Pluralism Vs Materialism Essay

My purpose in this essay is to explain and analyze the Divine Command Theory. Divine Command Theory states that morality is ultimately based on the commands of God. I disagree with this theory because how do we know what concepts of God are true and what other concepts are false? There are so many religions making their own claims and interpretations that they believe are true. Therefore, how do we know then what God approves or disapproves of?

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.

The priesthood doesn’t explore men’s beliefs in Christ and God and are not concerned on the matter, provided that the man submits to the judgement of the church in a concept the clergy profess as implicit faith. Calvin’s augmented relations with the clergy are further aggrieved by their ability to allow the glory of God to be dishonoured by ‘blasphemies’. They don’t attempt to halt such sacrilegious remarks about God. They refuse to intervene because they ought not want those to questions the primacy of the church. The clergy preach for the significance of mass, pilgrimage and express the intention of purgatory but they cannot prove these aspects from the word of God.

Bad is the Christian that dares to think this way. No matter what one believes in, what is important is to stay morally righteous and integrate. One might say that he or she is as Christian as he or she wants, but if one is not able to treat and respect an Arab as a brother or sister, one is not only revealing immense lack of Christianity, but also lack of humanity based on their religious

While I agree with certain aspects of both theories, I have to dispute both outlooks on the ultimate power of God. John Hick believes that there is no way you can deny the existence of evil, but he believes all evil exists because the all powerful God allows it to. How could a God who is all good allow evil to be present, you ask? Hick’s answer to your question would be; In order to draw us closer to him(GOD). If there were no sorrows, pains, or woes, mankind would not see the need for God’s forgiveness and love.

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. Secondly, the lack of complete understanding of a God that is greater than any other is the basis of Anselm’s argument. In other words, one needs not understand how it is that no other greater God exists, because it is not possible to do that. It is the concept of understanding that such a being exists that is important.

Our world today has fallen into the trap of thinking that believing whatever you want is okay. That it is acceptable for everyone to have their own right and wrong, and on the flip side, has made Christianity out to be this fairy tale religion that has no evidence to back it up. We as Christians need to be ready and able to defend our faith, all the while in a diplomatic and non hostile way. In order for us to do this, we need to understand evidentialism, basic beliefs, the Sensus Divinitatis, and who and what the skeptics are saying. The belief in Evidentialism has grown widely throughout the people in our world.

People cannot evaluate the character of Jesus by a person who claims to follow Jesus as many Christians fall susceptible to sin and deviate from the Bible. Jesus will forgive sins, but contrary to Balmer’s opinion, he does not condone

Voltaire suggests that a true and honest religious practitioner would overlook religion in a time of need. However the Protestant Minister’s behavior does not match the ideology behind Christian morality. This can be seen through the Protestant Minister’s statement, “...do you believe the pope to be Antichrist...be gone, rogue; begone, wretch; do not come near me again”(21). Instead of coming to the aid of Candide, the Protestant Minister evaluates Candide’s religious status before deciding if he will help Candide or not. If he were to be a “true” Christian, then Candide’s religious beliefs would

This, he says is more important than knowing the facts about God or performing rituals. This is one reason Kierkegaard supports the knight of infinite resignation over that of faith. The knight of faith is also seen as something comfortable but Kierkegaard doesn’t think we should feel so comfortable. The knight of faith seems to jump into the infinite and come back and seems to have no faith, which Kierkegaard is uneasy with. The knight of faith wants the material world to be the way he wants it and remains focused on the fact that he believes in God but is getting it all back.