CS115 Summative Journals Assignment Sample
Here’s the best sample of CS115 Summative Journals Assignment, written by the expert.
Journal 1:
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. (Van Kooten, 2008).
The journal accurately captures the different perspectives people hold towards God. I believe that each of the different personas described demonstrates the diverse nature of human thought towards supernatural or eternal subjects. The journal however does teach me that God cannot be described as somebody possessing certain traits or abilities; as would be the case for normal people. Rather, God is spiritual, existing only among living beings and not as an ultimate source of energy surrounding us. God is neither good nor bad, but forgiving, even towards those who have sinned. Moreover, God does not have a gender, which is a well-supported idea put forward in this journal. Being eternal, God instead possess attributes or qualities of both types of genders, but himself is not a man or woman. In a sense, the journal does show that while we are similar to God in many ways, we are also different. Suggesting that one cannot attempt to understand God in the same manner, he or she does so for people
Journal 2
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).
The main subject of discussion in Wright’s study was the Holy Spirit. I believe Wright made some extremely valid arguments and put forward notions that was unknown to me. I always believed that the Holy Spirit only existed as blessing for people, helping people muster through the difficulties of life. However, Wright broadened my perspective on this subject, describing the Holy Spirit as a tool for many purposes. For example, spreading God’s word, acting as a shield against modern sins and enabling passage to God’s kingdom. Later on, Wright suggested that churches were seen in both positive and negative views. I completely agree with the author on this subject, as during the early ages the church played a significant role in military conquest for the Roman Empire. The crusades stand as example of the atrocities the church committed in the past, which continues to haunt people affected by it modern times. Hence, seeing the church from a negative as well as a positive viewpoint demonstrates the author unbiased approach. Lastly, the author rejected panentheism views of God, which makes sense, as God does not exist in inanimate objects like chairs, tables, beds etc.
Journal 3
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).
Horton did excellent work in linking human aspects with God. For example, he drew similarity between the creations of man with the creations of God, suggesting that people are more closely linked with God than they think. While, the creations of God and people vastly differ with regard to scale, they both require creativity. The author puts forward a paradox with regard to the concept of “man in created in the image of man”, by questioning the link of murders or criminals to God. This is a rather controversial but valid argument, as criminals are also created in the image of God, so does that mean God is similar to a criminal? I believe that the answer lies in the fact that every individual has free will. God by allowing us a choice to choose our own path has resulted in many different types of people, with different personalities and tendencies. Unfortunately, this free will has also allowed evils to manifest within people’s lives, creating criminals. I would like to say that while criminals possess similarity to God in terms of image and creativity, its application that differs. Hence, saying that God must be like criminals on Earth is refuted.
Journal 4
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).
The journal puts forward the concept of fear within people’s lives. Nouwen’s arguments for most part are accurate; however, not all people live in fear and many of which are non-believers or non-Christians. That being said, Nouwen makes some strictly valid points; for example, fear manifest through the pressures of the modern world. This is extremely true as the contemporary world is a difficult place to live, with dangers, risks and sins surrounding people everywhere. Nouwen seems to stress on the fact that rich and powerful dominate the less privileged and weak. In a sense, Nouwen portrays human life being similar to living in the wild, where survival of the fittest is the order of the day. However, unlike in the wild, people who survive are those who accept God in their lives.
Reference List
Brunner, E., 1952. The Christian doctrine of creation and redemption. Lutterworth 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.
Hick, J., 2010. Evil and the God of Love. Springer.
LaNoue, D., 2000. The spiritual legacy of Henri Nouwen. Bloomsbury Publishing.
McClung, F. (2007). The Father heart of God. (Revised Edition). Eastbourne UK: Kingsway Publications.
Pennington, M.B., 2000. True self/false self: Unmasking the spirit within. Crossroad Publishing.
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:
