Sentences with phrase «free creatures in»

Not exact matches

Here is where the potentially bad effects still linger: While Netscape was born and grew as a creature of the free markets, it faded away having embraced more government involvement and interference in American business.

If your hands get tired in this mode, you can slide the Joy - Cons up and off (a tiny release button behind each lets them disengage), prop the Switch on a flat surface with its rear kickstand, then continue playing wirelessly, your hands free to roam like creatures loosed from cages.

Being willing to deal with them as you would an evil, blood - sucking creature of the dark is the second step in freeing yourself from them.

(10) It is possible that all creatures (creaturely essences) are such that they would go wrong with respect to at least one action in any world in which they were free with respect to morally significant actions (NN 184 - 89).

FIRST: The Creator created a world that had to potential to create, through free - will creatures, that could share in, and enjoy His attributes (made in His image).

Our task must be to free from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole nature in its beauty.»

What is created at that moment is a single new creature — a human person — with the capacity to become conscious and free «in the image and likeness of God».

Of his own free will He walks naked and alone into the heart of the storm as broken and twisted creatures wreak upon his innocent humanity the damage that mirrors the broken image of God in their own souls.

What we call salvation or justification is given to man, the creature and sinner, only through the free and undeserved grace of God, that is through God's free self - revelation in Jesus, the crucified and the risen Christ.

In this sense, too, if God wills to extend his love to creatures, in doing so he is freIn this sense, too, if God wills to extend his love to creatures, in doing so he is frein doing so he is free.

Is it right for a man to be as care - free as a bird, and even to surpass these creatures in unconcern, since they fly hither and thither in search of food?

He is thus against natural law theory but for a DCT in which God, by creating rational creatures, is bound to make their highest end a relationship with the divine persons, but free to pursue that end via any number of routes.

Much of what we see in our collective lives is the sinful and savage excesses of corrupt creatures, the diverse and perverse choices of free human agents.

First, for the process theist the natural order has value in itself and not just as a sphere in which free creatures can grow to moral maturity (as the Basingers imply for the classical theist).

As it strips political leaders and activists of vanity and illusion, it should also free them to wield power under God and in the service of God's creatures.

There is no other world that God might have created, not because he is bound by necessity, but because he is infinitely free, and so nothing can hinder him from expressing his essential and infinite goodness perfectly, in and through the freedom of creatures created to be the fellows of his eternal Son.

Indeed, for any significantly free creature there is a possible world in which that creature is significantly free but always does what is right.

That God is the supremely and enduringly loving one is never in doubt; but that God's love is fulfilled and returned is, in some degree, dependent on the free decision of the creatures.

Not a few men today experience their dilemma as that of creatures who were born to be free but are everywhere in chains.

Yet God is the One who values and uses, because God incorporates into the divine life which is everlasting the good that takes place in the historical sequence; and God overrules or uses for good that which comes from the «vain imagination of foolish men» in their sin and defection — and, we may add, from anything else that is evil or wrong thanks to the free decisions made by the creatures in their divinely granted capacity to choose among relevant possibilities.

I agree but add: God had no alternative to willing that there be some free creatures, first because (pace Alston) the idea of not creating at all could occur (if I may say so) only to a confused creature, second because, as Peirce, Bergson, and Whitehead have seen, by a «creature» we can consistently mean only a lesser form of the freedom or creativity which in eminent form is deity.

Many can now understand such judgements as that of Loren Eiseley, who did not speak of human difference from other creatures in the glowing terms of the Enlightenment: how we are «rational,» capable of «free will», and so on.

i am sorry J.W but i don't believe there is a god of any kind... if there was a god, why would such a so called all powerful being allow for the treatment of its creation by its creation... the argument of free will is an old and tired one... if the existence was true and the laws put in place to honor such a creature were equally upheld by god then i would have been punished a long long time ago and so would have the majority of people... believer or not!

Eternal hell only exists on the condition that some of God's free creatures reject God's love and grace and persist in doing so.

My interest in Barth as moral theologian suggests to me that his interpretation of the Reformed tradition (as equally concerned with God's glory and the free action of creatures) was deeply important in his theological growth.

In An American Childhood (1987), Dillard explores primarily her own life, and the social and historical world she recollects is largely free of nature's tooth and claw; fewer creatures sputter into flame.

Yes, I know, the «gift» of living forever (with the brutal supernatural creature) is «free» (as long as you believe in and worship the brutal supernatural creature).

He is what He is, in His own integrity, the everlasting source of all being and good, present in every moment of the world's life, determining it as fully as it can be determined in the light of the fact that out of His love He has set His creatures free, and will not destroy their freedom.

(1) Man is in a unique position between nature and spirit as a free creature.

Is it the kind of power that must be in absolute control of every detail, OR is it the kind of the power that is so wise and powerful, that it can truly give away power to free creatures?

[6] The primacy of Christ in creation emerges not simply from his being the beginning and end of the cosmos, but also from his being the saviour and justification of this cosmos of intellectual creatures free to give themselves to the creator.

Lear reads Plato's dialogues as attempts to explain, by the articulation of a psychology, how irony is possible: «why it is that we are creatures who, for the most part, do not grasp the real situation we are in; and how it is that on occasion an individual is able to break free of appearances and engage in genuine acts of pretense - transcending aspiring.»

But there is certainly nothing inherent in the standard free - will perspective that requires the FWT to hold that God's primary purpose for creating free creatures was to make it possible for God to «enjoy the value of knowing that those of us who developed moral character and spiritual virtue... did so freely» (ER 18).

So that Christ combines the imagination, spontaneity, and richness of experience which were God's aims in drawing forth human beings, with the free obedience and loving communion with God which in a «fallen» world are otherwise approximated only by creatures of a «lower» order.

It is the free person, God's creature, facing the ultimate issues of life and death, but facing them in their final dimensions, and making decisions which arise from the creative courage of one who has faced and accepted the conditions of real life.

Humans came to be seen less as fallen creatures living in a fallen world and more as autonomous, rational beings, capable of choice, of doing good of their own free will, and of creativity.

In the beginning, God set up a universe with genuinely free creatures, which can truly impact their surroundings — for good or for evil.

the church had it's day and age... our time has come in this age of information and technology to throw off the shackles of religion and as free thinking creatures and take center stage.

Even as God's work as Creator is in the deeper interest of every creature in a cosmic order that frees it to realize its own interests as fully as possible in solidarity with all its fellow creatures, so right actions toward others and, even more so, right structures of social and cultural order are byway of realizing the same deeper interest, thereby carrying forward God's own work of creation.

Thus we now recognize not only that we have the power in principle to transform these structures so that they more nearly allow for the realization of all relevant interests but also that it is in the deeper interest of all creatures that there be a social and cultural order that frees each of them to realize its interests as fully as possible in solidarity with all the others.

In addition, if there is FREE WILL, then his beloved creatures can do whatever they please, and God can't intervene, or else he is interfering with free wFREE WILL, then his beloved creatures can do whatever they please, and God can't intervene, or else he is interfering with free wfree will.

God as the sole source of each creature's creativity, not only establishes that creature in its esse, but also establishes that creature as a free agent with its own capacity to partially choose, that is, to partially characterize its own identity.

In the traditional version, the creature free will stems from a voluntary «withdrawal» of God's power, where God could have intervened but chose not to intervene in the creature's operationIn the traditional version, the creature free will stems from a voluntary «withdrawal» of God's power, where God could have intervened but chose not to intervene in the creature's operationin the creature's operations.

In a statement quoted by Hasker in his discussion of what he calls a «more subtle form» of the above argument (although it simply is my argument), I said that according to traditional free will theism it would have been possible for God to create «creatures who could enjoy all the same values which we human beings enjoy, except that they would not really be free» (Process 74In a statement quoted by Hasker in his discussion of what he calls a «more subtle form» of the above argument (although it simply is my argument), I said that according to traditional free will theism it would have been possible for God to create «creatures who could enjoy all the same values which we human beings enjoy, except that they would not really be free» (Process 74in his discussion of what he calls a «more subtle form» of the above argument (although it simply is my argument), I said that according to traditional free will theism it would have been possible for God to create «creatures who could enjoy all the same values which we human beings enjoy, except that they would not really be free» (Process 74).

But theologically we may still find the instinct of the New Testament synthesis significant, that in God himself there is a fullness and perfection that is unchanging and outside space and time, and that it is this which makes God the proper telos for a creation in which the mystery of that fullness is unpacked only through the ages of the evolutionary process, which passes through a series of increasingly critical stages and is now precariously poised in a dependence on the rational response of free creatures.

In God, Power, and Evil in response to the traditional question as to why God created free beings, I said: «Of course, in process thought all actualities have some freedom, so that question has to be modified to ask, Why did God bring forth creatures with high degrees of freedom?&raquIn God, Power, and Evil in response to the traditional question as to why God created free beings, I said: «Of course, in process thought all actualities have some freedom, so that question has to be modified to ask, Why did God bring forth creatures with high degrees of freedom?&raquin response to the traditional question as to why God created free beings, I said: «Of course, in process thought all actualities have some freedom, so that question has to be modified to ask, Why did God bring forth creatures with high degrees of freedom?&raquin process thought all actualities have some freedom, so that question has to be modified to ask, Why did God bring forth creatures with high degrees of freedom?»

In fact, Bonhoeffer declares that «God is worshiped first by the earth, «21 which might raise questions about worship as an act of free creatures toward a Creator.

Watch free movies in Wake Forest, explore nature at an ecostation in Raleigh, learn about birds in Carrboro or exploring a Raleigh park to discover night creatures this week.

Catch the «Shadow Ceremony» for Raleigh's groundhog at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, go for an evening hike and search for owls and other nocturnal creatures at Lake Crabtree County Park in Morrisville, learn about teeth and get a FREE dental screening at the Poe Center in Raleigh, experience Native American culture at a pow wow in Durham and enjoy pay - what - you - can admission to Kidzu Children's Museum in Chapel Hill.

Occasionally they were acquitted — a donkey on trial for lewd sexual acts, for example, was freed after loyal supporters testified that she was «in all her habits of life a most honest creature».