Recent orders
Gods Existence Blaise Pascal
God’s Existence
Michael Owino
Awriters
God’s Existence: Blaise Pascal
God’s existence has been a topic of contention between scientists and Christians or philosophers and Christians. Blaise Pascal (1623-62) maintains that no debate regarding the existence of God is satisfactory. Instead, he suggests, that belief alone is essential for a devout life. For Pascal, there exists no rational proof for or against God’s existence has ever existed. A person chooses either to believe or to deny the existence of God. Moreover, people believe in God because of emotion and not reason. The philosopher asks people to consider the two alternatives: the existence of God or the non-existence of God. He cites that people do not stand to lose anything if He does not exist. However, if He indeed exists, people stand to lose everything they have if they chose not to believe in Him (Ashton & Westacott, 2006).
Pascal’s two options in the wager have been the subject of discussion for long. By wager, he meant that an individual’s decision can either be correct or incorrect. The pay-off for making the correct wager, according to philosopher, is the best as it includes both an infinite gain and earthly blessings. Even though one believes in God and He does not exist, one does not stand to lose anything. However, people who refuse to make any spiritual commitment risk too much if they are incorrect (Fernandes, 2002). Given the two choices or outcomes, it is better for someone to wager on the existence of God than to bet on atheism. Christianity, as argued here, is a more rational option than atheism, because if a Christian wins, he wins everything, but if he loses, he loses nothing.
References
Ashton, J. & Westacott, M. (2006). The Big Argument: Does God Exist? New Leaf Publishing Group.
Fernandes, P. (2002). No Other Gods. Xulon Press.
God’s View of Sin in the Old Testament
God’s View of Sin in the Old Testament
Name
Institution
Year
The Bible as the manuscript that defines the origin of life and everything around human kind has remained influential for ages. The value of the stories told that depict the relationship between mankind and God is not only hinged on the relevance but also the inclusive truth. One of the defining moments in the Genesis is the deep ties God was intending to establish with man. However, man sinned that sparked the antagonism and rebellion that led to God chasing mankind from the Garden of Aden. The Bible and the stories told in the book of Genesis records that God was at the beginning very interested in establishing a close relationship with man. Moreover, the beginning as recorded in the book of Genesis unfolds quite an interesting era of God versus mankind. There is an incredible connection between what mankind sought to know and that God was wiling to reveal. The other lesson is that only God is Holy and this shows that he is beyond our reach in all manner. Mankind’s strive to stay holy was always faced with obstacles and the sinful nature of man prevents him from relating with God closely.
Sin is said to be the cause of the division and gap between man and God that to this day is deeply criticized in the Bible. One of the key aspects of the early Bible stories is that they held a strong connection between God’s Holiness and mercy. The book of Genesis narrates that mankind did not only hold a special place in God’s creation but was the ruler of the entire earth (Wright, 2020). However, God lost trust on mankind when he sinned by eating the forbidden fruit that made God angry towards mankind. The first story that depicts the origin of sin and its nature in God’s eyes is the Cain versus Abel. Cain as very rude and rebellious person in the Bible committed a very grave sin of murdering Abel. God was trying to show that He was the supreme being who ruled and oversaw all mankind’s actions on the land. The story of Cain killing Abel is an example of how sin brought mankind and God into separation (Martens, 2015). One thing the Bible stories teach the Christians is that sin was the obstacle that existed between mankind and God thus prevented the human race from accessing God’s favors.
Even today, sin is a major issue that all teachings try to condemn. The early life of mankind and his relationship with God appeared so solid until sin came in between. One of the key lessons from the early Bible stories is that God was kind and merciful ad was ready to forgive mankind (Martens, 2015). There is also the lesson about patience that was s very vital character of God. One of the key lessons about the Bible is that sin was the only thing that defied how God related with mankind. Other Bible stories like that of Moses shows that God was still merciful with his people. He chose Moses to lead the Israelites and rescued them from the hands of Pharaoh (Stibbs, 2017). Some of the defining elements of mankind’s relationship with God is thus related to the nature of purity that God expected. One thing that remain clear is that sin in its core value was the only separation that arose between man and God. The Bible stories depict that mankind was highly valued by God even in his sinful nature and thus God was always ready to forgive. In a religious context, sin is a transgression against divine law. Each culture has its own interpretation of what it means to commit a sin (Wright, 2020). While sins are generally actions, any thought, word, or act considered immoral, selfish, shameful, harmful, or alienating might be termed “sinful”.
The other major story in the early life of mankind is Abraham who was always faithful and obedient to God. Abraham underwent some trials where he was regarded as baren as he could not get child until the age of 99 years. God was using the life of Abraham to show that he is beyond nature as he gave Abraham a son at a very unrealistic age (Stibbs, 2017). The life of Abraham was built around faith and obedience to God but this did not mean that he was living a happy life always. God tried Abraham’s faith by telling him to sacrifice his son that caused an outrage between Abraham and his wife Sarah (Martens, 2015). The events in these stories shows that as much as God rewarded good deeds, he could also try and inflict pain on those who remained faithful. This brings the idea of the nature and reason from staying pure. The human condition as depicted by many Bible stories shows that man is bound to sin once in while.
The other lesson is that only God is Holy and this shows that he is beyond our reach in all manner. Mankind’s strive to stay holy was always faced with obstacles and the sinful nature of man prevents him from relating with God closely (Stibbs, 2017). The nature of sin in the Bible is better described within the context of the actions that angered God and the source of barrier between the Supreme Being and mankind. Moreover, the nature of man is always depicted as the one bound to a view of selfishness that is one of the causes of sin. Sin is a major issue that all teachings try to condemn (Martens, 2015). The early life of mankind and his relationship with God appeared so solid until sin came in between. One of the key lessons from the early Bible stories is that God was kind and merciful ad was ready to forgive mankind. There is also the lesson about patience that was s very vital character of God. The Genesis stories shows that man was willing to obey but often overcome by personal desires and greed. For example, Cain’s cause of killing his brother is said to have resulted from anger and jealousy. For example, God showed patience with Pharaoh when he held the Israelites captive and acted only when the time was right (Wright, 2020).
Moreover, the variant elements of a diverse and inclusive values that depict how God related with man are built around the element of honesty. The story of Cain’s murdering his brother shows that God was willing to listen to Cain’s side of the story. The only contradiction that arises from these perceptions about the Bible is that sin was still relative and determined how God associated with the human beings. In Christian views sin is an evil human act, which violates the rational nature of man as well as God’s nature and his eternal law. It is true that sin was a major issue that God hated but he was always to forgive that shows his unique nature.
References
Martens, E. A. (2015). God’s design: A focus on Old Testament Theology. Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Stibbs, A. (2017). God’s church: a study in the biblical doctrine of the people of God.
Wright, C. J. (2020). The mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s grand narrative. Inter-Varsity Press.
God and the brain. Is there a God spot in the brain
Name
Professor
Course
Date
God and the brain – is there a God spot in the brain?
The relationship between God and the brain is a field of study that that for many years been subject to countless research analogies each trying to prove or dissolute the essence of objectivity in the study. The scholarship approach to the study refers to it as neurotheology to connote the study of the relationship between neuroscience and theology (Newberg, 2010). Neuroscience is a broad subject of study encompassing the fields of cognitive, neurology, social discourse and psychology but figuratively neurology refers to the comprehensive study entailing to the functionality and set-up of the brain. Theology on the other hand refers to the empirical study of a specific religion and their atonement to belief particularly to God (Newberg, 2010). The study of neurotheology therefore is a composite science that tries to find the link between belief in God and the role played by the brain in accounting for this belief. The subject has managed to purport both positive and negative results since its inception in 1975 after publication of “Biopsychological Determinants of Religious Ritual Behavior” by Eugene and Charles arguing that neuropsychology was the stem to which the spiritual phenomenon religion establishes itself (Seybold, 2005). This study will provide critical analysis to the subject of determining whether rationally there is an existence of a God spot in the brain.
The brain is clearly the most complex entity of the human body considering the various branches of science concentrating on the shear nature of the brain in its entirety. The brain consists of an interlinked network of connections for the purpose of signal transmission each signal embedded with a message to serve a particular function. It is from this complexity factor that different hypothesis and analogies have developed throughout the existence of man in his quest to understand the essence of the brain and its purpose to the human psyche (Albright, 2000). Some studies have managed to prove that indeed there does reside a spot in the brain purposefully for God while other studies disapprove with entirety the context of the hypothesis to existence of a God spot in the brain. The complexity of the brain according to William James and Flower is a result of experiences both intrinsic and extrinsic to human character hence attributing to growth of a more personal and spiritual perspective (Kapogiannis et.al, 2009). The experiences that manifest with the occurrence of epileptic seizures have been used to justify the thesis of the existence of a God module in the brain with research showing that the left temporal lobe in the onset of this seizure emanates euphoric feelings that are associated with the manifestation of God in the Brain. The part of the brain attributed to this discourse is designated as repository for divine experiences in the human life and as a repository for religious misconceptions in the human life. Through this insightful experience, it is proclaimed that the spiritual essence in the “self” manifests hence arguably this means the complete human brain is a God module (Albright, 2000).
The “self” and the aspects it encompasses form one of the major conundrums studied in psychology in a bid to expound its relationship to human behaviour. Philosophy and religion have formed the basis of the study where according to western philosophy; the “self” is described as an entity in singularity both subjective and unique to every individual. Religion such as Christianity takes a firmer description of the self by proclaiming denial of the “self” to levitate into dependence of God (Han et.al, 2008). The consequences of such belief to the human psyche remain a mystery in relation to how it establishes in the workings of the brain. Studies of the brain show that there exists a brain structure attributed to self-referential processing. To establish if religious influence played a part in self-referential processing, candidates in a research were required to answer questions of a personal nature and to give their judgement on whether their conception represented the self or other values. Research through use of brain imaging showed that indeed human behaviour was influenced by religious beliefs in the ability of the brain to process information about the “self” (Han et.al, 2008). However the finding were passive in nature since they did not conclusively attribute the processing capability of the brain to any neural basis that would distinctively separate the basis of using Christian religion as the subject of study and if another religion subjected to the same study would yield the same results.
Religion beliefs have been a part of human life for the longest time now and are found in every community and social context studied in anthropology. This therefore means that human nature and behaviour intrinsically and extrinsically is characterized by religious and spiritual discourses. It is for this reason that the analogy to the existence of the “God spot” stems to justify the susceptibility and crucial impact that spirituality plays to the human psyche and more generally to their interaction in a societal context. However, from a scientific perceptive there does not exist a spot localized on the brain responsible for experiences attributed to divinity of God but hypothetically, it is important to note the essence of “the spot” to human recollection of spirituality and religion since it surpasses contextualisation to resonate even in secular people who still remain spiritual in nature.
References
Albright, C. (2000), The “God Module” and the complexifying brain. Zygon, 35: 735–744. doi: 10.1111/1467-9744.00311Han, S., Mao, L., Gu, X., Zhu, Y., Ge, J., & Ma, Y. (2008). Neural consequences of religious belief on self-referential processing. Social Neuroscience, 3(1), 1-15. doi:10.1080/17470910701469681Kapogiannis, D., Barbey, A., Su, M., Zamboni, G., Krueger, F., Grafman, J., & Raichle, M. (2009). Cognitive and neural foundations of religious belief. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 106(12), 4876 – 4881. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0811717106Newberg, A. (2010). Methodological principles for research in neurotheology: Practical and philosophical implications. NeuroQuantology, 8(4). Retrieved from HYPERLINK “http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.neuroquantology.com%2Findex.php%2Fjournal%2Farticle%2Fview%2F368&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGIzI6frEqc9GCzEh6BbFkv5-yNvw” t “_blank” http://www.neuroquantology.com/index.php/journal/article/view/368Seybold, K. (2005). God and the brain: Neuroscience looks at religion. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 24(2), 122-129.