Freaked out!. (neuroscience is beginning to debunk free wil?!?!)

[inocente]

Continuing from this statement in post 71, “Free will was invented by God, the Creator, and freely given to humankind as a gift included in human nature.” Next, we should look at both the general purpose of free will and the primary purpose of will itself. The primary purpose of human will is to seek eternal happiness beyond the decomposition of our anatomy. It is for our own good, that our will can freely respond with love for God Who calls all humans to share in His divine life through knowledge and love.
Scripture sources: Genesis 1: 26-30; John 3:16; and chapter 14, Gospel of John.

Not sure about the way you wrote that granny - “eternal happiness” sounds a bit hedonistic. Theologically, surely free will is there so you can love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, and love your neighbor as yourself, irrespective of any reward.

What the Catholic Church has been doing for centuries is to view Scripture as a whole in which God reveals Himself through Divine Revelation culminating in Jesus Christ, “Mediator and Fullness of All Revelation.” Yet, even though the public revelation of God’s plan for human beings was completed, it has not been made completely explicit. It is the province of the Catholic Church to gradually grasp its full significance over time.

If a private revelation is to mean anything then it must be openly connected back to the public revelation of scripture, and I think this is what the Church does, otherwise it would have no way of knowing what was from God.

Just as St. Paul learned from the Hebrew Scriptures about the connection between Adam, the first human being, and Jesus Christ, True Man and True God (Romans 5: 12-21), the Catholic Church learns Divine Revelation from studying all of Scripture to obtain the big picture. In addition, there were great scholars who lived in or close to the Apostolic Age who contributed to Catholicism’s knowledge of Divine Revelation. Because of the presence of the promised Holy Spirit, from Pentecost forward, a protocol was established to insure the wisdom and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

That sounded mighty sophisticated, then I realized it’s what Baptists call “reading the bible in the Spirit and the Spirit in the bible”.

To answer Inocente’s request for a scripture reference for human free will, please understand that I learned Catholic doctrines before opening a bible. I still have not read all 50 chapters of Genesis. Like some people before me, I follow the logic of Catholicism.

Apparently fear of reading the bible is called biblosophobia .

I realize that Inocente said in post 75: “If it’s not in scripture then for me it’s not part of revelation. Though either way it’s still not a logical argument of course.” That is his choice according to his worldview and I respect that even when I disagree.

Hang on, hang on, revelation wouldn’t be called revelation if it were logical argument, and I think it’s standard Catholic teaching that Christ completed revelation, so if that’s my choice of worldview I think it’s one that Pope Benedict inevitably shares .

Obviously, not every human action is a result of free will. Many actions are the result of habit or the result of normal limitations. In my worldview, it is the human “experience” of free will, even though its reality might be denied, which is the “reference in Scripture” in the sense that Scripture presents the wonder and mystery of human nature.

I think we have free will alright, it’s hard to see how we could be legally responsible otherwise, it’s just that the bible is ambiguous. Generally when that happens it indicates that the subject isn’t important, since otherwise scripture would say something definite.

Which means philosophers have devoted far too much time and effort to arguing about free will over the ages, so it’s pleasing to find the CCC only mentions it twice (1730 & 1731), and even then one of them is small print.

 

[grannymh]

Not sure about the way you wrote that granny - “eternal happiness” sounds a bit hedonistic. Theologically, surely free will is there so you can love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, and love your neighbor as yourself, irrespective of any reward.

If a private revelation is to mean anything then it must be openly connected back to the public revelation of scripture, and I think this is what the Church does, otherwise it would have no way of knowing what was from God.

That sounded mighty sophisticated, then I realized it’s what Baptists call “reading the bible in the Spirit and the Spirit in the bible”.

Apparently fear of reading the bible is called biblosophobia .

Hang on, hang on, revelation wouldn’t be called revelation if it were logical argument, and I think it’s standard Catholic teaching that Christ completed revelation, so if that’s my choice of worldview I think it’s one that Pope Benedict inevitably shares .

I think we have free will alright, it’s hard to see how we could be legally responsible otherwise, it’s just that the bible is ambiguous. Generally when that happens it indicates that the subject isn’t important, since otherwise scripture would say something definite.

Which means philosophers have devoted far too much time and effort to arguing about free will over the ages, so it’s pleasing to find the CCC only mentions it twice (1730 & 1731), and even then one of them is small print.

Regarding small print. It does have a special meaning. See CCC 18 - 22.

Now that I know I am hedonistic (had to look that up in the dictionary) and have biblosophobia, I would say that except for some details, we are on the same page regarding free will. We read the bible in the Spirit and the Spirit in the bible.

However, I do not think you share my “Catholic guilt.” I have a confession. I tried finding free will in the CCC and couldn’t so I gave up. Now, I have to tell people that a good Baptist taught me about free will from the Catholic Catechism.
CCC 1730-31 and following are very good.

 

[inocente]

Regarding small print. It does have a special meaning. See CCC 18 - 22.

Now that I know I am hedonistic (had to look that up in the dictionary) and have biblosophobia, I would say that except for some details, we are on the same page regarding free will. We read the bible in the Spirit and the Spirit in the bible.

However, I do not think you share my “Catholic guilt.” I have a confession. I tried finding free will in the CCC and couldn’t so I gave up. Now, I have to tell people that a good Baptist taught me about free will from the Catholic Catechism.
CCC 1730-31 and following are very good.

Then I also have a confession - all I did was type “free will ccc” into google.

http://www.unc.edu/courses/jomc050/idog.jpg

unc.edu/depts/jomc/academics/dri/idog.html