Possible Exam Questions Plans Flashcards

Question

To what extent does Aquinas’ cosmological argument successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator?

Answer 1

Introduction - Describe Aquinas’ cosmological argument Describe what is meant by transcendent creator Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument does not successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator Paragraph 1 - Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor Paragraph 2 - ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument does not successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator

Answer 2

Introduction Describe the two arguments for God which are based on observation (teleo and cosmo) State that Hume believes that neither of these prove the existence of God Conclude Hume successfully argues that observation does not prove the existence of God Paragraph 1 Cosmological – empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect HOWEVER, doesn’t prove the existence of God, just need of a first cause Paragraph 2 Teleological – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world HOWEVER, doesn’t prove the existence of God, just need of a designer Paragraph 3 Hume – order does not prove design Paragraph 4 Hume – why prove God? Why couldn’t there be more than one God? Paragraph 5 Hume – why the Christian God? It could prove the Hindu’s are right Conclusion Hume – cannot see the first cause or design, and cannot go outside universe to establish relationship between itself and its cause Conclude Hume successfully argues that observation does not prove the existence of God

Answer 3

Introduction Describe Aquinas’ fifth way (teleo) Conclude that Aquinas’ fifth way does not demonstrate the existence of God Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world Paragraph 2 Hume – order does not prove design Paragraph 3 Hume – why prove God? Why couldn’t there be more than one God? Paragraph 4 Hume – why the Christian God? It could prove the Hindu’s are right Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins) COUNTER Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote) Conclusion Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer or they were cruel Conclude that Aquinas’ fifth way does not demonstrate the existence of God

Answer 4

Introduction Describe the ontological argument Conclude that Kant does successfully criticize the ontological argument Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate Conclusion Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle) Conclude that Kant does successfully criticize the ontological argument

Answer 5

Introduction Describe the design argument (teleo) Conclude that the world was created by God’s design, not by chance Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind Paragraph 4 Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins) Conclusion Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote) Conclude that the world was created by God’s design, not be chance

Answer 6

Introduction Describe Aquinas’ cosmological argument Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is weak when used to prove God’s existence Paragraph 1 Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is weak when used to prove God’s existence

Answer 7

Introduction Describe Paley’s teleological argument Conclude that Paley’s teleological argument doesn’t successfully defend existence of God Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind Paragraph 4 Hume – weak analogy (Paley’s watch) Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins) Conclusion Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design Conclude that Paley’s teleological argument doesn’t successfully defend existence of God

Answer 8

Introduction Describe the design argument (teleo) Conclude that there is design in the universe Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind Paragraph 4 Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins) Conclusion Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote) Conclude that there is design in the universe

Answer 9

Introduction Describe Aquinas’ cosmological argument Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is unsuccessful in proving that God exists Paragraph 1 Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition Conclude Aquinas’ cosmological argument is unsuccessful in proving that God exists

Answer 10

Introduction Describe the two arguments for the universe which give an explanation (teleo and cosmo) Conclude the universe is just there: it neither has nor needs an explanation Paragraph 1 Swinburne (cosmological) – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ (both) – based on empirical evidence, everyone’s experienced the precepts Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer Paragraph 4 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind Paragraph 5 Hume – even if universe did begin, doesn’t mean anything caused it to come into existence Conclusion Hume – order does not prove design Conclude the universe is just there: it neither has nor needs an explanation

Answer 11

Introduction Describe the ontological argument put forward by St Anselm Conclude St. Anselm’s ontological argument doesn’t prove the necessary existence of God Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate Paragraph 5 Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle) Conclusion Aquinas – to define something we have to understand it, we don’t understand God Conclude St. Anselm’s ontological argument doesn’t prove the necessary existence of God

Answer 12

Introduction Describe the ontological argument Conclude we can’t derive the existence of God from his definition Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate Paragraph 5 Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle) Conclusion Aquinas – to define something we have to understand it, we don’t understand God Conclude we can’t derive the existence of God from his definition

Answer 13

Introduction Describe what ‘a posteriori’ and ‘a priori’ styles of arguments are Conclude that ‘a posterori’ is the more persuasive style of argument Paragraph 1 Plato – we cannot trust our senses, must focus on independent truths like goodness Example – optical illusions and mirages Paragraph 2 J.L Mackie – impossible to establish concrete reality based of a definition Paragraph 3 Hume – impossible to prove anything without empirical evidence or experience Paragraph 4 Aristotle and Aquinas – the natural world is the best source of evidence Paragraph 5 History – we change conclusions based on new evidence, ‘a priori’ does not Conclusion Science – results gathered and conclusions drawn from empirical evidence Conclude that ‘a posterori’ is the more persuasive style of argument

Answer 14

Introduction Describe the teleological argument Conclude that the teleological argument can be defended against the challenge of chance Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world Paragraph 2 Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer Paragraph 3 Problem of evil – John Hick’s vale of soul making, God designed it with evil in mind Paragraph 4 Hume – no one was there to witness the event of design Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins) Conclusion Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote) Conclude that the teleological argument can be defended against the challenge of chance

Answer 15

Introduction Describe the teleological argument Conclude that the teleological argument isn’t successful in proving the existence of God Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – empirical evidence, everyone can see the intricacies of the world Paragraph 2 Hume – order does not prove design Paragraph 3 Hume – why prove God? Why couldn’t there be more than one God? Paragraph 4 Hume – why the Christian God? It could prove the Hindu’s are right Paragraph 5 Science – evolution (Dawkins) COUNTER Science and religion are compatible (Darwin quote) Conclusion Problem of evil – evil shows the world is not perfect, no designer or they were cruel Conclude that the teleological argument isn’t successful in proving the existence of God

Answer 16

Introduction Describe the cosmological argument Conclude cosmological argument jumps to conclusion of transcendent creator Paragraph 1 Cosmological – empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect HOWEVER, doesn’t prove the existence of God, just need of a first cause Paragraph 2 Science – Big bang is first cause, no need for God Paragraph 3 Hume – order does not prove design Paragraph 4 Hume – why prove God? Why couldn’t there be more than one God? Paragraph 5 Hume – cannot see the first cause or design, and cannot go outside universe to establish relationship between itself and its cause Conclusion Hume – why the Christian God? It could prove the Hindu’s are right Conclude cosmological argument jumps to conclusion of transcendent creator

Answer 17

Introduction Describe cosmological argument Conclude cosmological argument is unsuccessful in proving the existence of God Paragraph 1 Swinburne – strong inductive, uses Ockham’s razor Paragraph 2 ‘a posteriori’ – based on empirical evidence, everyone has experience of cause and effect Paragraph 3 Science – the universe is either eternal or cause of a spontaneous random event Paragraph 4 Contradiction – Aquinas says God is infinite yet infinity is impossible Paragraph 5 Kierkegaard – Paradox not contradiction, it makes sense but we don’t understand God so can’t understand it Conclusion Russell – Fallacy of composition Conclude cosmological argument is unsuccessful in proving the existence of God

Answer 18

Introduction Describe the ontological argument Conclude that existence can be treat as a predicate Paragraph 1 Russell – ‘exist’ is being used wrong, Santa Clause argument Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence Paragraph 4 Hume – no difference to God in the mind and God in reality Conclusion Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate Conclude that existence can be treat as a predicate

Answer 19

Introduction Describe the ontological argument Conclude the ontological argument does not justify belief in God Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate Paragraph 5 Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle) Conclusion Aquinas – to define something we have to understand it, we don’t understand God Conclude the ontological argument does not justify belief in God

Answer 20

Introduction Describe the ontological argument Conclude the ontological argument does not prove the existence of God Paragraph 1 ‘a priori’ – deductive and reaches a logical conclusion Paragraph 2 Kant – existence is not a predicate and so the ontological argument is based on a mistake Paragraph 3 Descartes – the term ‘perfect’ includes within it the notion of existence Paragraph 4 Stephen Davis – Kant is not able to prove conclusively that ‘exists’ is not a real predicate Paragraph 5 Kant – the triangle argument (can’t reject 3 sides but can reject whole triangle) Conclusion Aquinas – to define something we have to understand it, we don’t understand God Conclude the ontological argument does not prove the existence of GodS

Answer 21

Introduction Describe Aristotle’s understanding of reality (4 causes and the prime mover) Conclude that Aristotle’s understanding of reality is incredibly weak Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – his ideas are based on empirical evidence Paragraph 2 Plato and Descartes – senses cannot be trusted Paragraph 3 Some argue no intrinsic purpose other than existing, no empirical evidence for prime mover Paragraph 4 Hume and Russell – universe is just brute fact Paragraph 5 Prime mover depends on everything having a cause, but the prime mover doesn’t have one Conclusion Science – Big bang theory is beginning for the universe and shows prime mover not needed Conclude that Aristotle’s understanding of reality is incredibly weak

Answer 22

Introduction Describe Aristotle’s four causes Conclude that Aristotle’s four causes are good for explaining everything bar the universe Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – his ideas are based on empirical evidence Paragraph 2 Plato and Descartes – senses cannot be trusted Paragraph 3 Some argue no intrinsic purpose other than existing, no empirical evidence for prime mover Paragraph 4 Uses in real life: science using the efficient and everyday using the final Paragraph 5 Prime mover depends on everything having a cause, but the prime mover doesn’t have one Conclusion Science – Big bang theory is beginning for the universe and shows prime mover not needed Conclude that Aristotle’s four causes are good for explaining everything bar the universe

Answer 23

Introduction Describe Aristotle’s four causes and how he uses them to explain the world Conclude that Aristotle’s four causes are ineffective at explaining the world Paragraph 1 ‘a posteriori’ – his ideas are based on empirical evidence Paragraph 2 Plato and Descartes – senses cannot be trusted Paragraph 3 Some argue no intrinsic purpose other than existing, no empirical evidence for prime mover Paragraph 4 Hume and Russell – universe is just brute fact Paragraph 5 Prime mover depends on everything having a cause, but the prime mover doesn’t have one Conclusion Science – Big bang theory is beginning for the universe and shows prime mover not needed Conclude that Aristotle’s four causes are ineffective at explaining the world

Answer 24

Introduction Describe where Aristotle’s prime mover comes from Describe where Plato’s form of the good comes from Conclude that they are incredibly different Paragraph 1 Both represent some form of ultimate reality, but for Plato this was true knowledge, and for Aristotle it was perfection Paragraph 2 The prime mover attracts, whilst the form of the good illuminates Paragraph 3 Both perfectly good, but in different ways (potentiality filled vs form of goodness itself) Paragraph 4 Prime mover is the soul important being, form of the good is the most important out of a hierarchy of forms Conclusion Prime mover is beyond time and space, the form of the good is something we can recognise in out world Conclude that they are incredibly different

Answer 25

Introduction Describe what Plato’s reliance on reason is Describe what Aristotle’s use of the senses is Conclude that Aristotle’s empiricism is superior to Plato’s rationalism Paragraph 1 Plato – ‘a priori’ because senses cannot be trusted Paragraph 2 Aristotle – ‘a posteriori’ because can only reach conclusions based on the strength of observable evidence Paragraph 3 Hume – impossible to prove anything without empirical evidence or experience Paragraph 4 Aristotle and Aquinas – the natural world is the best source of evidence Paragraph 5 History – we change conclusions based on new evidence, ‘a priori’ does not Conclusion Science – results gathered and conclusions drawn from empirical evidence Conclude that Aristotle’s empiricism is superior to Plato’s rationalism

Answer 26

Introduction Describe Augustine’s teaching on human relationships before the fall (caritas and Concordia) Conclude teachings on before fall aren’t significant because of the ideal it doesn’t portrays Paragraph 1 Genesis 3 and Fall not sufficient to explain complexity of relationships, and fall not explained Paragraph 2 Friendship is underestimated in Christian teaching but is foundation of personal, family life Paragraph 3 Acknowledged the place of the sexual drive but understood sex within the context of love Paragraph 4 Augustine limits sex to reproduction, but sex is also an expression of love and intimacy Paragraph 5 His teaching on obedience is not sufficient as it does not satisfactorily deal with free will Conclusion Significant as scholars continue to be unsure if humans are essentially generous or selfish Conclude teachings on before fall aren’t significant because of the ideal it doesn’t portrays

Answer 27

Introduction Describe Augustine’s view on human nature Describe how God’s grace can save Conclude that humans can be morally good without God’s grace Paragraph 2 The united nations Paragraph 3 Charitable organizations like CAFOD or OXFAM Paragraph 4 Conflicts, including WW2 and genocide Paragraph 5 Slavery and racism Conclusion Slavery and racism has improved a lot Conclude that humans can be morally good without God’s grace

Answer 28

Introduction Describe Augustine’s view on human nature Conclude that Augustine’s teaching on human nature is pessimistic Paragraph 1 Realistic – many argue that it allows those to recognize their sinfulness and concupiscence Paragraph 2 Optimistic – the City of God is the ultimate destiny and offers potential for improvement Paragraph 3 Realistic – we are free and our nature is a result of that Paragraph 4 Pessimistic – he believed everyone to have corrupt nature, even himself (Confessions) Paragraph 5 Pessimistic – original sin is passed between generations so we are incapable of being clean Conclusion Pessimistic – doesn’t allow people to be saved without God’s grace Conclude that Augustine’s teaching on human nature is pessimistic

Answer 29

Introduction Explain that distinct human nature is particular and the same for each human Describe Augustine’s view of human nature Explain how Sartre has an opposing view Conclude that human nature is not distinctive Paragraph 1 Augustine – all humans have the same nature of a tendency to sin from a very young age Paragraph 2 Augustine – our telos is to be one with God, this means we have an innate moral nature Paragraph 3 Augustine –absolute good or bad, perfect goodness before fall, distinctive way to be human Paragraph 4 Sartre – freedom over fate, we are not destined to sin because of our lineage Paragraph 5 Sartre –for some difficult to make free choices, but we all can, we’re not constrained by sin Conclusion Sartre – no absolute morality Conclude that human nature is not distinctive

Answer 30

Introduction Describe Augustine’s view on human nature (including original sin) Conclude that humans can be morally good despite Augustine’s idea of Original Sin Paragraph 1 Genetic engineering/infertility treatment Paragraph 2 The united nations Paragraph 3 Charitable organizations like CAFOD or OXFAM Paragraph 4 Conflicts, including WW2 and genocide Paragraph 5 Slavery and racism Conclusion Slavery and racism has improved a lot Conclude that humans can be morally good despite Augustine’s idea of Original Sin

Answer 31

Introduction Describe Augustine’s teaching on the fall and original sin Conclude that Augustine’s teaching on historical fall and original sin is wrong Paragraph 1 Science – Biblical creation story not true (John Selby Spong quote) Paragraph 2 Supporters Augustine – original sin not event, progression of innocence to moral knowledge Paragraph 3 Moral errors – we’re being punished for a crime we did not commit Paragraph 4 Supporters Augustine – punishment for sin is justified Paragraph 5 Science – evolution shows were going towards perfection, not from it Conclusion Schleiermacher – logical contradiction in a perfect world going wrong Conclude that Augustine’s teaching on historical fall and original sin is wrong

Answer 32

Introduction Describe Augustine’s teaching on original sin Conclude that Augustine’s teaching on original sin is wrong Paragraph 1 Science – Biblical creation story not true (John Selby Spong quote) Paragraph 2 Supporters Augustine – original sin not event, progression of innocence to moral knowledge Paragraph 3 Moral errors – we’re being punished for a crime we did not commit Paragraph 4 Supporters Augustine – punishment for sin is justified Paragraph 5 Science – evolution shows were going towards perfection, not from it Conclusion Schleiermacher – logical contradiction in a perfect world going wrong Conclude that Augustine’s teaching on original sin is wrong

Answer 33

Introduction Describe Augustine’s view on human nature (including original sin) Conclude that humans can be morally good despite Augustine’s idea of Original Sin Paragraph 1 Genetic engineering/infertility treatment Paragraph 2 The united nations Paragraph 3 Charitable organizations like CAFOD or OXFAM Paragraph 4 Conflicts, including WW2 and genocide Paragraph 5 Slavery and racism Conclusion Slavery and racism has improved a lot Conclude that humans can be morally good despite Augustine’s idea of Original Sin

Answer 34

Introduction Describe Augustine’s view on human nature Conclude that Augustine’s view of human nature is pessimistic Paragraph 1 Realistic – many argue that it allows those to recognize their sinfulness and concupiscence Paragraph 2 Optimistic – the City of God is the ultimate destiny and offers potential for improvement Paragraph 3 Realistic – we are free and our nature is a result of that Paragraph 4 Pessimistic – he believed everyone to have corrupt nature, even himself (Confessions) Paragraph 5 Pessimistic – original sin is passed between generations so we are incapable of being clean Conclusion Pessimistic – doesn’t allow people to be saved without God’s grace Conclude that Augustine’s view of human nature is pessimistic

Answer 35

Introduction Explain that distinct human nature is particular and the same for each human Describe Augustine’s view of human nature Explain how Sartre has an opposing view Conclude that human nature is not distinctive Paragraph 1 Augustine – all humans have the same nature of a tendency to sin from a very young age Paragraph 2 Augustine – our telos is to be one with God, this means we have an innate moral nature Paragraph 3 Augustine –absolute good or bad, perfect goodness before fall, distinctive way to be human Paragraph 4 Sartre – freedom over fate, we are not destined to sin because of our lineage Paragraph 5 Sartre –for some difficult to make free choices, but we all can, we’re not constrained by sin Conclusion Sartre – no absolute morality Conclude that human nature is not distinctive

Answer 36

Introduction Describe the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body (dualism – Plato) Explain Plato’s ‘prison for the soul’ quote Conclude the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body (dualism) is a weak view Paragraph 1 Plato – ‘a priori’, analogy, evaluate it Paragraph 2 Descartes – substance dualism, ‘I think therefore I am’ Paragraph 3 Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Paragraph 4 Dawkins – no soul, we are just the sum of our genes Paragraph 5 Ryle – the soul is a category mistake Conclusion Damage – drugs/injury compromises mental state, mind and body can’t be separate Conclude the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body (dualism) is a weak view

Answer 37

Introduction Describe the viewpoint that there is no such thing as the soul (materialism) Conclude that the idea that there is no such thing as a soul is a weak view point Paragraph 1 Descartes – substance dualism, ‘I think therefore I am’ Paragraph 2 Aristotle – monism, analogy of axe and eye Paragraph 3 Dawkins – no soul, we are just the sum of our genes Paragraph 4 Ryle – the soul is a category mistake Paragraph 5 Evidence – no empirical evidence for the soul, we cannot see it Conclusion Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Conclude that the idea that there is no such thing as a soul is a weak view point

Answer 38

Introduction Describe Plato’s view on the relationship between the body and soul (dualism) Conclude Plato successfully explains an incorrect relationship between body and soul Paragraph 1 Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Paragraph 2 Plato – soul can recognise concepts from world of forms Paragraph 3 Dawkins – no soul, we are just the sum of our genes Paragraph 4 Ryle – the soul is a category mistake Paragraph 5 Evidence – no empirical evidence for the soul, we cannot see it Conclusion Plato – analogy, good for audience Conclude Plato successfully explains an incorrect relationship between body and soul

Answer 39

Introduction Describe Descartes idea of substance dualism Conclude that substance dualism is not a convincing approach to questions of body and soul Paragraph 1 Descartes – ‘I think therefore I am’ Paragraph 2 Evidence – no empirical evidence for the soul, we cannot see it Paragraph 3 Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Paragraph 4 Dawkins – no soul, we are just the sum of our genes Paragraph 5 Ryle – the soul is a category mistake Conclusion Damage – drugs/injury compromises mental state, mind and body can’t be separate Conclude that substance dualism is not a convincing approach to questions of body and soul

Answer 40

Introduction Describe Gilbert Ryle’s argument that the soul is a category mistake Conclude that Ryle is incorrect to argue that the soul is a category mistake Paragraph 1 Descartes – substance dualism, ‘I think therefore I am’ Paragraph 2 Aristotle – monism, analogy of axe and eye Paragraph 3 Dawkins – no soul, we are just the sum of our genes Paragraph 4 Ryle – the soul is a category mistake Paragraph 5 Evidence – no empirical evidence for the soul, we cannot see it Conclusion Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Conclude that Ryle is incorrect to argue that the soul is a category mistake

Answer 41

Introduction Describe Dawkin’s idea about a metaphorical soul (soul 2) Conclude it’s incorrect to argue the soul is best understood metaphorically Paragraph 1 Plato – ‘a priori’, analogy, evaluate it Paragraph 2 Aristotle – monism, analogy of axe and eye Paragraph 3 Gilbert Ryle – category mistake Paragraph 4 Dawkins – metaphorical soul 2 Paragraph 5 Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Conclusion Descartes – substance dualism, ‘I think therefore I am’ Conclude it’s incorrect to argue the soul is best understood metaphorically

Answer 42

Introduction Describe the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body (dualism – Plato) Explain Plato’s ‘prison for the soul’ quote Conclude the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body (dualism) is a weak view Paragraph 1 Plato – ‘a priori’, analogy, evaluate it Paragraph 2 Descartes – substance dualism, ‘I think therefore I am’ Paragraph 3 Science – no one can tell what we’re thinking by measuring brain waves, we must be asked Paragraph 4 Dawkins – no soul, we are just the sum of our genes Paragraph 5 Ryle – the soul is a category mistake Conclusion Damage – drugs/injury compromises mental state, mind and body can’t be separate Conclude the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body (dualism) is a weak view

Answer 43

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Describe how Jesus taught Conclude that Jesus teachings was only about becoming a moral person Paragraph 1 Jesus as a teacher of morality – the sermon on the mount Paragraph 2 Jesus as a teacher of morality – the golden rule Paragraph 3 Jesus as a teacher of forgiveness – the parable of the lost son Paragraph 4 Jesus as a teacher of societal reform – Matthew 10:34 promotes push for social unrest Paragraph 5 Jesus as a teacher of life after death – the parable of the sheep and the goats Conclusion Jesus as a teacher – love was his main message, all of his teachings boil down to this Conclude that Jesus teachings was only about becoming a moral person

Answer 44

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Conclude that Jesus was more a teacher and liberator, than a political leader Paragraph 1 Political leader – Influence on liberation theology, Oscar Romero Paragraph 2 Political leader – his actions lead to his death by crucifixion – reserved for political criminals Paragraph 3 Jesus as a religious liberator – Mark 5:24-34, the women with the flow of blood Paragraph 4 Jesus as a teacher of morality – the sermon on the mount Paragraph 5 Jesus as a teacher of forgiveness – the parable of the lost son Conclusion Not political leader – his teachings and action were in the name of liberation and religion Conclude that Jesus was more a teacher and liberator, than a political leader

Answer 45

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Describe what it means to be the son of God Describe what Jesus miracles are Conclude that Jesus miracles demonstrate that he was the Son of God Paragraph 1 Healing – Healing of a blind man Paragraph 2 Nature – Walking on water Paragraph 3 Humanity – all three synoptic Gospels show Jesus as human in GoG as his is afraid of death Paragraph 4 Hypostatic union – 100% God and 100% human Conclusion Jesus resurrection – the ultimate miracle Conclude that Jesus miracles demonstrate that he was the Son of God

Answer 46

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Liberators set people free from systems, situations, or ideas that restrict them in some way Describe how this has influenced liberation theology, Oscar Romero Conclude Jesus role was to liberate the poor and weak against oppression, and much more Paragraph 1 Not liberator – Matthew 26:47-56, Garden of Gethsemane, scolds disciple for drawing sword Paragraph 2 Jesus as a political liberator – turning over the tables in the temple, it had lost its focus Paragraph 3 Jesus as a religious liberator – Mark 5:24-34, the women with the flow of blood Paragraph 4 Jesus as a teacher of morality – the sermon on the mount Paragraph 5 Jesus as a teacher of forgiveness – the parable of the lost son Conclusion Jesus as a liberator – Matthew 10:34, promotes activism, pushed for social unrest Conclude Jesus role was to liberate the poor and weak against oppression, and much more

Answer 47

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Describe what it means to be the son of God Describe what Jesus miracles are Conclude that Jesus miracles prove he was the Son of God Paragraph 1 Healing – Healing of a blind man Paragraph 2 Nature – Walking on water Paragraph 3 Humanity – all three synoptic Gospels show Jesus as human in GoG as his is afraid of death Paragraph 4 Hypostatic union – 100% God and 100% human Paragraph 5 Mark – 14:62, when asked if ‘the Son of the Blessed One’, responds with ‘I am’ Conclusion Jesus resurrection – the ultimate miracle Conclude that Jesus miracles demonstrate that he was the Son of God

Answer 48

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Describe what it means to be unique Conclude that Jesus was unique Paragraph 1 Raymond Brown – claim to divinely inspired authority, supported by Matthew 11:27 Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – Nicene Creed, Jesus is not a Son of God but the Son of God Paragraph 3 Miracles – healing of the blind man Paragraph 4 John Hick – Neither Christ or Christianity is unique, all religions have equal insight to God Paragraph 5 Don Cupitt – anti-realist who argued that all supernatural is not real, Jesus didn’t do miracles Conclusion Jesus resurrection – the ultimate miracle Conclude that Jesus was not unique

Answer 49

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Divine means to be the son of God Conclude that Jesus did think of himself as divine Paragraph 1 HP Liddon – book John, ‘I am’ like God in Exodus, ‘unveils a consciousness of eternal being’ Paragraph 2 John an interpretation – not historical, wrote by someone thinking Jesus is SoG, biased Paragraph 3 Humanity – all three synoptic Gospels show Jesus as human in GoG as his is afraid of death Paragraph 4 Miracles – he shows his divinity through miracles like walking on water, or healing blind men Paragraph 5 Resurrection – the greatest miracle, shows ultimate divinity Conclusion Mark – 14:62, when asked if ‘the Son of the Blessed One’, responds with ‘I am’ Conclude that Jesus did think of himself as divine

Answer 50

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Conclude that Jesus was way more than a political leader, he was a teacher and liberator Paragraph 1 Political leader – Influence on liberation theology, Oscar Romero Paragraph 2 Political leader – his actions lead to his death by crucifixion – reserved for political criminals Paragraph 3 Jesus as a religious liberator – Mark 5:24-34, the women with the flow of blood Paragraph 4 Jesus as a teacher of morality – the sermon on the mount Paragraph 5 Jesus as a teacher of forgiveness – the parable of the lost son Conclusion Not political leader – his teachings and action were in the name of liberation and religion Conclude that Jesus was more a teacher and liberator, than a political leader

Answer 51

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Describe what it means to be the Son of God Conclude that Jesus was the Son of God Paragraph 1 Raymond Brown – claim to divinely inspired authority, supported by Matthew 11:27 Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – Nicene Creed, Jesus is not a Son of God but the Son of God Paragraph 3 Miracles – healing of the blind man Paragraph 4 John Hick – Neither Christ or Christianity is unique, all religions have equal insight to God Paragraph 5 Don Cupitt – anti-realist who argued that all supernatural is not real, Jesus didn’t do miracles Conclusion Jesus resurrection – the ultimate miracle Conclude that Jesus was the Son of God

Answer 52

Introduction Describe who Jesus was Describe what it means to be a teacher of wisdom (inner purity, forgiveness, morality) Conclude that Jesus teachings was not only based around wisdom, but also much more Paragraph 1 Jesus as a teacher of wisdom (morality) – the sermon on the mount Paragraph 2 Jesus as a teacher of wisdom (morality) – the golden rule Paragraph 3 Jesus as a teacher of wisdom (forgiveness) – the parable of the lost son Paragraph 4 Jesus as a teacher of life after death – the parable of the sheep and the goats Conclusion Jesus as a teacher of societal reform – Matthew 10:34 promotes push for social unrest Conclude that Jesus teachings was not only based around wisdom, but also much more

Answer 53

Introduction Describe what it means to be the transformation of the whole of creation (every species) Conclude that heaven is the transformation and perfection of the whole of creation Paragraph 1 Biblical evidence – Romans 8:20, all of creation has suffered and will be rewarded Paragraph 2 Lacking Biblical support – only that one line in Romans, it could be interpreted differently Paragraph 3 Difficult – would bacteria be saved? Would this not cause disease? COUNTER Nature of God – Omnipotent, he could stop it causing bacteria whilst it also keeps its form Paragraph 4 Unlimited election – salvation is potentially for all, including non-humans Paragraph 5 Aquinas – animals have no rational souls and cannot live on after death Conclusion Christopher Southgate – immoral God not saving every creature when suffered in evolution Conclude that heaven is the transformation and perfection of the whole of creation

Answer 54

Introduction Describe what universalism is Conclude that all people will be saved through universalism Paragraph 1 John Calvin – demonstrates God’s omnipotence and omniscience, can’t change God’s mind Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – unlimited election, all are called to salvation but not all are saved Paragraph 3 Parable of the Sheep and Goats – heaven and hell is a consequence of own actions Paragraph 4 James Arminius – Jesus died for all people and so all have the chance to be saved Conclusion John Hick – Universalism, God is omnibenevolent, more a temporary purification Conclude that limited election is an unconvincing Christian belief

Answer 55

Introduction Describe what purgatory is Conclude that purgatory is a the most important Christian teaching about the afterlife Paragraph 1 Catholic Church – if impure but died in grace, don’t go straight to heaven, have to be purified Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – people need time to freely change, prayers speed this up, masses for dead Paragraph 3 Protestant – God’s grace is enough for someone to be transformed after death, no purg Paragraph 4 David Brown – protestant agrees catholic thinking, God cannot overcome individual freedom Paragraph 5 Protestant – not enough Biblical evidence to endorse it, mainly talks about heaven and hell Conclusion John Hick – God’s all loving, hell not eternal, universalism, needs time to draw to God Conclude that purgatory is a the most important Christian teaching about the afterlife

Answer 56

Introduction Describe what limited election is Conclude that limited election is an unconvincing Christian belief Paragraph 1 John Calvin – demonstrates God’s omnipotence and omniscience, can’t change God’s mind Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – unlimited election, all are called to salvation but not all are saved Paragraph 3 Parable of the Sheep and Goats – heaven and hell is a consequence of own actions Paragraph 4 James Arminius – Jesus died for all people and so all have the chance to be saved Conclusion John Hick – Universalism, God is omnibenevolent, more a temporary purification Conclude that limited election is an unconvincing Christian belief

Answer 57

Introduction Describe what it means by God’s judgement Conclude that God’s judgement takes place immediately after death Paragraph 1 Catechism – at death, soul goes to judgement, from here to heaven or hell Paragraph 2 Rich Man and Lazarus – immediate judgement is supported in this parable Paragraph 3 Sheep and the Goats – end of time supported in parable, Jesus judges in his second coming Paragraph 4 Day of Judgement – Soul reunite with body and judgment occurs then, then receive fate Paragraph 5 Catholic Church – soul judged immediately, then united with body for final judgement at end Conclusion Jesus on the Cross – ‘today you will be with me in paradise’, not a parable, not interpretation Conclude that God’s judgement takes place immediately after death

Answer 58

Introduction Describe what heaven is State that heaven is either not eternal, in time, or out of time Conclude that heaven is eternal outside of time Paragraph 1 Biblical support – Genesis 1:1, created heaven in beginning, time present, cannot be eternal COUNTER Old Testament a myth Paragraph 2 Biblical support – Revelation 8:1, time is present in heaven, cannot be eternal, new test Paragraph 3 NT Wright – God is transforming our world into something everlasting in time, not out Paragraph 4 Catholic Church – death is a moment of final decision; the soul does not carry on Paragraph 5 Bernard Williams – surely, we would get bored in an eternal heaven? COUNTER Nature of God – omnipotent and omnibenevolent, he could miraculously stop bordem Conclusion Karl Rahner – death fixes a person’s state of being, and so cannot be in time any longer Conclude that heaven is eternal outside of time

Answer 59

Introduction Describe what heaven is as eternal Conclude that heaven is outside of time Paragraph 1 Biblical support – Genesis 1:1, created heaven in beginning, time present, cannot be eternal COUNTER Old Testament a myth Paragraph 2 Biblical support – Revelation 8:1, time is present in heaven, cannot be eternal, new test Paragraph 3 NT Wright – God is transforming our world into something everlasting in time, not out Paragraph 4 Catholic Church – death is a moment of final decision; the soul does not carry on Conclusion Karl Rahner – death fixes a person’s state of being, and so cannot be in time any longer Conclude that heaven is outside of time

Answer 60

Introduction Describe what Hell is Conclude that Hell is not eternal Paragraph 1 Dante – Divine Comedy, traditional view is of an eternal hell Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – hell reserved for mortal sins, not chosen by God, self-imposed (free will) Paragraph 3 Parable of the sheep and goats – ‘into the eternal fire’, Jesus’ teaching seems to answer it Paragraph 4 Biblical support – Luke 12:58-59, ‘paid the last penny’, Hick believes means repent in Hell Paragraph 5 Unmerciful Servant – Matthew 18:32-34, ‘pay back all he owed’, repent in Hell Conclusion John Hick – Universalism, God is omnibenevolent, more a temporary purification Conclude that Hell is not eternal

Answer 61

Introduction Describe what it means to be the transformation of the whole of creation (every species) Conclude that heaven is the transformation and perfection of the whole of creation Paragraph 1 Biblical evidence – Romans 8:20, all of creation has suffered and will be rewarded Paragraph 2 Lacking Biblical support – only that one line in Romans, it could be interpreted differently Paragraph 3 Difficult – would bacteria be saved? Would this not cause disease? COUNTER Nature of God – Omnipotent, he could stop it causing bacteria whilst it also keeps its form Paragraph 4 Unlimited election – salvation is potentially for all, including non-humans Paragraph 5 Aquinas – animals have no rational souls and cannot live on after death Conclusion Christopher Southgate – immoral God not saving every creature when suffered in evolution Conclude that heaven is the transformation and perfection of the whole of creation

Answer 62

Introduction Describe what purgatory is Conclude that purgatory is a state through which everyone goes Paragraph 1 Catholic Church – if impure but died in grace, don’t go straight to heaven, have to be purified Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – people need time to freely change, prayers speed this up, masses for dead Paragraph 3 Protestant – God’s grace is enough for someone to be transformed after death, no purg Paragraph 4 David Brown – protestant agrees catholic thinking, God cannot overcome individual freedom Paragraph 5 Protestant – not enough Biblical evidence to endorse it, mainly talks about heaven and hell Conclusion John Hick – God’s all loving, hell not eternal, universalism, needs time to draw to God Conclude that purgatory is a state through which everyone goes

Answer 63

Introduction Describe what Hell is Conclude that Hell is a place, not an idea Paragraph 1 DZ Phillips – anti-realism, hell is a symbol of a person’s moral life on earth Paragraph 2 Pope John Paul II – hell a spiritual state experienced after death, symbolic language in Bible Paragraph 3 Rich Man and Lazarus – depicts hell as a real place, not a symbol, full of torment Paragraph 4 Science – where is Hell? We would have found it Paragraph 5 Nature of God – a loving God would not want to punish people in Hell? Must be symbol Conclusion John Hick – God’s all loving, hell not eternal, universalism, needs time to draw to God Conclude that Hell is a place, not an idea

Answer 64

Introduction Describe Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats Conclude that Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats depicts the afterlife as an end of time judgement where heaven and hell are real places and purgatory is non-existent Paragraph 1 Teaching on Morality – Do good and help people now, no going back on your actions Paragraph 2 Teaching on Jesus Judgement – end of time supported, Jesus judges in his second coming Paragraph 3 Teaching on Heaven and Hell as real – ‘into the eternal fire’, real eternal place Paragraph 4 Teaching on purgatory as non-existent – no mention in story, sheep and goats, no lambs Paragraph 5 Teaching on actions vs beliefs – judgement concerns action, unlimited election Conclusion Parable –analogous teaching of Jesus, and so it has to be interpreted and not literal, explain Conclude that Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats depicts the afterlife as an end of time judgement where heaven and hell are real places and purgatory is non-existent

Answer 65

Introduction Describe what purgatory is Describe what hell is Conclude that the idea of purgatory makes more sense than hell Paragraph 1 Catholic Church – if impure but died in grace, don’t go straight to heaven, have to be purified Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – people need time to freely change, prayers speed this up, masses for dead Paragraph 3 Protestant – God’s grace is enough for someone to be transformed after death, no purg Paragraph 4 David Brown – protestant agrees catholic thinking, God cannot overcome individual freedom Paragraph 5 Protestant – not enough Biblical evidence to endorse it, mainly talks about heaven and hell Conclusion John Hick – God’s all loving, hell not eternal, universalism, needs time to draw to God Conclude that the idea of purgatory makes more sense than hell

Answer 66

Introduction Describe what limited election is Conclude that the God of love would not elect a limited number of people to salvation Paragraph 1 John Calvin – demonstrates God’s omnipotence and omniscience, can’t change God’s mind Paragraph 2 Catholic Church – unlimited election, all are called to salvation but not all are saved Paragraph 3 Parable of the Sheep and Goats – heaven and hell is a consequence of own actions Paragraph 4 James Arminius – Jesus died for all people and so all have the chance to be saved Conclusion John Hick – Universalism, God is omnibenevolent, more a temporary purification Conclude that the God of love would not elect a limited number of people to salvation