Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How do we know that Genesis isn't referring only to spiritual death?
What did humans and animals eat if plants couldn't die?
That sort of goes around my question though. Why couldn't it be the case that things prior to the fall broke down physically and it was only spiritual death that entered the picture with the fall?because humans, to include Adam and Eve, physically die. God said that when they disobeyed they would die. what happened? the breath left the flesh and Adam and Eve were buried. if it was only spiritual death, there would be no need for a physical resurrection.
The death, however, that befell the soul because of the transgression not only crippled the soul and made man accursed; it also rendered the body itself subject to fatigue, suffering, and corruptibility, and finally handed it over to death.
When, therefore, it is asked what death it was with which God threatened our first parents if they should transgress the commandment they had received from Him, and should fail to preserve their obedience,—whether it was the death of soul, or of body, or of the whole man, or that which is called second death,—we must answer, it is all. For the first consists of two; the second is the complete death, which consists of all. For, as the whole earth consists of many lands, and the Church universal of many churches, so death universal consists of all deaths.
That sort of goes around my question though. Why couldn't it be the case that things prior to the fall broke down physically and it was only spiritual death that entered the picture with the fall?
it is always rich in fruits, ripe and unripe, and continually full of flowers. When trees and ripe fruit rot and fall to the ground they turn into sweet-scented soil, free from the smell of decay exuded by the vegetable-matter of this world. That is because of the great richness and holiness of the grace ever abounding there. -- On Commandments and Doctrines 82
Notice that it is nowhere written, “God created paradise,” or that he said “let it be and it was,” but instead that He “planted” it, and “made to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food” [Gen. 2:8-9], bearing every kind and variety of fruit, fruit which is never spoiled or lacking but always fresh and ripe, full of sweetness, and providing our ancestors with indescribable pleasure and enjoyment. For their immortal bodies had to be supplied with incorruptible food. -- Ethical Discourses 1.1
St. Augustine, City of God, Book 13.13
How do we know that Genesis isn't referring only to spiritual death?
Yes, thank you for this, and I can see that you have quite a knack for being able to recall such passages in the writings of saints which are so essential to the topic at hand.
I'll agree that we broaden nature to include man's mode of existence -- condition of life -- that we could say that he is naturally immortal if a continual vessel of grace. That being said, however, one can clearly see, even by careful examination of the Genesis narrative itself, that the height of Adam and Eve's communion with, and knowledge of God has often been greatly exaggerated in traditional Christian thought. I can explain how this occurred too, from the viewpoint of Christian mystical spirituality.
I'll mention here just in passing, not as evidence but only as food for thought, that Judaism has never taught the notion of a "fall" as is found within Christianity. The fall itself is never mentioned in the Bible. The Pentateuch is Jewish Scripture and it was they who determined its canonical authority.
From here on out, I suspect we'll experience greatly increased difficulty in communicating, because our underlying assumptions about the nature of religious (spiritual) knowledge in relation to other kinds of knowledge, which are arrived at in different ways, must now come to the forefront.
Gurney, Gurney, Gurney ... I think you have some more reading to do!
The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church
So if I understand correctly, the primary reason given here for rejecting physical death before the fall is that the consensus of Church Fathers support this view. Does this mean that if in 1000 years there is an even split or even reversal in the consensus of Church Fathers it will then be okay to accept biological evolution?
So if I understand correctly, the primary reason given here for rejecting physical death before the fall is that the consensus of Church Fathers support this view. Does this mean that if in 1000 years there is an even split or even reversal in the consensus of Church Fathers it will then be okay to accept biological evolution?
What he said.it's really not possible to answer this question, because such a reversal will absolutely never happen. that God created no death is a central element of the Orthodox faith, and if "Fathers" begin to teach otherwise then we know they are wolves in sheep's clothing. the idea that there can even be a reversal of consensus on a theological issue is not Orthodox - it denies that the current consensus is from God. It implicitly denies that the Fathers were theologians in the true sense of the word - it reduces them to philosophers and mere academics who can be overturned when better thinkers come along. If evolution is true then not only were the Fathers wrong on a great many teachings, but they didn't even know what theology is! If evolution is true they continually confused science with theology. we really can't question this stuff without questioning the spiritual state of the Fathers and what it means for the Spirit to guide the Church.
although it is entirely impossible to ever prove evolution, if somehow, hypothetically, evolution were to be proven true, I would walk away from the Orthodox faith.
So if I understand correctly, the primary reason given here for rejecting physical death before the fall is that the consensus of Church Fathers support this view. Does this mean that if in 1000 years there is an even split or even reversal in the consensus of Church Fathers it will then be okay to accept biological evolution?
Gurney, that post rocks my socks!
you are right about Adam and Eve -- evolution happens in populations, not individuals. so the idea of just two first humans becomes absurd. so the Church venerating them as Saints becomes absurd ...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?