Satan's Standing before God before his fall was not the same as it is after. God banished Satan from his rank and threw him from his throne. This happened to Adam after the fall.
God created Adam to be king and ruler over His creation. Adam was the crown of God's material creation. Death meant that Adam would be stripped from his rank and from enjoying God's presence just as Satan did.
Yes Satan still stood before God after his fall as in Job's story, but as an accused giving an account of his doings. Evil men will still stand before God on Judgment day but as accused not as sons.
In this sense, Adam and Satan were both dead after their fall. The difference is that Adam had hope and Satan does not.
You're not saying anything that we don't already know. What you haven't done is address the question. As I said, the relationship between God and man is completely different than the relationship between God and Satan or God and angels (relationships we are not privy to). As such, my question still stands. How could Adam understand something that didn't yet exist (viz. death)?
As I explained before, death is being away from God' presence. This applies to both the angels and man.
Satan died before Adam's creation. So the concept of death did exist, and was not something new. Adam must have understood it and thus God's warning of death as a result of breaking the commmandment ("you shall surely die")
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140210#msg140210 date=1308977053] As I explained before, death is being away from God' presence. This applies to both the angels and man.
No.
A few facts:
The nature of man does not equal the nature of angels. The relationship between man and God does not equal the relationship between God and angels. The knowledge of man does not equal the knowledge of angels.
There is no debate that separation from God is a spiritual death. However, the question relates to Adam's understanding of death. Did he understand death? No he did not. Did he understand the relationship between God and angels? No he did not. Did he understand that separation from God would lead to death? No he did not. Did death, as it relates to man and God exists? No it did not. Thus, how could Adam know or understand death?
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140174#msg140174 date=1308923166] If Adam did not know what death was, how would God have forewarned him of something he had never heard of?
Well, this is my own speculation/understanding of it: Adam saw that there was death in things around him such as plants and animals...I know that some fathers (can't remember off the top of my head exactly who) write that in Paradise before the Fall, there was an eternal bloom, an eternal spring time lets say of all living things and that there was no physical death at all...I don't mind believing this except that I always come to think of the dinosaurs :) God created Adam the last of His creation, so therefore the dinosaurs had to be created before Adam...they could've existed during Adam's time, but logically, most probably they did not. Unless they were a form of subhuman human along the evolutionary process...at least this is what Francis S. Collins argues in his book The Language of God.
Basically (one of) his arguments is that along the evolutionary process, the sub-human race eventually became man...which is at the point when he was able to 'look up' and contemplate on God...or rather when God made this knoweldge available to us. Of course this viewpoint requires an almost completely allegorical understanding of Genesis. thoughts?
i think there were animals that existed at the time of adam that since became extinct. if u look in job 40 and 41, he describes 2 large dinosaur type creatures, and i wonder if the environment after the great flood was unfavourable for them, so many animals became extinct after this time. the story of job is a very very old one, from long before the time of abraham, so it's possible job knew of these ancient creatures and then later they became extinct. also the exact shape of the dinosaurs is only speculated by the scientists, they usually postulate the shape from the fossils of several bones, not from a complete skeleton. just my thoughts, don't take it too seriously!
There is no debate that separation from God is a spiritual death. However, the question relates to Adam's understanding of death. Did he understand death? No he did not. Did he understand the relationship between God and angels? No he did not. Did he understand that separation from God would lead to death? No he did not. Did death, as it relates to man and God exists? No it did not. Thus, how could Adam know or understand death?
The stipulation made in these series of questions and answers is that Adam did not understand that by disobeying he will be separated from God.
If this is true then why would God continue with the punishment "you will surely die" after the commendment of not eating from the tree.
I think if we study carefully the story of creation we will come to the conclusion that Adam must have understood what it meant to die.
"Did Adam understand that God is omnipotent?" I believe he did.
"Did Adam understand that it was God Who created the whole creation and that He brought it out of nonexistence?" Yes.
"Did Adam know that he was mortal?" I suppose he did.
"Did Adam know that he was created out of nothingness?" Certainly.
"Did Adam understand that as God brought him to life, He could also bring him to nonexistence" Without any shadow of doubt.
Even Eve understood what death is by her answer to the serpent: "You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die." Genesis 3:3. The fall was the result of man believing the serpent that he would not die and instead become like God.
We pray in the Gregorian liturgy: "You gave me the learning of Your knowledge" (before the fall). This means Adam committed his disobedience with full knowledge that he would suffer the consequences of his disobedience which was death. Again, the problem was he believed the serpent that God's judgment would not come to fruition but rather he would escape it.
To say that Adam did not understand what death was, is to give an excuse to Adam that he was not aware of what was going to happen to him and had he known, he would not have committed the sin. Furthermore, God would be unjust to punish Adam with something he had no knowledge of.
This line of reasoning is contrary to what we pray in the liturgy; especially the Gregorian one. It is also contrary to the story as mentioned in the Bible as we explained.
To emphasize, by definition being mortal means an end to the state of the current life. If Adam knew that he was mortal, then he knew that someday his life as is would come to an end. Unfortunately, it did when he disobeyed and bore his punishment.
The fathers say that Adam desired to be like God, believing the serpent. In other words he wanted to become immortal like God. Thus he knew very well what it means to be mortal and what it means to die. The exposition that the Church reads on Monday of the Pascha week, during the 6th hour, explains this point very clearly.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140271#msg140271 date=1309126149] If this is true then why would God continue with the punishment "you will surely die" after the commendment of not eating from the tree.
God continued the punishment because He can't exactly go back on His word, now can He. He said it would happen. It happened.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140271#msg140271 date=1309126149] I think if we study carefully the story of creation we will come to the conclusion that Adam must have understood what it meant to die.
"Did Adam understand that God is omnipotent?" I believe he did.
"Did Adam understand that it was God Who created the whole creation and that He brought it out of nonexistence?" Yes.
"Did Adam know that he was mortal?" I suppose he did.
"Did Adam know that he was created out of nothingness?" Certainly.
"Did Adam understand that as God brought him to life, He could also bring him to nonexistence" Without any shadow of doubt.
Not sure what this has to do with anything. We are discussing whether Adam understood the concept of death. The fact of the matter is, while in Paradise, Adam would not die, regardless of his mortality. He was living in the presence of God, who is Life. You cannot die in the presence of Life. Both Sts. John Chrysostom and Athanasius are in agreement on this issue, as the quotes I have provided, illustrate.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140271#msg140271 date=1309126149] Even Eve understood what death is by her answer to the serpent: "You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die." Genesis 3:3. The fall was the result of man believing the serpent that he would not die and instead become like God.
That is not proof of understanding. She is just regurgitating (and adding) to what Adam told her. God said, 'Eat the fruit and you will die'. Adam told Eve, 'God said, 'Eat the fruit and you will die.'' Eve said, 'God said not to eat or touch (note the addition) the fruit or we will die.'
Did they understand what death was? No. Did they think it was something bad? Probably.
If they truly understood what death was, do you honestly think they would have eaten the fruit? Of course not. Adam and Eve had a childlike innocence. They believed pretty much everything they were told. Let's face it, if you saw a talking serpent, and it told you to do something, would you seriously do it if you UNDERSTOOD the consequences?
God endowed us with knowledge, yes. But not with ALL knowledge, as is evidenced by the presence of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam and Eve were not privy to that. Thus, they could not understand evil (and logically, death). They were created good and knew only good. The command from God was a test of obedience. A test both Adam and Eve failed due to pride (introduced to them by the talking serpent). Once they ate of the fruit, then they knew what they did and then they knew what the punishment was. Not before.
That is not proof of understanding. She is just regurgitating (and adding) to what Adam told her.
I am sorry. You are treating Adam and Eve as if they were two year old playing in a garden. Would not Adam had asked God what it means to die or rather God would have explained it as part of His commandment.
Would not Eve have asked Adam what it meant to die. What exactly this punishment mean? May be it would be worth it for her to endure the punishment and eat from the tree especially when it was desirable for the eye.
Would not the serpent play on Eve's ignorance of the concept of death and tell her "Oh death, is just a slap on the hand :)"?
The fact of the matter is, while in Paradise, Adam would not die, regardless of his mortality. He was living in the presence of God, who is Life. You cannot die in the presence of Life. Both Sts. John Chrysostom and Athanasius are in agreement on this issue, as the quotes I have provided, illustrate
No disagreement. The problem is that death would come after disobedience and not before.
I understood the question. God is letting Adam know that there is a consequence if he (Adam) disobeys His (God's) commandment. It would have been unfair of God if He did not warn Adam of the consequences and then after Adam ate of the fruit God said, 'Oops, now you die.'
Here's an analogy: You have a young child. You tell the child, 'Don't play with the knife or you will get a cut.' The child knows they will get a cut, but they don't understand what it means to get a cut. The child defies your 'commandment' and plays with the knife and gets a cut. Now, the child knows that you were right and understands what a cut is, not only is it a piercing of the flesh, but there is a great deal of pain and blood as a result.
If they truly understood what death was, do you honestly think they would have eaten the fruit? Of course not
The problem is that they believed the serpent that they would be like God. In their own minds God was tricking them. They accepted the advise of the serpent and left God's.
If they truly understood what death was, do you honestly think they would have eaten the fruit? Of course not
The problem is that they believed the serpent that they would be like God. In their own minds God was tricking them. They accepted the advise of the serpent and left God's.
Thank you for proving my point. Extend this to death, and they did not fully understand what death was. If they did understand death, they would not have believed the serpent and they would not have believed God was tricking them.
You have a young child. You tell the child, 'Don't play with the knife or you will get a cut.' The child knows they will get a cut, but they don't understand what it means to get a cut. The child defies your 'commandment' and plays with the knife and gets a cut. Now, the child knows that you were right and understands what a cut is, not only is it a piercing of the flesh, but there is a great deal of pain and blood as a result.
Again, you are treating Adam and Eve as if they were little kids. No, they were not. They were rulers of this world. They were entrusted with the Paradise to keep it and tend it. Adam understood loneliness, he understood love, he understood the nature of animals and named them accordingly.
Adam and Eve could argue logically and process the information with the serpent.
Extend this to death, and they did not fully understand what death was. If they did understand death, they would not have believed the serpent and they would not have believed God was tricking them.
If you mistrust someone, then you would not care about that person or what he tells you. Adam and Eve put their trust in Satan and not God. They desired to become like God was so strong.
We do the same thing on a daily basis with varying degrees .. no one could claim to be without sin. We tend to ignore God's commandment because we let our temptation takes control.
[Adam and Eve] believed pretty much everything they were told.
God created man innocent and pure but not stupid.
If what you are saying is true, the God is unjust and of course this is not so. The believed the serpent more than they believed God. In fact they made God a liar and made the serpent the truth sayer.
Everything in your 3 posts illustrates the mind of a child.
Loneliness, love, animals... these are all things children recognize yet do not fully understand. A child loves their parents without fully understanding love. A child feels lonely when they have no playmates, without fully understanding what loneliness is. A child knows animals are different than they are, without fully understanding the nature of animals. I cannot emphasise this enough: there is a difference between knowing something and understanding something.
If you mistrust someone, then you would not care about that person or what he tells you. Adam and Eve put their trust in Satan and not God. They desired to become like God was so strong.
Where did this mistrust come from? What reason did they have to mistrust God? God gave them everything. Hell, He gave them LIFE!
[Adam and Eve] believed pretty much everything they were told.
God created man innocent and pure but not stupid.
If what you are saying is true, the God is unjust and of course this is not so. The believed the serpent more than they believed God. In fact they made God a liar and made the serpent the truth sayer.
Adam and Eve were not stupid. They were pure and innocent. Which is why they believed everything they were told. These are qualities a child possess, purity and innocence. They believe everything they are told, even if they are contradictory. Who do children trust the most in the world? Their parents. And yet, they will still disobey their parents and listen to complete strangers. Not because they are stupid, but because they are innocent and pure. They have no concept of deceit. They have no concept of malice. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Adam and Eve knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that the serpent was deceiving them? I certainly don't.
Adam and Eve were not stupid. They were pure and innocent. Which is why they believed everything they were told. These are qualities a child possess, purity and innocence. They believe everything they are told, even if they are contradictory.
Let me ask you then:
What age of a child are you referring to?
Will a child understand the concept of being God? (I guess the answer depends on the answer to the above)
If a Child understands what the concept of God, will he trust that God or trust someone else?
The claim you make is that Adam and Eve were of Child's mind. On the contrary, Adam and Eve were fully grown man and woman. Innocent and Pure? Yes. Cannot comprehend because they were children? No.
Again, this line of thinking would make God an unjust God. He punished innocent children for not having the capability of understanding. This is totally against the account in the Bible, Church's prayers and readings as I have indicated.
What does it matter the supposed age that I'm talking about? It does not detract from the fact that they had the mind of children and the innocence and purity of children. Parents still discipline their children even if the children do not understand. They are disciplined for being disobedient. Adam and Eve were disobedient. They did not believe God. That alone is worthy of being disciplined. God is just and fair because He gave them fair warning about what happened. They disobeyed, they have to live with the consequences.
I guess our disagreement boils down to the state of mind Adam and Eve. Were they children unable to comprehend? Or were they fully grown man and woman?
From the Bible story, it is clear that they were fully grown capable of understanding what is told them.
First, God created man after his own image in understanding. He did not create him as a child but a fully grown man.
Second, Adam was entrusted as a king and ruler of God's creation. A child cannot be given this responsibility. He would not even be capable of handling it, would be frustrated and confused.
Third, God gave eve to Adam as a wife and blessed them. Children cannot marry.
God gave Adam and Eve the commandment to produce. This means that Adam and Eve were physically capable of producing. Children cannot produce.
Adam was capable of calling the animals by their names according to their species. He later called his wife Eve according to her creation. Children would not have this knowledge.
God entrusted Adam to teach Eve what he has received from Him. Children are uncapable of teaching and being entrusted with on's salvation.
Adam gave Eve God's commandment with no addition or subtraction. Children tend to add from their own imagination.
Eve was able to reason with the serpent and rationalize the information given to her. She was able to talk with one of the wisest creatures on earth. Children lack that capability.
The bottom line is that innocence and rationalization do not conflict with each other. Christ was innocent and pure and He even warns us that if we do not become like Children we will not inherit the kingdom. Does that mean that He had the mind of a child when it came to processing information, or did he lack understanding? Is His warning to us conflict with our ability to understand? Of course not.
We need to be like children in their innocence and purity by we also need to be shrewd like snakes. I am certain that God created Adam in innocence, purity and shrewdness.
Again, the Church readings, liturgical prayers point that man out of his pride disbelieved God and believed Satan thinking that death won't overcome him per God's instruction.
You are confusing yourself, it seems. Physically, Adam and Eve were adults. Spiritually and mentally, they were childlike. It's pretty apparent from the Genesis account that they were childlike intellectually. Again, a talking serpent... really?! And not just that, taking the word of a talking serpent over God? Doesn't sound like something a mature adult would do.
Adam gave Eve God's commandment with no addition or subtraction. Children tend to add from their own imagination.
No addition? Are you kidding me? I showed you what Eve said. She did add to what God commanded.
Here is what God told Adam: [quote=Genesis 2:15-17]15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Here is what Eve told the serpent: [quote=Genesis 3:1-5]1Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Note the bolded portion. That is what is called an addition. That phrase was not present in the command God gave to Adam.
At this point, I feel we are at a standstill. You seem to think that knowing and understanding are synonymous. They are not. I will no longer continue to post here. I've said what I had to. I've proved my point.
imikhail, it is not necessarily true that everything in the story of Genesis is to be taken literally...yes God could've made this literal but most likely, there are many symbolical/allegorical aspects to it. Like Kefas said, "a talking serpent, really?" We must take this into consideration. Let's say the talking serpent is representative of the dark thoughts which enter our minds and attacks us, inciting us to do sin and evil...basically, at one point, humans decided to rebel against God and turn to sin, which is when we lost our exalted state of being in Paradise (which could really mean, our very close connection we had with God before we started sinning and rejecting God).
The issue here is not the serpent. The issue is that Adam and Eve understood what death is and yet chose to disobey God because they believed the serpent.
Cephas contends that Adam and Eve had a mind of children and could not understand what death is.
Of course this is against God's justice, the Bible teaching, the Church readings and prayers as I have explained in my earlier posts.
they were childlike. It's pretty apparent from the Genesis account that they were childlike intellectually.
You have not addressed my points in my earlier post. Here they are again:
How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
How would God entrust His creation to a man with the mind of a child?
How would God marry a man and a woman who have no understanding of what marriage is?
How would God entrust the salvation of Eve to a man with a mind of a child incapable of understanding the commandments?
Why would God give a commandment to a mind of a child knowing that this mind could not understand it?
Is it necessarily true that being a child minded (spiritually) mean that this mind is incapable of understanding God's commandments?
What about this verse: ""Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3? Does this mean we need to abandon our adult rationale and become like children?
What about those who have not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, do they have the mind of a child? Or they did not sin because they had a better mind than Adam capable of rationalizing? Or was it both being like a child in purity and innocence yet having the ability to reason? "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." Romans 5:14
Again, the readings and prayers of the Church emphasize the fact that Adam and Eve fell because they disbelieved in the punishment of death and believed they would become like God.
they were childlike. It's pretty apparent from the Genesis account that they were childlike intellectually.
You have not addressed my points in my earlier post. Here they are again:
How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
How would God entrust His creation to a man with the mind of a child?
How would God marry a man and a woman who have no understanding of what marriage is?
How would God entrust the salvation of Eve to a man with a mind of a child incapable of understanding the commandments?
Why would God give a commandment to a mind of a child knowing that this mind could not understand it?
Is it necessarily true that being a child minded (spiritually) mean that this mind is incapable of understanding God's commandments?
What about this verse: ""Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3? Does this mean we need to abandon our adult rationale and become like children?
What about those who have not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, do they have the mind of a child? Or they did not sin because they had a better mind than Adam capable of rationalizing? Or was it both being like a child in purity and innocence yet having the ability to reason? "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." Romans 5:14
Again, the readings and prayers of the Church emphasize the fact that Adam and Eve fell because they disbelieved in the punishment of death and believed they would become like God.
Hi Brother,
Some of my thoughts on your questions:
1. How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
It is important to phrase this so that 'image' and 'likeness' can be distinguished - these are two different things in patristic teaching. The image is a static impress which is granted to his created human beings and the static authority which was bestowed upon man like authority to rule over creation. To be in the likeness of God is a summation of our human capacity for growth after the perfection of God and growth in virtue.
[quote="st irenaeus on image"]For He traced His own form on the formation, that that which should 'be seen should be of divine form: for (as) the image of God was man formed and set on the earth.
[quote="st irenaeus on likeness"]...in us all is the Spirit, who cries Abba Father, and fashions man into the likeness of God
Being in the 'image' of God means that we have a mind which can think and rationalise but it doesn't guarantee that that mind would function like God desires, to have this kind of mind is to be in the 'likeness' of God or to posses the virtues of discernment and simplicity virtues which because of the child like nature they lacked and needed to grow into and this was the cause of their fall.
The commandments God gave was suited to Adam's intellectual and spiritual capacity at that time.
2. How would God entrust His creation to a man with the mind of a child?
[quote="St Irenaeus"]Now, having made man lord of the earth and all things in it, He secretly appointed him lord also of those who were servants in it. They however were in their perfection; but the lord, that is, man, was (but) small; for he was a child; and it was necessary that he should grow, and so come to (his) perfection. And, that he might have his nourishment and growth with festive and dainty meats, He prepared him a place better than this world, excelling in air, beauty, light, food, plants, fruit, water, and all other necessaries of life: and its name is Paradise. And so fair and good was this Paradise, that the Word of God continually resorted thither, and walked and talked with the man, figuring beforehand the things that should be in the future, (namely) that He should dwell with him and talk with him, and should be with men, teaching them righteousness. But man was a child, not yet having his understanding perfected; wherefore also he was easily led astray by the deceiver.
The creation was a place for man to grow and learn responsibility and other such virtues by tending the garden as opposed to the other way around. God made us as free beings and to be free we must learn to lead a virtuous life, to learn obedience other virtues. The possession of virtue is something which involves an act of the will so we needed a place where these qualities could be learned.
Remember that we're not pets which God has chosen to look after; he wants us to be His image and likeness which means intentional deeds on our part to become more like Him regardless of whether we were in the Paradise or not.
3. How would God marry a man and a woman who have no understanding of what marriage is?
See 4 below.
4. How would God entrust the salvation of Eve to a man with a mind of a child incapable of understanding the commandments?
[quote="St Irenaeus"]And Adam and Eve----for that is the name of the woman----were naked, and were not ashamed; for there was in them an innocent and childlike mind, and it was not possible for them to conceive and understand anything of that which by wickedness through lusts and shameful desires is born in the soul. For they were at that time entire, preserving their own nature; since they had the breath of life which was breathed on their creation: and, while this breath remains in its place and power, it has no comprehension and understanding of things that are base. And therefore they were not ashamed, kissing and embracing each other in purity after the manner of children.
This question is a bit back to front; it is the simple purity and innocence of Adam and Eve which ensured that their relationship was sound Adam and Eve only had understanding so long as their simplicity was maintained. It was in this condition of childlike simplicity that they could grow and be united together.
5. Why would God give a commandment to a mind of a child knowing that this mind could not understand it?
[quote="St Irenaeus"]But, lest man should conceive thoughts too high, and be exalted and uplifted, as though he had no lord, because of the authority and freedom granted to him, and so should transgress against his maker God, overpassing his measure, and entertain selfish imaginings of pride in opposition to God; a law was given to him by God, in order that he might perceive that he had as lord the Lord of all. And He set him certain limitations, so that, if he should keep the commandment of God, he should ever remain such as he was, that is to say, immortal; but, if he should not keep it, he should become mortal and be dissolved to earth from whence his formation had been taken. Now the commandment was this: Of every tree that is in the Paradise you shall freely eat; but of that tree alone from which is the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat; for in the day you eat you shall surely die.
Again God knew our intellectual and spiritual level at that time so the law was given to man to understand that his freedom has boundaries and that God was His Lord and he needed to obey Him. There is a truth about human development; children learn behaviour before they learn to critically assess why they behave the way they do. This is a truth of human life and it is also a truth of they way that we ought to approach God:
[quote="St Philoxenus"]Now the Holy Scriptures have shown us that with this mind a man should draw nigh to God in faith and simplicity. And for this reason Adam and Eve, so long as they lived in simplicity, and so long as the faith which was in them had not been made gross through corporeal passions, immediately they heard the command of God they received it, and kept it. For God said to Adam, "Thou shalt not eat; and if thou eatest, thou shalt die; but if thou keepest the command I will give thee everlasting life." And by faith Adam received [the command], and kept [it], and [in] his simplicity he did not judge the command, [saying], "Why hath He withheld from us one tree, and given us power over all the others? And He hath promised to give me life if I keep the command;" these things because of his simplicity he neither judged nor sought to inquire into. Now when the counsel of the Enemy came and found simplicity, it taught craft and cunning, and sowed in that one simple thought, another thought which was its opposite, in order that he who was one man, and was wholly and entirely sincere in his simplicity, might be divided into two thoughts----the willing and the unwilling, the judging and the being judged, and the being in doubt whether he would do [the command] or not ----and the counsel which the Enemy brought to that childlike and simple man made him to be a judge of God's command to him. Now Adam did not prosper in his judgment because it had destroyed his simplicity, for he stupidly thought it meet to listen to an enemy rather than to a friend, and to one who killed rather than to one who could make alive, and to one who taught wickednesses rather than to one who had been to them a teacher of good things. So long as they existed in their simplicity they hearkened unto the voice of God, but as soon as they wished to act cunningly they became receptacles of the counsel of the Calumniator; for cunning is at the side of Satan, and simplicity is with those who belong to Christ. The man who wisheth to be cunning and crafty cannot become a disciple of Christ, as His doctrine requireth. The mind which is full of cunning is at all times destroying and building up thoughts which are opposite [to one another]; it bindeth up and looseth, it believeth and denieth, at one time it deemeth a thing good, but at another it rejecteth it and chooseth another. The mind which is trained in cunning is a channel for confused opinions, and it remained not [long enough] in any one [of them] to believe it and to support itself thereupon; but simplicity is the opposite of cunning in every thing, even as its very name testifieth, for there are in it no thoughts which abrogate the others.
This is an interesting passage because it shows that Adam was put into two minds by the serpents deceit; in this condition he was unable to repel the enemy; he needed to as St Irenaeus demonstrated before maintain the innocent of his intention by not deviating from God. There is however something implicit in God's commandment:
[quote="st philoxenus"]Now although the fear [of God] is born of faith, yet it itself is also the preserver of faith. Whosoever feareth God taketh heed not to transgress the boundary of the faith of God, and whosoever believeth in God himself draweth nigh to the fear of God, and the man, in whose soul the fear of God dwelleth, himself becometh a watchful guardian of all the commandments. Adam believed in God, and he was not afraid of God; he believed that He was, and he received from Him the law which He delivered into him. And because he cast out the fear of God from his mind, he forsook the faith, and trod the law under foot. |179 For He that ordained the law [p.186] involved the commandment with fear: "In the day that thou eatest of the tree, thou shalt die the death."5 And because Adam had cast out from him that fear, he believed the crafty one instead of God, and trod under foot the law which had been ordained by the Judge. And not only Adam did God surround with fear that it might be a fence for the keeping of His commandments, but in all generations, to all the commandments which He ordained did He unite fear.
God also taught Adam that he should fear Him and rather than believe God's instruction he believed the trickery of the serpent.
6. Is it necessarily true that being a child minded (spiritually) mean that this mind is incapable of understanding God's commandments?
[quote="St Philoxenus"]Not only is the simple man himself simple, but that which cometh into him he turneth to his own condition. For to simplicity is also closely joined obedience, and besides that it judgeth not the things which are spoken into it, it doth not dispute against the things which [men] command it to do.
Obviously not, God can make use of the mind of a child to the degree which it is capable.
6. What about this verse: ""Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3? Does this mean we need to abandon our adult rationale and become like children?
[quote="St Philoxenus"]Who is there that knoweth not how simple was that first union of the first ones of the race of the children of men, and how simple they were in respect of all the life and conduct of [this] world, for they had had no experience and they had never been occupied in any of its affairs, because the conversation of the things of the world had not as yet been revealed to them; but they were near unto divine sights, and God spake unto them continually face to face, and He was at all times found in close converse with them, carrying, and bringing, and leading them from that place from which they sprang and in which they had been framed, and placing them in Paradise. And in the form of a man He was shewing them everything as a near friend, and they never took thought in their mind as to where was the dwelling of Him that shewed them [these things]; or from what time He was; or if He had been made, and if He had been made, who made Him; and why hath He created us; and for what reason hath He set us in this Paradise and delivered unto us this law. These things were remote from, their minds because simplicity thinketh not of such, but it is wholly and entirely drawn to listening unto that which it heareth, and its whole thought is mingled with the word of him that speaketh with it, even as is [that of] the child with the speech of whosoever talketh with him.
In its appropriate context - yes. I think the point of these passages is that if it is God who is speaking with us and giving us commandments then there is no need to question or challenge the commandements because of their source. When it comes to the question of understanding; the point of simplicity is that we understand that all knowledge is a revelation from God not the product of human ingenuity. If God is beyond comprehension then why would we spend our limited human minds searching His Unseen Nature and Attributes out?
One of the early Church Fathers (St Hillary I believe) wrote something to the effect of "The fathers first go where heretics dare to tred". This means that the fathers never spent their time trying to define God they were quite happy just having an innocent relationship with Him in accord with the Gospels; it was heresy that was the source of so much of the theology which the Church Fathers produced to defend what the Apostles first taught.
7. What about those who have not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, do they have the mind of a child? Or they did not sin because they had a better mind than Adam capable of rationalizing? Or was it both being like a child in purity and innocence yet having the ability to reason? "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." Romans 5:14
I think St Philoxenus had a great passage on this but I can't find it.
Remember what I wrote before about children learning behaviour from their parents and society before they are able to critically assess why they're doing it. The problem of original sin is rooted in the corruption of the world not the understanding of our children. We become sinners before we have the intellectual capacity to do anything about it unless we happen to be like John the Baptist and are raised by God and Angels in the wilderness or something like that.
In the Genesis account we see that God was educating Adam, he showed him all the animals of the world and none was comparable to Adam and so he saw there was a need for a companion. God could have just created Eve before but He wanted to show Adam that he was missing something first. The minute that Adam saw Eve he understood what God was doing.
Adam needed to outright reject what the serpent said and not take it to heart, simplicity must be a two way street if we listen whole heartedly to God and don't question we also must stop our ears and run from the serpent. Since the serpent used guile to trick Adam and Eve, he used their innocence (their greatest virtue to this point) against them. Snakes kill people in two ways, the first is they paralyse with venom before eating the victim alive and the second is asphyxiation by squeezing them until they have no life or strength left. If the enemy is able to use these tricks we're done for because the moment we enter into dialogue with him he has us.
8.Again, the readings and prayers of the Church emphasize the fact that Adam and Eve fell because they disbelieved in the punishment of death and believed they would become like God.
I am not sure whether you have followed the whole discussion and know the arguments presented.
In summary the whole discussion revolves around whether Adam knew what death was. There are some on this forum who believe he did not for he has the mind of a child. I, on the other hand, contend that he had not a mind of a child and fully understood what death was. Hence my questions challenging those of the former opinion.
Original Question: 1. How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
Your answer: It is important to phrase this so that 'image' and 'likeness' can be distinguished - these are two different things in patristic teaching. The image is a static impress which is granted to his created human beings and the static authority which was bestowed upon man like authority to rule over creation. To be in the likeness of God is a summation of our human capacity for growth after the perfection of God and growth in virtue.
My Comment: I am not sure you have answered the question here. The verse: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness". Originally God created man as perfect as He should be. The quote you posted from St. Irenaeus supports this idea.
So, the question still remains: If Adam and Eve truly were created with a mind of a child, how would they be created after His image and likeness to rule this world and yet incapable of understanding His commandment?
in us all is the Spirit, who cries Abba Father, and fashions man into the likeness of God
This is after the fall and does not apply to Adam in the garden.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140837#msg140837 date=1309788910] So, the question still remains: If Adam and Eve truly were created with a mind of a child, how would they be created after His image and likeness to rule this world and yet incapable of understanding His commandment?
in us all is the Spirit, who cries Abba Father, and fashions man into the likeness of God
This is after the fall and does not apply to Adam in the garden.
I will admit I have not but I've presented these passages because I think they're at the very heart of the issue in terms of what Adam was and what he knew.
If this verse was issued before the fall of man how can it only be applied after? It is an anthropological statement about mankind, God is worshipped by free creatures with a capacity for growth not robots. St irenaeus is very clear about the distinction between image and likeness - my snippets are only a shadow of what he has to say on this subject. St Basil has a very similar explanation (the name of his writing escapes me now).
The world was created as a place for man as a free being to grow in the presence of God, the verses explain this - God has always intended for man to have a capacity of growth in virtue and this is why the bible says explicitly. On the first part it shows that we're capable of have a relationship with Him and have the Holy Spirit as a birthright 'image' and have capacity to grow over time in our ability to be more and more like God in virtue 'likeness'.
So St Irenaeus says Adam was a child because he was perfect but still needed to be perfected (read his passages carefully) The first perfection was given to him by God in creation and the second is a perfection he could only attain over time. Adam is therefore considered by St Irenaeus to be a child in understanding and spirituality but this was not the main issue for the fathers because the problem of the fall arose from disobedience because they were beguiled by the devils trickery. The needed to preserve their simplicity which they would have done through obedience but failed to do.
Remember that we know that love is the summit of virtues but Adam was only charged with following the virture of a beginner - obedience.
[quote="Epistle to Diognetus"]Confronted with these truths and listening to them with attention, ye shall know how much God bestoweth on those that love (Him) rightly, who become a Paradise of delight, a tree bearing all manner of fruits and flourishing, growing up in themselves and adorned with various fruits. For in this garden a tree of knowledge and a tree of life hath been planted; yet the tree of knowledge does not kill, but disobedience kills; for the scriptures state clearly how God from the beginning planted a tree [of knowledge and a tree] of life in the midst of Paradise, revealing life through knowledge; and because our first parents used it not genuinely they were made naked by the deceit of the serpent. For neither is there life without knowledge, nor sound knowledge without true life; therefore the one (tree) is planted near the other. Discerning the force of this and blaming the knowledge which is exercised apart from the truth of the injunction which leads to life, the apostle says, _Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth._ For the man who supposes that he knows anything without the true knowledge which is testified by the life, is ignorant, he is deceived by the serpent, because he loved not life; whereas he who with fear recognises and desires life plants in hope expecting fruit.
I'm happy to accept that I haven't answered the questions but the patristic passages are worthy of much meditation and consideration on this subject.
I would recommend you get your hands on the two writings of St Irenaeus and read the relevant passages.
Thank you for those quotes from Sts. Irenaeus, Philoxenus and the Epistle to Diognetus. Would you mind providing either the links or any references to these writings (if they are available online). Much appreciated.
Comments
God created Adam to be king and ruler over His creation. Adam was the crown of God's material creation. Death meant that Adam would be stripped from his rank and from enjoying God's presence just as Satan did.
Yes Satan still stood before God after his fall as in Job's story, but as an accused giving an account of his doings. Evil men will still stand before God on Judgment day but as accused not as sons.
In this sense, Adam and Satan were both dead after their fall. The difference is that Adam had hope and Satan does not.
You're not saying anything that we don't already know. What you haven't done is address the question. As I said, the relationship between God and man is completely different than the relationship between God and Satan or God and angels (relationships we are not privy to). As such, my question still stands. How could Adam understand something that didn't yet exist (viz. death)?
Satan died before Adam's creation. So the concept of death did exist, and was not something new. Adam must have understood it and thus God's warning of death as a result of breaking the commmandment ("you shall surely die")
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140210#msg140210 date=1308977053]
As I explained before, death is being away from God' presence. This applies to both the angels and man.
No.
A few facts:
The nature of man does not equal the nature of angels.
The relationship between man and God does not equal the relationship between God and angels.
The knowledge of man does not equal the knowledge of angels.
There is no debate that separation from God is a spiritual death. However, the question relates to Adam's understanding of death. Did he understand death? No he did not. Did he understand the relationship between God and angels? No he did not. Did he understand that separation from God would lead to death? No he did not. Did death, as it relates to man and God exists? No it did not. Thus, how could Adam know or understand death?
If Adam did not know what death was, how would God have forewarned him of something he had never heard of?
Well, this is my own speculation/understanding of it: Adam saw that there was death in things around him such as plants and animals...I know that some fathers (can't remember off the top of my head exactly who) write that in Paradise before the Fall, there was an eternal bloom, an eternal spring time lets say of all living things and that there was no physical death at all...I don't mind believing this except that I always come to think of the dinosaurs :) God created Adam the last of His creation, so therefore the dinosaurs had to be created before Adam...they could've existed during Adam's time, but logically, most probably they did not. Unless they were a form of subhuman human along the evolutionary process...at least this is what Francis S. Collins argues in his book The Language of God.
Basically (one of) his arguments is that along the evolutionary process, the sub-human race eventually became man...which is at the point when he was able to 'look up' and contemplate on God...or rather when God made this knoweldge available to us. Of course this viewpoint requires an almost completely allegorical understanding of Genesis.
thoughts?
the story of job is a very very old one, from long before the time of abraham, so it's possible job knew of these ancient creatures and then later they became extinct.
also the exact shape of the dinosaurs is only speculated by the scientists, they usually postulate the shape from the fossils of several bones, not from a complete skeleton.
just my thoughts, don't take it too seriously!
To tell Adam about death is to tell Adam about Satan. I think GOD only made things perfect and gave him warning.
If this is true then why would God continue with the punishment "you will surely die" after the commendment of not eating from the tree.
I think if we study carefully the story of creation we will come to the conclusion that Adam must have understood what it meant to die.
"Did Adam understand that God is omnipotent?" I believe he did.
"Did Adam understand that it was God Who created the whole creation and that He brought it out of nonexistence?" Yes.
"Did Adam know that he was mortal?" I suppose he did.
"Did Adam know that he was created out of nothingness?" Certainly.
"Did Adam understand that as God brought him to life, He could also bring him to nonexistence" Without any shadow of doubt.
Even Eve understood what death is by her answer to the serpent: "You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die." Genesis 3:3. The fall was the result of man believing the serpent that he would not die and instead become like God.
We pray in the Gregorian liturgy: "You gave me the learning of Your knowledge" (before the fall). This means Adam committed his disobedience with full knowledge that he would suffer the consequences of his disobedience which was death. Again, the problem was he believed the serpent that God's judgment would not come to fruition but rather he would escape it.
To say that Adam did not understand what death was, is to give an excuse to Adam that he was not aware of what was going to happen to him and had he known, he would not have committed the sin. Furthermore, God would be unjust to punish Adam with something he had no knowledge of.
This line of reasoning is contrary to what we pray in the liturgy; especially the Gregorian one. It is also contrary to the story as mentioned in the Bible as we explained.
To emphasize, by definition being mortal means an end to the state of the current life. If Adam knew that he was mortal, then he knew that someday his life as is would come to an end. Unfortunately, it did when he disobeyed and bore his punishment.
The fathers say that Adam desired to be like God, believing the serpent. In other words he wanted to become immortal like God. Thus he knew very well what it means to be mortal and what it means to die. The exposition that the Church reads on Monday of the Pascha week, during the 6th hour, explains this point very clearly.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140271#msg140271 date=1309126149]
If this is true then why would God continue with the punishment "you will surely die" after the commendment of not eating from the tree.
God continued the punishment because He can't exactly go back on His word, now can He. He said it would happen. It happened.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140271#msg140271 date=1309126149]
I think if we study carefully the story of creation we will come to the conclusion that Adam must have understood what it meant to die.
"Did Adam understand that God is omnipotent?" I believe he did.
"Did Adam understand that it was God Who created the whole creation and that He brought it out of nonexistence?" Yes.
"Did Adam know that he was mortal?" I suppose he did.
"Did Adam know that he was created out of nothingness?" Certainly.
"Did Adam understand that as God brought him to life, He could also bring him to nonexistence" Without any shadow of doubt.
Not sure what this has to do with anything. We are discussing whether Adam understood the concept of death. The fact of the matter is, while in Paradise, Adam would not die, regardless of his mortality. He was living in the presence of God, who is Life. You cannot die in the presence of Life. Both Sts. John Chrysostom and Athanasius are in agreement on this issue, as the quotes I have provided, illustrate.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140271#msg140271 date=1309126149]
Even Eve understood what death is by her answer to the serpent: "You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die." Genesis 3:3. The fall was the result of man believing the serpent that he would not die and instead become like God.
That is not proof of understanding. She is just regurgitating (and adding) to what Adam told her. God said, 'Eat the fruit and you will die'. Adam told Eve, 'God said, 'Eat the fruit and you will die.'' Eve said, 'God said not to eat or touch (note the addition) the fruit or we will die.'
Did they understand what death was? No.
Did they think it was something bad? Probably.
If they truly understood what death was, do you honestly think they would have eaten the fruit? Of course not. Adam and Eve had a childlike innocence. They believed pretty much everything they were told. Let's face it, if you saw a talking serpent, and it told you to do something, would you seriously do it if you UNDERSTOOD the consequences?
God endowed us with knowledge, yes. But not with ALL knowledge, as is evidenced by the presence of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam and Eve were not privy to that. Thus, they could not understand evil (and logically, death). They were created good and knew only good. The command from God was a test of obedience. A test both Adam and Eve failed due to pride (introduced to them by the talking serpent). Once they ate of the fruit, then they knew what they did and then they knew what the punishment was. Not before.
Would not Eve have asked Adam what it meant to die. What exactly this punishment mean? May be it would be worth it for her to endure the punishment and eat from the tree especially when it was desirable for the eye.
Would not the serpent play on Eve's ignorance of the concept of death and tell her "Oh death, is just a slap on the hand :)"?
I understood the question. God is letting Adam know that there is a consequence if he (Adam) disobeys His (God's) commandment. It would have been unfair of God if He did not warn Adam of the consequences and then after Adam ate of the fruit God said, 'Oops, now you die.'
Here's an analogy:
You have a young child. You tell the child, 'Don't play with the knife or you will get a cut.' The child knows they will get a cut, but they don't understand what it means to get a cut. The child defies your 'commandment' and plays with the knife and gets a cut. Now, the child knows that you were right and understands what a cut is, not only is it a piercing of the flesh, but there is a great deal of pain and blood as a result.
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140316#msg140316 date=1309199114] The problem is that they believed the serpent that they would be like God. In their own minds God was tricking them. They accepted the advise of the serpent and left God's.
Thank you for proving my point. Extend this to death, and they did not fully understand what death was. If they did understand death, they would not have believed the serpent and they would not have believed God was tricking them.
Adam and Eve could argue logically and process the information with the serpent.
We do the same thing on a daily basis with varying degrees .. no one could claim to be without sin. We tend to ignore God's commandment because we let our temptation takes control.
If what you are saying is true, the God is unjust and of course this is not so. The believed the serpent more than they believed God. In fact they made God a liar and made the serpent the truth sayer.
Everything in your 3 posts illustrates the mind of a child.
Loneliness, love, animals... these are all things children recognize yet do not fully understand. A child loves their parents without fully understanding love. A child feels lonely when they have no playmates, without fully understanding what loneliness is. A child knows animals are different than they are, without fully understanding the nature of animals. I cannot emphasise this enough: there is a difference between knowing something and understanding something. Where did this mistrust come from? What reason did they have to mistrust God? God gave them everything. Hell, He gave them LIFE!
[quote author=imikhail link=topic=11687.msg140321#msg140321 date=1309200217] God created man innocent and pure but not stupid.
If what you are saying is true, the God is unjust and of course this is not so. The believed the serpent more than they believed God. In fact they made God a liar and made the serpent the truth sayer.
Adam and Eve were not stupid. They were pure and innocent. Which is why they believed everything they were told. These are qualities a child possess, purity and innocence. They believe everything they are told, even if they are contradictory. Who do children trust the most in the world? Their parents. And yet, they will still disobey their parents and listen to complete strangers. Not because they are stupid, but because they are innocent and pure. They have no concept of deceit. They have no concept of malice. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Adam and Eve knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that the serpent was deceiving them? I certainly don't.
What age of a child are you referring to?
Will a child understand the concept of being God? (I guess the answer depends on the answer to the above)
If a Child understands what the concept of God, will he trust that God or trust someone else?
The claim you make is that Adam and Eve were of Child's mind. On the contrary, Adam and Eve were fully grown man and woman. Innocent and Pure? Yes. Cannot comprehend because they were children? No.
Again, this line of thinking would make God an unjust God. He punished innocent children for not having the capability of understanding. This is totally against the account in the Bible, Church's prayers and readings as I have indicated.
What does it matter the supposed age that I'm talking about? It does not detract from the fact that they had the mind of children and the innocence and purity of children. Parents still discipline their children even if the children do not understand. They are disciplined for being disobedient. Adam and Eve were disobedient. They did not believe God. That alone is worthy of being disciplined. God is just and fair because He gave them fair warning about what happened. They disobeyed, they have to live with the consequences.
From the Bible story, it is clear that they were fully grown capable of understanding what is told them.
First, God created man after his own image in understanding. He did not create him as a child but a fully grown man.
Second, Adam was entrusted as a king and ruler of God's creation. A child cannot be given this responsibility. He would not even be capable of handling it, would be frustrated and confused.
Third, God gave eve to Adam as a wife and blessed them. Children cannot marry.
God gave Adam and Eve the commandment to produce. This means that Adam and Eve were physically capable of producing. Children cannot produce.
Adam was capable of calling the animals by their names according to their species. He later called his wife Eve according to her creation. Children would not have this knowledge.
God entrusted Adam to teach Eve what he has received from Him. Children are uncapable of teaching and being entrusted with on's salvation.
Adam gave Eve God's commandment with no addition or subtraction. Children tend to add from their own imagination.
Eve was able to reason with the serpent and rationalize the information given to her. She was able to talk with one of the wisest creatures on earth. Children lack that capability.
The bottom line is that innocence and rationalization do not conflict with each other. Christ was innocent and pure and He even warns us that if we do not become like Children we will not inherit the kingdom. Does that mean that He had the mind of a child when it came to processing information, or did he lack understanding? Is His warning to us conflict with our ability to understand? Of course not.
We need to be like children in their innocence and purity by we also need to be shrewd like snakes. I am certain that God created Adam in innocence, purity and shrewdness.
Again, the Church readings, liturgical prayers point that man out of his pride disbelieved God and believed Satan thinking that death won't overcome him per God's instruction.
You are confusing yourself, it seems. Physically, Adam and Eve were adults. Spiritually and mentally, they were childlike. It's pretty apparent from the Genesis account that they were childlike intellectually. Again, a talking serpent... really?! And not just that, taking the word of a talking serpent over God? Doesn't sound like something a mature adult would do. No addition? Are you kidding me? I showed you what Eve said. She did add to what God commanded.
Here is what God told Adam:
[quote=Genesis 2:15-17]15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Here is what Eve told the serpent:
[quote=Genesis 3:1-5]1Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Note the bolded portion. That is what is called an addition. That phrase was not present in the command God gave to Adam.
At this point, I feel we are at a standstill. You seem to think that knowing and understanding are synonymous. They are not. I will no longer continue to post here. I've said what I had to. I've proved my point.
The issue here is not the serpent. The issue is that Adam and Eve understood what death is and yet chose to disobey God because they believed the serpent.
Cephas contends that Adam and Eve had a mind of children and could not understand what death is.
Of course this is against God's justice, the Bible teaching, the Church readings and prayers as I have explained in my earlier posts.
How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
How would God entrust His creation to a man with the mind of a child?
How would God marry a man and a woman who have no understanding of what marriage is?
How would God entrust the salvation of Eve to a man with a mind of a child incapable of understanding the commandments?
Why would God give a commandment to a mind of a child knowing that this mind could not understand it?
Is it necessarily true that being a child minded (spiritually) mean that this mind is incapable of understanding God's commandments?
What about this verse: ""Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3? Does this mean we need to abandon our adult rationale and become like children?
What about those who have not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, do they have the mind of a child? Or they did not sin because they had a better mind than Adam capable of rationalizing? Or was it both being like a child in purity and innocence yet having the ability to reason?
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." Romans 5:14
Again, the readings and prayers of the Church emphasize the fact that Adam and Eve fell because they disbelieved in the punishment of death and believed they would become like God.
How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
How would God entrust His creation to a man with the mind of a child?
How would God marry a man and a woman who have no understanding of what marriage is?
How would God entrust the salvation of Eve to a man with a mind of a child incapable of understanding the commandments?
Why would God give a commandment to a mind of a child knowing that this mind could not understand it?
Is it necessarily true that being a child minded (spiritually) mean that this mind is incapable of understanding God's commandments?
What about this verse: ""Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3? Does this mean we need to abandon our adult rationale and become like children?
What about those who have not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, do they have the mind of a child? Or they did not sin because they had a better mind than Adam capable of rationalizing? Or was it both being like a child in purity and innocence yet having the ability to reason?
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." Romans 5:14
Again, the readings and prayers of the Church emphasize the fact that Adam and Eve fell because they disbelieved in the punishment of death and believed they would become like God.
Hi Brother,
Some of my thoughts on your questions:
1. How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
It is important to phrase this so that 'image' and 'likeness' can be distinguished - these are two different things in patristic teaching. The image is a static impress which is granted to his created human beings and the static authority which was bestowed upon man like authority to rule over creation. To be in the likeness of God is a summation of our human capacity for growth after the perfection of God and growth in virtue.
[quote="st irenaeus on image"]For He traced His own form on the formation, that that which should 'be seen should be of divine form: for (as) the image of God was man formed and set on the earth.
[quote="st irenaeus on likeness"]...in us all is the Spirit, who cries Abba Father, and fashions man into the likeness of God
Being in the 'image' of God means that we have a mind which can think and rationalise but it doesn't guarantee that that mind would function like God desires, to have this kind of mind is to be in the 'likeness' of God or to posses the virtues of discernment and simplicity virtues which because of the child like nature they lacked and needed to grow into and this was the cause of their fall.
The commandments God gave was suited to Adam's intellectual and spiritual capacity at that time.
2. How would God entrust His creation to a man with the mind of a child?
[quote="St Irenaeus"]Now, having made man lord of the earth and all things in it, He secretly appointed him lord also of those who were servants in it. They however were in their perfection; but the lord, that is, man, was (but) small; for he was a child; and it was necessary that he should grow, and so come to (his) perfection. And, that he might have his nourishment and growth with festive and dainty meats, He prepared him a place better than this world, excelling in air, beauty, light, food, plants, fruit, water, and all other necessaries of life: and its name is Paradise. And so fair and good was this Paradise, that the Word of God continually resorted thither, and walked and talked with the man, figuring beforehand the things that should be in the future, (namely) that He should dwell with him and talk with him, and should be with men, teaching them righteousness. But man was a child, not yet having his understanding perfected; wherefore also he was easily led astray by the deceiver.
The creation was a place for man to grow and learn responsibility and other such virtues by tending the garden as opposed to the other way around. God made us as free beings and to be free we must learn to lead a virtuous life, to learn obedience other virtues. The possession of virtue is something which involves an act of the will so we needed a place where these qualities could be learned.
Remember that we're not pets which God has chosen to look after; he wants us to be His image and likeness which means intentional deeds on our part to become more like Him regardless of whether we were in the Paradise or not.
3. How would God marry a man and a woman who have no understanding of what marriage is?
See 4 below.
4. How would God entrust the salvation of Eve to a man with a mind of a child incapable of understanding the commandments?
[quote="St Irenaeus"]And Adam and Eve----for that is the name of the woman----were naked, and were not ashamed; for there was in them an innocent and childlike mind, and it was not possible for them to conceive and understand anything of that which by wickedness through lusts and shameful desires is born in the soul. For they were at that time entire, preserving their own nature; since they had the breath of life which was breathed on their creation: and, while this breath remains in its place and power, it has no comprehension and understanding of things that are base. And therefore they were not ashamed, kissing and embracing each other in purity after the manner of children.
This question is a bit back to front; it is the simple purity and innocence of Adam and Eve which ensured that their relationship was sound Adam and Eve only had understanding so long as their simplicity was maintained. It was in this condition of childlike simplicity that they could grow and be united together.
5. Why would God give a commandment to a mind of a child knowing that this mind could not understand it?
[quote="St Irenaeus"]But, lest man should conceive thoughts too high, and be exalted and uplifted, as though he had no lord, because of the authority and freedom granted to him, and so should transgress against his maker God, overpassing his measure, and entertain selfish imaginings of pride in opposition to God; a law was given to him by God, in order that he might perceive that he had as lord the Lord of all. And He set him certain limitations, so that, if he should keep the commandment of God, he should ever remain such as he was, that is to say, immortal; but, if he should not keep it, he should become mortal and be dissolved to earth from whence his formation had been taken. Now the commandment was this: Of every tree that is in the Paradise you shall freely eat; but of that tree alone from which is the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat; for in the day you eat you shall surely die.
Again God knew our intellectual and spiritual level at that time so the law was given to man to understand that his freedom has boundaries and that God was His Lord and he needed to obey Him. There is a truth about human development; children learn behaviour before they learn to critically assess why they behave the way they do. This is a truth of human life and it is also a truth of they way that we ought to approach God:
[quote="St Philoxenus"]Now the Holy Scriptures have shown us that with this mind a man should draw nigh to God in faith and simplicity. And for this reason Adam and Eve, so long as they lived in simplicity, and so long as the faith which was in them had not been made gross through corporeal passions, immediately they heard the command of God they received it, and kept it. For God said to Adam, "Thou shalt not eat; and if thou eatest, thou shalt die; but if thou keepest the command I will give thee everlasting life." And by faith Adam received [the command], and kept [it], and [in] his simplicity he did not judge the command, [saying], "Why hath He withheld from us one tree, and given us power over all the others? And He hath promised to give me life if I keep the command;" these things because of his simplicity he neither judged nor sought to inquire into. Now when the counsel of the Enemy came and found simplicity, it taught craft and cunning, and sowed in that one simple thought, another thought which was its opposite, in order that he who was one man, and was wholly and entirely sincere in his simplicity, might be divided into two thoughts----the willing and the unwilling, the judging and the being judged, and the being in doubt whether he would do [the command] or not ----and the counsel which the Enemy brought to that childlike and simple man made him to be a judge of God's command to him. Now Adam did not prosper in his judgment because it had destroyed his simplicity, for he stupidly thought it meet to listen to an enemy rather than to a friend, and to one who killed rather than to one who could make alive, and to one who taught wickednesses rather than to one who had been to them a teacher of good things. So long as they existed in their simplicity they hearkened unto the voice of God, but as soon as they wished to act cunningly they became receptacles of the counsel of the Calumniator; for cunning is at the side of Satan, and simplicity is with those who belong to Christ. The man who wisheth to be cunning and crafty cannot become a disciple of Christ, as His doctrine requireth. The mind which is full of cunning is at all times destroying and building up thoughts which are opposite [to one another]; it bindeth up and looseth, it believeth and denieth, at one time it deemeth a thing good, but at another it rejecteth it and chooseth another. The mind which is trained in cunning is a channel for confused opinions, and it remained not [long enough] in any one [of them] to believe it and to support itself thereupon; but simplicity is the opposite of cunning in every thing, even as its very name testifieth, for there are in it no thoughts which abrogate the others.
This is an interesting passage because it shows that Adam was put into two minds by the serpents deceit; in this condition he was unable to repel the enemy; he needed to as St Irenaeus demonstrated before maintain the innocent of his intention by not deviating from God. There is however something implicit in God's commandment:
[quote="st philoxenus"]Now although the fear [of God] is born of faith, yet it itself is also the preserver of faith. Whosoever feareth God taketh heed not to transgress the boundary of the faith of God, and whosoever believeth in God himself draweth nigh to the fear of God, and the man, in whose soul the fear of God dwelleth, himself becometh a watchful guardian of all the commandments. Adam believed in God, and he was not afraid of God; he believed that He was, and he received from Him the law which He delivered into him. And because he cast out the fear of God from his mind, he forsook the faith, and trod the law under foot. |179 For He that ordained the law [p.186] involved the commandment with fear: "In the day that thou eatest of the tree, thou shalt die the death."5 And because Adam had cast out from him that fear, he believed the crafty one instead of God, and trod under foot the law which had been ordained by the Judge. And not only Adam did God surround with fear that it might be a fence for the keeping of His commandments, but in all generations, to all the commandments which He ordained did He unite fear.
God also taught Adam that he should fear Him and rather than believe God's instruction he believed the trickery of the serpent.
6. Is it necessarily true that being a child minded (spiritually) mean that this mind is incapable of understanding God's commandments?
[quote="St Philoxenus"]Not only is the simple man himself simple, but that which cometh into him he turneth to his own condition. For to simplicity is also closely joined obedience, and besides that it judgeth not the things which are spoken into it, it doth not dispute against the things which [men] command it to do.
Obviously not, God can make use of the mind of a child to the degree which it is capable.
6. What about this verse: ""Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3? Does this mean we need to abandon our adult rationale and become like children?
[quote="St Philoxenus"]Who is there that knoweth not how simple was that first union of the first ones of the race of the children of men, and how simple they were in respect of all the life and conduct of [this] world, for they had had no experience and they had never been occupied in any of its affairs, because the conversation of the things of the world had not as yet been revealed to them; but they were near unto divine sights, and God spake unto them continually face to face, and He was at all times found in close converse with them, carrying, and bringing, and leading them from that place from which they sprang and in which they had been framed, and placing them in Paradise. And in the form of a man He was shewing them everything as a near friend, and they never took thought in their mind as to where was the dwelling of Him that shewed them [these things]; or from what time He was; or if He had been made, and if He had been made, who made Him; and why hath He created us; and for what reason hath He set us in this Paradise and delivered unto us this law. These things were remote from, their minds because simplicity thinketh not of such, but it is wholly and entirely drawn to listening unto that which it heareth, and its whole thought is mingled with the word of him that speaketh with it, even as is [that of] the child with the speech of whosoever talketh with him.
In its appropriate context - yes. I think the point of these passages is that if it is God who is speaking with us and giving us commandments then there is no need to question or challenge the commandements because of their source. When it comes to the question of understanding; the point of simplicity is that we understand that all knowledge is a revelation from God not the product of human ingenuity. If God is beyond comprehension then why would we spend our limited human minds searching His Unseen Nature and Attributes out?
One of the early Church Fathers (St Hillary I believe) wrote something to the effect of "The fathers first go where heretics dare to tred". This means that the fathers never spent their time trying to define God they were quite happy just having an innocent relationship with Him in accord with the Gospels; it was heresy that was the source of so much of the theology which the Church Fathers produced to defend what the Apostles first taught.
7. What about those who have not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, do they have the mind of a child? Or they did not sin because they had a better mind than Adam capable of rationalizing? Or was it both being like a child in purity and innocence yet having the ability to reason?
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." Romans 5:14
I think St Philoxenus had a great passage on this but I can't find it.
Remember what I wrote before about children learning behaviour from their parents and society before they are able to critically assess why they're doing it. The problem of original sin is rooted in the corruption of the world not the understanding of our children. We become sinners before we have the intellectual capacity to do anything about it unless we happen to be like John the Baptist and are raised by God and Angels in the wilderness or something like that.
In the Genesis account we see that God was educating Adam, he showed him all the animals of the world and none was comparable to Adam and so he saw there was a need for a companion. God could have just created Eve before but He wanted to show Adam that he was missing something first. The minute that Adam saw Eve he understood what God was doing.
Adam needed to outright reject what the serpent said and not take it to heart, simplicity must be a two way street if we listen whole heartedly to God and don't question we also must stop our ears and run from the serpent. Since the serpent used guile to trick Adam and Eve, he used their innocence (their greatest virtue to this point) against them. Snakes kill people in two ways, the first is they paralyse with venom before eating the victim alive and the second is asphyxiation by squeezing them until they have no life or strength left. If the enemy is able to use these tricks we're done for because the moment we enter into dialogue with him he has us.
8.Again, the readings and prayers of the Church emphasize the fact that Adam and Eve fell because they disbelieved in the punishment of death and believed they would become like God.
Amen.
Please pray for me.
LiD
I am not sure whether you have followed the whole discussion and know the arguments presented.
In summary the whole discussion revolves around whether Adam knew what death was. There are some on this forum who believe he did not for he has the mind of a child. I, on the other hand, contend that he had not a mind of a child and fully understood what death was. Hence my questions challenging those of the former opinion.
Original Question:
1. How would God have created Adam in the likeness of His image with the mind of a child incapable of understanding His commandments?
Your answer:
It is important to phrase this so that 'image' and 'likeness' can be distinguished - these are two different things in patristic teaching. The image is a static impress which is granted to his created human beings and the static authority which was bestowed upon man like authority to rule over creation. To be in the likeness of God is a summation of our human capacity for growth after the perfection of God and growth in virtue.
My Comment:
I am not sure you have answered the question here. The verse: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness". Originally God created man as perfect as He should be. The quote you posted from St. Irenaeus supports this idea.
So, the question still remains: If Adam and Eve truly were created with a mind of a child, how would they be created after His image and likeness to rule this world and yet incapable of understanding His commandment?
This is after the fall and does not apply to Adam in the garden.
So, the question still remains: If Adam and Eve truly were created with a mind of a child, how would they be created after His image and likeness to rule this world and yet incapable of understanding His commandment?
This is after the fall and does not apply to Adam in the garden.
I will admit I have not but I've presented these passages because I think they're at the very heart of the issue in terms of what Adam was and what he knew.
If this verse was issued before the fall of man how can it only be applied after? It is an anthropological statement about mankind, God is worshipped by free creatures with a capacity for growth not robots. St irenaeus is very clear about the distinction between image and likeness - my snippets are only a shadow of what he has to say on this subject. St Basil has a very similar explanation (the name of his writing escapes me now).
The world was created as a place for man as a free being to grow in the presence of God, the verses explain this - God has always intended for man to have a capacity of growth in virtue and this is why the bible says explicitly. On the first part it shows that we're capable of have a relationship with Him and have the Holy Spirit as a birthright 'image' and have capacity to grow over time in our ability to be more and more like God in virtue 'likeness'.
So St Irenaeus says Adam was a child because he was perfect but still needed to be perfected (read his passages carefully) The first perfection was given to him by God in creation and the second is a perfection he could only attain over time. Adam is therefore considered by St Irenaeus to be a child in understanding and spirituality but this was not the main issue for the fathers because the problem of the fall arose from disobedience because they were beguiled by the devils trickery. The needed to preserve their simplicity which they would have done through obedience but failed to do.
Remember that we know that love is the summit of virtues but Adam was only charged with following the virture of a beginner - obedience.
[quote="Epistle to Diognetus"]Confronted with these truths and listening to them with attention, ye shall know how much God bestoweth on those that love (Him) rightly, who become a Paradise of delight, a tree bearing all manner of fruits and flourishing, growing up in themselves and adorned with various fruits. For in this garden a tree of knowledge and a tree of life hath been planted; yet the tree of knowledge does not kill, but disobedience kills; for the scriptures state clearly how God from the beginning planted a tree [of knowledge and a tree] of life in the midst of Paradise, revealing life through knowledge; and because our first parents used it not genuinely they were made naked by the deceit of the serpent. For neither is there life without knowledge, nor sound knowledge without true life; therefore the one (tree) is planted near the other. Discerning the force of this and blaming the knowledge which is exercised apart from the truth of the injunction which leads to life, the apostle says, _Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth._ For the man who supposes that he knows anything without the true knowledge which is testified by the life, is ignorant, he is deceived by the serpent, because he loved not life; whereas he who with fear recognises and desires life plants in hope expecting fruit.
I'm happy to accept that I haven't answered the questions but the patristic passages are worthy of much meditation and consideration on this subject.
I would recommend you get your hands on the two writings of St Irenaeus and read the relevant passages.
Please pray for me,
LiD
LoveisDivine,
Thank you for those quotes from Sts. Irenaeus, Philoxenus and the Epistle to Diognetus. Would you mind providing either the links or any references to these writings (if they are available online). Much appreciated.