He has called believers to "fellowship with Christ,” to "holiness,” to "liberty,” to "peace,” and to "virtue". Believers are to "walk worthy" of the calling they have received. But there is still another calling that is even more personal than the moral callings. It is God's call to the individual believer for a specific ministry. For many believers one of the most difficult and elusive things they ever encounter is determining the will of God for their life.
There is nothing wrong with this, except when it comes to the issue of believing in God. Zagzebski makes a compelling point by discussing how people who are given Pascal’s wager would be motivated to believe in God due to the infinite gain, which is basically an appeal to one’s self-interest. This brings up the fundamental issue I have with Pascal’s wager: if God were to appear before every non-believer’s eyes and tell them to believe in Him or suffer eternal damnation, would these people believe in God just to avoid going
In her book “The Case for God” she writes that religion requires leaps of faith and should accept that there is no scientific proof for the existence of God. For this reason, Karen Armstrong agrees with this claim. Some philosophers, such as Keith Ward, say that religion is non-cognitive and that religion focuses on the way the believer lives their life rather than what you believe. This view on religion does not seem compatible with Aquinas’ Cosmological Argument because Aquinas is trying to find reason behind believing in God whereas Ward would say it doesn’t matter why or how there is a God. Ward believes religion to be existential.
As a result people will see and feel the love of God through our actions.. 18:20). Church is a place to learn, how we should live our lives as Christians, so we can teach the gospel to all. After the church is back on solid ground, Christians can begin to build a church, where people would have no misunderstandings of Christianity. I strongly believe that the church needs to figure out how to reach out to those who believe, but searching for a deeper more meaningful connection with our Lord. We need to
Dr. Johnson's primary focus of the book is to explain the six different evangelism styles, look at the strengths and weaknesses of each style, and how each style relates biblically to evangelism. Evangelism, I believe was associated with something unnatural or forced, and it sometimes felt uncomfortable and threatening. Now, why it was thought of this way, I do not know, because how can sharing something so good makes so many feel so bad. After reading this book, I understand now that most people are doing evangelism in a way contrary to the way God made them. Dr. Johnson give fair treatment to each style, and he not only offers a variety of approached for Christians to consider using, but he also does not promote one style as superior to another.
With god/s grounding the moral the foundation of the moral becomes arbitrary because it would only be good because god says its so. Also calling god good would not make any sense since he decided what good is or isn't, so how could he be good unless the moral was grounding him? If piety was a certain care of the god’s we could look to do always what is Pious and in return we would be worshiping/caring for the god/s if they exists. If the God’s are looking to something the “moral,piety” then if you act pious in your actions through life you will be in a way worshiping the god’s, because you are honoring what they already honer. The problem with this idea is when people think god grounds the moral
Perhaps this should also be the goal of every Christian, even if he or she is not in an active counseling role. One element of the Brief Christian Counseling model that is somewhat surprising is that, “Counselors maintain some ethical and legal responsibility long after the counseling relationship ends” (Ohlschlager & Clinton, 2005, 92). While I recognize the need for being accountable for the guidance given to the client, it could be concerning for the counselor if the client is no longer participating with that counselor and then commits violence or any other law violation. At some point, personal responsibility on the part of the client should be the determining factor, not finger pointing at the
However, the Grand Inquisitor’s rejection that the nature of man has potential to change when we accept Christ as our savior highlights the weak link in his argument. The inability to handle freedom appears to the Grand Inquisitor as one flaw possessed by humans. “… For nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom” (Dostoevski 29). He claims that man is too weak and rebellious to bear the weight of free will and therefore believes our paths should be decided for us. However, as Christians we believe that man should have freedom to choose whether he will follow Christ or not.
A true analogy of how people sometimes attempt to justify their denial of God's existence or an excuse for why they neither believe nor disbelieve. But the truth of the matter is that, "We are in no position to draw up maps of God's psychology, and prescribe limits to His interests. 2. I am a man/woman of facts. I believe in science and matter not miracles and blind faith!
On the other hand, Boethius also states that humans do not have free will. If God is omniscient then he already knows all of our choices, past, present and future regardless of whether we have even thought about them yet. This concept would suggest that human’s do not have a choice in their actions or the consequences of them, as, as some philosophers believes out future has already been predetermined. If this is correct and humans have no control over their actions then it would be wrong and unfair for God to punish someone, who had no choice but to do what God had already predetermined. If the Calvinist approach to predestination is true then there would be no need to hope of pray for anything as you cannot change your position, and God has already chosen who he will save before you are born.