The divine command theory suggests that an act is right if it has ben commanded by God, and morally wrong if God has forbidden it. God has absolute authority and decides alone what is right or wrong, and human reason has no contribution to the decision. He is the most reliable source of guidance for humans and provides them with laws that they should live by. Humans just have to accept these laws and respond to God’s commands. According to Emil Brunner, the divine command theory means that by doing what God wills or commands
a representation of some aspect of the natural world * What are some reasons that scientists use models? to gain an aspect of the natural world, different models about the same subject may result in different results that my support or refute a claim.. Scientists need to know the limitations of the models, so they don't have flawed observations * What are some examples of scientific models? globe, map, * Why might a scientist need to use several different models of the same aspect of the natural world? Why isn’t one model enough? Because no model represents all aspects of the natural world perfectly * Why is it important for a scientist to understand the limitations of the models they use?
All Christians to a certain extent believe that free will plays an important role in their lives (most commonly seen in their faith and actions). Although, ultimately they see God as the omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent being that governs their lives. Hard determinists state that everything in our lives is pre-determined, and therefore we have no influence over the matter and that we have no free will. Some determinists would argue that free will only appears to be present in our lives, where in actual fact we are 'disillusioned' (no choice principle). The argument of determinism gained a huge amount of respect and acknowledgement in 1924, when Clarence Darrow the lawyer to the case, stated that his clients, Leopold and Loeb, we're not completely responsible for the kidnapping and murder of Bobby Franks (aged 14).
Explain Moral Relativism Moral Relativism argues the claim that there are no universally valid rules for all people at all times, thus implying there are no intrinsic rights and wrongs. This results in Morality being relative to the individual, to their culture and their age group. In contrary Moral Absolutism is the antonym to the theory that morality is relative. Kant for example was not a moral relativist; he held the belief that we had ‘categorical imperatives’ which were always right. He believed as Absolutists believe today , we should be able to apply moral rules to everyone without making allowances for different people or circumstance , thus suggesting laws should be ‘universalisable’ .
Theologians like Dan Story obviously believe that no one person can judge. Only God can judge the hearts of humans. The morality of every person’s heart will be taken into account on the Day of Judgment. Sin and the Human Condition When recognizing sin, you must know where morality is founded. It is founded in God, Who did not only create the Ten Commandments, but He is the standard and the law.
Thomas More takes the side of the church and follows the idea that God judges the consciences of all, and if one is against God, then that person could be considered evil. “More went to his death as he said on the scaffold, “the king’s good servant and God’s first” ( Lahr). More believes that following God is the only way to go even if it resulted to death. More decides to stay true to his own beliefs and his own conscience based off of what is morally right under the law of God. This shows that in the Renaissance times, evil was viewed by what beliefs that people had in God, and the conscience and beliefs of the King are considered evil under what God laid down as
This could be seen as compatibilsm, or as Chaffee states “it claims that every person chooses according to his or her greatest desires” (Chaffee, 2010, p.141). When a compatibilist frankly makes choices, and if these choices are determined by a moral order they must in general as most religious agree that man is considered unable not to go against God’s laws or their Church teachings then he is held himself responsible. One could argue “all of the choices made are uncaused, then arbitrary, unpredictable and not a moral action at all” (www.the opedia.com). President Obama’s Affordable Care Act rollout has also created a
Science & Faith Fundamentalism is defined as the strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles. This term is often associated with the religious movement in the Protestant community that occurred in the first half of the twentieth century. The movement stressed that the Bible should be interpreted as a moral guide to life and an accurate historical account of the past. Any opposing views to this fundamentalist view of life were publically denounced and criticized. Although fundamentalism carries a religious connotation, it can also be applied to science.
Descartes wonders if God deceives him or not. Which God cannot do because he is the Ultimate and would not do that to something he created. Descartes states “the desire to deceive without doubt testifies to malice or feebleness, and accordingly cannot be found in God” (73). So God does have power and some people believe that a man of power will use his power to deceive, but the fact that something wants to deceive and show God to be a coward. God cannot be a coward because he is the Supreme.
Secular humanist feel that religion is really a negative thing because it gives you rules to follow therefore you never really follow your deepest desires. The one thing Christians and secular humanist have in common is that they both look for the good in everyone that no one is truly bad. Atheistic Existentialism is very different from Christianity in almost every way. Christian feels that we as humans have purpose and are on this Earth to follow whatever path God has for us. However, Atheistic Existentialism sees humans and even themselves as nothing but matter and to me it is completely sad that they have no faith or feeling of value.