Some Elaboration on the Second
Paper Topic
There's a bunch of different passages in the two books that we
read--the Book of Job and the Gospel of Matthew--that when taken
together, *seem* to conflict. For example, in the quoted
passage in the paper prompt, Jesus instructs us to be perfect like God
is perfect. But in the passages from Matthew that the prompt points us
to, God doesn't seem to be perfect at all. Or, at least, he doesn't
seem to be *morally* perfect. For (i) he seems to value certain
human attributes that we despise (e.g., meekness and poverty of
spirit), (ii) he seems to punish his enemies instead of love them
(e.g., he banishes the wicked to hell), (iii) he seems to reward people
who love him or do what he asks (e.g., he gives eternal life to the
righteous), which we might think is the wrong sort of way to get people
to do good since it will seemingly make people do the good only because
of what they'll get out of it, and (iv) he not only seems to reward and
punish the righteous and wicked respectively, but he gives out *infinite*
rewards and punishments for *finite* deeds, which we might
think is incredibly unfair. Moreover, there is the Book of Job and all
of the stuff that God does there that might make us think that he's
just cruel and mean, rather than morally perfect.
So, your challenge is to make sense of the claim that God is morally
perfect with what seems to contradict this. And then you are to say
whether you think that being
morally perfect, as God is, would make the world a better place. Notice
that the first part is exegetical--you will find yourself summarizing
points made in lecture and section; while the second part is all about
you, and what you think.
Please remember that no matter what
you say, anytime you voice an opinion, you must support it. Once
I see that you understand the material, what I am primarily interested
in is why you think what you
do, not what you think.
Page Last Updated: Oct.
13, 2005