Sentences with phrase «simpler interpretations of»

Simpler interpretations of Isaiah's call are more natural.11 Further reservations appear when we look closely at another item of support for the thesis that the great prophets were merely cult prophets.

With a populist approach centered on the sensus fidei of Catholics unencumbered by theological theories, Buttiglione claims that a simple interpretation of Amoris Laetitia will be the most faithful one, the one best able to understand and appreciate the pastoral novelty proposed by the pope.

I have put the case here as strongly as possible because it is a great danger to the concerns both of religion and of psychology to give a glib and simple interpretation of their relationship.

The extratropics may also contribute to the tropical SST changes via an «atmospheric bridge», confounding the simple interpretation of a tropical origin (Barnett et al., 1999; Vimont et al., 2001).

However the simplest interpretation of their motivation and communication at the time does reveal a will to present a picture other than the truth.

It may be a simple interpretation of your intent to take title in the name of an LLC.

Not exact matches

Most studies done to date only use one period of data, limiting interpretations of conclusions to simple associations.

Algo trading is usually the result of a series of indicators and trade line strategies as these are the simplest means for computer interpretation.

The interpretation of two words should be simple, shouldn't it.

Although it seems a simple concept, global supply chains make rules of origin complex, with a clear definition constantly open to interpretation.

Biblical interpretation naturally absorbs a lot of ink; but «modern biblical scholars» will be surprised to learn that many of them regard miracle stories as fictions «designed to influence the common folk of an ancient and more simple time»: a view closer to old - fashioned anticlericalism of Thomas Paine's vintage than modern scholarship even of a radical stripe.

Since Jesus Christ did not lie to the Apostles and His Church is still standing after 2000 years it is very simple to see who has the proper interpretation of the Bible... the Church that compiled the Bible... collecting the inspired scripture from amongst many scriptures and placing the Books in the Bible.

If every experience is already interpreted (as both Hartshorne and Whitehead believe), then the philosopher may choose to say, for example, that change is a fact (given in experience), but personal identity is an interpretation of simpler, more basic, or less interpreted, facts.

I come to wonder, if what we read out of scripture needs a proper interpretation of it following some basic principals to be in the proper context and we don't follow those simple rules, then what we interpret creates in our minds a false will of God and we follow this so called «Gods will» are we going down the wrong path?

It reflects the theology of those who thought of Jesus exclusively in apocalyptic terms, and were prepared not only to go through the tradition and substitute «the Son of Man» for his simple «I,» but also to insert appropriate quotations or paraphrases of their favorite apocalyptic texts in order to give his life its appropriate setting — as they assumed — and his teaching its proper interpretation.

In place of one individual's interpretation of Christ we have a tradition which shines like a shaft of light through the refracting, expanding prism of a rich and varied religious experience, and by its many - splendored radiance begins to prove how much was contained in the apparently simple and single, but really complex and manifold, manifestation of the divine mystery — the revelation of the mystery hid from past ages, the message of God through Jesus Christ, his Son, our Lord.

Dobbins wisely left out the theatrical tricks and frills that many directors tack on to Shakespeare to «keep it relevant,» allowing a simple and straightforward interpretation of the play.

In retrospect, the arguments I have been advancing in favor of my interpretation of the principle of process seem straightforwardly simple and, I hope, convincing.

The world may or may not be as tidy as it is often possible to conceive it to be; but it is part, and surely a legitimate part, of our inheritance from the successes of science, quite apart from anything else, that given two otherwise satisfactory interpretations of which one is simpler then that simpler one is preferable even if there is no means of judging — by appeal to evidence, say — that it is not, in respect of its greater simplicity, mere plausible fantasy.

The latter understanding is more akin to Mays's own position and his interpretation of Whitehead as an empiricist, pure and simple (PW 74/75), than to the Platonic quasi-world of forms which actual occasions mirror via ingression.

If his interpretations are not always our own, there are scenes and episodes which the reader of the Tetralogy will never forget: the inspired Tamar (38) motivated not by the simple passion of seduction but, convinced that Judah will bear the Blessing (see 49:8 ff.)

In particular, the denial that epistemology is wholly prior to ontology; the denial that we can have an absolutely certain starting point; the idea that those elements of experience thought by most people to be primitive givens are in fact physiologically, personally, and socially constructed; the idea that all of our descriptions of our observations involve culturally conditioned interpretations; the idea that our interpretations, and the focus of our conscious attention, are conditioned by our purposes; the idea that the so - called scientific method does not guarantee neutral, purely objective, truths; and the idea that most of our ideas do not correspond to things beyond ourselves in any simple, straightforward way (for example, red as we see it does not exist in the «red brick» itself).

So the simple, literal interpretation, instead of leading to the more sophisticated, «spiritual» view, often leads to rejecting God completely.

We may have to remain undecided about which of these two interpretations better fits, but notice that both of them dash to bits any sort of simple optimism about the sexual revolution.

However, even independently of their bearing on the Church's interpretation of Jesus» life, death, and resurrection, these texts have been held holy for the simple reason that they give authoritative expression to the central themes of promise and hope that constitute the core of biblical faith.

It is remarkable that this simple fact of human life fits in so closely with the pattern of the Christian interpretation of existence — so remarkable that we may be pardoned if we believe that it is not really accidental at all, but providential.

The Christian interpretation of man's pilgrimage in time can not be put into a simple parallelism with these political philosophies.

If you want to determine if an interpretation or doctrine is true there is a simple test: Does it affirm the absolute sovereignty and eternal perfection of our Creator, or does it elevate the status of man and man's deeds to levels where God's Holiness and Will and the atoning work of Christ are diminished?

Only after history had shown the error of simpler interpretation was this side of the gospel fully known.

It will not be as simple as it sounds, for the ambiguity that characterizes the Bible as a whole also characterizes its internal principle of interpretation, the biblical picture of Jesus himself.

The author of Job effectively showed that this interpretation of judgment is too simple to be viable.

Such a misunderstanding is easy, for the language of the church fathers who formulated this doctrine was different from ours, and it defies simple interpretation.

We must see the problem of human progress from a Christian interpretation, recognizing that it is not so simple a problem as romantic idealism made it, nor yet so simple as the present somewhat contemptuous rejections of it suggest.

Every tradition admits of critical interpretation for the simple reason that its forms of expression may always be appraised in the light of the basic motif they more or less adequately express.

Your interpretation is common, but I hope that as Christians we can move past this simple interpretation and embrace the deeper fact that all of us, Christian or no, always act in a context of great ignorance.

Here our interpretation is somewhat tentative, because we must recognize that any simple identification of the Spirit with this consequent nature will only produce confusion.

When applied to the witness of history, this means that interpretation can never be just a simple reproduction of history's being, «as it was.»

Oh... forgot you Proving... I wasn't referring to what he said... on the surface, it's fine to have a point of view... whether I agree with it or not... but when you are A) in a position of influence and B) spending money to fight the opposing view... and it's to stop two people who love each other from wedding in the eyes of their Lord, then it is hate... if your ignorance allows you to think my comments are stupid... so be it... and one last point about slavery... whether it was Democrats or Republicans who supported, or fought against slavery... many justified slavery because of their perverted interpretation of the bible... most people can't tell a simple story from one person to the next... but so many foolish Christians think they know exactly what the bible is saying w / o any doubt... forget the fact that it's been translated and passed for 1000s of years... yup you must be right that God is against two people loving each other... He must have made a mistake with those folks huh?

The clearest and simplest exposition of Benedict's approach to biblical interpretation is given in the Foreword to his first volume of Jesus of Nazareth.

It would surely have been very simple to arrange things in such a way that everything fitted properly if, after all, these prophecies, these words of God, these divine interventions in history, are all the religious interpretations of pious authors.

If all of these ideas, interpretations and understandings were so clear and simple, then why do they vary so widely from person to person, group to group?

Beyond the second derivative, simple physical or geometric interpretations of third, fourth and higher derivatives, the authors point out, do not exist.

A simple explanation would be that the story of the flood in Genesis is allegory and that literal interpretation was never intended.

Let me applaud you for your true and excellent interpretation / explaination of lent that was simple with appropriate analogies.

This simple philosophical interpretation of coordinate geometry also has its forerunner in Whitehead's mathematics.

Chef Romero reimagined the simple taco recipe with this modern Mexican interpretation; succulent duck confit on a bed of jicama tortilla and avocado mousse all topped with an orange - cherry salsa.

Not all of this case is that simple, and many of its elements are open to interpretation.

And if you see adoption as infinitely complex, you notice the nuances in her story, the shades of gray and hues of color, so much deeper and more intricate than simple black and white interpretations.

Interpretations change over time and it seems timely to me to look at Libya as more than an issue of simple national sovereignty.

Another obstruction to simply multiplying probabilities in Feynman diagrams is the presence of the spurious contributions we had described in the article, which disallow a simple probabilistic interpretation of an individual diagram.