Can the descriptions of God, claimed by the Bible, be proven In Descartes Meditations, Descartes logically proved the existence of an infinite and truthful being. The Holy Bible describes God, our creator. I plan to compare the logically proven infinite being (God) and the Biblical God and see if their traits mirror each other. If they do then it would prove, if not give strong evidence, that they are one in the same. First I will restate Descartes proof of an infinite and truthful being. P 1-Ideas are either internal, external, or innate.
P 2-The idea of infinity is not internal. P 3-The idea of infinity is not external. P 4-The idea of infinity is therefore innate. P 5-Any cause must be greater than or equal to its effect. P 6-An infinite being is the cause of the idea of infinity. P 1-P 6 proves that their exists an infinite being.
P 7- Established is an infinite, truthful being. Since its infinite, then its infinitely wise. In Plates The Republic, Socrates proved that a wiseman would be Just. Therefore, an infinite being would be infinitely Just. So if the Bible is truth, and the Biblical God exists, then God would be infinitely wise and Just as well. Following this logic, everything God carries out in the Bible must follow the guidelines of Justice.
If there is an instance where God displayed an act of injustice, it proves at least the prophet to be false. I have not inspected every line in the Bible nor do I plan to. But I will go over some of the main principles of Christianity, with a focus on Catholosism, and see if they follow that which is Just. The chose Catholosism for two reasons. One is because its my religion and its the one I know the most about. Second is because of its views of Salvation, which is the main focus of religion.
The Term Paper on The Errancy Of Fundamentalism Disproves The God Of The Bible
The Errancy of Fundamentalism Disproves the God of the Bible 1. Introduction This essay will investigate the often-made claim from Christians, that the Bible is the inspired word of god, a corollary of which is that it is perfectly without error. This view is exemplified by the following statement of Jimmy Swaggart, a Pentecostal pastor: "One of the most basic tenants of the Christian faith is ...
The Bible is translated in many different ways by different religions. Many religions belief that all you need is faith. Catholosism believes in faith and works. I will use the most extreme view, which is Catholosism. The steps to salvation are that you must have faith. When you have faith then you must also have repented all mortal sin…
In Catholosism the two kinds of sin are Mortal and Veniel. Mortal sins are called mortal because what it does is kill your salvation. You must repent a mortal sin to receive Gods grace once again. A Veniel sin is a less serious one that still lets you receive Gods grace. That is, they need not be repented.
If your soul is clean of all mortal sins then you are fine. If not then your going to hell. Now, does this follow in the logic of what an infinite and truthful being would do Well a sin is an instance where you gave in to your desires. An ideal human would never do that.
Any instance where you put appetite before wisdom are all covered within the ten commandments. Therefore the idea of sin is sound. Then comes the separation of a veniel sin and mortal sin. One might think that the separation is God passing judgement on you.
Passing judgement on someone to live forever in hell would harm them. It would make the Judgement maker unjust and less noble. Therefore an infinitely wise being, God, would not do this. He doesnt do this. The separation is not a passing of judgement. God makes rules and lets you choose your path.
If you chose one that would land you in hell, then God will give you the opportunity to repent and clean your soul of that mortal sin. Evidence also shows that you may commit as many Venial sins as you want. He does not use a balance scale to determine you salvation. Which proves that it is in no way passing judgement. Many may still argue, why is Catholosism preaching final judgement by the father.
The Essay on Gods and Mortals
This paper gives two examples from the Iliad of the ways in which godly intervention can have disastrous consequences for mortals. (3 pages; 1 source; MLA citation style.IIntroductionThe ancient gods (who are still around, laughing at us I'm sure) were far more accessible than today's deities. They appeared to mortals, made love with them, sometimes bribed them or incited them to war; it was a ...
If you examine the term Judgement, it means to make a decision or form an opinion. Since God is all knowing, he need not make decisions or opinion since he knows all that is truth. Therefore, neither would it be Just or possible for God for pass Judgement. Judgement, as stated in Catholosism, is used for lack of better term. The real definition is looking into your soul to find truth. That truth will determine whether you go to hell or heaven.
Then comes the question of, why is faith necessary. It is not nesa rely necessary. An ignorant human who was never given a chance to chose faith is not excluded from heaven. The ones without faith who are excluded are the ones who consciously chose not to put their faith in God, but rather to put their faith in something else or nothing at all.
That all follows what is Just, therefore Salvation as Catholics translate the Bible follows. Another belief is that of Purgatory. Purgatory happens when you have no mortal sins, but your soul must be cleaned of Venial sin before you may face God in heaven. In The Republic, a distinction was made between harming someone and hurting someone, being that harming makes one less noble and hurting may make one more noble. A being who is Just being would never do harm. Purgatory is an example of hurt without harm because it cleans the soul of every instance of sin.
Therefore Purgatory would be one of the supreme acts of Justice. Next I will examine Jesus, the son of God. It would be logical for the son of an infinite being to be an ideal human. An ideal human would commit no sin and commit no injustice. Or, he would never give in to his appetites when logically it would be unwise. Jesus never committed a sin, and did good works and carried out what was Just.
Jesus was that Ideal human. Since Jesus was human, eventually he would have to die. Which happened when they crucified him on the cross. He died on the sins of the Jews who were actual humans (non-Ideal).
They gave in to their appetites when logically there was no reason for his execution. You can deduce that they committed a sin when they killed him. Jesus died for our sins. It would not be hard to prove the execution of Jesus because of the kept records from that time.
The Essay on Adam And Eve God Sin Jesus
1. Eden and the Expulsion a. ) Eden, interpreted through the reversal of the curses, is given to Adam and Eve, like a gift from God. Eden offers them food, "and the Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out from the ground - trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food," (Genesis 2: 9) and a place to live a simple life. Adam's task is to work the land, and in return he would be provided ...
I will now take myself off the specific subject of God and put a focus on Jesus. A strong proof may be made not only on God, but on Catholosism as a whole. According to scripture, Jesus stated that whatever his twelve apostles preached would be as if he preached it himself. They were the founders of Catholosism with Peter, one of the twelve, taking head as the Pope. Through the years, Catholosism has not changed in their ideals and beliefs as the other religions have. They stuck with whatever the original twelve have said.
And it is logical to know as well that ideals also never change. If the popular belief on an issue has changed, it wouldnt make sense to change the ideal as well. It would be a fallacy of logic to conform simply because of a majority. In conclusion, I have not found any flaws in logic within the bibles description of God. All his traits and processes of salvation mirror that of what an infinite and truthful being would be and use.
Along with this, I was able to, un purposely, accomplish two other things. One was create or identify a method for disproving any divine scripture. Simply put, if a prophet makes a description of God, but that description does not follow logically into what an infinite and truthful being is, then the description is wrong. Therefore, anything else that prophet has written may fall into question and he may be defined a false prophet. I have found none such case and a proof that I will never find such a case has not been presented to me. The second thing that was unpurposally accomplished was a strong argument leading toward the overall truthfulness of Catholosism.
The Catholic Ideals follow logically what is God, and the son of God. It didnt change with any popular idea of a time. Any change in ideal that did occur was deemed unjust and changed back. It also didnt sprout out of no where simply because one did not agree with an ideal. What I have presented was a strong argument that should give Catholosism a logical edge over others, and make it a logit ions religion..
