Machelling Dichotomy

Oftentimes in these analyses, religious symbolism and secular language are present as a testament to the author’s acknowledgement of, as well as belief in, a higher power. Cormac McCarthy’s work suggests the existence of a God or higher consciousness that is, at once present and absent, while manifesting as natural forces that are simultaneously benevolent, ambivalent and antagonistic. But by what measure would one be able to gauge the presence or absence of divine providence, when the nature of holy divinity is, in itself, something imperceptible? Perhaps one must simply look to parallels between the classical role of God, claims of religious texts and followers and the tangible things that can be plainly understood. But where must one look to find the starting point for such an analysis? Perhaps the best place to begin is “[i]n the beginning.” (GEN

Another note about the symbolic theology— it is also important to know that the statement of “who God is” is not untrue, but the truth is beyond that true statement. As a result of that recognition, we often use parables and metaphors to see if we can make it less “beyond” and more humanly understandable. I would guess it is because there is a limited number of people, or probably none, who are lucky enough to have a physical encounter with God, for we are all living in the End Time. Therefore, “see for yourself” does not work here and we have to rely on symbolic descriptions. However, the problem generated from the symbolism is “misleading” as mentioned previously. (Ware, 2002) Take myself as an example, a lot of times I can understand the

His first Ontological Argument for God’s Existence starts by defining God based on Christian belief as “a being than which nothing greater can be conceived.” It is on the foundation of this definition that he builds his argument.

     Throughout these chapters we see many portrayals of God’s character: The destroyer, the ever-judging, a God with expectations, a God that grieves, feels pain, repents, a God that demands justice; a self-evaluating, ruling and omnipotent God whom also passes on saving grace to the deserving.

Medieval philosophers developed very precise notions of God and the attributes that he has, many of which are even now well-known among believers. For example, God is all-powerful all-knowing and all-good Other commonly discussed attributes of God are that he is eternal, that he is present everywhere and that he has foreknowledge of future events. While these traditional attributes of God offer a clear picture of the kind of being that he is, many of them present special conceptual problems, particularly when we try to make them compatible them with potentially conflicting facts about the world.

In the construction of the Large Hardon Collider, physicists seek and hope to unlock the mysteries of the universe by analyzing the attributes of the most miniscule particles known to man. In the same way, theologians have argued back and forth over the course of human history with regards to the divine attributes of God, seeking and hoping to unlock the mysteries of the metaphysical universe. Although these many attributes, for example omnipresence, could be debated and dissected ad nauseum, it is within the scope of this research paper to focus but on one of them. Of these many divine attributes of God, nothing strikes me as more intriguing than that of God’s omnipotence. It is intriguing to me because the exploration of

The image of God which is the mind is the last and highest thing among creatures in seeking God. The previously chapters have already tried to investigate the trinity of God both by faith in the scripture and by understanding some evidence of reason.

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God--the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God's existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God's true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this

The topic of the image of God is one essential to every human being because it will shape the way in which each individual will look at his or her life. A part of every human’s life is his or her vocation, which will also be changed by the view he or she holds about the image of God. The image of God is the footprint that God left in humans and in no other being in His creation, and it must shape the way in which everyone will look at his or her job.

In seeking to better understand an especially abstract concept, such as trinity, the use of analogies has understandably been common. Analogies are used to help us explain complex topics such as Trinity. Since the doctrine of the Trinity is often described and taught to be so complicated that no one can’t get a full grasp of it, we try to find a way to relay a clear understanding of the divine truth to not just new Christians, but to other people as well. A social analogy is able to emphasize the real, subsistent existence of each divine person, and bring out the understanding of the trinity a relationship of love. The strength of is that it shows how three things can share the same being or substance: memory, intellect, and will are distinct, but they share the same nature as constituting one human mind: they are not three minds. At this point we ask questions such as “how can we simplify this? What is a good analogy for the trinity? What if there is no analogy that can’t specifically break down the meaning of Trinity? I feel like this chapter desperately shuffles it way in trying to find answers for God being Trinity, which is a bit frustrating. Overall, we can just say that Trinity is one God, who is present in three persons (Father, Son and

This materialization of God in this form is important because this isn’t a literal assembly with God. This is a parable or metaphor that represents Mack’s introduction to a God that isn't the remote, presentiment, ominous, hypercritical figure that Mack has believed him to be,

ABSTRACT: Charles S. Peirce sketches "a nest of three arguments for the Reality of God" in his article "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God." I provide careful analysis and explication of Peirce's argument, along with consideration of some objections. I argue that (1) there are significant differences between Peirce's neglected argument and the traditional arguments for God's existence; (2) Peirce's analysis of the neglected argument into three arguments is misleading; (3) there are two distinct levels of argument that Peirce does not recognize; and (4) it is doubtful whether the argument meets all the criteria set by Peirce himself.

Tillich maintained that religious language is a symbolic way of pointing towards the ultimate reality, the vision of God which he

In this first objection of Case for Faith by Lee Strobel, it was very interesting to see the detailed contrast in a Christian view verses an Atheist’s. This whole chapter was very intriguing, the way the discussions played out and what each point leaded to. Out of all of it, I really caught onto when Keeft stated the three attributes of God; God is all powerful, God is all knowing, and God is all good. Throughout the chapter, Keeft made it very clear that he was defending the fact that there is a God. He used numerous different ways of explaining his point of the matter. I noticed that while doing that, revealing the attributes of who God is, really tied it all together.

our confession as well as the implications of a God who is three in one. In the following essay, I