Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

[OneSheep]

From a homily at St.Peter’s Basilica, by Fr. Raniero Cantalmessa:

Yet God’s measure of justice is different from ours and if he sees good faith or blameless ignorance he saves even those who had been anxious to fight him in their lives. We believers should prepare ourselves for surprises in this regard.

vatican.va/liturgical_year/holy-week/2009/documents/holy-week_homily-fr-cantalamessa_20090410_en.html

However, has any person been “anxious to fight him” knowingly and willingly? I am looking for an example of this. Ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin. Can such ignorance be understood and forgiven, or are there instances when a person can indeed be condemned?

Note: I am using “knowingly and willingly” in the broadest sense, i.e. those who crucified Jesus did not do so knowingly and willingly. They “willed” it in terms of choice, but their choice was in ignorance (and in this case, the ignorance was held blameless).

Feel free to make an assertion in your answer, but please provide an example.

Thanks!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

However, has any person been “anxious to fight him” knowingly and willingly? I am looking for an example of this. Ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin. Can such ignorance be understood and forgiven, or are there instances when a person can indeed be condemned?. . .s!

I’m waiting for you to provide evidence that “ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin”. In fact, I disagree with this assumption.

See the catechism:HE DEFINITION OF SIN

1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as "an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law."121

1850 Sin is an offense against God: "Against you, you alone, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight."122 Sin sets itself against God’s love for us and turns our hearts away from it. Like the first sin, it is disobedience, a revolt against God through the will to become "like gods,"123 knowing and determining good and evil. Sin is thus "love of oneself even to contempt of God."124 In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.125

1851 It is precisely in the Passion, when the mercy of Christ is about to vanquish it, that sin most clearly manifests its violence and its many forms: unbelief, murderous hatred, shunning and mockery by the leaders and the people, Pilate’s cowardice and the cruelty of the soldiers, Judas’ betrayal - so bitter to Jesus, Peter’s denial and the disciples’ flight. However, at the very hour of darkness, the hour of the prince of this world,126 the sacrifice of Christ secretly becomes the source from which the forgiveness of our sins will pour forth inexhaustibly.

III. THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF SINS

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

1853 Sins can be distinguished according to their objects, as can every human act; or according to the virtues they oppose, by excess or defect; or according to the commandments they violate. They can also be classed according to whether they concern God, neighbor, or oneself; they can be divided into spiritual and carnal sins, or again as sins in thought, word, deed, or omission. The root of sin is in the heart of man, in his free will, according to the teaching of the Lord: "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a man."128 But in the heart also resides charity, the source of the good and pure works, which sin wounds.

IV. THE GRAVITY OF SIN: MORTAL AND VENIAL SIN

1854 Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity. The distinction between mortal and venial sin, already evident in Scripture,129 became part of the tradition of the Church. It is corroborated by human experience.

1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.

Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

1856 Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us - that is, charity - necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation:

When the will sets itself upon something that is of its nature incompatible with the charity that orients man toward his ultimate end, then the sin is mortal by its very object . . . whether it contradicts the love of God, such as blasphemy or perjury, or the love of neighbor, such as homicide or adultery. . . . But when the sinner’s will is set upon something that of its nature involves a disorder, but is not opposed to the love of God and neighbor, such as thoughtless chatter or immoderate laughter and the like, such sins are venial.130
1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

 

[grannymh]

From a homily at St.Peter’s Basilica, by Fr. Raniero Cantalmessa:

Yet God’s measure of justice is different from ours and if he sees good faith or blameless ignorance he saves even those who had been anxious to fight him in their lives. We believers should prepare ourselves for surprises in this regard.

vatican.va/liturgical_year/holy-week/2009/documents/holy-week_homily-fr-cantalamessa_20090410_en.html

However, has any person been “anxious to fight him” knowingly and willingly? I am looking for an example of this. Ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin. Can such ignorance be understood and forgiven, or are there instances when a person can indeed be condemned?

Note: I am using “knowingly and willingly” in the broadest sense, i.e. those who crucified Jesus did not do so knowingly and willingly. They “willed” it in terms of choice, but their choice was in ignorance (and in this case, the ignorance was held blameless).

Feel free to make an assertion in your answer, but please provide an example.

Thanks!

I am sincerely looking forward to this thread because it relates to a number of Catholic doctrines. However, I first have to study the compete link and then review some of the many Catholic truths.

Regarding this line from post 1.
“Feel free to make an assertion in your answer, but please provide an example.”

So far, the examples I will be studying are the teachings of the Catholic Church. Defending the faith of Catholicism is proper on this public message board.

 

[OneSheep]

I’m waiting for you to provide evidence that “ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin”. In fact, I disagree with this assumption.

Good Morning!

Feel free to disagree! My statement is not an assumption, but a conclusion based on my own observations.

So, if anything is lacking, it is my own observations, so I am asking for the observations of others, like yourself, that may provide a counterexample to the conclusion.

I gave the example of those who hung Jesus on the cross. Feel free to provide an example on the contrary.

Thanks!

 

[OneSheep]

I am sincerely looking forward to this thread because it relates to a number of Catholic doctrines. However, I first have to study the compete link and then review some of the many Catholic truths.

Regarding this line from post 1.
“Feel free to make an assertion in your answer, but please provide an example.”

So far, the examples I will be studying are the teachings of the Catholic Church. Defending the faith of Catholicism is proper on this public message board.

So, as a matter of clarification, Granny, I am looking for examples of sinful behavior for which ignorance and/or blindness are not essential elements.

A doctrine is not a human behavior example, unless you are saying that the writing of the doctrine is sinful. Do you see what I mean?

Note: I am not limiting the discussion to the “sinful”. Any example of “rejecting God” is pertinent to the discussion.

Thanks

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Ignorance or blindness of some kind is always a factor in the rejection of God; only those who enjoy the beatific vision are incapable of preferring a lesser good to the supreme. That said, ignorance does not always excuse; it can be more or less willful.

As to an example of “knowingly” rejecting God, how about a satanist? I say knowingly in quotes, because no one who rejects God fully knows what he is doing. But his knowledge is sufficient to condemn him (cf. Romans 1:20).

 

[grannymh]

So, as a matter of clarification, Granny, I am looking for examples of sinful behavior for which ignorance and/or blindness are not essential elements.

A doctrine is not a human behavior example, unless you are saying that the writing of the doctrine is sinful. Do you see what I mean?

Note: I am not limiting the discussion to the “sinful”. Any example of “rejecting God” is pertinent to the discussion.

Thanks

In the Catholic Church, there are some doctrines which describe human nature and subsequently human behavior. This can also be found in the first three chapters of Genesis.

At first glance at the quote in blue, one can discern some basic Catholic teachings such as free will and rational soul. What is most interesting to me is the underlying relationship between those who had been anxious to fight him in their lives and God Himself. The concept of ignorance has me thinking of CCC 1260, first sentence. I love the words “in a way known to God.”

Of course, one is free to look for examples of sinful behavior for which ignorance and/or blindness are not essential elements. That is a worthwhile endeavor which could lead to some fascinating results. On the other hand, defending the faith of Catholicism is proper on this public message board. That allows me to examine not only the presented link, but also to carefully look at the reactions to the particular quote in blue.

In reply to post 5 – “A doctrine is not a human behavior example, unless you are saying that the writing of the doctrine is sinful. Do you see what I mean?”

I do not intend to be rude concerning doctrine definitions. However, according to free speech, we can choose what we wish to speak about. If you wish, you can speak about doctrines. However, I am more interested in studying the link and poster’s reactions to the quote in blue. My free choice to respond to comments or not respond is allowed on this public message board.

 

[frangiuliano115]

From a homily at St.Peter’s Basilica, by Fr. Raniero Cantalmessa:

Yet God’s measure of justice is different from ours and if he sees good faith or blameless ignorance he saves even those who had been anxious to fight him in their lives. We believers should prepare ourselves for surprises in this regard.

vatican.va/liturgical_year/holy-week/2009/documents/holy-week_homily-fr-cantalamessa_20090410_en.html

However, has any person been “anxious to fight him” knowingly and willingly? I am looking for an example of this. Ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin. Can such ignorance be understood and forgiven, or are there instances when a person can indeed be condemned?

Note: I am using “knowingly and willingly” in the broadest sense, i.e. those who crucified Jesus did not do so knowingly and willingly. They “willed” it in terms of choice, but their choice was in ignorance (and in this case, the ignorance was held blameless).

Feel free to make an assertion in your answer, but please provide an example.

Thanks!

God’s measure of justice is different from ours. Correct. We love to post and quote the CCC but only God knows our heart and is able to judge.

BUT - what does it mean that He sees good faith or blameless ignorance and can save those who were anxious to fight him in their lives???

This means they were fighting him and died in that state. How can you be saved if you fought God? Ignorance is only an excuse if you truly have never been presented with God/Jesus but somehow you know there is a higher power or have searched for God.
See Romans 1:19-20. Like someone in a tribe in So. America, for instance.

But if I FIGHT God it means I DO know about Him and have rejected Him. Many bible passages, Deuteronomy 30:15-18.

If you reject God you are lost. I agree with Ad Orientum in the sense that if someone really understood about God, eternity, and the such, there would be no way that he would reject God. But we like to put our own understanding into our eternal life and this is man’s no. 1 sin - he wants to know more than God and does not trust God.

So in this case, a person who rejects God cannot go to be with Him because the person does not believe he exists. If you don’t believe He exists you are lost because you don’t have God’s saving grace.

I mean, we’re having enough problems trying to understand our religion and then you hear such odd homilies too. I think all needs to be made more clear.

Those who nailed Jesus to the cross did not know He was God. But one of the thieves came to believe He was God and that thief was saved; the other one - who was in the exact same circumstances - did not believe and so he was lost.

Believing is the key. If you don’t believe, you can’t be saved by God.

I can’t see your religious affilitaion right now, but you say:

**However, has any person been “anxious to fight him” knowingly and willingly? I am looking for an example of this. Ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin. Can such ignorance be understood and forgiven, or are there instances when a person can indeed be condemned?
**

Who has been anxious to fight Him knowingly and willingly?

How about that satanist. He believes in a god, just not the right one.
How about any number of secular beliefs making the rounds:
Abortion, euthanasia, the desicaration of marriage, adultry, the god of money leading to corruption and stealing, abandoning children emotionally and any number of other situations.

These people are all fighting God. How else could it be explained???

Now it is possible to, for instance, have an abortion and be ignorant of the fact that we’re dealing with a human. But in the U.S. in 2015???

Jesus said Who Is Not For Us is Against Us. I believe people living in the U.S. know about Jesus.

If they REALLY don’t, then my So. America scenario would apply.

God bless

 

[grannymh]

Here is a Blast from the Past. A CAF post from 2013.
It refers to the problem of our ignorance and blindness.

A younger granny responded.
“May I gently point out that the Catholic Church teaches that it is Divine Revelation that Mortal Sin exists. This is independent of one’s own personal need to find an example of people sinning when they know what they are doing. The ideas that Catholic doctrines regarding the state of Sanctifying Grace and the state of Mortal Sin may be downgraded can be a devastating invitation.”

I have not changed my position that “we are not rocks who happen to fall into mortal sin.” However, I now have the opportunity to go deeper into the numerous issues. Also, there are additional posters who can teach me.

 

[grannymh]

God’s measure of justice is different from ours. Correct. We love to post and quote the CCC but only God knows our heart and is able to judge.

BUT - what does it mean that He sees good faith or blameless ignorance and can save those who were anxious to fight him in their lives???

This means they were fighting him and died in that state. How can you be saved if you fought God?

Never underestimate the power of God to touch a soul at the very last minute. Never underestimate the power of a soul to respond, in true love, to God at the very last minute.

 

[Convert1]

This means they were fighting him and died in that state. How can you be saved if you fought God? Ignorance is only an excuse if you truly have never been presented with God/Jesus but somehow you know there is a higher power or have searched for God.
See Romans 1:19-20. Like someone in a tribe in So. America, for instance.

I am somewhat confused. Help me understand. There a millions of individuals in the US and other progressive countries who have been raised in homes that teach basically…nothing…when it comes to God. Are those children blameless because they are ignorant of any teaching or understanding of God or religion? Not that they necessarily “fight” God, but they commit sin, unknowingly, because they are raised in a culture that does not believe in “sin” or “Hell” or “Heaven”. I think there are more of these individuals than you would imagine. Just curious.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Never underestimate the power of God to touch a soul at the very last minute. Never underestimate the power of a soul to respond, in true love, to God at the very last minute.

Whenever I bring up this scenario, I am reminded that one could be saved at the last moment of breath.

Then how do we continue with my thought?

God bless

 

[frangiuliano115]

I am somewhat confused. Help me understand. There a millions of individuals in the US and other progressive countries who have been raised in homes that teach basically…nothing…when it comes to God. Are those children blameless because they are ignorant of any teaching or understanding of God or religion? Not that they necessarily “fight” God, but they commit sin, unknowingly, because they are raised in a culture that does not believe in “sin” or “Hell” or “Heaven”. I think there are more of these individuals than you would imagine. Just curious.

I’m afraid that I believe that it is VERY DIFFICULT for anyone in the U.S. to claim ignorance of God. They could claim ignorance of His laws, of religious doctine, but they could not claim ignorance of God.

I’ve taught kids that come from homes where they have been taught nothing. But their parents want them to make their first communion, for instance.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that their parents never sent them to church for catechism. Do you believe that they would then never hear the word God, never see people going to church, never wonder what it’s all about, never watch the Discovery channel and hear them degrade chistianity, never read in the news that people in the Middle East are dying because of their christian faith, etc.?

At some point along this line they would have to stop and wonder about God. God gives us a choice to follow Him or not follow Him. The choice must be made.

If they don’t believe in sin or hell or heaven, then they have made a decision NOT to believe it and to follow modern society. We might call them atheists. Are atheists going to heaven?

(please don’t tell me they could change at the last moment of life-which I know is true, we’re discussing a concept here).

Do you not agree?

God bless
P.S. Are you speaking only of children? That would be a totally different story and the age of reason comes into play. I believe One Sheep, the O.P., is speaking of adults…

 

[Pallas_Athene]

I’m afraid that I believe that it is VERY DIFFICULT for anyone in the U.S. to claim ignorance of God. They could claim ignorance of His laws, of religious doctine, but they could not claim ignorance of God.

Unfortunately the words you used are ambiguous. Probably everyone has HEARD of God. So what? It is just the belief of many people, as opposed to the belief of also many people, who do not believe that God exists. I most certainly claim ignorance of God’s existence… even though I am aware that the CONCEPT of God exists. Do not confuse the existence of a concept with the existence of the referent of that concept.

If they don’t believe in sin or hell or heaven, then they have made a decision NOT to believe it and to follow modern society. We might call them atheists. Are atheists going to heaven?

Again, you committed a fundamental epistemological error. One does not DECIDE to believe something. One believes if one finds the argument or the evidence COMPELLING. But the actual evaluation process is NOT volitional. Just try to decide to start to believe something which you find impossible to believe.

Of course all this has been mentioned many times, and it makes no difference. I don’t know why I bother. Best wishes to you.

 

[OneSheep]

Ignorance or blindness of some kind is always a factor in the rejection of God; only those who enjoy the beatific vision are incapable of preferring a lesser good to the supreme. That said, ignorance does not always excuse; it can be more or less willful.

As to an example of “knowingly” rejecting God, how about a satanist? I say knowingly in quotes, because no one who rejects God fully knows what he is doing. But his knowledge is sufficient to condemn him (cf. Romans 1:20).

Hello Ad O

Interesting. You seem to agree with me, that no one fully knows what they are doing when they reject God. On the other hand, you have not stated that the lack of knowledge is an essential element in all sin, and you are saying that there is such thing as “sufficient” knowledge.

What I have observed is that when a person is not blinded by the appetites or blinded by resentment, and they do have “sufficient” knowledge, they simply do not sin. But we could look at your example, to see what a satanist may know or not know.

So, for starters, we could investigate the example with, “why does a person choose satanism?” Though there may be many reasons, we could pick reasons one at a time to determine whether or not there is a lack of awareness as a critical factor.

Why does a person choose satanism?

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

P.S. I’m glad you brought up “making excuses”. To me, we resent “making excuses” for people, as anyone of normal conscience can agree. However, when we refrain from understanding in order to avoid “making excuses”, we close our minds to the gift of the Spirit, understanding. So, in my experience, it is helpful to keep a careful eye on the process of understanding, making sure that the aim is not to withhold or avoid consequence, but at the same time not allowing the compulsion to avoid “making excuses” drive out all impetus to understand my brother or sister. That’s a lot of words, but did I make sense?

 

[OneSheep]

God’s measure of justice is different from ours. Correct. We love to post and quote the CCC but only God knows our heart and is able to judge.

BUT - what does it mean that He sees good faith or blameless ignorance and can save those who were anxious to fight him in their lives???

This means they were fighting him and died in that state. How can you be saved if you fought God? Ignorance is only an excuse if you truly have never been presented with God/Jesus but somehow you know there is a higher power or have searched for God.
See Romans 1:19-20. Like someone in a tribe in So. America, for instance.

But if I FIGHT God it means I DO know about Him and have rejected Him. Many bible passages, Deuteronomy 30:15-18.

If you reject God you are lost. I agree with Ad Orientum in the sense that if someone really understood about God, eternity, and the such, there would be no way that he would reject God. But we like to put our own understanding into our eternal life and this is man’s no. 1 sin - he wants to know more than God and does not trust God.

So in this case, a person who rejects God cannot go to be with Him because the person does not believe he exists. If you don’t believe He exists you are lost because you don’t have God’s saving grace.

I mean, we’re having enough problems trying to understand our religion and then you hear such odd homilies too. I think all needs to be made more clear.

Those who nailed Jesus to the cross did not know He was God. But one of the thieves came to believe He was God and that thief was saved; the other one - who was in the exact same circumstances - did not believe and so he was lost.

Believing is the key. If you don’t believe, you can’t be saved by God.

I can’t see your religious affilitaion right now, but you say:

**However, has any person been “anxious to fight him” knowingly and willingly? I am looking for an example of this. Ignorance is a huge, if not essential, part of human sin. Can such ignorance be understood and forgiven, or are there instances when a person can indeed be condemned?
**

Who has been anxious to fight Him knowingly and willingly?

How about that satanist. He believes in a god, just not the right one.
How about any number of secular beliefs making the rounds:
Abortion, euthanasia, the desicaration of marriage, adultry, the god of money leading to corruption and stealing, abandoning children emotionally and any number of other situations.

These people are all fighting God. How else could it be explained???

Now it is possible to, for instance, have an abortion and be ignorant of the fact that we’re dealing with a human. But in the U.S. in 2015???

Jesus said Who Is Not For Us is Against Us. I believe people living in the U.S. know about Jesus.

If they REALLY don’t, then my So. America scenario would apply.

God bless

Hi frangiuliano! (nice name!)

Thanks for the heads-up about Romans 1:19-20. Very pertinent to this thread. When I read scripture depicting God’s “wrath”, I wonder “did this person forgive?”. Like in this case, did Paul forgive the people he was criticizing? It’s hard to say. What I do know is that when I fail to forgive, it is automatic that I project that God does not forgive either. “A viewpoint is a view from a point.”

What I am saying is that there is a place for wrath, it has its purpose in the human and the capacity for wrath is a gift from God. However, Jesus calls us to forgive, and forgiveness does not condone sin, but it does extract wrath from the forgiver. If I think I have forgiven, but I still feel wrath towards the person, I am only kidding myself. It is easy for me to point and condemn, saying “he should have known better”, but from my observation now, if he did know better, he would not have sinned. One tricky part of all of this is that as soon as I point my finger at someone, my mind is already going into blindness mode.

A priest once told us that many people are exposed to the idea that God is wrathful and unmerciful. He said that a person is better off rejecting God, for this is the wrong idea, the wrong characterization of Abba. On the other hand, so many people believe in this very notion, of a “wrathful God”. In my mind, it is understandable to believe in a wrathful God, and such belief has its place in our journeys. “Wrong” is too strong a word, IMO.

Now, let us look at one of your examples, the example of the woman who has a “convenience” abortion, for example. Let’s start with a question. Does the woman know the value of the gift of a child, especially this child?

Give it a think. Pick any reasonable answer, and we can investigate.

Thanks!

 

[frangiuliano115]

Unfortunately the words you used are ambiguous. Probably everyone has HEARD of God. So what? It is just the belief of many people, as opposed to the belief of also many people, who do not believe that God exists. I most certainly claim ignorance of God’s existence… even though I am aware that the CONCEPT of God exists. Do not confuse the existence of a concept with the existence of the referent of that concept.

Again, you committed a fundamental epistemological error. One does not DECIDE to believe something. One believes if one finds the argument or the evidence COMPELLING. But the actual evaluation process is NOT volitional. Just try to decide to start to believe something which you find impossible to believe.

Of course all this has been mentioned many times, and it makes no difference. I don’t know why I bother. Best wishes to you.

I think we’ve had discussions before. And I see that you feel like giving up in general.

I think your problem is that you’re on the fence, as I think you’ve said at times (could be wrong). What you’re going to have to do is get off the fence. Avowed atheists have it easy because they don’t believe in God (I mean His existence - gosh I have to be so careful with wording! - and christians have it easy because they do!

I’ve quoted many times in these posts 1 Corinthians 2:14. Go back and read
1 Cor 2:1-16. Also, read about the discussion Jesus had with Nicodemus in John 3:1-3.
“Unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God”. We often hear that you have to “see to believe” but christians say we have to “believe to see”, as U2 lyrics suggest. (sorry about that).

So you say I make mistakes in my language. That’s because it’s ONLY language and if you don’t perceive somewhat, it does become really difficult to sit here and watch every single word I say or concept I’m trying to explain.

So my words are ambiguous and you say that everyone has HEARD of God. Okay. That’s my whole point!!! Thanks for confirming it BTW. People who believe that God does not exist are lost, as I said. If YOU are willing to accept the concept of God’s existence, well okay, I’d say you’re searching and are on your way.

I’m not confusing the existence of a concept with the referent of that concept because I believe that the referent of that concept exists. See? It’s just that I already believe and you’re not there yet.

Then you say that I make an epistemological error. But I’m not interested in philosophy. I’m interested in theology. Of which philosophy can certainly, and is in fact, a part. Priests study philosophy before they study theology. You want me to need compelling evidence to believe in God but I have all the evidence I need!

I’ll repeat, I may have said this to you already. There are two ways in coming to believe in God. By reason. Which is what you’re doing. By reason alone, you CAN come to believe. Did you ever read Evidence that Demands a Verdict? Can’t remember the author right now. An attorney who sets out to prove that God doesn’t exist and in his studies comes to be a believer. So that would be reason.

The other way is through some form of contact with God. A personal contact. Maybe through an experience or “hearing” His voice, etc.

So this sounds like circular reasoning to you. Your reasoning is also circular! Just because I don’t have compelling evidence for something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Apples were falling from trees way before Newton! The effect of “God” also exists. For christians anyway. We also feel we have the proof, but atheists won’t accept it. Because it’s different than proving gravity - which God created.

God bless

 

[grannymh]

From a homily at St.Peter’s Basilica, by Fr. Raniero Cantalmessa:

Yet God’s measure of justice is different from ours and if he sees good faith or blameless ignorance he saves even those who had been anxious to fight him in their lives. We believers should prepare ourselves for surprises in this regard.

vatican.va/liturgical_year/holy-week/2009/documents/holy-week_homily-fr-cantalamessa_20090410_en.html

All of us need to step back from the rush to blameless ignorance. That rush to the denial of the Catholic doctrines involving the purpose of free will (Genesis 2: 15-17; CCC 1730-1732) can cloud the true purpose of humanity. (CCC 356; Genesis 1: 27)

We need to be still and know that God desires our good faith offered to Him. “If God sees good faith” comes from the quote in blue in post 1. But what happens when we freely withhold our “good faith”? What happens when we commit a true mortal sin?

I realize that it may come as a surprise to some readers that the Catholic Church still teaches the human freedom to commit mortal sin. In the Catholic Church, mortal sin is when one freely knowingly and willingly completely and totally rejects God. Humans have awesome power. While examples of people freely knowingly and willingly rejecting God makes for interesting reading when one has difficulty falling asleep, the truth remains that rejection of God is possible.

If rejection of God is not possible, then how does one explain the word “if” in if He sees good faith? If rejection of God is not possible, how does one explain the Catholic Church?

 

[Pallas_Athene]

I think your problem is that you’re on the fence, as I think you’ve said at times (could be wrong). What you’re going to have to do is get off the fence. Avowed atheists have it easy because they don’t believe in God (I mean His existence - gosh I have to be so careful with wording! - and christians have it easy because they do!

You probably confuse me with someone else. I am as strong an atheist as they come. No fence for me. But I am also aware that I am not infallible, and as such I might be wrong.

So my words are ambiguous and you say that everyone has HEARD of God. Okay. That’s my whole point!!! Thanks for confirming it BTW.

I am glad to confirm it. But the fact that I heard both of God and the Loch Ness Monster is irrelevant. I also head of Jupiter and Zeus and a plethora of other gods. There is no evidence for either of them. So just because I heard of God it does not mean that I have the necessary information to KNOW that God exists, and I don’t have the necessary information to accept God’s purported existence as a CREDIBLE hypothesis. The point is that I do not REJECT God, I simply reject the concept of God, and the offered evidence. This is the answer to the question posited in OP.

Let’s be precise: “only a believer can reject God”. Someone believes that God exists can truthfully say: “I don’t want to have anything with God”. Non-Christians are UNABLE to reject God.

Then you say that I make an epistemological error. But I’m not interested in philosophy. I’m interested in theology. Of which philosophy can certainly, and is in fact, a part. Priests study philosophy before they study theology. You want me to need compelling evidence to believe in God but I have all the evidence I need!

I am sorry, if I was not clear enough. The error was simple: “you cannot CHOOSE what you believe”. You either believe something or not. Many people will try to counter this: “but what about free will”? The answer is obvious; only a miniscule part of our thinking is subject to volitional decisions. I am sure you have all the evidence you need, but we are not all alike. Some are much more demanding about the evidence, others are no so much.

I’ll repeat, I may have said this to you already. There are two ways in coming to believe in God. By reason. Which is what you’re doing. By reason alone, you CAN come to believe. Did you ever read Evidence that Demands a Verdict? Can’t remember the author right now. An attorney who sets out to prove that God doesn’t exist and in his studies comes to be a believer. So that would be reason.

The author was Josh McDowell, and of course I read it. It is a typical apologetic book, loaded with nonsense and errors. I am not interested in discussing it in detail, so I will only offer example. He offers the usual: “liar, lunatic or lord” choice and proudly proclaims that “one of them must be true”. Of course there is the fourth possibility: “legend”, which he conveniently forgets. Sorry, an apologist who makes such fundamental error has nothing to offer for me. I am glad that I don’t need the services of an attorney who makes such logical errors.

The other way is through some form of contact with God. A personal contact. Maybe through an experience or “hearing” His voice, etc.

I never had that experience.

Just because I don’t have compelling evidence for something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Of course it does not. There is an erroneous saying: “absence of proof is not a proof of absence”… but the correct version is: “absence of evidence is a strong evidence of absence”.

 

[Convert1]

I’m afraid that I believe that it is VERY DIFFICULT for anyone in the U.S. to claim ignorance of God. They could claim ignorance of His laws, of religious doctine, but they could not claim ignorance of God.

I’ve taught kids that come from homes where they have been taught nothing. But their parents want them to make their first communion, for instance.

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that their parents never sent them to church for catechism. Do you believe that they would then never hear the word God, never see people going to church, never wonder what it’s all about, never watch the Discovery channel and hear them degrade chistianity, never read in the news that people in the Middle East are dying because of their christian faith, etc.?

At some point along this line they would have to stop and wonder about God. God gives us a choice to follow Him or not follow Him. The choice must be made.

If they don’t believe in sin or hell or heaven, then they have made a decision NOT to believe it and to follow modern society. We might call them atheists. Are atheists going to heaven?

(please don’t tell me they could change at the last moment of life-which I know is true, we’re discussing a concept here).

Do you not agree?

God bless
P.S. Are you speaking only of children? That would be a totally different story and the age of reason comes into play. I believe One Sheep, the O.P., is speaking of adults…

Thank you for your response. I was speaking of children growing up in a constant atmosphere of indifference and lack of religious understanding; (not specifically pertaining to age, as they all grow up) You are correct that it would be difficult to claim absolute absence of exposure to God in our current climate of technology. But does simply being exposed consecrate understanding? It seems a great deal of this thread is based on assumption and generality. I don’t think it is man’s decision whether anyone is going to heaven; nor can we accurately assume what each individual’s true understanding of “sin” might be. Compassion, empathy, and love (as Christ would do) yields tolerance and patience in the face of judgment. In my opinion, it is not my place to determine the status of the soul of another; or their acceptance or rejection of Faith. Yet, it is my place to love them and nurture the presence of God in them, if given the opportunity. Again, just my opinion. Thank you for this discussion.