Argument For The Existence Of A Law Of Nature

10). Morality, the second element in developed religion, is universally acknowledged in human history. Lewis describes the moral experience as something felt by all people and felt to be disobeyed by all people. Lewis describes the third element shared by developed religion as occurring when people put morality and Numinous together. This occurs when they recognize that the power behind the Numinous is protecting morality (p. 11-12). The element unique to Christianity is the historical event when Jesus claimed to be the Son of the Numinous and source of morality (p. 13). Lewis presents two views that can be taken about Jesus and His claims; either He was a lunatic and deceiver or He actually was, and is what He said. Lewis states that if the first is wrong then the second must be accepted as true. Lewis goes on to state that it is by this act of accepting Jesus' claims to be the Christ that the problem of pain becomes a reality. "For pain would not be a problem unless, side by side with our daily experience of this painful world, we had received what we think a good assurance that ultimate reality is righteous and loving" (p. 14).

Lewis' argument in the third book is most important to the point I want to discuss. He argues through this chapter the Christian behavior. Morality is what he considers to be the basics of good Christian behavior. Lewis states that morality is not simply, "something that prevents you from having a good time", but rather morals are the "directions for running the human machine". Every moral rule is there to prevent wear and tear on the way machine operates. He realizes that is why the rules seem to be constantly getting in the way of are natural behavior. Lewis sees that some people think in terms of moral ideals not rules and obedience. Ideals suggest preference to personal taste. Something that subjective would be meaningless in practice. Idealistic notions are meaningless unless we try to carry them out. Acting on ideals requires rules. Lewis uses the analogy of the ship to show how ideals without rules can go wrong. If the ships keep on having crashes they will not be able to sail. If their steering gears do not work they will not be able to avoid crashes.

Ethics can be defined as ‘Human moral conduct according to principles of what is good or right to do’. In Christianity there are certain ethical teachings, mainly The Ten Commandments, Beatitudes, and Jesus’ commandments of love. The Ten Commandments are derived from the Old Testament which defines what people must do in order to serve God faithfully and gives direction on how to live a life according to the covenant and in essence to be a good Christian person. In the New Testament the Beatitudes and Jesus’ commandments of love are found. With love being the main concept of these teachings, they and the Ten Commandments can be seen as alike as they

In examining the relationship between religion and morality, there are many equally important topics that should be considered. One topic, nonetheless, that I think is essential in beginning to discuss the philosophy of morality in the context of religion is that which is concerned with whether religion has a significant role in the definition of morality. Religion does have a significant role in the defining and understanding of morality, and this is important for ethics. The aim of this paper is not to argue whether it is possible for one to be moral without being religious, for this I assume is more or less evidently possible, but rather whether a general concept of religion and God is needed in the proper interpretation of morality. I will refer to Plato’s Euthyphro and its focus on piety and the dilemma it generates, in guiding this discussion.

Christianity, or religion in general, has come under immense amounts of criticism. Especially in modern times where science has been growing beyond our imagination, and, now, individuals might downplay the relevance of religion. However, even thousands of years ago Christianity was met with criticism. One of the notable critics, and focus of this paper, was Celsus. He was A philosopher during the second century, had his writings complied into The True Word that housed his critiques on Christianity. From these critiques, it is possible to identify the characteristics Celsus might identity with a true religion. Moreover, the second focus of paper is Mark’s gospel, more specifically, Jesus. Having read Mark’s gospel, would his depiction of Jesus and his movement be considered valid in the eyes of Celsus? In this paper, I will argue that the depiction of Jesus and the Jesus movement in Mark’s Gospel would not be considered a true religion due to the fact it conflates with many of Celsus’s criticisms of Christianity.

Book 3 of Mere Christianity contains 12 separate chapters, which has far too great a scope to address properly here, so a glimpse will have to suffice. In the first, Lewis examines three components of morality; the relations between men, the interior moral mechanics of a man, and the relationship between a man and the God who made him. Lewis makes the case that, since we are destined to live forever in one state or another, it is desperately important that we pay attention to the sort of Being we are becoming. Lewis points out that most of humanity can agree that keeping relations between men running smoothly are important, but varying world views and religions-or lack of religion, have produced some disagreements on the necessity of keeping one’s own ship in order, as it were, and it completely breaks down when the relationship between a man and his Maker are addressed, as there is virtually no agreement there.

The theist, therefore, appears to be faced with a choice between a view which implies a kind of moral chaos and a life of moral immaturity, and one which belittles an Almighty God. One attempt to resolve this dilemma turns on the distinction

These individuals are known to be experts of morality. The chapter proposes two reasons as to why these individuals are called upon so frequently. One, for those who believe and have some sort of religious back round, and second, for those who believe in what is called a “scientific view” of the world. This chapter presents the idea that there is some popular belief that religion and morality go hand in hand and that in order to understand morality, you must understand religion. It is explained that when we view morality from a religious perspective, we give meaning to morality in a way that a “good man” made this world that we currently live in and that we are his children. While the book proposes the question that people who believe in God, or a higher power, base their values on what those religions state is right or wrong, whereas for an atheist the question still remains; how do these individuals weigh their moral compass and place their values?

Time is the next topic covered. Time is an interesting and complex issue as it relates to God. Our human minds think of time in terms of past, present and future. We assume that this applies to the whole universe and to God. Lewis states; “Almost certainly God is not in Time. His life does not consist of moments following one another.” C.S. Lewis believes that it is always the present for God. God can see everything past and future as the present. Also since God is not in time he is not constrained by time. He can hear all prayers and attend to them individually. He then moves on to discuss God as the Father and the Son. According to Lewis, “The Son exists because the Father exists: but there never was a time before the Father produced the Son.” In Lewis’ view, the statement, “God is love” is not true unless there are a Father and a Son because love is for another person. “Love is God” describes God’s creation of us and all that we do. The Trinity is God both as Supreme Being, Christ the son, and the Holy Spirit. If we let God have his way in our lives we can become sons of God. In Chapter Five Lewis uses an analogy of tin soldiers coming to life to describe how Christians are transformed into the likeness of Jesus. Our natural life if life self-centered in us. Chapter Six discusses individuals and a body of people. Lewis contends that Christianity considers individuals not by themselves but as organs in a body. Each individual is

Every culture ever known has operated under a system of values. Many varied on exact principles, but most applied the idea of Natural Law. Or, as C.S. Lewis would refer to it in his Abolition of Man, the Tao. In this particular book Lewis discusses the implications that would follow could man overcome this basic value system that has been in place since the development of rational thought. However, paradoxical as his opinion may seem, he holds that to step beyond the Tao is to plunge into nothingness. Simply put, it is his claim that to destroy, or even fundamentally change, man’s basic value system is to destroy man himself.

The question of whether or not God exists has been asked by billions of people since the concept of religion emerged. Many people try to explain things such as hurricanes and tornadoes as “Acts of God” or even the existence of human beings and the world itself to be “created” by an almighty power. Others claim that the harm they inflict was demanded of them by their God. CS Lewis argues that through the comprehension of standards of good and bad, God’s existence is proven. However, Lewis’s defense for the existence of God is adequate because it fails to acknowledge the possibility for people to be good on their own, without the instruction of a supernatural entity.

In this essay I will argue what is Cleanthes’ strongest and most convincing argument in favour of Natural Religion. I will critically analyse each section of the argument and the responses made by Philo. I will also be evaluating the successfulness of both characters’ arguments and responses in order to arrive at a definitive conclusion on what is Cleanthes’ most convincing argument and whether or not I am in favour for it after considering Philo’s objections.

Christian initially accepts this suggestion, for he is told by Mr. Worldly-Wiseman that Legality is a man who is known for his good works (Bunyan, 19). Christian them embarks on the trip to the Village of Morality, but in transit he encounters a hill that proved an insurmountable obstacle, along with the reappearance of Evangelist who shames him for trusting in the earthly qualities of morality and legality (Bunyan, 20-22). Therein we see confirmation of the notion that justification is by faith alone. For Christian, via the instruction and teachings of Evangelist, discards the knowledge and virtues of the concepts of morality and legality as nothing more than a fruitless diversion in comparison to seeking the Celestial City (Bunyan, 22).

In his work Euthyphro, Plato introduces a religiously based moral code. This code, the divine command theory, stresses the pleasing of god in one’s moral actions. Plato’s characters, Euthyphro and Socrates, take turns in a debate defending and criticizing this theory. Its flawed nature is uncovered and we as readers are able to notice its advantages and disadvantages. Using these criticisms, revisions to the divine command theory have been made. After analyzing the divine command theory and noting both its advantages and its critiques, I largely agree with the criticisms that are made about it. However, with certain revisions, it can be transformed into a reliable and successful philosophy.

Justice has been misperceived to go hand and hand with rules in which a society must conform to, mostly in due part to the enlightenment era. In the case with the Romans, the laws they established, especially early on, dealing with the spread of Christianity has been interpreted with a sense of disgust for the unfair treatment targeted towards Christians, and later on to those of other faiths. However, I argue that, Roman law, when concerning religion, was used to strengthen the identity of what it meant to be Roman. Furthermore, as Rome, the political institution, was beginning to decay, as an act of acclamation, the formulation of Roman Laws allowed Christianity to be a main means of connection to what it meant to identify as Roman. Utilizing various primary sources, it is evident that faith had been gradually accepted as the dominant form of unity and law, beginning with Emperor Diocletian to Emperor Theodosia, even among emperors, the Catholic faith had shown that all men were under God, and under God they were all Roman.