Any analysis that considers Jesus Christ and his proclamations historically inaccurate, make the whole Bible worthless. Arguments swing widely between them being either accurate in their portrayal of historical events, or that very few of the events described took place. Many scholars would agree that Christ is a historical figure. The issues that cause controversy are the miraculous events surrounding His life. For this reason, researching the historical accuracy of the setting in the Gospels is crucial to the argument regarding the authenticity of
In Chapter 43 of Second Isaiah, the prophet argues that “even when proper sacrifices have been offered, they have not been satisfying because of other iniquities” (Ackerman 1016). The people of Israel believe that if they do everything they can to make sure that their sacrifices are worthy and appropriate, God will accept them. However, Isaiah points out that the behavior and actions beneath the sacrifice will not be ignored. Similarly, in Chapter 58 of Third Isaiah, the Lord speaks to the prophet and seeks to define what is considered false and true worship. According to the book of Third Isaiah, “The Lord rejects fasting that is accompanied by oppression (v.3) and strife (v.4).” (Ackerman 1037).
In his essay "The Will to Believe" William James tells us that his purpose is to present "a justification of faith, a defense of our right to adopt a believing attitude in religious matters, in spite of the fact that our merely logical intellect may not have been coerced." Page2. I found his arguments also persuasive because he suggests the existence of God cannot be solve by our intellectual means. James argues that intellectual activity is motivated by two goals: to shun error and believe truth. The choice to believe or not is alive, forced and momentous.
He says, “The Sunflower story brings up the question of whether Simon had the right to forgive Karl in the name of all Jews. The question appears to me as irrelevant. Karl did not ask him to speak in the name of all Jews, or for that matter, for the harm done to all Jews but only for what he had done” (137). Flannery thinks Wiesenthal made the wrong decision, and later on said that if he were in the position that Wiesenthal was in, he would’ve forgiven the Karl. I, however, disagree with Flannery because I don’t think that the war crimes that Nazis have committed are something that can be
Some may argue that Abigail Williams was the main cause of the accusations, trials and consequences. However, Abigail was not the main contributor to the outcome. She fed Judge Danforth lie after lie and he believed everything she had said. Danforth, being one of the most honorable judges in the area should have had enough sense to see through the witchcraft facade, but even after being told multiple times by other people involved in the trial, he stuck to his beliefs, which ultimately led to the death of nineteen people. Judge Danforth based everything solely off of religion.
Waknuk, a community built on mutual respect for God. In John Wyndham’s classic novel The Chrysalids, this is all the people know. However, the community of Waknuk was built on another pillar, much darker than respect: fear. However, as a community built upon this fear, Waknuk will never be able to attain the True Image. Not only are the people of Waknuk subpar at detecting some deviations, meaning they could have seeped into society, but the True Image is little more than a guess made by Waknuk scholars.
Since these sins outweigh life because of basic stringencies, one must be martyred rather then transgress them under all circumstances. This was the case for the Jews of 1096 who allowed themselves to be killed rather then convert to Christianity. The Gemara in Sanhedrin is one of texts for the commandment of Kiddush
Though some completely disregard the Law of Moses, others have thought of it as unchristian and have given the law a message of death. Moses has favorably shown a doctrine of a law that can only create death in sinners, and this doctrine should have had a better effect on people (Calvin 223). This heresy needed to be abolished or else the aim of the Mosaic Law would be distorted. The repeal of the Moral Law was mainly caused by the belief of the law as a curse. The law was believed to “condemn and destroy” sinners, but had not completed the action (Calvin 223).
But then there is the argument for annihilationism, a theory that until I began researching for my paper I was completely unfamiliar with. But know that I know about it I am fascinated. It is a more pleasant theory than unending torment, instead of a disembodied soul suffering for all of eternity it is just destroyed. In a sense it is like putting it out of its misery, a mercy killing. When you think about the people you know and love who do not have a relationship with God I think it is natural to wish for annihilationism rather than the alternative.
They believe that as long as a person were to choose goals that give direction to one 's own life and believes that the goals are valuable and worth pursuing, life will have meaning and value. It is understood that the meaning of life is a choice made by each individual, even if one were to believe that there is a higher power who granted destiny, one would also need to commit to these thoughts and actions internally. Kierkegaard states that life gives one the option to choose their own expectations of life. He believes that finding something that is worth living or dying for is the beginning of life. We are unable to commit ourselves to a meaning that we find through a divine or otherwise powerful force unless we commit to something internally.