Surely and all loving (omnibenevolent) God wouldn’t allow this. Human Evil is where people cause harm to others and create chaos. Why would God create a world that consists of evil and cruelty? therefore Mill questions the idea of an omnibenevolent God, however if it is disagreed that God isn’t all loving then it could suggest that God doesn’t know of our suffering and could mean that omniscience cannot possibly be an attribute of God. Mill would say that if God is omniscient then surely he is aware of our suffering and would therefore intervene in the evil as he loves us all.
His first form of the argument runs as follows: (P1) God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived (P2) If God exists in the mind alone (in intellect) then a greater being can be conceived (in re) (P3) God to be the greatest being, has to existing the mind and in reality, otherwise another being would be greater than God. (C) Therefore God must exist both in the mind and in reality. This method of reasoning aims to demonstrate the truth of something by reducing to absurdity the very opposite of what you are trying to prove. In Anselm’s case this would be that God does not exist, which he claims is absurd by means of an argument which he claims is logically necessary. For Anselm, God cannot not exist.
The Chrysalids: Fear Waknuk is a society of the future with a setting from the past. It is one of the few places, which have survived Tribulation but it is a primitive society, where people reject change and difference in belief that that is how the ‘Old People’ lived. Waknuk is dominated by a religion, which is obsessed by perfection. “And any creature that shall seem to be human…it is a Blasphemy against the true image of God, and hateful in the sight of God.” They believe that they are the “True image of God”, and anyone or anything different is a ‘Mutant’. That is what they fear, ‘mutants’.
Though naïve as he is, this only leads to suffering. Ironically this is foreshadowed at the beginning by his own advice. “I seek for knowledge…I hope yours may not be a serpent as mine had been.” Not fit for the role of god victor is disgusted by the being he has created
And for morality to require God in such a way, there must be a direct link between the two. I believe that morality is defined by God, therefore immoral actions are wrong solely because God forbids them. Similarly, the “rightness” of moral actions is only because God has commanded them. In today's world things are defined as “right” or “wrong” or “moral” and “immoral.” This is because God, is the one that has allowed us to even understand what morality is. I believe that God is the creator and sustainer of all things, and that we would not even be self aware, let alone aware of right and wrong, if God had not created within us his image, and therefore the ability to make moral distinctions.
Gods existence is in a higher magnitude than just bigfoot. God’s existence is proven by many arguments like the First Cause and the Kalam Cosmological Argument. The first cause proves Gods existence by saying how anything that exists has an original cause and what exists is caused by God, the only uncaused first cause. People also try and disprove God by trying to point out imperfections of existence like the creation of evil. This does not convince however that God does not exist because evil is necessary for the good.
It also puts limits on God’s power. According to the definition of a theistic God, God is omnipotent. If God is all powerful then he should be able to command whatever he wants but by saying that morality is independent of God would mean that God is subject to the rules of morality (Fisher, 359). All in all the main issues with the Autonomy Thesis are that it would only be reasonable if one was not considering the existence of a theistic
Though Romans says that human nature is that we are sinners. Human beings are slaves to sin and seem to be powerless against it. We understand that we are not righteous at all, and that we need a relationship with God, so that we can be empowered by His righteous. His righteous comes through our faith in Jesus Christ. Only he can redeem, justify, and sanctify us, and we need all three for our salvation.
Emerson’s view on consistency is, once again, completely different form the average view from society. He sees consistency as a bad trait and something that everyone should shy away from. I myself believe that Emerson is right in believing consistency isn’t such a great thing. I believe people should be inconsistent and change their mind if they are given a certain amount of proof to change their mind. This is how Emerson sees consistency; he is very much against it and looks down upon those who do not change their minds.
Pray can I not, Though inclination be as sharp as will. My stronger guilt defeats my strong intent,” (III.iii.36-40). Claudius opens his soliloquy in a way that almost makes the reader feel sorry for him. A confession of his own immoral behavior to God that stems from a deep conviction. This is proof that Claudius is in a battle within himself.