The final type, passive, is an experience which the recipient has no control over. They are a ‘gift from God’ and leave one powerless. They can be accompanied by some sort of ‘spiritual gift’ such as speaking in tongues. James concluded that religious experiences are psychological phenomenas that occur in our brain and have both a physical and supernatural element to them. This conclusion was based on three principles.
Aquinas’ 3 ways make far too many leaps and assumptions. For Example, in the 2nd way – from Cause, the argument clearly states that everything has a cause, that cause must too have a cause, there cannot be an infinite number of causes therefore there must be an uncaused cause. The logic in this argument is sound however, when Aquinas makes the leap from there being an uncaused cause to that uncaused cause being God this is where I feel it falls. This leap is unjustified and therefore I don’t feel it is sufficient to be convincing as proof to the existence of God. Bertrand Russell would argue against the 2nd way with fallacy of composition.
Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious Experience? The argument for the existence of God using the idea of religious experience is an a posteriori argument in the sense that it is based on people’s personal encounters and experiences with God. As opposed to other ontological arguments, this argument is based on a direct link to God - because if we can show that God is experienced then we surely cannot deny his existence. In this essay, I am planning on examining the different strengths and weakness of Within the classic account of experiences (The Varieties of Religious Experience, XVI), William James identified four common characteristic to prove the existence of religious experiences and feeling from transcendent beings in the material world. Such experiences are indefinable; this is due to the fact that, they are so uncommon that it is almost impossible to define the feeling in ordinary terms as.
On one hand you have the philosophers who believe you can speak and write about God, because God is reality. On the other hand, are the Logical Positivists who claim that statements about God have no meaning because they don’t relate to anything that is real. There are a number of philosophers who claimed to have proven conclusively that religious language is meaningful, for example Aquinas’ theory of analogy. An analogy is an attempt to explain the meaning of something which is difficult to understand and forming relations through attributes or relations that are similar. Aquinas rejected univocal and equivocal language when talking about God.
The argument from religious experience is an inductive, ‘a posteriori’ argument which claims that because God can be experienced, God must exist. It’s underpinned by testimonies of religious experiences that exist in which the person has claimed to have had experienced God. Consequently, this has led people to conclude that God must exist. In order to understand how this argument works, a comparison is required. For example, I am writing.
C. Stoic Philosophers - A stoic is one who tries to avoid any show of emotion, whether anger or joy. II. Pure Christianity Seems Strange & Different To Many Religious People A. (Acts 17:18-20) B. (Acts 16:20-21; Acts 17:6) C. Error, if practiced long enough, makes the truth sound strange.
One could argue that the logical positivists were unsuccessful in arguing that religious language is meaningless because the verification principle has many weaknesses. For example Strong verification is not possible to talk meaningfully about history as no self- observation can confirm historical events. Swinburne stated that strong verification excludes all types of universal statements as there may be a random event that occurs that may mean that this cannot be verified. However, A.J Ayer developed a solution for this which is the weak verification principle. This form of the principle allows for statements to have meaning if the means to which a statement can be verified are known.
Unfortunately there is no concrete definition because it is tricky to distinguish between genuine or customary religious groups and a cult. According to Raymond Paloutzian (1983), there are five factors that help characterize that of a cult: charismatic/dogmatic leader, converts lives being dominated, former lives must be forgotten completely, monetary or other mistreatment, and “bizarre or unusual doctrine, occasionally communicated by deceptive methods” (113). Even with these traits, there are different cultic degrees. The initial “cult seduction” process usually begins with an individuals initial involvement with a cult member and then their eventual involvement with the cult (Alemendros et al. 2007).
This model although simplistic identifies in depth the core of man being made in the Image of God and it is at this core man’s difficulties evolve. Dr. Crabb and Dr. Hawkins come to the conclusion that many of man’s problems stem from a sin nature. In changing the man’s thinking through Christ, one can in turn affect man’s overall health as will be discussed. Crabb (1977) introduces an approach to integration in which he delineates several different approaches to theory. Dr. Crabb begins with the Separate but Equal theory in which spiritual problems are to be dealt with scripture and areas involving physical including psychological should be handled with qualified practitioners (pg.
Dawkins and Aquinas: Theology Whether it’s argumentative or sentimental, an author always aims to get a significant truth across to the reader. In the novel “The God Delusion,” Richard Dawkins analyzes many theories that theologians have developed about the existence of God and essentially squanders them. Through his unique sense of humor and his idea of “logic”, he gives reasons of why the theories of Thomas Aquinas, and other theories as well, are not well developed and are incorrect. Although he does raise some interesting points in his arguments, he does not address enough issues to completely reject the theories of God’s existence. God has a very broad meaning and the meaning varies from person to person.