Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

[frangiuliano115]

Hi Fran, good morning!

I’m sorry, I hope it is okay that I am paring things down a bit. Are you a chatterbox in person too?

It sounds like you are saying that a person could be blind, but still be “knowingly” doing something. It may be that we are working from different definitions. To me, a blind person (in this very important way, blind to the humanity of her own child) does not know what she is doing.

I think what you are saying is that she is blind but should not be. I agree, that is the ideal, but blind she is. Again, this is not an excuse, but an explanation for her behavior.

A way to resolve this is to enter into her mind. This is a made-up scenario, so we would be working solely from projection. We could go with your projections, my projections, or both of ours. What do you think, are you ready to look a little closer? It can wait until Tuesday.

Thanks

Yes. I’m a chatterbox in person too. Especially about christianity since I’ve had to explain it so many times.

Now, if after 3 pages of posting you still misunderstand my position, then, alas, I do believe my participation comes to an end.

However, before I go, I’d like to say that in post ****227, Aloysium ****is clearly telling you that he knowingly was rejecting God and you reply that he could not have known what he was doing. How do you jpresume to know more about his feelings than he does?

A major flaw that you have in your thinking, and I wish you’d get this cleared up since it’ common, not only to catholicism but to chrisitanity in general:

**Post no. 229, Aloysium **again (you should listen to him) says that “with action and retrospection comes the realization of one’s wickedness”. You want to have a post on whether or not one WILLINGLY AND KNOWINGLY rejects God and you don’t have the basic concept of christianiy which is that man IS wicked. Did you think you were headed for heaven when you were born and were baptized and then never accepted God? Do you not know that the closer you get to God the MORE you realize who wretched you really are?

Oh my. NO! Let us believe how nice we are and how well we all treat each other. Let us not feel guilty or lacking in any way. Are you sure you’re not a pscychologist???

In post no. 239 you and Vico are discussing a wounded nature. Can’t go back to his original (this thread is moving along too quickly) but you deny that we have one, if I understood correctly. Do you think our nature is as God intended? Hate to sound like grannymh, but have you not read the story of Adam and Eve? I’ll bet you have. So how could you misunderstand our nature? Please read the book of Romans again.

And in the same post, you tell Vico: **The man you described was blinded by desire. This is what happens. It is not an “excuse”; it is an explanation.
** Very good. So if it’s not an excuse, the the blinded man willingly and knowingly rejected God.

So here’s the short answer, as also provided by HelenRose.

You ALWAYS willingly and knowingly reject God exept in the few example I gave several times.

And I don’t know you and cannot understand what you’re getting at here, but I certainly hope that you understand that God is a loving God but He is also a Just God. Something we don’t like to think about.

Will still be following along, but will not have further to add. I think we’ve bothered that poor pregnant woman enough!

Fran

 

[grannymh]

Oboy! Do we get to talk about human nature?

Is there something bad about human nature? Please describe one “bad” part.

Thanks!

It decomposes!

 

[OneSheep]

Hello Folks,

It is so easy to assume things. We are brought up a certain way, we are influenced by so many voices around us as we age. Somewhere along the way we can miss something, something very significant.

The first time humans appear in the Bible, they are being created “in the image of God” (Genesis 1:27) as the concluding part of a creation that God continually calls “very good.” While some Christian theologies hold humans to be intrinsically evil due to the sin committed after this creation, Catholics believe that humans are intrinsically good because they were created in the image of the good God. This is known theologically as the imago dei (Latin for “image of God”), and it is a lynchpin of the Catholic understanding of human nature.

patheos.com/Library/Roman-Catholicism/Beliefs/Human-Nature-and-the-Purpose-of-Existence?offset=1&max=1

Now, the article goes on to explain about the effect of original sin, as seen by Augustine, then Aquinas. What Aquinas did not consider is the very topic of this thread, though. What he also did not address is why there is such a huge variation in our views of human nature.

Why is there such huge variation? We have the Calvinist view of human “wickedness”, depravity, voiced by some in this thread. We have the article from Patheos.com and others taking a more moderate approach, and there are people like me that see the human as beautiful, precious in the eyes of God, with no “stain” on his/her nature.

Yes, I will be so bold to suggest that people do not know what they are doing even though they may think they do. However, like I said in the beginning, I remain open-minded. To be convinced that there is such a case of K&WR, though, we must investigate what the person did not consider, or did not know. If a person knew everything that would ordinarily give one hesitation to sin, then they K&WRG.

And for starters, anyone who sees the human as wicked or evil has eyes blinded. Like the people who hung Jesus, they do not know what they are doing. Did those guys from ISIS see value in the historical buildings they destroyed? No, they saw them as having no value at all. Do they see the value of the humans they destroy? No, generally speaking, their hearts are full of anger and resentment. They are blind.

I am looking at the top of my screen, where there is a picture of an unborn child. Beauty. Precious. Nothing that child does after he or she is born changes that.

God Bless

 

[OneSheep]

What are you referring to from my post with the Catechism items?

Good morning Vico!

As I explained before, Vico, this thread is not about sin, it is about forgiveness, specifically using the gift of understanding to address actions we resent.

In order for a person to know the “moral character of the act” they must know the impact of their actions. If a person is destroying something that they see as worthless, but the item indeed has great value, then the person does not know the moral character of the act. This is especially the case when that “item of great value” is the well-being of another person.

I don’t remember your answer to this, Vico: Did the crowd who hung Jesus knowingly and willingly reject God? If not, what did they not know?

thanks I appreciate your participation because you know so much of the catechism.

 

[frangiuliano115]

It decomposes!

Grannymh,

Now now. The human body decomposes. NOT human nature.

Unless you mean that human nature just keeps getting worse and worse and where would that leave us chrisitans?

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Good morning Vico!

As I explained before, Vico, this thread is not about sin, it is about forgiveness, specifically using the gift of understanding to address actions we resent.

In order for a person to know the “moral character of the act” they must know the impact of their actions. If a person is destroying something that they see as worthless, but the item indeed has great value, then the person does not know the moral character of the act. This is especially the case when that “item of great value” is the well-being of another person.

I don’t remember your answer to this, Vico: Did the crowd who hung Jesus knowingly and willingly reject God? If not, what did they not know?

thanks I appreciate your participation because you know so much of the catechism.

May I answer for Vico?

You tell us. Did the crowd KNOW that Jesus was God?

Doesn’t that kind of make your question irrelevant??

Today, One Sheep, we KNOW that Jesus is God.

Also, you’re on the subject of forgivess. Answer this:

Why did Jesus say “FATHER forgive them for they know not what they do?”

Why didn’t He just say “I forgive you for you know not what you do.”

And if you believe that God sees us all as precious, could you explain to me why hell exists? If our nature is so good and we’re so precious why aren’t we all going to heaven?

You say:

“I am looking at the top of my screen, where there is a picture of an unborn child. Beauty. Precious. Nothing that child does after he or she is born changes that.”

Are you serious? What if he grows up and kills 3 people? Oh. That’s right. He didn’t know what he was doing. I apologize.

Do you not think that God will hold him responsible for his actions? Do you think He’s some nice little felllow, skipping along and singing kumbaja?

And yes, He will be coming along here. I think your view of Him is a bit dangerous. I’m no Calvinish my dear One Sheep. You’ve understood nothing about what I’ve been saying.

How about reading the book of Romans instead of what Acquinas or Augustine said? That might be helpful.

And think about this, if you care to take the time:

If I think everyone is nice and they do something horrible, shock will ensue.
If I think people are infected with concupiscense (which they are) and they do something horrible, I’ll be better able to understand them and better able to forgive them. I refer you to those shootings down south, can’t remember the state, I don’t live in the states and don’t get the news like you do.

Do I sound upset? No. I’m afraid for what you may have come to believe - which you will not clearly state and that is your prerogative.

Maybe you should take this post to a priest and let’s see what HE would have to say about it all?

Fran

 

[simpleas]

Yes. I’m a chatterbox in person too. Especially about christianity since I’ve had to explain it so many times.

Now, if after 3 pages of posting you still misunderstand my position, then, alas, I do believe my participation comes to an end.

However, before I go, I’d like to say that in post ****227, Aloysium ****is clearly telling you that he knowingly was rejecting God and you reply that he could not have known what he was doing. How do you jpresume to know more about his feelings than he does?

A major flaw that you have in your thinking, and I wish you’d get this cleared up since it’ common, not only to catholicism but to chrisitanity in general:

**Post no. 229, Aloysium **again (you should listen to him) says that “with action and retrospection comes the realization of one’s wickedness”. You want to have a post on whether or not one WILLINGLY AND KNOWINGLY rejects God and you don’t have the basic concept of christianiy which is that man IS wicked. Did you think you were headed for heaven when you were born and were baptized and then never accepted God? Do you not know that the closer you get to God the MORE you realize who wretched you really are?

Oh my. NO! Let us believe how nice we are and how well we all treat each other. Let us not feel guilty or lacking in any way. Are you sure you’re not a pscychologist???

In post no. 239 you and Vico are discussing a wounded nature. Can’t go back to his original (this thread is moving along too quickly) but you deny that we have one, if I understood correctly. Do you think our nature is as God intended? Hate to sound like grannymh, but have you not read the story of Adam and Eve? I’ll bet you have. So how could you misunderstand our nature? Please read the book of Romans again.

And in the same post, you tell Vico: **The man you described was blinded by desire. This is what happens. It is not an “excuse”; it is an explanation.
** Very good. So if it’s not an excuse, the the blinded man willingly and knowingly rejected God.

So here’s the short answer, as also provided by HelenRose.

You ALWAYS willingly and knowingly reject God exept in the few example I gave several times.

And I don’t know you and cannot understand what you’re getting at here, but I certainly hope that you understand that God is a loving God but He is also a Just God. Something we don’t like to think about.

Will still be following along, but will not have further to add. I think we’ve bothered that poor pregnant woman enough!

Fran

You want to have a post on whether or not one WILLINGLY AND KNOWINGLY rejects God and you don’t have the basic concept of christianiy which is that man IS wicked.

Is that a teaching of the church? I can’t remember ever being told that man is wicked. I’ve read some texts that refer to mans wickedness. but that was years ago, medieval times before the idea that God is love started to break through in peoples thinking, and at our core we are good, but can get lost along the way…

 

[OneSheep]

Yes. I’m a chatterbox in person too. Especially about christianity since I’ve had to explain it so many times.

Welcome back, Fran. You do have some zeal! Chatterbox Italian, likes to talk about faith, wish I knew you in person!

Will still be following along, but will not have further to add. I think we’ve bothered that poor pregnant woman enough!

Fran

Oh, she is not bothered at all. She is quite interested in understanding her behavior, and she wants help in her decision.

Let’s take a different approach.

Here are her characteristics:

1. She is a christian
2. She is familiar with christian ideals
3. She has fear and resentment.
4. The fear and resentment is causing blindness.
5. She is with child and wants to have an abortion.

Here is a conversation that a questioner has with the woman. I am projecting, of course, her possible answers.

Questioner: So, why do you want to have an abortion?

Woman: I am so scared, I don’t want to have the baby. I am not ready.

Q: Don’t you know that this is wrong?

W: I have heard that it is wrong, but isn’t it wrong to bring a child into a world when it is not wanted by the mother? Besides, the child is so small, it won’t know that it ever had a life. It would be wrong for a child to be reared by such a worthless mother.

Q: Can you not see that the child’s life has value even if it is not aware of his own value?

W: What value is life! I am so sick of life, I am ready to die. I hate myself, and I don’t care about life. I don’t care about God, Church, any of it. I reject God. I deserve hell.

Look at the whole picture there, Fran. Is the woman knowingly and willingly rejecting God? Or, is her “knowing” compromised by something? And if you see that her “knowing” is compromised, do you also see that if she was thinking clearly she would not be so inclined to choose abortion?

Feel free to completely modify the woman’s answers to extend the scenario or fit a more specific case you would like to address.

I hope you find this different approach more worthwhile.

Thanks

 

[Tantum_ergo]

One Sheep:

Just one quick question/clarifier here:

If a person cannot knowingly and willingly reject God, why was it necessary for Christ to die for us?

If we can’t knowingly and willingly reject God, we can’t sin mortally (because sin by definition is a rejection of God, either venial–a rejection that is only partial; or mortal–complete rejection).

Since venial sin does not kill our relationship with God and is not a full rejection, it would not be necessary for Christ to die for our sins/rejection of God, since we never ‘completely’ or ‘willingly’ reject Him in the first place, n’est-ce pas?

 

[OneSheep]

Do I sound upset? No. I’m afraid for what you may have come to believe - which you will not clearly state and that is your prerogative.

Fran

Hi Fran,

I hope to get to the rest of your post but I need to run. I think my statement in post 242 is clear, as is my OP.

Out with it! What are you afraid that I have come to believe? Is it this?:

Pope Francis ‏@Pontifex May 19

God is always waiting for us, he always understands us, he always forgives us.

fiery Italians…



You are a blessing, Fran!

 

[frangiuliano115]

Is that a teaching of the church? I can’t remember ever being told that man is wicked. I’ve read some texts that refer to mans wickedness. but that was years ago, medieval times before the idea that God is love started to break through in peoples thinking, and at our core we are good, but can get lost along the way…

Hi Simpleas,

Guess I never got back to you. This thread is so long, I guess because it’s interesting, and I almost forgot about your post to me!

I’m going to church this evening for a meeting for bible instructors, which would be me, and I’m not going to be able to take the time now to go, a tiny bit, through the old and new testaments.

For now, let me just say that if you’re new to this you may not understand my language very well and I apologize if I’m not more clear.

I don’t mean that man is wicked. I mean that man has concupisensce. In the garden of Eden man lost his innocence when he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Before he only knew good. After he ate, he also knew evil. Thus, man’s nature became damaged. SIN (not sins) intered into the world. All became infected with SIN. Man and nature. We could call this SIN the sin nature or concupisensce. (gosh I hate typing that word!).

It means that man is not wicket, but he could be if not infused with the grace of God. Man tends to sin. It is easy for him to sin. Have you read the book of Romans? I keep saying to read this book because it contains all the theology a christian has to know. This is a church teaching. You sound worried, nothing to worry about. I see you have catholic under religious affiliation. God loves you and cherishes you and you can be sure of that.

Let’s see about the CCC explanation which is more condensed. Start reading at no. 390 and keep going. It’ll tell you of man’s inclination toward sin.

One Sheep, back there, mentioned Calvin. Do you know who he is? He had some pretty weird ideas. One of them is that man’s nature is depraved. This is different than thinking it is damaged, or lackingm after original sin.

That’s pretty much it for this.

Will be back later.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

One Sheep:

Just one quick question/clarifier here:

If a person cannot knowingly and willingly reject God, why was it necessary for Christ to die for us?

If we can’t knowingly and willingly reject God, we can’t sin mortally (because sin by definition is a rejection of God, either venial–a rejection that is only partial; or mortal–complete rejection).

Since venial sin does not kill our relationship with God and is not a full rejection, it would not be necessary for Christ to die for our sins/rejection of God, since we never ‘completely’ or ‘willingly’ reject Him in the first place, n’est-ce pas?

Thank you Tantum ergo.
Seems so easy, doesn’t it?

Now we’re going to have to read up on what Pope Francis said. Hope he didn’t misspeak again!!

Fran

 

[simpleas]

However, Simpleas,

We can know that we personally have never K&WRG when we come to see our own blindness. And once we have that self-understanding, our eyes change. Beauty, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. Once we see our own beauty (and innocence) we can truly see the same in everyone around us, right? This is seeing with the “true self”. We know our “true self” when we have found that beauty and innocence. Surely you must see that innocence in the animals you care for. Why is it so hard to see our own? Oh, it is because seeing innocence is “making excuses” or trying to escape consequence. That hesitance, however, would mean that the person is not owning their poor choices. Understanding is not the same as disowning, denying, or white-washing our poor choices. We do awful things - but mean well - and we do not know what we are doing. My observations, of course.

And on the second paragraph, why don’t people “go with the options”? Please be specific.

Thanks. You are keeping me on my toes!

If you have time take a look at this and some of the comments that follow :

rhrealitycheck.org/article/2011/06/10/happy-abortioncatholic-womans-guiltfree-story/

 

[grannymh]

One Sheep:

Just one quick question/clarifier here:

If a person cannot knowingly and willingly reject God, why was it necessary for Christ to die for us?

If we can’t knowingly and willingly reject God, we can’t sin mortally (because sin by definition is a rejection of God, either venial–a rejection that is only partial; or mortal–complete rejection).

Since venial sin does not kill our relationship with God and is not a full rejection, it would not be necessary for Christ to die for our sins/rejection of God, since we never ‘completely’ or ‘willingly’ reject Him in the first place, n’est-ce pas?

Thank you.

Your concerns are absolutely correct. The title of this thread hints at something deeper.

If a person cannot knowingly and willingly reject God – that concept attacks the Catholic doctrines on Adam and Original Sin. No Adam, no Adam’s mortal sin rejection, no broken relationship with God, no need for a Divine Person to restore that relationship, no need for Jesus as True God.

No True Divinity is a good reason to deny the reality of the Catholic Eucharist.

 

[simpleas]

Hi Simpleas,

Guess I never got back to you. This thread is so long, I guess because it’s interesting, and I almost forgot about your post to me!

I’m going to church this evening for a meeting for bible instructors, which would be me, and I’m not going to be able to take the time now to go, a tiny bit, through the old and new testaments.

For now, let me just say that if you’re new to this you may not understand my language very well and I apologize if I’m not more clear.

I don’t mean that man is wicked. I mean that man has concupisensce. In the garden of Eden man lost his innocence when he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Before he only knew good. After he ate, he also knew evil. Thus, man’s nature became damaged. SIN (not sins) intered into the world. All became infected with SIN. Man and nature. We could call this SIN the sin nature or concupisensce. (gosh I hate typing that word!).

It means that man is not wicket, but he could be if not infused with the grace of God. Man tends to sin. It is easy for him to sin. Have you read the book of Romans? I keep saying to read this book because it contains all the theology a christian has to know. This is a church teaching. You sound worried, nothing to worry about. I see you have catholic under religious affiliation. God loves you and cherishes you and you can be sure of that.

Let’s see about the CCC explanation which is more condensed. Start reading at no. 390 and keep going. It’ll tell you of man’s inclination toward sin.

One Sheep, back there, mentioned Calvin. Do you know who he is? He had some pretty weird ideas. One of them is that man’s nature is depraved. This is different than thinking it is damaged, or lackingm after original sin.

That’s pretty much it for this.

Will be back later.

Fran

You clearly said that man is wicked, but thanks for clarifying what you actually meant. I’ve gone over sin in the ccc thanks, I came to the conclusion that man is good, but can do evil.
Enjoy your bible meeting

 

[frangiuliano115]

Thank you.

Your concerns are absolutely correct. The title of this thread hints at something deeper.

If a person cannot knowingly and willingly reject God – that concept attacks the Catholic doctrines on Adam and Original Sin. No Adam, no Adam’s mortal sin rejection, no broken relationship with God, no need for a Divine Person to restore that relationship, no need for Jesus as True God.

No True Divinity is a good reason to deny the reality of the Catholic Eucharist.

Well, grannymh, You won’t speak to me, but I’m going to speak to you!

One Sheep wants me to reread post 242 and listen to what Pope Francis has to say.

Will be listening in to Pope Francis later on. Dinner time right now in these here parts.

I do feel that you have hit the nail on the head. Why won’t One Sheep just come out and put forth his concept? I guess I should ask him that.

But yes, this idea of forgivess and projection. Does he really think we could project our feelings onto God? I do believe God is superior to all this and we must understand God as God wants us to understand Him; if not we are lost.

Well, after dinner, will be listening to the Pope, then church for the yearly theme for educators with the Bishop who makes a special trip for us, and then, if not too tired, will be replying - or else tomorrow.

I thank you for the enlightenment.

Fran

 

[Aloysium]

Good morning Vico!

As I explained before, Vico, this thread is not about sin, it is about forgiveness, specifically using the gift of understanding to address actions we resent.

In order for a person to know the “moral character of the act” they must know the impact of their actions. If a person is destroying something that they see as worthless, but the item indeed has great value, then the person does not know the moral character of the act. This is especially the case when that “item of great value” is the well-being of another person.

I don’t remember your answer to this, Vico: Did the crowd who hung Jesus knowingly and willingly reject God? If not, what did they not know?

thanks I appreciate your participation because you know so much of the catechism.

No, this thread is about sin, specifically mortal sin which involves a rejection of God, knowingly and willingly.
It could be about forgiveness, if one finds it difficult if not impossible to forgive someone in the knowledge that they willfully and knowingly did something to harm oneself.
But, that would not be forgiveness, as it is not loving a person to deny who they are and what they do.

You wanted an example regarding the OP, I gave you the example of myself, albeit without the details.
You recast the truth into an apology for sin, explaining it away as blindness.
I repeat, this is sheer nonsense.
Having confessed my sins, asked for His mercy and having been reconciled with God, I am free again.
I would not be had I engaged in the convoluted thinking that claims my sins are merely blindness.

You did ask for an example, and since you do not accept myself, I give you, you yourself.
You are clearly not blind to your rejection of Catholic teaching regarding the fallen nature of man.
You have chosen to deny it, advocating instead for your fairyland of dumb unicorns and rainbows.
This stuff is all belief. You do not know your stuff to be true any more than you do not know that the teachings of the church are true.
But, you are choosing, and you know it, and no one is forcing you.

Of course those who crucified Jesus knew what they were doing to another human being.
They sinned and that is why Jesus asks the Father to be merciful to them.
What they did not realize was that this naked man, humiliated and robbed of everything including His life, was the incarnation of Love Itself.

 

[grannymh]

Well, grannymh, You won’t speak to me, but I’m going to speak to you!

One Sheep wants me to reread post 242 and listen to what Pope Francis has to say.

Will be listening in to Pope Francis later on. Dinner time right now in these here parts.

Hi Fran,

Even if I did know where I need to listen to Pope Francis, I am involved in a family issue tonight.

What you may find interesting is that I almost replied to post 242. This is the part of the post which I find rather weird in Catholic circles. I put a some thoughts in bold.
"Now, the article goes on to explain about the effect of original sin, as seen by Augustine, then Aquinas. What Aquinas did not consider is the very topic of this thread, though. What he also did not address is why there is such a huge variation in our views of human nature.

"Why is there such huge variation? We have the Calvinist view of human “wickedness”, depravity, voiced by some in this thread. We have the article from Patheos.com and others taking a more moderate approach, and there are people like me that see the human as beautiful, precious in the eyes of God, with no “stain” on his/her nature."
I don’t see any problem with that huge variation. I almost asked OneSheep – ‘What exactly is your problem?’ But that might have sounded rude. The simple answer is that people have different opinions, so what is the big deal with that?

I do feel that you have hit the nail on the head. Why won’t One Sheep just come out and put forth his concept? I guess I should ask him that.

But yes, this idea of forgivess and projection. Does he really think we could project our feelings onto God? I do believe God is superior to all this and we must understand God as God wants us to understand Him; if not we are lost.

Well, after dinner, will be listening to the Pope, then church for the yearly theme for educators with the Bishop who makes a special trip for us, and then, if not too tired, will be replying - or else tomorrow.

I thank you for the enlightenment.

Fran

You are welcome.

I am looking for enlightenment on this projection thing. I hate to think this out loud. But I have this crazy feeling that this projection thing determines how God should act as if God did not have a say regarding Mortal Sin.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Hi Fran,

Even if I did know where I need to listen to Pope Francis, I am involved in a family issue tonight.

What you may find interesting is that I almost replied to post 242. This is the part of the post which I find rather weird in Catholic circles. I put a some thoughts in bold.
"Now, the article goes on to explain about the effect of original sin, as seen by Augustine, then Aquinas. What Aquinas did not consider is the very topic of this thread, though. What he also did not address is why there is such a huge variation in our views of human nature.

"Why is there such huge variation? We have the Calvinist view of human “wickedness”, depravity, voiced by some in this thread. We have the article from Patheos.com and others taking a more moderate approach, and there are people like me that see the human as beautiful, precious in the eyes of God, with no “stain” on his/her nature."
I don’t see any problem with that huge variation. I almost asked OneSheep – ‘What exactly is your problem?’ But that might have sounded rude. The simple answer is that people have different opinions, so what is the big deal with that?

You are welcome.

I am looking for enlightenment on this projection thing. I hate to think this out loud. But I have this crazy feeling that this projection thing determines how God should act as if God did not have a say regarding Mortal Sin.

Grannymh,

I just got back from that meeting in church. Pretty interesting stuff. Now, I’m not in the U.S. but it would be interesting to know if it’s the same over there. Quick: Christianity is not a “religion” but a way of life; we have to start reading the bible more - get away from the other writings. Oh my. I’ve been saying this for 40 yrs!

And you know how you like the CCC? Well, I have to teach and also use that. I don’t like it, if I may say. See what happens in these threads? Two people read the same pp and come up with two different ideas. But let’s get back to the topic.

I agree with you. One Sheep is going to end up saying that we are projecting our feelings onto God OR that we expect Him to behave as we behave. That would mean that we invented God - which is what a lot of atheists say. Is One Sheep an atheist??? Is he catholic? He sure doesn’t agree with catholic doctrine. Is he protestant? He would not fit into any mainline protestant denomination.

He is rather puzzling.

Now I do disagree with you on one thing you say:

“I don’t see any problem with that huge variation.”

Now, if we’re speaking amongst ourselves and wish to voice an independent opinion, that is okay. But we have to state it is an independent opinion. Otherwise, we DO have to go with what the church teaches. That’s how I’ve been trained. Otherwise, we’d all be inventing our own little religion.

And how do you feel about all these posts quoting Acquinas and Augustine and others? I can hardly stand it anymore. What say you? Don’t you think we should stick to the bible and at the least, the CCC?

It was nice of you to answer my post. Yes. We’re very busy with our families.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

You clearly said that man is wicked, but thanks for clarifying what you actually meant. I’ve gone over sin in the ccc thanks, I came to the conclusion that man is good, but can do evil.
Enjoy your bible meeting

It’s okay, simpleas.
Well, actually, some men are wicked.
But I did mispeak and meant that man has the sin nature.
Typing and thinking fast is a dangerous combination!
And re your conclusion. I think you need to study up some more and see if you can’t agree with what the catholic church teaches. Or any christian church, for that matter. Maybe it’s just a bit difficult to understand. The CCC just hates to be clear about anything!

Fran