Analysis Of God As A Creator and Sustainer
It is generally accepted in western philosophy that if God is a
creator then he must also by definition, due in part to his other
attributes, be a sustainer. This essay assumes that a God does exist
because otherwise, rather than analysing the attributes in question,
one regresses into providing evidence for God's existence which is the
purpose of arguments such as the ontological argument. Using evidence
and reason, this essay will see whether creatorship and sustainership
can be assigned to God and if they are necessary for His existence.
The main literary source of this evidence is from Hugh J McCann in his
essay on "Creation and Conservation" as noted in the bibliography.
This essay argues that the world's authorship should be assigned to
God given his omnipotence, and will show that it is logical and
necessary for him to sustain it having created it.
Firstly, it must be noted that in certain scenarios this essay will
assume that one of the other Judaeo-Christian attributes of God is a
fact, because there is not time to prove their necessity here.
However, if the proof is a crux of my argument, it will be dealt with.
Creatorship is an absolutely essential attribute of God in any
religion but especially the Judaeo-Christian perspective. This is
because, if God did not create, then who did and what power does God
in fact have? The first scenario, 'who did?' is an obvious
contradiction to the concept of God. If something other than God
created the universe then it would be greater than God and would thus
be defined as God. If one says that the universe is brute fact as
Bertrand ...
... middle of paper ...
...and was a free
choice on God's behalf. If God did create the universe, it seems
inevitable that he sustains because of his immutable nature.
Furthermore, because the only coherent concept of God depends on the
fact that God is illogically omnipotent, it follows that he is able to
be both transcendent and immanent at the same time. Thus God is able
to create ex nihilo and sustain the universe and still be coherent.
Bibliography
============
Peterson, Michael. & Hasker, William. Reason and Religious Belief.
Oxford: Oxford University Press 1998.
Quinn, Phillip L. A Companion To The Philosophy Of Religion. Trans.
Hugh J McCann. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers 1997Vardy, Peter. The
Puzzle Of God. Glasgow: Fount Paperbacks 1999
Ward, Keith. The Concept Of God. Great Britain: Basil Blackwell Oxford
1974
There is a stark parallel between the Vietnam War and the circumstances under which life is maintained on Potrero Hill. The soldiers in Gods Go Begging are poor, uneducated, and trapped fighting in a war they do not support; the boys on Potrero Hill are also poor, uneducated, and unable to escape the war into which they were born. They are victims of their circumstances and their government. Some of the boys that Jesse meets in Vietnam are there because they were drafted. Unable to get a deferment, either due to a lack of funds or because no higher education establishment would accept them, boys are forced to go off to war. Others, like Mendez, fled to the United States in order to escape the violence at home that resulted from the United States’
The continuous reading of Cornelius Plantinga Jr.’s book Engaging God’s World: A Christian Vision of Faith, Learning, and Living, has left me lingering on a lot of thoughts towards my relationship with God. In the conclusion of his book, Plantinga focuses on the redemptive qualities of God as well the the redemptive possibilities of mankind. Another main subject is the vocation in the Kingdom of God, correspondingly the Bible says in Romans 12:2, “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God- what is good and acceptable and perfect.” Plantinga (2002) states clearly, “given Jesus’ summons, his followers have always understood that to be a ‘Christ person’
Having faith is believing in things that you don’t see. According to the Meditations, Descartes gets rid of beliefs that he isn’t certain of and keeps the ones that are undoubtable. He tries to prove that God has must exist since we have such a clear and distinct idea of him. I believe it is impossible to prove without a doubt that God exists.
John 1: 1-18 focuses on how God is present in the world. John sees himself as a messenger for the word, which he can spread the good news about God’s creation. He knows he is not the messiah; however, he has goals of pointing people in the proper direction. At the beginning of the Book of John, there is a great amount of darkness that is over the world. People are stuck in the darkness, until they listen to word and follow the light of God. John tells the audience that true light is coming and will pour into their lives. Within the first few verses John shows that through God we can achieve great things. He shows brokenness in this
I ask a lot of questions; I’m a curious person. I once asked my mom why people die, why there are bad things in the world if God is so good and all-powerful. Her response was that we just couldn’t really understand why God does anything because we can’t comprehend God’s “master plan.” I’m sure that she was right, but that response is not very satisfying to a curious little boy. I saw an inconsistency in my understanding of reality, and I wanted to get things straight.
Hypothetically speaking, if there was a machine in the world that could able project the image of a person choosing to do tomorrow. Wouldn’t that entail tomorrow this person must do what was known in advance? In the end, despite the planning and deliberating, this person must choose exactly as the machine projected. The question we have to ask ourselves is this: “Does free will exist, or it just merely an illusion?” But, no machine with such capability existed in this world, and the only one with such power is God. The argument of God’s omniscient and human free will has gone for thousands of years, the core of this argument is if God was claimed to be all-knowing, hence in possession of infallible foreknowledge of human actions, therefore, humans should not have free will. The concept of God is all-knowing and human have free will is inherently contradictory, therefore, they cannot coexist. This argument implicated predestination and often resonated with the dilemma of determinism, because God was supposed to have given mankind free will.
The Sovereignty and Goodness of God is a primary source document written in the 17th century, by a well-respected, Puritan woman. This book, written in cahoots with Cotton and Increase Mather, puritan ministers, tells the story of her capture by Indians during King Phillip’s War (1675-1676). For three months, Mary Rowlandson, daughter of a rich landowner, mother of three children, wife of a minister, and a pillar of her community lived among “savage” Indians. This document is important for several reasons. First, it gives us insight into the attitudes, extremes, personalities and “norms” of the Puritan people we learn about in terms of their beliefs, and John Calvin’s “house on a hill”. Beyond that, despite the inevitable exaggerations, this book gives us insight into Indian communities, and how they were run and operated during this time.
The purpose of my essay will be to examine Descartes' argument for the existence of God. First, I will discuss Descartes’ proof for the existence of God then I will critique the argument of his existence. Lastly, I will point to some complications and problems that exist within the proof. Descartes’ proof of the existence of God is presented in the Third Meditation. He shapes his argument on the proof in the Second Meditation that in order for Descartes to think he must exist. From this specific examination he realizes his existence is very clear and distinct in his mind because of the fact he had just discovered his own existence. He then creates a rule that whatever things he sees are clear and distinct, are all true. Descartes begins his proof by splitting his thoughts into four categories, which consist of ideas, judgments, volitions, and emotions. He then further analyzes these categories to decide which thoughts might consist of error.
Looking different doesn’t mean you are different. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the master and his creation appear similar than one might think. Victor Frankenstein is a smart young man waiting to see what the world has to offer. When he was a little boy he would read books written by alchemists. Later on he decides to sets out on a mission to learn what he can about the world. Victor is like most boys, but he has plans that no one would ever think of. With science he has plans to create life. His fascination of acquiring knowledge has lead him up to this point. Victor’s creation shares remarkable similarities with Victor. Frankenstein illustrates that the monster and Victor are different in appearance, but are similar in terms of personality.
Many people state that they do not believe in any kind of god, that the world simply came into existence. However, this belief cannot hold true. Simply by examining nature and all of its intricate details, people stand unable to deny the presence of a Creator. Deep down, people cannot help but to feel that something greater than themselves exists. A Supreme Being- a god, but what kind of god exists? A god similar to Ares, the war-god of the Greeks? One who lusts for blood and destruction? Or a placid god, one parallel to Eirene, the Greek goddess of peace? Fabricated by mankind, these so called “gods” all bear flaws. The Bible, the Word of the Lord, remains the only book on earth that gives an account of the true God and His attributes. Through examination of the Word, readers will come to the realization that a just God exists, that He sends trials to his followers to develop their faith, and that He remains sovereign.
Divine Will is known as God’s will. Masha Allah is an Arabic phrase, that in translation means ‘god has willed it’. The phrase gives meaning to Arabic speaking Christian’s and Muslim’s, who use the word Masha Allah out of happiness and praise. The term God’s will, has been carried on throughout many different religions. Divine Command Theory is the meta-ethical theory that creates a foundation for philosophers as well as religions; it proposes that what is considered morally right or wrong is solely based on if God commands it. In this paper I am going to provide supporting facts and information of why we should not act morally solely based on God’s will.
Christianity is a religion which embodies the teachings of Jesus Christ. Christ is completely divine and mortal. He is God. He is truly unique in that He fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies of a coming Messiah. The aforementioned prophecies were explicitly communicated through the Bible, a guidebook for followers of Christianity. Specifically, the Old Testament is the foundation of many religions (i.e. Judaism, Islam and Christianity). The Bible (the Scripture) is composed of several books; each book is regarded as both a historical as well as allegorical source. The Bible is the canon of the Scripture, the basis of Christian beliefs. Every story chronicled throughout the scripture is factual. Although each story has a separate author, they all share a common link; they were inspired by way of revelation; therefore they are the truth. The Bible can be interpreted in three different ways: the divine oracle paradigm, the historical paradigm, or the literary paradigm. These biblical interpretive techniques are described in an article by Carl R. Holladay called "Contemporary Methods of Reading the Bible." Using "A Historical View of Texts" under the umbrella of the literary paradigm, particular claims of the scripture will secure credibility and further meaning. "A Historical View of Texts" does not take into account the Bible's development over time especially in terms of cause and effect how those shaped the texts; rather, it scrutinizes the Bible in its entirety, as a "finished product." More importance is given to literal than historical interpretation, "spatial rather than temporal (Holladay, p.138)." Historical references are only made when the text requires the reader or interpreter to do so. The net-effect of being oblivious to time whilst interpreting a piece is a purely literal breakdown of the text. This form of biblical analysis has two offshoots: diachronic and synchronic analysis. Holladay explains: In diachronic analysis, the interpreter thinks in terms of a linear time line along which the development of language and texts can be plotted. Synchronic analysis, by contrast, focuses on a single point in the time line and draws comparisons from other texts that are either roughly contemporary or otherwise relevant. In the literary paradigm, synchronic analysis may also involve comparing texts, or aspects of language, from different chronological periods, but doing so as if they occupied the same moment in time (Holladay, p.138).
Rene Descartes was born in La Haye in France in March 31, 1596. He was a mathematician, an scientific thinker, and an meta-physician. Descartes was the first major philosopher in the modern era. His views about knowledge, certainty, and relationship between mind and body have been very influential. Being a devout Catholic, Descartes, undeniably believed in God. He believed that the existence of God could be proved via reason. In this paper I will discuss what Descartes provided as a proof for existence of God.
The nature of God differs in every religion. Some religions have one, many, or even no God that they worship. However, no matter who or what they worship, there is always a spiritual aspect to their belief system. These spirits play a key role in influencing their actions in their everyday life.