The Resurrection Of Jesus Christ - 1168 Words

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the most debated issues throughout history. Christians place their trust in a resurrected Christ for salvation and a promise of eternal life. If the resurrection never happened, Christianity is a lie and people have been mislead for generations. On the other hand if the resurrection is true, Christianity is true also. This issue is of extreme importance because one’s soul is at stake. If all the claims that Christians make for the resurrection are true, the evidence for these claims must be examined. Equally important, are the claims against the resurrection; they too need to be looked at with careful consideration. Because so much is at stake, the question must be answered: Is the†¦show more content†¦Gary Habermas in The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus calls this the minimal facts approach. â€Å"The minimal facts approach considers only the data that meets two criteria: 1. The data are strongly evidenced 2. The da ta are granted by virtually all scholars on the subject, even the skeptical ones.† On the basis of this approach, four different arguments will be examined for the resurrection of Christ in this paper. The Empty Tomb Only a few explanations can explain the empty tomb: A stolen body, an earthquake, or the actual resurrection. Some believe that the disciples stole the body of Jesus. This is recorded in the book a Matthew. A claim that the Jews made in an attempt to explain the resurrection. If this were true there entire faith would have been a lie. All of Jesus Disciples died for what they believed in which includes the resurrection. This would mean that the disciples died for something they made up In Matthew 28:2 there is a recording of an earthquake when an angel of the Lord roll away the stone from the entrance of the tomb. Some will argue that the earthquake buried the body of Jesus under the rubble, thus having an appearance of an empty tomb. This claim does not explain Jesus appearing to Mary right after this event. Also, if the body of Jesus was just buried under rubble it could still be available for examination. After exulting

Abolishing the Death Penalty Thesis Free Essays

Abolishing the Death Penalty October 18, 2010 Abolishing the Death Penalty The death penalty has been an active force in the United States for decades. In the early history of our country, public executions were quite popular. Thousands have been executed with the majority occurring in the early twentieth century. We will write a custom essay sample on Abolishing the Death Penalty Thesis or any similar topic only for you Order Now But public sentiment towards the executions began to wane as the concepts of basic human rights were being developed throughout the century. As a result, a kind of unofficial moratorium was placed on all executions while several Supreme Court cases were taking place to determine the legality of the punishment. The result of the cases actually made the death penalty illegal as it stood, so several states rewrote their laws, being more specific as to the circumstances as to which the penalty can be applied. The Supreme Court reversed its decision and those states that met the new compliance could reinstate the death penalty. Today, it is legal to execute death row prisoners in all but fifteen states. While it may be legal, it still holds that the death penalty has not and cannot accomplish the task that it has been reinstated to fulfill. Part I: Thesis The death penalty should be abolished for a variety of reasons. Initially, the death penalty has long been held to be inherently unjust. It is considered unjust in relation to its application, unjust as to the type of punishment utilized and unjust as a punishment at all. It has and continues to be argued in court that the executions amount to what is considered cruel and unusual punishment and so barbaric that it should be done away with as a type of punishment. It is a sad but true statement to say that the United States is one of the last democratic nations to continue to utilize the death penalty. Our country has wavered back in forth on the issue of capital punishment being illegal and a breach of human rights. Additionally, even while continuing to use the death penalty it has not shown to be a deterrent of crime and actually may increase it. Opponents of the death penalty also recognize that it has not been applied fairly. For instance, minorities, the poor, and the mentally disabled tend to receive the death penalty with far greater consistency than their counterparts. That cannot be a punishment representative of a great industrialized country. Those against the death penalty also recognize the cost involved with executing a prisoner. To actually take a death row inmate through the complete appellate system, so as to ensure the inmate’s guilt without any doubt, would cost exponentially more than housing the same inmate for the duration of their life. The monies saved could be better served if used towards something positive, like victim’s programs or the like. Lastly, the death penalty is a punishment that is irrevocable; its effects are permanent and there is the sad reality that innocent lives may be lost. There is no perfect system and mistakes are bound to be made. This is one mistake, however, that cannot be corrected. This is why the death penalty cannot be the United States’ answer for grave offenders of the law. Part II: Anti-Thesis Proponents of the death penalty are large in number. According to many polls, as many as 80% of the American population still favor capital punishment. One reason for this is society as a whole believes that if a person kills another person, the killer forfeits his right to his own life. (Christie, 1990). If a person shows such complete and utter disregard for human life, the question is posed, why should any regard be shown for the person? Also, those in favor of using the death penalty argue that it is a just punishment for the crime and it is reliable. After all, though some states are trying to punish people with death for other heinous crimes, such as rape and repeat child molestation, so far the death penalty can only be imposed on murder cases. As far as the reliability argument, supporters will always point out that because of the thoroughness in applying and appealing death penalty cases, the process itself will weed out the innocent and wrongly convicted. Proponents of the death penalty also view it as a deterrent to crime. â€Å"Same old†, 1990). Just by having the possible punishment of death as an end result to a heinous crime has lowered the murder rate in some states. The feeling is that the more executions you have, the lower the homicide rate you will have. Not to mention the innocent lives you will save. Supporters of capital punishment will cite studies showing that murderers who are allowed to live will inevitably kill again. Studies have shown that murderers awaiting their death penalty sentence to be carried out have killed correction officers, knowing there could be no additional fate assigned to them. Another argument made in favor of the death penalty is one of Biblical proportions. There are some activists that say the Bible itself proclaims the right to execute a perpetrator of the most serious of crimes by quoting a scripture from Leviticus 24:20 – â€Å"†¦fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. As he has injured the other, so he is to be injured. † The old adage has not been lost on those who feel that it is their God given right to enforce the laws that God has given them regarding the taking of a human life. Gray, 2010) Lastly, many supporters of capital punishment feel that it is appropriate to give a punishment that fits the crime and one that is universal. It doesn’t matter a person’s color, race, creed, ethnicity, nationality, gender, or financial status; if two people, one white and one â€Å"non-white†, commit the exact same crime under the exact same circumstances, they in fact should receive the exact same punishm ent. It is believed that the death penalty, when applied under the circumstance of murder in the first degree with aggravating circumstances, is the great equalizer, with everyone being treated the same in the eyes of the law. Part III: Synthesis It is important that the United States realizes, sooner than later, that the death penalty has to be abolished. Proponents want us to think that a killer forfeits his own life. But the reality is all life is precious, regardless of its form or merit. (Thomson, 2001). Although someone has taken a life, and in no way should that be trivialized, it does not change that situation by killing the offender. All it does is show that two wrongs do not make a right. The execution of the murderer does not bring the victim back to life. Quite frankly, the death penalty often provides a way out for the offender and if punishment was the true desire of the sentence then there are situations, other than execution that may be far more punitive than the taking of his or her life. (Thomson, 2001). When it comes to reliability, the argument on behalf of the death penalty doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Yes, it is true that the exhaustive appeals process does on occasion help to find innocent people who have been convicted of murder. This is largely due to the relatively new innovation of DNA technology as it relates to crime scene investigation. (Gzedit, 2010). Well, if anything, this proves the fallibility of the death penalty process. If over 131 death row inmates could be exonerated and released from death row, that shows just how faulty the system is and proves it is unreliable. Again, as stated previously, once a prisoner has been executed, there is no returning from the grave to say a mistake has been made. At least if the inmate was serving a life sentence and found innocent, they could be released, although still wronged by a jail sentence, but it is a correctable injustice. One of the main arguments in favor of the death penalty is that it serves as a deterrent to serious crime. Would it surprise you to know that this simply is not true? It is a proven fact that the death penalty has not demonstrably deterred crime. (â€Å"Same old†, 1990). The 2004 Uniform Crime Report that was published by the FBI published that Southern states demonstrated the highest murder rate in the country, despite being responsible for 85% of the nation’s executions. (Friedman, 2006, p. 37). As further evidence that the death penalty doesn’t deter crime I introduce you to the state of Texas which has been nicknamed the â€Å"killing machine† because they tend to exercise the death penalty frequently and rapidly. Even with capital punishment Texas has a disturbing murder rate of 5. 6 per 100,000 persons s opposed to Massachusetts, which banned executions and only has a murder rate of 2. 6. (Gzedit, 2010). As for the idea that people who kill once develop an appetite to kill again, there have been no definitive studies that prove this theory. This mindset is based on gut reaction, conjecture, and hysteria. Perhaps one of the most controversial arguments in favor of the death penalty is the interpreted law given by God to exact the same punishment on the criminal as was forced upon the victim. Supporters of this notion quote scripture from the Holy Bible as a sort of guideline to follow. However the Bible also has scripture that specifically refutes the idea of the death penalty as retribution for man to man. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, â€Å"let he who is without sin cast the first stone. This is truly what Jesus would do! Finally, proponents of the death penalty exclaim that executions are given with perfect exactness according to the crime, without regard to race, color, creed, nationality, etc†¦ , basically saying without bias. However, many different studies have show that the likelihood of you receiving the death penalty increases according to those very attributes. People of color are more likely than t heir white counterparts to receive the death penalty for committing the same crime under the same circumstances. Also, blacks that murder white victims are far likelier to end up on death row than whites killing blacks. Furthermore, studies show that prosecutors are more likely to seek the death penalty against blacks than they will for whites who commit the same crime. (Friedman, 2006, pp. 86-89). So much for all being equal under the law! So, as you see, we are a country somewhat divided. While the majority of Americans still favour the idea of using the death penalty, it has become an increasingly more controversial subject. The United States always holds its head up high as the leader of the free world and is quick to condemn other countries with regards to their human rights violations. How then can we continue to justify our use of this antiquated, archaic method of punishment? It is time that our country steps in line with the rest of the industrialized countries into the 21st century and do away with the death penalty once and for all. References Gzedit. (2010, January 27). Pro-death: :America alone. The Charleston Gazette,A. 4. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. Document ID: 1948771421). Christie, J. (1990, March 29). At Last, Punishment Fits the Crime Death penalty: It has wide support because ordinary citizens identify with media images of brutalized victims :[Home Edition]. Los Angeles Times (pre-1997 Fulltext),p. 7. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from Los Angeles Times. (Document ID: 60026222). Friedman, L. (2006). The death penalty. Greenhaven Press Gray, L. (4   November). Houston Chronicle Lisa Gray column: Life, death and the prodigal son. McClatchy – Tribune Business News. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID:  1893533451). Same old anti-crime hype. (1990, October 15). Milwaukee Journal,p. a06. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 64063217). Thomson, R. (2001, June 18). A consistent pro-life stance rules out the death penal ty :[SARASOTA Edition]. Sarasota Herald Tribune,p. BS1. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 74204727). How to cite Abolishing the Death Penalty Thesis, Papers

Discuss How Different Approaches to Learning Can Affect Student Success in Higher Education free essay sample

It utilized a questionnaire based on an academic text, gathering some students, asking them to read the text then answer the questionnaire. Two distinctive groups were formed: students with high levels of understanding and perfect answers, named deep approach learners, and another with lower level, referred to as surface approach learners (Ramsden, 2003). Later, another approach was discovered and named as the strategic approach to learning (Chin, 2000). This essay recommends the deep approach to learning to be followed as a key of success in higher education, arguing particularly about the advantages and disadvantages of both deep and surface approaches to learning. Advantages of surface approach: The expression of the word surface means â€Å"the top layer of something† (Cambridge, 2009). Students who are surface learners are characterized by mechanical memorization (Chin, 2000), which stands for memorizing facts without understanding their objectives. These students learn only to pass exams or to meet a demand. Surface approach has only a lone advantage which can only benefit some students and not all. It is applicable particularly for the students who work while they are studying or who suffer from work loads such as preparing for academic assignments and doing extensive homework. This can fulfill their need of acquiring a time saving approach that enables them to succeed in their studies. Disadvantages of surface approach: In contrast, surface approach has many disadvantages. Some of these disadvantages can be summarized in five main ways. First, the students who follow this route of learning can not demonstrate the new ideas learnt thoroughly, neither can they relate them with other fields (Ramsden, 2003). Second, it directs the student to be a dependent learner. For instance, if a chemistry instructor asked his students to prove an experiment practically, then the surface learners will depend on their peers’ idea to verify the experiment. If they do not, then they will easily give up and this can be considered as a third disadvantage. The forth disadvantage is that it makes them easily ignore the points that they do not understand. As in the first example, those students neglect and forget about the ideas that were not helpful in doing their experiment. Finally, it brings the learner to forget the knowledge learnt easily and fast (Johansson, n. d). Advantages of deep approach: The expression of the word deep means â€Å"being a long way down from the top or surface to the bottom† (Cambridge, 2009). So, deep learners are the students who search for the full of meaning of the subjects they learn by following strategic ways to achieve that. Deep learners, unlike surface learner, use memorization when necessary but not always. There are many advantages related to deep approach. First of all, deep approach encourages the students to become more interested in their subjects and to have the curiosity to learn further. The second is that it assists the students to predict new information by analyzing recent ideas and connecting them with their prior experience and with other fields, as a result forming a complete image of the task required (Chin, 2000). Thirdly, it enables the students to have high quality outcomes in higher education (Johansson, n. d. ). The last is that it encourages the students to be independent learners (Entwistle, 1990). Disadvantages of deep approach: However, there is only one disadvantage of deep approach, which can be described as the obsession and passion that the student may follow in order to learn everything about the subject being learnt (Johansson, n. d). This can waste time and cause irregularity for other subject timetables. For instance, many deep learners like to know the whole idea about everything they learn, however they are not supposed to know everything, but this obsession leads them to waste time unconsciously. This situation can occur sometimes within the period of final exams revision, which can drive the student to have lower marks than expected for a deep learner. Conclusion: After the classification of the students into deep and surface learners, many universities recommended their students to follow the deep rather than the surface approach to learning owing to its benefits that their students are going to obtain. Perhaps the surface approach is applicable for some students but not all. Nevertheless, the advantages of deep approach to learning are more than surface approach; in addition the disadvantages of the deep approach are much less than the surface approaches. Therefore, by following the deep approaches to learning, students’ success in higher education will be advantageous. References: . Cambridge University Press (Ed. ). (2009). Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (3rded. ). Edinbrugh: Cambridge University Press. 2. Chin, C. amp; Brown, D. (2000). Learning in Science: A Comparison of Deep and Surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), (pp. 109-138). 3. Entwistle, N. amp; Tait, H. (1990). Ap proaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences of contrasting academic environments. Higher Education, (19), (pp. 169-194). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 4. Johansson, J. et al. (n. d). Experiences of learning student accounts linked with theory. Denmark: CDIO. 5. Ramsden, P. (Ed. ). (2003). Learning to Teaching in Higher Education. (2nded. ). USA: RoutledgeFalmer. Bibliography: 1. Beckwith, J. B. (1991). Approaches to learning, their context and relationship to assessment performance. Higher Education, 22, (pp. 17-30). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 2. Cuthbert, P. (2005). The Student Learning Process: Learning Styles or Learning Approaches? Teaching in Higher Education, 10(2), (pp. 235-249). United Kingdom: Manchester. 3. Entwistle, N. (1991). Approaches to learning and perceptions of the learning environment. Higher education, 22 (pp. 201-204). Edinbrugh: University of Edinbrugh. . Entwistle, N. (2000). Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment: Conceptual frameworks and educational contexts. In: the TLRP Conference, Leicester, November 2000. 5. Fowler, J. amp; Wilson, K. (2005). Assessing the impact of learning environments on students’ approaches to learning: Comparing conventional and action learning design s. Assessing amp; Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), pp. 87-101. 6. Fox, J. amp; Bartholomae, S. (1999). Student learning style and educational outcomes: evidence from a family financial management course. Financial Services Review, 8(4), (pp. 235-251). 7. Iran-Nejad, A. (1990). Active and dynamic self-regulation of learning processes. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), (pp. 573-602). USA: University of Albama. 8. Kolb, A. amp; Kolb, D. (2005). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning amp; Education, 4(2), (pp. 193-212). 9. Prosser, M. amp; Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in Higher Education. Buckingham: Open University Press. 10. Ramburuth, P. amp; McCormick, J. (2001). Learning diversity in higher education: a comparative study of Asian international and Australian Students. Higher Education, 42, (pp. 333-350). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 11. Scouller, K. (1998). The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. Higher Education, 35, (pp. 453-472). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 12. Xu, R. (2004). Chinese Mainland Students’ Experiences of Teaching and Learning at a Chinese University: Some Emerging Findings. In: the BERA 2004 Conference, UMIST, Manchester, 15th-18th, September 2004. Edinbrugh: University of Edinbrugh.