Is our free choice real

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “More like the Church has not addressed much of what I’ve posted, and you interpret that as “yes, the Church has done so.””
A. Actually I posted what the Church teaches in the Catechism and the dogmas. The Church does say something about each of these:* WHY we are held temporally responsible for the sins of our ancestors

• Why God refuses to fix imperfections
• Why we cannot have a personal relationship with God when prayer is a monologue.
• Why we are treated like criminals.
• Why does God make it horrifically difficult to go to heaven while making it ridiculously easy to go to hell.

You wrote: “A plan he refuses to disclose.” re: “God will not do everything possible but has a providential plan.”
A. Yes, it was revealed by Jesus Christ. Catechism

517 Christ’s whole life is a mystery of redemption. Redemption comes to us above all through the blood of his cross,179 but this mystery is at work throughout Christ’s entire life:

• already in his Incarnation through which by becoming poor he enriches us with his poverty;180
• in his hidden life which by his submission atones for our disobedience;181
• in his word which purifies its hearers;182
• in his healings and exorcisms by which “he took our infirmities and bore our diseases”;183
• and in his Resurrection by which he justifies us.184

You wrote: "I don’t believe in “luck” - meaning random chance - just using it as a rhetorical device. I define “luck” as “God wills to make something pleasant happen.” "
A. Unfortunate for it causes miscommunications and the dictionary definition is:

• luck: success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions.

You wrote: “But actual grace and sanctifying grace does not remove imperfections. We still fall over and over and over and over and over and over…”
A. When we have sanctifying grace only our free will choice can cause the imperfection of moral imperfection of sin. If we had not part in it then we would not merit a crown of victory in heaven.

You wrote: “No reason was given by the Church. The Church just says “it is what it is.”” re: “Reason was given for consequences for human nature.”
A. Yes it does. Catechism:

412 But why did God not prevent the first man from sinning? St. Leo the Great responds, "Christ’s inexpressible grace gave us blessings better than those the demon’s envy had taken away."307 And St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, "There is nothing to prevent human nature’s being raised up to something greater, even after sin; God permits evil in order to draw forth some greater good. Thus St. Paul says, ‘Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more’; and the Exsultet sings, ‘O happy fault,. . . which gained for us so great a Redeemer!’"308

 

[BobCatholic]

You wrote: “More like the Church has not addressed much of what I’ve posted, and you interpret that as “yes, the Church has done so.””
A. Actually I posted what the Church teaches in the Catechism and the dogmas. The Church does say something about each of these:* WHY we are held temporally responsible for the sins of our ancestors

You post a catechism cite that says it is the case, but not WHY.

• Why God refuses to fix imperfections

No catechism cite answers this.

• Why we cannot have a personal relationship with God when prayer is a monologue.

All you do is say prayer is the relationship, and when it is a monologue, how can there be a relationship? No catechism cite.

• Why we are treated like criminals.

No catechism citation.

• Why does God make it horrifically difficult to go to heaven while making it ridiculously easy to go to hell.

No catechism cite.

You wrote: “A plan he refuses to disclose.” re: “God will not do everything possible but has a providential plan.”

So what is his providential plan for my son to have a mental disease? That I have to take care of him for the rest of my life yet I cannot keep a job?

What is God’s providential plan that he makes us imperfect and punishes us because we are not perfect?

It seems the only thing is that we are slaves, no free choice, just do what God wants, nothing else, game over. We must not have a self because the self is evil.

You wrote: "I don’t believe in “luck” - meaning random chance - just using it as a rhetorical device. I define “luck” as “God wills to make something pleasant happen.” "
A. Unfortunate for it causes miscommunications and the dictionary definition is:

• luck: success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions.

luck: success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions.
God’s providence: success or failure apparently brought by God choosing it rather than through one’s own actions.

Lots of overlap here.

To me, the’re very much the same with a minor twist.

You wrote: “But actual grace and sanctifying grace does not remove imperfections. We still fall over and over and over and over and over and over…”
A. When we have sanctifying grace only our free will choice can cause the imperfection of moral imperfection of sin. If we had not part in it then we would not merit a crown of victory in heaven.

An unobtainable crown is irrelevant. You’re talking about PhD level stuff, while I can’t get out of kindergarten here!

412 But why did God not prevent the first man from sinning? St. Leo the Great responds, "Christ’s inexpressible grace gave us blessings better than those the demon’s envy had taken away."307 And St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, "There is nothing to prevent human nature’s being raised up to something greater, even after sin; God permits evil in order to draw forth some greater good. Thus St. Paul says, ‘Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more’; and the Exsultet sings, ‘O happy fault,. . . which gained for us so great a Redeemer!’"308

Yes, God takes evil and brings good things out of it. But not for me. I pray for others, others benefit, but no help is coming to me in the two big things in my life I need repaired.

Also, there is no answer from the Church about why:

• the old Adam fails and we are temporally held responsible for the sins of our ancestors.
• the new Adam succeeds and we are not released from this temporal responsibility of the old Adam. The new Adam only took care of the spiritual problems.

It is clear God only cares about spiritual things and not temporal things.

 

[Vico]

…

1. You wrote: “You post a catechism cite that says it is the case, but not WHY.” Re: held temporally responsible. and “No catechism cite answers this.” re: fix imperfections. and
   "there is no answer from the Church about why:

• the old Adam fails and we are temporally held responsible for the sins of our ancestors.
• the new Adam succeeds and we are not released from this temporal responsibility of the old Adam."
  A. Yes it does. Posted earlier in this thread. (There are consequences of original sin for human nature that a greater good is brought out of it.)

1. You wrote: “All you do is say prayer is the relationship, and when it is a monologue, how can there be a relationship? No catechism cite.”
   A. Yes it does. Posted earlier in this thread. (A relationship exists with a monologue.)
2. You wrote: “No catechism citation.” Re: treated like criminals. and . " Re: difficult to go to heaven.
   A. Yes it does. Posted earlier in this thread. (Necessary testing that we may be glorified.)
3. You wrote: “So what is his providential plan for my son to have a mental disease? That I have to take care of him for the rest of my life yet I cannot keep a job?” and “What is God’s providential plan that he makes us imperfect and punishes us because we are not perfect?”
   A. God gives grace that we can avoid sin in the face of necessary testing that we may be glorified.
4. You wrote: “It seems the only thing is that we are slaves, no free choice, just do what God wants, nothing else, game over.” and “God’s providence: success or failure apparently brought by God choosing it rather than through one’s own actions.”
   A. It is a dogma of faith that we have free will. Catholics are not Calvinists.
5. You wrote: “We must not have a self because the self is evil.”
   A. Yes, selfishness is evil but not self, we must have charity to achieve heaven, with the grace of God which makes that possible.
6. You wrote: “An unobtainable crown is irrelevant. You’re talking about PhD level stuff, while I can’t get out of kindergarten here!”
   A. Those with sanctifying grace can obtain. You were baptized therefore it is relevant.

 

[BobCatholic]

(There are consequences of original sin for human nature that a greater good is brought out of it.)

You combined two issues, addressed them with one statement that basically says “it is what it is” without explaining why.

How is there a greater good when it is ridiculously easy to go to hell and horrifically difficult to go to heaven? The scales are out of balance. The greater good is almost impossible to get for people.

Consequences and punishment are the same thing because God imposed them both! God wrote the program, he could have written the program differently.

You don’t explain why Christ did not obliterate the temporal punishment for our ancestors. He reopened the gates of heaven, but not the gates of Eden. Why?

. (A relationship exists with a monologue.)

Would you date someone who refused to talk to you?
Would you marry someone who refused to talk to you?
Would you STAY MARRIED to someone who refused to talk to you?

Does such a woman love you if she refuses to talk to you? The answer is no.

God acts the same way.

(Necessary testing that we may be glorified.)

The testing doesn’t make sense. Why not create us perfect and we pass the test and God is glorified because of this?

How is God glorified with tons of people falling into sin? Or people falling into hell?

A. God gives grace that we can avoid sin in the face of necessary testing that we may be glorified.

The grace does not heal my son. The grace does not obliterate my imperfections.

1. You wrote: “It seems the only thing is that we are slaves, no free choice, just do what God wants, nothing else, game over.” and “God’s providence: success or failure apparently brought by God choosing it rather than through one’s own actions.”
   A. It is a dogma of faith that we have free will. Catholics are not Calvinists.

Imperfections negatively affect free will. Free will is a cruel joke at best or nonexistent at worst, and I’ve provided plenty of examples.

1. You wrote: “We must not have a self because the self is evil.”
   A. Yes, selfishness is evil but not self, we must have charity to achieve heaven, with the grace of God which makes that possible.

Selfishness is evil because the self is evil.

1. You wrote: “An unobtainable crown is irrelevant. You’re talking about PhD level stuff, while I can’t get out of kindergarten here!”
   A. Those with sanctifying grace can obtain. You were baptized therefore it is relevant.

If I could obtain, I would have done it by now. That is, if I actually received the grace to do it. Clearly I haven’t. I’ve gotten to a certain level and stagnated. I’ve hit a wall and can’t get past it. If sainthood is the graduation of the PhD program, I’m stuck in kindergarten. I think I did manage to pass preschool with God’s grace (i.e. I think I overcame an overwhelming amount of mortal sin, but I could be fooling myself, but I’m burdened with tons of questions and doubts about if I am even there or not.

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “You combined two issues, addressed them with one statement that basically says “it is what it is” without explaining why.”
A. No, the answer for both of why is there. You continually focus on “temporal responsibility” like someone envious of another. We were not given the preternatural gifts and that is not unjust.

You wote: “Consequences and punishment are the same thing because God imposed them both!”
A. The two words have different meanings and are not the same.

You wrote: “You don’t explain why Christ did not obliterate the temporal punishment for our ancestors. He reopened the gates of heaven, but not the gates of Eden. Why?”
A. Eden was not perfect.

You wrote: “Does such a woman love you if she refuses to talk to you? The answer is no.”
A. It is not necessary to talk to someone to love them.

You wrote: “The testing doesn’t make sense. Why not create us perfect and we pass the test and God is glorified because of this?”
A. Free will is necessary that we be able to express charity, and that introduces the ability to sin. The tests allow for expression of charity and voluntary sharing in sacrifices like Christ.

You wrote: “How is God glorified with tons of people falling into sin? Or people falling into hell?”
A. By the saints.

You wrote: “The grace does not heal my son. The grace does not obliterate my imperfections.”
A. Yes. God gives the grace necessary to attain salvation (no mortal sin) and also allows the tests necessary for the life journey of each.

You wrote: “Free will is a cruel joke at best or nonexistent at worst, and I’ve provided plenty of examples.”
A. I posted the dogma of the Church that God gives free will to man, so it is not non existent. Also definitely does not meet the definition of Joke. God is not ridiculing us.

You wrote: “Selfishness is evil because the self is evil.”
A. Individuality is not evil.

You wrote: "If sainthood is the graduation of the PhD program, "
A. Saints struggle their entire life and there are many examples in the history of the Catholic Church. It is not over until your last breath.

 

[BobCatholic]

A. No, the answer for both of why is there. You continually focus on “temporal responsibility” like someone envious of another.

Envious? No. I don’t ever say Adam and Eve were evil people who should never have any preternatural gifts. I don’t wish ill on either of them.

Jealous? Yes. That’s a different thing, and that is morally OK.

Imagine a parent has two kids. Showers benefits and gifts on one, treats the other like garbage. The first kid fails and the second kid gets spanked as a consequence. I’m the second kid. Am I envious that the first kid is treated better? No. I’m angry because I’m treated worse. Big difference.

We were not given the preternatural gifts and that is not unjust.

I don’t talk about the preternatural gifts, what I talk about is being able to live in the Garden of Eden (paradise) and only having one rule, and having a personal relationship with God.

I don’t make a big deal about the preternatural gifts because they were not required to be in Eden or have one rule or to have a personal relationship with God (these are what I think are more important!!)

You wote: “Consequences and punishment are the same thing because God imposed them both!”
A. The two words have different meanings and are not the same.

God wrote the rules. God imposed both punishment and consequence.
God could have made it so the children remained in the Garden and had one rule and had that personal relationship with God, as the consequence. He didn’t. Thus, the consequence and punishment are the same thing.

You wrote: “You don’t explain why Christ did not obliterate the temporal punishment for our ancestors. He reopened the gates of heaven, but not the gates of Eden. Why?”
A. Eden was not perfect.

Never said it was. But it was easier to live there.

In Eden, it was equally easy to go to heaven or hell.
In this jail cell, it is horrifically difficult to get to heaven, while ridiculously easy to go to hell. The scales are WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY out of balance!

You wrote: “Does such a woman love you if she refuses to talk to you? The answer is no.”
A. It is not necessary to talk to someone to love them.

How is that? I don’t understand that. A relationship requires communication.

If I stopped praying, that relationship would be severed, right? How is the other way around (God not talking to me) not the case?

You wrote: “The testing doesn’t make sense. Why not create us perfect and we pass the test and God is glorified because of this?”
A. Free will is necessary that we be able to express charity, and that introduces the ability to sin. The tests allow for expression of charity and voluntary sharing in sacrifices like Christ.

Imperfections, if large enough, PREVENT expressions of charity, closes the door! If one’s imperfections get in the way, charity is deadened. OK, there’s no culpability, but where’s the charity?

You wrote: “How is God glorified with tons of people falling into sin? Or people falling into hell?”
A. By the saints.

The saints didn’t fall into hell. So that is a good thing. God is glorified.

The others fell into hell. That’s a bad thing. How is God glorified?

You wrote: “The grace does not heal my son. The grace does not obliterate my imperfections.”
A. Yes. God gives the grace necessary to attain salvation (no mortal sin) and also allows the tests necessary for the life journey of each.

Salvation is impossible without a personal relationship with God. I don’t want to pray daily and find out on that last day that He never knew me.

Also definitely does not meet the definition of Joke. God is not ridiculing us.

Free will is like having a $20 bill that someone dropped into a pile of excrement. It is nasty looking and smells bad. Nobody wants to accept it. Does this person have $20?
Technically yes, but he can’t benefit from it whatsoever, since nobody accepts it.

Free will is the same way. We apparently have it but can’t benefit from it.

You wrote: “Selfishness is evil because the self is evil.”
A. Individuality is not evil.

I didn’t say individuality. I said the self is evil, because selfishness is evil.

You wrote: "If sainthood is the graduation of the PhD program, "
A. Saints struggle their entire life and there are many examples in the history of the Catholic Church. It is not over until your last breath.

And if I can’t move any further forward between now and my last breath, I fear I am dead meat.

I need God more and more, but God stays far away. If the lesson is to teach us that we need God, mission accomplished in spades. If the lesson is to teach that God loves me, mission incomplete.

 

[davidv]

Envious? No. I don’t ever say Adam and Eve were evil people who should never have any preternatural gifts. I don’t wish ill on either of them.

Jealous? Yes. That’s a different thing, and that is morally OK. {snip}.

Not so fast. The Church is very clear that jealousy is also a sin.

1852 There are a great many kinds of sins. Scripture provides several lists of them. The Letter to the Galatians contrasts the works of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit: "Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God."127

 

[BobCatholic]

Not so fast. The Church is very clear that jealousy is also a sin.

If that is true, then you have to explain this:

Exodus 20:4

“You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

God does not sin, and yet He can be jealous. So obviously you’re missing a very important distinction between jealousy and envy.

Envy leads to covetousness, and that’s forbidden on the 9th and 10th commandments.

Here’s an example I like to use to illustrate the difference:

Your neighbor gets a brand new sports car.

Envy says “This creep does not deserve such a nice car. I should kill him and steal it from him.” That’s covetousness.

Jealousy says “Wow, that car is awesome. I want to get one too, but I can’t now. Maybe one day we can go to the car shows together and show off our cars.”

Getting back to the comment I made about Adam and Eve:

I want to live in the Garden of Eden and only have one rule and have a personal relationship with God like they did.

That’s impossible, so I can be jealous even though I can never return to Eden due to a lack of choice. As long as I am not unforgiving toward Adam and Eve and wanting them to be thrown in hell, there is no sin.
:

 

[davidv]

If that is true, then you have to explain this:

Exodus 20:4

God does not sin, and yet He can be jealous. So obviously you’re missing a very important distinction between jealousy and envy.

Envy leads to covetousness, and that’s forbidden on the 9th and 10th commandments.

Here’s an example I like to use to illustrate the difference:

Your neighbor gets a brand new sports car.

Envy says “This creep does not deserve such a nice car. I should kill him and steal it from him.” That’s covetousness.

Jealousy says “Wow, that car is awesome. I want to get one too, but I can’t now. Maybe one day we can go to the car shows together and show off our cars.”

Getting back to the comment I made about Adam and Eve:

I want to live in the Garden of Eden and only have one rule and have a personal relationship with God like they did.

That’s impossible, so I can be jealous even though I can never return to Eden due to a lack of choice. As long as I am not unforgiving toward Adam and Eve and wanting them to be thrown in hell, there is no sin.
:

The jealousy spoken of in Exodus is not the same jealousy of the CCC. The complaint against my understanding is not warranted.

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “Envious? No. I’m angry because I’m treated worse.”
A. Oxford Dictionary – "jealous: feeling or showing envy of someone or their achievements and advantages. synonyms: envious, covetous, desirous; " God is just.

You wrote: “God could have made it so the children remained in the Garden and had one rule and had that personal relationship with God, as the consequence.”
A. It was necessary for free will to be the way it is, so God could not logically do that.

You wrote: “Thus, the consequence and punishment are the same thing.”
A. The words have different meanings so are not the same thing.

You wrote: “In Eden, it was equally easy to go to heaven or hell.”
A. That is not known. If we did not have concupiscence we could fall the same way as Adam and Eve.

You wrote: “A relationship requires communication.”
A. No. Oxford Dictionary – “relationship: The way in which two or more concepts, objects, or people are connected, or the state of being connected.”

You wrote: “If I stopped praying, that relationship would be severed, right?”
A. No. God always gives actual graces.

You wrote: “OK, there’s no culpability, but where’s the charity?”
A. Catechism1813 The theological virtues are the foundation of Christian moral activity; they animate it and give it its special character. They inform and give life to all the moral virtues. They are infused by God into the souls of the faithful to make them capable of acting as his children and of meriting eternal life. They are the pledge of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the faculties of the human being. There are three theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity.77

You wrote: “The others fell into hell. That’s a bad thing. How is God glorified?”
A. Catechism294 The glory of God consists in the realization of this manifestation and communication of his goodness, for which the world was created. God made us “to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace”,138 for "the glory of God is man fully alive; moreover man’s life is the vision of God: if God’s revelation through creation has already obtained life for all the beings that dwell on earth, how much more will the Word’s manifestation of the Father obtain life for those who see God."139 The ultimate purpose of creation is that God "who is the creator of all things may at last become “all in all”, thus simultaneously assuring his own glory and our beatitude."140

You wrote: “Salvation is impossible without a personal relationship with God.”
A. One has it with sanctifying grace. Catechism
2565 In the New Covenant, prayer is the living relationship of the children of God with their Father who is good beyond measure, with his Son Jesus Christ and with the Holy Spirit. The grace of the Kingdom is "the union of the entire holy and royal Trinity . . . with the whole human spirit."12 Thus, the life of prayer is the habit of being in the presence of the thrice-holy God and in communion with him. This communion of life is always possible because, through Baptism, we have already been united with Christ.13 Prayer is Christian insofar as it is communion with Christ and extends throughout the Church, which is his Body. Its dimensions are those of Christ’s love.14

You wrote: “Free will is the same way. We apparently have it but can’t benefit from it.”
A. We gain merit from voluntary good actions when in the state of sanctifying grace.

You wrote: “I didn’t say individuality. I said the self is evil, because selfishness is evil.”
A. Oxford Dictionary – “self: 1.1 A person’s particular nature or personality; the qualities that make a person individual or unique.”

 

[BobCatholic]

The jealousy spoken of in Exodus is not the same jealousy of the CCC. The complaint against my understanding is not warranted.

There is a big difference between jealousy and envy. You think they’re the same thing, when they’re not.

 

[BobCatholic]

You wrote: “Envious? No. I’m angry because I’m treated worse.”
A. Oxford Dictionary – "jealous: feeling or showing envy of someone or their achievements and advantages. synonyms: envious, covetous, desirous; " God is just.

I’m talking about the theological definition, which makes it different from envy. The secular dictionaries make both envy and jealousy the same.

You wrote: “God could have made it so the children remained in the Garden and had one rule and had that personal relationship with God, as the consequence.”
A. It was necessary for free will to be the way it is, so God could not logically do that.

I don’t understand how. Please show me the reasoning, or theology behind this reasoning.

You wrote: “Thus, the consequence and punishment are the same thing.”
A. The words have different meanings so are not the same thing.

They have different meanings but in this case they are identical. God imposed both.

You wrote: “In Eden, it was equally easy to go to heaven or hell.”
A. That is not known. If we did not have concupiscence we could fall the same way as Adam and Eve.

Well, right now it is ridiculously easy to go to hell and horrifically difficult to go to heaven.

You wrote: “A relationship requires communication.”
A. No. Oxford Dictionary – “relationship: The way in which two or more concepts, objects, or people are connected, or the state of being connected.”

A secular dictionary is insufficient for theological discussion.

When I’m talking about relationship, I’m talking about knowing Christ, in a way that prevents him from saying “I do not know you” when I get there.

You wrote: “If I stopped praying, that relationship would be severed, right?”
A. No. God always gives actual graces.

But not if they’re not in relationship with him.

You wrote: “OK, there’s no culpability, but where’s the charity?”
A. Catechism1813 The theological virtues are the foundation of Christian moral activity; they animate it and give it its special character. They inform and give life to all the moral virtues. They are infused by God into the souls of the faithful to make them capable of acting as his children and of meriting eternal life. They are the pledge of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the faculties of the human being. There are three theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity.77

And if God chooses not to do this game over, no choice.

You wrote: “The others fell into hell. That’s a bad thing. How is God glorified?”
A. Catechism294 The glory of God consists in the realization of this manifestation and communication of his goodness, for which the world was created. God made us “to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace”,138 for "the glory of God is man fully alive; moreover man’s life is the vision of God: if God’s revelation through creation has already obtained life for all the beings that dwell on earth, how much more will the Word’s manifestation of the Father obtain life for those who see God."139 The ultimate purpose of creation is that God "who is the creator of all things may at last become “all in all”, thus simultaneously assuring his own glory and our beatitude."140

God is Glorified in his angels and his saints. God is not glorified because of those in hell.

You wrote: “Salvation is impossible without a personal relationship with God.”
A. One has it with sanctifying grace. Catechism

One does not have it if Christ does not know them. “I do not know you, go away you evildoer.”

You wrote: “Free will is the same way. We apparently have it but can’t benefit from it.”
A. We gain merit from voluntary good actions when in the state of sanctifying grace.

and not in the state of grace, no merit. And if God does not want to help one avoid getting out of the state of grace, no choice.

You wrote: “I didn’t say individuality. I said the self is evil, because selfishness is evil.”
A. Oxford Dictionary – “self: 1.1 A person’s particular nature or personality; the qualities that make a person individual or unique.”

What is selfishness? Putting the self first. What self is that? Not the GOOD self.

If selfishness is evil then the self is evil.

Now if one put the GOOD self first (i.e. Christ within them) then selfishness is good

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “The secular dictionaries make both envy and jealousy the same.”
A. One with envy wants to possess the good or excellence of another, and to destroy it, whereas for one with jealousy destruction is not an element. Jealousy is sinful when one desires something inordinately or unreasonably.

You wrote: “I don’t understand how. Please show me the reasoning, or theology behind this reasoning.” re: “It was necessary for free will to be the way it is, so God could not logically do that.”
A. Free will is necessary that we be able to express charity, and that introduces the ability to sin. The tests allow for expression of charity and voluntary sharing in sacrifices like Christ.

You wrote: “They have different meanings but in this case they are identical. God imposed both.”
A. No, consequences here involve no punishment for personal sin. What Adam and Eve experienced was greater since they were culpable for original (mortal) sin which has a two fold effect whereas the descendants are not.

You wrote: “A secular dictionary is insufficient for theological discussion.”
A. You did not accept the Catechism before but argued. Catechism:
2558 … in a vital and personal relationship with the living and true God. This relationship is prayer.

You wrote: “When I’m talking about relationship, I’m talking about knowing Christ, in a way that prevents him from saying “I do not know you” when I get there.”
A. Galatians 4:8-9:
8 At a time when you did not know God, you became slaves to things that by nature are not gods; 9 but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and destitute elemental powers? Do you want to be slaves to them all over again?

You wrote: “But not if they’re not in relationship with him.” and “And if God chooses not to do this game over, no choice.”
A. The dogma is that God gives actual grace even before conversion. This was condemned by Constitution, “Unigenitus,” * Sept. 8, 1713:
“No graces are granted except through faith.”
Also God always makes the first gift, no person is saved on their own.

You wrote: “God is Glorified in his angels and his saints. God is not glorified because of those in hell.”
A. God is even glorified even by those in hell because it shows his justice.

You wrote: “One does not have it [a personal relationship] if Christ does not know them.”
A. Christ knows – has a personal relationship with – all that have sanctifying grace.

You wrote: “And if God does not want to help one avoid getting out of the state of grace, no choice.”
A. No, Fourth Lateran Council (Denzinger):
430 One indeed is the universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved, * in which the priest himself is the sacrifice, Jesus Christ, whose body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the species of bread and wine; the bread (changed) into His body by the divine power of transubstantiation, and the wine into the blood, so that to accomplish the mystery of unity we ourselves receive from His (nature) what He Himself received from ours. And surely no one can accomplish this sacrament except a priest who has been rightly ordained according to the keys of the Church which Jesus Christ Himself conceded to the Apostles and to their successors. But the sacrament of baptism (which at the invocation of God and the indivisible Trinity, namely, of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, is solemnized in water) rightly conferred by anyone in the form of the Church is useful unto salvation for little ones and for adults. And if, after the reception of baptism, anyone shall have lapsed into sin, through true penance he can always be restored. Moreover, not only virgins and the continent but also married persons pleasing to God through right faith and good work merit to arrive at a blessed eternity.

You wrote: “What is selfishness? Putting the self first. What self is that? Not the GOOD self.”
A. There is only one individual soul which could be selfish. Merriam Webster – Selfish: concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one’s own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others.

You wrote: “If selfishness is evil then the self is evil.”
A. No Catholicism does not profess absolute depravity.

 

[BobCatholic]

A. One with envy wants to possess the good or excellence of another, and to destroy it, whereas for one with jealousy destruction is not an element. Jealousy is sinful when one desires something inordinately or unreasonably.

Precisely! So there is jealousy which is not sinful, and that’s my point.

A. Free will is necessary that we be able to express charity, and that introduces the ability to sin. The tests allow for expression of charity and voluntary sharing in sacrifices like Christ.

It is ridiculously easy to go to hell. It is our default destination. It is horrifically difficult to go to heaven. The scales are way out of balance.

It is one thing to say “introduces the ability to sin” - it is another that it is ridiculously easy to go to hell.

If the scales were balanced (i.e. 50/50 chance of heaven and hell) OK, I can see that we have free will. But when it is so lopsided in favor of hell, then how can one have free will?

A. No, consequences here involve no punishment for personal sin. What Adam and Eve experienced was greater since they were culpable for original (mortal) sin which has a two fold effect whereas the descendants are not.

Working by the sweat of the brow - imposed by God. God requires us to work for a living, but with me, he requires that i can’t keep a steady job, yet my responsibilities are steady and increasing. Scales are out of balance.

A woman has increased birth pangs, imposed by God.

An inability to have a personal relationship with God like they did in the Garden.

These are punishments, pure and simple, not just “consequences” and we are held temporally responsible for the sins of our ancestors.

I can’t see the difference. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

You wrote: “A secular dictionary is insufficient for theological discussion.”
A. You did not accept the Catechism before but argued. Catechism:
2558 … in a vital and personal relationship with the living and true God. This relationship is prayer.

I do accept the catechism, but you oversimplified a relationship with God by saying it is only prayer.

If I get to judgment and I’m going to hell, what will break my heart more is hearing from Christ “Go away, I never knew you.” and I will yell back “I TRIED!! YOU WOULD NOT LET ME!”

You wrote: “When I’m talking about relationship, I’m talking about knowing Christ, in a way that prevents him from saying “I do not know you” when I get there.”
A. Galatians 4:8-9:
8 At a time when you did not know God, you became slaves to things that by nature are not gods; 9 but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and destitute elemental powers? Do you want to be slaves to them all over again?

This scripture does not say how one came to know God.

I don’t want to merely believe - i.e. have an intellectual belief - I want to actually know God (each person in the Trinity), like a friend, like someone I love. Have a friendship where there are actual CONVERSATIONS.

Unfortunately, that’s not possible for me. Such a relationship is only for mystics and saints, not for me. The best I can have is a corporate relationship with God.

You wrote: “But not if they’re not in relationship with him.” and “And if God chooses not to do this game over, no choice.”
A. The dogma is that God gives actual grace even before conversion. This was condemned by Constitution, “Unigenitus,” * Sept. 8, 1713:
“No graces are granted except through faith.”
Also God always makes the first gift, no person is saved on their own.

Faith is when one knows God like a friend, or someone they love. It is not a mere intellectual assent. Such a relationship is only for mystics and saints, not for me. The best I can have is a corporate relationship with God.

You wrote: “God is Glorified in his angels and his saints. God is not glorified because of those in hell.”
A. God is even glorified even by those in hell because it shows his justice.

God is cursed by those in hell. They hate him. Haters gonna hate and they’re drinking the haterade by the gallon.

You wrote: “One does not have it [a personal relationship] if Christ does not know them.”
A. Christ knows – has a personal relationship with – all that have sanctifying grace.

How?

. Moreover, not only virgins and the continent but also married persons pleasing to God through right faith and good work merit to arrive at a blessed eternity.

And remember what faith really is, not just an intellectual acceptance.

A. There is only one individual soul which could be selfish. Merriam Webster – Selfish: concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one’s own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others.

Again, a secular dictionary.

“exclusively with oneself” or “without regard for others” - this is narcissism. The definition above conflates selfishness with narcissism.

I see 3 levels of selfishness.

level 1: self interest. This is one’s personal needs. Food. Drink. Medical care.
level 2: selfishness. “I want to do what I want to do,as long as it does not harm others.” - this is for one’s wants and desires.
level 3: narcissism. “I want to do what I want to do, and I don’t care if it hurts others.” one’s wants and desires at any cost, even if it causes great harm to others.

Level 3 = self is evil
level 2 = self is evil
level 1 = self is evil, If one’s needs are more important than one’s need for God.

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: "Precisely! So there is jealousy which is not sinful, and that’s my point. …
“Envious? No. I’m angry because I’m treated worse.”
A. Note that jealousy can be sinful. That Adam and Eve had their moral testing any easier than us has never made sense to me. Adam and Eve lived very long lives and had to struggle with concupiscence just as we do. They did not have the sacraments no the redemption available in there lifetimes. They had the additional knowledge of there loss.

You wrote: “But when it is so lopsided in favor of hell, then how can one have free will?”
A. God gives us grace so God makes it possible.

You wrote: “How?” [do we come to know God]
A. The Father sent his Son to bring us truth and His Spirit to make us holy. We know through that truth and through grace.

You wrote: “These are punishments, pure and simple,”
A. Yes, for Adam and Eve.

You wrote: " not just “consequences” and we are held temporally responsible for the sins of our ancestors.
A. Catechism says consequences differentiating they from personal sin which involves build. Original sin is only analogical sin.

You wrote: “I can’t see the difference. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.”"
A. Cause is the significant difference.

You wrote: “I do accept the catechism, but you oversimplified a relationship with God by saying it is only prayer.”
A. I quoted the Catechisms, more than one section, over these posts, so I am not the authority but the Church is.

You wrote: "If I get to judgment and I’m going to hell, … “I TRIED!! YOU WOULD NOT LET ME!”
A. I in the end if one does not love God, then hell will be justified.

You wrote: “This scripture does not say how one came to know God.”
A. John 10:14-16
14 I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I will lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep[a] that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.

You wrote: “Faith is when one knows God like a friend, or someone they love. It is not a mere intellectual assent.” and “And remember what faith really is, not just an intellectual acceptance.”
A. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit received in the sacraments. (Faith, hope, charity.)

You wrote:" Again, a secular dictionary." Re: selfish.
A. Sin rather than self is what is evil. Catechism
357 Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. And he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead.

Catechism
1850 … In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.125

 

[BobCatholic]

That Adam and Eve had their moral testing any easier than us has never made sense to me.

Same here. So you do understand something of what I’m struggling with.

Adam and Eve lived very long lives and had to struggle with concupiscence just as we do. They did not have the sacraments no the redemption available in there lifetimes. They had the additional knowledge of there loss.

Right, and I’m not begrudging their salvation nor holding any anger at them. Though I did mention bopping them on the head with a pillow (in a playful way!) that was not indicative of me being angry or resentful or other evil.

You wrote: “But when it is so lopsided in favor of hell, then how can one have free will?”
A. God gives us grace so God makes it possible.

But why can’t God’s grace make it ridiculously easy to go to heaven?

One thing I can’t understand is this.

It is horrifically difficult to get to heaven and ridiculously easy to go to hell, and that means we have free will.

But for some reason if it was the other way around (ridiculously easy to get to heaven and horrifically difficult to go to hell) - there is no free will. This was the situation of Adam and Eve yet they had free will.

You wrote: “How?” [do we come to know God]
A. The Father sent his Son to bring us truth and His Spirit to make us holy. We know through that truth and through grace.

But that is vague.

You wrote: “These are punishments, pure and simple,”
A. Yes, for Adam and Eve.

And for us as well since we suffer them too.

You wrote: “I can’t see the difference. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck.”"
A. Cause is the significant difference.

Right. Adam and Eve did the crime, that’s the cause, we do the time.

You wrote: “I do accept the catechism, but you oversimplified a relationship with God by saying it is only prayer.”
A. I quoted the Catechisms, more than one section, over these posts, so I am not the authority but the Church is.

Yes, but there must be more than just prayer in a relationship. It takes his part as well, to talk to me.

You wrote: "If I get to judgment and I’m going to hell, … “I TRIED!! YOU WOULD NOT LET ME!”
A. I in the end if one does not love God, then hell will be justified.

So how do I love someone who I cannot relate to or have a conversation with?

You wrote: “This scripture does not say how one came to know God.”
A. John 10:14-16
14 I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and mine know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I will lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep[a] that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.

But I can’t hear his voice.

You wrote: “Faith is when one knows God like a friend, or someone they love. It is not a mere intellectual assent.” and “And remember what faith really is, not just an intellectual acceptance.”
A. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit received in the sacraments. (Faith, hope, charity.)

And I have not received that gift. I just have a corporate relationship with God and that’s the best I can expect.

It seems to me that the mystics and saints have that relationship with God I am seeking, the trustful Abba relationship. The rest of the Catholics have this lack of God talking to them personally.

I must be an ego-maniacal narcissist to think I could ever have a relationship with God that is only reserved for saints and mystics, since I am neither saint nor mystic.

I must therefore conclude that the corporate relationship with God is the only thing I can have during my time on earth, and I just have to be grateful for even having that. I, after all, am a gentile, and am eating from the crumbs left by the children. I am, after all, a husband and father, not a monk, and am a second class citizen in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “Same here. So you do understand something of what I’m struggling with.”
A. No I am saying that it never made sense to me to say that Adam and Eve had it any easier.

You wrote: “But why can’t God’s grace make it ridiculously easy to go to heaven?”
A. Each person has different situation and tests. There is no implication of ease in what I read in the teachings of the Church, but necessary tests to receive our crown, even as Christ states:
Mark 10
28 And Peter began to say unto him: Behold, we have left all things, and have followed thee. 29 Jesus answering, said: Amen I say to you, there is no man who hath left house or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, 30 Who shall not receive an hundred times as much, now in this time; houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions: and in the world to come life everlasting. 31 But many that are first, shall be last: and the last, first.

You wrote: “It is horrifically difficult to get to heaven and ridiculously easy to go to hell, and that means we have free will.”
A. No, that God gave us free will is why we have free will.

You wrote: “But for some reason if it was the other way around (ridiculously easy to get to heaven and horrifically difficult to go to hell) - there is no free will.”
A. We have free will, the Catholic Church rejects Calvinism.

You wrote: “And for us as well since we suffer them too.” and “Right. Adam and Eve did the crime, that’s the cause, we do the time.”
A. Suffering has a different meaning than punishment which has to do with guilt for punishment. So not having the preternatural gifts, which are not due to us, is not a temporal punishment for our sins.

You wrote: “Yes, but there must be more than just prayer in a relationship. It takes his part as well, to talk to me.”
A. The Father sent his Son and Holy Spirit which is that.

You wrote: “So how do I love someone who I cannot relate to or have a conversation with?”
A. Prayer and penance. Do the will of God. John 8
42Jesus therefore said to them: If God were your Father, you would indeed love me. For from God I proceeded, and came; for I came not of myself, but he sent me: 43Why do you not know my speech? Because you cannot hear my word. 44You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. 45But if I say the truth, you believe me not. 46Which of you shall convince me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do you not believe me? 47He that is of God, heareth the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God.

You wrote: “But I can’t hear his voice.”
A. It is right there in the Catechism and the Gospel.

You wrote: "And I have not received that gift. "
A. If you were baptized then you received the gifts of faith, hope, and charity.

 

[BobCatholic]

You wrote: “Same here. So you do understand something of what I’m struggling with.”
A. No I am saying that it never made sense to me to say that Adam and Eve had it any easier.

So they had preternatural gifts and we don’t. That gives them an advantage.

They only had to follow one rule and we have to follow 17. That gives them an advantage.

They got to live in paradise, we can’t. That gives them an advantage.

So unless their imperfections are far larger than ours, which is not likely due to their preternatural gifts, they had it FAR easier than us!

You wrote: “But why can’t God’s grace make it ridiculously easy to go to heaven?”
A. Each person has different situation and tests. There is no implication of ease in what I read in the teachings of the Church, but necessary tests to receive our crown, even as Christ states:

I make no discussion about the test, only that the test is far harder for us mere mortals than it was for Adam and Eve.

You wrote: “It is horrifically difficult to get to heaven and ridiculously easy to go to hell, and that means we have free will.”
A. No, that God gave us free will is why we have free will.

You wrote: “But for some reason if it was the other way around (ridiculously easy to get to heaven and horrifically difficult to go to hell) - there is no free will.”
A. We have free will, the Catholic Church rejects Calvinism.

I think you missed my point here. You keep saying that if it was easier for us to get to heaven, then we have no free will. But if it is easier to go to hell, we have free will.

So not having the preternatural gifts, which are not due to us, is not a temporal punishment for our sins.

I don’t care about the preternatural gifts, you keep going back to that.
What I care about is living in paradise and only having one rule.

You wrote: “Yes, but there must be more than just prayer in a relationship. It takes his part as well, to talk to me.”
A. The Father sent his Son and Holy Spirit which is that.

And if He’s silent, game over. C’mon, I’ve been saying that God is silent to me.

You wrote: “So how do I love someone who I cannot relate to or have a conversation with?”
A. Prayer and penance. Do the will of God. John 8

How can I do the will of God if

1. he won’t tell me AND
2. he punishes me for not doing it?

It seems to me that the mystics and saints have that relationship with God I am seeking, the trustful Abba relationship. The rest of the Catholics have this lack of God talking to them personally.

I must be an ego-maniacal narcissist to think I could ever have a relationship with God that is only reserved for saints and mystics, since I am neither saint nor mystic.

I must therefore conclude that the corporate relationship with God is the only thing I can have during my time on earth, and I just have to be grateful for even having that. I, after all, am a gentile, and am eating from the crumbs left by the children. I am, after all, a husband and father, not a monk, and am a second class citizen in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[fbl9]

My thoughts have followed s similar path as Bob’s. ie. the Why Me?
However since i came to accept the lot that has been chosen for me, i consider myself blessed. In hard times the Why me has become why not me.
Bob wrote i am a second class citizen of heaven.
I am not sure but i have read that there is a hierarchy in heaven. Well Bob second class to me seems very good cause i consider myself to be on the outer fringes of said hierarchy.

 

[Vico]

…

You wrote: “… That gives them an advantage…, they had it FAR easier than us!”
A. The difference is that of having original justice: which includes being constituted in sanctifying grace and having access to immortality in the Tree of Life (a preternatural gift).
Advantage: a condition or circumstance that puts one in a favorable or superior position.
It does not seem to be of a favorable or superior position to me, however, since God gives grace to each in proportion to circumstances that one be able to remain in a state of sanctifying grace. That is a dogma of faith.

You wrote: “You keep saying that if it was easier for us to get to heaven, then we have no free will. But if it is easier to go to hell, we have free will.”
A. No, I keep saying what the Church teaches that God gave us free will, without any reference to difficulty.

You wrote: “And if He’s silent, game over. C’mon, I’ve been saying that God is silent to me.” and “How can I do the will of God if 1) he won’t tell me AND 2) he punishes me for not doing it?”
A. If God were silent then there would have been no prophets, Incarnation, Gospel, nor grace through the Holy Spirit, and no divine providence.

You wrote: “It seems to me that the mystics and saints have that relationship with God I am seeking, the trustful Abba relationship. The rest of the Catholics have this lack of God talking to them personally.”
A. Some people have charismatic gifts.