Descartes blames us and says that it is our errors and God has not given us defective faculties. It is the misuse of our freedom of will to assent to things, which we don’t perceive clearly or distinctly. In fact the lack or imperfection lies in the operation of the will and it is not due to the faculties, which we have received from God. Descartes proved the existence of God by saying that since existence is inseparable from God, he really exists and God can never deceive. Works Cited Descartes, Rene.
This counters everything that conservative Christians argue: that a society without God would be “hell on earth: rampant with immortality, full of evil, and teeming with depravity.” Neither of these extreme philosophies seem to be correct. A society that claims that there is no God, can, in fact be pleasant, as is evident with Sweden, Denmark and Scandinavia. However, a society without God cannot exist. This is because even if there is no external belief in God within a society, God still exists in that society. Camus once stated, “The silence of the universe has led me to conclude that the world is without meaning."
In a twisted sense, Satan is necessary in our lives to tempt us. Without his temptation, there would be no choice but to follow the glory of God. No living person can live a perfect life like Christ did. This means that man had a definite destination for them, and it wasn’t Heaven. Heaven is perfect and cannot be tainted by people who are born sinners.
The affect of the book on me was so great that I that was even thinking of it days and nights. That is the reason why I have chosen this book for my term paper in order to develop the theme “Family in Charles Dickens' novel ‘David Copperfield’ ”. Charles Dickens is one of the most popular and ingenious writers of the XIX century. He is the author of many novels. Due to reach personal experience Dickens managed to create vivid images of all kinds of people: kind and cruel ones, of the oppressed and the oppressors.
These replies are unsuccessful, because Van Inwagen's response is to say that God entails "being the playthings of chance." living in a world with no justice is a consequence of our separation with God; it's one more evil thing about our world. God's infinite perfection allows him to control how much evil is necessary to bring to whom, but he is executing his plan and waiting people to recognize how horrible it is to be apart from God. In my opinion about the replies of Van Inwangen’s objection, if God is infinitely perfect, then we are limited to comprehend God, we can allow that God's infinite perfection and the evil of his great plan can be reconciled in some unknown way.
Voltaire felt that the most grievous of these superstitions was the belief that only those who follow their own religion are given eternal salvation and all others will suffer eternal damnation. The result of this was severe persecution of those who had a faith other than their own. Voltaire's satirical view of this is evident when he says, 'And is it not evident that it would be even more reasonable to worship the sacred navel, the sacred prepuce, and the milk and dress of the Virgin Mary, than to detest and persecute one's brother'; (1109). Assuredly Voltaire believed that it was incredibly foolish of humankind to persecute their fellow men for having beliefs that did not coincide exactly with their own. His detest of such actions can be inferred from his suggestions that the worship of such bizarre things as the sacred navel, foreskin, and the dress and milk of Heavenly Mother being more sensible than the great persecutions of people based on religious pretext.
Philo says that for God to exist he must not be anthropomorphized; God is blind to good and evil, he is an indifferent prime mover. God is all powerful, all knowing, but not all good. The dialogue provided by Demea, Cleanthes and Philo all conflict on the nature of God, but none of them conflict on the presence of a God. Thus, the fact of evil, to me, does not provide grounds for not believing in God, but instead provides grounds for reinterpreting Gods nature. I agree with Philo in that in order for God to coexist with evil, he must be lacking goodness.
Another popular argument strongly tied to the mystery of evil revolves around a former Christian, Bart D. Ehrman (2008). Although Ehrman is certainly not the cr... ... middle of paper ... ... that God is omnipotent in that he can do what he wants, when he wants, how he wants. He possesses the potential, the power to do absolutely anything without exception. However, there are many things that God will choose not to do because of his morally perfect nature. This does not negate his ability to do anything, only reinforces his benevolence in restraining from being immoral.
For it is God’s written Word. Men spoke from God as they were carried along by the “Holy Spirit” (21b), this means that scripture did not come from creative work of the prophets’ or their own invention or interpretation. God inspired the writers, so their message would be authentic and reliable. God used the talents, education, and culture background of each writer. God cooperated with the writers in such a way to ensure that the message he intended was faithfully communicated in the very words they wrote.
They also held the belief that God is present in each individual; That humans as a whole form God because a fragment of Him is within each human being. Christopher McCandless did not share these beliefs. In reality, McCandless was arrogant and self-important. He felt inferior to nothing and superior to everything. He did not believe that Go... ... middle of paper ... ...hat Christopher McCandless is, in fact, a true transcendentalist because he failed to qualify for so many of the requirements of transcendentalism.