Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is linked to another fundamental theme of Dostoevsky's work, particularly The Brothers Karamazov: the idea that, in a world where there is no God and no immortality of the soul, everything is permitted. This in turn is linked to the theme of ethical solipsism. [6] The dream as a revelatory crisis. In the case of the Ridiculous Man it is a ...
The role of the psychoanalyst in the Jungian approach is to assist in the analysis of dreams and symbols and prevent the patient from being overwhelmed by unconscious material or being cut off from the meaning offered by suprapersonal forces. Jungian analysts typically believe that the psyche is the source of healing and the drive toward ...
In 2 Thessalonians 2:3–10, the "man of sin" is described as one who will be revealed before the Day of the Lord comes. The Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus have the reading "man of lawlessness" and Bruce M. Metzger argues that this is the original reading even though 94% of manuscripts have "man of sin".
In Christian scholarship, the Book of Signs is a name commonly given to the first main section of the Gospel of John, from 1:19 to the end of Chapter 12. It follows the Hymn to the Word and precedes the Book of Glory. It is named for seven notable events, often called "signs" or "miracles", that it records. [1]
A god complex may also be associated with mania or a superiority complex. The first person to use the term "god complex" was Ernest Jones (1913–1951). [3] His description, at least in the contents page of Essays in Applied Psycho-Analysis, describes the god complex as belief that one is a god. [4]
The first presentation is often given by commentators as follows, based on Schellenberg's own summing up: [7] If there is a God, he is perfectly loving. If a perfectly loving God exists, reasonable nonbelief does not occur. Reasonable nonbelief occurs. No perfectly loving God exists (from 2 and 3). Hence, there is no God (from 1 and 4).
He compares the popular knowledge of the world in Thomas Aquinas's time to what we now know about the world. He uses the example of Laplace —"It works well enough without that [God] hypothesis" [ 19 ] —to demonstrate that we do not need God to explain things; he claims that religion becomes obsolete as an explanation when it becomes ...
The logical form of the argument tries to show a logical impossibility in the coexistence of a god and evil, [2] [10] while the evidential form tries to show that given the evil in the world, it is improbable that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and a wholly good god. [3]