APPLYING BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES INSTRUCTIONS AND TEMPLATE
Part 1
Study Jesus’ parable of the “Good Samaritan” in Luke 10:30–35 (Hint: read Zuck’s (Basic Bible Interpretation) Chapter 9 on parables). Record your content in
this document.
1. What did the parable mean (teach) to the hearers in Jesus’ day?
2. What historical and cultural issues are different today?
3. What theological principles can be devised from the parable?
4. How should individual Christians apply the principles today?
Part 2
1. Study the immediate context of Philippians 4:13.
2. Write your own real-world scenario that parallels that of Philippians 4:13.
3. Here are the 3 criteria to use in writing your scenario. Your scenario can be personal but remember the context is that of Paul’s suffering for the
Gospel. We all face problems, pain, betrayal and a myriad of other possible calamities just as the unredeemed of the world do.
Element 1: A Christian is involved.
Element 2: The Christian is experiencing a variety of trying circumstances as a result of following Christ faithfully. Recall that Paul was in prison for
preaching the gospel when he wrote the letter to the Philippians.
Element 3: How did Christ give this Christian the strength or ability to endure the trials?
4. Your scenario should read like a story with characters and action. It should not read like a report. Word count requirement: 200 words.
Use Basic Bible Interpretation written by Roy B. Zuck Chapter 9 and the NASB version of the BIBLE
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Faith, Spirituality and Ethics Essay requires 3 points:
1.Discussion of what are spirituality and faith, including sources of beliefs in the Sacred (based on at least one article).
2.Discussion of the value of faith and spirituality for various individuals and groups (based on least one article).
3.Analysis giving your agreement and/or
disagreement with specific items in what you heard and read about the first two points above, giving the reasons for your opinions. You can include
additional considerations which you feel should be included in the discussion of faith and spirituality.
This paper should show that you understand and can
integrate the ideas in the following outcome: Outcome3.1. An understanding of faith and spirituality, and an appreciation for their significance within the human community Criteria Students are able to: 3.1a. Understand faith and spirituality both as matters for intellectual reflection and as styles of life that offer structures, self-awareness, and depth of experience to individuals and communities. 3.1b. Interpret multiple facets of faith and spirituality,
including sources of tradition and beliefs and experiences of God and the Sacred. 3.1c. Understand different religious and non-religious perspectives and value systems central to faith and spirituality.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Write a clear thesis statement without saying it ‘thesis statement is…’
topic:: Both The Iliad and the Hebrew Bible are filled with stories of violence. What role does violence play in shaping the biblical and the Homeric worlds?
Do Homer and the biblical writers regard violence as justified or necessary? To what extent are these writers similar or different? Write a thesis-based
essay in which you compare OR contrast the depiction of violence in the Hebrew Bible and The Iliad. Only use the Bible and the Iliad and cite them properly
(which chapter which line). From bible, use Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,I&II Samuel, I&II Kings,and Isaiah (mainly focus on
David,Saul,Solomon and some other characters whose stories have violence)
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
10 pages double-spaced. 4 sources. It has to be on the impacts of different religions on African slavery and Africans in diaspora. Talk about christianity,
Islam and whichever other religions were of the native Africans and their impacts on the movement and the communities and history.
Use at least three (3) quality references Note: Wikipedia and other related websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Here you will respond to an article written by an actual atheist. This article titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question. McCloskey is an Australian philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s including the book God and Evil (Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God.
Please note the following parameters for this paper:
1. Your assignment is to read McCloskey’s short article and respond to each of the questions below. Looking for a detailed response to each question.
2. The response paper is to be a minimum of 1,500 words (not including quotes) and must be written as a single essay and not just a list of answers to questions.
3. The basis for your answers must primarily come from the resources provided in the lessons covering the philosophy of religion unit of the course (Evans and Manis, Craig, and the presentation) and these sources must be mentioned in your paper. You are not merely to quote these sources as an answer to the question—answer them in your own words.
4. You may use other outside sources as well, as long as you properly document them. However, outside sources are not necessary. Each of the questions can be answered from the sources provided in the lessons.
5. While the use of the Bible is not restricted, its use is not necessary and is discouraged unless you intend to explain the context of the passage and how that context applies to the issue at hand in accordance with the guidelines provided earlier in the course. You are not to merely quote scripture passages as answers to the questions. Remember this is a philosophical essay not a biblical or theological essay.
6. While you may quote from sources, all quotations must be properly cited and quotes from sources will not count towards the 1,500 word count of the paper.
7. You may be critical of McCloskey, but must remain respectful. Any disparaging comment(s) about McCloskey will result in a significant reduction in grade.
?******Specifically, you must address the following questions in your paper****:
1. McCloskey refers to the arguments as “proofs” and often implies that they can’t definitively establish the case for God, so therefore they should be abandoned. What would you say about this in light of Foreman’s comments in his “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence” presentation?
2.On the Cosmological Argument:
a. McCloskey claims that the “mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being [i.e., a necessarily existing being].” Using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the non-temporal form of the argument (on pp. 69–77), explain why the cause of the universe must be necessary (and therefore uncaused).
b. McCloskey also claims that the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause.” In light of Evans and Manis’ final paragraph on the cosmological argument (p. 77), how might you respond to McCloskey?
3.On the Teleological Argument:
a. McCloskey claims that “to get the proof going, genuine indisputable examples of design and purpose are needed.” Discuss this standard of “indisputability” which he calls a “very conclusive objection.” Is it reasonable?
b. From your reading in Evans and Manis, can you offer an example of design that, while not necessarily “indisputable,” you believe provides strong evidence of a designer of the universe?
c. McCloskey implies that evolution has displaced the need for a designer. Assuming evolution is true, for argument’s sake, how would you respond to McCloskey (see Evans and Manis pp. 82–83)?
d. McCloskey claims that the presence of imperfection and evil in the world argues against “the perfection of the divine design or divine purpose in the world.” Remembering Evans and Manis’ comments about the limitations of the cosmological argument, how might you respond to this charge by McCloskey?
4. 4. On the Problem of Evil:
a. McCloskey’s main objection to theism is the presence of evil in the world and he raises it several times: “No being who was perfect could have created a world in which there was avoidable suffering or in which his creatures would (and in fact could have been created so as not to) engage in morally evil acts, acts which very often result in injury to innocent persons.” The language of this claim seems to imply that it is an example of the logical form of the problem. Given this implication and using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the logical problem (pp. 159–168, noting especially his concluding paragraphs to this section), how might you respond to McCloskey?
b. McCloskey specifically discusses the free will argument, asking “might not God have very easily so have arranged the world and biased man to virtue that men always freely chose what is right?” From what you have already learned about free will in the course, and what Evans and Manis says about the free will theodicy, especially the section on Mackie and Plantinga’s response (pp. 163–166) and what he says about the evidential problem (pp. 168–172), how would you respond to McCloskey’s question?
5.On Atheism as Comforting:
a. In the final pages of McCloskey’s article, he claims that atheism is more comforting than theism. Using the argument presented by William Lane Craig in the article “The Absurdity of Life without God,” (located in Reading & Study for Module/Week 6), respond to McCloskey’s claim.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Introduction
Topics in regard to Gods existence have resulted in ongoing battles that have lasted for quite a while. These topics have sparked several debates with some people agreeing with the existence of God while other refuting such claims (Boehme, 2014). However, the debates that pertain to the existence of God have intrigued several philosophical ideas with many people alleging that they being that God cannot be seen, his existence is debatable.
Other schools of thought also allege that if God exists and claims to be all powerful, then evil should not exist in this world. It is essential to note that there are several pieces of evidence that support the existence of God (Boehme, 2014). This paper, therefore, attempts to critic McCloskeys views in regards to the atheistic objections and also describes several arguments that establish his illusions of the existence of God including the opposing arguments against his existence.
Proofs Can’t Establish the Case of Gods Existence
To begin with, McCloskeys view implies that there are no proofs that can establish Gods existence and those allegations should be abandoned. In my view, McCloskey makes no effort to determine what evil is nor does he explain its existence. In other words, he attempts to discredit people’s belief in God by making allegations against the origin of their beliefs. However, McCloskey fails to address why the faith of a people may not be valid and whether they take the time to discover such evidence before they ascent to Christian theism (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). McCloskey views God as jaded, unforgiving, uncaring, and punitive and believes that the best proofs on the nonexistence of God can be depicted in the evil acts of his creation since morality has strongly subdued the proof of an intelligent creator designing the universe. For Christian, the expressions of truth are only found in Christ’s words in John 14:6 that He is the way, the truth and the Life.
The Cosmological Argument
The author of the article, “On Being Atheist”, opens by giving a description on the reasons theist believe in God. He purports that the grounds of such beliefs are inadequate and gives the reasons as to why the atheist do not believe in Gods existence. McCloskey in his article tells of a Christian friend who believed that philosophers place so much of importance on the proofs that regard to the existence of God as the foundation to their religious beliefs (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). In my view, in order for the universe to exists, there was its origin or something that created its existence. Nothing has the capacity to create itself and there is the need of an independent creator that existed before the universe.
In the book: Reasonable Faith, William Lane Craig, alludes to the fact that there must be a creator responsible for all the creation activities and the creator needs not a cause to do the things that have an origin. This, therefore, means that everything that exists needs a cause and saying that something has no beginning denies the existence of a predecessor. McCloskey also alleges that the Cosmological Argument does not give us the right to postulate an all-powerful case that he considers uncaused (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). In as much as this argument provides no proof of the existence of God , it supports the idea of a necessary being as the only responsible cause that erases the need for an infinite regressive cause. In my view, there is only one possible view that is compatible with other views on Gods existence, a factor that makes it an individual’s choice to desire learning about the existence of God.
The Teleological Argument
This argument is an argument from the design point of view that alludes to the existence of a maker of all the contingent objects. This argument in some way has some connections with the cosmological argument that implies that all the designs employ a greater designer, there is a designer in the world, and that the designer is the greatest (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). McCloskey as other philosophers claims that to believe that nature was designed; there is a need for indisputable examples.
In other words, this author claims that the evidence and examples on this must never be refuted and also contends that indisputable claims are essential and unreasonable in defining God. In my own view, a given example or evidence on the existence of God such as nature shows the indisputable possibility of a creator and there is nothing that can be disputed in this claim (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). In regard to McCloskey’s claim on the presence of imperfection and evil is an argument that is incompatible with the perfection of the Divine Creator since the creator set a perfection standard for goodness, but man as a sinful being made the imperfect evil possible.
On the other hand, McCloskey suggests that evolution should take the place of a Divine Designer. In my view, this would imply that everything that exists in nature is primarily motivated by chance, which would hardly be the case since everything in nature requires some guidance (Feser, 2013). This is a process since everything has a specific construction and certain functions. If there is not a Divine Designer then this would mean that everything in nature may function by chance, a factor that could see things happen in any manner. For example, the snows would come during summer since everything functions in no order.
On the Problem of Evil
McCloskey also stresses in his articles on his objections on the problem of evil by alluding that no being that is perfect and claims of goodness could create the world in which there is suffering of the creatures. According to Feser (2013), the element of evil remains one of the conversant objections that have widely been presented by the atheists. The atheists tend to view why people should not believe in God as described. These objections are mainly posed by the frequent occurrences of suffering and evil that is presently seen. This remains the reason why many philosophers, as well as McCloskey, dismiss the claims on Gods existence basing their claims on the presence of evil. The theist approach of Gods view is in relation to His attributes that depict Him as omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent. On the other hand, the atheist believe that if all this attributes point towards God and He truly exists as He claims then he had the capacity to stop suffering and evil.
Other theists also take a stance on the concept to the of evil by leaning on the free-will defense, which alludes that God was the creator of human beings and was the same giver of the free will to choose what is right and wrong. This according to them is considered better since humanity has the freedom of choice than to haven none. According to this view, the evil that is prevalent in the world today exists since man chose the way of evil (Feser, 2013). Considering the fact that we have been granted the free will to choose what we opt right or wrong, humanity therefore needs to choose to believe in God, who needs to be worshiped, and praised. God has the capacity to mitigate the element of evil, but this means we may lack the free-will to choose. The coming of Christ to offer salvation to Humanity would not have made any sense if God chose to eliminate evil offer salvation.
Some theists respond to the problem of evil through a free-will defense in which God is stated as the creator of human beings with a free will since it is better to have the freedom to choose that to lack the freedom of choice (LeDrew, 2013). In other words, the evil that exist in the world is a result of the choice of a man to do evil. As free will beings, we need to believe in God, worship and praise Him. If God would have eliminated evil, then Christ should not have come to offer salvation and he would not have died for our iniquities.
On Atheism as Comforting
At the end of his article, McCloskey concludes by asserting that atheism is more comforting than theism. In his argument on this point, he uses the existence of evil and the sufferings that occur of the innocent to support his atheistic perceptions that a perfect being may not necessarily exist and allow evil things to occur (LeDrew, 2013). He also contends that people who follow theism are more likely to find cold comfort in believing religiously and that people need to find comfort and strength wherever they can find it inclusively.
Thinking about this, it is essential to note that people in many instances may need comfort, a factor that makes them seek for spiritual authorities to assist them in understanding things, both the bad and the good (LeDrew, 2013). A Biblical understanding of the element of comfort is encouragement which can be done through the use of words or the presence of an individual to help in the times of need. Comfort in this case as viewed by Christians remains in the ability of Christians o choose whether to believe in God or not, thus giving them the chance to know God more, understand him and commit to him truthfully.
Conclusion
McCloskeys view implies that there are no proofs that can establish Gods existence and those allegations should be abandoned. In my view, McCloskey makes no effort to determine what evil is nor does he explain its existence. McCloskey also alleges that the Cosmological Argument does not give us the right to postulate an all-powerful case that he considers uncaused (Boehme, 2014). In as much as this argument provides no proof of the existence of God, it supports the idea of a necessary being as the only responsible cause that erases the need for an infinite regressive cause.
On the Teleological Argument McCloskey as well as other philosophers claims that to believe that nature was designed; there is a need for indisputable examples, views that find to substantial backings. McCloskey also stresses in his articles on his objections on the problem of evil by alluding that no being that is perfect and claims of goodness could create the world in which there is suffering of the creatures and concludes by asserting that atheism is more comforting than theism (Boehme, 2014). In a nutshell, I believe that McCloskey provides minimal pieces of evidence on his claims that are aimed at supporting atheism and instead attempts to point out to the faults of Christians as a claim to refute the existence of God. The arguments of this theist, therefore, point out to the existence of God.
References List
Boehme, A. J. (2014). The Atheist’s Primer. Reviews in Religion & Theology, 21(1), 114-116. doi:10.1111/rirt.12286
Feser, E. (2013). The New Atheists and the Cosmological Argument. Midwest Studies In Philosophy, 37(1), 154-177. doi:10.1111/misp.12000
H.J. McCloskey (1974). “On Being an Atheist, “The Southern Journal of Philosophy – Vol. 15 – Issue 1 – pp. 101-111
LeDrew, S. (2013). Discovering Atheism: Heterogeneity in Trajectories to Atheist Identity and Activism. Sociology of Religion, 74(4), 431-453.
Thiessen, J. (2014). There Is No God: Atheists In America. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 53(2), 453-455. https://www.doi:10.1111/jssr.12099
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
In Module/Week 5’s Reading & Study folder, there are 3 short readings. Your assignment is to read them and then write an essay of at least 600 words in current APA format addressing the questions listed below.
While you are free to quote from sources, quotations will not count towards the minimum word count.
A note about the readings: The first reading is a synopsis of The Matrix. If you have seen the movie, this will function as a review for you.
The second reading comes from Plato’s classic work, The Republic. It is in the form of a dialogue between Socrates and Glaucon, a brother of Plato, and contains the famous cave allegory.
The third and final reading is a section from Meditation I, from Meditations on First Philosophy by Rene Descartes, who offers some reasons to doubt his senses.
Questions to Consider
1. Compare and contrast The Matrix with the readings from Plato and Descartes. What are some similarities and differences?
2. Can we prove that the world we are experiencing is real? How do we know we are not dreaming, living in a Platonic cave, or trapped in some sort of matrix?
SAMPLE ANSWER
Plato, Descartes, and the Matrix
Question 1
Basically, the three readings, Descartes’ musings, Plato’s cave analogy, and The Matrix are similar in that they all focus on the reality that our senses experience. There is a concern regarding if this reality is objective and tangible or an illusion. The Matrix is all about the reality that the computer generates and at one point, Cypher thought that knowing the truth would result to an easier life, but later, there is the discovery that knowledge is really a weight burden. Therefore, he wants to erase memories so that he can attain the former state. Descartes’ reasoning is that at one point, people discover that the false opinions that were taken to be true are actually vague since everything based on the fails. Therefore, it becomes necessary to do away with them and adopt a new framework for a firm foundation. In cave analogy, there is an enquiry regarding if what people perceive as the reality really holds. Following this reasoning, Descartes continued speculating what higher power it was that had subjected people to such deception (Descartes, 1641). Although these three sources differ in some other concepts, they all speculate on if not or if our perceptions or senses can be trusted.
Second, there is an exploration of how real reality is in the three sources. However, there is an agreement that the reality that people presently perceive through their senses can only be replaced by alternatives that also perceived through the same senses. In The Matrix, the reality that is within people has been presented in the form of a computer that holds their minds captive and gives them many illusions. To Plato, the reality is just like the shadows (Plato, n.d.). However, the usual items to illustrate reality (stone statues, fire, stone wall, humans, and sunshine). Similarly, Descartes knew that for him to reach the higher enlightenment, it was necessary to use the power of the present reality including his brains and thinking abilities (Hasker, 1935). The sensory experience that relates to reality is so much into humanity such that they cannot think of reality that differs from it.
Question 2
For people to prove different things, the premises underlying these proofs would first need to be established. Many times, human beings are never content with the basic reality and, therefore, they have a tendency of seeking the explanations for this reality. However, there are no alternatives to the reality. And if those refuting this reality can offer at least an example of a person who escaped this reality and was enlightened in another reality, then their arguments would have weight. Nonetheless, trusting that evidence would be hard since it would not be sure it the enlightenment experience of that person was simply another delusion based on the sadistic computer mastermind. The only necessity is an external source originating from an entity which is not restricted to human dimensions. This entity should be divine as no human would manage escaping this reality to confirm its reality.
There are different sources that advocate for true divine origins, including the Bible and Quran. However, presently, there are different movies which create awareness about divinity. One of these is ‘Heaven is Real’, and anyone who has ever watched it can agree that divinity is real. The young boy in the movie is able to perceive things that the parents had never told him about, and he says that Jesus informed them those things. This makes the dad very angry and confused. The boy was able to enter the realms and dimensions that are only accessible to the angles and Jesus Christ, and get answers on different things, and even meet his sister who had passed away on birth. The dad was in denial of what the son was experiencing since he declined using his senses to perceive the works of God in his son’s life (Dew & Foreman, 2014). However, with time, he realized how special his son was and his faith in God increased. Other people were also influenced immensely by this occurrence.
References
Descartes, R. (1641). Meditation I of the things of which we may doubt. In Descartes, R., Meditations on First Philosophy. Retrieved from Blackboard: http://www.learn.liberty.edu
Dew, J. K. & Foreman, M. W. (2014). How do we know: An introduction to epistemology. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Hasker, W. (1935). Metaphysics: Constructing a world view. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Plato. (n.d.). The allegory of the cave. In Plato, The Republic, Book VII (pp. 514A1-518D8). Retrieved from Blackboard: http://www.learn.liberty.edu
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Here you will respond to an article written by an actual atheist. This article titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question. McCloskey is an Australian philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s including the book God and Evil (Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God.
Please note the following parameters for this paper:
1. Your assignment is to read McCloskey’s short article and respond to each of the questions below. Looking for a detailed response to each question.
2. The response paper is to be a minimum of 1,500 words (not including quotes) and must be written as a single essay and not just a list of answers to questions.
3. The basis for your answers must primarily come from the resources provided in the lessons covering the philosophy of religion unit of the course (Evans and Manis, Craig, and the presentation) and these sources must be mentioned in your paper. You are not merely to quote these sources as an answer to the question—answer them in your own words.
4. You may use other outside sources as well, as long as you properly document them. However, outside sources are not necessary. Each of the questions can be answered from the sources provided in the lessons.
5. While the use of the Bible is not restricted, its use is not necessary and is discouraged unless you intend to explain the context of the passage and how that context applies to the issue at hand in accordance with the guidelines provided earlier in the course. You are not to merely quote scripture passages as answers to the questions. Remember this is a philosophical essay not a biblical or theological essay.
6. While you may quote from sources, all quotations must be properly cited and quotes from sources will not count towards the 1,500 word count of the paper.
7. You may be critical of McCloskey, but must remain respectful. Any disparaging comment(s) about McCloskey will result in a significant reduction in grade.
?******Specifically, you must address the following questions in your paper****:
1. McCloskey refers to the arguments as “proofs” and often implies that they can’t definitively establish the case for God, so therefore they should be abandoned. What would you say about this in light of Foreman’s comments in his “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence” presentation?
2.On the Cosmological Argument:
a. McCloskey claims that the “mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being [i.e., a necessarily existing being].” Using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the non-temporal form of the argument (on pp. 69–77), explain why the cause of the universe must be necessary (and therefore uncaused).
b. McCloskey also claims that the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause.” In light of Evans and Manis’ final paragraph on the cosmological argument (p. 77), how might you respond to McCloskey?
3.On the Teleological Argument:
a. McCloskey claims that “to get the proof going, genuine indisputable examples of design and purpose are needed.” Discuss this standard of “indisputability” which he calls a “very conclusive objection.” Is it reasonable?
b. From your reading in Evans and Manis, can you offer an example of design that, while not necessarily “indisputable,” you believe provides strong evidence of a designer of the universe?
c. McCloskey implies that evolution has displaced the need for a designer. Assuming evolution is true, for argument’s sake, how would you respond to McCloskey (see Evans and Manis pp. 82–83)?
d. McCloskey claims that the presence of imperfection and evil in the world argues against “the perfection of the divine design or divine purpose in the world.” Remembering Evans and Manis’ comments about the limitations of the cosmological argument, how might you respond to this charge by McCloskey?
4. 4. On the Problem of Evil:
a. McCloskey’s main objection to theism is the presence of evil in the world and he raises it several times: “No being who was perfect could have created a world in which there was avoidable suffering or in which his creatures would (and in fact could have been created so as not to) engage in morally evil acts, acts which very often result in injury to innocent persons.” The language of this claim seems to imply that it is an example of the logical form of the problem. Given this implication and using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the logical problem (pp. 159–168, noting especially his concluding paragraphs to this section), how might you respond to McCloskey?
?
b. McCloskey specifically discusses the free will argument, asking “might not God have very easily so have arranged the world and biased man to virtue that men always freely chose what is right?” From what you have already learned about free will in the course, and what Evans and Manis says about the free will theodicy, especially the section on Mackie and Plantinga’s response (pp. 163–166) and what he says about the evidential problem (pp. 168–172), how would you respond to McCloskey’s question?
5.On Atheism as Comforting:
a. In the final pages of McCloskey’s article, he claims that atheism is more comforting than theism. Using the argument presented by William Lane Craig in the article “The Absurdity of Life without God,” (located in Reading & Study for Module/Week 6), respond to McCloskey’s claim.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Introduction
Topics in regard to Gods existence have resulted in ongoing battles that have lasted for quite a while. These topics have sparked several debates with some people agreeing with the existence of God while other refuting such claims (Boehme, 2014). However, the debates that pertain to the existence of God have intrigued several philosophical ideas with many people alleging that they being that God cannot be seen, his existence is debatable.
Other schools of thought also allege that if God exists and claims to be all powerful, then evil should not exist in this world. It is essential to note that there are several pieces of evidence that support the existence of God (Boehme, 2014). This paper, therefore, attempts to critic McCloskeys views in regards to the atheistic objections and also describes several arguments that establish his illusions of the existence of God including the opposing arguments against his existence.
Proofs Can’t Establish the Case of Gods Existence
To begin with, McCloskeys view implies that there are no proofs that can establish Gods existence and those allegations should be abandoned. In my view, McCloskey makes no effort to determine what evil is nor does he explain its existence. In other words, he attempts to discredit people’s belief in God by making allegations against the origin of their beliefs. However, McCloskey fails to address why the faith of a people may not be valid and whether they take the time to discover such evidence before they ascent to Christian theism (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). McCloskey views God as jaded, unforgiving, uncaring, and punitive and believes that the best proofs on the nonexistence of God can be depicted in the evil acts of his creation since morality has strongly subdued the proof of an intelligent creator designing the universe. For Christian, the expressions of truth are only found in Christ’s words in John 14:6 that He is the way, the truth and the Life.
The Cosmological Argument
The author of the article, “On Being Atheist”, opens by giving a description on the reasons theist believe in God. He purports that the grounds of such beliefs are inadequate and gives the reasons as to why the atheist do not believe in Gods existence. McCloskey in his article tells of a Christian friend who believed that philosophers place so much of importance on the proofs that regard to the existence of God as the foundation to their religious beliefs (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). In my view, in order for the universe to exists, there was its origin or something that created its existence. Nothing has the capacity to create itself and there is the need of an independent creator that existed before the universe.
In the book: Reasonable Faith, William Lane Craig, alludes to the fact that there must be a creator responsible for all the creation activities and the creator needs not a cause to do the things that have an origin. This, therefore, means that everything that exists needs a cause and saying that something has no beginning denies the existence of a predecessor. McCloskey also alleges that the Cosmological Argument does not give us the right to postulate an all-powerful case that he considers uncaused (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). In as much as this argument provides no proof of the existence of God , it supports the idea of a necessary being as the only responsible cause that erases the need for an infinite regressive cause. In my view, there is only one possible view that is compatible with other views on Gods existence, a factor that makes it an individual’s choice to desire learning about the existence of God.
The Teleological Argument
This argument is an argument from the design point of view that alludes to the existence of a maker of all the contingent objects. This argument in some way has some connections with the cosmological argument that implies that all the designs employ a greater designer, there is a designer in the world, and that the designer is the greatest (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). McCloskey as other philosophers claims that to believe that nature was designed; there is a need for indisputable examples.
In other words, this author claims that the evidence and examples on this must never be refuted and also contends that indisputable claims are essential and unreasonable in defining God. In my own view, a given example or evidence on the existence of God such as nature shows the indisputable possibility of a creator and there is nothing that can be disputed in this claim (H.J. McCloskey, 1974). In regard to McCloskey’s claim on the presence of imperfection and evil is an argument that is incompatible with the perfection of the Divine Creator since the creator set a perfection standard for goodness, but man as a sinful being made the imperfect evil possible.
On the other hand, McCloskey suggests that evolution should take the place of a Divine Designer. In my view, this would imply that everything that exists in nature is primarily motivated by chance, which would hardly be the case since everything in nature requires some guidance (Feser, 2013). This is a process since everything has a specific construction and certain functions. If there is not a Divine Designer then this would mean that everything in nature may function by chance, a factor that could see things happen in any manner. For example, the snows would come during summer since everything functions in no order.
On the Problem of Evil
McCloskey also stresses in his articles on his objections on the problem of evil by alluding that no being that is perfect and claims of goodness could create the world in which there is suffering of the creatures. According to Feser (2013), the element of evil remains one of the conversant objections that have widely been presented by the atheists. The atheists tend to view why people should not believe in God as described. These objections are mainly posed by the frequent occurrences of suffering and evil that is presently seen. This remains the reason why many philosophers, as well as McCloskey, dismiss the claims on Gods existence basing their claims on the presence of evil. The theist approach of Gods view is in relation to His attributes that depict Him as omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent. On the other hand, the atheist believe that if all this attributes point towards God and He truly exists as He claims then he had the capacity to stop suffering and evil.
Other theists also take a stance on the concept to the of evil by leaning on the free-will defense, which alludes that God was the creator of human beings and was the same giver of the free will to choose what is right and wrong. This according to them is considered better since humanity has the freedom of choice than to haven none. According to this view, the evil that is prevalent in the world today exists since man chose the way of evil (Feser, 2013). Considering the fact that we have been granted the free will to choose what we opt right or wrong, humanity therefore needs to choose to believe in God, who needs to be worshiped, and praised. God has the capacity to mitigate the element of evil, but this means we may lack the free-will to choose. The coming of Christ to offer salvation to Humanity would not have made any sense if God chose to eliminate evil offer salvation.
Some theists respond to the problem of evil through a free-will defense in which God is stated as the creator of human beings with a free will since it is better to have the freedom to choose that to lack the freedom of choice (LeDrew, 2013). In other words, the evil that exist in the world is a result of the choice of a man to do evil. As free will beings, we need to believe in God, worship and praise Him. If God would have eliminated evil, then Christ should not have come to offer salvation and he would not have died for our iniquities.
On Atheism as Comforting
At the end of his article, McCloskey concludes by asserting that atheism is more comforting than theism. In his argument on this point, he uses the existence of evil and the sufferings that occur of the innocent to support his atheistic perceptions that a perfect being may not necessarily exist and allow evil things to occur (LeDrew, 2013). He also contends that people who follow theism are more likely to find cold comfort in believing religiously and that people need to find comfort and strength wherever they can find it inclusively.
Thinking about this, it is essential to note that people in many instances may need comfort, a factor that makes them seek for spiritual authorities to assist them in understanding things, both the bad and the good (LeDrew, 2013). A Biblical understanding of the element of comfort is encouragement which can be done through the use of words or the presence of an individual to help in the times of need. Comfort in this case as viewed by Christians remains in the ability of Christians o choose whether to believe in God or not, thus giving them the chance to know God more, understand him and commit to him truthfully.
Conclusion
McCloskeys view implies that there are no proofs that can establish Gods existence and those allegations should be abandoned. In my view, McCloskey makes no effort to determine what evil is nor does he explain its existence. McCloskey also alleges that the Cosmological Argument does not give us the right to postulate an all-powerful case that he considers uncaused (Boehme, 2014). In as much as this argument provides no proof of the existence of God, it supports the idea of a necessary being as the only responsible cause that erases the need for an infinite regressive cause.
On the Teleological Argument McCloskey as well as other philosophers claims that to believe that nature was designed; there is a need for indisputable examples, views that find to substantial backings. McCloskey also stresses in his articles on his objections on the problem of evil by alluding that no being that is perfect and claims of goodness could create the world in which there is suffering of the creatures and concludes by asserting that atheism is more comforting than theism (Boehme, 2014). In a nutshell, I believe that McCloskey provides minimal pieces of evidence on his claims that are aimed at supporting atheism and instead attempts to point out to the faults of Christians as a claim to refute the existence of God. The arguments of this theist, therefore, point out to the existence of God.
References List
Boehme, A. J. (2014). The Atheist’s Primer. Reviews in Religion & Theology, 21(1), 114-116. doi:10.1111/rirt.12286
Feser, E. (2013). The New Atheists and the Cosmological Argument. Midwest Studies In Philosophy, 37(1), 154-177. doi:10.1111/misp.12000
H.J. McCloskey (1974). “On Being an Atheist, “The Southern Journal of Philosophy – Vol. 15 – Issue 1 – pp. 101-111
LeDrew, S. (2013). Discovering Atheism: Heterogeneity in Trajectories to Atheist Identity and Activism. Sociology of Religion, 74(4), 431-453.
Thiessen, J. (2014). There Is No God: Atheists In America. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 53(2), 453-455. doi:10.1111/jssr.12099
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Topic: Analysis of the David-Bathsheba story.
write a 1400 word paper. You must follow current Turabian format and present a analysis and discussion of the chosen topic. A minimum of 7 scholarly sources must be used when writing this paper. Biblical evidence and explanation of key biblical texts is essential. Sources that are cited, referenced, and/or quoted must be footnoted, and the paper must be your original work. In light of the length of this paper, avoid lengthy quotations and make sure that the paper stays on topic. Use headings to mark off the major sections of your paper. A bibliography of sources used must be included.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Introduction
The story of David and Bathsheba as given account of in 2nd Samuel 11 provides an illusion of the beginning of King David’s failures and compromises echoed for the generations that are to come. The scriptures depict a narrative that is full of tension, deceit and irony with the aim of painting a picture of how the human heart can be corrupt following a devastation that results in the event that one of Gods servants turns his eyes from the Lord[1]. David as referred to in scripture was considered a man after Gods’ heart, a factor that brings controversies about his adulterous relationship with Bathsheba.
David’s deceitful attempt to cover up this sin eventually lead to another atrocity that saw Uriah who was Bathsheba’s husband murdered a crime that displeased the Lord and resulted in immense consequences[2]. To many, this analogy remains a story of judgement and condemnation while others see it as a story of grace, hope and restoration. However, those who admit the element of sin and accept the judgement of God, restoration and grace remains the essence of this account. This paper, therefore, aims at analyzing the story of David and Bathsheba as depicted in scripture.
Analysis of the David-Bathsheba Story
The books of Samuel reveal David as a highly spoken of the king also inferred to as the skillful player, a man of war and valor who was considered prudent in speech. Scriptures also mention that the Lord was with David I everything he did. However, the author of the book begins in 11; 1 with a statement that contradicts the motives of David. The story of David and Bathsheba begins in 2nd Samuel 11; 1[3] in which the scripture mentions the kings battling while David stayed back in Jerusalem. It is essential to note that at the very root of David’s issues, he is portrayed as a King who wasn’t where God had planned for Him to be in the beginning. Thinking of this, if David took the initiative to engage himself with other kings in the battlefield where he ought to have been instead of remaining back in the palace peeping at naked women, chances are this incidence would never have occurred.
According to some scholars, David may have been presumed as undergoing depression or passing through a middle life crisis, a factor that caused him not to be where he belonged. This according to my opinion marks the first step in falling[4].In as much as Bathsheba is an important character in this account, very little is given in this account to provide the readers with the understanding of who she was at first. Scripture only mentions of her beautiful physic and in verse 5 she is depicted as sending word to David of her pregnancy. This, therefore, gives a vague description of Bathsheba. However, the Bible reveals much of Bathsheba’s husband known as Uriah. Uriah is painted as a faithful King, who served in the battle against the Amorites, and was included in the list of David’s mighty men in chapter 23 who managed to lead the Warriors[5].
As the author of the book gives a description of David and Bathsheba’s adultery and the victims attempt to conceal this sin, Uriah is shown as an honorable, committed and loyal man who remained obligated to David’s kingship. David, therefore, took advantage of this and slept with Uriah’s wife. Scriptures, therefore, show the irony of Israel’s spiritual leader battling issues of loyalty from one of his servants, an element that leaves the readers of these books disillusioned as to why a God-fearing leader would stoop so low in hiding his transgressions that yielded judgment upon himself[6]. David takes another advantage of causing Joab to sin by asking him to put Uriah to death. Joab, in this case, is depicted as obedient to the orders of David rather than those of God, a factor that entangles him in this sin as well.
One thing that comes into my mind that needs a critical answer is in understands the role of Bathsheba in this. At some point, I am tempted to think Bathsheba was an innocent victim who feels pray to David’s abuse of power. Another aspect that challenges my thought is the reason behind the narrators attempt to provide a vague image of Bathsheba’s character through the account. This draws me into digging into the culture of David’s period and how the community viewed women[7]. Through this, it is essential to note that women were considered as unequal compared to the men. In many instances, women were seen as property. This would perhaps shed some light on the thought that Bathsheba could have been an innocent woman who was subdued by the power of King David and in abiding by the culture; she was forced to submit to David’s authority. This could be the reason as to why little is mentioned by the narrator on the character of this Bathsheba.
In as much as this thoughts may be substantial, the only truth that can never be justified is in the fact that both David and Bathsheba committed sin. In the next chapter, the author of this book courageously records the objections of a woman who fell upon the evil advances of a man. The scripture reveals David’s son Ammon in his attempt to woo his sister into lying. The Bible shows that Ammon’s sister refused to this request asking his brother not to violate her for such a thing had never been done in Israel. If at all Bathsheba was innocent then why doesn’t Tamer mention Bathsheba in her conversation with her brother? Well in my view, it could be possible to determine that Bathsheba may not have offered herself to David but consented to the desire of this King.
Application of this Story
To begin with, it is essential to mention that this account teaches the believers today about God. God hates sin at all times and has zero tolerance on those who choose to sin, a factor that reminds us of how the writer of Hebrews described God. The author mentions God character as one that loves righteousness and hates wickedness[8]. In line with this, God, therefore, subjects those of His with harsh disciplinary actions on those who disobey Him. God carried out disciplinary measures on David by bringing the death of his sons include the illegitimate son as well. This action was attributed to the fact that God did not want the sword to leave David’s house.
No matter how dreadful the sin we commit or the manner in which the punishment is harsh, God’s grace wipes away the penalty of sin from us just like in the instance of David. This can be depicted in Nathans words to David that the Lord has put away his sin. God’s grace is, therefore, sufficient to save the humankind.
Secondly, it is vital to take note that unconfessed sin that is concealed would lead to greater sin. David was so concerned about his image, a factor that prevented him from repenting and stopping his wickedness. He, however, decided to conceal this sin and went into greater depths that resulted in the mushrooming of more sin. It is, therefore, essential for the contemporary Christians to repent of their sin than conceal the sins.
In addition to this, it is also worth of learning for the Christians today to refrain from idleness. If David were at the right place that the Lord required him, he would not have been entangled in this sin. We need to avoid idleness by taking advice from the writers of the New Testament that mentioned we ought to be watchful and sober-minded by setting our minds on the things above and to be filled by the power of the Holy Ghost.
Conclusion
This narrative, therefore, gives a depiction of how we need Gods Anointed one Jesus Christ in order to atone for our sins, a factor that reconciles us with God. The corruption of David’s heart in this gives a picture of how man’s heart can turn deceitful. Like David, we all fall short of the glory of God[9]. This clearly points out to the fact that we need Jesus Christ more than we do any other thing in this life.
Bibliography
Estep. 2013. “David & Bathsheba.” American Record Guide 76, no. 2: 104-105. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
Garroway, Kristine Henriksen. 2013. “Was Bathsheba The Original Bridget Jones? A New Look At Bathsheba on Screen and In Biblical Scholarship.” Nashim: A Journal Of Jewish Women’s Studies & Gender Issues no. 24: 53-73. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
Kibble, David G. 2003. “Nathan Rebukes King David.” Expository Times 114, no. 10: 340. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
Kilgore, Robert. 2014. “The Politics of King David in Early Modern English Verse.” Studies In Philology 111, no. 3: 411-441. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
Kim, Uriah. 2002. “Uriah the Hittite: A Context of Struggle For Identity.” Semeia no. 90/91: 69. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
Lowery, Richard H. 2003. “David, Bathsheba, Nathan, and War.” Tikkun 18, no. 2: 23. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
Snyman, S. D. (Fanie). 2014. “Some thoughts on the relationship between Old Testament studies and systematic theology.” Verbum ET Ecclesia 35, no. 1: 1-7. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 6, 2015).
[1]. Estep. 2013. “David & Bathsheba.” American Record Guide 76, no. 2: 104-105.
[3] . Snyman, S. D. (Fanie). 2014. “Some thoughts on the relationship between Old Testament studies and systematic theology.” Verbum ET Ecclesia 35, no. 1: 1-7.
[5]. Kilgore, Robert. 2014. “The Politics of King David in Early Modern English Verse.” Studies in Philology 111, no. 3: 411-441.
[6]. Kim, Uriah. 2002. “Uriah the Hittite: A Context of Struggle for Identity.” Semeia no. 90/91: 69.
[7] . Lowery, Richard H. 2003. “David, Bathsheba, Nathan, and War.” Tikkun 18, no. 2: 23.
[8]. Garroway, Kristine Henriksen. 2013. “Was Bathsheba The Original Bridget Jones? A New Look At Bathsheba on Screen and In Biblical Scholarship.” Nashim: A Journal Of Jewish Women’s Studies & Gender Issues no. 24: 53-73
[9]. Kibble, David G. 2003. “Nathan Rebukes King David.” Expository Times 114, no. 10: 340.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
You will submit 9-page paper during this course that contain a personal analysis pertaining to the various leadership audits stemming from the Malphurs textbook readings. Each paper must contain a 1-page introduction, 1 page per audit, and a 1-page conclusion describing 2 personal action points stemming from the analysis. A current Turabian style title page, pagination, footnotes, and bibliography are also required.
Module/Week 4 includes the following audits:
Christian Leader: p. 173
Servant Leader: p. 180
Credibility: p. 182
Spiritual Gifts: p. 184
Natural Gifts: p. 191
Passion: p. 193
Character Audit (men/women): pp. 195/198
SAMPLE ANSWER
Introduction
The term audit is often used in or within the context of an in-depth financial investigation. In its more common occurrence it usually take a significant period of time where the investigation is done following a predetermined pattern. The main aim in a financial audit is to see if the custodians of an organization’s resources. The basis of the audit is usually the comparison between the standards that have been set and the actual performance on the ground. A leadership audit is based on similar principles since this involves the assessment and appraisal of an individual’s leadership capabilities and qualities. Leadership is of course the ability to lead people who are in one form of organization or another. The concept of leadership is abstract unlike financial record keeping which will be done through the comparison of numerical values. The abstract nature of leadership means that there is a degree of flexibility in its analysis. Usually the concerned parties conduct a leadership audit based on an already existent value system, specifically the relevant aspects of the value system. Another unique aspect about a leadership audit that separates it from the conventional audit is the fact that it is best carried out retrospectively since an individual is best placed to judge his or her collection of attitudes, strengths and weaknesses relevant to their ability to lead. Leadership audits can therefore be based on[1] religious principles, legal principles or ethics that apply in a given area of human interest such as academia,politics or other career areas. A leadership audit is an invaluable tool when there is an impending strategic change around the corner. This is because it provides a logical and accurate pointer about the capacity an existent leader has, something that can be compared to the challenge or task ahead. Leadership audits are not done to determine whether change will take place or not. On the contrary they are done so that individual leaders know exactly where they are so that they figure out what to be more alert about, which areas they need to urgently improve and also the strengths they can capitalize on. This exercise details a leadership audit that I am conducting on myself based on principles of Christian leadership as discussed in the course.
Christian Leadership
Christian leadership is basically the tendency or ability of a leader to exemplify christian principles through his or her leadership. As a christian leader myself, the values that are manifested in the depiction of various leaders in the Bible need to be clearly seen in the way I carry out my responsibilities as a leader. I scored 15 in this area, indicating that I am above average with regard to being a Christian leader. Christian leadership for me is layered and it first of all begins with who I am as a person, secondly it is manifested in my professional life and ethics, third, Christian leadership needs to be very clear in the way I interact with other people in the workplace, mainly those who are my subordinates.
As an individual I need to be completely blameless without having any possible blame or issue that would bring me into disrepute. This is a case of the proverbial ‘putting my house in order.’ To the best of my knowledge I believe I have no problems in as far as my personal life goes. I live my life based on christian principles and this means that I hold firmly to honesty, sensitivity and also affirmatives. The one area that I however feel I need to work on is that of being steadfast when it comes to moral dilemmas in the wake of public pressure. My spiritual convictions mean I have to make decisions that stay on the ‘straight and narrow.’ I always work to ensure my obedience to scripture is based on my fear of God and not a fear of fellow human beings. This keeps me accountable even in private.
As a worker I always strive to ensure that I am following the rules that the organization has set. This way I show those who have been placed under my leadership a proper example and also show them that I have faith in the rules. Being transparent also key to my christian leadership since it shows that I have nothing to hide and this helps to create an environment of transparency. Being transparent also keeps me alert and more accountable for my actions[2].
Servant Leader
The concept of servant leadership was best exemplified by Jesus as he established his ministry here on earth two millennia ago. The term servant-leadership is somewhat of a moron given the fact that leaders are often the ones being served in society. Jesus’ best illustration of being a servant leader was when he washed the feet of his disciples, something that would be taken as the severe lowering of the status that a leader has relative to the members of the group. In this area I scored 12 and that is indicative that I am doing well in the area of servant leadership. For me servant leadership refers to looking for ways where I can serve those I am leading and add value to their lives instead of merely issue instructions.
The desire to offer service is something that I have had for a long time and it enables me to have the initiative to make things better wherever I am. As a result, I find myself having an urge to lead so that I can make things better for everybody involved whether it is in an informal setting or a formal one.
In the instances that I have been in a position of leadership, I strove to ensure that the needs of the major stakeholders are clear and well known. Once this is done, I had to weigh the different needs and give priority to the ones that were most pressing. This necessitates the need for dialogue and compromise since there is the ever present reality of needs clashing. Some of these needs are my own and as a servant I need to keep them aside for the sake of the greater good. I have noted that I tend to achieve greater success in instances where I keep personal interests aside. I think this is because in such a situation I have a much clearer focus on the people that I am working with. I have the capability to better leverage on the strengths of my subordinates and also be sensitive about the challenges they have. I also don’t have any qualms about working alongside those I am leading since this is how I get an opportunity to demonstrate to them specifics about their tasks. If they have any challenges that are specific to their responsibilities, I will easily pick up on them and work towards a way forward[3].
Credibility
Being credible is basically being believable from the perspective of others. Gaining the trust of people is not something automatic. It is more of a journey whereby the level of trust gradually increases. I say this because I also tend to be skeptical of people I don’t know and it takes some considerable amount of time before I can trust them. I scored 17 in credibility, a sign that this aspect of my leadership is also above average. I am also particularly aware of the fact that people tend to have difficulty placing their trust in leaders and this therefore obliges me to be more deliberate about how I tender my duties as a leader. The best way for a leader to be viewed as credible is for him or her to be first of all trust-worthy as a person and second within their position of leadership.
The only platform that I have for my credibility to be manifested is through the interactions I have with other individuals. I believe that honesty is something that everyone should have and that the truth should always be told without its potential consequences being a determinant of whether it needs to be said or not. As a result I do my best to avoid being economical with the truth especially when the temptation to do so is great. Examples of this are when I have to express my displeasure about an offense that a friend or relative has committed against me. Another example is when I have to correct somebody about a potentially sensitive aspect of their person. With respect to social issues of public interest I must admit that I have lacked in credibility since it is at times more convenient to appear to be on the fence about a matter than to take a side which will be more controversial. I do this under the guise of seeking political correctness but the truth of the matter is that I need to be more credible and concise about the beliefs I have. These views however need to be expressed in respect so as not to raise ugly arguments with those of a contrary belief.[4]
Spiritual Gifts
Spiritual gifts are abilities given to us through the Holy Spirit’s workings. These gifts are very important in that they enable a person to better minister to others by enhancing his or her abilities. Spiritual gifts in the context of leadership are mainly those that have an inter-personal manifestation as they are supposed to enable the leader better relate with others and inspire them towards a desired direction or goal that has been set. Besides the interpersonal component which will be emphasized in the course of my leadership, these gifts should also be manifested in my administrative capacity as an overseer of the affairs of a larger group. My score for spiritual gifts was 19 and this shows above average manifestation of these gifts in my leadership.
On a personal level the gift of leadership makes me visionary and capable of imagining a suitable or desirable future of any formal/informal, spiritual/secular or academic group I find myself operating in. I easily find myself asking myself about the reason we are together in a specific group and furthermore how we can maximize on the strengths we have to achieve the goals. If the goals have not been defined, I always encourage the rest of the members to be clear and specific about the goals that need to be achieved. I am very respectful of those I am managing and this makes it easy to see the potential they have within the group. Being a good administrator helps me to understand those I am working with better and assign them responsibilities that they will best carry out. I am also well placed to effectively pair people up into solid teams. Charisma is another spiritual gift that I have. With respect to the leading of heterogeneous groups of people with different cultural backgrounds and ethnicity, charisma makes it easy to break the boundaries and relate with everybody. I also get to act as a central figure connecting people who may ordinarily have difficulty interacting[5].
Natural Gifts
Besides the spiritual gifts that have been mentioned above, I also have natural gifts which are important in helping me to lead effectively. These natural gifts include creativity, problem solving and intellect. All of these have a bearing on the way my leadership is manifested. My score in this area was 9 and this shows that a key strength area for me is the presence of natural gifts.
Being creative means that I thrive on the development of ideas in the different areas of life that interest me. I am regularly thinking of alternative ways of doing things and this is commonly referred to as the practice of ‘thinking out of the box.” As a result of this, my ideas tend to stand out from the existent ones, something very important when one needs to rectify a problem that has been existent for a long time due to inadequate resolution strategies being applied. Creativity ensures that redundant approaches to solving problems are eliminated and instead replaced with objective oriented techniques. I find that creativity helps me a lot in being progressive as a leader. The groups that I lead are always making progress and improvements to the members and to the task or tasks at hand. Another natural gift that helps me in problem solving is my intellect and ability to effectively analyze situations that are ahead of me for problem solving. Intellect enables me to mentally cross reference several variables at once and establish the kind of relationship they have with each other. Understanding problems better means solving them better. The application of the above gifts in combination leads to the coverage of greater ground without an acute increase in the demand for resources or the faculties of the members of a group. It is also key in motivating people since the human psychological reward mechanism is result based where people can easily account for their energy and effort[6].
Passion
There are two main forms of motivation that an individual can have. These are intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation comes from within and is dependent on the person’s state of mind and their collection of thoughts. Extrinsic motivation on the other hand is based on external factors that will act to boost the morale of the individual. With respect to passion being manifested in my leadership, it is more of a subjective issue. My score for passion was average and this means that there are things I seriously need to improve on.
The degree of passion I have tends to depend on the specific project being worked on and the degree of involvement. When I am involved in something that grants me some responsibility and autonomy, I will easily be passionate about it. Responsibility for me is important since it keeps me on my toes in that I have to deliver certain things within my responsibility and this makes me feel like an important part of the team. Autonomy enables me to manage the tasks at hand with relative mental freedom. The combination of these two therefore greatly boosts the level to which I am passionate about work.
There are however instances when the degree of passion I have wanes. This will take place when I am in a situation of strictly following the lead of another person and relying on them for any action I take. When such a scenario arises, I tend to be severely demotivated and disinterested since the contribution being made appears to be on behalf of another person rather than my own.
Character Audit
An audit of my leadership will be incomplete if I don’t include my qualities as a man and how they reflect on my ability to lead and guide others. From the audit I scored 45 which indicates that my character is above average. The key strength that I have as a man is not being dependent on the major detractors that stop men from being at their best with respect to their leadership. My main strengths are the fact that I have a good support base in that I relate well with the members of my family at home and that sets the pace for my relations with other people. I am accustomed to an environment where everybody is treated with love and respect and it reflects in my interactions with other people away from the family context.
The reputation I have in my immediate community is a good one and this is due to the fact that I have generally had positive relations with most people who know me. I have stayed in the same neighborhood for a long time and people recognize me and know me for engaging in honest dealings. Some people have seen me growing up and the improvements that I have made since childhood are noticeable, specifically with regard to how I present myself.
I however do have a weakness and it is in my temper. It is not an explosive temper but I easily get frustrated when I am working under pressure. During such times I will be passive aggressive in my expression of myself and this can really put off those working in close proximity to me. In as much as it is not very pronounced, it remains to be impatience and I therefore need to do something about it so as to improve on my character and consequently my leadership[7].
Conclusion
From the leadership audit I conducted, I found out that based on different aspects of my character and value system, I am rank as an above average leader. There are however two main areas that I seriously need to work on so as to ensure my leadership is all rounded and effective. These are my passion and also my patience.
A combination of the audit and introspection pointed my attention to these two areas and as such I feel I need to put in place deliberate measures that will enable me convert these weaknesses into strengths.
With respect to the issue of passion, I need to train myself to be a follower lest I let my pride have the better of me. If I don’t learn how to follow, I cannot be an effective part of the team since I also have those who are senior to me and their position is just as crucial as mine. Also not being passionate can show my subordinates or those I am leading a bad example.
About patience, the best way to go about it is for me to purposefully seek to work with people who have in the past made me impatient. Instead of avoiding them or putting them off, I need to compromise and give them a chance, in the process training myself to have greater control of my temper. This way I will become a man of great character.
Improving on these two areas will be of benefit to me as well as anybody who will be under my leadership.
[1] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003 p173
[2] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003 p 173
[3] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003 p 180
[4] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003182
[5] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003 p 184
[6] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003 p 193
[7] Malphurs, Aubrey. Being leaders: The nature of authentic Christian leadership. Baker Books, 2003 p 1959
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
This forum focuses on the role of the Mosaic Law in the life of a Christian. The New Testament teaches the law is eternal and will never pass away (Matt 5:17), but that believers in Christ are “no longer under the law” (Romans 7; Galatians 3–4). For this assignment, read the article “Applying the Old Testament Law Today” by J. Daniel Hays and then write a 400-word reflection on what this article has contributed to your understanding of the Christian’s relationship to the Mosaic Law. You may discuss areas of agreement or disagreement, and/or specific issues raised in the article. Does the article help in showing how the Christian uses the law as an ethical and moral guide? Why or why not? This is a reflection on the article, not a summary of its argument, but you must deal with the specific ideas and issues raised in the article.
For the second part of the assignment, write a 250-word explanation of how you would take one of the following passages from the OT law and apply it to your life. In your explanation, your application must reflect what you have taken away from the article and/or what you have learned about ways the New Testament itself applies the commands of the Mosaic Law to New Covenant believers. Be clear and specific in relating how this particular part of the law applies to believers today and make sure that you reflect the basis and reasons for your application.
SAMPLE ANSWER
The Christian and the Old Testament Law
Throughout the ages, the Old Testament (OT) Law has actually caused a lot of interpretive problems for Christians. This paper provides a reflection on what Applying the Old Testament Law Today by J. Daniel Hays has contributed to my understanding of the Christian’s relationship to the Mosaic Law. Areas of disagreement or agreement are discussed, and/or particular issues that Daniel Hay has raised in this article.
Part 1: Reflection on Applying the Old Testament Law Today by J. Daniel Hay
In the article, the author clearly sums up the traditional approach to OT Law that many evangelical scholars and Christians use. Hays’ separation of the Old Testament Law into ceremonial, civil and moral categorizations is a clear and understandable summary, and captures what I have actually observed and read on applying the OT Law to current life. All in all, the article tries to answer the question: How should Christian believers apply the OT law? The answer of Hays to this question is (i) for Christians to follow his own 5-step intricate procedure referred to as principalism; that is, an alternative approach to applying the Old Testament law. (ii) To establish which perpetual moral principle is beneath every single Old Covenant Law; and (iii) to bring that eternal moral principle into the New Covenant.[1] This supposes that (1) each OT Law certainly has a perpetual moral principle beneath it; (2) The Lord expects every Christian to be able to carry out the research needed to objectively perform the task; and (3) each OT Law has to be brought into the New Covenant in such a way.[2]
Contrary to the Dispensation hermeneutic, Hays maintains that every Christian has to apply that which The Lord has specifically restated and reiterated to the Church – the Dispensational hermeneutic – and also that which he believes has to underlie each single law.[3] This task is impracticable and monumental for average Christians who lack a theological degree. In addition, it may discourage Bible study as demanding too much.
This article helps in showing how the Christian makes use of the law as an ethical and moral guide. This is because, as Hays pointed out, a lot of Christians choose to obey some of the laws and disregard others by deciding which ones are relevant or valid and which ones are not. I agree with David Hays that Christians breach the Old Testament Law with some regularity. The OT Laws commonly overlooked by Christians include Leviticus 19: 32: Rise in the presence of the elderly; Deuteronomy 22: 5: A man must not wear clothing of women and a woman should not wear clothing of men; and Deuteronomy 14: 8: Pig is unclean as it does not chew cud though its hoof is split, and their carcasses should not be touched, nor their meat eaten.[4] I agree with Hays that Christians actually comply with some laws and disregard others. For instance, they obey the following laws properly: Exodus 20: 13: do not commit murder; and Leviticus 19:18: love your neighbour as yourself.[5]
Nonetheless, Hays chooses to focus on what Christian believers breach rather than what they actually practice. This way, Hays invites readers to engage in a process of self-justification instead of true examination in the mirror of The Lord’s law.
Part 2: Application of one Old Testament (OT) Law: Leviticus 17: 10 – 14
Leviticus 17: 10 – 14 is essentially a law against eating blood. In this passage, the Old Testament Law stipulates that if any Israelite or strangers in Israel eat any blood, then The Lord would set his face against him or her, and He will cut that person off from amongst his or her people. Blood must not be eaten since the life of the flesh is actually within the blood, and blood is used in making atonement, on account of the life. This passage clearly spells out that any person who hunts any bird or beast that could be eaten has to pour out the blood of that bird or beast and then cover the blood with earth.[6]
Given that mankind has domination over every other creature on this earth, and since blood denoted life, the blood of any animal was to be reserved only for sacrifice to God, the Author of Life.[7] In every circumstance, an animal’s blood was spilled on the alter and offered to The Lord. This way, the taking of the life of an animal meant a turning from self to God, and God’s mercy and providence in caring for mankind. I would apply this law into my own life by avoiding consuming blood whatsoever. Eating animal blood would signify a turning to self; a participation in sin and worldliness; a rebuff of the life that God gave. The people who breached the proscription amongst the people of Israel and consumed animal blood were cut off from other persons. By eating blood, I would not just be made impure by my actions, but I would also become outcast from the people. As such, I will never eat blood.
References
Catholics United for the Faith. The Biblical Prohibition of Eating Blood. Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Road Publishing. 2010.
Hays, Daniel. “Applying the Old Testament Law Today,” in Bibliotheca Sacra, 158, No. 629 (2001): 21-35.
Kelly, Russell Earl. Hermeneutics: Reply to J Daniel Hays. Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Road Publishing. 2011.
Mangrum, Rick. Old Testament Law and Modern Lives. London, England: Thomas Nelson Publishers. 2010.
[1] Daniel Hays. “Applying the Old Testament Law Today,” in (Bibliotheca Sacra, 158, No. 629, 2001), 22
[2] Russell Earl Kelly. Hermeneutics: Reply to J Daniel Hays. (Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Road Publishing), 10.
[3] Daniel Hays. “Applying the Old Testament Law Today,” in (Bibliotheca Sacra, 158, No. 629, 2001), 26
