Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between morals and religion
Relationship of morality and religion
Relationship of morality and religion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The relationship between morals and religion
Mere Christianity In C.S Lewis’s Mere Christianity, Lewis provides his thoughts and beliefs on the subject of Christianity by setting up a logical breakdown of why Christians and humans in general behave the way they do. The first book Right And Wrong As A Clue To The Meaning Of The Universe has a lot to be discussed with in it. It describes the simple law of human nature and the concept of right and wrong.
I believe that Lewis is right when he talks about there being a moral code. I think that each individual society has a set of standards they go by, people might not even be sure why they follow them or who made them; all they know is what they were taught by their elders growing up. For the most part, these sets conventions are not questioned they are simply followed in order to conform to one’s society. A statement he made that I thought was an extremely valid point to bring up was that we often judge one another pretty harshly thinking that one set of
…show more content…
Buddhists don’t pray to any specific God like being, they follow strict teachings of the Buddha and hope to seek enlightenment. Buddhism, in my opinion, is completely impersonal. To reach enlightenment they must learn to become detached and accept that there is evil in the world. The four noble truths say to accept that suffering comes from desire (wanting things) so in order to stop suffering one must learn to do without and this will bring them closer to their ultimate goal. This extremely different from the Christian way of praying to a God who is good and sort of ignoring the evil in the world.
Lewis’s views on Christianity were very insightful through out the book and the way he broke up his thoughts were structured and organized. The information was fair, well thought out and it felt very fact based. C.S Lewis is an intelligent man and I feel that I learned quite a bit about social and moral laws and how they play into
The book Under the Feet of Jesus by Helena Maria Viramontes shows you the story of Estrella and her family and the struggles they face as migrant workers. Among all the symbolism in the book the one that stand out the most is Petra’s statue of Christ, which symbolizes the failure of religion and the oppressive nature of the Christian religion especially in minorities. Throughout the book, Estrella’s mother, Petra relies on superstitions and religion to get her through the hardships in life. In tough times, she turns to the statue and prays for guidance. Her thirteen-year-old daughter Estrella is the first of her family to realize that she needs to stop relying on religion and take control of her life. This brings in a wave of self-empowerment, not only for Estrella but eventually for all the characters as well. In the book, you’re able to see how religion exemplifies the failures of religion in minorities and how it hinders the growth of the characters while helping some of them.
“Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it” (Lewis, “Mere Christianity”). C.S. Lewis, a renowned broadcaster, essayist, lecturer, novelist, theologian, and Christian apologist, used his writing to create a significant effect on the Christian movement. During his lifetime, Lewis went through an amazing transformation from an avid Atheist to a strong Christian, and dedicated his career to sharing the truths of Christianity in his writing. Lewis utilized Christian apologetics to explain and defend his views of Christianity, and made the idea of Christianity more accessible to
C.S. Lewis begins his book, “Mere Christianity”, by introducing the Law of Right and Wrong or the Laws of Nature. This, however, arises a question. What is the Law of Nature? The Law of Nature is the known difference between right and wrong. That is, mans distinction between what is right and what is wrong. “This law was called the Law of Nature because people thought that everyone knew it and did not need to be taught it”(18). Lewis relates the law to how we treat others. We treat others the way we want to be treated and if they treat us poorly in return we become agitated and annoyed with them. He states that we become a society of excuses when something goes wrong. He goes on to say that we want to behave in a certain way when in reality we do the opposite of what is right or what is wrong. We are humans and humans have primal instincts. We are all capable of using our instincts to do right or wrong. Lewis uses an example of a drowning man to prove this point. When one sees a man in trouble two desires or instincts kick into play, to save the man or ignore him because the situation at hand could endanger you. However, there in another impulse that says help the man. With this comes a conflict of instincts. Do you run and forget about it or do you jump in and help. Most people will help even if the situation is going to endanger their life. This is just one way of seeing moral law. The right in a situation will mostly always prevail over the wrong. “Men ought to be unselfish, ought to be fair. Not that men are selfish, nor that they like being unselfish, but they ought to be”(30). We are creatures of habit and logic. Lewis believes that the moral law is not taught to us rather known by us instinctively. He also believes that the law is real. The law is our behaviors in life via good or bad. Lewis states, “there is something above and beyond the ordinary facts of men’s behavior”(30). This opens Lewis to believe that the natural law is both alive and active in mans life today. Lewis goes on to say that the law must be something above mans behavior. He begins to relate this to the creation of the world.
In The Meaning of Jesus N.T. Wright and Marcus Borg present different views on issues relating to how Jesus is viewed. While Borg and Wright do agree on central ideals of Christianity, Borg tends to have more liberal views, whereas Wright holds more conservative views.
In chapter five, Lewis brings up sexual morality. First of we should talk about how the world makes sex. They makes sex seem as though it is only to please the body, but that is wrong. It is not bad to have pleasure when having sex but that is not all that is was made for. What sex is really for is to make children, not to pleasures your ever lust.
C.S. Lewis was the 20th century’s most popular proponent of faith based on reason. As a child, he created an imaginary world where personified animals came to life, and later, he wrote the book, Chronicles of Narnia. How did he transform from a boy fascinated with anthropomorphic animals into a man of immense faith? His transformation to the Christian religion happened as his fame began to flourish. People wrote him, asking him about his claims about the truth of Christianity (Belmonte, Kevin). As I attended the drama of Freud’s Last Session, I was engrossed into the plot of the play and was constantly thinking about how it pertained to the objectives of the World Literature class. I not only connected the content of the play to its context, but I also reached out to apply the context to a discussion on a broader scale. I then discovered why the context of literature is imperative for true understanding of the w...
In C.S. Lewis’ essays Learning in War Time and On Living in an Atomic Age there is a reoccurring theme. The theme displayed in both essays was not to be distracted in times of crisis and continue living. Lewis believes one must work through the threats faced in this world. Working and living through these times consists of one acting to the fullest humanistic potential. The humanistic acts Lewis believes one should abide by are to enjoy life, to seek knowledge, to question everything, and discover the power of the “Creator,” God. Following the route mapped out by God will lead us to a fulfilling life ending when He is ready for us in His kingdom. God’s Divine Providence is what upholds our natural world. One must ignore the threats of life and focus on God’s Divine Providence.
My discourse community is Christianity. My discourse community involves people who believe in God and lives up to the guidelines of the Bible. The people from this community are trying to enhance themselves by learning the Bible. An impeccable member attends church, strive for better lives, and aim to help others spread and disseminate words of wisdom. There are several reasons why Christianity is a discourse community. My discourse community has all of the six characteristics defined by John Swales. In my paper, I will describe how my discourse community meets all of Swales characteristics.
There are several aspects to consider when exploring the Christian worldview. There are many facets or denominations and they each have their own distinct beliefs and practices, but they all share the same fundamental beliefs. In this Paper we will explore the character of God, His creation, humanity and its nature, Jesus’ significance to the world, and the restoration of humanity, as well as my beliefs and the way that I interact with Christianity and my personal worldview.
According to Odia, (2014), Christianity's center of gravity shift from Europe into the global south over the last 100 years has been the most dramatic since the advent of Christianity 2,000 years ago. Quantitatively, Odia also posits that it may also be the largest shift in religious affiliation that has ever occurred, anywhere.
“Christianity, along with all other theistic belief systems, is the fraud of the age. It serves to detach the species from the natural world, likewise, each other. It supports blind submission to authority[control of the masses].”(Zeitgeist 2007) In this essay, we will explore the different roots of religion and the plagiarism that Christianity and a number of different religions have committed.
What is Christianity and why has it been able to develop into a continuously growing and evolving religion?
My readings on Humanism makes vivid an issue that I thought was a part of a cultural conflict in my local UU community where I had indicated I had not left the Catholic and the Mormon Church for another brand of the same constructions. As I reflect on the readings, I am inclined to think that this is the nature of traditional humanism to entertain the rigidity of what's familiar.
One of the central developments was to establish what principles is shared by people of different faiths, as Christianity is not completely universal nor necessarily natural in all of its principles set forth. Grotius took part in initiating this development as he denounced the notion of universal Christianity, and suggested a better degree of validity would be possible under a less biased set of moral principle (Coleman, pg. 67). This development was found to be what is most “reasonable” for mankind by modern theorists such as John Finnis, yet branching from the notions set forth by prior theorists. Finnis’ theory operates in the absence of a divine figure, yet still holds a universal standard of what is “good.” This reasonable notion is further evaluated as moral principles are naturally embedded into human beings, and a particular system such as religion is not necessary to reflect such (Coleman, pg.
Lewis says some folks object to the fact that there is a moral law. Some believe that this is no more than our herd instinct that has been developed. Other say what we call moral law is just a social convention, something that is put into us by education. The author points out that the way each opponent defends his side really shows that there is a right and wrong independent of what people think. Even though the idea of decent behavior makes us suspect whether there is a real natural law of behavior at all, the author concludes that the things we are bound to think about when we explain the differences, really prove just the