Sentences with phrase «always been good human beings»

Not exact matches

As a rule, humans almost always believe they deserve more credit for a job well done than they would be willing to dish out to a co-worker who completed the same task.

«Being always on is not the way human beings operate at their best,» she said.

First, it reminds us that we are human, that our problem - solving is always a matter of looking for better solutions, not perfect ones.

Its human nature to always be on the lookout for something newer and better, and unfortunately we have a tendency to associate the two together in our thinking that technology can provide the perfect answer to all of life's problems.

Ma, a former teacher, says he always warns government leaders to also «pay attention to education,» because right now we're teaching children the wrong thing: that machines are better than humans.

Other than Post, only a handful of scientists are working on lab - grown meat; others believe the future lies in plant - based substitutes, ones so good they could fool even the most discerning palate, although Post maintains that we humans will always have an appetite for the real thing.

Robots will always be more efficient at processing those calculations than humans, however, so they will always be better at analyzing market data and completing successful trades.

Man has always perverted the truth, ever since the first time he fell for a lie... it's in human nature, or better said it's a human disease we're born with, till God does His work in our lives, if we allow Him....

They schooled me according to a black folk tradition that taught that trouble doesn't last always, that the weak can gain victory over the strong (given the right planning), that God is at the helm of human history and that the best standard of excellence is a spiritual relation to life obtained in one's prayerful relation to God.

But it does mean we should be more than defensive, and should always be careful to highlight the nature and the appeal of what we are defending, and so of what we are offering — the larger human good in the service of which some constraints on our individual will and power are required.

Greg: Charles Taylor believes humans are naturally ordered toward the good, which means they will always feel a religious impulse.

Economists should also recognise that while we always aim for the good in economic, as in all human, activity, we are also morally weak.

This is in fact a resurgence in other terms and with other objectives in view — of the error always committed by Christians who intervene in the sphere of human actions to justify them and to testify that in the end man has good reason for doing what he does.

One can very well agree that Christian existence has always been an ontological possibility for man, in the sense that it does not entail «changing human nature into a supernature, «54 and yet say that it is an antic possibility only for those in a certain historical situation.

The Christian people suspect, and not always without reason, that because the Church's human law must be established by the authorities it is actually subject to the arbitrariness of the ministry and hence not really a law that would give the people a well - established position over against the decisions of the Pope or the entire episcopate.

But you can always make a case that every person has the potential to make society better or more advanced and bringing harm to another human being should be against the law.

There can not be true peace if everyone is his own criterion, if everyone can always claim exclusively his own rights, without at the same time caring for the good of others, of everyone, on the basis of the nature that unites every human being on this earth.»

I mean the burning passion of lived awareness that we occupy a precarious existence on this planet together with the soil and its flowers, the water and its fishes, the air and its birds, the fire and energy sources; that our fellow human beings are truly brothers and sisters with whom it is better always to make love - justice than war; and that gentleness lasts longer and touches more deeply than other kinds of power.

Just because evil is always relative does not mean we as humans can not see ourselves in others and share that with them, letting them know we can relate, that we feel the relative evil as well and attempt to support those in harms way by saying «I am you too, i'm on your side.»

Or, to switch images, Christian teaching provides one set of inputs into human consciousness, but other inputs are always cycling through that consciousness as well.

Admittedly, in the area of religious faith and morals we have been rather slower to discard the old in favour of the new, for this is the aspect of human life in which conservatism has always been most strongly entrenched, for the very good reason that man looks to this area of life more than any other for his stability and security.

We do not know what effect such prayers will have, but we do know that all generous prayer is valued by God, and while God always does the best that can be done in every circumstance, we may cherish the thought that God also can use prayer of that kind for furthering the divine purposes for good, though it may be in a way past human comprehension.

Writes Dark, «It is only when we're blessed by a feeling of finitude that we can begin to perceive the holy, that sense of a whole before which our limited understanding is dwarfed... Only a twisted, unimaginative mind - set resists awe in favor of self - satisfied certainty... More humility might characterize our talk of God if we believe that the whole truth can never be entirely ours and that our attempts to nail God down are always well - intentioned human constructs at best and idols at worst.»

One thing I want my soul to remember is that life isn't always good, humans aren't always good, but God is good.

If God was not always present to create, sustain, and bring to greater good, there could be no human life.

Beginning with the experience of Paul, the Christian view of this world which came to theological expression in the Reformers and which has now been revived with great power in the contemporary Protestant theology, has always shown a certain distrust of identifying human efforts toward the good with the divine work of redemption on the ground that the good as man knows it and seeks it is really of a different order from the good revealed in Christ.

This would always be an attack on the dignity of the person and his freedom, which is not a means to an end (in this case the compulsory realization of something good), but part of the meaning and goal of the human person.

I therefore continue to maintain that intelligence is always inferred, that we infer it through well «established methods, and that there is no principled way to distinguish human and divine design so that human design remains empirically accessible but divine design is rendered empirically inaccessible.

Because, implicitly or explicitly, it is always by reference to some conception of the overall and final human good that other goods are ordered, the life of every individual, household or community by its orderings gives expression, wittingly or unwittingly, to some conception of the human good.

We human beings too are always a living and a causal part of that one «creation in community» for better or worse, for good or for degradation, (cf Col 1, 16 - 26.

Omnipresence tells us that the divine Love is everywhere and always present and at work to augment the good, often in very surprising places — a Christian would point especially to a humble human life, to a man born in a manger, and to that same man rejected and put to death, as the place where such active presentness is most clearly seen.

You have to accept the fact that humans can be good and bad with out any god,, and have always been, despite the best efforts of religious leaders to say other wise.

Even so, the power of good is always seen as the prior and absolute power, not dependent on human nature but always working directly.

What distinguishes the structure of existence in Jesus» situation from that of the contemporary Christian can best be broached, Cobb suggests, through an analysis of the pronoun «I.» This «I,» we are told, is to be identified with both reason and the passions as the two dominant modes which have always characterized human psychic activity.

Because, it is claimed, evaluation presupposes valuation as a condition of its possibility, any merely «disinterested» or «value - free» understanding of human reflection is of necessity excluded.20 Any consideration of the evidence of experience could only in the nature of the case ever illustrate, but logically could not falsify what must always necessarily be the case, even if such a consideration could well force a limited reconstrual of the hermeneutical analysis always itself presupposed in the strictly conceptual presuppositional analysis which uncovers the necessity of such elemental valuing.21

«24 His own positive view of globalization reads thus: «The Trinity, as mystery of communion of the three Divine Persons, has always given herself to creation as well as to the life of every single human being, and has revealed herself — under the forms of sociability, mutual openness, love and self - giving, but also accusation and protest against the lack of such values — to the communities of humanity.

Francis concludes further «The best way to restore men and women to their rightful place» is to reaffirm an understanding of a supreme Creator God — «Otherwise, human beings will always try to impose their own laws and interests on reality.»

lol, yes clay i am an atheist... i created the sun whorshipping thing to have argument against religion from a religious stand point... however, the sun makes more sense then something you can't see or feel — the sun also gives free energy... your god once did that for the jews, my gives it to the human race as well as everything else on the planet, fuk even the planet is nothing without the sun... but back to your point — yes it is very hypocritical of me, AND thats the point, every religious person i have ever met has and on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the group.

The understanding that Christ fulfils all that is good in human nature and in creation can be lacking in these theological circles (with notable exceptions, of course), so there is not always a strong emphasis on the link between liturgy and the rest of life.

Is it perhaps that whilst God always wills the best for people, God so respects human freedom that the divine will is not imposed on peoplIs it perhaps that whilst God always wills the best for people, God so respects human freedom that the divine will is not imposed on peoplis not imposed on people?

Perhaps — and this is something only the performance of genetic ontology can decide — genetic ontology is capable of better explaining to us how beings are always understood in the natural development of the human subject, whence our concepts of Being come, under which mode of meaning these concepts stand, and what their relationships are to historical ontologies.

In reality, large expenditures on alcohol and tobacco and junk food, all included in personal consumption, do not always add to human well - being.

We are and always have been one world family, joined in the spiriling genetics of all human beings, joined through the emotions and intellect that define our species — for better or worse.

From Tocqueville's comparison - and - contrast between aristocracy and democracy — wherein democracy brought gains in justice, but losses in other estimable human qualities — Peter drew the lesson that «things are always getting better and worse.»

In the early centuries of Christian history, the Pelagians advocated this view, arguing that human beings were innately good and could always choose the good if they wanted.

The whole world may come to participate more or less imperfectly in the universal mission of Christ and the Church: the Eastern Orthodox churches, Protestant ecclesial communities, the Jewish people, Islamic monotheism, the great world religious traditions that are not always explicitly monotheistic, and even secularists through the workings of the moral conscience by which human beings are led to seek the true and the good.

Because this is the sole ideal that has the solidity once owned by Catholicism and the flexibility that this was never able to have, the only one that can always face the future and does not claim to determine it in any particular and contingent form, the only one that can resist criticism and represent for human society the point around which, in its frequent upheavals, in its continual oscillations, equilibrium is perpetually restored, so that when the question is heard whether liberty will enjoy what is known as the future, the answer must be that it has something better still: it has eternity.29

No... choice is so present in the human condition that obvious failure of «good» choice will always happen — thus we a system where forgiveness is prized very highly — but the love part is possible.

I was not always happy with the revisions of old readings - they sometimes seem to excuse human responsibility - but in the end evil is called evil and good is called good while an overly simple generalizations are avoided.

Therefore, we can not say that it is always wrong to take control of nature and turn it in directions we think good, for such self - transcendence is an expression of the freedom that is essential to being human.