Since we know evil and suffering is a necessary bi-product of human life, we must acknowledge that evil does exist. This proves problematic as it then brings into question the traditional theist’s view of God. However, no traditional theist would accept Hume’s conclusions because it denies God of His perfection. There are ways of sidestepping this issue such as, atheism, deism and polytheism, but none are accepted by traditional theists, and are therefore not a true solution to the problem. A theodicy is seen as a true solution as it defends God’s nature in the face of evil and suffering.
They believe that the Bible is the Word of God and consider its 66 books to be divinely inspired and historically accurate. Even though they are Christian-based, the group believes that the traditional Christian Churches have deviated from the true teachings of the Bible, and do not work in full harmony with God. The traditional Christian Churches, for their part, do not regard the Jehovah’s Witness as a mainstream Christian denomination because it rejects the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, which it regards as both irrational and unbiblical. When we talk about prejudice and discrimination, they have been subject to a lot since they first came out in the 19th century. So let us talk about the “Nazi” times.
He asserts that the Holy Spirit makes the Bible authoritative and evangelicals make the mistake in stating that general revelation should be rendered inoperative because of the curse of sin that was imputed to man after the fall of Adam and Eve. He feels that general revelation should not need the help of special revelation simply because man is prone to the curse of sin and is incapable of understanding or seeing God in His creation. Thomas C. Oden in his article, "Without Excuse: Classic Christian Exegesis of General Revelation", seems to agree with Diehl from an exegetical standpoint when he asserts that the doctrine of general revelation has suffered due to the lack of proper exegetical work done on the
Many people believe that morality is dependent is religion and morality is based on the religious scholars and holy books. There is no point in morality of God hadn’t set the moral values in the first place. However, some also say that humans only behave morally because they’re scared of God and any punishment to follow. There are several approaches that are taken when attempting to work out the relationship between religion and morality. ‘Is what is pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved?’ In Plato’s Euthyphro dilemma, Plato is asking ‘is x good because God loves it or does God love x because x is good?’ An example of this is murder; is murder wrong because God says it is or is murder wrong because it is wrong morally?
Furthermore, private experiences are, ultimately, terribly subjective and will be dependent on a person’s religious stance or even their sobriety at the time of event. William James’ point regarding the experience to bring a positive outcome is puzzling if you examine the case of Abraham being told to execute his son; whilst God eventually told him not to proceed, the event would not have brought about a good disposition which goes against James’ criteria. Ultimately, I feel that these points alone prove that arguments for religious experience are
Likewise, many Christians pray loudly and serve publicly just so everyone can see how godly they are being. However, this is specifically forbidden in Matthew chapter six, which states, “Do not be like the hypocrites, for they like to stand and pray… that they can be seen by others.” The church as a whole is ignorant of this verse in practice; quite often, prayers are said for the benefit of one’s own reputation, not one’s relationship with God. In this way, Tartuffe accurately symbolizes the Christian church from an atheist view. Orgon, on the other hand, represents Christians, or church followers. Orgon had loved Tartuffe like a son, and he had bought in to Tartuffe’s display of religiousness.
RUNNING HEAD: Luther’s 95 Theses Luther’s 95 Theses HIST 101 Western Civilizations Instructor: Dorothy Slane Leslie Brooks October 2, 2011, Thesis In the 95 Thesis Luther is basically discussing his disappointment with the Catholic Church. He did not approve of the way the pope was granting partial remission of time to be spent in purgatory or any other consequences that may be given to the people because of a sin they have committed. The church was basically practicing in the selling of indulgences when they did not have the right to remit and penance for any sin or guilt. That was the sole job of their God and no one else could produce that right or charge for a right that they do not even possess. Luther was also disappointed in man and felt that they should take the consequences that go with their sins and hope that these lessons could be taught to them before it would become too late.
The terrible irony is that conscience is a Christian notion, here being abused in the name of Christianity. Danforth says to Proctor in Act Four, ‘Your soul alone is the issue here, Mister, and you will prove its whiteness or you cannot live in a Christian country’ (p. 122, act 4). Here Danforth is telling Proctor that he isn’t worthy of living in a Christian country unless he signs a confession that is a lie and then lies about other people as well by saying he saw them with the devil. All of this, of course, goes directly against Proctor’s conscience and his own Christian beliefs (‘Thou shalt not bear false witness’). 4.
Luther's teachings successfully undermined the Catholic Church's attempt to gain economic prosperity by means of remitting sins and shortening visits to purgatory for profit's sake. He accomplished this by preaching that faith alone can bring salvation. People during this time were completely blown away by this because traditional beliefs at this time did not correspond with Luther’s ideas. He taught that man's salvation is totally dependent upon god and is in no way related to the good acts you do in your life. (381-383,
And also like Danforth and Abby, he uses this logic when there is no good argument to make. When thinking about Parris's use of fallacies, one must consider the point in the novel when Parris was deflecting Proctor's claims for the defense of his wife: "You are in all respects a Gospel Christian? (yes)... Such a christian that will not come to church but once in a month"(Miller 90) Parris uses no viable argument, but rather resorts to attacking the person the person being Proctor. The fact that he uses Proctor's church attendance as an argument, is very irrelevant to the case itself.