Benchmark Assignment: Gospel Essentials This paper will show how the Christian Worldview has been shaped by the sufferings of God, Jesus and man. Man was initially seen to be completely good and through their actions have created the downfall for all of man. This downfall has led to the suffering of all man, which led to the suffering and resurrection of Jesus to erase those sins and gain redemption for all mankind. God In the Bible, God is the ultimate power by which all things were created. He wanted to demonstrate his power to all by calling forth the light, the earth and all creates that dwell on it.
He states what he believes to be the solutions theists give to solve the problem of evil. These solutions include the fact that the pain is unreal, God’s punishment for sinning, what makes the world better, and is God’s way of reminding men of his existence while also warning them to repair their ways. He argues that atheists are not affected by evil like theists are, which is why life is more comfortable for atheists. Evil does exist in the world, but evil also makes the world a better place. McCloskey claims that the presence of evil in the world argues against “the perfection of the divine design or divine purpose in the world.” (McCloskey, 52) This is not reasonable, however, since evil does not discriminate between theists and atheists.
The Great Awakening unleashed a new wave of conversions driven by a desire to be cleansed of sin and avoid eternal punishment. These beliefs depend on a fear of God rather than sole worship, as He is portrayed to be a spiteful, all-powerful being. In my teaching, the fear of God was not placed within me. Instead, a deeper trust in God’s saving powers was instilled upon my beliefs, which attempted to draw belief from love rather than fear. God was portrayed as an all-loving being attempting to free us from the control of sin, which quite evidently contradicts the image of a vengeful God.
Likewise, atheists would also consider the implications of the legality of using these drugs. Right or wrong, legal or illegal, those considerations would certainly be in the forefront. However, their reasoning would not be derived from living in accordance to God’s design for humanity (Pasley, 2015), but instead they would be influenced with experiences and present interactions with others that would shape their ideology. Once again, they would not look definitively at a superior being (God) for answers because in their belief system, it does not exist. Ultimately, their decisions to use or not use performance-enhancing drugs could parallel that of the Christian, but the basis for their reasoning would be from opposite ends of the
Chapter three in Jesus and Nonviolence compares and contrasts Saul Alinsky’s principles to the nonviolent teachings of Jesus. I thought his first point, that power is not only what you have but also what your enemy thinks you have, to be an interesting point. I was wondering if this point, however, is suggesting you deceive the enemy? I do not think that being deceptive is the right answer. Alinsky also teaches to never adopt a strategy that you would not want your opponents to use against you (Pg.
Calvin, the founder of Calvinism, wrote that science is an art that “unfolds the admirable wisdom of God” (Doc 2). This shows that while the Church disapproves of science, it can still help people understand the phenomena that occur in the Bible, and consequently, strengthen people’s religious beliefs. Calvin supported both religion and science and believed they should not conflict with one another. Bacon, one of the contributors to the scientific method, wrote that the goal of science was “that human life be endowed with new discoveries and powers” (Doc 4). This shows that the intention of science was to help people understand the world, not to cause harm to others.
He strongly believes that “the scientific method is our only source of knowledge” (58). I disagree with his belief because people also possess their own sense of knowledge. They gain this knowledge through the different obstacles they come across in their lives, which indicates that not all knowledge comes from scientific method. Freud describes “the teachings of Jesus as “psychologically impossible and useless for our lives” (38). I cannot agree with his statement because there are people who study and believe in Jesus because Jesus gives them an optimistic view to life.
Also, the foundation of our knowledge of God’s true intentions is purely based on assumptions. There isn’t factual evidence that God’s decisions benefit the world directly other than having faith and trusting in the goodness of his persona. The only way humans cope with evil is by assuming God sent it for a reason. One general example would be when thousands die at war defending their country. We rationalize their death as a sign from God that the community should be more supportive of each other in times of hardships, yet God could have sent death to punish humanity for the innate evil within us.
The Puritans even knew that; however, God gives a second chance at a new beginning, so that they would not die in sin. Bradstreet and Edwards were only trying to draw their people closer in their faith. Both of their ways were effective because they hit places that meant the most to them. However, the question still stands are you right in the eyes of the
The basic principles of metaphysical naturalism are very different than that of naturalism. Metaphysical naturalism has a more meaningful religious interpretation in that human beings may not be able to entirely comprehend the ultimate purpose of the universe and its parts. This brings us to the scientific thought that the laws of physics and chemistry are of hierarchical organizational patterns and exceed the limits of religious concepts and theory. Scientific naturalist sees science as the only sensible way of understanding nature. In this regard if there is something more than naturalism in this world, science alone may be considered an inaccurate means of recognizing and comprehending these concepts.