DCT Practice Questions Flashcards
Assess the view that Augustine’s view on human nature is too pessimistic
Despite our fallen nature, humans can still be saved through the Grace of God; ‘Doctor of Grace’
Summum bonum is available to those who set their hearts on God — however, is this optimistic about human nature or God? Compared with Rousseau and Locke’s emphasis on sociability of human nature and the ‘blank slate’ we are born with, whereas Augustine seems to focus on our fallen nature and our corruption from birth. Jean-Paul Sartre argued that we come into the world as free, undetermined, autonomous individuals who decide what we become
Is Augustine’s emphasis on the Fall pessimistic? Aquinas’ synderesis argues for human inclination to do good… but if this is the case, why was Eve corruptible?
Idea of ‘concupiscence’ (sinful lust) is realistic. Supported by Kant’s second formulation and Catholic teaching on fornication; he himself accepted his own insatiable sexual desire with his mistress
Must be noted that the 4-5 century had different notions of morality to our contemporary society when considering whether he is ‘too’ pessimistic
Assess the view that God can be known because the world is so well designed
Natural theologians argue that observation can capture God’s existence. William Paley used the analogy of a watch and its maker to capture the complexities of the world, serving as evidence that the world was designed by God. Swinburne agrees due to the order and purpose of the world (JSM criticises the ‘order’ and Hume criticises the leaps in a posteriori arguments through his Epicurean thesis)
Other natural theologians argue that God can be known from innate sense of the divine due to the way God designed us. Genesis describes God creating Adam imago dei and breathing Himself into him. John Calvin argued we have a ‘sensus divinatus’: ‘There is within us the human mind, and indeed by natural instincts, an awareness of divinity’. Supporters of this natural route argue that our design means we can recognise designed beauty in the world
However, revealed theologians would reject the view above. Karl Barth declared that natural theology was a form of idolatry; we can only know God through mediate or immediate revelation and the 3 forms of his Word — Jesus, the Bible and the Church
Bonaventura: eye of flesh (empiricism), reason (logic) and contemplation (faith)
Teleological argument supports; Aquinas argued that God gave us our senses and reason, perhaps for an empirical purpose whereby God can reveal truths through our reason. In ‘Summa Theologica’, he presented 5 ways the world must have requires design (5th point makes reference to design in theological argument) — by end of his life he concluded that God can never be truly known by the human mind
Assess the view that Jesus Christ was not unique
Jesus was unique as God incarnate, shown by his miracles in Mark’s gospel and Resurrection — his authority came directly from God. Rahner used the onion analogy to convey the divine nature within, which O’Collins agreed with. The First Council of Nicaea resolved that Jesus as the Father were homoousios (of the same substance)
However, David Hume emphasised the lack of modern-day miracles to prove that Jesus had God’s power. He did not reject that Jesus was unique, however, only that his uniqueness could be proved empirically (must be taken on faith)
For Paul, the Resurrection is the centrepiece of Christian teaching and what makes Jesus truly unique, emphasising ‘God’s victory over death’ (McGrath). Without the Resurrection, Jesus was merely a moral teacher and revolutionary. Hick drew comparisons to Moses, Jeremiah and Muhammad as prophets — the Resurrection is the act which sets Jesus above
Reza Aslan argues that Jesus was involved in a more confrontational resistance than is portrayed in New Testament: ‘I did not come to bring peace, but a sword’. However, the Bible speaks of a form of liberation that transcends society — in sin and death, making Jesus more than a political figure like Lenin or Napoleon
His moral teachings were divine, speaking of forgiveness of sins and healing on the sick in Mark’s gospel. C. S. Lewis claimed that ‘A man who is merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said cannot be a great moral teacher. He would be a lunatic… or else he would be the Devil of Hell’
How fair is it to claim that there is nothing distinctive about Christian ethics?
Distinct as Bible is ‘sola scriptura’ — God’s infallible commands — some understand it as God’s literal word in ‘no prophecy of scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation’ (Peter). Richard Mouw condemns situational approaches to the Bible (thus distinct from consequentialist theories)
However, there is a lack of consistency in the Bible, such as different styles of writing and contradictions — Freud: ‘[religions] are full of contradictions, revisions and falsifications’
Also distinct from other deontological theories — Kant has little place for the Bible (exception of his maxims) and Aquinas does not require the Bible to interpret moral messages of synderesis and precepts
Jesus’ teachings make Christian ethics unique, due to his God-given authority. Paul Tillich recognises love as the centrality of Christian ethics, due to the wisdom and justice it has as its ‘backbone’. He balanced situational aspects of agape with eternal wisdom of moral law to amalgamate deon and cons approaches
However, Muow condemns the centrality as unique as it appears to ignore other biblical commands, promoting one arbitrarily
Does Bonhoeffer place too much emphasis on suffering?
NO:
He is spreading the message of Jesus; Luke: ‘Anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple’ — costly grace is cost of discipleship, which often entails hardship. Bonhoeffer: ‘when Christ calls a man he bids him come and die… suffering, then, is the true badge of discipleship’. He rejected Lutheran notions that mere grace was needed for salvation, including cheap grace, (however, pluralists like Hick would contest this) as this would lead to ‘millions to spiritual corpses’
Karl Barth, regarding discipleship, taught that we should not focus on that which we cannot change (ie when God saves us and reveals himself) and instead focus on what we can change (ie suffering in the world)
YES:
Not all Christian communities have and will experience the level of suffering that was evident in the Nazi era. Bonhoeffer ordained as minister in 1931 with rise of Nazism. In 21st century world of democracy, hard to apply concepts of utopian altruistic society. However, even in times of peace, people still experience hardship — BH’s teachings promote solidarity
Christians might argue that he downplays joy of the Resurrection, as Jesus transcends his suffering on the Cross, defeating sin and death, but BH seems to focus on the cross.
Assess the view that if Christ is the truth, there can be no other means of salvation?
Exclusivist maintain that Christ is the only means of salvation. Hendrik Kramer argues non-Christians cannot achieve salvation as religions cannot be partly considered, so one either accepts Christ or does not. Barth argued God can be known through his 3 words — Christ, Bible, Church (although he accepts God reveals himself as he chooses, thus perhaps independent of Christianity)
Inclusivists argue that Christianity is the normative means of salvation. Karl Rahner described Christianity as ‘absolute’ religion, but Grace makes allowance for ‘anonymous Christians’ who lived good lives independent of Jesus (ie before AD1 or in different cultures)
William Lane Craig believed God has a ‘middle knowledge’ — what one would have done. Jesus’ death made salvation possible for all who accepted Christ — Sweetman: ‘this act made salvation possible for all’
Paul’s letter to the Romans suggests that people are intuitively aware of Christ as the truth, allowing for inclusivism
Pluralists reject that Christ is the only means of salvation. Hick believed that truth-claims of Christianity were myths as non-cognitive and a benevolent God would not limit salvation. All religions fall short of attempting to understand God (Kant’s ‘phenomenal’ world) because humans are only capable of a ‘noumenal’ understanding of God
Raimon Panikkar saw Christ not as a specific individual, but as a name for God revealing himself, thus Christophany not limited to Jesus of Nazareth (he was from a mixed-faith family, so could be undermining Christian message)
Assess the view that Christianity is essentially sexist
Daly, as a post — Christian theologian — argued that Christianity perpetuates female inequality in the unholy trinity of rape, genocide and war. God needs to be ‘castrated’ to free women, supported by his depiction as a ‘King’ and ‘Father’. ‘Rapism’ is symbol of violent oppression toward women, linking to genocide which leads to war in male-led states
However, Simon Chan argues that using male terms for God does not create masculine qualities, eg his ‘deep compassion’ as a Husband in Book of Isaiah. God is a Heavenly Father for all, not just men, not just a man. Fiorenza suggests that Bible supports women’s struggle, such as Jesus breaking sexist customs
Ruether, as a reform feminist, argues that Christianity is not essentially sexist, but rather has been interpreted as such. She referred to God as ‘Gaia’, trying to recover God’s female aspects. Also, Jesus is a servant King, focused on serving rather than conquering. She believed balancing male and female qualities is a truer imago dei
Chan, however, argued that one cannot rewrite the Christian story to heighten women’s importance, yet Ruether would maintain that she is not rewriting, merely reinterpreting
Daphne Hampson: ‘Feminism represents a revolution […] As women come into their own, theology will take a different shape’
Assess the view that Christianity is a major cause of personal and social problems
Personal problem as it corrupts the mind from a young age. Freud viewed Christianity as wish fulfilment, giving the vulnerable false purpose in life, yet ‘[religions] are full of contradictions, revisions and falsifications, and where they speak of factual confirmations they are themselves unconfirmed’ — Christianity is unhealthy, creating dependence and repressing the id
Dawkins described dependence on religion as ‘infantile’ and narrowing to our view of the world — uses example of Jews kidnapped by Catholic priests to emphasise indoctrination — child’s minds are ‘hijacked by religious faith’
Yet, Jo Marchant suggests beliefs have physiological benefits, despite not defending Christianity, such as optimism and community — ‘feeling part of something bigger may help us not only deal with life’s daily hassles but to defuse our deepest source of angst: knowledge of our own mortality’
Major cause of social conflict. Dawkins looks to Catholic and Protestant conflict to exemplify this. Rumi: ‘Every war and every conflict between human beings has happened because of some disagreement about names’
However, inter-faith dialogue eg Christian and Muslim forums suggests that religion is prospect for less conflict — Pope John Paul II’s ‘Redemptoris Missio’, ‘Dialogue with out brothers and sisters of other religions’
Social and personal problems of discrimination. Ruether argues Christianity has been interpreted in patriarchal light — traditionally only men took leadership roles in the Church. Also intolerant to minorities — Dawkins points to ‘American Taliban’ to present problems of absolutist faiths, criminalising anything different from their moral absolutes
However, this shows individual interpretation of Christianity, not the message itself. Anglican Bishops were central in decriminalising homosexuality in 1967
Assess the view that Marx does not offer a satisfactory solution to the problem of the poor
Marx is an atheist — ‘opiate of the people’ — showing the clash between theism and Marxism. Gutierrez: ‘to know God as liberator is to liberate’. Marx claimed that religion was a key cause of alienation, and Leonardo Boff argued that Christians must rejects Marxism, instead looking to the Gospel
However, Bonino: ‘The Marxist scheme cannot be taken as a dogma, but rather as a method which has to be applied’ — middle-way suggests Marx is satisfactory when applied to Christian doctrine. Also, Christianity has history of engaging with new insights eg scientific developments and healing stories in Mark’s Gospel — Genesis sees God task humans with learning new things of the world
Marx’s acceptance of conflict and death is unacceptable. He provides no comfort for those who die in revolutionary struggles, viewing it as inevitable — for Christians, only God has power to determine human life and death
Yet Colombian priest/guerilla Restrepo believed Christians have a duty to use violence (difference in culture). Also, Reza Aslan maintains that Christ himself was part of a confrontational resistance to Rome. Bentham’s act utilitarianism would argue that death of few for liberation of the many is a necessary sacrifice (secular thinker)
Perhaps ‘preferential option for the poor’ coincides Marxist thought. Father Pedro Arrupe coined phrase, meaning the poor should be prioritised; Gutierrez: ‘He is a God who sides with the poor’ — his calls for collectivism and end of class supports this, despite his atheism
However, can this be satisfactory when it has been proven to fail in the past, such as Russian Rev only perpetuated marginalisation of workers under Stalin’s Dictatorship
Analyse the view that Christian should not seek to convert others
Advocates of inter-faith dialogue would argue that Christians should not seek to convert others, as multi-faith societies can be source of social-cohesion: Rumi: ‘…just beyond the arguing there is a long table of companionship’; John Paul II’s Redemptoris Missio beings ‘Dialogue with brother and sisters of other religions’ (however he does emphasise necessity of missionary work)
Secular thinkers like Dawkins and Freud deplore religion as corrupting and a source of conflict, thus disagreeing with the view above. They would still agree with the above statement though
Christian exclusivists such as Kraemer and Barth believe Christianity is the only means of salvation, thus missionary work is a duty. Barth stressed centrality of Christ in salvation and Kraemer rejects ‘partial truths’ of other religions, as they must be considered in their entirety
However, perhaps pluralist/inclusivist notions that Christianity is not only means of salvation is stronger as it fits with traditional notions of a benevolent God and Jesus’ sacrifices (Sweetman)
‘There is no such thing as an ideal Christian family.’ Discuss
For Christians, family is created and shaped by God and so is ideal in traditional form, as heterosexual and hierarchal. John Paul II’s ‘Mulieris Digniatem’ speaks of ‘complementarianism’, whereby women equal to men but ill-equipped for leadership roles in the family. Aristotle: ‘by nature such that that the male is higher… the male rules and the female is ruled’, Aquinas extended this to encompass intelligence. Also look to Genesis as Eve created as Adam’s ‘helper’
However, liberal Christians have less acceptance on this traditional ideal family, as ‘Christian egalitarianism’ argues that traditional norms must be challenged — 1967 Anglican Bishops helped decriminalise homosexuality
For feminists, this ideal Christian family is patriarchal and result of socialisation. Mary Daly believed women’s abilities to be superior to men’s — as a post-Christian theologian, she believed no Christian family could be ideal. Liberals attribute gender qualities to socialisation, not biology or God — as gender is a spectrum, there is no ideal Christian family as the orthodox dominant male is wrong. Simone de Beauvoir believed motherhood was forced upon women and they were defined by their children
