Sentences with phrase «evil natures of»

Generally, do atheist believe that mankind is naturally good or naturally bad; another way to ask; how do atheist explain the good and evil natures of mankind?That is: what is the driving force behind mankind's character?

Leonardo da Vinci suppressed his plans for a submarine: «This I do not divulge on account of the evil nature of men who would practice assassinations at the bottom of the sea by breaking ships in their lowest parts and sinking them.»

The film does a great job at capturing the cold, evil nature of Ian Mckellen's character (who is well cast and gives a great performance) But considering that this is a film directed by Bryan Singer, you know right from the start that this isn't his strongest directorial effort.

Parvo is evil it is a demonic disease that takes the most innocent and to this day his death upsets me more than some human ones because of the truly evil nature of this disease.

Not exact matches

We transcend ordinary life, as it were, in moments of imaginative, ecstatic insight, sometimes brought on by the power of nature, and sometimes by the power of love, or even by the power of what is ugly or evil.

It's scary that someone with this conviction about the nature of evil is a serious presidential contender.

Religion is a very bad mental disease, without religion there would be fewer starving people in the world, we would have settled Mars by now, and the abusive GOP and it's greedy banker uber - rich masters would be disempowered, as it is their veil of religion that disguises their evil, immoral and unethical nature.

@toxictown: you're wrong there... those pesky trees and wetlands that get in the way of oil drilling represent the «evil» in nature Just ask Santorum

The evil that men do is worse because, in effect, they can do better; man's intellect and reason are reflections of divinity, signs of his higher nature, and they can lead him to the brink of grasping it.

We interviewed Scott Derrickson in our latest issue and the movie explores many of Derrickson's own beliefs about the nature of good and evil.

NOt all who call themselves prophets are true believers... some are just for the gains... those are persecuted... cause their evil gets them... those who don't separate themselves from God's side and wisdom can not be harm by evil... evil bows to them and allows them to pass by him unharmed... Cause evil can not harm God... it's the law of Nature... only evil can be harmed by evil...

So you agree that lying itself is not evil... that it is the intent of the lie that determines its nature?

Such is the self - perpetuating and insidious nature of evil, breeding more deception and alienation from God along the way, and Ms Lamott's musings are a symptom and confirmation of that truth.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.28 And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, covenant - breakers, without natural affection, unmerciful: 32 who, knowing the ordinance of God, that they that practise such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also consent with them that practise them.

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.

Plotinus recast the Platonic unease with the material world in a straightforward manner: «The nature of bodies, insofar as it participates in matter, will be an evil» (Enneads, 1.8.4).

Reviewing a book titled The Son of Man written by François Mauriac (a French Roman Catholic who wrote about the problems of good and evil in human nature and in the world), Flannery O'Connor writes: He proposes in the place of that anguish that Gide called the Catholic's «cramp....

The will of Man is by nature sinful & selfish and easily vulnerable to the influence of Satan which is corrupt and evil.

The process theists believe that the only way to solve the problem of evil is to assume that human wills and nature as a whole have their own autonomy.

This view entails a complete dismantling of traditional Christian doctrine, including: creation out of nothing, the finite duration of history and nature, miracles as direct divine acts, and the final triumph of good over evil.

Creating the universe from nothing, forging a union of human and divine natures, and causing the defeat of evil — each of these events would involve full ontological determination by God.

If people wish to regard homosexuality as a freak of nature, and even if it is not the condition ordained by God when He said that it was not good for man that he should be alone, then we can only rejoice that God is, as ever, bringing good out of evil.

Initially, it appears that they were already evil because of their pride, but a more fundamental reason reveals itself in Augustine's discussion: «Now, nature could not have been depraved by vice had it not been made out of nothing.»

Humans are evil in nature but some choose the path to peace and forgivness which is the core of true evangelical Christianity.

We, and our students, have written not only about God but also about the problem of evil, Christ, the church, Christian education, pastoral counseling, preaching, the nature of human beings, history, liberation and salvation, spirituality, religious diversity, interfaith dialogue, science and religion, and other standard theological topics.

Kekes» account of the roots of evil may be superior to naive Enlightenment theories of man and society, but it leaves sophisticated religious theories of evil, which recognize man's fallen nature, untouched — indeed it unconsciously echoes them.

It is so obvious that: a) those held in slavery were human beings (a biological category); b) all humans are by nature persons (a philosophic category), that is, beings with inviolable worth that ought never be treated as means to an end; and c) the evil practice of slavery was not a private matter - the whole community is harmed because we are all communal beings by nature, in solidarity with those who are treated unjustly.

Since it reflects aspects of human nature — envy, ambition, the need for belonging — evil is a permanent threat.

Although generally categorized as a novel for young readers, this Newbery award - winner and science fiction classic, grapple with adult - sized questions about the nature of God and the existence of evil.

This disbelief in the value of the human body was epitomised by Thomas Hobbes, who wrote: «Man is in the condition of mere nature, which is a condition of war, as private appetite is the measure of good and evil».

to ascribe anything but evil intent to the Pope's motives make one suspect that it is not one decision that is the real problem: it is really about the fact that the nature of Catholicism and the role of the Pope have at their core a claim so audacious as to provoke outrage.

Lem me see here, according to your holy book your God personally ordered more infant killings than all American abortion doctors combined, ordered the annihilation of half a dozen civilizations, routinely taunted and tortured humanity, introduced evil into the world then blamed the things he created for it (even though he's supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent), then abandoned humanity for at least a couple thousand years while making plans to come back and slaughter 2/3 of Earth's inhabitants so that he can judge them and throw most of them into a torturous hell for all of eternity... for not being able to overcome the nature your book says he gave them... Just so he can have non-free will - having cloud gnomes sing his praises for eternity.

According to Noddings, history (including philosophy, theology, politics, societal structures) up to this point has obscured the nature of the problem of evil because all systems for dealing with it have been created, elaborated, and promoted by and for males.

This self love is sin.God never forced chaos on us.we gave in to satan's lies about evil being an inherent necessity.Jesus said he was the way, the truth and life.He was the life (love) that everyone craves for, he is the truth which meant that his love was our only need and he exposed the lies of satan that we could attain bliss on subordinating people to our cravings.Sinning people don't accept a God who requires us to renounce ourselves because they are not convinced of God's love being enough for them and they are afraid to destroy their identity and live for the Glory of God.So, upon death, these souls realize that the physical world was just a shadow of God's love (the nature, food etc) and their own lies (violence, self love etc) and realize that love is their only need.They pursue it from other soul beings but are hurt that there's only hate and self love.They are afraid to approach the light because they don't want to renounce their identity as they have not recognized God's love before.

It is not the nature of the act but the kavanah which determines whether or not it is good or evil, holy or profane, strong or weak in redemptive power.

To Jesus the world is not evil, but men are evil; and not in the sense that the human race as such is evil because of its lower nature.

But it was the Father's will to redeem humanity from slavery to evil and eternal corruption, and precisely for the sake of His Son in whom humankind was created and called to become co-sharers of the Divine Nature.

Often, those that are very sick indeed (ie «evil») have also had a number of «nurture» dysfunctions heaped upon their «nature» wiring.

It is surely possible to think that Whitehead's understanding of the consequent nature of God or the kingdom of heaven is implicitly if partially grounded in a genuine eschatology, and is so because it apprehends a transmutation of evil into good by way of a cosmic and universal process.

What Kant perceived as «radical evil,» rendering the freedom of man subservient to the mechanisms of nature that persisted in him, takes on an even darker and more subtle turn in this emergent situation.

«The consequent nature of God is added to meet the awful fact of evil which Whitehead sees and feels so keenly» Quoting from Process and Reality V, I, Wieman spoke of Whitehead's great sensitivity to the tragedy of the loss of beauty, richness, and value.

(ENTIRE BOOK) This book is addressed to both believers and unbelievers and examines a number of areas of religious thought and practice including an approach to intelligible religion, the fundamentals of religious experience, the existence and nature of God, the problem of good and evil, the meaning of the supernatural and of future life, the significance of Christ, the Church, the Bible, miracles and prayer.

My question boils down to: Why would a perfect all loving, all powerful, all knowing god CREATE the VERY ESSENCE of evil, and would that not indicate that god is evil in nature?

God has in his nature the knowledge of evil, of pain, and of degradation, but it is there as overcome with what is good.

Although all three definitions are fundamentally similar in that in each one evil consists in the loss of the past, the particular expression of the nature of evil that is found in each (due to the equation between the nature of evil and one of its manifestations) suggests that Whitehead has elaborated each of those definitions from the standpoint of differing preoccupations or points of view.

Partly to provide a way of conceptualizing God's transcendence over evil, and in part for other systemic reasons which we need not cover now, Hartshorne is forced to introduce a dualistic account of the divine nature.

Now, I'm not saying that there is a specific evil spirit in a storm — but I am saying that disturbances in weather are part of the fallen nature of our world.

It suggests that the whole of nature is part of the divine self; it shows how the exploitation of nature impoverishes the very richness of divine experience; it encourages a respect for the intrinsic value of individual organisms; and, in saying that God loves the world as a self loves a body, it suggests that embodiedness itself is a good to be cherished rather than an evil to be avoided (McFague, 74).

observer, If God did not put the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the the Garden of Eden nor created Satan, the nature of Adam and Eve would still have been the same just not revealed.

Study of Scripture through the filter of man's biases results in the type of man - centered ideas proferred by Baden, like «God learns to accept their inherently evil nature», and humans «are the only species that can give him what he wants — which, in the view of Genesis, is bloody, burned animal sacrifices», and «it is, rather, our job to make ourselves uncomfortable that he might be appeased.»