Two Versions of Christianity in The Grand Inquisite by Dostoevsky
In Dostoevsky's book "The Grand Inquisitor" he develops two versions of
Chrisitianity. One is the Roman catholic version which is represented by the G.I. or Grand
Inquisitor and the other is the Protestant version represented by the Christ-like figure. The
whole dialogue begins when the GI has thrown the Christ-like figure or CLF in prison
after watching him do a few miracles (pg. 24). He then begins to barraage him with
questions that he answers himself. And From this comes the argument of freedom. The GI
then claims that because the CLF refused the 3 temptations (mainly the turning of the stone
into bread) (pg27) he placed the burden of freedom on man. According to the GI if the
CLF had only turned the stone into bread he would have "satisfied the universal and
everlasting craving of humanity--to fing someone to worship"(pg.27). Instead the CLF
rejected it for the sake of freedom. The GI goes on to say that instead of taking mans
freedom from them ("by giving them bread") when you had the chance you instead choose
to make it stronger than ever (pg28). The Gi sees freedom as being the main problem in
man, its almost like a disease. He says that man wants happiness in life not freedom. By
creating this "free" society the CLF has placed the burden of responsibility on man. Now
if you think about it what he says here makes a lot of sense. Because we have the power to
choose, the freedom to choose. We also have to take the responsibility of our choices. We
are forced to deal with the consequences of our actions. Now you might say that's fine just
make good choices and you'll be fine. Well according to the GI men are weak and are
incapable of acce...
... middle of paper ...
...ave only saved yourselves
but we have saved all.(pg.33)
In the end a basic question arises ....Freedom or happiness?
In the last chapter of "The Grand Inquisitor" we meet father Zossima, who is a
Russian monk. Father Zossima pleads for a unitary brotherhood of man. He says that the
salvation of Russia comes from the people(pg.70). He also says that men should love as
God loved, not for the moment but for all eternity. He talks of monks stopping the beating
of children, rising up and teaching them. He says that salvation will come from the people
from ther faith and there meekness(pg.71). He says that fathers are to watch over the
people's faith and this will not be a dream. He talks about the importance of humility. He
talks about the importance of sincere prayer as well. He talks of faith and forgivness, all of
these he says are the way to salvation.
Mencken’s observations are very relevant and it applies to contemporary society. It is necessary to identify what it means by being “free”. Does being free mean that one has choice of religion and type of government? The type of freedom mentioned previously do not apply to mankind if mankind is not safe and is risk for danger. It is human nature to choose safety over freedom as shown in various examples.
• Baker General Ludwig was able to provide each man with a pound of bread per day
The reason that I will not re-enlist is that the sickness kills most people and I don’t want to die too. “I am sick . .
Knowing whether or not man is free involves knowing whether he can have a master ... For in the presence of God there is less a problem of freedom than a problem of evil." You know the alternative: either we are not free and God the all-powerful is responsible for evil. Or we are free and responsible but God is not all-powerful.3
Strength of the Human Spirit Revealed in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
Sonya is a humble penitent who understands the gravity of the forgiveness God has granted her and offers unconditional forgiveness and Christian love in turn, which have a great impact on Raskolnikov. C.S. Lewis, in his book Mere Christianity, provides a definition of perfect repentance: “[Repentance] means unlearning all the self-conceit and self-will that we have been training ourselves into for thousands of years. It means killing part of yourself, undergoing a kind of death. In fact, it needs a good man to repent” (Lewis 57). Sonya sins for selfless reasons, prostituting herself so that her family can eat; Raskolnikov taunts her with this, pointing out, “They’re all on your hands” (Dostoyevsky 318). Even so, she offers no excuses for her
orthodox teaching and tried to make his opinions and beliefs known, he talks about how the
He expresses the Russian reformation and social reconstruction by juxtaposing the evolution of his characters and their political stances. He carefully constructs the outcome of each character to communicate his stance on the unstable post-war
The power to choose is a liberating capability, one that provides us with a sense of self-worth and freedom. Our decisions can lead us to feelings of pride, or even disappointment, but nonetheless, they belong to he who made the decision and solely him. The old saying “less is more,” greatly falls into play in Barry Schwartz’s book, The Paradox of Choice. The decisions that the average person must face have become so abundant, that one may become overwhelmed, and in turn be held captive within the so called “freedoms” of his or her choice. Schwartz divides his book into four sections, each focused on a different aspect of human choice and the negative effect that excessive decision-making has on the decision-makers. Irony is constantly incorporated throughout the entire book to emphasize the counterintuition of freedom of choice. Studies and statistics further prove Schwartz’s thesis that an exceedingly large number of options will lessen the appeal of the final choice.
...wed. Each person has always been focused on gaining more power for himself; therefore, man has failed to establish a model for civilization to accommodate absolute freedom. If the human race is ever to achieve this goal, each man would first have to initiate reform within himself before the reconstruction of current society in favor of a utopia of freedom, independence and liberation could begin.
He recognized the world Soviet citizens inhabited, and instead found ways to speak to the populace by following the law and following his moral conscious. This did end with him being arrested, but because he followed the law, it backfired against Russian authorities, because it garnered him more support. Moreover, unlike Solzhenitsyn, he did not try to dictate what Russian citizens did. Instead he had meetings and offered information to his audiences, answering any questions they might have. He let them make the key choice of deciding for themselves instead of trying to force his ways on them. This demonstrated a very important element from Christianity that is overlooked by many Christians, which is the gift of free will, which was given directly from God to humans. In fact, Dudko’s approach even led one foreign atheist to admit to finding value in Christianity (Ellis 309-315). Dudko is an example many American Christians could learn from, because he made meaningful social change by offering advice on how to improve their lives and leading by example, not trying to force his fellow citizens into believing what her did. When a person wants to do something, they are more likely to stick with it rather be resentful because they have to do it. By analyzing the behavior of these soviet priests, their current American counterparts could discover valuable tactics that could be employed
He describes how he has found his purpose and destiny in life through an understanding of how “leadership, happiness and fearlessness” work;
Sigmund Freud once said: “Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility”. Humans are by nature selfish and cruel, but conceal their inner desires and act in ways accepted by society. When all traces of civil society disappear, humans are prone to express their nature to it’s fullest and act impulsively, unless they possess a strong enough conscience to override it. According to Sigmund Freud, this impulsiveness, it’s opposing force of reason and the combination of the two represent the three main aspects of human nature, commonly referred to
I agree that we all have a choice and that blaming others for our actions or inactions is wrong. However, the statement may be an over simplification. One issue with the statement is that it assumes that everyone believes that they have the freedom to choose, which is not always the case.
As society as a whole we are most often times given a set of rules to follow. These rules or laws act as a pathway to help us choose between right and wrong. If someone were to choose the wrong path, there can be severe consequences. In the United States it is common to see jail time when we go against the set moral code. In other countries we may see forced labor or find people put to death for their actions. Each society sets it’s own rules and moral standards. But there is much more to being a moral person than following the laws of a society. As defined by Alan Wolfe, moral freedom means “individuals should determine for themselves what it means to lead a good and virtuous life” (Wolfe, 2001). This means that even though we are given a