Sentences with phrase «gods relation to nature»

When we speak of Gods relation to nature, we must do so in terms not only of actualized order but also of the universe's adventure toward novel forms of order.

Not exact matches

It can be argued, however, that to minimize the miraculous and thereby conclude that what occurs in nature in relation to particular persons can not be controlled by God alleviates the problem of natural evil only up to a point.

It can be plausibly argued that while it might appear that Plantinga's free - will defense is only relevant to moral evil, it actually has significant, necessary ramifications for how God's power can be conceived in relation to nature.

It focused on human history in contrast to nature, or on the individual person in relation to God.

Supposing that creatures have two separate prehensions of God, one of each nature, would complicate the theory far more than viewing the one prehensive relation as relating to both natures.

The code of laws provides the regulations which create the proper relations between man and God, such as saying prayers, fasting, and other religious duties; they guide man in his relations with his brother in Islam or the non-Muslim community, in organizing the structure of the family and encouraging reciprocal affection; they lead man to an understanding of his place in the universe, encouraging research into the nature of man and animals and guiding man in the use of the benefits of the natural world.

He will not require not merely that the new knowledge be used as the foundation of the proof, but that the very spirit and atmosphere of the new knowledge enter in such a way into thedemonstration of God's existence, that the complexities and confusions of human thought engendered by the new knowledge shall be resolved in harmonious unity in the postulate of God's existence, nature, and relation to created being.

A thing's relation to God, being a creature, makes no difference to its nature or intelligibility.

Since all prayer rests back upon our understanding of the nature of God and his relation to the world, we must now look at this more directly.

Even so, Schleiermacher surrendered very little, and his own consciousness's appropriation of God's being, «in relation to us» of course, included and emphasized the traditional attributes of omnipotence, eternity, omnipresence, and omniscience.5 And for him, «immutability» is already contained within the notion of God's eternity.6 Causality within the entire system of nature can be exhaustively accounted for by God's causal activity.7 Following the lead of Aquinas, Schleiermacher declared that there is no distinction between potential and actual in God.8

That realm of nature which used to be beyond human understanding and control, with which, therefore, one could only establish a creative relation by means of this hypothesis «God», is now more and more being conquered by reason and technique.17

Hartshorne is willing to begin with the metaphysical reality of God and other selves (not just as a postulate, but as concrete existences), and then to use inference and imagination to provide an account of their nature and relations — an account which can he more or less adequate to its object, given the limitations of our form of consciousness.

Her discussion here is complicated by its relation to a view of how God redeems the world: «To be actual, God must take on a «body» and in so doing, redeem: i.e. he must have physical feelings of the totality of each and all finite achievements, integrating them into the ongoing unity of his consequent nature» (p. 163to a view of how God redeems the world: «To be actual, God must take on a «body» and in so doing, redeem: i.e. he must have physical feelings of the totality of each and all finite achievements, integrating them into the ongoing unity of his consequent nature» (p. 163To be actual, God must take on a «body» and in so doing, redeem: i.e. he must have physical feelings of the totality of each and all finite achievements, integrating them into the ongoing unity of his consequent nature» (p. 163).

A generation ago the existence and nature of God and his relation, if any, to what seems to be a cruel and morally indifferent universe, occupied many minds.

The true relation of man to the physical world — including that part of it which is his own body — is that through nature «God produces and sustains his life.»

These are the unity of sickness and health, of body and spirit, of the freedom of the individual with the fixities of nature, of the relation of God to his total created world.

Having thus far spoken of the need to speculate about the nature of finite actualities in themselves, including their causal relations, I now move to the question of God.

Their alternative speculative suggestion is that a realm of finite actual occasions has always existed, that it exists as necessarily as does God, and that the basic God - world relation belongs to the very nature of things.

We should emphasize the unity of God and see the «natures» as abstractions, descriptions from particular viewpoints of how God as a whole functions in relation to the world and to the eternal objects.

And even when we do experience God's revealing / restoring nature in relation to our own sins, we so easily forget.

Because, at least in part, they think of personality as objective, they hope to safeguard God's personality, or His personal relations with man, by limiting His nature to the personal alone.

Also in the face of the ecological disaster created by the modern ideas of total separation of humans from nature and of the unlimited technological exploitation of nature, it is proper for primal vision to demand, not an undifferentiated unity of God, humanity and nature or to go back to the traditional worship of nature - spirits, but to seek a spiritual framework of unity in which differentiation may go along with a relation of responsible participatory interaction between them, enabling the development of human community in accordance with the Divine purpose and with reverence for the community of life on earth and in harmony with nature's cycles to sustain and renew all life continuously.

(a) Hartshorne's objection to my position on truth would be that I assume that there are truths about the past and that truth is real now as involving a relation of correspondence with an object, the past; however, the past on my view is not real now, is not preserved in its full subjective immediacy in the consequent nature of God.

But this tale of desolation in society and nature is not the end of the prophetic vision, When humanity mends its relation to God, the result must be expressed not in contemplative flight from earth but rather in the rectifying of the covenant of creation.

How to understand men as fundamentally related to God when their relations to nature and society had so changed presented a most difficult practical as well as theoretical problem.

Hence Muslim theology is also called the science of unification (of God), because its object is to determine the nature of God and His attributes, and to explain the relation between Him and His creation, all of which follow as corollaries from a definite concept of Allah as the Absolute One.

Ely's more detailed analysis and discussion of the religious aspects of Whitehead's God pertain to three central problems as they function in Whitehead's thought: [1) the preservation of values (God's consequent or concrete nature); (2) the transmutation of evil into good (which includes the problems of evil and God's goodness); and (3) the problem of the relation of God's goodness and the preservation of the individual as such.

The readings offer four distinct perspectives on the nature and attainment of happiness, each of which will serve as the springboard for the discussion of a different set of issues in relation to the search for human ful llment: participation in public life, self - control and education, the longing for God, and the confrontation of death.

The concept of the consequent nature of God gives a reciprocal relation to God and the world.

The God who is the supreme determinant of the nature of all things, entering into their very constitution sustains the relation of immanence to every creature.

The first of these is the question of how we can adequately define that love which Christianity holds to be the clue to the nature of God and therefore define the content of that real good in relation to which all particular goods are finally judged.

It is the real relation of things - and as such, should be recognized as our relation to nature, people and God, and their relation to us.

Hence we must deal with the nature of God and God's relation to the universe together in relation to the problem of evil.

The liberal theology has never yet been given sufficient credit for having taken the new science — the new world view of the nineteenth century, the conception of growth and evolving life — and trying to reconceive the nature of God so as to make His relation to such a world intelligible.

That is to say, it is not yet settled that the relation which Christian doctrine holds to exist between God and the spiritual soul as regards its origin, is to be regarded as not occurring otherwise in nature and its history.

With their understanding of the divine - human nature of Jesus Christ and of the ubiquity of Christ in all compassionate and needy companions, Christians are led to see that as the neighbor can not exist or be known or be valued without the existence, knowledge and love of God, so also God does not exist as God - for - us or become known or loved as God except in his and our relation to the neighbor.

The interpretation of the present nature of human beings in any situation, as «made in the image of God» and as «brothers for whom Christ died» should be as Persons - in - Relation and destined to become Persons - in - Loving - Community with each other in the context of the community of life on earth through the responsible exercise of the finite human freedom reconciled to God.

The calling to create, recreate and develop cultures arises out of the involvement and transcendence of the human self in relation to nature and to other human selves under God's purpose.

A man can not through cultic, sacramental means bring himself into closer relation to the remote God, nor obtain for himself a divine nature.

He does not display sufficient realization of the distinctiveness of man in relation both to nature and to God.

The implications of the constitutive relationality affirmed in CiV are stunning: no relations taken up by human beings in the course of their lives are purely contractual, -LSB-...] freedom is an act of choice only as already embedded in an order of naturally given relations (cf. 68) to God, family, others, and nature.

God, as chief causative principle and as supreme affect, is «in this world or he is nowhere»; biblical material, and in relation to it Christian liturgical and hymnological imagery, with the theological articulation of this, intend to make affirmations which are to be found in the pictures and forms and myths — and these we must seek to make meaningful and valid for ourselves in our present existence; man is an «embodied» and a social occasion or series (or «routing») of occasions, organic to the world of nature, and can only truly live as he lives in due recognition of these facts and sees them as integral to himself.

The rationale for process theology evolved from philosophical critiques of Augustine's attempt to combine the living God of the Bible with the changeless being of neo-platonic metaphysics and reframed the doctrine of God in relation to a contemporary view of nature and the new historical consciousness.

Irenaeus therefore made a distinction between the image of God which is man's distinctive endowment of reason, his dominion over nature, and his creaturely dignity; and the similitude to God which is faith, hope and love, that is, the full and righteous relation which man is supposed to enjoy as God's creature.

Prayer may therefore be understood only in the light of the nature of God and of the relation of the Deity to man.

The ecological model of the universe helps us to overcome the dichotomy between the individual and its relations to its environment, between the living and the non-living, between freedom and determinism and between nature and God.

25 His work was marred by a distinction between God and «Godhead»: «God is deity conceived in relation, over against the universe, its cause or ground, it law and end; but the Godhead is deity conceived according to His own nature, as He is from within and for Himself.»

First of all, if the Bible says that men and women should not have relations that are contrary to their nature then it would seem that if a man or woman is gay, having straight relationships would be «contrary to their nature» and therefore sinful in the eyes of God.

Whitehead's discussion of the relation of God to time, like much of what he says about God, is primarily focused on the primordial nature of God.

«Critical reflection» could lead to the result that this statement made by the gospel is based in the nature of the case (the relation between God and man), and consequently is to be seriously respected.»