Adam And Eve

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840748' date='Apr 19 2009, 05:23 PM']As I said, the Western tradition sounds a bit different than yours on this issue, or if nothing else it is more ambigious on the role of Eve (i.e. not an either/or position).[/quote]
Eve is not the efficient cause of death, nor is the Theotokos the efficient cause of life.

[Justified Saint]

I am not doubting the typology between Christ and Adam, only demonstrating the obvious of why the analogy is imperfect and why my position does not necessitate the taking of textual liberties on the basis of metaphorical reasoning. It was also the same St. Paul who said that it was "the woman" who "transgressed."

And again, Teutrillian: "Dost thou not know that thou, too, art Eve? Even today God's judgment applies to all thy sex, hence thy sin must also subsist. Thou art the Devil's portal; thou hast consented to eat of his tree, and thou wast the first to renounce the law of God."

How could Eve be considered the "Devil's Portal" if only Adam is accountable for humanity? Why is Eve's sin of any consequence in the face of Adam's much graver sin?

My contention is that both the Bible and the Church's tradition offer a more complex, perhaps even confounding, view on the legacy of Eve than your position is willing to concede. Since this is evident to me both scripturally and through the Church's witness, we will have to agree to disagree if you don't consider these standards of argumentation.

[Apotheoun]

The analogy is not imperfect. Had Adam not sinned, no one would have died. It is Adam's action, not Eve's, which brings death, because he is the head of the human race. If you wish to reject this biblical truth so be it.

God grant you many joyful years,
Todd

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840809' date='Apr 19 2009, 06:07 PM']And again, Teutrillian: "Dost thou not know that thou, too, art Eve? Even today God's judgment applies to all thy sex, hence thy sin must also subsist. Thou art the Devil's portal; thou hast consented to eat of his tree, and thou wast the first to renounce the law of God."[/quote]
Tertullian is not a Church Father, because he died a heretic.

If Eve is the cause of death, like Adam, then Mary is our Savior, which is a heretical notion.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840809' date='Apr 19 2009, 06:07 PM']My contention is that both the Bible and the Church's tradition offer a more complex, perhaps even confounding, view on the legacy of Eve than your position is willing to concede. Since this is evident to me both scripturally and through the Church's witness, we will have to agree to disagree if you don't consider these standards of argumentation.[/quote]
Death entered the world by the action of one man, as St. Paul said, while life is restored by one Man, the new Adam (Christ).

[Apotheoun]

The typology between Eve and Mary does not have the same theological weight as the typology between Adam and Christ.

Christ is the sole savior of humanity, because He recapitulates the headship of the first Adam, correcting what the first man did wrong. On the other hand, Eve was not then, nor is Mary now, the head of the human race, and so their actions do not have the same ontological force as those of the old head or new Head of mankind.

[Justified Saint]

Do you also convict Anselm of heresy for considering Mary's role in salvation as "[b]necessary[/b]"? Or what of Jerome for suggesting "death through Eve, life through Mary?" Is Ambrose to be casted out as well for calling Eve the author of Man's fall?

By what standard do you mean to judge these men heretics if you spurn the church's tradition?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840847' date='Apr 19 2009, 06:48 PM']Do you also convict Anselm of heresy for considering Mary's role in salvation as "[b]necessary[/b]"? Or what of Jerome for suggesting "death through Eve, life through Mary?" Is Ambrose to be casted out as well for calling Eve the author of Man's fall?

By what standard do you mean to judge these men heretics if you spurn the church's tradition?[/quote]
Their comments are hyperbolic and unbiblical. Mary is not our savior, nor is Eve the cause of our death; although each of them had a role in the events they were not then, nor are the now, the head of the human race.

It is sad that your theology seems to lack the biblical concept of Adam's / Christ's headship.

[Apotheoun]

The consensus of the Fathers, and not the merely the teaching of a few of them, is to be held as definitive.

[Justified Saint]

Do you consider the above statments made by said Church Fathers heretical?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840856' date='Apr 19 2009, 06:55 PM']Do you consider the above statments made by said Church Fathers heretical?[/quote]
Yes, I would (depending upon the context). Just as I would describe St. Augustine's notion of irresistible grace as heresy, and his view that humanity is a "mass of damnation" is heresy, and St. Gregory of Nyssa's confused views on universal salvation were heretical. Again, it is only the consensus of the Fathers that is to be held as doctrinally definitive.

Edited April 20, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

By the "context" I mean to say that they may not be teaching what you espouse, and as long as they are speaking only in a hyperbolic fashion (i.e., as long as they do not mean their comments literally, because that would involve their denying the headship of the old and the new Adam), then it follows (i.e., if they are only speaking hyperbolically) that their comments are not heretical.

[Justified Saint]

Then how could there be considered a consenus on this matter (of Eve) if there are such notable instances of dissent?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840868' date='Apr 19 2009, 07:03 PM']Then how could there be considered a consenus on this matter (of Eve) if there are such notable instances of dissent?[/quote]
A consensus does not require absolute unanimity. It requires only a moral unanimity. Very few dogmatic decrees have been unanimously approved.