John 1:1 States that “[I]n the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This statement is one of a few that Trinitarians believe to prove their belief in the idea of the Trinity. The Trinity is a belief that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are all one being. The dogmatic “doctrine” of the trinity is not taught in the bible, there are only a few passages that were wrongly interpreted that these claims are based from. The bible itself disproves the theory that the three entities, God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are three separate beings, operating together to bring the will of God to the world.
Isaiah 53 When studying the bible, you can find that there is not place in all the Old Testament is it so plainly and fully prophesied. That Christ would have to suffer, and then to enter into his glory, as in this chapter. But to this day few discern, or will acknowledge, that Divine power which goes with the word. The authentic and most important report of salvation for sinners, through the Son of God, is disregarded. The low condition he submitted to, and his appearance in the world, were not agreeable to the ideas the Jews had formed of the Messiah.
But what exactly does it mean to have a religious belief? In my own definition, it means to have a strong belief in a higher power that controls human destiny and is directly linked to faith. The higher power in Christianity, for example, is portrayed as a God, who is mentioned in the Bible. The members of this religious knowledge system have never actually seen God, their knowledge and beliefs are singularly based on what is written in the Bible. Although there is no visual proof of a supernatural power such as God, believers are motivated by universal beliefs in things we cannot see.
Dawkins desires the reader to understand that the Bible is just “a chaotically cobbled-together anthology of disjointed, historically inaccurate documents”. He claims that believers use a two-edged sword when only taking certain sections of the Bible literally. “It is as much a pick-and-mix philosophy”. According to his text, God is simply an illusion that does not exist.
This shows how Holden is associating religion with phoniness. He doesn’t think that religion can be authentic, just related to faith. Holden wants that faith and connection, which he demonstrates by saying that he wants to pray, just a page before. However, the idea of an organized religion seems fake to Holden. I think that this is because of traditions behind these religions which Holden doesn’t feel connected with.
For example, there are religions which view God as a physical object or as one that has a body. Therefore, Aquinas observes that Anselm’s definition can only work with those who define God in one way. Secondly, he observes that even if all people were to understand the meaning of the word “God”, it would then only subsist in people’s imagination and not physically. However, his claims can be refuted on the basis that, when one says that “no greater God can be conceived”, then one would only be talking about God. The word God is what you call a being that is above all understanding.
They disagreed on the idea of Christ's presence during the Lord's Supper. Luther believed in Christ's literal presence at the Lord's Supper, and Zwingli thought otherwise. Because of this disunity, "Luther said Zwingli was of the devil and that he was nothing but a wormy nut. "3 This disagreement prohibited the uniting of Zwingli and Luther, and therefore the German and Swiss reform movements.
He makes a mention about how the Romanists are the sole interpreters of the bible. He strongly disagrees with this saying that “it is a wicked base invention, for which they cannot adduce title of evidence in support”. This clearly shows Luther’s view on this. He believes that interpreting the bible should be for everyone rather than for a select few who could be infected with the devil. It also gives the impression that the clergy are interpreting the bible in a way that benefits themselves and the church rather than focusing on the spiritual needs of the greater
Being unable to access both of their articles individually, one could look at Surratt’s brief view into Rosenthal’s critique of the novel and support it. After all, it is Elder and Theodore Wieland’s isolation in their beliefs that results in their respective downfalls. Watts’ analysis of Brown critiquing Elder Wieland’s sectarianism is also valid, as it is his conviction to a peculiar sect of Christianity that leads him to his doom, but the novel does not support a critique of orthodox Christianity, so I can’t say I’d agree with his article in its
It isn’t enough to pray to the Dark Lord for something... you must also put forth some effort on your end; It is a popular belief that Satanists do not believe in the Christian God. Atheistic Satanists (LaVeyan Satanists) do not believe in God, they do not even believe in Satan as a real entity. To believe in Satan, you must believe in God, and visa versa. As much as the Dark Lord despises the Christian God, Jehovah, he will tell you that he is the true Creator.
He particularly uses the fictional religion of Bokononism and again the quote “Call me Jonah… .They called me John” to highlight the fallacy in the belief, following and creation of religion as well as the saving grace which religion possesses. The name of John may be intended to echo that of two Biblical prophets, John the Baptist and John of Patmos. The former foretold the coming of Christ and ended up dead for his troubles. The latter saw elaborate visions of the end of the world but did not truly understand them.
Major Primary Source Paper: Koran This paper will be discussing the Koran and specific questions about how The Koran, Hebrew scripture and the Bible relate to a specific section of the Koran. The specific section being pages 204, 205 and 208. The Koran is a religious text written almost 1500 years ago. It was written down by the prophet Mohammed.
In this article titled “How Do We Know It's The One True Church?” the author “Fr. Dwight Longanecker” gives many critical points of defending his argument. In this article the author gives background on how he was brought up in the church. The author gives his conversion story on how he was raised as a protestant and then converted to Catholicism.
In chapter 3 of Speaking of Jesus, Carl Medearis talks about what it means to own Christianity. He says "If we don't truly know what the gospel is, we have to find an explanation for Christianity." Meaning that if we do not know what the gospel is or what it is teaching us, then we try to define it by our own standards, and that is where it gets messy. Medearis talks about how Christianity is more than a religion, but it is a relationship and people tend to not understand that. He explains why people are so defensive and put up their guards towards Christians, because Christians can be so judgemental.