The Life of a man - to know and love God

[murraymuzz]

Just something I wrote while I was bored, hope you guys like it.

As the Catechism of the Catholic Church starts, we are given a purpose as people, to know and love God. As it is written it would seem we must first come to know God then we can come to love him. As St. Anselm puts it “Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.” (St. Anselm used this statement in one of his proofs for God however a different conclusion can be drawn from it also) Therefore we must not grasp at the notion of God and wrestle with it intellectually, because we are to simply put it, incapable.

So if we cannot know God on our own, then how can we prove God? We cannot because “MAN being wholly dependent upon GOD, as upon his Creator and LORD, and created reason being absolutely subject to uncreated truth, we are bound to yield to GOD, by faith in His revelation, the full obedience of our intelligence and will. And the Catholic Church teaches that this faith, which is the beginning of man’s salvation, is a supernatural virtue1” and so we either choose to acknowledge the existence of God or dismiss it.
Most people involved in the argument for God’s existence tend to believe that what they believe about God is true, most likely due to personal life experiences and reasons which go beyond the natural view of the world (e.g. believing the bible is the inspired word of God because he revealed it to them either directly or indirectly, which then shows the teaching of the Catholic Church to be true for faith in God comes from God), in comparison to an agnostic atheist perspective which depends on what is most likely to be true given what society has proven to be true.

As Bl. John Paul II had said in 1996 “truth cannot contradict truth” the agnostic atheist perspective does not contradict a belief in God, it in fact has nothing to do with God, but still leaves room open for there to be a God (among other things), this seems to be the most logical and reasonable conclusion, as the possibility of absolutes is not dismissed, it is merely assigned a percentage of probability and depending on the individual the odds differ.

So if faith comes from God and he wishes all people to be saved (1 timothy 2:3-4) then because there are people who do not believe in God therefore there is no God. The Catholic Church also answered this question “The Human Will remains free under the influence of efficacious grace, which is not irresistible. (De fide.)2”

And so this brings us back to the first paragraph of the catechism, the life of a man – to know and love God, to use our free will to either know, or reject God. But if you don’t believe in God how can you know him? Faith exists for everyone, we either choose to embrace it or reject it.

1 McNabb, V. (1907). The Decrees of the Vatican Council (22). New York: Benziger Brothers

2 Ott, L. (1957). Fundamentals of Catholic dogma (246). St. Louis: B. Herder Book Company.

 

[jkiernan56]

As it is written it would seem we must first come to know God then we can come to love him. As St. Anselm puts it “Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.” (St. Anselm used this statement in one of his proofs for God however a different conclusion can be drawn from it also) Therefore we must not grasp at the notion of God and wrestle with it intellectually, because we are to simply put it, incapable.

Must a person have faith (knowledge of God) in order to love? No, all human beings have the capacity to love whether or not they understand “know” God.

See response #26 Can an atheist be closer to God than a Christian? (Posted by JRKH )

“Our Catechism even states that one who has not heard (and this includes “understood”). It states in Para 847
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. And what is God’s Will? That we Love…
So the Atheist in seeking Agape is seeking God without knowing it…”

Second, I do not agree with St. Anselms definition of God. God is beyond even “a being than which no greater can be conceived”. Conception of God has no bearing on who and what God is in Himself/Herself (I do not only attribute masculinity to God). God is the Absolute Perfection of the Fullness of Being in the communion of 3 Divine Persons.

The Catholic Church teaches that God is a MYSTERY. Mystery does not mean that which cannot be known - but rather that which can never be FULLY known. Man is finite and God is infinite. Finiteness will never fully grasp infiniteness.

So if faith comes from God and he wishes all people to be saved (1 timothy 2:3-4) …

But if you don’t believe in God how can you know him? Faith exists for everyone, we either choose to embrace it or reject it.

Again you seem to imply that those without faith will not be saved. Love is what saves you (the will), not knowledge (intellect). To say that knowlege is what saves you is the heresy of Gnosticism.

 

[murraymuzz]

Must a person have faith (knowledge of God) in order to love? No, all human beings have the capacity to love whether or not they understand “know” God.

I didnt say that, I quoted the first part of the catechism and said, to re-phrase it, for a man to love God we must first know him, I didnt suggest some people are not capable of love.

See response #26 Can an atheist be closer to God than a Christian?

Thats fine but this wasn’t what i was discussing, as the title of that thread is an oxymoron.

“Our Catechism even states that one who has not heard (and this includes “understood”). It states in Para 847
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. And what is God’s Will? That we Love…
So the Atheist in seeking Agape is seeking God without knowing it…”

Yes i agree, I didnt say otherwise. If one is not sincerly seeking truth then that is a grave matter.

Again you seem to imply that those without faith will not be saved. Love is what saves you (the will), not knowledge (intellect). To say that knowlege is what saves you is the heresy of Gnosticism.

Well if you are a Catholic
“And since without faith it is impossible to please GOD, and to attain to the fellowship of His children, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification; nor will anyone obtain eternal life, unless he shall have persevered in faith unto the end.”

McNabb, V. (1907). The Decrees of the Vatican Council (23–24). New York: Benziger Brothers.

 

[jkiernan56]

I didnt suggest some people are not capable of love.

Well if you are a Catholic
“And since without faith it is impossible to please GOD, and to attain to the fellowship of His children, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification; nor will anyone obtain eternal life, unless he shall have persevered in faith unto the end.”

On one hand you agree that those who do not have faith ARE capable of love towards others. Then on the other hand you quote that those without faith cannot please God. Isn’t someone who loves pleasing to God (regardless of whether they have faith - ie: knowlege of God)? I do not agree that those without faith cannot please God. That is a contradiction. And by the way, that is not Catholicism to say those without faith will not attain heaven - that is Protestant fundamentalism. Faith “should” make us more pleasing to God - but that doesn’t imply without it that a person cannot love (thus please God).

“Whoever loves lives in God and God in them” 1 John 4:16

 

[murraymuzz]

On one hand you agree that those who do not have faith ARE capable of love towards others. Then on the other hand you quote that those without faith cannot please God. Isn’t someone who loves pleasing to God (regardless of whether they have faith - ie: knowlege of God)? I do not agree that those without faith cannot please God. That is a contradiction. And by the way, that is not Catholicism to say those without faith will not attain heaven - that is Protestant fundamentalism. Faith “should” make us more pleasing to God - but that doesn’t imply without it that a person cannot love (thus please God).

“Whoever loves lives in God and God in them” 1 John 4:16

What i quoted you was from the documents of the Vatican Council I, which all faithful must believe, if you disagree, then your disagreement is not with me.

But I think there is misunderstanding here,
Faith is a gift from God, to reject God’s gift is to displease him, thats not saying he then stops loving that person.
when you gave that last quote from 1st John if you look at the verse just before it, he is talking to a specific group of people
“Whoever confesses the Jesus is the son of God, God abides in him, and he in God” 1 John 4:15

 

[jkiernan56]

What i quoted you was from the documents of the Vatican Council I, which all faithful must believe, if you disagree, then your disagreement is not with me.

But I think there is misunderstanding here,
Faith is a gift from God, to reject God’s gift is to displease him, thats not saying he then stops loving that person.
when you gave that last quote from 1st John if you look at the verse just before it, he is talking to a specific group of people
“Whoever confesses the Jesus is the son of God, God abides in him, and he in God” 1 John 4:15

Please don’t stop just at verse 15.

15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them..

Please reconcile your Cathecism verse with the other Catechism verse I quoted you earlier #847 - “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation”

Only those who “believe in Jesus” can be pleasing to God and go to heaven huh?

 

[murraymuzz]

Please don’t stop just at verse 15.
15 If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in them and they in God. 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them..

What I quoted for you, I mentioned it was the verse just before yours and didn’t think I needed to continue, my apologies. But as I said before, a particular group of people were being addressed namely those who confess Jesus is the Son of God.

Please reconcile your Cathecism verse with the other Catechism verse I quoted you earlier #847 - “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation”

I don’t see anything for me to reconcile I agree completely with the catechism quote, but I can’t say I have met an atheist who hasn’t heard the gospel of Jesus Christ, if there is such a person out there, and they are seeking the truth with sincerity then this is where the catechism quote applies, but read carefully how it is written, as it says “those through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church,” I don’t believe this applies to every atheist as I have seen many atheists well versed in the scriptures and seem to know the gospel better than myself, but I am not going to assume to whom it does and does not apply to.

Only those who “believe in Jesus” can be pleasing to God and go to heaven huh?

Yes this is what every Catholic must believe. John 14:6 “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”"

 

[jkiernan56]

What I quoted for you, I mentioned it was the verse just before yours and didn’t think I needed to continue, my apologies. But as I said before, a particular group of people were being addressed namely those who confess Jesus is the Son of God.

I don’t see anything for me to reconcile I agree completely with the catechism quote, but I can’t say I have met an atheist who hasn’t heard the gospel of Jesus Christ, if there is such a person out there, and they are seeking the truth with sincerity then this is where the catechism quote applies, but read carefully how it is written, as it says “those through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church,” I don’t believe this applies to every atheist as I have seen many atheists well versed in the scriptures and seem to know the gospel better than myself, but I am not going to assume to whom it does and does not apply to.

Yes this is what every Catholic must believe. John 14:6 “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”"

My common sense tells me anyone (atheist and Christian) who acts with love towards their neighbor is pleasing to God. It is obvious to me your understanding of the Catechism verse you quoted (only those with faith can be pleasing) is too rigid (ie - black and white). Gray is also a color. I might even go so far as to say those who love are also exhibiting faith in some sense the Catechism speaks about (even if the person doesn’t know it).

 

[murraymuzz]

My common sense tells me anyone (atheist and Christian) who acts with love towards their neighbor is pleasing to God. It is obvious to me your understanding of the Catechism verse you quoted is too rigid (ie - black and white). Gray is also a color

Im sorry I don’t mean to come across that way, I don’t mean to imply that God wont save whom he wishes, but I can only assume that if God wants to save someone then the person being saved will come to the knowledge and accept Jesus Christ as the son of God and Savior of the world, as this is what his church teaches.

 

[jkiernan56]

Im sorry I don’t mean to come across that way, I don’t mean to imply that God wont save whom he wishes, but I can only assume that if God wants to save someone then the person being saved will come to the knowledge and accept Jesus Christ as the son of God and Savior of the world, as this is what his church teaches.

True - but not necessarily in this life. Every knee will bend to the name of Jesus one day. No one will get into heaven but through the saving merits and grace of Christ’s death on the cross. It is who you are and what is in your heart that matters to God in my opinion. The fire of God’s love will test every person’s metal. No one will enter heaven with any impurity in love. Thank God for Purgatory (if only I can get there … lol).

 

[murraymuzz]

True - but not necessarily in this life. No one will get into heaven but through the saving merits and grace of Christ’s death on the cross. It is who you are and what is in your heart that matters to God in my opinion. The fire of God’s love will test every person’s metal. No one will enter heaven with any impurity in love.

I agree, and yes I personally believe even in the next life you will still get another chance to accept Jesus Christ as the Lord, and those who accept it, can then go through purgatory for purification, as I believe in Christs infinite mercy, but those who don’t ask for Christ and reject his mercy, woe to them!

 

[MPat]

As St. Anselm puts it “Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived.” (St. Anselm used this statement in one of his proofs for God however a different conclusion can be drawn from it also) Therefore we must not grasp at the notion of God and wrestle with it intellectually, because we are to simply put it, incapable.

So if we cannot know God on our own, then how can we prove God? We cannot because “MAN being wholly dependent upon GOD, as upon his Creator and LORD, and created reason being absolutely subject to uncreated truth, we are bound to yield to GOD, by faith in His revelation, the full obedience of our intelligence and will. And the Catholic Church teaches that this faith, which is the beginning of man’s salvation, is a supernatural virtue1” and so we either choose to acknowledge the existence of God or dismiss it.

The same First Vatican Council that you cite has declared: “If anyone says that the one, true God, our creator and lord, cannot be known with certainty from the things that have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.” (ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm, first of canons on revelation from the third session). Thus, if I understand your intermediate conclusion “So if we cannot know God on our own, then how can we prove God? We cannot …]” correctly, it is not really compatible with Catholic doctrine…

By the way, while you say that St. Anselm has “defined” God as “a being than which no greater can be conceived”, then you reason as if the definition was similar to “a being which cannot be conceived”. Nothing in the original definition says that God cannot be conceived or known. Thus the rest of your argument does not really follow… Or, perhaps, you skipped some steps of your argument…?

 

[murraymuzz]

The same First Vatican Council that you cite has declared: “If anyone says that the one, true God, our creator and lord, cannot be known with certainty from the things that have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.” (ewtn.com/library/councils/v1.htm, first of canons on revelation from the third session). Thus, if I understand your intermediate conclusion “So if we cannot know God on our own, then how can we prove God? We cannot …]” correctly, it is not really compatible with Catholic doctrine…

So my Argument was that man cannot know God, unless he revealed it, for instance I used St. Anselms argument to show that we as humans cannot even conceive of God, so therfore we cannot know him, then I quoted the first vatican council to show the only way one can know God is by faith, and that faith is a “supernatural virtue” so therfore we can only know God because God gave us faith, and the Holy Mother Church deepens our faith and allows us to know God even further, then love him. My contention wasn’t that God is not apparent in creation, only that the faith of a person doesn’t nessecarily prove God exists to another person, or in other words, God proves himself through his creation, and humans dont prove God.

By the way, while you say that St. Anselm has “defined” God as “a being than which no greater can be conceived”, then you reason as if the definition was similar to “a being which cannot be conceived”. Nothing in the original definition says that God cannot be conceived or known. Thus the rest of your argument does not really follow… Or, perhaps, you skipped some steps of your argument…?

The St. Anselm Argument is a bit tricky to understand, but Fr Robert Barron explains it quite well in his Catholicism series(episode 3), the way he put it was, if you think of the true God, plus the world, God is still greater than that, its a paradox ultimately. And so thats what I was trying to show, that we cannot even think of God, because he transcends human logic and reason, and we can only know what he chose to reveal.

 

[MPat]

So my Argument was that man cannot know God, unless he revealed it, for instance I used St. Anselms argument to show that we as humans cannot even conceive of God, so therfore we cannot know him, then I quoted the first vatican council to show the only way one can know God is by faith, and that faith is a “supernatural virtue” so therfore we can only know God because God gave us faith, and the Holy Mother Church deepens our faith and allows us to know God even further, then love him. My contention wasn’t that God is not apparent in creation, only that the faith of a person doesn’t nessecarily prove God exists to another person, or in other words, God proves himself through his creation, and humans dont prove God.

The St. Anselm Argument is a bit tricky to understand, but Fr Robert Barron explains it quite well in his Catholicism series(episode 3), the way he put it was, if you think of the true God, plus the world, God is still greater than that, its a paradox ultimately. And so thats what I was trying to show, that we cannot even think of God, because he transcends human logic and reason, and we can only know what he chose to reveal.

Unfortunately, I am not sure if I understand you correctly. Could you please explain what exactly do you mean by “think of God”, “know God”, “prove God”, “revealed it”…? For example, I get the impression that you count the whole creation as a kind of “revelation”. Is that a correct impression?