Galileo was imprisoned for his belief in the Copernican theory. Even though this theory is true, the Church was enraged of him publishing a book and trying to spread the word of this theory. Galileo displayed many acts of moral courage. These acts demonstrate a connection between the Holocaust and Galileo’s acts of moral courage. The personal impact of these events have been apparent to me.
He also gives the audience a better understanding by giving a visual glimpse of what the black community had to endure. Dr. King also included definitions and examples of unjust and just laws, and how they are not right. He included an example of these “laws” by talking about the things Adolf Hitler did was allowed but supposedly helping someone was not allowed. He writes and uses the letter to show the white Americans that are unaware of what is happening around them. Even, though Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is best remembered for his powerful voice and pathos in this letter is a thoughtful logical argument.
The idea of teaching the viewpoint of evolution is considered modernism. In teaching this idea of evolution, it is going against the law and that is exactly what Scopes did. This whole trial was going against traditionalism. It exposed a deep division in America between new scientific values and traditional religious values. People starting seeking a different and better way to represent reality and the world they lived in.
Malcolm X is controversial, he said that equality should be attained "by any means necessary". Many think Malcolm X only preached violence and hate, others think of him as doing what was necessary. While he didn’t advocated peace, he helped to empower people to stand up for their rights. This was Malcolm’s goal and shows that he had good intentions. However, his good intentioned were covered up by his flaws.
A Whole New World (A Critique of Milton’s Theology) Milton’s Paradise Lost is one of the most important pieces of literature because of its literary quality and its controversial relationship to theology. He is rather controversial with his portrayal of biblical figures. By rejecting the Trinity and depicting God and the Son as two separate beings, Milton creates a new theology. Through his use of this theology, Milton shows the Son’s rise to glory through action and character, a concept that gives way to an argument against the birthright of monarchs. By framing the story around the relationship between God and the Son, Milton is able to define his political values in Paradise Lost.
“On the other side of the continuum are pure white supremacists often motivated by a perversion of Christianity called Christian Identity where- in which they believe this country is meant for them, they are the ones who are supposed to be running this country, everybody else is inferior (“Oklahoma”). “‘When federal officers violate the constitution, either through malice or excessive zeal, they can be held accountable for violating the State’s criminal laws’” (Kravets). Timothy McVeigh’s friend showed him a book called “The Turner Diaries”. “Evidence of McVeigh’s admiration for a novel called The Turner Diaries, published in 1978, will aid the prosecution 's effort to portray him as a hate- filled radical. The book, a favorite of far-right groups, tells the story of a group of white supremacists who blow up FBI headquarters in Washington at 9:15 one morning- almost exactly the same time of the Oklahoma City bombing”
In this case the Bible does not give a detailed explanation about how the world was created but only talks about who created the worlds, on the other hand science explains how old the earth is and how it was made. Like Augustine says that the two books of God cannot contradict each other, which means that conflicts arise when any of these Books are interpreted wrong. Conflict arise only if one has a presupposition that science is false, but making science and theology interact with each other through dialogue will shed some light on the truths that they claim. These two books are meant to answer different questions and it isn’t fair to impose and scientific question on the Bible because the Bible was not meant to answer the mechanical functions of the natural world but the Bible gives a purpose for life and talks about the cause of life.
Søren Kierkegaard is considered the father of existentialism (“Christian and Theological Existentialism”). Kierkegaard wrote a book about the paradox surrounding Abraham sacrificing Isaac. The narrator questions whether “Abraham’s faith in God can justify killing his son” (Søren Kierkegaard: A Master of Refraction 78). Another existentialist, Karl Jaspers, argues that, “free will makes all faith essentially existential. Jaspers also argues that, since life is absurd, it is less absurd to believe in a God which promises eternal life than to believe in nothing at all (“Christian and Theological Existentialism”).
Michael gave a bit of hope and a reflection of what the baby boomers and what white youth cultures were thinking during this racially charged time back in the 70’s. He is a Democrat and a professed Yippie sympathizer. Michaels progressive views allowed to challenge those who wanted to glorify Archie’s bigoted way but more than likely this balancing act only made the show partially redeemable. There is still a lot to frown down upon when it came to the lack or minimal use of positive identity development in these
Prof John Lennox started his speech with a consideration of worldviews. Atheistic critics of religion by trying to draw battle lines between science and religion. Prof John Lennox dispels this myth with a pointed argument that worldviews actually shape the way everyone, atheists included, view science, so that the real battle is not between atheism and religion, but between the philosophical system of naturalism (nature is all there is) and the philosophical system of theism. In the process, he takes on the two most popular historical examples often cited to show that there is a “war” between science and religion: Galileo and the church, and the Huxley–Wilberforce debate. He explains that in Galileo’s case, the real problem was the Catholic
Many people were disenchanted with liberalism and wanted major changes on how the Federal Government ran the country. The New Right movement was made up of Evangelical Christians, struggling blue collar-workers, middle class voters, and disenchanted Democrats. Most New Rights individuals supported civil rights and the end of segregation. Their goals were, reducing the size of the Federal Government, providing work incentives for the poor without direct welfare payments, and rewarding wealthy Americans who had
Clarence Darrow came to defend scopes. he had a agnostic view on religion and believe evolution is a important to know about. on the state 's side was William Bryan and christian who believed the bible should be thought of in a literal sense and evolution was a dangerous and would lead to a social movement. Just by knowing this it should have been a mistrial based on the fact that the state attorney 's main argument was that it goes against the literal interpretation of the bible because it 's obviously mixing church and state. Just to show you how silly this argument is heres some quotes from the bible Leviticus 19:27 states: “Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard”.
In response to Lynn White’s “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis” Thomas Sieger Derr provided a response saying that White’s claims against Christianity were not as solid as he thought. Derr tries to disprove White’s statements by explaining how they are wrong. Many things in Derr’s argument are logical and disprove the claim that Christianity is to blame for our ecological crisis. In the end of an excerpt from Derr’s “Religion’s Responsibility for the Ecological Crisis: An Argument Run Amok” he makes the comparison between White’s argument and the inventor of fire to blame for all of the world’s arsonists. This is an excellent point but is more accurate of a statement than White’s claim.
In his autobiography, former slave turned abolitionist and writer, Frederick Douglass, makes a rather bold statement about the relationship between religion and slavery. He goes so far as to say that the most zealous religious practitioners made the cruelest masters and “found religious sanction and support for [their] slaveholding cruelty” (Douglass 32). However, this raises the question of how radical this idea truly is. Is it really so hard to believe that people would be more likely to dig out and stress religious beliefs that coincide with their own actions? I personally believe that most people are more likely to use their beliefs to justify the morality of their actions rather than to question it.
Root seemed to convey the idea that certainty is the enemy of science; that science is humble to being open to its theories being disproved. However, I personally see science as being a more rigid set of facts than theology. On the Root presented Christianity as having a pessimistic reputation of refusing to be uncertain. Just a week earlier, I had a conversation with an atheist who confirmed this, saying that Christians act like they’re the ones who have to have everything defended and can never be wrong. However, I personally feel like I have experienced the exact opposite in my theology classes; the more I learn about theology, the more I realize that I’ll never be able to learn everything.