While I do not completely agree with his whole book, Shane Claiborne speaks some truths on many ugly topics of our society. I agree with him that there needs to be a higher concern in our society for the less fortunate, poor, and those who do not have a voice in local government. He speaks for an alternative thinking, conveying an idea that the traditional church isolates itself from the poor and disenfranchises many LGBT people. He communicates to his audience; it is okay to question a church that may be wrong in their views or traditions. I believe our generation subjects themselves to staying neutral on controversial topics.
Many examples in the book made me consider perspectives that I had never thought of before. In my opinion, this book definitely stirred up a reassurance of my place in society and what can be done to liberate the oppressed. I believe the voices represented in this book can cause negative reactions from some churches because it goes against what is and has been normal. Churches would not really like to change the view of “white” Christ to be a diverse Christ of another race because it would change certain aspects and power. The church is called to be one diverse body of God, but as churches can remain dominant to one race, it becomes difficult to incorporate diversity into what already is established.
By knowing the definition of these integration models, one can better understand how others approach integration. In doing so, the author also refers to two books of God, the Book of God's Word (the Bible) and the Book of God's Works (His creation). Enemies do not believe integration to be possible. Spies tend to "piece together" information from both psychology and theology to come up with something that they could believe in and helps others in the process. Colonialists place "...the book of God's Word over the book of God's Works, and theology over psychology."
Fox does not blame the Christian church for this disconnectedness, but instead believes that the church has, “…either foster[ed] or ignore[d] the continued damage to the earth” (Kinsley 166). The lack of empathy towards groups and beings at the bottom of a hierarchy created and dominated by patriarchy, has in turn created a lack of, “…spirituality of connectedness” and “…strong negative ecological implications” (Kinsley 167). Fox strongly believed a shift in paradigms towards a view of, “…Christ pervading the entire cosmos with sacrality, connectedness and wonder”(Kinsley 168) that emphasizes the sacredness of all creatures, instead of a God only concerned with individual salvation. Fox’s views on a shift in the views of Christianity, I believe, could be extremely beneficial to the modern world. Because so much of the world follows some sect of Christianity, a change in there fundamental views of nature and its place in our hierarchy, would have a huge impact on the entire
This is similar to the circumstance of God and human freewill. This parable also links with the Christian and Islamic idea of God as noted in the parable it is necessary for humans to have freewill so that they will learn to love God out of genuine love and not out of fear. Through John Hicks theodicy he focuses on the reasons why God chose to give us such freedom. He understood that humans were made in an immature moral state, and that humans can be perfected through the use of their freewill – through learning from their mistakes. God knew it was inevitable that humans would make mistakes.
I believe the phrases “Public Opinion” and “Voice of God” are integrated into Twain’s conclusion in order to provide a hint of irony to sum up the effects of popular opinion. Twain first uses “Public Opinion” as a noun in order to display its influence on the common individual. In the previous sentence before the phrase is mentioned, Twain state that “We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking.” “It” is Public Opinion, and its influence makes man involuntarily lean towards trends in society. “Voice of God” is then used as ironic evidence that people who try to justify their supposedly “individualistic” thoughts are actually influenced by an external source (religious activists). The phrase “Some think it is the Voice of God” is crucial in that “some” is used rather than a singular noun, proving that these justifications have already been influenced by external sources, thus proving
Relative Ethics allows people to understand why they take the actions they do. It allows them to explain their reasons. This contrasts to Absolutism where everyone who follows has to follow the same rules and laws. Cultral backgrounds and religious views make absolutism unrealistic. Right and wrong is a reflection of people’s emotions, and as emotions vary, they can never have the same views on subjects.
Entwistle (2010), discusses how worldviews shape how individuals view their lives and that includes how they view theology and psychology. The thought of integrating spirituality and psychology has been looked down upon because of the stigma attached with psychology. From a religious standpoint psychology is deemed not worthy
One important principle that exemplifies these beliefs is Gelassenheit, and although it is rarely spoken its meaning is woven into the social fabric of the Amish’s everyday life. The main idea behind Gelassenheit is that a believer should surrender to God by living a life that is pleasing to him. It also takes on various other meanings: self-surrender, self-denial, resignation to Gods will, yielding to others, and a calm and contented spirit are just a few. Being humble is another important belief of the Amish, which they teach the importance of in their actions in everyday life. The Amish abhor pride and all actions that scream for attention and recognition.
“Good People” In a way we’re all the same. We believe in one God, just the name has changed. A God who puts love, faith and humanity in our hands. To govern these elements in the right way can put doubt and trouble into your life, and how do we even govern them? And if we do govern them and it’s wrong, how do we correct?