Another aspect of the anti-kingship argument is that, in the case of the Bible, there should be no king because God had not planned for one. Overall, I feel that in this case, the anti-kingship argument is the best, because it is what follows God's word. God would have have provided for a king to have been named without having to had asked Him for a king. This is another good example of why we should follow God's Word, because if we follow His words,
While Sir Thomas More is the play’s ‘hero’, the Common Man is the ‘Man for All Seasons’. Do you agree? In Robert Bolt’s play, A Man For All Seasons, the lead character, Sir Thomas More, had the option to conform like the rest of society, however, he chose to make a choice that he felt was correct, and stood behind it until the end. With the courage to battle the King of England, Sir Thomas More was perceived to lead a silent attack on the Throne. His resolution to protest the unlawful marriage of King Henry and Anne Boleyn was rooted in Christian beliefs and morals.
He believes that the earth itself will “prove armed solder’s, ere her native king” (R.II.3.2-25). Richard appears convinced that his name is enough to protect him “arm, arm my name” (R.II.3.2-82). However, this is false; and perhaps god abandoned his duty to Richard because Richard abandoned his duty as king. A notion had emerged by the time of Richards rule, “constitutional monarchy [...] a sovereign who rules according to the constitution” (Bagdanor1) and this notion was documented via “The magna Carta 1215” (Bagdanor3). Significantly the Magna Carta advocated that a sovereign must rule in accordance with the law and
Soren Kierkegaard, a protestant Fideist, saw the biblical figure of Abraham as a hero and an example of the fideist position; this is because against all moral and ethical qualities, Abraham was willing to go against any kind of reason and sacrifice his own under the will of God. Strong rationalism and Fideism are the two extremes of each concept, the middle ground between those two is Critical Rationalism, believing that a balanced life allows for both reason and faith. Some things can be known by reason alone, whereas other things must be known by faith. History and reason through the bible will explain to us that Jesus lived and preached the kingdom of God, also performing
Thoreau on School Segregation Henry David Thoreau is known as one of history’s greatest critics of American government. Thoreau argues that a government should be run by the group with the most legitimate viewpoint, not the group with the most power. In 1849, he wrote Civil Disobedience in which he urges his readers to use their conscience to determine if a government is acting within its bounds or if it is committing injustice. Thoreau argues that a citizen must do what is right and not simply comply with the law’s demands. He cites the existence of unjust laws and declares that we as citizens should not be obligated to follow them.
Situation Ethics runs on the idea of agapeistic love which is the Christian concept of unconditional love, which is how the greater good works. Joseph Fletcher during the 1960’s was being opposed to be a radical Christian ethic. He argued that Agape is the only guiding principle in morality. This was taken from the golden rule, therefore situation ethics plays a large part in the religion Christianity. This act rejects legalistic (which is where the law comes from) for example this ethical theory could be for example ‘The Divine Command Theory’, however, it also undermines the idea of antinomian ethics (where there’s no law.)
Separation of church and state is a paraphrasing of Thomas Jefferson’s words when asked about the function and intent of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause, which are both in the first amendment. The establishment clause states that the government may not establish an official religion, and free exercise clause, which says that the government may not interfere with religious practices, (116). This is confusing because of contradicting ideas: “one nation, under God,” in the Pledge of Allegiance, and “in God we trust,” written on money. The idea of separation of church and state is important because this was a key idea that America was born on: that no religion is forced, and religion shall be practiced freely. 8.
“Will to Power” is a section that is parallel to “Thoughts on Life” because is discusses an individuals will to become powerful and make a personal stand for themselves. In “On Interpretation” he shares his view that there is no fact in the world because everything is an interpretation. As you can see all of these sections have a possible relation to Christianity and their set of beliefs. A particular problem I notice with Nietzsche’s aphorisms is that it creates an image for the reader to portray a Christian to be a weak mined helpless being. He basically degrades the entire Bible by saying that there is no fact in the world and everything is an interpretation.
Elizabeth Perricone 397 Dan Churchwell-Introduction to Philosophy Research Paper 1 2/22/2013 Anti-Intellectualism among Evangelicals Philosophers have been opposing, contemplating, and defending the idea of God for centuries. The majority of philosophers in today’s day and age take the arrogant view of pushing the concept of “God” out of their philosophy. They do this by their prideful standing against submission or conceiving a being higher than themselves and seeing those who believe in such a being as, leaning on a mere crutch that humanity has surpassed long ago. The poor opinion America’s culture has on the Christian Church’s intelligence is not surprising. Movies and TV shows have been portraying Christians as judgmental, mindless, know-it-alls for years.
The separation of powers however, acquired greater significance when John Locke, an 18th century philosopher argued that the executive and legislative powers should be separate for the sake of liberty. Montesquieu was a political philosopher of France and regarded as the chief architect of the principles of Separation of powers. He argued that ‘all would be lost if the same man or the same ruling body… were to exercise these three powers’. Montesquieu based his ideas of the British Constitution in the 18th Century, as he saw it. His ideas were, however, idealized and not entirely accurate, since he did not appear to understand the exact roles of the various participants in the British constitutional set up.