Jonathan Edwards Sinnners in the Hands of An Angry God Essay -- Chris

Jonathan Edwards' Sinnners in the Hands of An Angry God Jonathan Edwards delivered his sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, in Enfield Connecticut on July 8, 1741, the year following George Whitefield's preaching tour which helped inspire the "Great Awakening." Weeping and emotional conviction among Edwards’ audiences came at a time of great spiritual thirst. While very foreign to mainstream American opinion today, this extraordinary message was fashioned for a people who were very conscious of how their lifestyles affected eternal consequences. By today's popular perspective, the doctrine of predestination probably discourages conversion because of the new-age independent attitude. However, in Puritan culture, through Jonathan Edwards’ sermon, Sinners in the Hands of An Angry God, fear might have powerfully affected people to look within them for the evidence of grace and then experience salvation. First, Edwards' sermon is filled with graphic images of the fury of divine wrath and the horror of the unmerciful punishment of the wicked in hell. If one were to continue in their sin, according to Edwards, not only would a person be tormented in the presence of holy angels, but God’s terribleness would be magnified upon his/her life and forced to suffer through God’s wrath for all eternity (74). â€Å"Although it conveys the reek of brimstone, the sermon does not say that God will hurl man into everlasting fires--on the contrary, doom will come from God’s indifference...† (Thompson 71). Edwards had little need to justify his scare tactics and theology. His consuming obligation was to preach it; to preach it fiercely, purposely, persuasively, and firmly. Next, an example of God’s wrath is seen through Edward’s p... ...e wrath of God be seen as a primitive or obscene concept? Is the very notion of hell an insult? If so, it is clear that the God one worships is not a holy God: thus, He is not a God at all. If we despise the justice of God, a person is not a Christian. One stands in a position which is every bit as dangerous as the one which Edwards so graphically described. â€Å"If we hate the wrath of God, it is because we hate God Himself. We may protest vehemently against these charges but our vehemence only confirms our hostility toward God† (Sproul â€Å"God In The Hands Of Angry Sinners†). But a God of love who has no wrath is no God. One who does not love God in this present world is considered a loser, as he has lost all peace, comfort, strength, and even hope. A person’s greatest detriment in the hereafter is found in the loss of the sight of Christ and the beholding of His glories. Jonathan Edwards' Sinnners in the Hands of An Angry God Essay -- Chris Jonathan Edwards' Sinnners in the Hands of An Angry God Jonathan Edwards delivered his sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, in Enfield Connecticut on July 8, 1741, the year following George Whitefield's preaching tour which helped inspire the "Great Awakening." Weeping and emotional conviction among Edwards’ audiences came at a time of great spiritual thirst. While very foreign to mainstream American opinion today, this extraordinary message was fashioned for a people who were very conscious of how their lifestyles affected eternal consequences. By today's popular perspective, the doctrine of predestination probably discourages conversion because of the new-age independent attitude. However, in Puritan culture, through Jonathan Edwards’ sermon, Sinners in the Hands of An Angry God, fear might have powerfully affected people to look within them for the evidence of grace and then experience salvation. First, Edwards' sermon is filled with graphic images of the fury of divine wrath and the horror of the unmerciful punishment of the wicked in hell. If one were to continue in their sin, according to Edwards, not only would a person be tormented in the presence of holy angels, but God’s terribleness would be magnified upon his/her life and forced to suffer through God’s wrath for all eternity (74). â€Å"Although it conveys the reek of brimstone, the sermon does not say that God will hurl man into everlasting fires--on the contrary, doom will come from God’s indifference...† (Thompson 71). Edwards had little need to justify his scare tactics and theology. His consuming obligation was to preach it; to preach it fiercely, purposely, persuasively, and firmly. Next, an example of God’s wrath is seen through Edward’s p... ...e wrath of God be seen as a primitive or obscene concept? Is the very notion of hell an insult? If so, it is clear that the God one worships is not a holy God: thus, He is not a God at all. If we despise the justice of God, a person is not a Christian. One stands in a position which is every bit as dangerous as the one which Edwards so graphically described. â€Å"If we hate the wrath of God, it is because we hate God Himself. We may protest vehemently against these charges but our vehemence only confirms our hostility toward God† (Sproul â€Å"God In The Hands Of Angry Sinners†). But a God of love who has no wrath is no God. One who does not love God in this present world is considered a loser, as he has lost all peace, comfort, strength, and even hope. A person’s greatest detriment in the hereafter is found in the loss of the sight of Christ and the beholding of His glories.

Theory of Consumer Behavior

Chapter 4 – Theory of Consumer Behavior Economics 11 – UPLB Prepared by T. B. Paris, Jr. December 11, 2007 Theory of Consumer Behavior ? ? ? Useful for understanding the demand side of the market. Utility – amount of satisfaction derived from the consumption of a commodity †¦. measurement units ? utils Utility concepts ? ? cardinal utility – assumes that we can assign values for utility, (Jevons, Walras, and Marshall). E. g. , derive 100 utils from eating a slice of pizza ordinal utility approach – does not assign values, instead works with a ranking of preferences. Pareto, Hicks, Slutsky) Total utility and marginal utility ? ? Total utility (TU) – the overall level of satisfaction derived from consuming a good or service Marginal utility (MU) additional satisfaction that an individual derives from consuming an additional unit of a good or service. ? TU MU = ? Q Total utility and marginal utility Example (Table 4. 1): Q 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 T U 0 20 27 32 35 35 34 30 36 MU –20 7 5 3 0 -1 -4 ? ? ? ? TU, in general, increases with Q At some point, TU can start falling with Q see Q = 6) If TU is increasing, MU > 0 From Q = 1 onwards, MU is declining ? principle of diminishing marginal utility ? As more and more of a good are consumed, the process of consumption will (at some point) yield smaller and smaller additions to utility Total Utility Curve TU 35 Total utility(in utils) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 Quantity 6 Q Figure 4. 1 Marginal Utility Curve MU Marginal utility (in utils) 20 15 10 5 0 -5 Figure 4. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quantity Q Consumer Equilibrium ? ?So far, we have assumed that any amount of goods and services are always available for consumption In reality, consumers face constraints (income and prices): Limited consumers income or budget ? Goods can be obtained at a price ? Some simplifying assumptions ? ? ? ? Consumer’s objective: to maximize his/her utility subject to income constraint 2 goods (X, Y ) Prices Px, Py are fixed Consumer’s income (I) is given Consumer Equilibrium ? Marginal utility per peso ? additional utility derived from spending the next peso on the good MU MU per peso = PConsumer Equilibrium ? Optimizing condition: MU X MU Y = PX PY ? If MU X MU Y > PX PY ? spend more on good X and less of Y Simple Illustration ? Suppose: X = fishball Y = siomai ? Assume: PX = 2 PY = 10 Numerical Illustration Qx 1 2 3 4 5 6 TUX 30 39 45 50 54 56 MUX 30 9 6 5 4 2 MUx Px 15 4. 5 3 2. 5 2 1 QY 1 2 3 4 5 6 TUY 50 105 148 178 198 213 MUY 50 55 43 30 20 15 MUy Py 5 5. 5 4. 3 3 2 1. 5 ? ? 2 potential optimum positions Combination A: ? X = 3 and Y = 4 ? TU = TUX + TUY = 45 + 178 = 223 ? Combination B: ? ? X = 5 and Y = 5 TU = TUX + TUY = 54 + 198 = 252 ? Presence of 2 potential equilibrium positions suggests that we need to consider income. To do so let us examine how much each consumer spends for each combination. Expenditure per combination ? ? Total expenditure = PX X + PY Y Combination A: 3(2) + 4(10) = 46 ? Combination B: 5(2) + 5(10) = 60 ? Scenarios: If consumer’s income = 46, then the optimum is given by combination A. .†¦Combination B is not affordable ? If the consumer’s income = 60, then the optimum is given by Combination B†¦. Combination A is affordable but it yields a lower level of utility ? end

Analysis Of Shakespeare s Sonnet, Let Me Not And The...

Comparisons of Shakespeare s sonnet â€Å"Let Me Not in to the Marriage of True Minds† and Sherran s composition â€Å"Thinking Out Loud† In the poem â€Å"Let Me Not in to the Marriage of True Minds† also known as â€Å"Sonnet 116† Shakespeare uses the theme that love endures; to articulate that in spite of obstacles, true love never expires. First, he defines love as having a decree. For example, over time circumstances and a person can change, but Shakespeare declares that love can not be influenced. After explaining the regulations of love Shakespeare defines love as having no boundaries. For instance, throughout the sonnet he clearly indicates that love cannot move, be measured or die. Much like Shakespeare, Ed Sheeran wrote the song â€Å"Thinking Out Loud† with a similar theme of love s endurance; although, Sheeran marvels over love and how age will affect the circumstances of a persons true feelings. For example, Sherran writes about how age, memory, and looks default over time, and contemplates if he and his lover will still feel the same way about each other after time alters their mind s and bodies. Using the endurance of love as a theme to teach that love is eternal, Shakespeare uses metaphors and personification; however, Sheeran questions love s lasting effects by using personification and hyperbole. Shakespeare uses his theme to inform people of everlasting love with his use of metaphors and personification. For example, in lines 5-7 he states, â€Å"O, no it is an ever fixed mark,