They felt the Native Californians were pagans who were desperately in need of conversion to Christianity for the salvation of their souls. This conversion was a high priority and was accomplished through baptism, instruction in Catholic rituals, moral education, inclusion into the mission community, and enforcement of strict discipline. The Indians were worked hard and paid little. The missions were dependent on native labor to construct buildings, tend the crops, care for the animals and produce goods. The Spanish saw the native neophytes as little more than slaves, who cost nothing to acquire and nothing to maintain.
Once the individual is baptized, he or she is committed to keep the Ordnung. I think all these rules in the Ordnung are just a way to create uniformity in a community, where all its members dress, live and act within strict parameters. Any rules created in this community are to enforce the qualities of humility, modesty, God’s will and purity, doing everything to keep them separate from the rest of the world. Amish use these rules as a way to visually show others their beliefs. The Amish believe that God has called them to be completely separate from the world and its negative influences.
First, he focuses on their politeness in speech, in which they give importance and listen, without interruptions, to what others have to say, unlike Europeans who constantly had disputes and left speakers “hoarse in calling to order”. He also defends the Indian’s civility by exalting their tolerance and acceptance towards what others say, without showing signs of disapproval, disbelief, or refusal. Franklin mentions a situation where the Indians acknowledged the Christian religious views and listened to their stories with respect, despite the fact that they differed greatly form the Indian religious beliefs. The Swedish minister—whom spoke of the Christian
They say it is conservative and when a community is cooperating such as practising worship together in church it creates a social harmony among everybody. Religion often promotes love and peace, these are positive attributes that would create a good society when practised. It works by religion helping people choose the right moral decisions. An example derived from Christianity would be when followers look into the accounts from the holy Bible where they can read passages from Jesus’ teachings and access guidance “ What would Jesus do?” Jesus did good things, so the people that follow him will create a social harmony. Religions such as Christianity offer social norms and rules with the “10 commandments” such rules as “do not steal” have become universal.
Jesus is aware of the power whom had gone forth from him and that her faith had been made well. Although the woman was in fear for what she had done, Jesus’ response was to go in peace and be healed. Here is one example where we gather Jesus was willing to help those in need because their faith had come from the heart and not through words. With all who witnessed, Jesus healing, in the crowds and were astonished, it helped spread the good word. Jesus was a compassionate man who was never afraid to spread his faith, or respond to the faith in others.
This problem had a big contribution to the split as they couldn’t agree on anything, and if they did, it was because their national interests were at risk. These policies show how the two countries also had different beliefs in which direction the country should go. Mao was more for self-sufficiency, which can be seen in his policies like the Hundred Flowers Campaign, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Whereas in the USSR a social
Christianity teaches that people should not work on the day of Sabbath as God himself didn’t and that it should be the day of rest. However, Jesus didn’t follow these rules and decided to do the most loving thing and heal a sick person on this day even though he wasn’t supposed to. Some could argue that situation ethics and its ideas about love fit into Christian theology perfectly because even Jesus broke rules to do the most loving thing possible. Johns part of the gospels state that “God is love” and from this we can interpret that Christians must live their lives by trying to be Omnibenevolent and doing the most loving thing in all situations no matter how extreme. Fletcher incorporated the quote from the gospels into his ethical theory and devised six propositions and four principles.
This exposes that god was more worried about his people than the Sumerian gods. Overall this shows that the events leading to the flood might have been entirely different, but the purpose was the same: to cleanse the world. The Sumerian people had an entirely different relationship with their gods than the Hebrews had with their god. To start with, the Sumerians were polytheistic and their gods were not believed to be flawless. They also had more of a casual relationship with their gods.
H.G. Wells reveals the shortcomings of England’s ethos through the Time Traveller’s character. His selfishness, lack of morality, sexism and classism is displayed through his attitude toward Weena and his partisanship toward the Eloi. His desire to bring Weena back to his time is a reflection of a prevalent attitude in white culture that does not respect ones surroundings but sees them merely as a resource. The Time Traveller does not see Weena as a fellow living being, he sees her as research material.
But for Hobbes the meaning of war is not simply that of a battle, but also the threat of a battle to come. Thus in the state of nature man finds himself in circumstances in which no one rules over him, but this is far from desirable given Hobbes account of human nature, and his definition of war. The first reason Hobbes gives for the state of nature being far from desirable is that human beings are naturally appetitive. He describes mankind as egoistic individuals motivated by their ever-changing and inexhaustible desires. Human beings are slaves to their desires; their actions are determined by the will of their strongest present desire.