Skip to main content

Why God is bothered by human sinfulness?

Human sinfulness inhibits our abilities to enjoy the things that are designed to make deeply relational creatures, like us, genuinely happy. The genuine happiness that I have in mind involves a feeling of deep satisfaction that evokes awe in response to the beauty of a relationship that is inspired by love. For example, our tendency to be greedy inhibits our ability to enjoy the act of giving that is motivated by love. Extramarital affairs inhibit a person’s ability to enjoy the depth of a loving relationship with his or her spouse. Pride inhibits our ability to enjoy a loving relationship with other people. The act of lying inhibits our ability to enjoy the beauty of a relationship that is based on honesty. Worldly pleasures inhibit our ability to enjoy the beauty of a life that is lived in peace and tranquility. The loving God designed humans for genuine happiness. However, human sinfulness inhibits our progress to genuine happiness. So, a loving God ought to be deeply bothered by human sinfulness.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Politicization of the Pulpit

After the death of Jerry Falwell and the declining popularity of Pat Robertson, surprisingly the legacy of the evangelical right persists in politically conservative media (like Fox News) and conservative evangelical churches (like some Southern Baptist and Assemblies of God churches). Equipped with sensationalistic jesters and political preachers, bearers of such legacy can pester the current administration. No wonder Obama and his advisers are launching an attack on Fox News, the main source of information for the evangelical right. Since the presidential campaign season for the 2008 election, I heard numerous anti-Obama sermons in a large congregation with a devoutly Republican pastor. A devoutly Republican pastor is one who cleverly subsumes the Christian message under the Republican agendas. Many conservative evangelical churches have devoutly Republican pastors, who regularly politicize the pulpit by unnecessarily turning congregants against Obama. In a subtle way, this is danger...

Lawrence Krauss (Physicist) on Philosophy

Some scientists have an anti-philosophy bias. Lawrence Krauss, a famous physicist from Arizona State University, is definitely one of them. Krauss wrote a popular science book on cosmology, where he attempted to answer an old philosophical question: “Can something come from nothing?” David Albert, a philosopher from Columbia University who has a doctoral degree in physics, gave a deeply penetrating critique of Krauss’ book. In the process of answering the interview questions from The Atlantic regarding Albert’s review of his book, Krauss appears to have downplayed the value or significance of philosophy (including philosophy of science). The discussions that develop from the intellectual dispute between Krauss and Albert gave rise to very interesting insights on the value or significance of philosophy and the nature of the relationship between science and philosophy. In order to learn more about it, one can start by looking at Brian Leiter’s blog: http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blo...