Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The rooster in the story is warning the dreamer of the dangers of focusing on the wrong things. In the story, the man is failing to concentrate on his physical needs, but the author's purpose in the passage is to point out that spiritual salvation is man's critical need. Furthermore, the passage utilizes providence by specifically stating that one who seeks the Kingdom of God will have his needs met.
Finally, the author concludes his passage with an argument in the form of a short epilogue, recapping what he has said throughout the rest of the passage. He warns the reader, "Therefore, do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own evil" (Matt 6:34). In other words, he tells the reader that anxiety is not going to solve the problems. He makes a vague reference to the simple life, which is that each day has its own evil, and one does not need to borrow more evils. Interestingly enough, this epilogue fails to make reference to the idea of providence.
Conclusion
Argumentation
Matt 6:25 begins with the argument that anxiety about food, drink, and clothing is unnecessary because a man is more than those things. Matt 6:26 uses a lesser to the greater argument to demonstrate that if God cares for birds, he will take care of man. The author moves onto the argument that anxiety is not productive in Matt 6:27. In Matt 6:28, the author continues the use of analogy and argues from the lesser to the greater by asking the reader to consider how the lilies grow in the field. The author moves from asking the reader to consider other creatures to a warning that a person's achievements cannot match God's in Matt 6:29. Matt 6:30 reveals a return to the argument of analogy. Matt 6:31 directly tells people not to worry because anxiety will not solve one's problems. In 6:32, the author uses the argument of opposites, by showing that non-Jews are striving for worldly possessions; therefore Jews should not be striving for them. Finally, in Matt 6:33,...
The author concludes in Matt 6:34 by warning the reader against anxiety, reiterating the idea that anxiety is not productive.
Providence
Matt 6:25 introduces the idea that a man is more than a physical body, which opens the door for arguments about providence. Matt 6:26 passage focuses on providence, by asking the reader to consider that if God will care for birds, why would He not care for humans? Matt 6:28 uses the idea of providence by hinting at God clothing lilies, though the lilies do not do anything to earn their clothing. In Matt 6:29 the author uses the providence argument and suggests that a sense of gratitude and valuing things appropriately is critical to a view of providence. In Matt 6:30, by showing that all people can receive God's providence, the author introduces the idea of providence. Matt 6:31 also supports the idea of providence, if only by hinting at the notion that faith in God requires giving up anxiety about worldly concerns. Matt 6:33 uses providence to specifically state that God will provide for people's needs.
The Simple Life
Matt 6:25 does not specifically mention the simple life, but it does being to suggest that the poor can live a good life. By introducing the idea of birds in Matt 6:26, the author continues the suggestion of the simple life, since birds do not have the same material concerns as mankind. In Matt 6:28, the author introduces the idea of the simple life by suggesting that lilies, which grow in the field, have a lifestyle that is easier to sustain. Matt 6:29 speaks to the simple life by reflecting on the relative lack of value of the lily. Matt 6:30 harkens to the simple life by comparing people to something as simple as grass. Matt 6:33 speaks to the simple life by suggesting that focusing on material possessions is counterproductive. Finally, in 6:34, the author concludes with a vague reference to the simple life by suggesting that each day has its own evils.
Works Cited
Aphthonius of Antioch. "Progymnasmata."
Dio Cocceianus of Prus, "Hunters of Euboea."
Diogenes and Crates. "Principal Representatives of Cynic Philosophy."
Epictetus. "A Stoic View of…
Works Cited
Aphthonius of Antioch. "Progymnasmata."
Dio Cocceianus of Prus, "Hunters of Euboea."
Diogenes and Crates. "Principal Representatives of Cynic Philosophy."
Epictetus. "A Stoic View of Divine Providence."
However, the ability to criticize and gain depth into a subject was the key factors involved in qualitative research. In order for qualitative research methods to be applied to qualitative research, these methods had to undergo some form of transformation to make them acceptable to the empirical mindset. Wainwright argues that in order to achieve this, qualitative methods had to sacrifice some of their critical elements in favor of
Education The definition of an educated person has no doubt altered over time. Certainly, many people have tried to formulate the ultimate definition of what an educated person is, and what achieving that state might entail. In my earliest thoughts about the subject, I probably thought an educated person was probably my grandmother; she seemed so wise, and certainly, I never asked her anything for which she didn't have an answer,
Strangers in Their Own Land, Arlie Hochschild presents what she calls the "great paradox" of American society: why ultra conservatives vote against their best interests. By almost all accounts, red states are poorer economically, have much poorer health and educational outcomes, and a lower quality of life overall than blue states. That being the case, why would the reds continue to vote for the same platforms, even going so far
' Religion is belief in the existence of a supreme being while science is a study to explain the how. The main conflict of these two disciplines begins with the concept of life. Religion explains that God is the creator and giver of life, whereas scientists argue that life evolved from a microorganism. The debate between religion and science is highly controversial but I choose to take the stand of the