CS115 Christ centred Worldview Assignment Sample
Here’s the best sample of CS115 Christ centred Worldview Assignment, written by the expert.
Assignment 1
Journal 1:
Week 3 – White, J.E. (1998). A Search for the Spiritual: Exploring Real Christianity. Baker Books: Grand Rapids. pp. 35-42.
White (1998) explores the philosophical question “what is God like?” while doing so James puts forward six independent perspectives. Each of the perspectives discussed addresses the different stands people might possess regarding what God is like; not from just a physical perspective but also from a personality point of view.
The first perspective discussed is God as a cosmic cop. According to White, some consider God’s only priority or mission is to punish wrong doings, where the emphasis is on maintaining law and order throughout the cosmos. It is believed that those who follow the rules forgo God’s judgement, whilst the rule breakers are punished severely. There are no compromises in rules; even small misdeeds are considered a felony. This depiction of God portrays the almighty as one who is severe, strict and stern; someone who only cares about the rules established in life. I personally believe this is untrue, as God is more enthusiastic to reward or enriched our lives; than to punish. James counter argues and rightfully so by quoting Psalm 103:10-11, 13-14. The quotes puts forward God’s compassion towards people, where even punishments delivered fail in comparison to the actual crimes committed (Hoekema, 1994). On the opposite end of the spectrum there are people who picture God as a ”celestial Santa Claus”, one who only showers gifts and ignores all wrong doings. James is quick to point out that this perception is just as distorted as the “cosmic cop” is. In Isaiah 6:1-5 Isaiah’s encounter with God showed us that his response upon seeing God made him feel guilty as he considered himself a sinner. His emotions portrayed one of fear, embarrassment and disappointed; a type of reaction that would not have manifested if God was a “Celestial Santa Claus”.
Although less common, the view of God as a tyrannical ruler portrays peoples’ contrasting viewpoints over who god is. Such people consider serving god as serving a tyrant, where all they do is serve and not get anything in return. However, the bible contradicts this suggestion on several occasions. According to the bible, serving god is like entering a family and developing deep relationship. A type of relationship which promises returns for those who believe and serve God (Romans 8:14-15). While, on the other hand, the perception of god as being a ‘powerful’ ‘superhuman’ being is more common among people. In White’s (1998) discussion of “the big man”, he quotes John 4:24 and 1 Timothy 1:17 justifying God as one that is not bound by any physical form, rather exists as a spirit; immortal, eternal and invisible (Bryson, 2004).
God is also considered as energy existing within us and around us. White (1988) tactically links this to being similar to the so called “force” portrayed within the Star Wars movies. The bible rejects this theme by claiming that God may be spirit by God does not exist everywhere. Since, created people in his own image, God is more likely to exist in each of us rather than throughout the endlessness of the cosmos. White’s (1988) discussion ends by counteracting atheistic viewpoints; in which he states that Jesus being born on Earth is sufficient to suggest that there is a God (Atkinson and Bourrat, 2011).
Journal 2:
Week 4 – McGrath, A.E. (2012). Theology the basics. (Third edition). Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 24-35
This journal discusses highly debatable and controversial aspects related to how people perceive God. Throughout the bible and in Christian faith in general, God is someone who has always been referred to as a “father”. McGrath suggest that ideas may be linked to use of the term father. First, fathers like mothers are human beings. Secondly, Fathers are a responsible role in creating life. Thirdly, fathers look after their children. Lastly, fathers are undoubted male. While, the first three can be linked to God easily, the last idea of God being a male attracts controversy. McGrath also points out the consistent use of masculine language within the bible when referring to God. Even Jesus Christ himself referred to God as “our heavenly father” in Mathew 7:9-11. While, the use of such masculine theological language might suggest that God is male; in reality it is not quite so. There are numerous examples of female imaginary like Isaiah 49:15 where God was being compared to a “mother” who could never turn against or forget her children. The use of both female and male imagery would suggest that God is neither male nor female. The main aim of using such language would be to represent various aspects of God; that portray both feminine and masculine characteristics (McClung, 2007).
McGrath (2012) also suggests the notion of “a personal God”, which he essentially argues that the relationships between people and God is one of deep meaning and personal. In other words, God relates to each individual on a personal level. Further arguments are put forward by identifying key themes like faithfulness, trust and love within the bible, that legitimise McGrath’s (2012) view. Martin Buber’s work of “I and Thou” was cited, which portrays people’s relationship with God as being the “I-Thou” type. Because of Buber’s analysis, several concepts about God are strengthened. For example, God is not a concept, God is not an object and God is self-revealing. The discussion ends by suggested the Jesus Christ acts as a mediator who helps restore personal relationships between people and God (Carson, 2002).
God is often refereed the almighty, the creator of heaven and earth, the ultimate source of power. McGrath (2012) argues that making such a statement also means the people are suggesting that God could also do anything. If God is indeed “almighty” and capable of doing anything, then God could also break promises or lie. This is highly offending and taboo in Christian faith, as raising such questions places doubt on God’s moral character. God’s trustfulness and faithfulness is a key theme seen throughout the bible, so such questions are never raised as seen in Psalm 145:13. That being said, the use of the term almighty is indeed paradoxical. One example provided was if God could do anything then could God draw a four-sided triangle, which is impossible. McGrath then suggests that God could do anything that is logically possible; like make people hate him. In the end, it would seem that although God is “almighty”, God only acts through faithfulness and righteousness. This suggests that one cannot attempt to understand God in the same manner he or she does so for other people (Van Kooten, 2008).
Journal 3:
Week 6 – Wright, N.T. (2006). Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense. Harper Collins: Melbourne. pp. 121-129.
Wright (2006) points that God never answers our questions directly. This was even seen back in the time of Jesus Christ when his believers questioned him regarding the fate of Israel. In Acts 1:16-8 Jesus replied to his followers that “it isn’t for you”, in other words it is not for you to know. Rather, Jesus went on state that they would receive power through the Holy Spirit. Wright argues that this is because most people ask questions, which “don’t make sense”. According to Wright (2006), the Holy Spirit is inseparable from the Church, whilst playing an important role in people’s lives. While, the Holy Spirit can enrich a believer’s life with God’s comfort, love, joy and presence, its true purpose is to embolden people to spread the word of the Lord. In doing so, the Holy Spirit enables us passage to God’s kingdom. The Holy Spirit is also described as a tool for followers of the faith to live in the current time, while preparing for life in the future. The Holy Spirit is also seen to be the embodiment of God’s own personal self that seeks to protect followers from modern sins like alcoholism, drug addiction, adultery etc. (Pennington, 2000).
Wright portrays two separate images of “churches”. One that represents physical buildings, false solemnity, pretentious religious pronouncements and rank hypocrisy. Another that represents a gathering of people, a place for healing or hope, a place to socialise and embolden each other with faith, a place of worship and a place to pray. Despite most churches being that of the negative overtone in modern times, Wright (2003) accurately puts forward examples of exceptions like Churches in Europe and South Africa, which acted as beacons of peace, healing and redemption during times of turmoil.
Living a Christian life is essentially a learning process, where the devout learns to live by rules of a future world. A Christian must do so while continuing to exist within the present life. Jesus himself refers this life as being a sinful and corrupt generation. A theme starts to emerge, that living today according to God, will guarantee “inheritance” to God’s kingdom. The idea behind this is that through “inheritance” the whole world will eventually become “God’s holy land”, a land reclaimed by God, a world free from slavery, decay, corruption and death. Wright (2003) goes on to argues that those who receive the spirit are given a “taste” or “preview” of what the future world of God would be like as seen in 2 Corinthians 5:17. Hence, the Holy Spirit acts God himself guiding, leading, rebuking, warning and grieving followers towards their “inheritance”. Later on Wright (2003) addresses what Christianity is, by addressing the concept of panentheism within the faith. Wright (2003) rejects this concept, which claims God’s existence to be in everything, both equal and consistent. He rejects this concept calling it absurd as it created a situation where evil could not be eradicated. More importantly, the concept prevented believers from “inheriting” the Promised Land in the future, as there would be impossible to move to any such future (Cooper, 2006).
Journal 4:
Week 7 – Horton, M. (1994). Putting the Amazing Back into Grace. Baker Books: Grand Rapids, Michigan. Pp. 29-45.
Horton (1994) attempts to link humanity with the God’s image. The first similarity discussed was that concerning moral perfection. Genesis 1:31 implies God’s satisfaction with creating a “very good” creature that had no “internal defects”. There was nothing to suggest that such a creature would follow a path to sin; rather, godliness, holiness and righteousness was eminent. In a sense, man and woman bared similar resemblance to God, as would a creator to his invention. Beyond good morals, people also empowered with God’s creativity within themselves. First, God as a being displayed a high degree of creativity when he created the entire universe, the sun, the moons, the plants, the animals and so forth. There is so much distinction between species, lands and ecosystems, which could only be brought about through creativity. Similarly, God’s creativity is seen through the many works of people; for example, inventions, advances in science, modern technology. Horton also links people and God from a religious perspective as well. Similar to God, people also concern themselves with the eternal (Willard, 2009).
Horton (1994) also reinstates the fact that “creation is universal”, while redemption is limited. In other words, God creates all irrespective of them being Christians or non-Christians. While, only those who accept and spread the word of God may be redeemed of their sins. This has a few implications, which could be positive or negative. Firstly, all people are created in the divine image of God; who could be a murderer, terrorists or even an atheist. This also means since that such individuals bear the image of God, we, as Christians must treat them with equal respect and divinity as the devout and righteous. Secondly, since all people are created equal and in the image of God, each individuals holds similar capacity for religious interests, creativity and morality. This gives hope in a sense that every person stands an equal chance of receiving God’s spirit and inheritance; even if they born or brought up as sinful individuals. In other words, God is always ready to forgive; even those who commit the most outrageous of sins (Brunner, 1952).
Horton’s journal also questions the purpose of humanity; or why are people here on earth?. While, science has been to some extent successful in decoding the origins of man, it still fails to address the question. Questions related to purpose of life and the afterlife are still a mystery from a scientific perspective, and are most likely to continue to remain so. However, from a theological perspective, several theories emerge. One such theory suggests that God was lonely so he created human. Another suggests that God simply wanted to bring life to creatures, which could display love and affection toward him; through free will. Horton (1994) also states that creation can however be seen from dual perspectives; one that is God-centred and the other human-centred. Both these perspectives argue the purpose of existence over the other. Later on, Horton points out benefits to the “doctrine of creation”, stating that people are encouraged to respect God and others around themselves, irrespective of them being non-Christians or atheists. This allows a higher degree of tolerance and social bonding within society as whole. The doctrine also creates a feeling of purpose within work. In other words, people feel that they have their own purpose on Earth, one that involves acting in manner that benefits society (DeWaay, 2006).
Journal 5:
Week 8 – Nouwen, H.J. (1986). In the House of the Lord. Darton, Longman & Todd: London. Pp. 3-9.
Nouwen (1986) provides a detailed description of living life in fear. According to him, fear has crept into people’s life to an extent where it affects their daily lives. Fear is omnipresent and intertwined with human life; especially in contemporary times. He goes on address the issue of why people tend to be scared, by using himself as an example, which was accurate. According to viewpoint, a person “A” may fear “B”, if “B” was more powerful than “A”, consequently, “A” could also force “B” into doing anything. While is it true that people may be scared or fear for different reasons, Noumen believes that fear caused by power is significant. Common examples put forward help strengthen his stand. For example, employees fear their managers. Children fear teachers, as teachers could punish them. And so forth. Hence, as long we are scared, we could be made to act according to the oppressor (LaNoue, 2000).
Fear manifest through fearful questions; for example, an employee asking himself what would happen if losses his job. Such questions almost never answers in a positive manner or suggests a positive outcome. Taking the example from before regarding the employee; he may answer the question by saying “if I lose my job I would lose my lavish lifestyle as well, while my marriage could suffer and in worst case circumstances I could end up being homeless”. However, the question could be answered in positive light “if I lost my job, I could get another one, which is higher paying and further helps develop my career”. Unfortunately, fear never lets such positive answers to manifest. However, theology teaches us that Christ was aware of this fact and despite living in fearful environment; never raised “fearful” questions. The bible shows us that Jesus transformed the original questions before answering them. Hence, from this perspective it can be argued that despite being followers of Jesus were still unable to follow his example. The more we raise questions derived from fear, the more we tend to reject God’s love and his word. As pointed out by Nouwen (1986), ‘but’ is always used a means to point difficulties and “realities”. For example, a person skipping prayer to attend work on Sundays may argue, “I would love to receive the word of God and gather in union, but if I skip work, I may get fired from my job”. This reveals that the modern world with all of its negativity, temptation and sin still manages to exert a strong grip over people, even believers of Christianity (Hick, J., 2010).
Assignment 2
Themes
-
God is a personal God
It is a common practice in Christian faith to consider relationships with God as “personal”. When people pray to God or even talk to God in their own minds, they do so believing that they connect with the almighty through personal relationships; I myself hold this very notion. This a natural thing to assume, yet critics claim that God is “impersonal”. A major theme emerged through McGrath’s (2012) writings, which argues that the relationship people possess with God is one that can be described as “personal”. The author puts forward the notion that God and people hold personal relationships. While, the concept of our relationship with God being “impersonal” is rejected. In other words, God looks after humanity as a whole, and not only an individual basis (Tisdale et al. 1997).
-
Trust, loyalty and faithfulness
This second theme is connected with the first one, in a sense that a personal relationship with God is built through trust, loyalty and faithfulness. The Bible shows us that God places importance on love and faithfulness; for example, Proverbs 3:3-4 states that true loyalty manifests from within the heart, draped in love. We must also be loyal to God as he is to us. God’s loyalty to us is depicted throughout the bible like Probers 21:21, Deuteronomy 7:9, Matthew 26:33-35 and Romans 8:35-39. These scriptures tell us that God himself is loyal to us no matter the circumstances (Kaufman, 1981).
-
Attributes of God
The texts also put forward theme of “attributes of God”. In other words, what God looks like? What is God’s gender? What is God’s personality and so forth. White (1998) began discussion with portraying the various images people possess of God. God as a “cosmic cop“ was one that suggested God was a rule maker, obsessed with punishing those who broke them. God as “celestial Santa Claus” was one that showered people with gifts and blessings even if they did wrong or committed sin. God as “a tyrannical ruler”, one who only cared about being worshiped. God as “the big man” or someone capable of superhuman feats through sheer power. God as “the force” who existed as energy throughout the galaxies. Lastly, God as Jesus Christ. White, in discussing these perspectives, built attributes that could be linked to God. For example, God is a sprit, God punishes, God forgives, God is eternal, God is infinite, God rewards and God can manifest as a living being (Green, 1998).
-
Love is stronger than fear
Fear being a dominant force within peoples’ lives makes it difficult for them to accept love. Love in a sense God’s love, blessing, spirit and promise. Nouwwen (1986) theme of “love is stronger than” fear shines light and raises hope, even within a world where people are scared or fearful. 1 John 4:18 states that those who love cannot fear, those who love can cast out fear; pointing towards the importance of accepting the love of God without our lives (Parker, 2013).
Analysis
Theme 1
Before analysing the author’s perspective, I would like to state that as God “reveals” himself through scripture, some critics point out that this would lead to an “I-it” relationship. This is because God does not actively seek out people; rather people seek him out. McGrath refutes this stand by suggesting that God chooses to reveal himself in those who believe him; an act which would suggest an “I-Thou” relationships, which I agree too. “I-it” relationships between one active and one passive component; for example, a person using a pen to write; where the person is “I” and the object is “is”. On the other hand, “I-Thou” relationships are one which sees an active connection between two active agents or components; for example, relationship between husband and wife. Understanding this concept helps us understand our relationship with God, which is one that is undoubtedly personal. In 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, Paul speaks about “reconciling” with God. Moreover, the nature of Paul’s words and use of the word “reconciliation” points us to an understanding that our relationship with God is like any other close relationship with another human (Martin, 1993).
Theme 2
Even if people are faithless, God remains faithful. Even if a believer fails God’s expectations, God would continue to remain royal. The word of God also tells us that we should be equally loyal to God and Christ. Romans 1:16 encourages people to remain loyal to God and not be ashamed of their belief for the gospel. While, Hosea 6:6 states that loyalty is preferred to sacrifices. Another powerful image that is related to loyalty is Jesus’s address to the crowd in Mark 8:34-35. He suggested that those who wished to follow him must do so in complete faith and loyalty, to the extent that one must not seek to protect one’s life (Peshkin, 1988.).
Theme 3
McGrath’s (2012) discussion reveals gender-specific personality attributes; for example, God is neither man nor woman; but possess qualities of both. I believe that it is most accurate to suggest that God exhibits qualities or attributes of both fatherhood and motherhood as seen in the use of masculine and feminine interpretations of God within the bible. I accept this view as McGrath provides strong examples that support his case.
God as the shepherd that guides us is an example of male attributes. Psalm 80:1 portrays God as the “Shepard of Israel”, while Psalm 95:7 preaches, “We are the people of his pasture”. I believe this is true as seen in some of St Paul’s verses. For example, John 10:1-18 puts forward the key qualities of a good Shepard, which portray provision, example, trustworthiness, sacrificial and relational as key qualities. McGrath (2012) also quotes feminine proclamations of God, where God possess woman-like or mother-like attributes. One such example being Mathew 7:9-11. His discussion on “God as the father” points to a central notion, that when people talk of God as a father or mother, they do so without associating gender or sexuality (Peek et al. 1991). Hence, God as a father is not a male god nor is he a female god when seen as mother. The important point McGrath (2012) stresses is the attributes of God cannot be linked to gender differences based on sexuality; rather difference that manifest from nature and quality. This I is a vital point; as being Christian I have encountered many believers of the faith who treat God as a male gender; instead of appreciating the quality and nature of God himself.
Theme 4
While, Nouwen (1986) makes a fair point, I strongly believe that his view on a “fearful” world that we live in is hyperbolic. I do not agree that fear takes often takes over our lives and makes us act differently. While, this is true is some cases, it is unrealistic to portray such an image over the entire human race. People do not live their lives based on fear, as suggested by Nouwmen; rather live their lives based on their economic situation and attitudes towards living. That being said Nouwen raises valid questions arguing that people may have become so “deaf” that may not be able to hear God’s voice. There are numerous instances where the phrases “do not be afraid” and “have no fear” have been repeated; not only in the Old Testament, but the New Testament as well (Machen, 2015). Genesis 15:1, Abraham’s vision of God, where God reassures Abraham not to be afraid. Through the trinity, God exist as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God himself exists as a reason for us not to be afraid. Nouwen appropriately quotes John 6:20, where Jesus walks on water to approach his disciples, who are shocked and scared at the time. Jesus simply said, “It is I” “do not be afraid”; once again highlighting the strong presence of this theme throughout the bible. Nouwen then illustrates a transition from living a fearful life to one that of love. He does so by suggesting the need to accept Jesus in one’s life, spreading the word of God and inherit a place in God’s house. This new life being depicted is one of God’s love, Jesus’s love, a place that transcends beyond the afterlife. Wright (2003) portrays a similar image with regard to this, by suggesting that those who receive the inheritance of God will be free from fears of life like death, decay and slavery; a claim that I agree to.
Personal Reflection
Reading the texts has broaden my understanding over biblical perspectives on God. Firstly, I believed that God existed everywhere; however, the discussion put forward convinced me that while God can existing any and anywhere, God chooses to dwell in one’s self, mind and heart. Secondly, my conception of Gods “Holy Land” was that belonging in heaven or some other spiritual or eternal abode. However, the text shows that the holy land can exist here on Earth within the each individual believer. Thirdly, I strongly believed that sinners like murderers or even terrorist were incapable of atonement. Once, again I was proven wrong as I made aware of the fact that all people are created in the image of God; as a result, every person possess the same capacity to repent and achieve salvation.
Reference List
Atkinson, Q.D. and Bourrat, P., 2011. Beliefs about God, the afterlife and morality support the role of supernatural policing in human cooperation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(1), pp.41-49.
Brunner, E., 1952. The Christian doctrine of creation and redemption. Lutterworth Press.
Bryson, M., 2004. The tyranny of Heaven: Milton’s rejection of God as king. University of Delaware Press.
Carson, D.A., 2002. The gagging of God: Christianity confronts pluralism. Zondervan.
Cooper, J.W., 2006. Panentheism–The Other God of the Philosophers: From Plato to the Present. Baker Academic.
DeWaay, B., 2006. Redefining Christianity: Understanding the Purpose Driven Life Movement. 21st Century Press.
Green, G., 1998. Imagining God: Theology and the religious imagination. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
Hick, J., 2010. Evil and the God of Love. Springer.
Hoekema, A.A., 1994. Created in God’s image. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
Kaufman, G.D., 1981. The theological imagination: Constructing the concept of God. Westminster John Knox Press.
LaNoue, D., 2000. The spiritual legacy of Henri Nouwen. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Machen, J.G., 2015. Christianity and Culture. Ravenio Books.
Martin, G., 1993. Reading Scripture as the Word of God: Practical Approaches and Attitudes. Verbo Divino.
McClung, F. (2007). The Father heart of God. (Revised Edition). Eastbourne UK: Kingsway Publications.
Parker, J., 2013. God’s Love for the World. Dorrance Publishing.
Peek, C.W., Lowe, G.D. and Williams, L.S., 1991. Gender and God’s word: Another look at religious fundamentalism and sexism. Social Forces, 69(4), pp.1205-1221.
Pennington, M.B., 2000. True self/false self: Unmasking the spirit within. Crossroad Publishing.
Peshkin, A., 1988. God’s choice: The total world of a fundamentalist Christian school. University of Chicago Press.
Tisdale, T.C., Key, T.L., Edwards, K.J., Brokaw, B.F., Kemperman, S.R., Cloud, H., Townsend, J. and Okamoto, T., 1997. Impact of treatment on God image and personal adjustment, and correlations of God image to personal adjustment and object relations development. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 25(2), pp.227-239.
Van Kooten, G.H., 2008. Paul’s anthropology in context: The image of God, assimilation to God, and tripartite man in ancient Judaism, ancient philosophy and early Christianity (Vol. 232). Mohr Siebeck.
Willard, D., 2009. The divine conspiracy: Rediscovering our hidden life in God. Harper Collins.
________________________________________________________________________________
Know more about UniqueSubmission’s other writing services:
awesome