Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Christian view on forgiveness
Religious beliefs about forgiveness
Christian beliefs on forgiveness
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Christian view on forgiveness
The video Collision is a collection of clips from debates between Christopher Hitchens and Douglass Wilson. Hitchens, the atheist, raised many objections to Christianity, which are addressed in this paper. They are with God anything is permissible; the laws of physics have never been broken and galaxies simply hold themselves together; and that if there was an eternal and unchanging God we would be living in a totalitarian universe. The first objection, with God anything is permissible, means that with God, people can do anything they want because they will always be forgiven. That is not the case. God will forgive people, but only if they ask for forgiveness and truly regret what they did. He also holds Christians accountable for their actions. Since Christians are supposed to be examples of Jesus, we are held at a much higher standard of behavior, as stated in Ephesians 5:3-4. So with God, everyone is held to a certain …show more content…
This also means that we would have no true free will. Totalitarianism actually is a political system where all authority is in the hands of the government. In these societies, all aspects of life are run by the government. Actually, God is always there for us, but not in the negative way that Hitchens meant for this statement to be understood. God is always looking out for us and has our best interests in mind, unlike totalitarian governments, whose interests lie in maintaining power. However, if God really is forcing us to live in a totalitarian system, then why does God not force everyone to believe in Him? Why do we have this choice available to us? The answer to both of these questions is that we are not living in a totalitarian system with an eternal, unchanging ruler, but we are instead living with the freedom to choose what to believe
“The Hitchhiker,” by Lucille Fletcher, narrates the unusual happenings Ronald Adams, the protagonist, experiences, while driving along the deserted and densely populated roads of the United States. Adams continually observes a hitchhiker, whom he first saw, having almost hit him, on the Brooklyn Bridge, and apprehends traveling on the highways, for fear this phantasmal man shall reappear. Struggling to grasp reality once receiving news of his mother’s breakdown after the death of her son, Ronald Adams, he reverts his attention to the hitchhiker, the realization of never having been who he thought he was, and being alone without protection from the traveler, both wrench his mind in two. Lucille Fletcher uses suspense to build the plot of, “The
The controversial topic involving the existence of God has been the pinnacle of endless discourse surrounding the concept of religion in the field of philosophy. However, two arguments proclaim themselves to be the “better” way of justifying the existence of God: The Cosmological Argument and the Mystical Argument. While both arguments attempt to enforce strict modus operandi of solidified reasoning, neither prove to be a better way of explaining the existence of God. The downfall of both these arguments rests on commitment of fallacies and lack of sufficient evidence, as a result sabotaging their validity in the field of philosophy and faith.
Joseph Heller's novel Catch-22 deals with many issues that mankind is prone to deal with. One issue that is raised is the subject of theism versus atheism.
The Canadian philosopher J.L. Schellenberg has recently put forward an argument for atheism based on the idea that God is supposed to be perfectly loving and so would not permit people to be deprived of awareness of his existence. If such a deity were to exist, then, he would do something to reveal his existence clearly to people, thereby causing them to become theists. Thus, the fact that there are so many non-theists in the world becomes good reason to deny the existence of God conceived of in the given way. I first raise objections to Schellenberg’s formulation of the argument and then suggest some improvements. My main improvement is to include among the divine attributes the property of strongly desiring humanity’s love. Since to love God requires at least believing that he exists, if God were to exist, he must want widespread theistic belief. The fact that so many people lack such belief becomes a good argument for atheism with respect to God conceived of in the given way. Some objections to this line of reasoning are considered, in particular the claim that God refrains from revealing himself to people in order to avoid interfering with their free will or to avoid eliciting inappropriate responses from them or some other (unknown) purpose. An attempt is made to refute each of these objections.
Evans, C. Stephen. Critical Dialog in Philosophy of Religion. 1985. Downers Grove, IL. InterVarsity Press. Taken from Philosophy of Religion - Selected Readings, Fourth Edition. 2010. Oxford University Press, NY.
Charles, T. (n.d.). A Response to HJ McCloskey’s “On Being An Atheist”. Retrieved from Carry your cross: http://charlestinsley.wordpress.com/2012/12/17/a-response-to-hj-mccloskeys-on-being-an-atheist/
Hick, John. Disputed Questions in Theology and the Philosophy of Religion. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. Print.
...hal. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Called to Love: Christian Witness Can Be the Best Response to Atheist Polemics." America 198 (2008): 23. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 8 Dec. 2013.
The existence of god has been relentlessly debated with many strong arguments. This essay will primarily discuss the most prevalent arguments for and against the existence of a higher being. Although there are many strong arguments for both atheism and theism, ultimately the theist point of view is greater justified morally and logically.
In “William Wilson”, Edgar Allan Poe teases his readers throughout the entirety of story with hints about its unexpectedly expected conclusion. Through figuratively-infused passages, Poe meticulously leads the reader to the front steps of the story’s ending without ever truly revealing the conclusion until the final sentences. Within those final sentences, the question of who the second William Wilson truly is, is answered, immediately transforming the story from a battle between two physical beings with both the same name and appearance into an internal battle staged within the mind of one man with conflicting desires. In order to create this dramatic and essential shift, Poe externalizes the protagonist’s internal struggle by blurring the
...ferences and similarities as its predecessor atheism. Individuals and groups continue to assert their ideologies through their writings and critics continue to rebut these claims. As discussed, new atheism has shown evident different approaches in showing how religion has detrimental effects on society using events such as the many previous wars that have been initiated due to issues concerning religion. New atheism also addresses how these views and conceptions are forced upon children which highlight the significant developments of the ideas that have emerged since traditional atheistic times. By understanding how atheism and new atheism has developed and evolved, it can also be understood that there will be an endless and continuous arrivals of more diverse interpretations, approaches and goals of new atheism and issues revolving around religion in the future.
There are different viewpoints on the question “what is the universe made of?” I think that both science and religion offer their own explanation to this topic and they sometimes overlap, which creates contradictions. Therefore, I do not agree with Stephen Jay Gould’s non-overlapping magisterial, which claims that there is a fine line separating science from religion. That being said, I think the conflict between science and religion is only in the study of evolution. It is possible for a scientist to be religious if he is not studying evolution, because science is very broad and it has various studies. In this essay, I will talk about the conflict between religion and science by comparing the arguments from Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins. I argue that science and religion do overlap but only in some area concerning evolution and the cosmic design. Furthermore, when these overlaps are present it means that there are conflicts and one must choose between science and religion.
In today’s society, many topics create a very substantial amount of controversy between different groups of people. From abortion to the healthcare reform, there are countless topics of discussion. One of the major and ongoing controversial topics in the religious society is the Big Bang theory versus Creation. One side of the controversy is, predominately, the scientific community, with the other end obviously being the religious community.
ABSTRACT: Curiously, in the late twentieth century, even agnostic cosmologists like Stephen Hawking—who is often compared with Einstein—pose metascientific questions concerning a Creator and the cosmos, which science per se is unable to answer. Modern science of the brain, e.g. Roger Penrose's Shadows of the Mind (1994), is only beginning to explore the relationship between the brain and the mind-the physiological and the epistemic. Galileo thought that God's two books-Nature and the Word-cannot be in conflict, since both have a common author: God. This entails, inter alia, that science and faith are to two roads to the Creator-God. David Granby recalls that once upon a time, science and religion were perceived as complementary enterprises, with each scientific advance confirming the grandeur of a Superior Intelligence-God. Are we then at the threshold of a new era of fruitful dialogue between science and religion, one that is mediated by philosophy in the classical sense? In this paper I explore this question in greater detail.
This passage captures the essence of how the average religious person views atheism. Atheism is probably the least popular and least understood philosophical position in America today. It is often approached with fear and mistrust, as if one were about to investigate a doctrine that advocates a ...