Sentences with phrase «better creatures with»

Each one has unique abilities and can change into better creatures with the proper training.

The first is that it is the birthday of a wonderful dog who simply by his existence has shown us how we can become kinder, better creatures with unstinting love for others.

Not exact matches

«Companies have gotten very good at providing creature comforts to developers — they have candy, free lattes, free massages — but if you ask developers what they want, it's a quiet place to work, with a door that closes and more flexibility on getting to learn the technology and experiment.

If your business model revolves more around river tours and large bodies of water, the mighty kraken, complete with lots of morbid jokes about your service to the creature, ferrying tourists to feed its unending hunger for human flesh, may do a better job of making your employees feel like they are part of something greater.

But the researchers who studied the well - preserved dinosaur wings found «bidirectional claw marks» in the amber, along with other evidence that this creature was still moving when it died.

Augmented reality is a type of technology best exemplified by the hit summer mobile game Pokémon Go, in which players could use their smartphones to hunt digital creatures that are overlaid onto the real world with the help of their phones» sensors and cameras.

I know myself and my situation well enough to understand that if I had invested the same amount of money in a taxable brokerage account with more liquidity, I would have spent plenty of it on creature comforts that I don't need, and I would be worse off today for it.

However, The difference between myself and those who profess to be God's chosen is that I don't delude myself with the anthropocentric nonsense that humans are masters of all other creatures on this planet (as well as all creation), we are merely and momentarily at the top of the food chain.

Half a wing is better than no wing and even with just enough of a wing, a creature can survive to a lower branch.

Like trees in many folktales, he also speaks to them as well, albeit with the arboreal sluggishness of a slow - growing, slow - moving creature.

(6) God can not make a person (P) significantly free with respect to an action (A) and yet causally determine or bring it about that P go right with respect to A — i.e., to create creatures capable of moral good, God must create creatures capable of moral evil.

our compet itors also had sophisticated brains — ours was just a hair bit quicker, with better reasoning - match that with our long arms and you have a creature that can kill from a distance more often (tools, or more sophisticated tools).

Second, it needs to see human life as profoundly interrelated with all other forms of life, refusing the traditional absolute separation of human beings from other creatures as well as of God from the world.

At the close of the twentieth century, with ecological deterioration accelerating and the nuclear threat ever with us, we need to feel not acceptance but the challenge to join forces on the side of life, for while we, like all creatures, are ultimately part of a universe that is brutal and may well end, we have, while we live, a part to play different from that of any other creature: we are responsible agents who can join with our loving parent to help our own and other species to survive and flourish.

On the other hand, the fact that God created other creatures and saw that they were good quite independently of their relation to human beings does not mean that each creature is of equal value with every other.

For the saving love of God to be present to human beings it would have to be so in a way different from how it is present to other aspects of the body of the world — in a way in keeping with the peculiar kind of creatures we are, namely, creatures with a special kind of freedom, able to participate self - consciously (as well as be influenced unconsciously) in an evolutionary process.

Since God creates the spiritual creature for union with Himself in freedom, which is the highest good, the possibility of sin, and hence suffering, comes from the realities of creaturely contingency.

@ christopher, if your father had only done exactly that we wouldn't have this creature you call yourself... kinda a waste of space really but you have potential to be something not moronic still so perhaps you can still use air better suited to others with goals in their lives other then to please their non existent sky fairy.

Or, best of all, they may weary of trashing their own dignity as creatures endowed with the divine gift of reason.

Process doctrines can go the whole way with existentialism in recognizing that man in his freedom may plunge into self - worship, or self - destruction; but this is because the real world has this risk within it, not because God wills that any creature should lose the meaning of life or decrees that any person should lose his possibility of knowing the good and doing it.

«1 Many of us who live in urban, industrial settings forget that we are members of a larger community of life, that we share with other creatures a common evolutionary heritage, that we depend on them for our sustenance, and that the earth is their home as well as our own.

We have arrogantly assumed control over other creatures, deluding ourselves with the notion that we know best what is good for the earth and ourselves.

It may seem somewhat trite to invoke the freedom of creation as part of the works and ends of divine love, or to argue that the highest good of the creature — divinizing union with God in love — requires a realm of «secondary causality» in which the rational wills of God's creatures are at liberty; nonetheless, whether the traditional explanations of how sin and death have been set loose in the world satisfy one or not, they certainly render the claim that an omnipotent and good God would never allow unjust suffering simply vacuous.

God's creatures are good, and were made for men to serve God with, and do not willingly subserve to any other purpose, and groan when they are abused to purposes so directly contrary to their nature and end.

They may object, for instance, to the proposition that God loves the creatures on the ground that it is a strange love which expresses itself by acting as God does, inflicting upon the loved ones numerous sufferings, the well - behaved ones being victims along with the wicked or unkind.

You should ask yourself, to help cure you of your horrid delusions, why it is that even the majority of believers in the world believe in a different god than you do, with wildly different rules to follow, and why your supposedly omnipotent creature can't do a better job of marketing himself over those other beliefs.

We are inundated these days with best - selling testimonials to the self - reflexive cure, as though the personal journey alone can sustain the creature's meaning.

God, then, in Dr. Cumming's conception, is a being who has no pleasure in the exercise of love and truthfulness and justice, considered as effecting the well - being of His creatures; He has satisfaction in us only in so far as we exhaust our motives and dispositions of all relation to our fellow - beings, and replace sympathy with men by anxiety for the «glory of God.»

And statistically, many of those could have contained «good» creatures with god worshiping religious organizations of their own.

Those who don't believe in God are only living half a life and, unfortunately, not the better half for we are all fallen creatures with a propensity towards the harmful.

We are creatures of the spirit as well as of the flesh, and we can not be at ease with ourselves unless we feel we are fulfilling, however vaguely or imperfectly, a moral purpose.

Men and women are then seen to be «co-creators» with God, as Whitehead put it; and as such they are both the creatures of God's love and the sharers in God's ongoing purpose of good in the creative advance.

The true liberty of man is, to know, obey and enjoy his Creator, and to do all the good unto, and enjoy all the happiness with and in his fellow creatures that he is capable of; in order to which the law of love was written in his heart, which carries in it's nature union and benevolence to Being in general, and to each being in particular, according to it's nature and excellency, and to it's relation and connexion with the supreme Being, and ourselves.

«Incalculable and unaccountable», I say, for the narratives constantly betray a baffled wonderment; but not magical or irrational, because they are congruous with the account which Jesus gave of the character of God: the «Father in heaven», who is «good» with a goodness beyond justice, (Mark 10:18; Matthew 5: 45; Luke 6: 35; Matthew 20: 1 - 15) supported by sufficient power; (Mark 10: 27, 14:36) and who persistently takes the initiative in giving good gifts to His creatures.

what a sad lot you are, your the lie to what the truth offers the truth being god the lie being the creature you serve, good luck with that, you fowl creatures who distort the truth in the hope of drawing away those who seek the way.

We should recognize that other creatures have the right to share this planet with us and that their well - being makes claims upon us.

The impression I was left with was that the best of the forces of good and the worst of the forces of evil would finally engage in all out war, releasing creatures and demons and angels and monsters into the agonized world ruled by intelligent but wicked men who would overthrow everything and anything that was established.

But we have to distinguish atheism from atheists; atheists are our fellow creatures, like us the children of Adam, and we do well to listen to them with care, to confess our shortcomings, and also to look them in the eye with cheerful confidence and friendliness and explain as simply as we can how the gospel witnesses to God's gift of life.

Accordingly, we may make the theological statement that God wants us to enjoy ourselves, to enjoy one another, to increase the enjoyment of other people — all other people — and of the other creatures with whom we share this planet as well.

Ogden, for example, tells us that «God is not neutral or indifferent to creaturely conflict but always sides with what makes for the good of his creatures as against all that makes for evil» (FF 94).

It never did fit well with the Biblical witness, where God is in constant interaction with the creatures and is affected by their decisions — hardly the picture of a God devoid of contingency (see Rice's contribution to Pinnock et al. 11 - 58).

He has created this world of creatures with their particular powers, and has created them good.9 Niebuhr therefore says explicity: «Power is not evil of itself.

But if man is a social creature there is nothing curious or invalid about the doctrine that I can unselfishly enjoy my neighbor's good.14 The logic of this problem and the solution I am urging has been set forth with a clarity equal to Nygren's in Charles Hartshorne's Man's Vision of God.

with a sensibility so exquisitely refined that he registers the distress of each fellow creature — he is well intentioned but terminally ineffectual.

They are with other creatures as well.

Ultimately, the Arian / feminist dislocation of meaning from words results in either a remotenessof God which can never be accessed and whose gap no creature (not even the Logos creature of Arianism) can ever hope to bridge (i.e. Arianism); or it means an immanence of God who is one with creation and its articulation in such a way that every articulation of meaning can be surpassed by a further better one, as evolution / God evolves to a higher state of being.

As Christian documents so well, God's initial conformal feelings are perfect, re-enacting the same feeling with all of the intimacy and poignancy that the creature felt, without any loss or distortion.16 Here God is completely vulnerable, completely open to all the evil and the tragedy that the world has seen.

Humans crave order and power over their environment and their fellow creatures and what better way than to threaten them with unprovable stories and then kill them when the don't acquiesce — because YOU are right an god is on YOUR side.

There they were in the illustrations to the antiquated children's biblical histories handed down from class to class in my parochial school; exotic, powerful female creatures with their veils and sandals and the bracelets they wore on their upper arms and ankles as well as on their wrists.

We will deal wisely with our problems only if we seek the well - being of the other creatures out of real concern for them.