The Catholic Perspective

by sabastious 139 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • sabastious
    sabastious

    In another thread, BTS quoted this Catholic doctrinal paraphrasing of Adam and Eve:

    http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt1art1p7.shtml#390

    God created man in his image and established him in his friendship.

    ^ I don't believe you can be a subject of another entity while at the same time being in "friendship." To me, friendship is an equality whereas Adam's relationship with God was not equal so I would not call them "in friendship".

    A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God.

    ^ Free submission? That is a very loaded term. So God creates me with free will since I can "freely" choose to be in submission to him or choose independence. Then he withholds friendship, and all benefits that come with that, for not choosing to live in submission.

    The prohibition against eating "of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" spells this out: "for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die." The "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.

    ^ Why must we "recognize" that we are dependent on God? We either are free to do as we wish or we are not. This reminds me of a father telling his son to respect him because of the position and not his actions. I would never expect my son to respect me if my actions didn't merrit respect. But that is what you say God expects. According to your "perfect scanario" we would have just accpeted the fact that we have limits. That we will only progress as a species when God allows for it, which of course defeats the purpose of progress when it intravenously injected into us by our Creator.

    Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God's command. This is what man's first sin consisted of.278 All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.

    ^ Trust is not the issue here, that's a strawman. The issue is whether or not we really have free will or not. The Devil didn't tempt Adam and Eve, the Devil brought up the real issue. He knew we would struggle living in "God's Terrarium": The Garden of Eden and eventually Earth. He knew God put it in us to want freedom and autonomy. The Bible's Devil is not mindless evil, he is a theme througout the Bible as "the other side of the coin."

    You, and many other people in Organized Religion, have bought into the Bible's message: that we cannot direct our own step. Your reasoning for this is that we make mistakes, that we are flawed therefore all plans we make will ultimately fail. The "Devil's" message is the exact opposite: we can direct our own step. When it comes to "who ended up being correct" history would lean towards the Devil's position... because we are still here and progressing as a species.

    But here comes the Religionists. Telling us that we are all "sinners" worthy of death. It's a f*cking scam.

    In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully "divinized" by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to "be like God," but "without God, before God, and not in accordance with God."

    ^ Oh poor God, he got rejected by his own creations! The nerve of those humans to exercise the free will imparted upon them when created. And God got pretty mad according to the Genesis account:

    • He expelled humans from his "holiness" which included having a lifespan that ended in torrment (old age) and of course, death
    • He cursed the Earth
    • He cursed all serpents
    • He specifically targetted females with a curse to make childbearing much more painful
    • He targetted females again while allowing males to dominate them
    • He required specifically the death of animals to be sacrificed to him to satiate his special needs

    All for what? Because man preferred himself? Of course we prefer ourselves. The better we are as individuals the better we are as a collective.

    Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness. They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image—that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.

    So now it's our fault, we are being "disobedient" now I see. I find it interesting how God created the human "parent/child" relationship. We have a child and that child is dependent on us for a time. But eventually our child becomes an adult... and equal. We put people behind bars for raising a child to be a subject, or slave. We have created a code of conduct and call them Human Rights, because many people on this planet wish to enchroach upon those rights for self interest.

    But that's not how God works, according to the Genesis account. We are designed to be perpetual children, which is the polar opposite of how EVERYTHING works in the fleshly universe.

    Can you stand there and tell me that God created everything to have a child phase except the relationship he has with his greatest creations? What a mind f*ck! Here we are surrounded by things growing into eventual autonomous entities including our own children.

    But we don't get the satisfaction of knowing that WE found a way to keep ourselves alive with food and shelter. That WE developed technology to better ourselves, that WE created systems of Law and Government to try to keep peace?

    Do we deserve no credit? Does God deserve all the credit?

    No he does not. He deserves a LOT of credit for designing us, but HE WANTS US TO HAVE THE CREDIT for what WE create! That's what He enjoys, just as you or I love seeing our children succeed and create something from nothing.

    Original Sin is a scam, a means to control. Humans are doing the best they can with the tools allotted and Original Sin discredits all accomplishment in the past 6000 years because we are all being "disobedient" and "only concerned with ourselves."

    Well, who else is going to make an attempt to save this planet? Should we all be like Witnesses and lie down into the fetal position and wait for Papa God to come save us all?

    -Sab

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    The point is one of reconcilation between God and his children.

    Children rebel against their parents all the time, but that animosity is not healthy or well adjusted, they are far better off and happy being reconciled with their parents.

    Even more so our relationship with God.

    It's not about putting the reponsibility for our planet on God, that is OUR job no matter what, it's not about not taking creddit for what we DO and can do that is good, God gave us the ability to think and evolve for a reason and that reason is to use those abilities for our betterment and the worlds.

    We have don great things and done horrific things, both in his name and against his name but the one thing that has remained is his Love for us.

    We have the choice to reconcile with God or to not, notice that he doesn't force anyone and we should all follow that example.

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    The point is one of reconcilation between God and his children.

    What? For two parties to reconcile they have to have a fued to start with.

    What is the fued? That God demands strict obedience and we don't want to be obedient? What a blantently human concept. I think whatever entity that created humor would find it in this very concept.

    When did I choose to rebel against God? Why do I have to "bury the hatchet" with God? Why do my sins require forgiveness since I have no other choice but to sin because of genetics? The flaws in this explanation of events are too many for me to accept it in any form.

    -Sab

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    It's not about putting the reponsibility for our planet on God, that is OUR job no matter what, it's not about not taking creddit for what we DO and can do that is good, God gave us the ability to think and evolve for a reason and that reason is to use those abilities for our betterment and the worlds.

    It is about the credit, because God is supposedly making it an issue (according to Holy Handbook).

    The story of Adam and Eve, according to fundamentalist Christianity, is "proof" that we need help. That all of this that we have done since then is in vain. We should still be back in that "Terrarium" so many years later, under the cover of God's eternal protection, if we just didn't f*ck up.

    -Sab

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    We have don great things and done horrific things, both in his name and against his name but the one thing that has remained is his Love for us.

    I'd like to point out that everything we have done has been in His name because we are his creations. Everything we do is a reflection of the designer. Pain is not his fault, but it is a reflection on him as the Creator.

    -Sab

  • sabastious
    sabastious
    We have the choice to reconcile with God or to not, notice that he doesn't force anyone and we should all follow that example.

    Doesn't force us? That's a whole discussion in itself. I would argue it's highly compulsory.

    -Sab

  • dgp
    dgp

    Sabastious, as a former Catholic I agree with you. I just would point out that all Christian use essentially the same Bible and worship essentially the very same devil of a god. It doesn't make sense, no matter what particular flavor you choose.

  • DJPoetech
    DJPoetech

    ^ I don't believe you can be a subject of another entity while at the same time being in "friendship." To me, friendship is an equality whereas Adam's relationship with God was not equal so I would not call them "in friendship".

    I kinda halfway agree. I agree its not a friendship. It was supposed to be like a father to children relationship.

    So God creates me with free will since I can "freely" choose to be in submission to him or choose independence. Then he withholds friendship, and all benefits that come with that, for not choosing to live in submission.

    This shows 1) a misunderstanding of freewill and 2) assumption you know all the in's and out's of the costs of a decision utilizing free will.

    1. Assuming we were "given" freewill, we were given enough of it to deny even the very fact that we "received" it. This is something many of us "choose" to excersise.

    2. Our human perspective leaves us sadly lacking in dealing with a possible spirit realm and the benefits/detriments there in. Some choose to believe that those benefits never existed. Some await it in some possible future state. If we assume we know everything then you close the door on the possibility of learning anything more than you can measure or count.

    Your feelings are valid but I have to "pump the brakes" when it seems as we are going down the same tired road of "self-realization". because we are still here and progressing as a species

    You show your hand in that statement. The question would be "Are" we progressing and in what sense. There are many things showing that we are not, but that is another thread. We are either at the greatest point of human history or we are setting ourselves up for the biggest fail ever known to man.

    Of course we prefer ourselves. The better we are as individuals the better we are as a collective.

    I solidly disagree with that statement. There is no guarantee to that. Human history shows that if an individual is "better", he is just better than some other lesser individuals. History also shows that as a collective, we have far more tradgedies than benefits. Where humans are concerned the math is a little different. 1 +1 doesn't always equal 2. Sometimes it equals 1.2.

    Humans are doing the best they can with the tools allotted and Original Sin discredits all accomplishment in the past 6000 years because we are all being "disobedient" and "only concerned with ourselves."

    ^ This, by far, is the most interesting statement of your whole post. On the one hand, we are doing the best we can with the tools allotted giving the sense we could be doing better with better tools. While at the same time considering the past 6000 years as amazing accomplishments not worthy of discrediting. All of which plays into the quoted "only concerned with ourselves". Which most of your post indicates that you would rather be concerned with yourself and your accomplishments... f*ck sin.

    ^The whole story of original sin is something that many humans attempt to verify or discredit and will for centuries after you and I have passed on. It hasnt been solved by us for thousands of years and won't for thousands more if left totally to us.

    For those that believe God has a plan, that little issue will be solved. For those that are believing otherwise, well the saga continues.

    I guess the point to your post was to indicate that Original Sin and the Adam and Eve story is B.S. ... thanks for the nicely worded opinion!

    I am not Catholic or in organized religion. I am a former Witness.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    When a religion, any religion, put out their doctrine they are saying this:

    This is how WE view things, this is how we interpret them, if you liek what you hear and agree, come to Us.

    That is all it means.

    Of course there are many denominations of religions, why wouldn't there be?

    Freedom of expression and freedom of interpretation leads to differen doctrines.

    Don't agree with the CLavinistic view of original sin? fine, don't follow it.

    Don't agree with the RCC version of it, fine, don't follow it too.

    You actually don't have to follow ANY oranised religion at all.

  • DJPoetech
    DJPoetech

    PSac,

    I wish the act of choosing a different doctrine or no doctrine at all was met with such acceptance.

    When you have tradition intermingling with doctrine, its a coctail for authoritarian control.

    Leaving a set of beliefs and traditions could be similar to coming out of the closet for certain individuals.

    Seems easy to say but the cost to "do" is weighty and heavy.

    The reason I think more independantly thinking individuals find evangelicals so icky, is because of this very aspect of their approach. Almost this "resistance is futile" sort of attitude. Total lack of freewill although saying its all about freewill. Its hypocritical.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit