To give up omnipotence is to give up this picture of God. b. good and evil are illusions Another move is to deny P4 and say that there is no evil in the world. One can do this by saying that morality is an illusion -- by being a sort of nihilist. Rejoinder: This, too, is a solution most theists are unwilling to make. It is part of many religious traditions that bad things do happen in the world.
The Good Wife fornicated consciously knowing that it was against religion’s rules. The Wife’s lifestyle was immoral and religion could not justify the faults committed. Many may argue that religion does make moral individuals. Chaucer wrote about individuals that were religious yet committed fault after fault. That is not the case for everyone who beliefs in religion.
Masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act (Pope Paul VI). However, scholars in Islam do not strictly banned masturbation and they also not generally approve masturbation except in extenuating circumstances. For me, I agree that under certain condition, masturbation can be done as we are looking for a solution to treat infertility couple to have children as long as it is done for correct intention and noble
All gods in this religion are smaller deities to the greater Brahman, making this monotheistic, but then it is also polytheistic because there is truly the supreme belief in one major God. Hinduism only seems hard to understand because it deals more with one’s life then ones actual practice or belief of the religion. In reality, Hindus still believe in Brahman, one Supreme Being. Hinduism affects ones entire life and being. Hinduism is both monotheistic and polytheistic in my opinion.
However, Luckmann’s ideas are in contrast to Berger’s as he still feels religions play a pivotal role in individual lives. Luckmann also debates about the relation between religion and individuals – holding the viewpoint that people would still resort to them for morals and judgements – but Berger only analyses the association of religions with societies. According to Berger, a crisis of credibility and plausibility – coexistence of various nomoii – has ultimately led to decline of religions socially, as such a state encourages the infusion of ideas from different ‘sacred’ nomos and this questions the legitimacy of those nomos and
Francis Collins is right about this because people cannot prove something that is in the nature of this world to prove something that is supernatural. Many argue that God is not real because they do not see him or that there is no true evidence of him. As a matter of fact it would be like if an unborn child were to say that their
The spread of Influenza in the early 20th century gave people a gloomy feel for that time. Some people thought that the Influenza infection was a sign from their gods so they let religion influence their choices while dealing with the infection. Other people were displeased by the fact that the government wasn’t taking the infection seriously and that people were receiving little to no care. Lastly there were doctors and volunteer nurses who were with people that had Influenza and didn’t get the infection. After looking at all of the documents, it’s obvious that their were some different views towards the spread of the Influenza infection.
There are other religions, more possibilities, and more gods. If we take those other possibilities, it could be that, for example the religion Hinduism or Buddhism is correct, and we are totally worried about our egos that we would be incarcerated because we got it wrong. If we put all those possibilities up in Pascal 's wager it would start to not make sense at all to just believe in God because of all these other possibilities that could be out there. That’s one the major problems, and that is why I think Pascal 's wager fails. He is favoring towards Christianity to believe in God than realizing that there are other outcomes in this world.
Another reason is that many Islamic countries practice Sharia Law which is not at all in line with western values as it oppresses women and homosexuals. What I think these people fail to see is that religion is simply being used as a tool of oppression in these areas. Another thing which people are not able to realize that Islam is not the only religion that has been used to justify violence. The crusades was a war that was fought on the behalf of Christianity in a quest to reclaim Jerusalem from the Muslims. What this proves is that it is possible to convince someone to commit acts of violence if you tell them that it is God’s
Some religious groups believe after death the soul enters into the next world. There are many religions that teach at death the soul leaves the body and lives on for eternity. Afterlife is a mystery because there is no evidence or proof that this does happen but in spite of the lack of evidence many religion groups talk about the process of the afterlife and what happens after you die. Different religions have teachings on what happens to the body after death. Some religion does not believe in after life.
These laws allow people to legally discriminate and cover it with the excuse that it violates a person’s beliefs. People are trying to use their religion, something the nation has long grown out of as a reason to justify their poor treatment of others. Even though people are facing modern issues with an immature approach, abuse of the RFRA laws approach the point where it can be used to take away a person’s equality because he or she is too different from most people. Eventually, this will begin to violate the Constitution because it will put the people who constantly abuse the law above the people they use it against. If this law is used excessively, there is a high chance that the nation will return to its dark period of discrimination and will jeopardize people’s equality.
In our society, gay marriage opposers are notorious for citing “religious freedom” in order to not serve the LGBT community, and by and large we have accepted this. By bringing a somewhat obscure religion- Hinduism- into the discussion, Von Drehle is able to give the reader a better picture of what Davis is actually doing- and by forcing the reader to recognize that for anything else, citing religious freedom would not be an excuse to not perform one’s duties as an elected official in a community. By starting out with a question to the reader rather than an opinion he wishes the
• In this case, Mr. Reynolds was following the rules of his religion because he was believing that it was a way to please his god. • Mr. Reynold has the right to have his own belief, but once he committed the act of bigamy he broke the law. • In 1786 Jefferson wrote a bill for the Establishment of Religious Freedom, which basically says that there should be a separation of church and state. • The U.S government says that giving certain rights to a specific religion is wrong. • The laws of the land must apply to everyone because it can allow peace and have exclusive control of the territories.
If someone is willing to put above all else their set of beliefs, then they belong to a religion. You can’t physically have or hold religion, so it’s the people who make it what it is. There are many “religions” out there that, in my opinion, are very strange, such as Scientology and Rastafari, but these
Perhaps one may realize that this is a certain topic that they feel strongly about and strive to make a difference. For example, there are those uninformed in this world who unjustly depict all Muslims as being terrorists, just because those in ISIS are that religion, too. This stereotype is discriminatory and prejudicial because a religion doesn 't make a human being do terrible things. A religion does not turn a person evil, it is the person who chooses to commit those acts. It is up to me, and others who feel the same way, to uncover my voice to show that all religions should be treated equally.