Category: God

Introduction

The novel The God of Small Things was written by Roy Arundhati. It features the story of two Indian twins that happened during their childhood, and how love laws destroyed their lives. The rules state how one ought to love, how much one should love as well as people who they ought to fall in love with.

Generally, the book describes how peoples lives and behavior may be affected by some minor things. This paper discusses the novel The God of Small Things, which mainly focuses on love laws people apply to, thus they are responsible for their enforcement. The guilty as well as punishment for breaking them are the main issues described in the story.

Love is a force that cannot be controlled by law. It is so powerful that it cannot be influenced or adhere to some social code of conduct. The book highlights different love stories that can be said to touch the biological, family, erotic spheres as well as issue of hope. However, the novel mainly focuses on taboo and forbidden love.

Writer of the novel considers breaking the laws of love a taboo in the Indian Community. Such an action leads to serious punishment to those who break it. Generally, according to the novel, love laws are rules and traditions set in the Indian community that are aimed at restoring Indian love culture despite increasing globalization. It also focuses on ensuring that the community restores its culture and traditions.

These laws were established to guide children and young adults according to the expectations of the society and with whom they ought to have fallen in love, how much they were expected to love such people and how they should have loved the people they claimed to be in love with ( Kline 370).

These rules or laws of love were applicable to all the people in the society irrespective of sex or age. However, it mainly focused on young adults and teenagers who had a dream of marrying and/or were in search for a marriage spouse. It was applicable to people with blood relations.

These laws aimed at controlling marriage between people of the same biological parents. Laws are adopted to control certain aspects, but adherence to these rules depends on the law enforcers. Love laws were concerned in family matters and enforced by the elders in the society, especially by elderly family members, such as parents, among others. Parents were to ensure that their children were not allowed to love each other because it was considered a taboo in the Indian community (Batra and Messier 112).

Love laws were applicable to biological relatives, such as a brother and a sister. Therefore, biological partners were guilty of breaking love laws in case they married each other or engaged in intimate activities. The laws were observed in the society, and those found guilty of breaking the rules were severely punished because it was considered a taboo in the Indian community (Kline 370). Breaking of the love laws is one of the worst taboos, and its punishment is severe.

For instance, Velutha was banished because of breaking the love law, while Ammu was locked up in her room. Furthermore, in another incident from the book, Vellya was willing to kill his biological son because he discovered that he had been associating with the touchable class yet they belonged to the untouchable class in the society. Therefore, breaking the love laws could lead to death penalty or banishment (Batra and Messier 118).

Works Cited

Batra, Nandita and Vartan P Messier. Transgression and Taboo Critical Essays. Puerto Rico: Caribbean Chapter Publications. 2005, Print.

Kline, Donna C. The Laws of Love: A Legal Guide for Couples. Blue House Press, 2007. Print.

Introduction

The novel The God of Small Things was written by Roy Arundhati. It features the story of two Indian twins that happened during their childhood, and how love laws destroyed their lives. The rules state how one ought to love, how much one should love as well as people who they ought to fall in love with.

Generally, the book describes how peoples lives and behavior may be affected by some minor things. This paper discusses the novel The God of Small Things, which mainly focuses on love laws people apply to, thus they are responsible for their enforcement. The guilty as well as punishment for breaking them are the main issues described in the story.

Love is a force that cannot be controlled by law. It is so powerful that it cannot be influenced or adhere to some social code of conduct. The book highlights different love stories that can be said to touch the biological, family, erotic spheres as well as issue of hope. However, the novel mainly focuses on taboo and forbidden love.

Writer of the novel considers breaking the laws of love a taboo in the Indian Community. Such an action leads to serious punishment to those who break it. Generally, according to the novel, love laws are rules and traditions set in the Indian community that are aimed at restoring Indian love culture despite increasing globalization. It also focuses on ensuring that the community restores its culture and traditions.

These laws were established to guide children and young adults according to the expectations of the society and with whom they ought to have fallen in love, how much they were expected to love such people and how they should have loved the people they claimed to be in love with ( Kline 370).

These rules or laws of love were applicable to all the people in the society irrespective of sex or age. However, it mainly focused on young adults and teenagers who had a dream of marrying and/or were in search for a marriage spouse. It was applicable to people with blood relations.

These laws aimed at controlling marriage between people of the same biological parents. Laws are adopted to control certain aspects, but adherence to these rules depends on the law enforcers. Love laws were concerned in family matters and enforced by the elders in the society, especially by elderly family members, such as parents, among others. Parents were to ensure that their children were not allowed to love each other because it was considered a taboo in the Indian community (Batra and Messier 112).

Love laws were applicable to biological relatives, such as a brother and a sister. Therefore, biological partners were guilty of breaking love laws in case they married each other or engaged in intimate activities. The laws were observed in the society, and those found guilty of breaking the rules were severely punished because it was considered a taboo in the Indian community (Kline 370). Breaking of the love laws is one of the worst taboos, and its punishment is severe.

For instance, Velutha was banished because of breaking the love law, while Ammu was locked up in her room. Furthermore, in another incident from the book, Vellya was willing to kill his biological son because he discovered that he had been associating with the touchable class yet they belonged to the untouchable class in the society. Therefore, breaking the love laws could lead to death penalty or banishment (Batra and Messier 118).

Works Cited

Batra, Nandita and Vartan P Messier. Transgression and Taboo Critical Essays. Puerto Rico: Caribbean Chapter Publications. 2005, Print.

Kline, Donna C. The Laws of Love: A Legal Guide for Couples. Blue House Press, 2007. Print.

Introduction

When studying philosophy, one will inevitably come across Thomas Aquinas and his five arguments for the existence of a higher being, such as God. His justifications for the existence of a higher being were developed to offer a firm basis for the conviction that a God does, in fact, exist. Utilizing his well-known 5 ways, Aquinas tries to demonstrate the presence of God. They assist in proving the existence of God to not just those of religious background but also those who were at first dubious about the contentious subject (Roszak and Huzarek 743). In addition, many persons who identify as religious, irrespective of the faith they embrace, want to center their beliefs on Aquinas teachings. They embrace his writings because they offer more rational proof of Gods presence than other peoples words or texts like the Bible or the Quran, which assert the existence of various gods and godlike entities. It is simple to comprehend why most religious adherents want to utilize Thomas Aquinas ideas to support the existence of their gods after carefully examining his works. Therefore, Thomas Aquinas developed The Five Ways to demonstrate the presence of God. Each Way has a unique approach to using examples from the natural world to demonstrate Gods existence. Every argument makes an effort to illustrate an effect using cause and consequence. The effects are relatively simple, and current science may make some compelling cases for why they exist. The Five Ways, however, was a very effective technique when Thomas Aquinas developed it. Therefore, this paper considers St. Thomas Aquinass five ways to assess his arguments, reasoning, and the nature of his God.

Briefly: The Five Ways

Thomas initial approach entails evidence of the exercise. According to Thomas, the premise that anything that moves requires a motor proves the existence of a god who is a stationary motor. A sound cause idea is present in the second approach. The constellation of causes and consequences we observe in the world must originate somewhere for it to have logic. Consequently, a deity who is the root cause exists. The third method demonstrates that not all existing things are due to themselves. However, if everything was unintentional, none of these circumstances could have co-occurred, making action impossible. The required entity, God, must account for all things. The fourth method displays that everything has a degree. Noble and not noble, for instance, are more or less accurate (Schoot). Hence, such a measure implies an ultimate presence as a metric of all these relative measures. The fifth method asserts that God is the leading creator or architect because of how things behave in the world.

Aquinass Arguments

Most Successful Arguments

God is referred to as the Prime Mover in the first definition. Aquinas: Since fire only heats supposedly heated wood in diverse ways, it is difficult to determine what is actually hot. Therefore, a thing cannot be both the mover and the item being moved simultaneously; that is, it cannot move itself. Science has established beyond a shadow of a doubt that most, if not all, objects are in motion. The object under motion is as a result of another motion; all things are motionless unless they are in potentiality to another entity in motion; while an entity moves to the degree, it is in action, according to the concept of motion (Fogelin 305). This premise is still valid because motion only transforms anything from possibility to reality (Swinburne). However, something must be an entity in a state of actuality to decrease anything from potentiality to existence. For example, anything that is genuinely hot, like fire, can make wood, and anything that is potentially hot can be hot, causing it to move and change. Because of this, it is not conceivable for this situation to exist concurrently in potentiality and reality in similar yet differing ways.

The hot cannot simultaneously be presumably hot, but instead concurrently hypothetically cold is true in reality (Swinburne 18). This notion renders it unlikely for an object to be both the mover and the object being moved, that is, to have the power to reposition itself similarly and to the same degree. This way focuses on the truth that each moving entity must be susceptible to motion by another. When one entity in motion causes another to become that object in motion, the second item in motion should then be caused to become that object in motion by yet another (third) item in motion, and so on. Besides, because the succeeding movers only move to the degree that they are subject to a motion by the prime mover, the movement of this network cannot be regarded as infinite because there would be no adequate explanation for the first mover and, as a result, no other mover. Reaching God, the initial mover and the only one who can move anything, is made possible by this premise (Flew and Kenny).

Least Successful Argument

According to Aquinas fourth method of demonstrating the existence of God, the Absolute Being serves as a standard for evaluating all other attributes. It is obtained through the classification of items. The existence of advancements in items, such as going from less genuine to more accurate or from less honorable to more nobility, is mentioned in a fourth way. This type of hierarchy suggests that a superior being is at the root of existence, in this instance, God. This defense of Aquinas five propositions is thought to be the least successful of the five. First, even though a yardstick is necessary before talking about less or more, there is no basis for this measure to be an actual one. This notion is true, especially when current information is taken into account. Hence, ideals like truth, noble, and good are essentially evaluated differently throughout various historical periods and cultures. For instance, western cultures view polygamy negatively or dishonorably because it is considered a crime. However, Muslim civilizations allow polygamy and even promote it in some circumstances, mainly when multiple men die due to war or diseases (Schoot 39). As a result, ranking the various social standards hierarchically would be unworkable. This perspective rejects God as the Absolute Being because there is no clear gradation present.

Critical Analysis of Aquinass Position

Aquinas made significant claims that supported the presence of God. The philosopher observed that everything in the world seemed to be in motion in the first argument. It is accurate to say that things do not just occur in the universe. There is no possible way for us to start moving immediately. We can only identify God as the reason for our being, as there must be a foundation for our movement. The items we see should be attributed to Gods cause. The only evidence that God exists should be the notion that we can close and open our eyes. The second argument uses causality to demonstrate that there must have been an antecedent source for the sequence of causes (Kenny 38). The causal effect is supported by scientists subscribing to some concepts, such as the big bang theory. Even if a single, massive physical blast formed the entire world, there had to be a reason behind it. If the physical occurrence can be explained, Gods presence is the sole explanation for the nonphysical experience.

The third justification for existence leads to God. The presence of objects in the universe is sufficient evidence that something that does not go away appears to exist there. All entities that exist must have a reason for existing. Even when some of our lives perish, the cause, which is supposed to be everlasting, nonetheless keeps an eye on all of them. All beings that can exist today could not have done so without God, who is the wellspring of all beings. There must be an account for why not all entities are identical in the fourth proof, founded on ethics and the goodness of things (Roszak and Huzarek 747). One may see that some things are intrinsically excellent and some that one might consider wrong. Someone of the highest good must have chosen what is good and what is not (Kenny 88). One could argue that God is ethical in all respects and that it is up to him to establish what is right and wrong. All things in the universe serve a function, as was the focus of the previous discourse. Even if some entities in the environment can be said to lack intellect, it is evident that they have a specific function and were put in existence for that function. Even though they may not be sentient, these things demonstrate the presence of God.

Conclusion

The Five Ways of Thomas Aquinas to Prove the Existence of God have been briefly articulated in this paper, along with the most and least successful arguments. This papers most compelling argument for Gods existence is The First Way: God, the Prime Mover. On the other hand, the ultimate being of God has been deemed the least compelling argument for Gods existence in this paper. The five-part Aquinas proof offers a strong case for the existence of God. The philosopher asserts that a close examination of nature can ultimately convince one of Gods existence. Starting with the motion problem, we know that natural entities move but do not comprehend what causes them to move. Scientists have attempted to elucidate the motions origin, but they have been unable to do so without also attempting to explain the motions causative factors. The mystery surrounding the origin of these events is perplexing due to its inexplicability. There must have been a difficult to comprehend cause that remains to watch over all creation. God may have created natural objects to support life. The premise that everything was made distinctively indicates that God must have had a reason for doing it. It is accurate that God is required for our presence because he is well aware of human needs. Regarding goodness and intent, it is clear that there are distinctions among natural objects and that these distinctions serve a role. Possibly, God did not make objects without thinking about how they might benefit the world. Therefore, evidence that God exists can be found in nature and in how particular things work.

Works Cited

Flew, Antony, and Anthony Kenny. The Five Ways: St. Thomas Aquinas Proofs of Gods Existence. The Philosophical Review 80.3 (1971): 411. Print.

Fogelin, Robert J. Philosophical Interpretations. New York: Oxford UP, 1992. Print.

Kenny, Anthony. The Five Ways: St Thomas Aquinas Proofs of Gods Existence. Vo. Routledge, 2014. Web.

Roszak, Piotr, and Tomasz Huzarek. Seeing God. Thomas Aquinas on Divine Presence in the World. Bogoslovni Vestnik 79.3 (2019): 739-49. Print.

Schoot, Henk J.M. Thomas Aquinas on Human Beings as Image of God. European Journal for the Study of Thomas Aquinas 38.1 (2020): 33-46. Print.

Swinburne, Richard, and Mirosaw Szatkowski. What kind of necessary being could God be?. Ontological proofs today 50 (2012): 345.

Transcendentalists believed in knowing God on a personal level, watering down the idea that there was no need for an intermediary in understanding God and the spiritual world. To cement their beliefs, transcendentalists embraced idealism, where they focused on nature and opposed materialism. Transcendentalists were inspired by many sources, including Platonism, Neo-Platonism, and Persian scriptures. The transcendentalist movement refused to acknowledge any supreme power beyond their abilities. Instead, they took a strong stand that each person had the right to make their own decisions and draw their lines between the world, fellow human beings, and God.

Among the leading proponents of the movement, Ralph Emerson once banished the biblical teaching and records of Jesuss great miracles. He claimed that Jesus was a great man in his days, but despite performing great miracles, he claimed that Jesus was not God (Francis, 2018). Transcendentalists believe that God is not a strict judge as the bible depicts him; neither does he distanced himself from transcendentalists, but his authority and existence can be manifested through nature. God can be well understood as a supernatural spirit through observing natural processes like breathing free air and the unending power of divinity filled on earth. According to their understanding, people are better and more at liberty when they are self-reliant and free from authority. In their view on God, societies and institutions like Christianity and other religions were created to corrupt the purity of individuals and deny them their independence.

In conclusion, transcendentalists do not dismiss the existence of God. Instead, they view God as a supreme being who does not focus on a single person but views God as a being manifested in nature. They value all of Gods creation, man, animals, and nature in general and believe that man should be self-reliant since that was how God intended when he created man. Due to the free will given to man, there should not be a medium to connect man to God.

References

Francis, R. (2018). Nature versus history. In Transcendental Utopias (pp. 1-34). Cornell University Press.

The distinction between Gods natural and supernatural knowledge and between grace and nature has been the subject of intense debate among Catholic theologians. Many believe that where God is, there is no place for wildlife and scientific knowledge; it can be known only through faith. However, after analyzing the literature on this topic, the conclusion arises that the presence of God is mediated by nature.

The first proof of the connection between God and nature is that its creator is necessary for the universe to exist, and it is not enough to create matter out of nothing. The process of its development is also subject to certain laws. Without natural laws, matter at creation would be in a state of chaos; its particles would float in black outer space without any electrical or chemical connection between themselves. However, even after creation, the universe exists in an orderly and organized manner, and this must have a basis on the corresponding mathematical equations discovered by scientists, where numerical values reflect their exact strength when planning all matter in the Universe.

A little more gravity would lead to the instability of stars like our Sun  those of them that are 1.4 times the mass of the Sun, they would burn up too quickly. But if the force of attraction were a little less, then only a small luminary would be formed, weighing only 0.8 of the mass of our Sun, which would exclude the existence of heavy elements necessary for the origin of life. But even without going into such complex examples, it is enough for the reader to know that the Universe is based on precise mathematical laws, not on accidents, and the structure of the Universe provides additional scientific evidence of the Creators reality.

In a broad sense, Catholicisms interpretation of ecology and the natural environment coincides with the generally accepted one. Ecology is the doctrine of the home, which is the world; since man develops this science for the sake of man, it should have as its subject the diverse and necessary conditions of human existence in this home. According to the modern Catholic concept, the house is given to man by the Creator and given to him for further civilizational activities for the reasonable transformation of the natural environment. Unfortunately, man caused a lot of negative consequences with his civilizational activity. Enriching the natural environment with many things that do not exist in nature, he simultaneously deprived it of its original harmony and primordial elements necessary for life: clean water, clean air, uninfected soil, etc. These elements determine a persons normal life as a species, the quality of his existence on Earth.

Thomas Aquinas, an indisputable authority for modern Catholic philosophers, interpreted all the laws of the world as specific manifestations of one divine law in the work Summa theology. He acts as the will of God and is eternal and unchangeable, just like God himself. All created beings obey this law or right. However, mans attitude to eternal law is quite special. As a rational being, he must first know what the divine right requires of him and act in accordance with its requirements. Due to the presence of consciousness and the ability to cognize, a person reads the eternal right of God written in his nature (St. Thomas Aquinas, chapters 1-9). Actually, this right, objective but conscious and perceived by the subject, acts as a natural right  the God-given order of existence and development of the material world and man.

Moreover, the creation of nature by the Creator is described in detail in the scriptures themselves. Thus, God first created the sky and the earth, then saw the light and created darkness. Consequently, it became known as day and night, and there was a changeability of the time of day. Man is the only creature on earth that God has desired for his own sake. Of all material beings, only man can know and love his Creator. Man is called by knowledge and loves to participate in the life of God. He was created for this purpose, and this is the basis of his dignity (Old Testament). Consequently, man is created as a part of nature, proving the continuous connection between reality and the Creator.

Moreover, human nature has some divine qualities: example, compassion, kindness, love, mercy, the desire to help your neighbor, and sacrifice. The Bible teaches us that we must preserve and, if possible, multiply our positive character traits to become closer to God. Our qualities responsible for conscience, morality, and morality are given primarily by God. Furthermore, all these qualities are inextricably linked with human nature. Therefore, we can conclude that God has a direct relationship with nature and reality.

It is known that Jesus had the ability to heal other people. The Gospel of Matthew describes in detail how Jesus performs miracles of healing and gives people food for survival. Therefore, God is aware of the problems of mortal people, thirst, hunger, and diseases (An Overview of Matthew). This is another proof of Gods involvement in human nature and reality and recognizes the Almighty as the creator of all processes on planet Earth, including the work of the human body.

By way of conclusion, it is important to note once again that various religious teachings describe the continuous connection of nature with God. Moreover, the divine principle is in every person since all people are created in the divine image and likeness. Examples provide proof of this statement from the Gospel of Matthew, the Old Testament, and the work of Thomas Aquinas.

References

Old Testament. Genesis 1-4. The Creation of the World. St. Thomas Aquinas. Summa Contra Gentiles. An Overview of Matthew. The Bible Project.

Introduction

The Attributes of God and Communion with God are my chosen biblical doctrines. The main character of the biblical God is a powerful, invisible force that directs the course of history and intervenes in the lives of people on earth. Many people see this as evidence of an all-powerful, loving deity who cares about humans and their salvation. Communion with God narrative is about the first man, Adam, who was created by God in his own image. When Adam sinned, he separated himself from God, and all of creation was affected. However, through Jesus Christs sacrifice on the cross, humans can be reconciled and restored to fellowship with God. Communion story is a reminder that the bible books are not separate but rather united under one overarching redemption story. The Attributes of God and Communion with God demonstrate Gods love for humans during creation, fall, redemption, and restoration.

The Attributes of God and Communion with God

There are many different attributes of God that are discussed in the biblical narrative. Some of these include his omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. These attributes have implications for understanding the unity of the Bible books. For example, because God is omniscient, He knows all things past, present, and future. This means that He is able to unify the disparate stories and events recorded in Scripture into one coherent whole (Etzel & Small, 2016). In addition, because God is omnipotent, He has the power to bring about His will and purposes in spite of any opposition. This can give us hope that even when things seem hopeless or out of control, God is still sovereign and in charge.

The Attributes of God are found throughout the Bibles narrative, which unfolds through creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. In creation, we see that God is majestic and eternal (Psalm 90:2), omnipotent and omniscient (Genesis 18:14), righteous and just (Deuteronomy 32:4), kind and merciful (Psalm 103:8), gracious and slow to anger (Exodus 34:6). In the fall, we see that sin entered the world through Adam and Eves disobedience to God, which resulted in their separation from Him (Pink, 2019). This introduced suffering, pain, death, and corruption into the world.

The Attributes of God are revealed through the biblical narrative as it unfolds from Redemption to Restoration. For example, in the story of Adam and Eve, we see Gods character as one who is willing to forgive and redeem sinners (Pink, 2019). This is seen in the way that He provides a way for them to be clothed and covered despite their sin. In the story of Noah, we see Gods character as one who is willing to give second chances. Even though Noah was righteous and found favor in Gods sight, he still faced destruction along with the rest of mankind. Through Noahs faithfulness, God saved him and his family through the flood (Pink, 2019). This shows us that God is always willing to extend mercy toward those who are repentant.

The biblical story of communion with God unfolds throughout the narrative of Creation and Fall. In the beginning, when God created the world and man, there was perfect harmony between humans and their Creator; but then came sin, and with it, separation from God (Ene, 2021). The man was no longer able to live in close communion with his Maker, and life on earth became a struggle. Through Jesus Christs intervention, mankind has been offered reconciliation and once again can come into fellowship with God. This happens through faith in Jesus as our Savior; we are saved by grace alone through faith in Him (Etzel & Small, 2016). And when we receive him as our Lord and Savior, we receive the Holy Spirit who enables us to have communion with God Himself.

Moreover, communion with God also unfolds through redemption and restoration. The word communion comes from the Latin communio, which means sharing or participation (Summerhays, 2020). Christians believe that through Christ, they can have a personal relationship with God. This mutual sharing and communication between God and believers is based on principles found throughout Scripture. The biblical narrative of redemption teaches that all people are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27). We are designed for fellowship with Him, but our sinful nature, prone to rebelliousness, breaks that communion. Because of our sinfulness, we are cut off from his presence (Isaiah 59:2). Due to his greatness, he gave us his only son to die for us, which cleansed our sins by restoring the good relationship between man and God.

In the book of Exodus, Moses encounters God in a burning bush. God commissions Moses to lead the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt and into Canaan, the land he promised them. After leading the Israelites across the Red Sea and through the wilderness, Moses arrives at Mount Sinai (Ene, 2021). There, God reveals his law to Moses and makes a covenant with the people of Israel. Moses mediates between God and his people, conveying Gods will and bringing about reconciliation when they stray from him. After forty years of wandering in the wilderness, the Israelites finally enter Canaan but quickly fall into idolatry.

Conclusion

In conclusion, through communing with God and the attributes of God, we learn that his love for humans is unwavering from creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. Concerning Gods attributes, he is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, just, righteous, merciful, kind, slow of anger, and gracious. All the qualities are seen during the creation, but after mans disobedience to God, he introduced suffering to man; he later forgave the man. Regarding communing with God narrative, after the man sinned against his Maker, thus drifting their relationship. He still offers his only son Jesus Christ; he reconciles with the man. During the Israelites deliverance, they went against Gods laws, but through Mosess mediation, they were pardoned and reached the promised land.

References

Ene, I. (2021). Religion-The discipline of restoring communion between people. European Journal of Social Science Education and Research, 8(1), 79-87. Web.

Etzel, G., & Small, R. (2016). Everyday theology. B&H Academic.

Pink, A. W. (2019). The attributes of God. General Press.

Summerhays, P. J. (2020). Diocesan synod: Event of communion and action of governance for the archdiocese of San Francisco. The Catholic University of America.

Stewardship is a critical spiritual principle that has always been a part of faith in God. It is a complex principle, that many in the modern world do not wish to fulfill or interpret. As noted in the reading by Walborn and Chan (2015), stewardship as a concept has been lost in the modern church despite being a vital foundation. Most members of the church, are willing to contribute as long as the demands do not impose on their otherworldly allegiances or desires. People are taking up the cross only if it does not overbear them, fit in their schedules, and does not oppose their lifestyle needs. All this represents humanitys fallenness which opposes the very nature of Christianity and its call for repentance, faithfulness, and dedication.

Stewardship has been in place since the times of the Old Testament. There, the teachings of stewardship are based on the principles that everything is in Gods ownership, Gods covenant people are responsible for their management of resources that belong to God, and giving is an appropriate action to Gods ownership of everything (Walborn and Chan 2015). Therefore, in these principles, it is vital to understand that God created the Earth and all that is in it and inhabits it.

People tend to forget this in the context that humankind is essentially stewards of the planet. Everything that we ever owned or owned belongs to God. In turn, by giving generously as part of the act of stewardship, one is not giving away personal possessions but Gods gifts. The act of being able to part with the material to support the faith is essential in stewardship and an individuals salvation. This was true in the times of David and Israel and remains true to this day.

Stewardship continues to be emphasized in the New Testament as well. Jesus continues the theology of Gods ownership with the parable of the servants. It once again makes the reference to the origin of the concept of stewardship, which is defined as a caretaker of the property, a servant overseeing the domestic property (Walborn and Chan 2015). New Testament gives more agency to the faithful, by making the people responsible and accountable stewards. Nevertheless, the coming of the Master is at hand, which may provide heavenly rewards or punishment in hell. However, the mysteries and wisdom of God call upon practicing proper stewardship already on earth, with experiencing these rewards on a smaller scale.

Going back to the modern-day, Walborn and Chan (2015) note that stewardship seems more palatable as a theological principle than just a practical one. Many experience strong emotions and difficult questions when attempting to give in to stewardship. Stewardship, even in the modern-day should be approached as if God already owns all material goods, thus not being a slave to them but living a faithful and dedicated life similar to that anecdote with the shoemaker.

As stewards, mankind just oversees the goods of this world until the return of the master. Stewardship is not difficult, requiring discipleship on how possessions are handled; mission with the giving of time, money, and talents; generosity, a key Christian value; and a lifestyle, of living humbly and giving from the heart, not just from what is leftover. As a result, the faithful who act in stewardship is able to proclaim Christ and advance the mission of the church while also accepting personal responsibility of being good stewards of Gods creation.

Reference

Walborn, Ronald, and Frank Chan. 2001. Stewardship and the Kingdom of God. Colorado Springs, CO: The Christian and Missionary Alliance.

Introduction

Diverse religious opinions arise whenever individuals hold different views about a certain spiritual issue. Most people respect the opinion of others about a certain topic. People appreciate that rational individuals can in differ in opinion. However, these sensible and tolerant attitudes lead to the formulation of two distinct lines of thought where people align with groups that share similar opinions.

For instance, Christians and Muslims believe in the existence of Jesus and they exalt, respect, and love him. However, they differ over the issue of his divinity. In a bid to solve this question, Christians refer to the Bible, while Muslims refer to the Quran. Despite referring to the major doctrines, believers do not agree with the claim that Jesus is God. Some will argue that both the Bible and the Quran explain that Jesus is not God. The antagonists claim that many people do not understand the teachings of the Bible, and claim that it is the mindset of many that the belief in Jesus as God is so widespread to qualify it to have its origin in the Bible (Adoni 14). This paper will show that Jesus is God and biblical teachings manifest that Jesus possessed the characteristics and abilities of God.

Critical evaluation

Understanding the most religious discussions to a point of taking sides requires extensive and critical evaluation of the issue. Applying some epistemological concepts is necessary before one can dispute other peoples beliefs regarding religious debates. One must first differentiate rationality from mere persuasiveness and the critical concepts driven by logic. The idea that individuals taking divergent opinions are opponents drives the debate towards the wrong direction. Religious discussions should target achieving the truth, and thus seeing others as opponents simply cut them off and beliefs that are perceived by some as true end up losing basis. Claiming Jesus is not God should not be seen as a denial of the truth, but as a way of searching the truth since every side is given the challenge to prove the credibility of its assertions.

Disagreement with peers about a religious belief in many cases makes one doubt about his/her beliefs. This essay will take a critical evaluation of this topic by referring to works of three authors who support the claim that Jesus is God and it will evaluate works by two authors who offer counter arguments about this topic.

Arguments for

Most non-Christians rightly know much about this topic and most importantly the contents of the Bible. However, they do not seem to consider the divine nature of the Bible; hence, they do not seek to abide by its doctrines. The message conveyed in the Bible declares that Jesus is indeed God and this message should not be taken as a mere construction among the Christian believers. Jesus was all-powerful just as God, but he took human nature to make people understand what God expected of human beings. According to Rice, Jesus is God and every Christian believer can find in the Bible adequate evidence of that fact (21).

Rice claims that lack of belief in Jesus as God is not based on the search for the truth or learning, but the desire to dispute what is conventional in Christology (37). Rice refers to the teachings of John to show that antagonists fail to believe in Christ not because they are stupid, but because they are stubborn and evil (40). The Bible quotes that Jesus possessed traits and capabilities of God within himself and this argument is sufficient to argue that Jesus is God (Rice 41). Jesus came to the world in human form, and thus the biblical explanation and his own clarification were necessary. Therefore, to search verses in the Bible and suggest that they teach Jesus as not God is a misinterpretation of the teachings. However, antagonists fail to understand that Jesus represented the only God taught in the Bible.

In his book, How God Became Jesus, Bird responds to Ehrmans book, How Jesus Became God, by pointing out that Jesus divinity was independent of the ideas given by Ehrman about intermediary figures. Jesus was unique and different from intermediary figures because he was part of Gods identity (Bird 79). Furthermore, angels and other exalted beings did not share Gods power and God did not praise them, but Jesus received Gods praise. Bird states that Jesus was God as it was taught in the gospel of John (81). Contrary, Ehrman argues that Johns gospel emerged later as constructions of the church and it lacked historical basis (111).

This assertion is inadequate since the gospels were written by men under the inspiration of God and they elaborated the activities of the early church. According to St. Paul, Jesus performed many miracles and said great things about himself, which no other exalted being possessed. God manifested himself through Jesus and Jesus was conveyed in human form to convince people to repent, but it did not mean that Jesus was different from God.

Apparently, Christianity is experiencing controversies about faith and belief in Jesus divinity. Antagonists develop a self-proclaimed knowledge about the Bible of which they use to counter those who have faith in Bible teachings. Copan claims that such intolerant thinkers should not stop Christians from discussing what they believe in (41). Prayer, patience, and practice can help one understand the Bible and learn how to respond in a manner that leads into a meaningful discussion with those who refute others faith. Copan shows that it is hard to share the belief that Jesus is God with those with the intention of showing the opposite (93).

In the early centuries, the Jews adhered strictly to monotheism, which formed the basic principle of the Old Testament that is advanced in the New Testament. This aspect shows that the doctrine of Trinity presented one God who manifested himself in three forms, viz. the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit (Copan 36). Jesus was the son meaning the he was God in the human form. Antagonists fail to understand this aspect, and thus they claim that the same Bible teaches of only one God and Jesus himself failed to declare himself God.

Arguments against

Both Christians and Muslims acknowledge that God is all- knowing and mighty. According to Ehrman, Jesus was not all-powerful because Marks gospel indicated that he failed to heal a blind man until a second attempt (74). Jesus did not claim himself to be God nor did his disciples believe so (Ehrman 74). Ehrman also argues that Jesus had shortcomings in his knowledge because he declared not to be aware when the last day would be as such knowledge belonged to God alone. These assumptions were some of the poorly interpreted statements that Jesus made. He was aware of the human nature and being the same as God, he could not reveal to humanity about what was supposed to remain unknown to man. The gospel of Luke shows that Jesus increased in knowledge and learned to obey (Ehrman 32).

Claiming that Jesus did not know everything since he learned new things is insufficient because Jesus was God, but he took human form and went through normal life for humankind to accept and understand his teachings. Ehrman also shows that only God is immortal since Jesus failed to defeat death on the cross (118). Contrary, no death had hold of him, but only his human form died and resurrected to an immortal being. His human attributes passed away, but not his godlike dimensions that defined him as God from the beginning to eternity. Claiming that exalted men like Moses were gods and so was Jesus is fallacious. Moses was used to convey Gods message to the people, but he was not worth of Gods praise unlike Jesus who represented Gods will and did not emphasize on self-proclamation about his divinity.

While most Christians will dispute claims that the New Testament is controversial, antagonists show that its teachings lacked historical basis. However, according to Adoni, Jesus is a mere prophet, but not God since he failed to proclaim that (40).

Jesus was a humble representation of God and self-proclamation about his divinity was evident in the way he performed miracles. Adoni claims that Jesus was an exalted son of man and the Old Testament teaches humankind not to trust the son of man (53).

From this perspective, Jesus is seen as not God, hence incapable of saving humanity. Adoni shows that the son of man cannot help fellow humankind since Jesus was given power, which he did not own. This aspect shows that God was acting through Jesus to reach humanity. If Jesus acted on his own, it would mean that there existed another God. In many occasions, Jesus worshiped, this fact caused problems to the Christians since it implied Jesus had a God to exalt. Antagonists question Christians why they should worship Jesus since he did not believe to be worth the honor. This aspect does not suggest that Christians want Jesus to be their God since indeed he is God (Bird 85). Jesus worshiped God to teach humanity of what was expected of them by the Father. The essence of taking human form was primarily to serve as example to humankind.

Conclusion

Disagreements between believers and non-believers are necessary to achieve the grounds upon which individuals can base their beliefs. However, what matters is not identifying which belief has a rationalized argument and the one that lacks the same, but delving further to have substantial evidence to support ones claims. To know Jesus is to know the true righteousness of God. With the presence of Jesus, people gain knowledge about God. The Bible clearly indicates that Jesus was perfectly God, but he manifested in human nature. Through the teachings of the Bible, one can learn that Jesus is God and other opinions outside that framework are inventions that portray him in different identities.

Works Cited

Adoni, Sollog. Jesus Is Not God The Biblical Truth by Sollog, Florida: Adoni Publishing, 2013. Print.

Bird, Michael. How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus Divine Nature-a Response to Bart Ehrman, Michigan: Zondervan, 2014. Print.

Copan, Paul. True for You but Not for Me: Overcoming Objections to Christian Faith, Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 2009. Print.

Ehrman, Bart. How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee, New York: Harper One, 2014. Print.

Rice, John. Is Jesus God? An Answer to Infidels in the Church and Out, Wheaton: Solid Christian Books, 2014. Print.

Introduction

In the well-known passage in Genesis, God said, Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness& (New King James Version Bible Genesis 1.26). It is a powerful and fundamental statement that came define humanity for millennia, that humans are a likeness of the Divine. However, we are not divine or perfect, but rather full of errors  biological, psychological, and moral among others. Furthermore, humans are often self-destructive, selfish, and lack awareness, both personal and global on the impact of taken actions.

It poses an important question on how humans and God relate in the context of this juxtaposition that we are an image of God but also so imperfect. Humanity is created in the divine image of the Lord which enables to understand to some extent His complex design and serve as the agents of Gods work on Earth by having faith and loving God while helping fulfill His plan for all creation.

Agents of the Lord

From the early stages of the OT, humans are described as agents of the Lord. As mentioned, humans are created in the likeness of God, and for a specific purpose to let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth (Genesis 1.26). This can be interpreted as humans being made as safekeepers of the Earth. Creation is a complex phenomenon that is recognized as everything ranging from a miracle to salvation. However, theological scholars agree that a harmonious world order was built in the very infrastructure of creation.

Therefore, human existence and practices of righteousness foster the integration of social and cosmic orders. If such Gods will and human righteousness are not followed, there are concrete consequences felt across created spheres. In the OT, aspects of nature, justice, and politics are part of the comprehensive order of creation. However, Yahweh is not the God of Creation not because He is the God of humans, but rather He is the God of human history, because he is the God of Creation (Fretheim 4-5).

The power of Creation plays the key role in forming the moral identity of communities of faith from the early history of the OT. Humanity relates to God in that the beings are both his servants and the most important agents of His faith on Earth. Certain events and persons have an absolutely close relationship with God, serving as His messengers. One common example in the Pentateuch books of the OT is Moses.

The story of the Exodus tells the sage of how the Israelites were oppressed by the Egyptians. God hears the cries of the oppressed and notices, intimately being involved in the suffering. Moses is selected by God to be a messenger and agent of Gods will to actively liberate the oppressed, And God said to Moses, I AM WHO I AM. And He said, Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you (Exodus 3.14).

God offers protection, companionship, and support to those who believe in Him and worship. This represents a general tendency throughout both Old Testament and Christian history, God rarely intervenes in Earthly affairs through some divine events, but commonly through human action. Moses was one of these individuals that moved the historical process forward, a decisive agent (Herzog 259). As humans are made in the image of God and his highest creation, humanity despite all its flaws and weaknesses, is empowered and called upon by God to be the agents of His will.

Gods Involvement

The Historical books of the OT are commonly less popular and drier than the canonically crucial Pentateuch books. However, they are important as they relay the history of what happened to the Israel nation and people after independence. In the book of Kings several narratives are told, but a crucial one is Israels search for its religious identity. The first chapters of Kings discuss the life of King David, and the latter talk about the reign of King Judah and others.

It is important to note that the kings are evaluated not by their socio-political accomplishments but from a theological perspective. A substantial part of Kings focuses on Ephraim, which has to make the decision of whether Yahweh is their God, or will it worship other deities such as the Baals. It challenges the question of who God is and how is he related to human beings. The narrative describes the stories of how Yahweh is the all-powerful God, but people are not willing to accept that point. Elijah and Elisha are shown to be representatives of God, practically His embodiment and exercising his power and judgment, and therefore the attitude of the people toward them is their attitude towards God (Goldingay 194).

Kings demonstrates a certain relationship between humans and God where both the free determination of human beings is explored in juxtaposition of Gods involvement in socio-political life. God brings judgement on politics and can get things done despite deliberate human acts. Eventually, when Jerusalem falls, it was largely due to the issue that the people failed to worship Yahweh or did in the wrong way, brought disaster upon the nation (Goldingay 195).

It creates a complex precedent that humans are expected to live in the manner that God wants and not stray into territory of denial or worship of other deities. It is also symbolical of the relationship which forms when there is no direct messenger like Moses, but rather there are leaders who are either with God or choose to turn away from Him through their actions, but God gets things done, nevertheless. This is an interesting theme to explore since religion in modern politics is not as prevalent but remains a common mention in speeches and actions of American leaders. The judgements relayed in historical Scriptures are made to commit humans to proper attitudes in politics and the right worship of God in word and action.

Talking to God

In the context of humanity being agents of God and expected to act based on His will, it poses the challenging question, of how humans connect with God and begin to know what the right path might be. In the Old Testament, the Psalms were written as the collection of prayers that is meant to teach worship and prayer. The Psalter has its own nature and purpose, teaching any faithful on how to intuitively pray and connect with the Spirit (Goldingay 291).

He will respond to the prayer of the destitute; he will not despise their plea (Psalm 102.17). It is universally considered by theologists that God seeks to build a relationship with every human, and similar to any Earthly relationship, one can only establish one with God through conversation otherwise known as prayer. It is at the same time the greatest privilege but also a failure for many faithful. It is important to note that throughout both the Old and New Testament, the prophets, saints, and disciples relied on prayer consistently for guidance and deliverance.

The Psalms hold many wisdoms in them by retelling some of the greatest stories from church history, offering some guidance, and announcing some of the most important proclamations such as the humans are agents of God on Earth. Psalm 8 goes deeply into the relation between human and God, by mentioning that humanity is valued highly by their creator, especially those suffering at the hands of evil. God is established as a sovereign, but human exercise legitimate rule within the authority and realm of God.

Humans are exalted as the marvel in the magnificence of creation and God would intervene to protect the faithful and overcome all forces that go against Gods will (Guthrie and Quinn 237). Humans are fallible, but even as far as the OT, the relationship between God and humanity is one of love, almost like parent and child. While the symbolism of Father and Son was not developed until Jesus and the New Testament, the foundation was built beforehand for centuries.

Free Will as the Sovereign of God

The relationship built between humans and God is inherently complex, and paradoxical to an extent. There is a compatibility between Gods sovereignty and human free will and they are not mutually exclusive. Despite Gods sovereign control over His domain and creation, human responsibility is not absolved, even if Evil was part of His plan and sin is used for His purposes in His infinite wisdom.

In Isaiah 10.5 it is written, Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger/ And the staff in whose hand is My indignation. At close analysis, Assyria is an instrument of Gods judgment that is also being condemned. Assyria is a pagan idolatrous nation that is used to instill divine judgment against the Israelites that are held responsible for their disbelief in Him and idolatry. Despite being used as a tool of divine wrath, the Assyrians are also held responsible for their arrogance and violence in the acts of evil.

This situation from Isaiah accurately describes the relationship that God has with the human world. Although God controls through a divine power and all actions, individual and global go on according to His purpose, it does not remove the culpability of responsibility from evildoers. Gods perception of justice and fairness differs from human ethical guidelines. Humans are judged on both motive in their hearts and action.

It establishes the final block in this complex relationship of duty, love, and worship  and that is obedience and responsibility. Humans are expected to be good and act in goodness, whether they are aware and knowledgeable of God and faith or not. Free will is given to all but the burden of responsibility still stands, and righteousness is expected (Geisler 14-16). Just as humans are made in the image of God, it is expected that humanity will attempt to follow his example of true righteousness and justice despite obvious fallibilities.

Discussion and Summary

In Biblical terms, it can be said that God has developed a stewardship of His creation in humans, and in turn, humans are placed in the position of being stewards of the Earth and ourselves. Steward is a word that is encountered several times in the Bible, taking on the meaning of treating something with care and respect while managing it wisely. Despite being created to dominate all living beings, it is rather reminiscent of the Hebrew word for dominion which indicates to take responsibility for the well-being of those in the realm of power. Humans are in the dominion of God just as other living beings are in the dominion of man. God created everything, and it was good.

Humans are good and are blessed by the Lord, and it is the responsibility of humans to practice stewardship, righteousness, and faith in Gods will. Sometimes creation is violated, there is injustice among humans, and often all creation and order suffer. However, it is part of Gods plan, and despite free will, God will enable his order, compassion, or wrath if His will so dictates.

Conclusion

As humans were created in the image of God, so has the relationship between God and human has grown to be overwhelmingly complex. Humanity is both an agent of Gods will as well as a society that is given the free will to live according to His rules and divine providence. God has demonstrated interventionist acts as well as forgiveness and compassion. Humanity is called upon to show obedience but also build a loving connection with God. The Old Testament is inherently darker and more brutal than the New Testament which emphasizes the forgiveness and compassion aspects of the relationship with God. Nevertheless, an exploration of the various elements of the OT have demonstrated that many of the theological foundations to modern Christianity were set in the early years of human existence and civilization.

Works Cited

Fretheim, Terence E. God and World in the Old Testament: A Relational Theology of Creation. Abingdon Press, 2005.

Geisler, Norman L. Chosen but Free: A Balanced View of Gods Sovereignty and Free Will. Bethany House, 2010.

Goldingay, John. An Introduction to the Old Testament: Exploring Text, Approaches & Issues. InterVarsity Press, 2015.

Guthrie, George H., and Russel D. Quinn. A Discourse Analysis of The Use of Psalm 8:4-6 In Hebrews 2:5-9(1). Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, vol. 49, no. 2, 2006, pp. 235-246. Web.

Herzog, Frederick. Moses in Contemporary Theology. Union Seminary Review, vol. 44, no. 3, 1990, pp. 253-264. Web.

The Bible. Authorized New King James Version, Thomas Nelson, n.d. Web.

Joseph was one of Jacobs twelve sons and the most loved ones, so his father gave him a beautiful colorful coat. Josephs brothers became jealous of him and decided to sell him as a slave. He was taken to Egypt and started to serve the Potiphar, who was a Pharaohs official.

In Egypt, he interpreted the dreams of two prisoners and then of the Pharaohs. He said that he would have seven years of plenty and the same amount of famine. When Pharaohs understood that Joseph had an ability from God, he made him the governor of Egypt. One day Joseph met his brothers again because they were starving, and their father sent them to Egypt to buy grain. The Brothers did not recognize him, and Joseph decided to keep it a secret and test their characters.

He invited them all for dinner and put a silver cup to the sack of one of the brothers to see if he changed. Then he realizes that they are different now and forgives them. He says to his brother But now do not be sad, and let it not trouble you that you sold me here, for it was to preserve life that God sent me before you. You did not send me here, but God (English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Genesis 45:5, 8). Joseph showed his wisdom and realization that his brothers did what they had to do.

Joseph understood that everything that had happened to him was Gods plan. He knows that God leads him even if he cannot see it at the moment. Joseph accepted the faith because it eventually showed him his purpose. He could save his family from the hunger that he predicted. That is why he trusts God and knows that he guides him.

Joseph is an example of a person who lived faithfully and had Gods mercy for his excellent behavior. This story shows how God always has a plan that people might not see at the beginning. Therefore, it is important to be righteous and have faith so God will always show the way.

Reference

English Standard Version Bible. (2001). ESV Online. Web.