The New Testament is clear that Adam and Eve were real people created by God. To deny Adam and the fall is to deny Christ, the new Adam. https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-incest-in-genesis-was-ok (I am not saying you deny Adam but modernists do)
8 New Testament Passages That Support a Historical Adam and Eve https://www.crossway.org/articles/8...xpQGgf_Uh5A2Ryje9Thrib3wc6N6DLAsPM45vWFm6-yhH
Yes, the premise of the book is that Freud was definitely westernizing the Kabbalah, his theory is too fully formed to have been invented by one man. The other book she mentions, which was very dark, is The Assault on Truth, which dives into proofs that Freud in his early years was very much aware and even believed his patients, that they had been violated. It wasn't until he was about 36 years, the age of initiation, that he completely flipped and started gaslighting people. It's just so sick he is hailed as a hero of a "science."
I have never denied that Adam and Eve existed, nor that through them sin entered the world and led us to the Fall, and that Christ is the New Adam who, through His perfect obedience on the Cross, brought us salvation, reversing the effects of the fall of our first parents through the sanctifying grace of the Sacraments. However, I raised the question of whether the theory of hominid evolution is or is not totally incompatible with our faith, because I believe the fossil record is evidence that is difficult to ignore. I also mentioned the questions raised by atheists regarding the first descendants of Adam and Eve, which could suggest that Genesis was speaking literally of an evolutionary leap toward the Homo sapiens sapiens lineage—when humanity acquired full knowledge of good and evil, as well as the moral law, through the knowledge of God and the principle of obedience. I considered the hypothesis that Adam and Eve were the first members of our current lineage to receive direct knowledge from God, and that some of their early descendants may have interbred with members of an earlier human lineage. After all, science does not deny that there were hybrid descendants between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, even though the latter eventually achieved genetic dominance over the former. Saint Paul tells us that God predestined us to be holy and blameless even before the foundation of the world, which suggests that the Fall would have had to occur in some way so that God could manifest the plan of Redemption—made possible only through the knowledge of good and evil.
I think lots of those supposed fossils have been tampered with. I haven't watched these videos for a while but in one of them he discusses the problem of our supposed ancestors. I think he does a good job in debunking. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaoyYdMHPjXltig8sEHAMgJ1waQDvGv26&si=qVVXeQmQxp8ITLIQ In regards to the incest question, in my own personal reflections upon the matter, if we believe Adam and Eve were created perfectly both spiritually and physically, the Fall didn't affect them only spiritually but also physically and what if part of that was also in the genomes? So in the beginning of man's history a brother marrying a sister wasn't an issue until the genomes began to degenerate which needed time. My own personal theory is the mark of the beast would be a vaccine or medical procedure promising to reverse aging which in a way would be fulfilling what the serpent promised that we wouldn't die. What I think about when house cleaning
Every word of your post resonates with me. There was a time when I cowed before those loud voices claiming evolution as fact not theory. No more! Like you, I believe the inerrant Word of God. All of it. Unashamedly. Confidently. We have for the last 50 years been jerked around by worldly theologians and academics. E very institution has been corrupted. We are living the temptation of Eve all over again. "Did God say..." we must shout back " YES. GOD DID SAY..." these latest horrible revelations are sickening the hearts of ordinary people. God's Light is shining brighter as the world grows darker and the people of good will are stumbling their way back seeking God with humble and contrite hearts.
Thanks Philothea, I had a look at the Assault on Truth book on Amazon and saw it was written by Jeffrey Masson. I read one of his books many years ago called My Father's Guru - A Journey through Spirituality and Disillusionment. It's about his family's connection with early Western Guru Paul Brunton, who is generally credited with introducing Ramana Maharshi to the western world. Masson describes his journey and eventual disappointment with Brunton, regarding him as something of a fraud and charlatan. I suppose that was one of the early books (1993) which made me sceptical about trusting these so-called teachers. Around that time I had also read a fairly critical book about J. Krishnamurti who I'd been interested in for some years. In fairness, some of the things in that book have since been questioned and dismissed by others who were close to JK but all in all, that whole area is a minefield. Many of these people are considered by their admirers as the One who Knows and will transmit Enlightenment but generally turn out to be well short of that. It's odd but my initial comments in this thread were prompted by the revelation that "Quantum Healer" Deepak Chopra was in the Epstein files.
This would explain why, in those days (during the reign of the Antichrist), people will seek death and will not find it. This is meant in a literal sense of fulfillment. It could also mean that one of the reasons for divine intervention will be to prevent something that would strip human beings of what essentially makes them human.
Great questions, Luan. Makes one wonder whether we have the mental capacity to answer them. Nevertheless, the questions persist and whereas you will obviously take into account the appeal to humility, most have been conned into thinking human reason is the ground of reality. It's not politically correct and 'young earth creationists' are dismissed as mouth-breathing, saliva-drooling sub-human superstition-clinging idiots. I used to dismiss them so myself, even when I had developed grave doubts about the Darwinian Evolutionism that had been laid on with a trowel upon me. But, as I read more and more deeply into the subject (Chinese paleontologist: 'in your country, you can criticise your government, but not Darwin; in mine you can criticise Darwin, but not the government'), I became increasingly more sceptical and the young earth creationists pose a lot of very lucid questions, most particularly about human descent-the alleged fossils are much more equivocal than the anthropologists would like us to believe. An example is the geohistory: the incidence of dating fossils by geological age, while simultaneously dating geological age by the fossils found within! Also, the best description of information theory (a new science, hard as physics), I received in a book by a new-earth creationist. Evolution does not fare well in the face of Information Theory. I'd recommend a start with Catholic evolutionary theorist, Michael Behe, and his book 'Darwin's Black Box'. This is a modest, quite specific and specified questioning of Darwinism, where I began thirty years ago. But, it's devastating. And hasn't been answered since. I don't think that Evolutionism evades the problem of there being primarily two human common ancestors. For it to claim otherwise would imply severe problems and contradictions with mathematical probability, its greatest flaw.
Genesis is orders of magnitude more plausible than Darwinism, which is logically and rationally impossible, apart from contradicting Scripture. The essence of Darwinismis to claim that Man could enter reality randomly, without the need of a Creator. The evidence is overwhelming that Darwinism is impossible-it is only retained as the standard narrative through 'authority' (= power). It is undeniable for anyone only interested in Truth that the origin of Man is dependent upon an Intelligence that is beyond the scope of a recently very vastly over-rated human reason. Genesis might be a description in simple terms for limited human reason, and might involve details that are beyond us, but it is essentially, and in the concerns that we need to know, absolutely True.
I know more about Jung than Freud, having read the former's 'Memories, Dreams, Reflections' and 'Answer to Job'. Jung was in partnership with Freud at the beginning, but broke with him and went his own way. Jung did not continue with a psychology that meant man was a slave to his desires. His ideas were far more ambitious and it is arguable that he was devising a psychology that might eventually be reconcilable with Christianity. Unlike Freud, an atheist, he most definitely proclaimed a belief in God ("I don't think, I know"), but he might not have been quite a Christian. It is perhaps to his credit, but perhaps not to Freud, that accusations of anti-semitism (yawn, at this stage) were laid against him.
I'm somewhat familiar with Jung and too read Memories, Dreams, Reflections, many moons ago. I think a lot of the post Vatican 2 clergy were drawn to his ideas about Psychology and in some ways incorporated it into their theological outlook. By the way, I just noticed that I made a sort of 'Sleudian Frip' in that earlier post - spelling it as Kab-allah rather than Kabb-alah
The evidence that I have come across demonstrates everything that darwinism has placed its foundations upon has been demolished. It has been debunked mathematically, geologically and biologically. But because the ideas the cabal promotes are set institutionally they don't die.
I know that these men are technically sedevacantists but they do not reference that in the documentary. This is an excellent (in my opinion) documentary debunking the lie of Darwinism which has been forced upon us. It also covers proofs for Catholic miracles.
It has always bothered me that we have these supernatural events happening around the world and they hardly get reported on. Even in our own churches no one talks about it. Even now with the shroud of Turin and the Tilma and all the science backing them up and hardly a peep. It is all so insincere.
I think that is part of it. The other part is that the cabal wants people to think we only live in the natural world of materialism. People understanding they can be holy undermines their aims. But every now and again they let stuff out. There is a class of mythical hero in video games called a paladin/healer. The term comes from the 12 closest knights to Charlemagne. Kind of like the knights of the round table. These guys were famed as being super holy and abided by chivalry. My understanding is that they had a grasp on the nature of reality whereby they understood that being righteous had the advantage of being closer to God and therefore far better at combat. Knights who failed at chivalry were likely to have been witnessed to succumb to all sorts of things "accidently". A stray arrow, bad wine, infections and so on. When kids play as this class in video games they become inspired to become righteous. Chivalry died with the enlightenment and I believe the family unit and society started its decline here as well.
Charles Darwin's spiritual Journey is so interesting. He came from a very devout indeed Anglican family all in on Faith. But then after he put forward his Theory of Evolution he went through a huge spiritual crisis which caused him real inner agony and eventually his Faith winked out and he became an atheist. Accompanying him in his journey was his sister who warned and warned the poor guy about the dangers on his path . This correspondence between the two was very touching. It reminds me of the Scripture: Psalm 131:1 A song of ascents. Of David. My heart is not proud, LORD, my eyes are not haughty; I do not concern myself with great matters or things too wonderful for me. I do not know the answers to all this myself. I do know that the Church allows really wide latitude in our understanding of this. When Charles Darwin put forward his theory it was only a theory. I don't believe any modern scientist would go along with it all . It reminds me of people who wonder about life on other planets . Maybe there is and maybe there is not. But I don't think God wants us to get caught up in it all too much. file:///C:/Users/BCR/Downloads/Charles_Darwin_and_lady_hope_the_le.pdf It was on one of those glorious autumn afternoons, that we sometimes enjoy in England, when I was asked to go in and sit with the well known Professor, Charles Darwin. He was almost bedridden for some months before he died. I used to feel when I saw him that his fine presence would make a grand picture for our Royal Academy; but never did I think so more strongly that on this particular occasion. He was sitting up in bed, wearing a soft embroidered dressing gown, of rather a rich purple shade. Propped up by pillows, he was gazing out on a far-stretching scene of woods and cornfields, which glowed in the light of one of those marvelous sunsets which are the beauty of Kent and Surrey. His noble forehead and fine features seemed to be lit up with pleasure as I entered the room. He waved his hand toward the window as he pointed out the scene beyond, while in the other hand he held an open Bible, which he was always studying. “What are you reading now?” I asked, as I seated myself by his bedside. “Hebrews!” he answered — “still Hebrews. ’The Royal Book,’ I call it. Isn’t it grand?” Then, placing his finger on certain passages, he commented on them. I made some allusion to the strong opinions expressed by many persons on the history of Creation, its grandeur, and then their treatment of the earlier chapters of the Book of Genesis. He seemed greatly distressed, his fingers twitched nervously, and a look of agony came over his face as he said: “I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took wildfire. People made a religion of them.” Grzegorz Malec Charles Darwin and Lady Hope – The Legend Still Alive [129] Then he paused, and after a few more sentences on “the holiness of God” and “the grandeur of this Book,” looking at the Bible which he was holding tenderly all the time, he suddenly said: “I have a summer house in the garden, which holds about thirty people. It is over there,” pointing through the open window. “I want you very much to speak there. I know you read the Bible in the villages. To-morrow afternoon I should like the servants on the place, some tenants and a few of the neighbors to gather there. Will you speak to them?” „What shall I speak about?” I asked. “CHRIST JESUS!” he replied in a clear, emphatic voice, adding in a lower tone, “and his salvation. Is not that the best theme? And then I want you to sing some hymns with them. You lead on your small instrument, do you not?” The wonderful look of brightness and animation on his face as he said this I shall never forget, for he added: “If you take the meeting at three o’clock this window will be open, and you will know that I am joining in with the singing.” How I wished that I could have made a picture of the fine old man and his beautiful surroundings on that memorable day! [Lady Hope 1915, 1071
