Anselm Of Canterbury

God is the representation of standards that exemplify the means of reality and morality. The character of God is the foundation for truly understanding the absolute truth of our existence, the purpose of our being, and the morals we must follow. The before Christ era’s identity admitted that the earth was a constant struggle for existence. The struggles are shown through fatality, ailment, misery, and natural disasters, but do not take away from the purity of morality. Atheists’ thriving argument against the Christian faith is the evidence of evil and the suffering people must endure. “If God is all good and God is all powerful, why does He allow evil to exist?” Everything was perfect and worked in perfect harmony. Genesis 1 verse 31 says, “ Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day,”(Gen, 1:31). The animals did not eat each other. Nothing could come to wipe out creatures. Creation was designed perfect until Adam’s rebelled against God. His actions brought about evil, death, and destruction into the world. Death is not an enemy, but a part of creation passing. “Without a foundation of an initially perfect creation, there is no foundation upon which to say that these natural evils are bad and contrary to God’s original purpose”(Broocks). God ultimately dealt with immorality through the shedding Jesus’ blood on the cross and providing an eternity without

The question of God’s existence has been pondered by humans for centuries. There are an infinite number of different opinions, arguments, and ideas favoring for or against the idea of God. Personally, I strongly believe in God not only due to my religious affiliation, but also because of my own opinions, ideas, and experience. To begin with, the complexity of Earth and the life that has formed upon it cannot be based just on luck or chance. I believe that ultimately God, as a power, rather than a mystical being is the one created and controls the universe. Although the God and his authority are not entirely comprehensible by humans, it’s our faith as worshiper that eventually lead us to a greater understanding.

Someone who would believe a statement such as this one would most likely be in agreement with the Divine Command Theory---the reason being that the main claim in this theory is, all that is morally right, is right because God commands it so. Therefore in order to believe in the Divine Command Theory, one would need to be a strong believer in God---and would truly believe that if there were no God, morality would be absent. With this in mind, if God is the creator of all that is morally right, and there turns out to be no god at all, then nothing is morally wrong or can be capable of being morally wrong---would be a statement that non-believers of the Divine Command Theory would believe, and believe that morality can exist on its own, with or without a God. In this paper I will focus on the Divine Command Theory in relation to the statement above, and those who would oppose this statement. In doing so, I will attempt to show why I believe that those opposing this statement have a more plausible view.

In Proslogion, St. Anselm of Canterbury argues that God must exist because nothing else can exceed him both as a concept in the human mind and as a figure in reality. As an objection to his argument, Gaunilo of Marmoutier states that anything that exists in the mind can also exist within reality, such as the idea of a perfect island that everyone has imagined, yet no one has encountered. Gauniloʻs objection does not effectively refute St. Anselmʻs argument because an island does not possess qualities comparable to the God that St. Anselm is arguing for and therefore, greater things can exist beyond an island. The objection is also inadequate because the concept of an island is already known to exist, and so the embodiment of a perfect island

There has been many thinkers in history who have lacked a belief in God. Some ancient Greek philosophers, such as Epicurus, obtained natural explanations for these superior miracles. Epicurus was the first to question the compatibility of God with suffering. In contrast, Descartes proves God 's existence as an external reality and that ideas of perfection or infinity cannot come from oneself. He explains that “I am a finite being and thus cannot generate these ideas on my own. I have also never experienced perfection or infinity in the world, so they cannot come from experience, either”. God is a “perfect being”.

If God were omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good, then the world would not contain evil.

The difference between knowing and having rational grounds for believing is that knowing entails that something is 100% true while having rational grounds for believing something is true means that we see reason to believe it is true but we don’t know it is true. An example of rational grounds is like a kid believing in the tooth fairy. We know the tooth fairy isn’t real but we still tell the kid the tooth fairy is real. For the kid, every source they trust is telling them the tooth fairy is real so they believe in the tooth fairy. These are rational grounds for believing because though the tooth fairy is not real the kid has every reason to believe it is. In the case of God, it goes the exact same

Those who choose to believe in God have a right to do so, however, for me it seems to be nearly impossible that a higher ideally perfect God with the world we live in today. As though my thoughts on God differ from others, I will never tell others that their thoughts or beliefs are unjust. I feel as if God is a magical figure most look up to have hope in life. Ironically, those who believe in God only praise him when good happens in the world, but don't mention his name when natural evil occurs. I used Louise Antony’s ideas of moral evil to prove the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent God does not exist.

In his article, Robert K. Merton explains the role of social structure in generating anomie, which is the sense of lawlessness and alienation within individuals. Merton also discusses between the adoption of culturally prescribed goals, and how these goals are acceptably achieved. Merton begins his article by defining conformity, and how some social structures add pressure upon certain individuals. Merton then breaks down the social structure into two important sections or phases, and how both sections or phases intertwine and how they are both different. One section is described as the culturally defined goals, purposes, and interests. The other section, is the regulation and controls acceptable in achieving goals. Merton then goes on to discuss

Both the idea of God and the existence of God play a major role in the writings of Descartes and Pascal. Both certainly appear to believe in him though they argue the case for his existence very differently and they also give Him a very different sort of role in their works. Whilst Descartes claims that he is certain of the existence of God, using a large part of his Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire la raison, et chercher la verité dans les sciences to prove the supreme being’s existence, Pascal’s approach to philosophy cannot allow anything to be certain. He instead asserts that he knows God and that, through the use of his famous Wager, it is better for anyone

Belief in a God is common and different religions praise different forms of God. God is frequently called the ultimate judge, with equal attributes to supernatural powers. This creates a debate in those that are judgmental. It allows developing behavior to be based on new principles of right and wrong. Behavior that deviates might otherwise be blocked out by the sensibilities that the

In the Canterbury Tales, the Knight is the first pilgrim characterized in the Prologue and narration of his tale, thus signifying his upperclassman status and prestigious reputation that both the author and Host support. The Knight’s Prologue illustrates his notability and worthiness of a of a perfect knight, in which embraces honesty, chivalry, and benevolence- in association with the Code of Chivalry and Christianity. Additionally, he earns the respect and embodies strength, due to the imposing battles that he has fought in the course of his military career; the Crusades to other non-Christian battles that includes places in Turkey and Russia. Consequently, in the Knight’s Tale he portrays honour, loyalty, and romance, in a story of two

Whether god exists or not has been in discussion for thousands of years, and an important discussion. Whether it is rational to believe in god or not is another story, like believing in god itself, this topic has brought many discussions. It is one thing to discuss whether god is real or not and it is a complete other to discuss whether it is rational to believe in god or not. I believe that while there may not be any convincing evidence or arguments that God does exist, I do still believe that it is still rational to believe that god does exist. I think this because, believing in God is not simply just believing that he exists, but believing that it can bring good to our lives, we otherwise would not have. It teaches us to have a moral

Morality only exists if we believe in God; therefore if God doesn’t exist there is no morality. There have been so many evil acts committed in the name of God that it is difficult to maintain that a belief in God equates to morality. There are situations that happen every day where decisions are made based off of human rights that contradict the word of God. Morality comes from within, it is an understanding of right versus wrong and the ability to choose what is right. Knowing all this a belief in God is not a requirement for a person to be moral. (Mosser, 2011)

God is the only sound foundation for morality and resolve that enables people to live better than they should live without ,that brings to minds the provocative question of “Can we be good without God?” which makes people furious because of their strong loyalties to their religions . Of course,it is not proper to say who doesn’t have belief in God can’t own the qualities of goodness.Although the question is not ‘Can we be good without belief in God’, the question is ‘Can we be good without God whose existence provides the existences of moral values, moral duties and moral accountability at the same time and constitutes the actions that are good and bad?'If there isn’t any God or Gods, there won’t be a concept like good and bad.For