Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter OneSheep
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, Jesus is saying that because they say, correctly, that they “see” in the sense of understanding religious and moral truth, they are guilty of sin.

No, it doesn’t mean those who consider themselves righteous. Those who see are the religious leaders, who have understood to some extent religious and moral truth. But when Jesus arrives, many of them reject Him and the fullness of truth that he brings, thereby becoming blind. Then those who previously had little understanding of religious and moral truth accept Christ and can then “see” because they obtain a much fuller understanding.

An atheist who rejects religion because he realizes that if he accepts that God exists, he will have to examine his life and give up his sins. The same situation for a non-Catholic Christian who refuses to consider that the Catholic Church might be the one true Church because he knows that if he does, he might have to change his life. This type of sin is interior.

The Church teaches that invincible ignorance reduces or remits culpability, even for grave sin. We are responsible before God and our consciences for those acts we knew to be immoral, and for willful ignorance.
FOR ONE SHEEP

Post no. 32

Ron Conte is righ for pp one. I agree and it’s the same as post 25.
In pp 2, I agree with RC in all except his very first statement. Of course the pharisees considered themselves righteous. Well, I’d also say that they were blind even before Jesus arrived but that’s a technicality and I hate debating technicalities.

Regarding the atheist. RC and I agree on the first part of pp regarding atheists. I do not agree with him that this same problem exists for non-catholics. Protestants are doing just fine living a just life if they belong to a mainline denomination and they would not have to change their LIVES but would have to accept doctrine and/or dogma they cannot believe in.

I agree with RC regarding the reduction of culpability for invincible ignorance.
COULD SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WILLFUL IGNORANCE TO ME??
 
Good Morning!

Okay, do the Pharisees understand religious and moral truth? If so, they are not blind, right? So the sin has nothing to do with them being blind, the sin in this case is that they know the truth of their harm but are behaving differently, condemning Jesus and the healed man.

So, this provides an example. Why did the Pharisees condemn Jesus? Wait a minute, you provide the answer just below.

Do you see what I mean? The Pharisees became blind as they reject and resent Jesus.

So, the next question for the atheist example is “Why does the atheist resist examining his life and giving up his sins?”

The next question for the non-Catholic Christian is “Why does he resist changing his life?”

Are the two examples above “willful ignorance”?

If so, let us continue with them. If not, you could come up with another example after we address these two.

Thanks for your response!
FOR ONE SHEEP

post no. 36

Well, this is point of contention. Did the pharisees understand religious and moral truth? Jesus said not only did they not know it, but they refused to let others in (into the fold).
The pharisees understood THE LAW. The law kills. The jews could not follow the law and were not even taught it but were treated as stupid and as outsider. The pharieses did not help them to enter throught “the gate”. Jesus brought grace. The pharisees rejected grace, Jesus’ teachings and, finally Jesus. He was a danger to them and their way of living (superior to everyone else - thence the were righteous but not in a good sense, which would be God’s righeousness).

RC explains why Jesus was rejected. And as above.

The pharisees were blind before Jesus entered onto the scene. It is because they claimed to “see” that they sinned. He tried to teach them that they were blind. Remember his discussion with Nicodemus.

Can we leave the atheist out of this? He doesn’t even believe God exists. Why should he give up his “good and fun loving” life for an entity he doesn’t believe in??

A catholic christian “resists” changing his life because the church has not taught him how he’s supposed to live! Let’s not go there - this is a pet peeve of mine. Look at a recent poll. I think 48% of catholics belive SSM is okay. Don’t quote me on the %. But it’s high. Another reason is just that, for those who care to learn, we are constantly growing and on our way to sanctification (if I can be allowed to state it as such and forget about the CCC explanation) and we can only respond to God as we understand holiness more and more.

Yes. I think the two examples above are from ignorance. The atheist is ignorant of the fact that God exists. The catholic could be WILLFULLY refusing to change his life. But then he wouldn’t be ignorant. The ignorant catholic is the one who is walking toward sancificatin and can only understand his present requirements.
This, again, goes back to willful ignorance and I just don’t understand it. If you do, please explain.

That’s it for now.

p.s. The woman does not know the value of the child because she has not come to that conclusion by her life experience and our church has not taught her.

God bless
 
Good Morning!

So, to understand part of the purpose of this thread, here is a core verse:

Mark 11:25 (NIV)

25 And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins. "

So, when we read something from Paul, or Peter, or anyone for that matter that sounds like the writer is holding something against someone, then we can either charitably rework the wording so that it does not sound that way, or we can consider Peter and Paul as human (which they were) and realize that they are just as capable of holding a grudge as the next person. Since it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to discern our own blindness, (we are blind to our blindness) it behooves us to gently point out when our comrades have been possibly blinded in some way. If I hear words of resentment, then either I am hearing incorrectly, or the speaker is a bit blind.

In any case, it is up to me to forgive those I resent. That is our calling. It would be very easy to push it off and “let God handle it”, but that doesn’t free me from the slavery of resentment, and it does not bring holiness.
Forgot about Mark 11:25

I reread it. There’s nothing new there for me. It goes along with the Our Father.
Also, try reading John 13:5-10. Can you tie that in? The washing of the feet. Is it really about service to others??

Forgiveness. It’s a mystery. It’s, like, if I don’t forgive the person, somehow it hinders God. I don’t understand too well although I have taught this. We don’t understand everything we teach !00%. I still don’t understand the Trinity and never will. I DO understand how difficult it is to teach. You can say all you want, it’ll never be understood. In fact, you always risk teaching modalism.

Anyway, check out John. I think it only fair that we all work on this!

God bless
 
We have absolutely no evidence that Jesus was addressing any fewer than the entire crowd present in Luke 23:34. He was addressing the unrepentant supporters of His crucifixion.
Absolutely no evidence that Jesus … What happened to the divinity of Jesus?

“No evidence” sounds exactly like those people who want to quietly limit the divinity of Jesus Christ. In the post 42 scenario, Jesus addresses the unrepentant supporters of His crucifixion. In other words, Jesus’ divine power is limited to those He physically sees in His presence. Apparently, He skips the repented. I think that is what it means. Help!

Thank heavens, the Catholic Church does not depend on someone finding evidence. For general information. When it comes to doctrines, the Catholic Church depends on the wisdom of the Holy Spirit Who personally guides the Church during its major ecumenical councils. The Catholic Church does not depend on those people within the Church who have “legitimate views” on how to properly rewrite Divine Revelation according to their personal preferences for some kind of community gathering.

Just re-read post 42. That non-existence evidence, which determines the physical reach of divinity, refers to “any fewer than the entire crowd.” Interesting! I wonder how Jesus feels having His divinity limited to the crowd as in fewer or not fewer.

It seems to me that an important Catholic doctrine is missing from the presented interpretation of Luke 23: 33-34. I bet what is missing is that Jesus divinely knows the state of each individual human’s soul regardless of where that person is standing or hiding. I also wonder if that presented interpretation of Luke 23: 33-34 is somehow related to the issue – Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

If no one can reject God because of blindness and lack of awareness, then there is no mortal sin. So, who cares about the divinity of Jesus hanging bloody on His chosen cross?
 
Good Morning frangiuliano! (is just “fran” okay?)

I am going to try to be as brief as possible, pare things down a bit. I hope that is okay.
I’m happy to know that your familiar with all of the above ideas. "Take the log out of your eye…
So, yes, we are blind to our own blindness. But as you grow in holiness you begin to see more and more that you cannot be a slave to sin and not forgiving someone makes you a slave to those feelings you speak of, one of which is resentment.
I usually find that the very thing I am condemning in someone else, I am myself doing. The “log” verse is insightful and a great means of understanding.
I don’t project that God doesn’t forgive that person…
And yes, God has forgiven before time because God is infinite and outside of time.
I think I may need to clarify projection. For example, I tell you that a man walks out into a stadium and the whole crowd present stands up and cheers. I ask you, “how does the man feel?”. Your first reaction will be one of “how I would feel in the same situation”. Your answer might be “elated!”. In reality, the person could feel frightened, guilty, even angry, we have no idea. We can indeed try to avoid projection, and it can be helpful to do that, but even our alternatives are based on our own past experiences. This is the same way people think about God. You must have already encountered this with other people on the CAF. It is easier to see in others than to see it in ourselves. Bottom line: God is infinitely loving and merciful, regardless of our projections.
We now have a damged nature. We are inclined to sin - this is the sin nature. The book of Romans: What I want to do, I do not do; what I do not want to do, I do. (my favorite book).
Paul was reflecting the fact that we are not in control, and we mess up. More on this below.
If the woman is doing this for her convenience, then she does not understand that children are a gift. If she understood that they are, she would accept the child and make whatever sacrifice necessary to raise and love the child.
Whether or not she accepts that the child is a gift is irrelevant to her choice to sin. If she is really a christian she understands that it’s a gift and if she goes through with it because she wants to keep her job, then it’s a sin.
So, the last question was “How does she not know the value of the child if she is Christian?”.

Well, I think I kind of see an answer in your post. Remember, the question of the thread. “Sin” can have several meanings in everyday vernacular, such as “sin is doing something hurtful, whether we meant to or not.”

There are two options, in my observation:
  1. She is really, truly unknowing of the value of the child. She is ignorant.
  2. She is blind. Desire, resentment, and fear blind us.
Search your own life, Fran. Blindness is an automatic response. Have you ever been blinded by one of these and behaved in a way that seems irrational or hurtful? Yet, we resist understanding our blindness because we feel guilty and do not want to “make excuses” for ourselves. So for our purposes, let us remain dedicated to not relieving any consequence, regardless of our understanding. We do not want the compulsion to avoid “making excuses” to be a roadblock to understanding.

And, as you astutely pointed out, we are blind to our blindness. Once the fear, desire, and resentment are gone, I realize I was blind… someone could also point out my blindness to me.

The mother with the “unwanted” child fears her future, and resents her poor choice to have sex. In the case of rape, the resentment is even greater. To clear up the blindness, we have to address the fear and the resentment. Crisis pregnancy counseling is very little about “you are wrong about the life of the child”, it is more about “this is how we can help you address your fears, and save a life.”

So, what do you think, has the woman Knowingly and Willingly rejected God? If you think she has, explain, and we can investigate.
Now I know that wrath can be a good thing, which I think I must have mentioned, but I don’t undertand how projection can be a good thing…
Okay, I will save you the trouble. Projection is a very important part of empathy.
I still maintain that it’s better to accept an incorrect version of Jesus than not to accept Him at all. It goes back again to being saved or not being saved.
A person who believes that God is cruel and unmerciful is going to have a very warped view of the “perfection” that we are called to. He will still remain a slave to his resentment. Check the comments in blue on post 42 for clarification.

We are to “be perfect, as our heavenly Father is perfect.”

I’ll get to the rest of the series in my next post.
 
Absolutely no evidence that Jesus … What happened to the divinity of Jesus?

“No evidence” sounds exactly like those people who want to quietly limit the divinity of Jesus Christ. In the post 42 scenario, Jesus addresses the unrepentant supporters of His crucifixion. In other words, Jesus’ divine power is limited to those He physically sees in His presence. Apparently, He skips the repented. I think that is what it means. Help!

Thank heavens, the Catholic Church does not depend on someone finding evidence. For general information. When it comes to doctrines, the Catholic Church depends on the wisdom of the Holy Spirit Who personally guides the Church during its major ecumenical councils. The Catholic Church does not depend on those people within the Church who have “legitimate views” on how to properly rewrite Divine Revelation according to their personal preferences for some kind of community gathering.

Just re-read post 42. That non-existence evidence, which determines the physical reach of divinity, refers to “any fewer than the entire crowd.” Interesting! I wonder how Jesus feels having His divinity limited to the crowd as in fewer or not fewer.

It seems to me that an important Catholic doctrine is missing from the presented interpretation of Luke 23: 33-34. I bet what is missing is that Jesus divinely knows the state of each individual human’s soul regardless of where that person is standing or hiding. I also wonder if that presented interpretation of Luke 23: 33-34 is somehow related to the issue – Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

If no one can reject God because of blindness and lack of awareness, then there is no mortal sin. So, who cares about the divinity of Jesus hanging bloody on His chosen cross?
I’m sorry, love. You seem to be reading so much into my words and comments that I do not know where to begin to reply. You had given me the impression that Jesus was only addressing a few of those present at the crucifixion, so that might have been an error on my part.

Please, if you can think of a case of someone knowingly and willingly rejecting God, describe the case, and we can go from there.

Peace… and Love. 🙂
 
Maybe you’re projecting!!
Possibly! Let me know when, okay?🙂
HOW can ignorance be willful and knowledgable and culpable? I said back when that if you are truly ignorant of a sin, God does not hold you reponsible as a judge in court would. He’s not a judge in a court, as you well know. That’s why children are not responsible for their sins till the age of reason.
I don’t know how this experiment of yours can work.
Okay, here you are stating that ignorance relieves culpability. Here, it depends on the tone and definition of “culpability”. If you mean that understanding and forgiveness of the sinner drives out our resentment, that is one use. If you mean that we are not responsible, that is accountable, that is quite another. We all need to take ownership of our sins, and answer for them, regardless of our age. I think you agree with all this, but I am doing some clarifying. There is a difference between culpability and condemnation.

This is not really an experiment in my thinking. This thread is about understanding people, it is an anthropology. It is an investigation: “Does anyone ever knowingly and willingly reject God?”
 
COULD SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WILLFUL IGNORANCE TO ME??
Here is my explanation: A person is saying “I don’t want to know/think about/ the Truth on this.” Which is a position that anyone of normal conscience would condemn.

The question here is “Is willful ignorance an example of knowingly and willingly rejecting God?” which would be the question open to investigation on this thread.

Great question, frangiuliano.
post no. 36

Well, this is point of contention. Did the pharisees understand religious and moral truth?



p.s. The woman does not know the value of the child because she has not come to that conclusion by her life experience and our church has not taught her.

God bless
We can start on determining if the pharisees ever knowingly and willingly rejected God, but we can handle cases one at a time. If we are done with the question on the woman, we can start on the pharisees.

Your p.s. addresses the “ignorance” I wrote about in my post 65. I also addressed the other option, blindness. If you can think of any other way that she knowingly and willingly rejected God, let me know, otherwise we can close the woman example.

Wow, you are writing a lot!🙂

Thanks, and God bless you too.
 
Forgot about Mark 11:25

I reread it. There’s nothing new there for me. It goes along with the Our Father.
Also, try reading John 13:5-10. Can you tie that in? The washing of the feet. Is it really about service to others??

Forgiveness. It’s a mystery. It’s, like, if I don’t forgive the person, somehow it hinders God. I don’t understand too well although I have taught this. We don’t understand everything we teach !00%. I still don’t understand the Trinity and never will. I DO understand how difficult it is to teach. You can say all you want, it’ll never be understood. In fact, you always risk teaching modalism.

Anyway, check out John. I think it only fair that we all work on this!

God bless
Hi again.

Well, it can be explained.

The priest who taught our Bible study said that God always forgives. There is no hindrance. A hindrance would be a condition, but God loves us without condition, without limit.

However, (the priest continues) if one refuses to forgive someone else, he will never understand that God forgives him without condition. Our understanding of God’s forgiveness is going to be limited to the way that we behave in our world. As long as I withhold forgiveness from anyone, God as I know Him will be a God who conditionally forgives. And if God only conditionally forgives, our minds will find ourselves not meeting the condition, or at least being very uncertain about whether God loves us. This is the “torture” referred to in the parable of the unforgiving servant. The torture is the insecurity, the uncertainty of God’s mercy and love for us (to say nothing of the slavery of holding a grudge). When we forgive, we know that God forgives. Until then, not.

I’m not sure how John 13:5-10 works into the investigation here. We are called to humility and service. The definition of “clean” may be a different question.

Thanks! I think I have addressed the highlights. If you like, just address my post 68 so we are not so scattered. 🙂
 
Jesus seemed to be more upset with the Pharisees than the sinners. After the Pharisees had said that Jesus drove out devils by the devil, Jesus talked about the unforgivable sin called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. The Church seems to interpret this act as an unwillingness to receive forgiveness. This would imply a complete rejection of God and his mercy.

The Pharisees in rejecting the Holy Spirit were perhaps preferring their own version of God made in their image rather than the one true God.
Good morning, and welcome!

There has been a lot written about the “unforgivable sin”. It has nothing to do with God’s unlimited love and forgiveness, but about the closed-mindedness of people. In the anthropology I have concluded, people are only closed-minded if they are blind or ignorant, so they are not Knowingly and Willingly rejecting God. You may be able to come up with a different example, though. Let me know.

Are you thinking that the Pharisees knowingly and willingly rejected God in their preference of their own version? If so, the first question is:

Why did the pharisees prefer their own version? (We should delve a little into “their version”)

Thanks for your response!🙂
 
Hi again.

Well, it can be explained.

The priest who taught our Bible study said that God always forgives. There is no hindrance. A hindrance would be a condition, but God loves us without condition, without limit.

However, (the priest continues) if one refuses to forgive someone else, he will never understand that God forgives him without condition. Our understanding of God’s forgiveness is going to be limited to the way that we behave in our world. As long as I withhold forgiveness from anyone, God as I know Him will be a God who conditionally forgives. And if God only conditionally forgives, our minds will find ourselves not meeting the condition, or at least being very uncertain about whether God loves us. This is the “torture” referred to in the parable of the unforgiving servant. The torture is the insecurity, the uncertainty of God’s mercy and love for us (to say nothing of the slavery of holding a grudge). When we forgive, we know that God forgives. Until then, not.

I’m not sure how John 13:5-10 works into the investigation here. We are called to humility and service. The definition of “clean” may be a different question.

Thanks! I think I have addressed the highlights. If you like, just address my post 68 so we are not so scattered. 🙂
Important reality check.

There happens to be two, really two, individuals involved when the Catholic Church teaches about God’s forgiveness. Obviously, it is to the benefit of those wishing to change the Catholic Church to conveniently skip the nature of the second individual, the one who is not God.

The red flag words are “conditional” and/or “unconditional.”
 
Good morning, and welcome!

There has been a lot written about the “unforgivable sin”. It has nothing to do with God’s unlimited love and forgiveness, but about the closed-mindedness of people. In the anthropology I have concluded, people are only closed-minded if they are blind or ignorant, so they are not Knowingly and Willingly rejecting God. You may be able to come up with a different example, though. Let me know.

Are you thinking that the Pharisees knowingly and willingly rejected God in their preference of their own version? If so, the first question is:

Why did the pharisees prefer their own version? (We should delve a little into “their version”)

Thanks for your response!🙂
Why do you use the words “closed-mindedness”, rather than willfully disobedient? How the latter not possible?
 
. . . “closed-mindedness”, rather than willfully disobedient? . . .
👍

Jesus was right in front of them.
They rejected Him.
They would not accept God as He is - Love.
They worshipped a different god.
They knew what they were doing.
 
Why do you use the words “closed-mindedness”, rather than willfully disobedient? How the latter not possible?
Hi David,

Have I ever mentioned what a joy it is to have your participation? It seems that you are always so charitable, yet you ask such pertinent questions. The CAF is blessed by your presence.

Yes, willful disobedience is absolutely possible. I had no intention to avoid the words. The question is, Does anyone ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

So, if you can think of an example of such a case, (no need to name anyone) please do! Give an example of disobedience, perhaps?

Thanks for the question.
 
👍

Jesus was right in front of them.
They rejected Him.
They would not accept God as He is - Love.
They worshipped a different god.
They knew what they were doing.
Hi Aloysium,

Here is a follow up question.

If they knew what they were doing, why did Jesus say that they did not know what they were doing?

Thanks.🙂
 
Hi David,

Have I ever mentioned what a joy it is to have your participation? It seems that you are always so charitable, yet you ask such pertinent questions. The CAF is blessed by your presence.

Yes, willful disobedience is absolutely possible. I had no intention to avoid the words. The question is, Does anyone ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

So, if you can think of an example of such a case, (no need to name anyone) please do! Give an example of disobedience, perhaps?

Thanks for the question.
I have offered examples in prior threads on this subject that were rejected as valid. I won’t repeat them here.

Any act of willful disobedience of moral law is a direct rejection of God. What knowledge or act of the will is missing in these cases?
 
Important reality check.

There happens to be two, really two, individuals involved when the Catholic Church teaches about God’s forgiveness. Obviously, it is to the benefit of those wishing to change the Catholic Church to conveniently skip the nature of the second individual, the one who is not God.

The red flag words are “conditional” and/or “unconditional.”
A quote from Pope Francis:

“Our hearts can be attached to true or false treasures, they can find genuine rest or they can simply slumber, becoming lazy and lethargic. The greatest good we can have in life is our relationship with God. Are you convinced of this? Do you realize how much you are worth in the eyes of God? Do you know that you are loved and welcomed by him unconditionally, as indeed you are? Once we lose our sense of this, we human beings become an incomprehensible enigma, for it is the knowledge that we are loved unconditionally by God which gives meaning to our lives.”

— Message for the 30th World Youth Day, Feb. 17, 2015

Raise them flags, Granny! Whew! Twice in one paragraph.😃

“Do not forget that true love sets no conditions; it does not calculate or complain but simply loves.” - Pope John Paul II popequotes.org/

Want a quote from Pope Benedict also?🙂
 
Hi Aloysium,

Here is a follow up question.

If they knew what they were doing, why did Jesus say that they did not know what they were doing?

Thanks.🙂
I am not omniscient but clearly they were rejecting God in full knowledge of what they were doing. They were not baking cookies.
What they did not know perhaps might be the consequences of their actions.
Not realizing that love is what it is all about, is likely; they no doubt assumed a cruel and brutal world in which they would come out on top.
Many (most?) people are unaware that the world is upside down, that the servant is higher than his master.
They do know what it means to be a cruel master when they behave as such.
 
I am not omniscient but clearly they were rejecting God in full knowledge of what they were doing. They were not baking cookies.
What they did not know perhaps might be the consequences of their actions.
Not realizing that love is what it is all about, is likely; they no doubt assumed a cruel and brutal world in which they would come out on top.
People are unaware that the world is upside down, that the servant is higher than his master.
They do know what it means to be a cruel master when they behave as such.
Hi

Well, if they had “full knowledge” then Jesus misspoke. We have no evidence of misstatement.

Yes, they did not know the consequences of their actions. Can you describe the consequences that they missed?

Thanks.
 
. . . if they had “full knowledge” then Jesus misspoke. We have no evidence of misstatement.
Yes, they did not know the consequences of their actions. Can you describe the consequences that they missed? . . . .
Huh?

They thought they were killing and torturing some megalomaniac, however they would frame it in those days. No great loss, barely worth the sweat of nailing Him to the cross. It’s a job I suppose. That’s what some would think. When the sky darkened, the curtain was rent, the earth quaked and stones were split, some thought otherwise.

One potential consequence is hell. The most important consequence is that they killed Jesus Christ, the innocent Lamb.
They did not care! Maybe they did when they realized His power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top