Some scientists will tell you that discovering things about the Earth does not mean that God didn't create it. And some scientist will tell you that discovering things about the nature of the Earth does not prove that God doesn’t exist. A lot of religious scholars can tell you the same thing. Both will tell you that if God loves us as much as the Bible says so, then He doesn't want us to forever remain ignorant. If you find things in the Bible and read them literally to justify your refusal to use the reasoning abilities that God has so graciously provided for you (the same reasoning used in science), then you are the one going against God, not the scientists.
This primarily means the Bible for some, although as Catholics we accept as equally true the teachings of the Apostles handed down through the bishops and known as Tradition. For both the Bible and Tradition, we believe we must obey because the teachings come from God, not because they are wise, will ensure a long life or prosperity. Christian ethics may be contrasted with Utilitarianism, whose adherents simply "do what works." Utilitarian ethics allowed the Holocaust, slavery, and totalitarian Communism. Because Christians do not believe humans made themselves or occurred "naturally," we do not believe we are free to do whatever su... ... middle of paper ... ...?
In his 95 Thesis he established that salvation is within oneself and that individual faith in God is very important . But the church did not see it that way. The church believed that the only way to atone for your sins were through indulgences. Indulgences were paying for the removal of your sins. Martin Luther was later excommunicated from the church.
Which raises a question: how does one really know there are no losses believing in God? Pascal fails to mention other types of religion because his argument is based on a Christian God. What if an atheist loving God existed? One may argue that there may be more to lose; therefore, he/she will oppose Pascal’s Wager due to the fact that there may be more than one God. In today’s modern world, there are believers as well as non-believers who constantly question the existence of God.
Religious believers have been taught to believe and dedicate their life to god, if someone is to prove the non-existence of god they, in their mind they are not virtuous. Science and religion are in conflict solely because they oppose each other, they, are polar opposites. Science believes in facts and hates unreliable evidence whereas religion is all about faith and in believing in the word of god without proof. The conflict is there because no matter what the beliefs do not match up, one relies on faith whereas the other relies on facts. Now how is one with either view supposed to accept being either faithful or factual?
Religions like Christianity believe that our body is like a temple that houses the holy spirt and we should not pollute it with vaccines. For example, a vaccine is a manmade invention used to alter our immune system to protect us from disease, and the immune system is a gift from God that protects our body from diseases. So when we trust in vaccines in which are made by humans we are saying that God didn’t make us right and so we need to correct him. By doing that we are questioning God and that is against Christianity. Another religion that has historically been against vaccines is Jehovah Witnesses, because they believe the human body is sacred and whatever kind of disease you have is a gift from God and you should not contaminate your body with other human/
Contrary to popular belief, there is not so much a “war on Christianity” as there is a war on the first amendment by the religious and atheists. However, if we are to have this discussion properly, we must assert which is better for moral and ethical teaching. Paul Kurtz in his article, Atheism Teaches Morality and Ethics, argues from the view that—though it is quite obvious from the title—atheism is the best source for these teachings; Stephen J. Pope argues from the opposite view in his article, Only Religion Can Teach Morality and Ethics. Although I do not believe either writer quite gets it right, these two present quality perspectives from both sides of the aisle. The consensus between both writers seems to be that there is no possibility
—God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived. —That which can be conceived not to exist is not God." Anybody can see why God can seem to be considered inconceivable, but some may agree if someone take the time to get to know God then it will be easier to see that God is conceivable. In suggestion, Sin is one reason God sent Jesus to live on this earth, so we can see with our own eyes that there is a God, but at the same time, there will be those who still choose not to believe in God's existence. The weakness of Anselm argument is, he says he believes in God and seeks God at the same time Anselm thinks that it is hard to seek God when he cannot see God.
The Epistle to Diognetus and To Scapula were texts written to defend Christianity against accusers of Greece and Persecutors of Rome. Even though the two texts are discussing about the same matter, both authors approaches the problem with a different attitude and method. While the author of epistle talks more about the Christian ways and how God is truly the creator and ruler of heaven and earth, the author of To Scapula talks about how the Christians don’t want any trouble and that killing them will anger God. After looking at the two sources, The Epistle to Diognetus provides more insight to the Christian life and is more persuading to defend against accusers. The author of The Epistle To Diognetus intended this text to defend Christianity against its accusers.
A third reason people believe in God is because of their personal religious experiences. Non-believers might argue that such people are mistaken into thinking they have had an experience, but have not had one at all. One reason that non-believers say that God does not exist is because of the amount of evil in the world. Christians would argue against this view admitting that there is evil the world, but that this is because God gives people free will and they make the wrong decisions. Christians believe that worship is worthwhile because they believe that it brings them closer to God.