Doubt being first, but then overcoming that obstacle and then seeking reconciliation for the previous doubt. I will tackle these topics in the order in which I believe they happen, and then discuss how this relates to myself and how this class has helped me get to this point, having gained a better understanding of the scriptures. II. Part One – Doubt a. Theological Definition People can doubt many things throughout their life; people, claims, objects, time, situations and sometimes even facts. While there are many people who do not stray or question their faith in God or Jesus Christ, there are still also many that do continue to retain doubts.
That's why I preach my way through entire books of the Bible, dealing carefully with each verse and phrase--even though that occasionally means spending time in passages that don't readily lend themselves to anecdotal or motivational messages. I am grateful to the Lord for the way He has used this exposi- tory approach in our church and in the lives of our radio listeners. But now and then someone tells me frankly that my preaching needs to be less doctrinal and more practical. Practical application is vital. I don't want to minimize its importance.
Due to the fact that this book indeed deals with the historical roots of Pentecostalism, Dayton has the prerequisites to write this well informed and objective work. After reading the work, it is obvious that Dayton intends this book to be read by an academic audience. If one is not familiar with Pentecostal faith or doctrine, the text is difficult to grasp. The subject itself is more intended for the Christian scholar meaning that it deals with the history of the Pentecostal church. To the majority of the laity, this would not be desired knowledge unless one expressed a keen interest in the subject.
Dawkins and Aquinas: Theology Whether it’s argumentative or sentimental, an author always aims to get a significant truth across to the reader. In the novel “The God Delusion,” Richard Dawkins analyzes many theories that theologians have developed about the existence of God and essentially squanders them. Through his unique sense of humor and his idea of “logic”, he gives reasons of why the theories of Thomas Aquinas, and other theories as well, are not well developed and are incorrect. Although he does raise some interesting points in his arguments, he does not address enough issues to completely reject the theories of God’s existence. God has a very broad meaning and the meaning varies from person to person.
As I read the book I found myself questioning my understanding of some of the very things he questioned, such as metaphors, white lies and rhetorical questions. In the matter of metaphors, he suggested that they should be considered lies because they were not true at all. Christopher himself said, “The word "metaphor" means carrying something from one place to another and it is when you describe something by using a word for something that it isn't. This means that the word "metaphor" is a metaphor. He also mentioned a list of metaphors such as “people do not have skeletons in their cupboards”.
It is important to identify and understand the way they study it, not assume that because their practices don’t conform to our way of thinking, that other ways are wrong. Another obstacle faced by scholars is preconceptions of how we think religion should be practised to conform to our understanding. A
Believers practicing loving God with all their mind would be a witness to this world and even a way of reaching out in compassion and gentleness we have left behind by burying our arguments in our Bibles and not engaging the questions raised by the lost. Understanding where Evangelicals have fallen intellectually will help foster obedience to Christ’s command to love God with all of our mind. The major arguments held by critics Richard Hofstadter, George M. Marsden, and Alister McGrath, declare modern Evangelicalism anti-intellectual. Some of the main reasons for this are the average Evangelicals fear of defending their faith, the separation of the spiritual and secular, and the slothfulness Evangelicals have to
Cameron Farrell God’s Involvement in the Creation of Right and Wrong The argument pertaining to God’s involvement in the existence of right and wrong is very complex, as one can gather from analyzing the text. The general idea the author is trying to convey to the reader is that it is difficult to say that God is good while also saying he created right and wrong, and specified the differences between the two. The writer is not trying to argue against the differences between right and wrong, but more so the situation that exists within the difference between the two. The situation at hand is if the differences of right and wrong were God’s decision to create, or not. If God did create the difference between right and wrong then that means that for God, initially, there wasn’t a difference between to two.
He talks about our consciences, both authoritarian and humanistic. He even goes into detail about why it’s better to Garra 2 obey out of love then out of fear. Erich also states that “For centuries, obedience was insisted as a virtue, and disobedience was insisted as a vice.”(Fromm 683). This statement implies that obeying was the right thing to do, and disobeying was the wrong thing to do. He even uses religion and terms that deal with religion throughout his article for more evidence.
Some have criticized James in that they thought he was teaching that salvation was by works alone, but in reality he is complementing Paul’s teaching of salvation by faith. The two go hand in hand. Salvation by faith results in holy living (Harper, 1967). The book is included to help believers put their faith into action. It is not enough to talk the talk but to also live it (James 2:14, New Living Translation).