Is our free choice real

[BobCatholic]

By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice.

The fact we are held temporally responsible for Adam’s sin - implicated in Adam’s sin - contradicts the idea that we are implicated in Christ’s justice.

Apparently Christ took care of the spiritual aspects of Adam’s sin. That was paid in full.
The temporal aspects…left alone, not taken care of.

This is like a billionaire who buys everyone drinks at the packed pub, pays the tab in full and does not pay the parking fee.

Why does God begrudge the temporal? Why is he holding back?

 

[tonyrey]

To go to hell, just exist.

On the contrary. If hell didn’t have its compensations no one would reject God. To have one’s own kingdom and absolute power over oneself must be a source of great satisfaction…

To go to heaven, you need the grace of God and horrific suffering throughout your life.

Everyone receives God’s grace but there is no obligation to make use of it. Nor is there a precept that everyone has to endure “horrific suffering throughout your life” to go to heaven.

Our free choice is real enough because hell is a state of self-imposed isolation which gives great satisfaction but also deep frustration. In the long run we all get precisely what** we** want but what we want isn’t necessarily what brings** us** joy and fulfilment. Jesus told us we have to love others as well as ourselves and if necessary suffer and die for them as He did…

 

[BobCatholic]

On the contrary. If hell didn’t have its compensations no one would reject God. To have one’s own kingdom and absolute power over oneself must be a source of great satisfaction…

I don’t understand. If someone had their own absolute power over themselves, they’d choose to be in paradise, nobody would choose hell willingly, if they knew what hell entailed.

Nor is there a precept that everyone has to endure “horrific suffering throughout your life” to go to heaven.

That. Is. False.

In order to get to heaven, one must follow Christ.

To follow Christ, one must deny themselves and CARRY THEIR CROSS. Christ also said that there would be tribulations, sufferings and other horrific suffering throughout life - GUARANTEED. Did you forget the Beatitudes that one is blessed if they endured all kinds of horrific suffering because of his name? Oh, and what about what scripture says that God scourges all his children - anyone not scourged is treated as illegitimate?

Now, if you’re saying there is NO OBLIGATION to endure horrific suffering to go to heaven, that’s going against the words of scripture.

In the long run we all get precisely what** we** want but what we want isn’t necessarily what brings** us** joy and fulfilment. Jesus told us we have to love others as well as ourselves and if necessary suffer and die for them as He did…

And if someone wanted God, but could not want the horrific suffering as the price, God will do what? Will He say “You didn’t want me enough so downstairs you go!”

 

[Vico]

The fact we are held temporally responsible for Adam’s sin - implicated in Adam’s sin - contradicts the idea that we are implicated in Christ’s justice.

Apparently Christ took care of the spiritual aspects of Adam’s sin. That was paid in full.
The temporal aspects…left alone, not taken care of.

This is like a billionaire who buys everyone drinks at the packed pub, pays the tab in full and does not pay the parking fee.

Why does God begrudge the temporal? Why is he holding back?

Implicated means involved. Certainly we are involved in both.

If one is not baptized (water, desire, or blood), so one is not justified from original sin – it is not temporary.

If one chooses to be selfish at the point of death, then that one will remain with the fallen angels forever, and that is hell. Conversely if one chooses to be unselfish at the point of death, then that one will remain with the saints forever, and that is heaven. Yet one may die at any moment so must be vigilent,

It was stated in the Gospel of 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.

And Matthew 10
34 Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 35 For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And as a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household.

 

[Vico]

The fact we are held temporally responsible for Adam’s sin - implicated in Adam’s sin - contradicts the idea that we are implicated in Christ’s justice.

Apparently Christ took care of the spiritual aspects of Adam’s sin. That was paid in full.
The temporal aspects…left alone, not taken care of.

This is like a billionaire who buys everyone drinks at the packed pub, pays the tab in full and does not pay the parking fee.

Why does God begrudge the temporal? Why is he holding back?

I should post the Catechism on that one question you asked:

1264 Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically,

“the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” 67 [Council of Trent (1546): DS 1515.] Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.” 68 [2 Tim 2:5]​

 

[BobCatholic]

I should post the Catechism on that one question you asked:

1264 Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically,

“the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” 67 [Council of Trent (1546): DS 1515.] Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.” 68 [2 Tim 2:5]​

It can most definitely harm those who do not consent. People are innocent victims of crime all the time. In addition, people get laid off because the CEO wants more money in his bonus check. Narcissism negatively affects other people.

Your catechism citation does not explain why God begrudges the temporal, why our concupiscence is not destroyed.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . why God begrudges the temporal, why our concupiscence is not destroyed.

When we had it all we blew it.
Now it is clear that we are not God and that we cannot do it alone.
Concupiscence compels us to seek Him.
If things were easy, we would likely not give Him a second thought.
We are not destined for bovine bliss.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God.

Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Gospel of St. Matthew 5:3-10

:twocents:

 

[Vico]

It can most definitely harm those who do not consent. People are innocent victims of crime all the time. In addition, people get laid off because the CEO wants more money in his bonus check. Narcissism negatively affects other people.

Your catechism citation does not explain why God begrudges the temporal, why our concupiscence is not destroyed.

The harm or injury referred to is sin.

It is from Session 5, Council of Trent, a dogma of faith:

1. If any one denies, that, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only rased, or not imputed; let him be anathema. For, in those who are born again, there is nothing that God hates; because, There is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ by baptism into death; who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man, and putting on the new who is created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, harmless, and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ; so that there is nothing whatever to retard their entrance into heaven. But this holy synod confesses and is sensible, that in the baptized there remains concupiscence, or an incentive (to sin); which, whereas it is left for our exercise, cannot injure those who consent not, but resist manfully by the grace of Jesus Christ; yea, he who shall have striven lawfully shall be crowned. This concupiscence, which the apostle sometimes calls sin, the holy Synod declares that the Catholic Church has never understood it to be called sin, as being truly and properly sin in those born again, but because it is of sin, and inclines to sin.

 

[tonyrey]

On the contrary. If hell didn’t have its compensations no one would reject God. To have one’s own kingdom and absolute power over oneself must be a source of great satisfaction…

Hell is not a trap but a choice. Even in this world people choose power and riches at the cost of becoming isolated and alienating others.

That. Is. False.

In order to get to heaven, one must follow Christ.

To follow Christ, one must deny themselves and CARRY THEIR CROSS. Christ also said that there would be tribulations, sufferings and other horrific suffering throughout life - GUARANTEED. Did you forget the Beatitudes that one is blessed if they endured all kinds of horrific suffering because of his name? Oh, and what about what scripture says that God scourges all his children - anyone not scourged is treated as illegitimate?

Now, if you’re saying there is NO OBLIGATION to endure horrific suffering to go to heaven, that’s going against the words of scripture.

On the contrary, there are canonised saints who have not had to endure “horrific suffering throughout life” in spite of sermons threatening hell-fire for the slightest offences. Your extreme view is certainly not that of the Catholic Church:

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him** if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.**613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”

In the long run we all get precisely what** we**

want but what we want isn’t necessarily what brings** us** joy and fulfilment. Jesus told us we have to love others as well as ourselves and if necessary suffer and die for them as He did… And if someone wanted God, but could not want the horrific suffering as the price, God will do what? Will He say “You didn’t want me enough so downstairs you go!” I don’t understand. If someone had their own absolute power over themselves, they’d choose to be in paradise, nobody would choose hell willingly, if they knew what hell entailed.

God is not a vindictive monster who delights in sending His children to be tortured for all eternity. Jesus gave us a great example of His infinite love and mercy. That is why purgatory exists - which you have overlooked. **Hell is not a trap but a choice with full knowledge of the consequences. **There is more joy in heaven over one repentant sinner…

 

[BobCatholic]

When we had it all we blew it.

And we were never forgiven for that.

Concupiscence compels us to seek Him.

Nope. Concupiscence compels us to sin. It compels us to fail. It compels us to hell.

If things were easy, we would likely not give Him a second thought.

If things were easy, then hell and heaven would be at least balanced out - easy to get into ether. Instead, it is ridiculously easy to get to hell and horrifically difficult to get into heaven.

Hell is not a trap but a choice. Even in this world people choose power and riches at the cost of becoming isolated and alienating others.

How is it a choice when most don’t go there with a full and complete choice?

People get created imperfectly, then they make mistakes and can’t recover from them.

On the contrary, there are canonised saints who have not had to endure “horrific suffering throughout life” in spite of sermons threatening hell-fire for the slightest offences.

Who? I’ve read the lives of the saints, they all endured horrific suffering throughout their lives.

Your extreme view is certainly not that of the Catholic Church:

if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren

Precisely. I’m not rich, and I cannot help the needs of the poor when I can’t even help myself. Therefore, I’m doomed to go to hell. All because I’m not rich.

God is not a vindictive monster who delights in sending His children to be tortured for all eternity. Jesus gave us a great example of His infinite love and mercy.

Correct. He suffered horrific suffering. He said the servant is not greater than his master so if he had to endure horrific suffering, so do we, to get to heaven.

That is why purgatory exists - which you have overlooked. **Hell is not a trap but a choice with full knowledge of the consequences. **There is more joy in heaven over one repentant sinner…

We don’t have full knowledge, and full choice. We are imperfect. We are buggy software, and crash. That bug is called concupiscence. God did not heal this bug, and yet still expects us to be perfect. That is impossible.

 

[BobCatholic]

The harm or injury referred to is sin.

It is from Session 5, Council of Trent, a dogma of faith:

1. If any one denies, that, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only rased, or not imputed; let him be anathema. For, in those who are born again, there is nothing that God hates; because, There is no condemnation to those who are truly buried together with Christ by baptism into death; who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man, and putting on the new who is created according to God, are made innocent, immaculate, pure, harmless, and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ; so that there is nothing whatever to retard their entrance into heaven. But this holy synod confesses and is sensible, that in the baptized there remains concupiscence, or an incentive (to sin); which, whereas it is left for our exercise, cannot injure those who consent not, but resist manfully by the grace of Jesus Christ; yea, he who shall have striven lawfully shall be crowned. This concupiscence, which the apostle sometimes calls sin, the holy Synod declares that the Catholic Church has never understood it to be called sin, as being truly and properly sin in those born again, but because it is of sin, and inclines to sin.

Again, zero information on why God did not bother to fix this bug of concupiscence in our software.

Why does God begrudge this tiny healing that would be helpful in getting away from sin?

 

[Vico]

Again, zero information on why God did not bother to fix this bug of concupiscence in our software.

Why does God begrudge this tiny healing that would be helpful in getting away from sin?

There is no begrudge with God that is love. Concupiscence cannot injure except those that do not want healing.

So you missed it in a previous post then?

“an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.” 68 [2 Tim 2:5]

2 Tim 2:
3 Labour as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No man being a soldier to God, entangleth himself with worldly concerns: that he may please him to whom he hath engaged himself. 5 For he also that striveth for the mastery, is not crowned, except he strive lawfully.

 

[tonyrey]

Hell is not a trap but a choice. Even in this world people choose power and riches at the cost of becoming isolated and alienating others.

What evidence is there for that belief? Do you reject purgatory?

On the contrary, there are canonised saints who have not had to endure “horrific suffering throughout life” in spite of sermons threatening hell-fire for the slightest offences.

Who? I’ve read the lives of the saints, they all endured horrific suffering throughout their lives.

What evidence is there for the belief that **every single one **of the saints endured horrific suffering throughout their lives? Please cite a statement in the Catechism supporting that dogma.

Your extreme view is certainly not that of the Catholic Church: if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren

Precisely. I’m not rich, and I cannot help the needs of the poor when I can’t even help myself. Therefore, I’m doomed to go to hell. All because I’m not rich.

God does not expect us to do the impossible.

God is not a vindictive monster who delights in sending His children to be tortured for all eternity. Jesus gave us a great example of His infinite love and mercy.

Correct. He suffered horrific suffering. He said the servant is not greater than his master so if he had to endure horrific suffering, so do we, to get to heaven.

Non sequitur. Please cite a statement in the Catechism to the effect that **everyone **must endure **horrific **suffering to get to heaven.

That is why purgatory exists - which you have overlooked. **Hell is not a trap but a choice with full knowledge of the consequences. **

There is more joy in heaven over one repentant sinner…
We don’t have full knowledge, and full choice. We are imperfect. We are buggy software, and crash. That bug is called concupiscence. God did not heal this bug, and yet still expects us to be perfect. That is impossible.

Then you don’t believe God is infinitely merciful and infinitely loving.

 

[BobCatholic]

There is no begrudge with God that is love. Concupiscence cannot injure except those that do not want healing.

Then why are we not in the Garden of Eden? Why did God not heal our concupiscence?

Concupiscence DOES injure. Hell is the proof of that. Suffering on earth is the proof of that. Being held temporally responsible for the sins of others is the proof of that.

“an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.” 68 [2 Tim 2:5]

And the rules are we must endure horrific suffering.

What evidence is there for that belief? Do you reject purgatory?

That is only if one’s imperfections are small enough that they don’t commit mortal sin.

What evidence is there for the belief that **every single one **of the saints endured horrific suffering throughout their lives? Please cite a statement in the Catechism supporting that dogma.

I read the lives of the saints. I have yet to see one that didn’t endure horrific suffering.

God does not expect us to do the impossible.

“Be perfect like your heavenly Father is perfect” - yet he does not fix the concupicense bug that prevents this from happening. Set up to fail.

Non sequitur. Please cite a statement in the Catechism to the effect that **everyone **must endure **horrific **suffering to get to heaven.

Oh, so you believe this is not required and the Church doesn’t say this is required? So The Church teaches contrary to Christ who says one must carry their cross to follow him? The cross is now optional?

Then you don’t believe God is infinitely merciful and infinitely loving.

He’s loving in a way I can’t recognize as love.
He’s merciful in a way I can’t recognize as mercy.

That’s why I hate being imperfect. I hate being imperfect!!!

 

[Vico]

Then why are we not in the Garden of Eden? Why did God not heal our concupiscence?

Concupiscence DOES injure. Hell is the proof of that. Suffering on earth is the proof of that. Being held temporally responsible for the sins of others is the proof of that.

And the rules are we must endure horrific suffering.

That is only if one’s imperfections are small enough that they don’t commit mortal sin.

I read the lives of the saints. I have yet to see one that didn’t endure horrific suffering.

“Be perfect like your heavenly Father is perfect” - yet he does not fix the concupicense bug that prevents this from happening. Set up to fail.

Oh, so you believe this is not required and the Church doesn’t say this is required? So The Church teaches contrary to Christ who says one must carry their cross to follow him? The cross is now optional?

He’s loving in a way I can’t recognize as love.
He’s merciful in a way I can’t recognize as mercy.

That’s why I hate being imperfect. I hate being imperfect!!!

One can only be healed that is willing to be healed, an that requires an act of will, of repentance. The sacraments of healing are baptism and reconciliation. It is not temptation (the concupiesence) that one is healed from, that it the test. Having overcome that test, with the grace of God, gives glory to God and shows us to be icons of Christ.

Also, Adam and Eve did not experience concupiscence before their fall due to the preternatural gift of integrity that they were given. That preternatural gift was a gift extension to human nature. We have no claim to preternatural gifts.

 

[BobCatholic]

One can only be healed that is willing to be healed, an that requires an act of will, of repentance.

OK, I’m willing to be healed. I want this concupiscence gone.

It is not temptation (the concupiesence) that one is healed from, that it the test. Having overcome that test, with the grace of God, gives glory to God and shows us to be icons of Christ.

There’s no other way to glorify God?

I would think that if we were created perfect, that perfection comes from God and that would reflect on God and give him Glory.

An artist that paints a masterpiece gets glory. A piece of trash painting gives the artist no glory.

I’m that piece of trash. I want to be a masterpiece (perfect). I want the concupiscence gone. How is it solved?

Also, Adam and Eve did not experience concupiscence before their fall due to the preternatural gift of integrity that they were given. That preternatural gift was a gift extension to human nature. We have no claim to preternatural gifts.

Adam & Eve were created imperfect. They had the imperfection of either pride, naivete, stupidity or fear.

 

[STT]

There’s no other way to glorify God?

I don’t think that God needs to be glorified. He is perfect. Why would he want that?

I would think that if we were created perfect, that perfection comes from God and that would reflect on God and give him Glory.

The only perfect being is God. The rest is imperfect. It is logically impossible to create perfect being, God, because they (two Gods) simply share single absolute reality, meaning that they are one.

An artist that paints a masterpiece gets glory. A piece of trash painting gives the artist no glory.

Perhaps you have infinite potential within. That is however true that you can never become perfect, so you will be always in state of imperfection which is not pleasing. What is the God purpose? I don’t know.

I’m that piece of trash. I want to be a masterpiece (perfect). I want the concupiscence gone. How is it solved?

You are not a piece of trash. You are just imperfect. It is better to get used to it.

Adam & Eve were created imperfect. They had the imperfection of either pride, naivete, stupidity or fear.

Why don’t you think that the story is a myth?

 

[Vico]

OK, I’m willing to be healed. I want this concupiscence gone.

There’s no other way to glorify God?

I would think that if we were created perfect, that perfection comes from God and that would reflect on God and give him Glory.

An artist that paints a masterpiece gets glory. A piece of trash painting gives the artist no glory.

I’m that piece of trash. I want to be a masterpiece (perfect). I want the concupiscence gone. How is it solved?

Adam & Eve were created imperfect. They had the imperfection of either pride, naivete, stupidity or fear.

The concupiscence is here to stay, it is the test. It can be conquered by cooperating with the grace of God, which requires the person to use the will to oppose sin.

Catechism
294 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

Matthew 19

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples:

Amen, I say to you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. 25 And when they had heard this, the disciples wondered very much, saying: Who then can be saved? 26 And Jesus beholding, said to them: With men this is impossible: but with God all things are possible.​

 

[fbl9]

Then why are we not in the Garden of Eden? Why did God not heal our concupiscence?

Concupiscence DOES injure. Hell is the proof of that. Suffering on earth is the proof of that. Being held temporally responsible for the sins of others is the proof of that.

And the rules are we must endure horrific suffering.

That is only if one’s imperfections are small enough that they don’t commit mortal sin.

I read the lives of the saints. I have yet to see one that didn’t endure horrific suffering.

“Be perfect like your heavenly Father is perfect” - yet he does not fix the concupicense bug that prevents this from happening. Set up to fail.

Oh, so you believe this is not required and the Church doesn’t say this is required? So The Church teaches contrary to Christ who says one must carry their cross to follow him? The cross is now optional?

He’s loving in a way I can’t recognize as love.
He’s merciful in a way I can’t recognize as mercy.

That’s why I hate being imperfect. I hate being imperfect!!!!

There’s your cross of suffering pick it up and quit whining.
I have my own cross to carry and for me it’s weight is crushing and many time i fail to carry it. But with faith i know it can be carried and with God’s mercy i can be forgiven when i have let my cross hold me in the dirt.

 

[BobCatholic]

I don’t think that God needs to be glorified. He is perfect. Why would he want that?

It is right and just.

Think of it this way. Think of your favorite celebrity or rock star. The one who you think is awesome. If you go around telling him/her that they’re awesome, is that doing something wrong? They don’t need to know they’re awesome to be awesome.

Same thing with God.

The only perfect being is God. The rest is imperfect. It is logically impossible to create perfect being, God, because they (two Gods) simply share single absolute reality, meaning that they are one.

Incorrect.

God can create a perfect human being. By saying he can’t do that, you’re denying his omnipotence.

Why don’t you think that the story is a myth?

Because even science backs up the fact the human race had two original parents.