The XVIth Council of Carthage.

[judge]

The sixteenth council of carthage in 418 A.D. condemned as heresy the following propositions.

(1) Adam was created mortal and would have died whether he had sinned or not.
(2) The sin of Adam hurt only himself, and not all mankind.
(3) Newborn infants die in the same state as Adam was in before the Fall.

It would appear that they considered the converse of the above statements to be indispensible to the Christian faith.

Should we have the same attitude?

By denying the historic view of the fall of man are we losing a proper understanding of our salvation?

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

By denying our scientific knowledge of the world, are we in danger of making faith look silly?

 

[LiveFreeOrDie]

Anyone?

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

It is amazing how much the christian faith has been influenced by a handfull of individuals. Especially in councils of the early church. Women were granted souls, the gnostic gospels were branded as heresies, the concept of the trinity, and which books to include/exlude into the bible were all decided by these meetings. In cases where I have brought this up the usual reply is; "Well the council members were inspired by God, and that is why Enoch and Bartholemew are not part of the bible".

 

[isshinwhat]

By denying the historic view of the fall of man are we losing a proper understanding of our salvation?

I believe that any time we fail to understand any part of God's plan and the truth that lies behind it, we fail to have a "proper understanding of our salvation."

God Bless,

Neal

 

[Chuck_Darwin]

Is there an online translation of the findings of that Council? I couldn't find one any where when I looked on google. I would love to verify that. IO would prefer a complete translation of the text.
I would wager that they expounded on many thing at that council that would contradict current american fundimentalism. Lot's of folks like to quote from church fathers very selectively.

 

[Chris H]

I have a very serious question here. If most of the scientific evidence points towards evolution, and if we believe that Christ is the savior of mankind, then shouldn't we want to re-examine our thinking on Adam in light of science just to be sure that we have the proper understanding of scripture???

Chris

 

[Chris H]

And yes, by denying scientific knowledge we do make faith look silly. I'll give you that one.

Chris

 

[judge]

Originally posted by Chris H
I have a very serious question here. If most of the scientific evidence points towards evolution, and if we believe that Christ is the savior of mankind, then shouldn't we want to re-examine our thinking on Adam in light of science just to be sure that we have the proper understanding of scripture???

Chris

 

Hi there!

I don't think evidence "points" anywhere. Individual facts and pieces of data are collected or disgarded and organised into a framework. depending on the "framework" the same collection of facts can be made to say different things.

Alternatively one can collect different facts as well.

 

All the best

 

[judge]

Originally posted by Chuck_Darwin
Is there an online translation of the findings of that Council? I couldn't find one any where when I looked on google. I would love to verify that. IO would prefer a complete translation of the text.
I would wager that they expounded on many thing at that council that would contradict current american fundimentalism. Lot's of folks like to quote from church fathers very selectively.

 

It would be great if there was an online translation, but not yet!  As far as I am aware. But you should be able to find many references using google. Try it with original sin perhaps. Also try the council of trent and the council of orange as IIRC they dealt with the same issues. (or even Romans chapt 5)

 

All the best.