Posted on 12/12/2018 8:15:16 AM PST by Salvation
Continuing our series of questions related to the Incarnation, we next ponder whether Jesus would have come at all had we not sinned in the garden. We also consider why He waited thousands of years before coming to our rescue.
Would Jesus have come if Adam had not sinned?
St. Thomas Aquinas (in his Summa Theologica) first states that there are different opinions on the matter. He also notes that God’s power is not limited and therefore God could have become incarnate even if sin had not existed. However, St. Thomas believes that if man had not sinned then the Son would not have become incarnate. As I often do, I’ve presented St. Thomas’ words in bold italics, while my commentary appears in plain red text.
For such things as spring from God’s will, and beyond the creature’s due, can be made known to us only through being revealed in the Sacred Scripture, in which the Divine Will is made known to us. Hence, since everywhere in the Sacred Scripture the sin of the first man is assigned as the reason of Incarnation, it is more in accordance with this to say that the work of Incarnation was ordained by God as a remedy for sin; so that, had sin not existed, Incarnation would not have been (Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 1, Article 1).
While theological speculation may have its place, it is certain that the Incarnation was instituted by God first and foremost as a remedy for sin. While the Incarnation offers more than is required to remedy sin (e.g., an increase in human dignity (because God joined our family), God’s visitation, the opening of a heavenly (not merely earthly) paradise), Scripture presents remedy for sin as God’s primary motive. In remedying our sin, God shows the greatness of His mercy because He does not merely restore us but elevates us to a higher place. The least born into the Kingdom of God is greater that the exemplar of the Old Covenant, John the Baptist. Had we not sinned and had God merely wanted to elevate us, He could have done so in other ways. It seems to me that St. Thomas’ position is best suited to the evidence.
If the Incarnation is a remedy for sin, why did God wait so long to apply it?
St. Thomas provides a sensible answer that addresses aspects of the question we might not have considered. His answer is found in the Summa Theologica (part III, question 1, article 5). First, he addresses why the Incarnation did not happen before sin:
Since the work of Incarnation is principally ordained to the restoration of the human race by blotting out sin, it is manifest that it was not fitting for God to become incarnate at the beginning of the human race before sin. For medicine is given only to the sick. Hence our Lord Himself says (Matthew 9:12-13): “They that are in health need not a physician, but they that are ill … For I am not come to call the just, but sinners.”
Next, St. Thomas addresses why the Incarnation did not happen quickly, soon after Original Sin, rather than thousands of years later. He sets forth four reasons:
First, on account of the manner of man’s sin, which had come of pride; hence man was to be liberated in such a manner that he might be humbled and see how he stood in need of a deliverer. … For first of all God left man under the natural law, with the freedom of his will, in order that he might know his natural strength; and when he failed in it, he received the law; whereupon, by the fault, not of the law, but of his nature, the disease gained strength; so that having recognized his infirmity he might cry out for a physician, and beseech the aid of grace.
Quick solutions to problems do not always permit proper healing to take place. Most parents know that if they solve every problem a child has, important lessons may be lost. It is often beneficial to live with our questions for a while so that the answers are more appreciated and more effective.
Indeed, it took us humans quite a while to acknowledge the seriousness of our sin and pride. Shortly after Eden, the tower of Babel indicated that human pride was still a grave problem. Even when given the Law, a good thing, the flesh corrupted it, turning its perfunctory observance into an occasion for pride. The prophets then had to keep summoning Israel and Judah back to the Lord and away from prideful self-reliance. The Assyrian invasion of the Northern Kingdom and the Babylonian Captivity only further illustrated the depths of our sin, so that this cry went up: “O Lord, that you would rend the heavens and come down” (Is 64:1).
We had to be led gradually to recognize our profound need for a savior. Otherwise, even if the remedy were offered, too few might reach for it.
Secondly, on account of the order of furtherance in good, whereby we proceed from imperfection to perfection. Hence the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 15:46-47): “Yet that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; afterwards that which is spiritual … The first man was of the earth, earthy; the second man from heaven, heavenly.”
There is a kind of theology of grace implicit in this answer. Grace builds on our nature, and it is our nature, physically and spiritually, to grow gradually. While sudden conversions and growth spurts have their place, the best and most typical growth is that which occurs steadily and in stages.
Thirdly, on account of the dignity of the incarnate Word, for on the words (Galatians 4:4), “But when the fullness of the time was come,” a gloss says: “The greater the judge who was coming, the more numerous was the band of heralds who ought to have preceded him.”
Here is underscored the dignity of the Son of God, that many should precede Him, announcing Him. There was also a need for us to be prepared to meet Him, so that we would not miss Him or refuse Him when He came. As Malachi says, See, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents; or else I will come and strike the land with total destruction (Mal 4:5-6). Those who were prepared were able to abide the day of the Lord’s coming and heed His call.
Fourthly, lest the fervor of faith should cool by the length of time, for the charity of many will grow cold at the end of the world. Hence (Luke 18:8) it is written: “But yet the Son of Man, when He cometh, shall He find think you, faith on earth?”
This is an interesting aspect of the question that many might not consider; we typically ponder more what is good for us than what is good for succeeding generations. It is sadly true, though, that fervor, both collective and individual, can fade as a wait becomes lengthy. Therefore, St. Thomas suggests that God appointed a time for the Incarnation within human history such that the greatest possible number of people could be saved.
Complete title:
Would Jesus Have Come If Adam Had Not Sinned? Why Did He Wait So Long Before Coming?
Monsignor Pope Ping!
Long seemingly for us, nothing to God.
“In the fullness of time” ...
When the time was right. Cosmically RIGHT, as only God can know rightness.
“A wizard is never late. Nor is he early. He arrives precisely when he means to.”
...St. Thomas Aquinas (in his Summa Theologica) first states that there are different opinions on the matter.
First Error is to question God’s Purpose
https://www.hymnal.net/en/hymn/h/582
Trust and obey,
For there’s no other way
To be happy in Jesus,
But to trust and obey.
As Jesus told the eleven just before he was taken up from them into heaven, “It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established by His own authority.” Acts 1:7 NABRE
Jesus arrived for God’s reason and at the exact time God wished. I find no serious mention of consultants or cabinet meetings to assist God in his decision.
However, I’m sure your critique amuses God.
One of my favorite NT books is Acts of the Apostles. I’m overwhelmed by the courage of those in the early Church who embraced the command to spread the Gospel to the ends of the earth. I’m not sure the Apostles could have feasibly obeyed that commandment, nor their deeds been recorded, had the Roman Empire not evolved to the point it had. Granted this is purely my speculation and mine alone, but it seems to me Christ arrived at the earliest point in human history that his name could, and would be spread to the ends of the earth by his followers in the years, centuries and millenia to follow.
Pope's questions are beside the point. The salient issue from which Pope digresses (and perhaps leads others to avoid) is this: Man sinned of his own accord. God so loved us that He sent His only begotten Son- fully God and fully human- to take all our sin upon Himself and die in our stead. Only by God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ will man be saved. And no person will gain salvation unless he or she comes directly through Christ Himself.
Someone should tell Pope that there is a very fine line between genius and heresy.
It was the teaching of St. Bonaventure, a Doctor of the Church, as well as Blessed John Duns Scotus that, even if Adam had not sinned, Jesus would still have come to show us how to love as God desires us to love.
What’s your point? That these questions ought not be asked? He’s giving you an orthodox answer, BTW.
I wonder who really believes what Jesus actually said:
“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” Mat 16:28
Matthew 24:2 2”Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
Luke 19:44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”
Now for the $64 question. When was the Temple destroyed?
Or perhaps, as millions believe, Jesus was actually “meaning the Muslim Dome of the Rock that actually sits on the place the original temple existed.
Though I believe we have a problem here: The Dome of the Rock was built in 1327AD Long after the data that the Temple was destroyed in 70AD
Even so, we still have a problem for those who believe John wrote the book of Revelation in 95AD: Stating within....
“I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, “Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, with its worshipers.” Rev 11:1
Woops. The Temple was long since destroyed ****** AND ****** No mention of its destruction any where. Which is hard (IMPOSSIBLE) to believe, because Jesus clearly referenced this as a sign of his return. Forget not also, that there were “some” who heard Jesus saying this, actually witnessed it.
So one must really meditate long and hard on this; because, ignoring Jesus’s words is no different than ignoring him.
Paul warned of this:
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but having itching ears, they shall heap to themselves teachers in accordance with their own lusts.” 2 Tim 4:3
Jesus has came. We all believe this because we all (Christians) believe we go to heaven when we die.
“But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars of heaven will fall, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then He will send His angels, and gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven.
“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender, and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see these things happening, know that it is near—at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is. It is like a man going to a far country, who left his house and gave authority to his servants, and to each his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to watch. Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming—in the evening, at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning—lest, coming suddenly, he find you sleeping. And what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!”
Mark 13:21-37
If this is really to hard to believe, then I suggest reading and studying the book of Daniel.
The thing is, if one picks and chooses what to believe and discards the rest, the said person is believing a God of their own making and not one of TRUTH.
Jesus came to pay for our sins because it was in GOD’s PLAN for our salvation. God, in His unfathomable Wisdom,could have had an infinite number of plans for our salvation but HE selected the plan that HE executed. It must have been the one HE preferred.
What about the timeliness? Sorry, GOD does not wear a watch.
Interesting, distressing to me, conversation. I think people may not appreciate that a major purpose of theology is apologetics, whose own chief purpose is evangelism, saving st puld.
If it is wrong to question, was the Panagia wrong to ask, “How can this be, since I know not a man?”
From Justin Martyr on, Catholicism has endorsed reasonable examination of the Faith. It is Calvinists and Muslims whose theology so derogates reason that they can “reasonably” say such questions shouldn't be asked.
So what are we to do if a non-believing friend says, “The picture you paint of God is cruel. For so many centuries he left so many without solace. Why did he wait so long?”
He's a non-believer, so you can't tell him he should be piously accepting. And he already thinks we're unreasonable ...
I think Monsignor Pope's articles are pleasant and good. I think St. Thomas was a genius. I think the faithful and pious may, and probably should, ask questions about the meaning of “fullness of time,”
If Adam had not sinned there would not been any need for Jesus to come and save us. The problem was that women were created that has led to sin and turmoil.
Wrong!
If Adam had not sinned there would be no need for Jesus. God, who walked with Adam would have handled that discussion and teaching Himself if he felt it necessary.
You are entitled to that opinion. However, I defer to a Doctor of the Catholic Church. I’m pretty sure he studied this a little more than dirtymac.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.