The Theology Of Paul Tillich

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

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 traditional God in the Judeo-Christian tradition is known to be as an “Omni-God” possessing particular divine attributes such as omniscient, which means he knows everything he is also omnipotent, or all powerful. God has also been said to be also he is omnipresence which means he exists in all places and present everywhere, however there are many philosophical arguments on whether if any of that is actually true or if there is a God at all. This paper argues that it is not possible to know whether the traditional God exists or not. While there have been philosophers such as Aquinas, Anselm, Paley and Kierkegaard who are for god and present strong argument, likewise philosopher like Nietzsche and arguments like the problem of evil both make valid point on why God isn’t real.

In this essay I will discuss the ontological problem of the existence of God and discuss Pascal’s Wager and how it solves the issue. The problem with the proof of the existence of God is that it is not something we will know for sure until our dying day. We can speculate and bet on his existence and “feel” his presence but at this point it is just that, only a bet. This wager is famous for opening up minds to look at the problem in a bigger picture. The problem with the existence of God is not in the answer but instead in the question. Pascal is responsible for refocusing this discussion on God to the bigger problem of the existential context of human life. In a way this can all be broken down to very black and white terms “Either God is or he is not.” But upon looking further we realize that this is a much bigger issue with many grey areas than something as simple as ‘is or is not’.

So in the end, Thomas Aquinas and Rene Descartes both attempted to prove the existence of God, but they differ in respect to the different thought processes to obtain the existence of God. An still to this day both Philosophers are regarded as key factor in the world of philosophy and their arguments were so influential that they were able to land a spot in our textbook “THE GREAT CONVERSATION”. But thanks to these gentlemen and their contributions to their works were able

This transmission and responsible commentary on tradition must be understood in the context of a double judgement made by Kasper around Christianity and the philosophical thought. Kasper suggests that Christianity is in a “transitional state.” In terms of philosophical thought, the author claims that the modern principle of subjective, the process in which “man posits himself as the starting-point and measure for understanding reality as a whole,” is certainly in relation to the history of Christianity. In this way,

Lewis’ essay relates to this course as Theology provides a perspective on understanding creation, the transcendent power, and humanity around us. He acknowledges that multiple viewpoints exist from the inside and outside perspectives. Also, one cannot ignore or discount specific inside experiences as it helps us think about something. Therefore, in Theology 205, there will inevitably be many ways to understand life, our purpose, and the people we are becoming. We are also covering the Bible in depth, so some of us will look “at the beam” if they have never read it, while others will look “along the beam” if they are familiar with its interpretations. The students who will look along the beam are those who are Christian or Jew, since they already use the Bible as some guidance in life. In contrast, those who look at the beam are ones who are new to this subject, those willing to view this course from a new lens, and those who do not practice Christianity or Judaism.

Paul Tillich was a renowned American Protestant theologian born in Prussia 1886. As a self-proclaimed philosophical theologian, Tillich saw the very nature of Christian faith expressed in religious symbols that demanded constant reinterpretation. He was famous for believing that it is possible to speak meaningfully about metaphysical concepts and therefore came up with the theory that religious language, because it is symbolic in nature, has an overwhelming effect upon humans.  Tillich argued that religious language is symbolic. This means that religious symbols communicate the most significant values and beliefs of human beings.

In her book Perfect Being Theology, Katherin A. Rogers wrote, “None of us can comprehend the intrinsic being of God.” A truer word might never have been spoken with such brevity. Yet, theologians and philosophers find themselves contemplating not only the existence of God, but also what constitutes God as “God”. During such conversations, God is conceived as a perfect being (or the best possible being). God as the perfect being dates to pre-Socratic philosophy, and the idea became permanently a part of Christian theology since Augustine, if not before him. Anselm of Canterbury, being highly influence by Augustine, became one of the first examples to produce a “clear and systematic attempt at a perfect being theology.” On account of this, it remains imperative for modern day theologians (and students!) to critically reflect on Anselm’s conception of God. Thus, this paper will be an engagement with Anselm’s perfect being theology by 1) sketching the major tenets of Anselm’s perfect being theology, 2) asserting some of the merits of his theology, 3) exposing a pitfall of his perfect being theology, 4) giving a rebuttal of said pitfall, and 5) closing on the success of Anselmian perfect being theology.

Most major arguments of God are rooted in the existence, or lack thereof. However there has been a continuous debate regarding the specific characteristics of God. In this debate, Charles Hartshorne, Alfred North Whitehead, and other the processed theologians oppose Anselm, Augustine, and other classic theologians. Although there are many points of disagreement, there are some characteristics for which both sides can agree upon. I will show one strong point of agreement and one strong point of opposition, and allow you the opportunity to decide for yourself how different, or similar, these two camps are.

Known as the father of modern liberal theology, Friedrich Schleiermacher was a German theologian, philosopher and biblical scholar who focused his attention on the nature of religious experience from the viewpoint of the individual and human nature itself (Mariña 3). Influenced by German Romanticism, Schleiermacher attempted to reconcile the criticisms of the Enlightenment with traditional Protestant Christianity (Crouter 261). By doing so, he abandoned the pietistic Moravian theology that had failed to satisfy his increasing doubts and he adopted the rational spirit of Christian Wolff and Johann Salomo Semler. He then became acquainted with the techniques of historical criticism of the New Testament and of Johann Augustus Eberhard, from whom he acquired a love of the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. As a result, he began applying ideas from the Greek philosophers to a reconstruction of Immanuel Kant’s system (Mariña 3). On this basis, this essay articulate Friedrich Schleiermacher’s understanding of religion and its relationship to Christianity as described in Speech I: Defense and Speech II: The Nature of Religion of his work On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers. The essay will explore Schleiermacher’s rejection of various views of religion held by the despisers, explain his identification of the true religion with feeling and describe his view of the relationship between religion and Christianity.

We continue our study of the history of God by looking at His attributes from a number of different viewpoints. We will first examine the view of Classical Theism, then the view of Freewill Theism, and finally that of Open Theism. We begin by defining Classical Theism, also called traditional theism or Augustinian theism.

Throughout the course of this essay we shall examine two of the major philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The arguments that we are going to focus on shall be the Design argument and the Ontological argument. We shall compare, evaluate and discuss both the Design (or teleological) argument for the existence of God and the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, as well as highlighting philosophical criticisms of both theories too. By doing so, we shall attempt to draw a satisfactory conclusion and aim gain a greater understanding of the respective theories and their criticisms of each theory.

Paul Tillich was a versatile and trailblazer author, theologian and philosopher throughout his whole life. Hence, there was a direct correlation between his concrete choices/decisions and his actual life. To wit, one should consider his actions to understand what his thoughts were. Tillich did not lose touch with the world and life. So, his thoughts and actions cannot be considered according to solitude of the philosophical or theological investigations. Furthermore, this is the case why his writings left us some important and wealthy conceptions to philosophical considerations. Although it is difficult to formulate the views of an anti-systematic philosopher such as Tillich, in his animated writings, one can find hints of his thoughts that would help one to get a better understanding about the difference of his stance regarding human existence that would allow a comparison of his views with his contemporaries.

The fields of philosophy and theology are often grounds of debate. While some hold these two to be relevant and dependent on each other, others find them to be completely independent of each other. In John D. Caputo’s work, Philosophy and Theology, he expresses his view of these fields as companions. Caputo states, “Think of philosophers and theologians as fellow sailors on [the] ocean,” depicting his view of the interdependence of these two fields (Caputo 69). Through his illustration we can find the influence philosophy and theology can have on each other in facilitating our toleration of such a mysterious future and world.