Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

[OneSheep]

I think Gen 3:5-6 gives a very clear explanation of his intent and want. Highlighting mine.

I see no evidence of blindness here.

Exactly. He wanted the knowledge, the power, the wisdom.

Why did he want the power and wisdom? And, did he want to hurt God while he was at it, offend God?

Oh, there were some other questions too, I edited the last post. I will put them here:

Did Adam know that he would have billions of offspring?

Did he know the value of those offspring?

Did he know that they would die because of his actions?

Did he know that women would suffer more in childbirth because of his actions?

Thanks. Read the rest of my edited last post too, if you care. It has some pertinent points.

Going back to work. You have lots of time to respond.

 

[Vico]

Good morning, Vico!

When one “prefers an inferior good” they are seeing the inferior good as a superior good. This is ignorance/blindness, so it is not an example of K&WRG.

It would be interesting to know here what aspect of “salvation” Pope Francis was talking about. In Jesus’ ordinary use o the word, he was talking about freedom from the slavery of our nature. Those who do not accept correction, for example, from slavery to their desire to accumulate wealth will remain slaves to the desire.

Here his use of “throughout their lives” indicates he was using “salvation” the way Jesus did.

The hypocrites were pure? I am a bit confused on that one. When Pope Francis said “the Lord did not want them”, was he referring to not wanting them in his group of followers, versus the tax collectors and prostitutes who were repentant? I think this is the case. The Lord, as Pope Francis says, “always understands, always forgives”. Pope Francis was not saying that those people were not loved and forgiven. After all, Jesus forgave the unrepentant from the cross, Vico.

Jesus wanted his followers to be exactly as Pope Francis described, “accepting correction” and “trusting in the Lord”. Pope Francis is addressing those who cling to money, status, and power and are enslaved by it, imploring the faithful to take on a different attitude, an openness.

Addressing the rest of the post goes too far beyond the scope of this thread, Vico. Please bring forward an example of a person K&WRG, or we can continue to discuss the example you presented in the other thread.

Of course, you could put a different meaning on Pope Francis’ words there, or you may come up with something else he said that appears to indicate non-forgiveness from God. Please do!

Thanks.

That one prefers an inferior good, as I have described it, is a free will choice, otherwise is would not be a sinful act. As I present it, is not ignorance/blindness.

 

[OneSheep]

That one prefers an inferior good, as I have described it, is a free will choice, otherwise is would not be a sinful act. As I present it, is not ignorance/blindness.

Hi Vico,

As you presented the guy having an affair? He was irrational, remember? His will was not with his choice. He did not will to reject God or “prefer the inferior good” if I remember right. He was sort of, well, insane.

Please correct me if I don’t remember that right.

After all, what is a “preference”? It is saying “this is better”. If he says what I call an inferior good is “better”, then he is saying that the particular good is not inferior, but superior. If he says that the inferior good is superior, he is believing an untruth, and if so believing, he is not operating “knowingly”.

However, that was not the case with the man you described. He had his inferiors and superiors in line, up front and clear, and he chose the inferior anyway. Completely irrational. Not of sound mind. The scenario is so unlikely. With desire comes blindness, the blindness “pushes” the inferior to the superior position, and then the person says things like “It doesn’t hurt anyone” even though it does.

Thanks

 

[Vico]

Hi Vico,

As you presented the guy having an affair? He was irrational, remember? His will was not with his choice. He did not will to reject God or “prefer the inferior good” if I remember right. He was sort of, well, insane.

Please correct me if I don’t remember that right.

After all, what is a “preference”? It is saying “this is better”. If he says what I call an inferior good is “better”, then he is saying that the particular good is not inferior, but superior. If he says that the inferior good is superior, he is believing an untruth, and if so believing, he is not operating “knowingly”.

However, that was not the case with the man you described. He had his inferiors and superiors in line, up front and clear, and he chose the inferior anyway. Completely irrational. Not of sound mind. The scenario is so unlikely. With desire comes blindness, the blindness “pushes” the inferior to the superior position, and then the person says things like “It doesn’t hurt anyone” even though it does.

Thanks

All sin is irrational, yet we may still be culpable for it.

A person that chooses the things of this world forsakes those of the next, according to the truth given by Jesus Christ. That a particular good is chosen against the faith is sinful.

Faith is necessary which has merit particularly because it is not scientifically demonstrable.

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Hi T.e.!

I think post 264 was the response to the question you asked. No need to revisit it. I hear a hesitation about sharing your own view of why Jesus died on the cross. I’m not going to push it, I’ll let it go.

It sounds like you really, really want to discuss Adam. If you could line out, exactly the difference between a “prenatural nature” and “regular human nature” and explain exactly the content of the “infused knowledge” he had, then I am up for it. You might want to use my last post to David as a guide.

So, the ball is in your court. Explicitly describe Adam’s humanity, and we can start!

I know you mean well on wanting to talk about Adam, but maybe it would be easier just to talk about a normal human defying his elders or something like that. Why the fixation on Adam? The story comes from Persia, and it says in the CCC that it is to be taken figuratively. An analysis of Adam’s thinking misses the point of the story, which for the most part is: “be obedient”.

This thread is about understanding people, T.E., I have been explaining that all along. When we understand, it is easier to forgive. And a big part of understanding people is seeing their blindness and lack of awareness. If you ever resented Adam, did you forgive him? If so, explain how you forgave. That would still be in keeping with this thread.

May God graciously bless your day.

I believe that you asked if any human ever knowingly and willingly rejected God. The burden of proof is now on you to prove that Adam was not human.

I’m waiting.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Exactly. He wanted the knowledge, the power, the wisdom.

Why did he want the power and wisdom? And, did he want to hurt God while he was at it, offend God?

Oh, there were some other questions too, I edited the last post. I will put them here:

Did Adam know that he would have billions of offspring?

Did he know the value of those offspring?

Did he know that they would die because of his actions?

Did he know that women would suffer more in childbirth because of his actions?

Thanks. Read the rest of my edited last post too, if you care. It has some pertinent points.

Going back to work. You have lots of time to respond.

I’ll jump in.

Are you trying to tell me that unless a person can see every possible negative event arising from his action until the end of recorded time that the person “lacks knowledge”? Because that seems to be your thrust.

Based on this kind of criterion it might appear that no mere human being (including Adam) since we all lack this kind of omniscience (including Adam) could ever have sufficient ‘knowledge’ of all the effects of sin.

But here’s the rub. As creatures, we never (including Adam) had that kind of omniscience to begin with (not even ‘preturnaturally’). So you’re saying God ‘set us up’ so that we could never really truly reject Him.

And that means you’re utterly rejecting free will. If we never have the choice to reject, as well as choose, we are not free. We are bound. We are robots acting out a script where we are given lines which seem to indicate that we are doing one thing, but it’s just words on a page that SOMEBODY ELSE WROTE, not something we choose.

 

[simpleas]

Yes simpleas, if man is inherently bad, he can’t be inherently good. Yes. I didn’t say man is evil. But there are evil men, check out 2 Timothy 3:13. Timothy, one of the apostles is saying it, I’m just repeating it.

Nature has also inhereted the sin nature. That’s why there are hurricanes. Even nature is awaiting the return of Christ, Check out Romans 8:18-25. Even nature is graoaning and waiting to be liberated from its bondage to decay - read Romans chapter 8.

You say you know nothing, but you’re not willing to really study and learn because you just keep going back to your idea that man is good. I’ve given you a few paths to take. Want to know what you should really do?

Take my posts to a priest of your choosing and ask him if they’re correct. Print them out and let him read them. Sometimes priests like to sugarcoat things, just tell him you want the truth.

Buy a concordance and a commentary and read the bible and use the commentary. When you have time, look up the word “evil” just for fun.

As far as evil goes: Evil is both a verb and a noun. And no matter what anybody tells you - nobody knows where evil comes from. Ask your priest about this too. If he says it comes from satan, ask him where satan got it. You’ll find that eventually he’ll have no answer for you. If he mentions Augustine, remind him that when Augustine died he stated that he really didn’t know where evil comes from.

It’s complicated simpleas. I’m limited here and it seems like you’re not open and why should you be? You don’t know me and you shouldn’t trust just anybody. Read the bible so you know when someone is telling you something wrong.

Let’s take One Sheep as an example. He has his mind so made up that he doesn’t even LISTEN to what people are saying. He thinks I brought up Judas and what was in his mind when what I said is that we don’t know what was in his mind; except that he felt pretty horrible about betraying Jesus.

First he says that Pope Francis said everyone is saved and now he’s rethinking his position and saying that it depends on our choice.

So yes, keep reading and studying. You could even read 2 Timothy chapters 3 and 4. It’s a start. And always remember God treasures you whether you know little or whether you know a lot, as long as you love His son Jesus.

I pray God blesses you abundantly
Fran

Why do you think I am not open? Just because I see in man good and bad?

I’m saying man is both good and bad, we can be two sides of the coin, of course we strive to be good but we do fail. You said this in a previous post.
Believe me I am aware that man can do evil.

Nature too is beautiful but can be destructive.

Have a nice day Fran.

 

[grannymh]

Thank you to all who are bravely explaining Catholic doctrines.

 

[pocaracas]

I’ll jump in.

Are you trying to tell me that unless a person can see every possible negative event arising from his action until the end of recorded time that the person “lacks knowledge”? Because that seems to be your thrust.

Based on this kind of criterion it might appear that no mere human being (including Adam) since we all lack this kind of omniscience (including Adam) could ever have sufficient ‘knowledge’ of all the effects of sin.

That’s why I told him he was stretching the concept of “knowingly” a bit too much…

But here’s the rub. As creatures, we never (including Adam) had that kind of omniscience to begin with (not even ‘preturnaturally’). So you’re saying God ‘set us up’ so that we could never really truly reject Him.

And that means you’re utterly rejecting free will. If we never have the choice to reject, as well as choose, we are not free. We are bound. We are robots acting out a script where we are given lines which seem to indicate that we are doing one thing, but it’s just words on a page that SOMEBODY ELSE WROTE, not something we choose.

Some may say that we are biological robots and our perceived “free will” is only an illusion - given the same set of circumstances, our brains will reason the same way, over and over again…
The rub is that our brains also incorporate prior experiences into the decisions, so it’s not possible to repeat an experiment with the exact same circumstances, thus making this view an unprovable hypothesis… it doesn’t mean it’s wrong… we just can’t tell for sure.
Until we can map out the neural pathways used to arrive at a particular reasoning/behavior, and realize that it couldn’t have happened any other way, “free will” remains a real perception.

Conclude whatever you want about God from there…

 

[OneSheep]

I’ll jump in.

Are you trying to tell me that unless a person can see every possible negative event arising from his action until the end of recorded time that the person “lacks knowledge”? Because that seems to be your thrust.

Good Morning, T.E.,

That knowledge is only pertinent in terms of “if the person knew this, then they would not do the action”. I did say in the OP that I was using “knowingly” very broadly. It all boils down to intent. Humans do not intend to do harm for the sake of doing harm. (This could be explained with examples, but the crucifixion is an example I can use to clarify)

Based on this kind of criterion it might appear that no mere human being (including Adam) since we all lack this kind of omniscience (including Adam) could ever have sufficient ‘knowledge’ of all the effects of sin

.

This is true, but important aspects are the intent of the person, if they would have performed the act if knowing the consequences, and if blindness had been triggered.

But here’s the rub. As creatures, we never (including Adam) had that kind of omniscience to begin with (not even ‘preturnaturally’). So you’re saying God ‘set us up’ so that we could never really truly reject Him.

Well, we do reject Him, but my observation is that we do so not knowingly and willingly. Again, it is important to look at the person’s intent, what did he want? Why did he want it? What did he not consider? What was off the radar? The point of this thread is understanding people and seeing the world in their shoes. We can do so with forgiveness when we learn to also forgive ourselves for our own past deeds, as Paul did concerning his persecution of Christians.

And that means you’re utterly rejecting free will. If we never have the choice to reject, as well as choose, we are not free. We are bound. We are robots acting out a script where we are given lines which seem to indicate that we are doing one thing, but it’s just words on a page that SOMEBODY ELSE WROTE, not something we choose.

Let me present an example. If a person is holding a grudge for years, but does not know that the means to overcome the grudge is to forgive, then the person’s “will” is limited by that lack of knowledge. Certainly the person can “freely” choose from all of the options that he knows, but those options accessible can be limited. In addition, when the person is holding the grudge, forgiveness even if known as an option, is resisted. The person we hold a grudge against is devalued in our minds. This happens automatically, we think negatively about the person, we are blinded to their humanity. We do not have the “freedom” to undo this negativity until we understand and forgive. The negativity “predestines” our minds to resist forgiving. So, to some degree, our “free will” is limited.

In addition, desire and fear alter our minds. Again, like holding grudges, the effect is written into our nature. Our will is “freer” after we have forgiven, when we address our fears, and when we are not overcome with desire. None of this goes against our Catholic teachings.

I believe that you asked if any human ever knowingly and willingly rejected God. The burden of proof is now on you to prove that Adam was not human.

Well, I would like to treat Adam as human, and we can do that, but we may run into the encyclopedia description of “prenatural” and “infused knowledge”. That may present a problem in the analysis that may make understanding very difficult.

So, feel free to address the questions I sent David. We can stay on with Adam as long as we stick to his being completely human, and not knowing everything that was pertinent to his decision because his knowledge was “infused”. Do you see the difficulty? We don’t know what he knew. On the other hand, it would be quite fruitful to put ourselves in the place of Adam and simply ask, “Why would I do that?”.

Would that be easier, T.E? Why would you have eaten the fruit in A&E’s situation?

Thanks for staying with this, maybe we can truly get somewhere!

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Humans do not intend to do harm for the sake of doing harm. . . .

. . . Oh, you were serious. . .

 

[OneSheep]

. . . Oh, you were serious. . .

Hey, Bro, got your attention, eh?

The crucifixion is an example because the intent of the crowd was to destroy an evil, a blasphemer. The resentment toward Jesus, as all resentment, led to a blindness to His humanity. So, indeed they saw they were doing harm, but the net effect in their eyes was a greater good: justice, elimination of an evil.

Do you see what I mean? This is why I would have participated; it would have been because I was blinded by resentment. Would this have been the case for you, or do you simply not understand why they crucified Him?

Thanks for your response, I understand completely your reaction!

 

[You]

That’s why I told him he was stretching the concept of “knowingly” a bit too much…


Some may say that we are biological robots and our perceived “free will” is only an illusion - given the same set of circumstances, our brains will reason the same way, over and over again…
The rub is that our brains also incorporate prior experiences into the decisions, so it’s not possible to repeat an experiment with the exact same circumstances, thus making this view an unprovable hypothesis… it doesn’t mean it’s wrong… we just can’t tell for sure.
Until we can map out the neural pathways used to arrive at a particular reasoning/behavior, and realize that it couldn’t have happened any other way, “free will” remains a real perception.

Conclude whatever you want about God from there…

That could be proven. Because:

1. The program demands one out come.
2. You flip a coin and do whatever is says.
3. You have used free will to baffle repeating yourself…

 

[pocaracas]

That could be proven. Because:

1. The program demands one out come.
2. You flip a coin and do whatever is says.
3. You have used free will to baffle repeating yourself…

I sense an attempt at a joke in there… but am baffled by its lack of efficacy.

When you have a black box, you don’t know what the program is, nor what is the expected outcome.
The action of flipping coins is purely mechanical… the uncertainty of the outcome comes from our own uncertainty in the force applied to the coin. I guess that, with proper training, you can come to make a flipping coin land the way you want.
I also have the illusion of free will… could I have not responded to this post? yes… how likely would that have been, knowing my own psyche? very little - I find it difficult to resist replying to someone who’s talking to me… am I free?

 

[OneSheep]

I sense an attempt at a joke in there… but am baffled by its lack of efficacy.

When you have a black box, you don’t know what the program is, nor what is the expected outcome.
The action of flipping coins is purely mechanical… the uncertainty of the outcome comes from our own uncertainty in the force applied to the coin. I guess that, with proper training, you can come to make a flipping coin land the way you want.
I also have the illusion of free will… could I have not responded to this post? yes… how likely would that have been, knowing my own psyche? very little - I find it difficult to resist replying to someone who’s talking to me… am I free?

Hi pocaracas,

What I liked most about your comments earlier was ““free will” remains a real perception”.

The illusions we have seem so very real! However, they are all we have in terms of ‘from what we operate’, and we don’t know that they are illusions until something takes us outside of the whole picture.

So, when I see someone as “evil”, for example, as the crowd saw Jesus, that characteristic is an illusion. This thread is here, among other things, to promote understanding, to promote forgiveness and take people out of the whole picture of seeing negative in others. The negativity is an illusion, as Fr. Anthony de Mello, a psychotherapist, said.

That said, the illusion itself is not negative in its presence in the human mind. The illusion does serve a function, as you may intuitively conclude. Or do you not?

Thanks.

 

[Aloysium]

Hey, Bro, got your attention, eh?

The crucifixion is an example because the intent of the crowd was to destroy an evil, a blasphemer. The resentment toward Jesus, as all resentment, led to a blindness to His humanity. So, indeed they saw they were doing harm, but the net effect in their eyes was a greater good: justice, elimination of an evil.

Do you see what I mean? This is why I would have participated; it would have been because I was blinded by resentment. Would this have been the case for you, or do you simply not understand why they crucified Him?

Thanks for your response, I understand completely your reaction!

Our free-will is basically neutral. We decide whom we will become through our actions.
We chose between the various gods, the mundane ones being wealth, power and pleasure, and we devote our lives to them.

Agreed, the crowd had its reasons, each person, their own.
They did have knowledge of what was going on and acted on it.
I do not believe any of them wished to eliminate evil.
If anything, other than the sport of seeing someone suffer,
they more accurately wanted to be righteous.
In other words, they were spiritually proud.
Love would have whispered to them that it was wrong to kill this man.
The evil within them shouted, “Crucify Him!”
They knew what they were doing and why.

When we are in the presence of the Beatific vision, it will not be possible to sin,
because we will know everything as it is as a manifestation of God’s love.
At the beginning of time, we chose the other door.
I do agree that we chose ignorance and lies over the truth.
We now have to pull ourselves out of this mire.
We cannot however, truly become loving persons outside of Christ.

People are given sufficient knowledge to make a moral choice - to love or not to love.
On that basis, through our actions, we grow in Christ or more demonic.
Sin hurts, from our side, our relationship with God.
In order to heal, we must recognize the sin and repent.

I have no idea where you are coming from; it comes across like some anti-scrupulosity.

 

[OneSheep]

Agreed, the crowd had its reasons, each person, their own.
They did have knowledge of what was going on and acted on it.
I do not believe any of them wished to eliminate evil.
If anything, other than the sport of seeing someone suffer,
they more accurately wanted to be righteous.
In other words, they were spiritually proud.
Love would have whispered to them that it was wrong to kill this man.
The evil within them shouted, “Crucify Him!”
They knew what they were doing and why.
.

True, they wanted to be righteous, but their minds most certainly demonized Jesus, they were blind to His humanity. They wanted to eliminate a perceived evil. You disagree - that’s okay.

When people want to see someone suffer, that person is not of value in their eyes, only disvalue.

They did not, Aloysium, know what they were doing. They thought they were destroying something repulsive, they meant to carry out justice, but did not.

We see it differently, Aloysium. That’s okay. Have you forgiven the crowd?

 

[Aloysium]

True, they wanted to be righteous, but their minds most certainly demonized Jesus, they were blind to His humanity. They wanted to eliminate a perceived evil. You disagree - that’s okay.

When people want to see someone suffer, that person is not of value in their eyes, only disvalue.

The did not, Aloysium know what they were doing. They thought they were destroying something repulsive, they meant to carry out justice, but did not.

We see it differently, Aloysium. Have you forgiven the crowd?

Some people like to see others suffer.
If you want to carve them up psychologically,
you might say the emotion/desire caused it,
but that shattering of the self is a sign of the brokenness
that arises out of our pain and of sin.

The ones who justified their behaviour
as being in accordance with the law did not worship God.
They rejected Love, knowingly and willingly.

If you confess and repent, you are reconciled with God.
This is what truly enables one to forgive - reconnecting with Love.
No mental contortions trying to determine motives are required.

 

[grannymh]

Obviously, Catholics agree that the first real human, historically known as Adam, committed the first Original Sin; therefore, he is the designated human who knowingly and willingly rejected God.

Since the title words, knowingly and willingly, are being properly discussed, it might be interesting to look at willingly in terms of Catholic thought. Adam and Eve were the only creatures mentioned in the first three chapters of Genesis who were called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life. Sharing in God’s life (Genesis 1:27) is a mighty powerful concept. Love has to be willingly given.

When we turn the thread title upside down, we ask "does any human ever knowingly and willingly accept God? Think about the crowd surrounding the crucified Jesus Who would conquer death with His divine resurrection. There were sincere people, starting with Mary His Mother, and others gathered there, who did accept Jesus as God. Too often, there is a rush to blame the crowd and then excuse the crowd, that it becomes easy to lose the fact that Jesus is fully Divine and therefore, He knew the state of each individual in the vicinity. Jesus knowing the state of each individual does not automatically mean that we can assume that everyone wanted to accept Jesus as God. Accepting Jesus as fully Divine means accepting chapter 6, Gospel of John.

Getting back to the fact that we are called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life, we discover that there is a lot that we need to do when we willingly love God. One is to remain in the State of Sanctifying Grace which means that we have to recognize and completely understand the State of Mortal Sin. In that state of Mortal Sin, there is the need for personal sorrow, repentance, and to willingly seek forgiveness from our Creator. I do realize that a lot of nitty-gritty about this blindness or that lack of awareness is necessary if we are to judge people’s actions. However, in the real world of Jesus hanging bloody on His chosen cross, it is this Jesus, Who comes to us in the Catholic Sacrament of Confession and Reconciliation. He knows our guilt or our innocence just like He knew the guilt or innocence of each person in the crowd.

Thus, we with our limited minds cannot assume that on Good Friday, there was universal forgiveness regardless of the state and willingness of each individual.

 

[OneSheep]

Some people like to see others suffer.
If you want to carve them up psychologically,
you might say the emotion/desire caused it,
but that shattering of the self is a sign of the brokenness
that arises out of our pain and of sin.

Hi Aloysium,

Yes, that is a way of describing it. People can be broken? A spiritual-director (not mine) said to me that ‘people are broken’ the other day, and then I got distracted. I wish I had time to investigate with her this “brokenness”. For example, is PTSD a “brokenness”? The symptoms are a mind trying to deal with trauma. It’s more like a broken arm, I think, but more serious. The person is not broken, he mind has experienced trauma. There is a difference, sometimes the difference is important.

The ones who justified their behaviour
as being in accordance with the law did not worship God.
They rejected Love, knowingly and willingly.

Your conclusion does not proceed from the premise you gave, Aloysium. If they found their behavior justified, then they saw it as being in accord as they saw the situation. They very well could have worshiped God, but were simply blind or ignorant. They did not reject what they perceived as Love, they perceived Love incorrectly. If they did not worship God, then they knew even less about what they were doing. Do you understand the crowd’s thinking, Aloysium? Do you hold anything against them?

If you confess and repent, you are reconciled with God.
This is what truly enables one to forgive - reconnecting with Love.
No mental contortions trying to determine motives are required.

Mental “contortions”, eh? If they were contortions, they would only perpetuate or worsen the illusions that lead to blaming others and resistance to forgive. Do you hold anything against the crowd, Aloysium? I assume not. If not, why not?

Are you trying to make your posts look like poetry?

God Bless.