefrom; hence it is written (Romans 5:20): "Where sin abounded, grace did more abound." Hence, too, in the blessing of the Paschal candle, we say: "O happy fault, that merited such and so great a Redeemer!"

Reply to Objection 4. Predestination presupposes the foreknowledge of future things; and hence, as God predestines the salvation of anyone to be brought about by the prayers of others, so also He predestined the work of Incarnation to be the remedy of human sin.

Reply to Objection 5. Nothing prevents an effect from being revealed to one to whom the cause is not revealed. Hence, the mystery of Incarnation could be revealed to the first man without his being fore-conscious of his fall. For not everyone who knows the effect knows the cause.[/quote]

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1351838' date='Aug 7 2007, 02:19 AM']So, this brings me to ask this (this may be basic stuff, I don't know. If it is, sorry, I'm new to all of this):
Has the trinity always been? Or prior to Christ's coming, was it only the Father and the Holy Spirit?[/quote]

No need to apologize my friend, you're new to this, still learning, still in the conversion process. Ask whatever you need to in order to make Church teaching clear, even if you're afraid it might be a dumb question.

God Bless!

[scardella]

All I know is that we'd all be naked.

[Socrates]

This issue has been debated since at least the Middle Ages. (I believe there was a "Dominican position" vs. a "Franciscan position.")
One side said the Incarnation would not have happened had Adam not fallen and man needed a Redeemer. The other said that Christ would have become incarnate anyway out of pure love.

This remains purely speculative theology, and the Church does not have an "official" dogmatic stance on this issue.