Does any human ever knowingly and willingly reject God?

[Vico]

Vico, my Brother!

I will always remember you fondly, Vico. Do you remember the other thread where we had this conversation?

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=879640

You were one of the patient few willing to complete the investigation, and I thank you. You may have considered it a waste of time, but I learned a great deal. As often as I have heard the importance of defining ones’ terms, our investigation did not, and in the end we ended up both “right” based on our own use of the terms.

In the example you put forth, the sinner was irrational. He was behaving completely against his beliefs for a reason that was not his priority, yet he was completely clear-headed and not blind.

Arguably, the person was practically insane, which to me was not “knowingly”, but it was the irrationality part that already showed that he was not in the knowing. If he was not blind, something was misaligned in his mind.

You, on the other hand, included irrationality in the realm of “knowingly”, so in your view you had proven your case. All good!

Thanks again.

P.S. Did you want to further explore irrational behavior?

It is logical as stated in the Catechism, since sin is contrary to reason yet mortal sin is a possibility, it follows that mortal sin is possible by acts contrary to reason. Also knowingly means in the face of either conscience or knowledge of the moral character of the act as informed by the Church.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom …

1872 Sin is an act contrary to reason. It wounds man’s nature and injures human solidarity.

 

[grannymh]

OneSheep,
in your Catholic Church, are there teachings on the State of Mortal Sin? If yes, please, what are they?

 

[frangiuliano115]

The generally accepted definition of “knowledge” is justified true belief. From here you can work it out why a “justified” and “true” belief is superior to simple, unqualified belief. It is not a rocket science.

A conversation without properly defined terms is useless.

No, we cannot. There are “gnostic theists”, “agnostic theists”, “gnostic atheists” and “agnostic atheists”. Yes, I insist on using the proper terms. The words “theist” and “atheist” are metaphysical terms. The words “gnostic” and “agnostic” are epistemological terms. Very different subjects.

You know Pallas Athene,

Our conversation ends here. You’re just too freakin’ smart for me.

If you wanted to have an intelligent discussion you wouldn’t insult people constantly. Or would that be “continuously”. Oh my. Maybe we should stop wondering if God exists and learn the correct word???

Now, if I WERE a rocket scientist I would KNOW that first I’d have to KNOW that something exists BEFORE I could BELIEVE in it - but it must be as you say in your previous post: I have to BELIEVE in it BEFORE I even KNOW it. Yeah. That makes a lot of sense.

And, yes, as I said above, let’s take a few hours and make sure we agree on terminology. Those super intelligent geniuses always have a list of words in their pocket.

And you love definitions: What is normal physical love? Doing whatever you want? That would be normal? I’d like to be in bed with two guys, two gals and a sheep. That’s what I WANT. Is that normal?? Just wondering.

BTW: Ovaries are not lost due to a tubal pregnancy.

A non-christian, any many christians, do not understand being “open to life”. That doesn’t mean you want a baby every two years, Pallas Athene.

Lastly. You say that accepting evil is equivalent to blind faith. Is this really what you mean? You’re so careful with words. I’ll leave it at that, I think posters will know better what you meant than you do.

Now, if I seem harsh it’s because you’ve called my intelligence into question twice. You may not agree with a person, but that doesn’t mean you’re intelligent and they’re dumb.

You kinda (is that a word?) have this attitude with everyone. Maybe one day you’ll change.

Fran
P.S. I guess if I were a REAL christian, I’d just accept ANYTHING you said to me.

 

[frangiuliano115]

This may be way off topic, but have object to the bold. God loves us unconditionally. There is nothing we can do to prevent God from loving us. There are no conditions under which God would stop loving us. Jesus’ death on the cross is proof of this. A major feature of this love is to allow us the freedom to love. There are, however, many things we can do to prevent that love from having its desire effect.

Yes davidv, Not only is it off topic but I’m sorry I got into it.

But what about my idea that if God loved everyone, no one would go to hell?

But that makes it sound like He doesn’t love everyone.

So, let’s drop it. But just remember that love is a two way street.

It’s not MY idea, BTW. It could be biblically proven. But what would be the use??

Either definition is fine with me; there are more important things to discuss.

God bless you
Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

I don’t believe this. I believe it is we that condemn ourselves by our words and deeds.

Right davidv.

It is OUR choice to believe in God or not believe in Him that condemns us.

I won’t go back and look for what I said but, trust me, I know the above concept REALLY well, so what I must have said is that if love is unconditinal God would condemn no one to hell.
In the case of a non-believer (whom He would love unconditionally) it would be God condemning him to hell because they don’t believe in Him and cannot make the choice.
See? It wouldn’t be a judgement based on their words and deeds, but on their non-belief.

But, yes, it is always our desire to follow God that allows us heaven, and OUR unwillingness to believe in Him and then follow his teachings that condemn us.

God bless you

 

[frangiuliano115]

Matthew 12:36-38New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)

36 I tell you, on the day of judgment you will have to give an account for every careless word you utter; 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

Could I just ask you why some people not only quote the bible but tell you which version it is?

Thanks.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

So many posts. . .and still so much confusion.

Are people really so incredibly smart and good that they simply cannot 'knowingly and willingly reject God?" Really? I know I’m not that smart and I’m not that good. I know that in spite of all my attempts to either rationalize my own mortal sins (too many of them and I’m not proud of that), or to try to forget them since ‘society’ kept telling me how ‘normal’ they were. . . I still KNEW I was doing grave, wicked wrongs, that yes it was against God, that I was rejecting His truths, rejecting His love. And no matter how much I tried to excuse myself --passion, a little too much to drink, societal expectations, ‘everybody’s doing it’, “I’ll lose him if we don’t have sex”, “Well we ARE going to get married”, “We can’t afford a baby right now”, etc. etc. I still knew what I was doing wrong, and did it freely anyway.

So yes, here’s one human who sadly did exactly what the OP wondered if a person COULD do.

Knowingly and willingly rejected God.

And how sorry I am just can’t be said. All these years later, the regrets are still fresh. Why didn’t I listen to Him? Why didn’t I trust HIM instead of those whom I knew were wrong? Why did I think my ‘needs’ just were more important than obedience to show my faith, hope, and love?

And you know, every single time there was a point (even in my ‘I was too drunk to consent’ situations) where I knew (obviously before I allowed myself to take the drink that tipped me into ‘too drunk’) , “if I don’t stop this RIGHT NOW I’m going to do something wicked and wrong”. . .and I HAD the chance to stop but I just said, “I WANT this”. . .and that was that.

(Rape, of course, is a different story. Any kind of forced evil action by its nature of being forced onto someone is not something freely and fully consented to. So any woman or man who is raped, even so-called ‘date rape’, doesn’t consent and isn’t guilty of mortal sin. The rapist is the guilty one.)

I’m not proud of this. It’s not pretty and I’d give anything to have NOT sinned then. . .but I did it and I can’t undo it, I can only beg forgiveness, confess, and try not to sin again, and hope for God’s mercy.

What a clear and wonderful response.

It seems that easy to me too, so I do keep wondering what we’re doing here.

You and Helen Rose in post no. 150 have pretty much said it all.

Some comment from One Sheep?

God bless you
And we’re all in the same boat.

 

[frangiuliano115]

So many posts. . .and still so much confusion.

Are people really so incredibly smart and good that they simply cannot 'knowingly and willingly reject God?" Really? I know I’m not that smart and I’m not that good. I know that in spite of all my attempts to either rationalize my own mortal sins (too many of them and I’m not proud of that), or to try to forget them since ‘society’ kept telling me how ‘normal’ they were. . . I still KNEW I was doing grave, wicked wrongs, that yes it was against God, that I was rejecting His truths, rejecting His love. And no matter how much I tried to excuse myself --passion, a little too much to drink, societal expectations, ‘everybody’s doing it’, “I’ll lose him if we don’t have sex”, “Well we ARE going to get married”, “We can’t afford a baby right now”, etc. etc. I still knew what I was doing wrong, and did it freely anyway.

So yes, here’s one human who sadly did exactly what the OP wondered if a person COULD do.

Knowingly and willingly rejected God.

And how sorry I am just can’t be said. All these years later, the regrets are still fresh. Why didn’t I listen to Him? Why didn’t I trust HIM instead of those whom I knew were wrong? Why did I think my ‘needs’ just were more important than obedience to show my faith, hope, and love?

And you know, every single time there was a point (even in my ‘I was too drunk to consent’ situations) where I knew (obviously before I allowed myself to take the drink that tipped me into ‘too drunk’) , “if I don’t stop this RIGHT NOW I’m going to do something wicked and wrong”. . .and I HAD the chance to stop but I just said, “I WANT this”. . .and that was that.

(Rape, of course, is a different story. Any kind of forced evil action by its nature of being forced onto someone is not something freely and fully consented to. So any woman or man who is raped, even so-called ‘date rape’, doesn’t consent and isn’t guilty of mortal sin. The rapist is the guilty one.)

I’m not proud of this. It’s not pretty and I’d give anything to have NOT sinned then. . .but I did it and I can’t undo it, I can only beg forgiveness, confess, and try not to sin again, and hope for God’s mercy.

What a clear and wonderful response.

It seems that easy to me too, so I do keep wondering what we’re doing here.

You and Helen Rose in post no. 150 have pretty much said it all.

Some comment from One Sheep?

God bless you
And we’re all in the same boat.

 

[simpleas]

I find it slightly strange that some people can not believe that God loves everyone and that even those that do not believe in God could in fact make it to eternal life. I think most people are hurting inside, that they have much trouble finding peace, and through their actions are seeking, but get knocked back by others who keep pointing out their failures.

Granted there maybe some who do not wish to hear anything about a God who loves, because they can’t see anything. But maybe deep inside they do search. Like I said before we see only the surface, the creator on the other hand sees all.

We talk alot about who God loves, who he’ll forgive etc, we can’t know for sure, that’s why we can’t condemn anyone.

Keep an open mind.

 

[frangiuliano115]

I find it slightly strange that some people can not believe that God loves everyone and that even those that do not believe in God could in fact make it to eternal life. I think most people are hurting inside, that they have much trouble finding peace, and through their actions are seeking, but get knocked back by others who keep pointing out their failures.

Granted there maybe some who do not wish to hear anything about a God who loves, because they can’t see anything. But maybe deep inside they do search. Like I said before we see only the surface, the creator on the other hand sees all.

We talk alot about who God loves, who he’ll forgive etc, we can’t know for sure, that’s why we can’t condemn anyone.

Keep an open mind.

Simpleas,
You prove my point exactly. About how unconditional love could be misunderstood.

You find it strange that some people believe God does not love everyone. Well, He does and we can’t get into that in detail. Let me just ask you: If you were a father and had a 32 year old son that kept beating you up and tried to throw you off a balcony, more than once, would you still love that child??
(this actually happened up in these here parts).

Well, you WOULD love him because he’s your child and you made him and brought him up, and in the fatherly sense you would love him.
But wouldn’t you love that other son more who took care of the elderly father, brought him food, took him for walks, etc. Is this so difficult to understand?
Switch the scenario to a girlfriend/boyfriend, husband/wife. What do you think?

I mean, we could get into this biblically, but I don’t think One Sheep would be too happy about that. Didn’t Jesus say that we have to do what His father in Heaven wants? Isn’t that setting a condition? Are we all going to heaven? Hell doesn’t exist? Satan doesn’t exist? So it doesn’t matter if we have the divine in us or not?

Then you go on to say that even those who do not believe in God could make it to eternal life. Well, I’m not going to judge anyone, that’s a different story. But, go back to John 3:16, seen at every football game. What does it mean to you? Really. I’d be interested to know. If they’re searching, God knows their heart. A priest friend of mine once told me that if you’re searching for God (sincerely, not like some posters that just want to debate) you’ve already found Him.

Simpleas, not MOST people are hurting, ALL people are hurting. A poster has a signature line I like a lot: “Be nice to those you meet, you never know what battle they are fighting.”
So, of course, you’re right.

OTOH, when it comes to God, it’s right that we always say the correct thing - it might even be hurtful sometimes to the other person, but we can’t sugarcoat being lost and losing eternity.

You say:

**But maybe deep inside they do search. Like I said before we see only the surface, the creator on the other hand sees all.

We talk alot about who God loves, who he’ll forgive etc, we can’t know for sure, that’s why we can’t condemn anyone.**

Yeah. Only God sees the heart. Let’s not condemn anyone; that’s not for us. But if we see a wrong, let us not be afraid to say it!

God bless you

 

[grannymh]

Yes davidv, Not only is it off topic but I’m sorry I got into it.

But what about my idea that if God loved everyone, no one would go to hell?

The idea that "if God loved everyone, no one would go to hell " denies some basic Catholic doctrines, starting with human nature being animated by a rational spiritual soul directly created by God at conception. With a denial of a rational spiritual soul comes a denial of human’s free will which is a key Catholic doctrine of human nature. One may check CCC 356 and *CCC *1730-1732. Or if one prefers Sacred Scripture, there is Genesis 1: 27; Genesis 2: 15-17; Genesis 3: 2-3; Genesis 3: 8; Genesis 3: 11; Genesis 3: 15. Some of these verses can also be used to affirm mortal sin.

The state of mortal sin is taught by the Catholic Church as a doctrine. The easiest definition for mortal sin is found in the CCC Glossary, page 889. The companion Catholic doctrine of Sanctifying Grace is defined on page 898 of the CCC Glossary. Personally, I think CCC 356 is the greatest. If you prefer Sacred Scripture, read Genesis 1: 26-28. Another personal favorite is the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26.

For general information.
The above information is required according to the topic of this thread.

 

[grannymh]

Not to mention that I have never seen a rational explanation for “why” should people ALWAYS be open to procreation. The average couple has about 2.2 children - which is already more than enough.

Open to procreation within a stable family insures the survival of the species.

And that is where I see the problem. If there is no rational argument for allowing that “evil”, then the acceptance of it amounts to “blind faith”.

Just because an older than dirt granny does not understand why God allows evil does NOT automatically prohibit someone else from understanding.

 

[frangiuliano115]

The idea that "if God loved everyone, no one would go to hell " denies some basic Catholic doctrines, starting with human nature being animated by a rational spiritual soul directly created by God at conception. With a denial of a rational spiritual soul comes a denial of human’s free will which is a key Catholic doctrine of human nature. One may check CCC 356 and *CCC *1730-1732. Or if one prefers Sacred Scripture, there is Genesis 1: 27; Genesis 2: 15-17; Genesis 3: 2-3; Genesis 3: 8; Genesis 3: 11; Genesis 3: 15. Some of these verses can also be used to affirm mortal sin.

The state of mortal sin is taught by the Catholic Church as a doctrine. The easiest definition for mortal sin is found in the CCC Glossary, page 889. The companion Catholic doctrine of Sanctifying Grace is defined on page 898 of the CCC Glossary. Personally, I think CCC 356 is the greatest. If you prefer Sacred Scripture, read Genesis 1: 26-28. Another personal favorite is the dramatic shift from Genesis 1: 25 to Genesis 1: 26.

For general information.
The above information is required according to the topic of this thread.

grannymh,

Please reread my post when you’re not tired. Maybe you don’t know all the concepts of why some people believe NO ONE is going to the southern hemisphere.

And, omg, please stop quoting the CCC. Do you know it by heart, for goodness sake?
It so reminds me of work.

Figure that one out.

Could you explain mortal sin to me again? I think I still don’t understand it…

God blesses you

 

[grannymh]

I find it slightly strange that some people can not believe that God loves everyone and that even those that do not believe in God could in fact make it to eternal life. I think most people are hurting inside, that they have much trouble finding peace, and through their actions are seeking, but get knocked back by others who keep pointing out their failures.

Granted there maybe some who do not wish to hear anything about a God who loves, because they can’t see anything. But maybe deep inside they do search. Like I said before we see only the surface, the creator on the other hand sees all.

We talk alot about who God loves, who he’ll forgive etc, we can’t know for sure, that’s why we can’t condemn anyone.

Keep an open mind.

My sincere suggestion is to slowly and prayerfully study *CCC *1260. Please look twice at the words “in a way known to God”.

I do not print it here because most people want to find out what the next poster writes. Studying something, which may sound unusual, is usually not on the agenda.

 

[grannymh]

This may be way off topic, but have object to the bold.

I want to yell – open your eyes.

These words in bold are just one part of the thread title’s basic opposition to some serious Catholic doctrines. **Now if His love were truly unconditional, **

 

[frangiuliano115]

My sincere suggestion is to slowly and prayerfully study *CCC *1260. Please look twice at the words “in a way known to God”.

I do not print it here because most people want to find out what the next poster writes. Studying something, which may sound unusual, is usually not on the agenda.

grannymh,

You sent me running to the CCC. While I was turning to 1260, it almost fell apart!

Do you think it’s speaking of someone who has heard of God and has rejected Him, OR do you think it’s about someone who is seeking “God” in his own condition, for instance in a remote tribe in South America?

Clue: It does mention the Gospel of Christ.

You probably won’t answer me this time either, and I don’t understand why???

God bless

 

[grannymh]

Could you explain mortal sin to me again? I think I still don’t understand it…

God blesses you

CCC Glossary, page 889
MORTAL SIN: A grave infraction of the law of God that destroys the divine life in the soul of the sinner (sanctifying grace), constituting a turn away from God. For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must be present: grave matter, full knowledge of the evil of the act, and full consent of the will (1855, 1857).

CCC Paragraph 1855
1855 Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him. (1395)

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

Additional paragraphs regarding the Original [mortal] Sin. CCC 396-400.

 

[davidv]

Could I just ask you why some people not only quote the bible but tell you which version it is?

Thanks.

Fran

In my case, it comes with the citation that I copy.

 

[davidv]

Yes davidv, Not only is it off topic but I’m sorry I got into it.

But what about my idea that if God loved everyone, no one would go to hell?

The idea is false, because it denies the possible outcome of free moral choices that humans make.

But that makes it sound like He doesn’t love everyone.

Seems to me this is based on an incomplete appreciation of what God’s love is.

So, let’s drop it. But just remember that love is a two way street.

It’s not MY idea, BTW. It could be biblically proven.

Not very convincing. Some attempt to prove from the Bible that fornication is acceptable.

But what would be the use??

Either definition is fine with me; there are more important things to discuss.

God bless you
Fran

 

[grannymh]

grannymh,

You sent me running to the CCC. While I was turning to 1260, it almost fell apart!

Do you think it’s speaking of someone who has heard of God and has rejected Him, OR do you think it’s about someone who is seeking “God” in his own condition, for instance in a remote tribe in South America?

God bless

CCC 1260 refers to the fact that “Christ died for all.” Therefore, it is speaking in regard to anyone who is ignorant of the Gospel of God and of His church. Consequently, I would have to reply that it could refer to both people-- someone who has heard of God and has rejected Him, and someone who is seeking “God” in his own condition, for instance in a remote tribe in South America?