He argues that humans are made in the image of God with the potential to accomplish perfection in the future, and then humans will then grow to become the likeness of God. Hick accepted that if the likeness of God is to be accomplished through experiencing evil then God is partially responsible for evil. However, Hick argues that God is justified in allowing evil because we develop virtues as a result of overcoming life’s challenges. These virtues are “intrinsically more valuable than the virtues created within him ready made without effort on his own part”. Vardy’s example further supports this with the analogy of the king who falls in love with a peasant girl.
For starters, Antigone does not care about the law when she feels the law is wrong. Second, she has the impression that Creon is trying to play god and she makes it known when she tells him “Sorry who made this edict? Was it god? / Isn’t a man’s right to burial decreed / By divine justice? I don’t consider your / Pronouncements so important that they can / Just…overrule the unwritten laws of heaven.
When a religious group promotes hate for selected persons it recruits others for a cause clocked in the ways of ‘The Lord’. Religion is supposed to be a positive spiritual motivator, not a tool to attack and banish people. The leaders of such groups are using the words of the Bible to influence others to see homosexuals as filth that needs to be eradicated. They do not see that these homosexuals are just like any average person. Their sexual orientation does not dictate the kind of person they are.
By persecuting his father is piety. But Socrates discards his definition because it is in fact not a definition but rather an example. It does not give reason on why things are pious. So, Euthyphro rebounds by claiming piety is what is pleasing to the gods. He says that “ The things and the men that are pleasing to the gods are pious, and the things and the men that are displeasing to the gods are impious.” Socrates approves of this definition because it is of a very generalization.
Situation ethics is a Christian approach in dealing with ethical problems and moral choices. Joseph Fletcher, who published his theory in his book ‘Situation Ethics’ in 1966, primarily developed the theory. The theory is teleological due to its belief that actions have no intrinsic value. Instead, the theory focuses on one intrinsic good, agape, the Greek word for self-sacrificial, impersonal love. Agape is believed to love as God loves and Fletcher described it as ‘an attitude not a feeling’, therefore separating it from all other forms of love.
Secular worldviews often see human relationships as self-serving with an ultimate goal of getting ahead of the other person for bettering on oneself. In contrast, a biblical worldview of human relationships seeks to serve others first and place God above all else. Romans 2:8 speaks on the ultimate fate for the “selfishly ambitious” who do not obey the Word of God. Throughout the Bible, there are several instances of the ultimate human relationship found in Scripture. For example, Mark 12:31 states, “ …’You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’” as Jesus’ proclamation of human relationships with one another and God.
Colonialists place "...the book of God's Word over the book of God's Works, and theology over psychology." (Entwistle, 2010, p. 145). Neutral parties keep psychology and theology separate for fear that one will contaminate the other. And then there are Allies, those who believe that both psychology and theology belong to God and that "all truth is God's truth". They believe in total integration and know and respect the two books of God.
Thus, he believes there is no reason why should you live a moral life rather than for one's self. Fidley asks Seltzer one last question, “what motivation for adopting the moral point of view can you possibly offer without a belief in God and immorality?” which leads us to this quote, “When religion tells us that there is nothing more we can say about morality than that we can’t see the reasons for it, but do it if you know what’s good for you, then I do condemn it. We can do better than that. We can become moral grown-ups. And if there were a God, surely he would approve”.
He then leads up to his main objection of this definition by means of stating that even though men and gods love that which they think is noble and good, and hate that which is opposite to those things, not everyone thinks this way about all things (Plato, 7). This being in the nature of things that are considered to be good by a group of people, can be hated by others, and this would also apply to the gods, for not everyone thinks the same. Socrates then uses a good example concerning the gods to better prove his reasons. He states that even though Euthyphro's decision to proceed against his own father may seem agreeable to Zeus, but not to Cronos or Uranus, and that there may be other gods who have these differences of opinions (7). Concerning
He states that it is either Christianity went wrong or our instincts went bad. He believes that our instincts have gone wrong. He goes on to say that we have been lied to and that our sexual desires is in the same state of any of our other natural desires and if we stop hiding it then things will be alright. Many people think that Christian Chastity is impossible, but when one really puts there mind to it they will be surprised at what they can overcome. Lewis then goes on to say that we cannot simply do it on our own strength but to go to God for our strength.