DIVINE POWERS HAVE NO CONTROL OVER HUMAN BEINGS

DIVINE POWERS HAVE NO CONTROL OVER HUMAN BEINGS

1. HUMAN CRIME DEMONSTRATES GODS LACK OF CONTROL OVER FREE WILL

Lactantius, philosopher, ON THE ANGER OF GOD, circa 300 A.D.

http://www.epicurus.net/anger.html Accessed June 1, 2003. p. 3.

But if God takes no trouble, nor occasions trouble to another why then should we not commit crimes as often as it shall be in our power to escape the notice of men? and to cheat the public laws? Wherever we shall obtain a favourable opportunity of escaping notice, let us take advantage of the occasion: let us take away the property of others, either without bloodshed or even with blood, if there is nothing else besides the laws to be reverenced.While Epicurus entertains these sentiments, he altogether destroys religion; and when this is taken away, confusion and perturbation of life will follow. But if religion cannot be taken away without destroying our hold of wisdom, by which we are separated from the brutes, and of justice, by which the public life may be more secure, how can religion itself be maintained or guarded without fear? For that which is not feared is despised, and that which is despised is plainly not reverenced. Thus it comes to pass that religion, and majesty, and honour exist together with fear; but there is no fear where no one is angry. Whether, therefore, you take away from God kindness, or anger, or both, religion must be taken away, without which the life of men is full of folly, of wickedness, and enormity. For conscience greatly curbs men, if we believe that we are living in the sight of God; if we imagine not only that the actions which we perform are seen from above, but also that our thoughts and our words are heard by God.
2. GOD LACKS POWER

Lactantius, philosopher, ON THE ANGER OF GOD, circa 300 A.D.

http://www.epicurus.net/anger.html Accessed June 1, 2003. p. 7.

God, says Epicurus, regards nothing; therefore He has no power. For he who has power must of necessity regard affairs. For if He has power, and does not use it, what so great cause is there that, I will not say our race, but even the universe itself, should be contemptible in His sight? On this account he says He is pure and happy, because He is always at rest. To whom, then, has the administration of so great affairs been entrusted, if these things which we see to be governed by the highest judgment are neglected by God? or how can he who lives and perceives be at rest? For rest belongs either to sleep or to death. But sleep has not rest. For when we are asleep, the body indeed is at rest, but the soul is restless and agitated: it forms for itself images which it may behold, so that it exercises its natural power of motion by a variety of visions, and calls itself away from false things, until the limbs are satiated, and receive vigour from rest. Therefore eternal rest belongs to death alone. Now if death does not affect God, it follows that God is never at rest. But in what can the action of God consist, but in the administration of the world? But if God carries on the care of the world, it follows that He cares for the life of men, and takes notice of the acts of individuals, and He earnestly desires that they should be wise and good. This is the will of God, this the divine law; and he who follows and observes this is beloved by God. It is necessary that He should be moved with anger against the man who has broken or despised this eternal and divine law. If, he says, God does harm to any one, therefore He is not good. They are deceived by no slight error who defame all censure, whether human or divine, with the name of bitterness and malice, thinking that He ought to be called injurious who visits the injurious with punishment. But if this is so, it follows that we have injurious laws, which enact punishment for offenders, and injurious judges who inflict capital punishments on those convicted of crime. But if the law is just which awards to the transgressor his due, and if the judge is called upright and good when he punishes crimes -- for he guards the safety of good men who punishes the evil -- it follows that God, when He opposes the evil, is not injurious; but he himself is injurious who either injures an innocent man, or spares an injurious person that he may injure many.

Arturo Escobar

Arturo Escobar is the Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts. A native of Colombia, he is the author of numerous articles on Latin America and the Third World. In 1996, he won the Best Book Award from the New England Council of Latin American Studies for "Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World" which provides the focus for this article. He has made trips back to Columbia several times including a 1981-82 fieldwork project with the Department of National Planning in Bogota. He is a harsh critic of projects seeking to develop Third World countries.

Escobar describes his approach as poststructuralist and anthropological. By poststructuralist, he claims to mean that his “approach is discursive, in the sense that it stems from the recognition of the importance of the dynamics of discourse and power to study any culture” (Encountering Development vii). Escobar wishes to critique the way that policymakers talk about the “Third World” because his view is that our speech is a critical part of the devastation that Western societies release on others. Development discourse is a racial slur of the grandest kind. It defines the other as inferior according to terms invented within the development discourse. This definition has all sorts of nefarious implications. Those implications are explained by the parts of Escobar’s anthropological approach.
Anthropology, the “study of man,” refers to an examination of culture, economics, society, politics and other studies that will reveal the changes that development discourse creates within the societies that it is imposed on. The cultural changes are the most significant because development discourse dramatically downplays the value of other cultures. Societies without Western technology or money are very different culturally, but development discourse condemns these cultures because they do not appear to take care of their own people. Of course, the definition of “taking care of people” comes from the West, meaning that societies that might think they are just fine get corrected by international banks and Western hegemony.

Directory: uploads
uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10
uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers
uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It?
uploads -> For want of a nail
uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models
uploads -> Police Militarization
uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016
uploads -> Township of winfield
uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014
uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now!

Download 5.81 Mb.

Share with your friends: