Willful Ignorance

[keras]

In Bible prophecy we are told that people will deliberately reject these:

1/ That God created the world, which at first was covered with water. Genesis 1:1-2
2/ That God once judged this world with a global cataclysmic flood. Genesis 7:1-24
3/ That God is coming back to judge this world again, but next time it will be by fire. Isaiah 66:15-16, 2 Peter 3:1-7
Notice that the emphasis here is on a deliberate rejection, or a willful ignorance. It is a deliberate action on a person’s part not to believe. Romans 1:19-25

People often ask the question: ‘If there is so much evidence that God created the world and sent a global cataclysmic flood called Noah’s Flood, then surely all scientists would believe this?’ The answer is given in Matthew 11:25
It is simply not a matter of evidence to convince people, because people don’t want to be convinced. There is ample evidence to convince anyone that God is Creator, so much so that we are condemned for not believing. Furthermore, Romans 1:18 also tells us that people ‘suppress the truth in unrighteousness’.
It isn’t that there is not enough evidence to convince people that the Bible is true, because they don’t want to believe the Bible anyway. 2 Peter 3:3-4

The reason for this is obvious. If people believed in the God of the Bible, then they would have to submit themselves to His authority and obey the rules He has laid down. However, every human being suffers from the same problem, the sin which Adam committed back there in the Garden of Eden, is a ‘dis-ease’ which we all inherit. Adam’s sin was rebellion against God’s authority. Likewise, people everywhere today are in rebellion against God, so to admit that the Bible is true would be an admission of their own sinful and rebellious nature, and of their need to be born again by cleansing through the blood of Christ.

It is easy to see this willful ignorance in action when watching debates over the creation/evolution issue. In most instances the evolutionists are not interested in the wealth of data, evidence and information the creationists put forward. Often evolutionists attack creationists by attempting to destroy their credibility. They are not interested in facts because they are totally committed to their religious faith called evolution.

And, as Jesus Christ in Matthew 24:37-39 uses the event of Noah’s Flood as a warning that God has judged and will judge again, they would have to agree that God is going to come back as judge and next time He will use fire.

Sinful man in rebellion against God does not want to admit that he must stand before the God of Creation one day and account for his life. Thus, in rejecting Creation and Noah’s Flood and claiming ‘scientific’ evidence that supposedly supports his own belief, he becomes comfortable in not thinking about coming judgment. But, just as God created the world by His Word and sent the Flood, so God will judge this world, once again ‘as in the days of Noah’: by sending fire. Matthew 3:12, Luke 12:49

The fossil record stands as an undeniable memorial to the fact that God has judged by water. All of this should warn each man, woman and child that just as God has kept His Word in the past concerning judgment, so He will keep His Word in the future coming judgment, in His Day of fiery wrath., that will severely affect everyone alive. 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8, Zephaniah 3:8, Revelation 6:12-17, Revelation 14:18-20

 

[TurtleAnne]

I'm not very skilled in such debates, but I find them awkward to read.

Usually the atheist opponent in the debate will launch accusations such as, "You only believe, but I have facts. You only believe the Bible because other people believe it and taught you to believe it. You don't 'know' anything, you just believe, while I know facts."

But then very quickly the same atheist opponent turns around and launches into, "The claims I am making are facts, because I read them in a book, and tons of other people agree with it."

I mean I hope nobody gets me wrong, I do think science is a useful tool in some regards, but those debates are just.. ugh.

 

[IAMANOBODY2015]

I'm not very skilled in such debates, but I find them awkward to read.

Usually the atheist opponent in the debate will launch accusations such as, "You only believe, but I have facts. You only believe the Bible because other people believe it and taught you to believe it. You don't 'know' anything, you just believe, while I know facts."

But then very quickly the same atheist opponent turns around and launches into, "The claims I am making are facts, because I read them in a book, and tons of other people agree with it."

I mean I hope nobody gets me wrong, I do think science is a useful tool in some regards, but those debates are just.. ugh.

Very good

I like it

 

[TurtleAnne]

Very good

I like it

Idunno maybe it's a little ironic in a way, but the various pieces on philosophy that I have read over the years ultimately pushed me more towards faith in God than away from it. Same with psychology. It's like people think they "know" so much as long as they read it on the internet or in a book and certain people agree with them. I find my experience as a Christian to actually be somewhat different, in that I formed my own conclusions, then found confirmation in the scriptures later in life, and most of the world actually doesn't agree with me. So it's just admittedly difficult for me to wrap my mind around the atheist perspective, because we just proceed based on and value different things, when forming our perceptions. I rely first and foremost on my own experiences and observations, though I am definitely willing to consider input from others. And I know that I can't like.. transmit my own experiences into someone else's mind, so I don't expect them to see it the way I do or to believe what I believe, but I'm curious about what they think of their own experiences and observations in life. But more often than not they are just parroting others' beliefs, and also expect me to blindly believe it as they have, even if it contradicts my own experiences. It's just kind of weird.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I'm not very skilled in such debates, but I find them awkward to read.

Usually the atheist opponent in the debate will launch accusations such as, "You only believe, but I have facts. You only believe the Bible because other people believe it and taught you to believe it. You don't 'know' anything, you just believe, while I know facts."

But then very quickly the same atheist opponent turns around and launches into, "The claims I am making are facts, because I read them in a book, and tons of other people agree with it."

I mean I hope nobody gets me wrong, I do think science is a useful tool in some regards, but those debates are just.. ugh.

When in reality, they have opinion, based on scientific facts, and that equates to opinion/theory...nothing more. A lot more sleight of hand going on there than many recognize, or in keeping with the OP, *choose* to recognize.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

I'm not very skilled in such debates, but I find them awkward to read.

Usually the atheist opponent in the debate will launch accusations such as, "You only believe, but I have facts..."

You are correct, Miss Turtle. But the same arguments are made both ways and the silly defenses are poor logic.

You are correct, they are hard to follow and awkward to read. The only way to see the silliness on both sides is to actually study both sides. Of course, then both sides will consider one a turncoat.

 

[TurtleAnne]

When in reality, they have opinion, based on scientific facts, and that equates to opinion/theory...nothing more. A lot more sleight of hand going on there than many recognize, or in keeping with the OP, *choose* to recognize.

I have seen many examples of "scientific facts" that were not actually even that, though, as well. I am just very skeptical of anything that contradicts my own experiences and observations. I won't get into heated back and forth arguments with people, it is not my desire to topple their own beliefs, but I'm also not about to give mine up just because someone is coming at me with, "This article I found disagrees with you." Like okay yeah, a lot of people disagree with me, this is nothing new.

Like some months ago someone tried to tell me that 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 people are mentally ill. After a little while of digging, I found out that the truth was that either 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 (depending on the source) U.S. citizens have been prescribed psychiatric medication, and another source for the original claim was also about drug use. So I was like ah I see what you did there.

And again I still think actual science, as in proceeding with the scientific method, can be a pretty useful tool in various regards, I'm not bashing on science itself. But I just don't get people who come at me with, "I read this on the internet and people agree with me," and then act like I should be sitting there looking like a mind=blown meme.

You are correct, Miss Turtle. But the same arguments are made both ways and the silly defenses are poor logic.

You are correct, they are hard to follow and awkward to read. The only way to see the silliness on both sides is to actually study both sides. Of course, then both sides will consider one a turncoat.

I don't see it as a matter of being a turncoat in some way, if I am willing to consider the evidence of opposing views. I just value the evidence I have gathered for myself over the evidence that I am told exists. I also understand that many people see this as foolish, I get it. But to me they are foolish. It's like.. I can understand them, and they can probably understand me; we just prioritize differently when shaping our views. That's all it is.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I have seen many examples of "scientific facts" that were not actually even that, though, as well.

Agree, that is a fact, just saying, that is the tricky part of what they do. They start with a fact, slip in an opinion, then state it's scientific fact, which it is in a sense, but the two together don't equal a fact. I really believe that throws those off who choose to believe it, otherwise they would question it more.

I never knock science, it is what it is, and is very useful. It can be used for truth, or merely used.

 

[SnowyMacie]

In Bible prophecy we are told that people will deliberately reject these:

1/ That God created the world, which at first was covered with water. Genesis 1:1-2
2/ That God once judged this world with a global cataclysmic flood. Genesis 7:1-24
3/ That God is coming back to judge this world again, but next time it will be by fire. Isaiah 66:15-16, 2 Peter 3:1-7
Notice that the emphasis here is on a deliberate rejection, or a willful ignorance. It is a deliberate action on a person’s part not to believe. Romans 1:19-25

People often ask the question: ‘If there is so much evidence that God created the world and sent a global cataclysmic flood called Noah’s Flood, then surely all scientists would believe this?’ The answer is given in Matthew 11:25
It is simply not a matter of evidence to convince people, because people don’t want to be convinced. There is ample evidence to convince anyone that God is Creator, so much so that we are condemned for not believing. Furthermore, Romans 1:18 also tells us that people ‘suppress the truth in unrighteousness’.
It isn’t that there is not enough evidence to convince people that the Bible is true, because they don’t want to believe the Bible anyway. 2 Peter 3:3-4

The reason for this is obvious. If people believed in the God of the Bible, then they would have to submit themselves to His authority and obey the rules He has laid down. However, every human being suffers from the same problem, the sin which Adam committed back there in the Garden of Eden, is a ‘dis-ease’ which we all inherit. Adam’s sin was rebellion against God’s authority. Likewise, people everywhere today are in rebellion against God, so to admit that the Bible is true would be an admission of their own sinful and rebellious nature, and of their need to be born again by cleansing through the blood of Christ.

It is easy to see this willful ignorance in action when watching debates over the creation/evolution issue. In most instances the evolutionists are not interested in the wealth of data, evidence and information the creationists put forward. Often evolutionists attack creationists by attempting to destroy their credibility. They are not interested in facts because they are totally committed to their religious faith called evolution.

And, as Jesus Christ in Matthew 24:37-39 uses the event of Noah’s Flood as a warning that God has judged and will judge again, they would have to agree that God is going to come back as judge and next time He will use fire.

Sinful man in rebellion against God does not want to admit that he must stand before the God of Creation one day and account for his life. Thus, in rejecting Creation and Noah’s Flood and claiming ‘scientific’ evidence that supposedly supports his own belief, he becomes comfortable in not thinking about coming judgment. But, just as God created the world by His Word and sent the Flood, so God will judge this world, once again ‘as in the days of Noah’: by sending fire. Matthew 3:12, Luke 12:49

The fossil record stands as an undeniable memorial to the fact that God has judged by water. All of this should warn each man, woman and child that just as God has kept His Word in the past concerning judgment, so He will keep His Word in the future coming judgment, in His Day of fiery wrath., that will severely affect everyone alive. 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8, Zephaniah 3:8, Revelation 6:12-17, Revelation 14:18-20

There are millions of Christians around the world that disprove your argument.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

I don't see it as a matter of being a turncoat...

Nor do I. But the YEC supporters commonly dismiss my comments and arguments as non-belief in Biblical truth and the secular scientists lump me in with the 'ignernt myth believers'.

... in some way, if I am willing to consider the evidence of opposing views. I just value the evidence I have gathered for myself over the evidence that I am told exists.

I agree. Accumulating, sorting and verifying evidence on an individual basis is critical to getting somewhere mentally.

One of the serious problems I have with the standard 'squabbles' is both sides have a obsessive compulsive basis in clinging to the explanations of either Reverend Beauhardt or Proffessor Ghasbaag. Respectively, the factions feel they must conform to one in order to attain Salvation or the other to be 'serious scientists'.

I also understand that many people see this as foolish, I get it. But to me they are foolish.

One of the reasons I tend to not enter the 'discussion'. I just get frustrated at the abominable ignorance in argument and logic both sides demonstrate and at times the absolutely incoherent conclusions derived.

It's like.. I can understand them, and they can probably understand me; we just prioritize differently when shaping our views. That's all it is.

You are much more forgiving and kind spirited than I, Miss Turtle Anne.

 

[OcifferPls]

When Jesus stated "You will be with me in paradise," he wasn't expounding from the perspective espoused by the creationism of our day.

 

[keras]

There are millions of Christians around the world that disprove your argument.

Sure, we believe in Creation. But we Christians are a minority.

The real point that I am leading up to, is that of the millions of Christians, most willfully ignore the 1/3rd of the Bible that details what God has planned for our future. They either just don't ever think about it or they have chosen to believe false teachings.

I never knock science, it is what it is, and is very useful. It can be used for truth, or merely used.

Unfortunately, science has usurped the high ground and now purports to have the whole truth and if you disagree with their 'evidence' then you are an idiot. Climate change is another example of this attitude.

 

[Biblewriter]

It all comes down to what or, more to the point, whom, you CHOOSE to believe. Some people choose to believe the Bible. But sadly, a very large percentage of those people are actually only believing what others have told them that the Bible says.

Other people choose to believe what "scientists" say. And almost all of these people have basically zero personal knowledge of the scientific facts in question. Almost ALL of them are simply choosing to believe what others tell them are what "scientists" claim to be the facts. For believing an alleged "fact" in a book is nothing other than choosing to believe what the author claimed was a "fact."

So, in actual fact, almost everyone is simply choosing to believe either what others tell them the Bible says, or choosing to believe what others tell them are the scientific facts.

And the sooner everyone understands this critical fact, the sooner everyone will understand both why this debate will never be resolved and why God will hold all individuals responsible for their beliefs.

 

[CrystalDragon]

Sure, we believe in Creation. But we Christians are a minority.

The real point that I am leading up to, is that of the millions of Christians, most willfully ignore the 1/3rd of the Bible that details what God has planned for our future. They either just don't ever think about it or they have chosen to believe false teachings.

Unfortunately, science has usurped the high ground and now purports to have the whole truth and if you disagree with their 'evidence' then you are an idiot. Climate change is another example of this attitude.

About the "most willfully ignore what God has planned", I see many more ignore the violent things the Bible says, only focus on the loving bits, not even read the Bible, and only believe the points that they've been lead to believe that aren't even in the Bible (like thinking Satan=Lucifer=Serpent when Lucifer was referring to a Babylonian king, the serpent was just seen as a serpent until Revelation centuries later, and Satan was an agent of God in Job and only was seen as the one in charge of all evil in the New Testament)

 

[Major1]

I'm not very skilled in such debates, but I find them awkward to read.

Usually the atheist opponent in the debate will launch accusations such as, "You only believe, but I have facts. You only believe the Bible because other people believe it and taught you to believe it. You don't 'know' anything, you just believe, while I know facts."

But then very quickly the same atheist opponent turns around and launches into, "The claims I am making are facts, because I read them in a book, and tons of other people agree with it."

I mean I hope nobody gets me wrong, I do think science is a useful tool in some regards, but those debates are just.. ugh.

I hear you but this is really not a debate at all.

 

[Major1]

It all comes down to what or, more to the point, whom, you CHOOSE to believe. Some people choose to believe the Bible. But sadly, a very large percentage of those people are actually only believing what others have told them that the Bible says.

Other people choose to believe what "scientists" say. And almost all of these people have basically zero personal knowledge of the scientific facts in question. Almost ALL of them are simply choosing to believe what others tell them are what "scientists" claim to be the facts. For believing an alleged "fact" in a book is nothing other than choosing to believe what the author claimed was a "fact."

So, in actual fact, almost everyone is simply choosing to believe either what others tell them the Bible says, or choosing to believe what others tell them are the scientific facts.

And the sooner everyone understands this critical fact, the sooner everyone will understand both why this debate will never be resolved and why God will hold all individuals responsible for their beliefs.

Excellent thought!

 

[Major1]

Sure, we believe in Creation. But we Christians are a minority.

The real point that I am leading up to, is that of the millions of Christians, most willfully ignore the 1/3rd of the Bible that details what God has planned for our future. They either just don't ever think about it or they have chosen to believe false teachings.

Unfortunately, science has usurped the high ground and now purports to have the whole truth and if you disagree with their 'evidence' then you are an idiot. Climate change is another example of this attitude.

You said........
"The real point that I am leading up to, is that of the millions of Christians, most willfully ignore the 1/3rd of the Bible that details what God has planned for our future. They either just don't ever think about it or they have chosen to believe false teachings."

Are you sure that this OP is not about how most people disagree with your views on the Rapture and the 2nd Coming of Christ?

 

[keras]

Are you sure that this OP is not about how most people disagree with your views on the Rapture and the 2nd Coming of Christ?

This thread is about the truth of the Prophetic Word.
As a general rapture of Christians to heaven is not stated anywhere in the Bible, but what God has planned for His people, is comprehensively prophesied, then what is Written is what we must believe.
Jesus will Return, as promised, but much must happen before that glorious Day. Shouldn't we know about it all? 1 Thessalonians 5:4

 

[keras]

Of this, they are willfully ignorant of…. 2 Peter 3:5.

This is in regard to the forthcoming worldwide judgement by fire, but it applies to all people who want to be free of any hindrance to their own will, to do the things they want to do regardless of what is found in the Word of God. This willingness to be ignorant of the things of God is a willful choice based on a selfish desire, rather than a desire to please God.

It is not that they cannot grasp the truth; or that they cannot understand it. The fact is that they do not want the truth because the truth of God's word would mean changing their cozy lifestyle. This also applies to those who have chosen to believe false teachings, in order to avoid the testing times to come.
Look at Acts 7:51-60….Then they cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears. Why? They did not want to know the truth about the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

This is true in our day as well. There are multitudes of people who do not want to know the things of God because they do not want to be beholden to God. They are willfully ignorant. Paul said something similar to that in 1 Corinthians 14:38. But if any man be ignorant, let him remain ignorant. Isaiah 29:9-12

Until a person is willing to receive the truth with an open mind and thereby become mentally renewed , he or she will remain in the dark about salvation and for Christians about the great future God has planned for us.

 

[Winken]

It all comes down to what or, more to the point, whom, you CHOOSE to believe. Some people choose to believe the Bible. But sadly, a very large percentage of those people are actually only believing what others have told them that the Bible says.

Other people choose to believe what "scientists" say. And almost all of these people have basically zero personal knowledge of the scientific facts in question. Almost ALL of them are simply choosing to believe what others tell them are what "scientists" claim to be the facts. For believing an alleged "fact" in a book is nothing other than choosing to believe what the author claimed was a "fact."

So, in actual fact, almost everyone is simply choosing to believe either what others tell them the Bible says, or choosing to believe what others tell them are the scientific facts.

And the sooner everyone understands this critical fact, the sooner everyone will understand both why this debate will never be resolved and why God will hold all individuals responsible for their beliefs.

Count me out of that "almost everyone is simply choosing to believe what others tell them." Amen.