Originally posted by dottewell What if she turned up at your doorstep begging to be let in, saying that she would suffer some unspeakably terrible fate if you said no?
FYI, in the analogy the wife is God and the man committing the mortal sin is the husband.
EDIT: I'll save you the trouble of rephrasing. If you go back to God and beg to be let in, then clearly you are no longer an atheist and have repented for wanting to be separated from Him in the first place.
However, when you die in a state of mortal sin, you have accepted you'd rather be in Hell than with God.
Originally posted by lucifershammer FYI, in the analogy the wife is God and the man committing the mortal sin is the husband.
EDIT: I'll save you the trouble of rephrasing. If you go back to God and beg to be let in, then clearly you are no longer an atheist and have repented for wanting to be separated from Him in the first place.
However, when you die in a state of mortal sin, you have accepted you'd rather be in Hell than with God.
I understood that, but I couldn't very well ask her what she would do if you were in that situation. (As far I as I know, she may be fictional...)
when you die in a state of mortal sin, you have accepted you'd rather be in Hell than with God
No, you haven't accepted anything of the kind - if you honestly did not believe in heaven, hell, god, etc.
Imagine you are walking through a wood. Someone has left subtle clues (marks on trees, etc.) pointing you to buried riches beyond your wildest imagination. Unfortunately, you don't notice these. (Perhaps you have heard of the treasure and even make a conscious effort to look for the clues.) Have you accepted that you'd rather not be rich?
Originally posted by dottewell I understood that, but I couldn't very well ask her what she would do if you were in that situation. (As far I as I know, she may be fictional...)
when you die in a state of mortal sin, you have accepted you'd rather be in Hell than with God
No, you haven't accepted anything of the kind - if you honestly did not believe in heaven, hell, a conscious effort to look for the clues.) Have you accepted that you'd rather not be rich?
Read what I've been writing about mortal sin all along - it requires full knowledge and deliberate consent (CCC 1857). A person who commits a mortal sin in rejecting God does indeed make the choice that he'd rather be in Hell than with God.
EDIT: And read also the part where I said a person can reject God without it being a mortal sin.
EDIT2: Here's the relevant part of the CCC:
1859. Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.
1860. Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. the promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6C.HTM
Originally posted by lucifershammer Read what I've been writing about mortal sin all along - it requires full knowledge and deliberate consent (CCC 1857). A person who commits a mortal sin in rejecting God does indeed make the choice that he'd rather be in Hell than with God.
EDIT: And read also the part where I said a person can reject God without it being a mortal sin ...[text shortened]... iberate choice of evil, is the gravest.[/i]
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6C.HTM
Im I the only one who spotted this, but the origional post clearly talks about a man who does not believe in God and not one who believe in him but rejects him. It is imposible to reject or accept something you do not believe in and therefore that sin could not apply.
Originally posted by twhitehead Im I the only one who spotted this, but the origional post clearly talks about a man who does not believe in God and not one who believe in him but rejects him. It is imposible to reject or accept something you do not believe in and therefore that sin could not apply.
LH is approaching this from a Catholic standpoint; others here will have different views.
Originally posted by lucifershammer It should be the Orthodox view as well, though they might express it slightly differently.
I still dont believe there is such a thing as rejecting God.
If you dont believe in him, you are not rejecting him.
If you do believe in him but dont really know him you are not rejecting him but rather rejecting a concept which does not match the reality.
If you do believe in him and know enough about him to make an 'informed decision' then there is no way you will choose the Hell route unless the reality is very different from what is described in the Bible.
Originally posted by twhitehead I still dont believe there is such a thing as rejecting God.
If you dont believe in him, you are not rejecting him.
If you do believe in him but dont really know him you are not rejecting him but rather rejecting a concept which does not match the reality.
If you do believe in him and know enough about him to make an 'informed decision' then there i ...[text shortened]... hoose the Hell route unless the reality is very different from what is described in the Bible.
If you dont believe in him, you are not rejecting him.
Yes, you are. By the natural law, every human being knows intuitively that God exists. Refusing to believe that is indeed a rejection of God. The only question is the extent to which the person had knowledge and gave consent to that rejection.
Originally posted by lucifershammer Jesus and St. Paul disagree. (c.f. Mt 12:31, 1 Cor 3:15)
Indeed, I stand corrected. What I was attempting to say was in reference to the scripture that says if you break one of the laws you in effect break them all and are labeled a sinner. Unfortunatly I do not have a Bible with me to look it up. Perhaps you know the verse I am refering to?
Please elaborate on how under natural law people intuitively know that God exists.
From the Catechism:
1956. The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties:
For there is a true law: right reason. It is in conformity with nature, is diffused among all men, and is immutable and eternal; its orders summon to duty; its prohibitions turn away from offense . . . . To replace it with a contrary law is a sacrilege; failure to apply even one of its provisions is forbidden; no one can abrogate it entirely.
1957. Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles.
1958. The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history; it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies:
Theft is surely punished by your law, O Lord, and by the law that is written in the human heart, the law that iniquity itself does not efface.
1959. The natural law, the Creator's very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.
1960. The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known "by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error." The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.
Essentially, Natural Law is a code of morals and truths about God that is present to every human being capable of reasoning. Naturally, this includes the truth about His own existence. (c.f. CCC 36)
Ok. This should be a quick one
21 Jun '06 15:451 edit
Back to Top