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.
Existentialism Many people try to understand the meaning of life and whether there is a spiritual force behind it. This is what is known as absurdity since eventually, the person will not have any meaning of existence. Some philosophers tried to find out about existence, for instance, Jean-Paul Sartre, who does not believe in a God and that a person first live then discovers more about himself and the world (Booker, 2015 pg. 282). Albert Camus is another philosopher who wondered whether there is a God or not and what man was supposed to believe to protect him from bad faith.
When looking through the logic of philosophers from the medieval period of Philosophy and their unconvincing logic, we first look at Anselm. Anselm wanted to prove God existed, Anselm argues that you can prove the existence of God through metaphysic metaphysical analysis, for example: Think of the most perfect being possible. If you can picture the most perfect being in your mind, then it is possible that it exists only in your mind as an example of Plato’s Theory of Forms. Anselm’s argument fails because anything you can imagine can come popping out of your mind if you wished it to be so, If anyone were to sit down and imagine the perfect God or the perfect island, would that perfect God or island even exist outside of their mind, would that
This is because critics may question the origins of God based on Descartes’s claim that perfection precedes imperfection and “something must come from something”. (Bennet 2004, 12) It is important to note that perfection in itself reaches a limit because it is incapable of improving further, thus when God possesses the sum of all possible perfections, it would mean that God does not have potential for anymore improvements. This presents a dilemma for Descartes because if God is already perfect, and perfection is viewed to be a form limit itself, then there must be no being who is more perfect than God himself. However, since everything has a cause, God must have origins as well. This means that God either comes from nothing or something.
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”). Dostoyevsky uses two contrasting chapters to argue against atheistic existentialism. The Grand Inquisitor is a story written by Ivan Karamazov. In the story, Jesus visits the Spanish Inquisition, but the religious leaders do not want Him there. They claim that they already have freedom, and that His return will take the freedom away.
God 's existence has been a continuous debate certainly for centuries. The issue of God 's existence is debatable because of the different kind of controversies that can be raised from an "Atheist as being the non-believer of God" and a "Theist who is the believer of God". An atheist can raise different objections on the order of the universe by claiming that the science is a reason behind the perfection of the universe. In Aquinas 's fifth argument, he claims that the order of the universe cannot be explained by chance, but only by design and purpose. To explain this order of the universe he concludes that, there is an intelligent being whom we call "God".
We must be able to use knowledge to question judgement. A question many people would ask that does not have empirical evidence to prove tends to be if God exists? There is no empirical evidence whether god exists, inductive reasoning and intuition strongly oppose each other at this point because deductive reasoning would ask for evidence to suggest that God exists however my intuition would say that God does exist through personal experiences. CREATIONISM: However the big bang could be argued because monotheists believe that a higher being is only possible to create such an event. By using inductive reasoning, solid evidence can eliminate any sense of doubts.
Furthermore, the claim that “those who believe in God regard him as a personal Agent who, among other things, designs and creates mechanisms” are palpably wrong. I, for one, believe in God and I do not visualize God as manipulative and generating mechanisms. What I visualize is that by subjecting God creative energy to what appear to be inflexible laws, God creates what appear to be mechanisms, which appear to be designed. All of these appearances exist in the sense of the stable
Mark Jones analyzes Antinomianism with comparing to Reformed Theology. The main theological error of Antinomian’s thinking is that they put too much stress upon the doctrine of justification; furthermore, they interpret the rest of doctrines in Christianity from a biased perspective of justification. They even argue that good works are not significant for Christians because God does not see the sins of His children and does not anger to His children; therefore, the law is not important for Antinomians after the first coming of Christ. Regarding these problematic understanding, Jones suggests a solution for Antinomianism, that is concentrating on the real meaning of Christology; in other words, to rediscover and redefine the person and work
The Divine Command Theory (DCT) explains which actions are moral based on whether or not God commands it. The theory is difficult to support due to its flaws, arbitration, and even due to the essence of God. While Divine Command Theorists may completely support this theory, I will argue why the theory is impractical and cannot dictate what is morally right or wrong. In understanding if this theory holds ground we must question what God commands. Instead of uncritically accepting a theory we must put it to question and eliminate any flaws.
Henry approaches religion from an anti-authoritarian perspective and instead focuses on living as a non-conformist. Henry even suggests at one point that God may be an atheist, saying, “I often wondered, Deacon Ball, if atheism might even be popular with God himself” (19). While Henry is not rejecting religion with this statement, he is trying to convey that blindly following anything without stopping and questioning yourself is no way to achieve true intelligence – and that God himself disregards those who lack self-actualization. As Emerson’s maxim emphasizes as well, Henry is trying to push society to realize that the only way to achieve “integrity of the mind” is not the way people are blindly following the thoughts of others, but to boldly question authority, not just sit around and wait until you innately realize the truth about society’s conformist nature. Henry states, “We are all related … interrelated to an Universal Mind” (19) and reflects the maxim’s intended meaning, since Emerson intended originality and those who achieve a relation to the “Universal Mind” can fully achieve their potential as true
From this it is then reasonable to conclude that this causality was set in motion by a supreme being which is God. This argument answers the question of whether or not there is a God far better than the intelligent design arguments of William Paley. For, Paley’s argument easily invalidated by modern science because it argues that simply because there are complex features that can’t be explained by nature and that there are further complex forms in the universe then there must be a God who created the
His speech is not simply aided by the frightful connotations held with each word, but by the objective nature of his statements. Edwards speaks not from personal view, but from the view of a spiteful God forced to gaze upon the state of His creation. The omission of phrases such as “I believe” or other personal statements places the central focus upon God rather than Edwards himself. Despite his reputation as a gifted, educated minister, an audience of anxious colonists is likely to fear God in a manner which cannot be held towards a mere human being. By speaking instead for God Himself when Edwards declares, “Men’s hands cannot be strong when God rises up”, a superstitious audience is left petrified with distress.
St. Iraneaus debated that Gnostics are those who are spiritual with growing knowledge of God, lack the true faith because Gnostics deny the “Incarnation and bodily Resurrection of Christ,” [p. 182]. Iraneus described in p. 4 of Selections that believers should mirror Christ 's life. The purpose of establishing an uncomplicated simplicity of just believing in one God while understanding that redemption of the entire human race is only through Jesus Christ. [ p. 13].St. Iraneaus debated that Gnostics are those who are spiritual with growing knowledge of God, lack the true faith because Gnostics deny the “Incarnation and bodily Resurrection of Christ,” [p. 182].
People believe what they want and most of the time ones mind cannot be changed. There are a couple of arguments that philosophers have come up with. When one is looking at different general types of arguments for God’s existence there are 2. One is a posteriori which is physical evidence and the second is a priori which is purely logical (Furman). The question is did we come from a being that is more powerful than us named God or are we existing through science evolution?