Sentences with phrase «from older human»
But this process — even when taking skin cells from an older human — doesn't guarantee stem cells with «older» properties.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/ Not exact matches
John spent his life breaking barriers, from defending our freedom as a decorated Marine Corps fighter pilot in World War II and Korea, to setting a transcontinental speed record, to becoming, at age 77, the oldest human to touch the stars.
It was unclear how far the court would go to shield businesses and perhaps individuals as well from the human rights lawsuits under the 223 - year - old Alien Tort Statute.
The main difference between the old AlphaGo AIs and the new one is that one learns how to play Go from human data and one doesn't.
From the 18 - year - old intern to the 72 - year - old seasoned professional, human resources professionals need to find a balance between them -LSB-...]
Its product suite addresses the entire human life - cycle, from infancy to old age, and comprises ingredients in products ranging from infant formula to nutritional supplements, as well as branded medical foods, sold only under a doctor's supervision.
They want a respite from the temporal and transitory, a place where they might without embarrassment engage permanent questions of human life» not unlike that old - fashioned method employed by Socrates.
Second: The Creation tale is simply a way for early humans to explain mans creation and «fall» from God's predetermined path... The old testament is full of stuff more related to philosophy and health advice then «Gods word» However, this revelation has not made me less of a christian... In Contrast to those stuck in «the old ways» regarding faith (not believing in neanderthals and championing the claim that earth is only 6000 years old), I believe God created the universe on the very principle of physics and evolution (and other sciencey stuff)... Thus the first clash of atoms was the first step in the billionyear long recipe in creating the universe, the galaxies, the stars, the planets, life itself and us.
«Older people face enormous challenges, and I've been on your great programme before talking about how difficult it is for an older person with dementia, how difficult it is for an older person whose only vistors - human contact - every day is the 15 minutes they get from some kind of carer.&rOlder people face enormous challenges, and I've been on your great programme before talking about how difficult it is for an older person with dementia, how difficult it is for an older person whose only vistors - human contact - every day is the 15 minutes they get from some kind of carer.&rolder person with dementia, how difficult it is for an older person whose only vistors - human contact - every day is the 15 minutes they get from some kind of carer.&rolder person whose only vistors - human contact - every day is the 15 minutes they get from some kind of carer.»
Most importantly, note this: I am a Christian, I'm gay, I'm a recovering alcoholic, I believe in Evolution, I believe the universe is 13 billion years old and that the Earth is 4.5 or so billion years old, I believe man evolved from lower primates and that Adam was the first man who God gave a soul and sentience, I do not believe in hell but I do believe in Satan, I do not believe the Bible is a book of rules meant to imprison man or condemn him but that it is rather a «Human Existence for Dummies» guide, I believe Christ was the son of God but I do not believe Christianity is the only «valid» religion, I do not believe atheists will go to hell, while the English Bible says God should be feared, the Hebrew word used for fear, «yara», such as that used in the Book of Job, actually means respect / reverence, not fear as one would fear death or a spider.
The old religion was more human, more tolerant of shifts from one god to another, and less likely to breed fiercely embattled heresies.
It is the very old attitude, described at length in the Bible, of human pride, which has always tried to break away from God; it is the «will to power.»
Stupid things such as, «Jesus wants me to be rich», «the Earth is 6000 years old and every human is descended from Adam and Eve», and «my ignorant beliefs should be imposed on everyone by the government, as long as I don't have to pay for it.»
Few factors were as influential in Jesus» teaching as the seriousness with which he appropriated from his Old Testament heritage these home relationships as symbolizing divine - human kinship, and the insight with which he enlarged and deepened this use of the family.
Funny how creationists adamantly refuse to accept that they evolved from something so almost human as monkey, but have absolutely no problem blindly believing that they came from a mud dummy blown to life by a bearded old white guy.
The Gnostic and Marcionite position represented one extreme: The entire Old Testament comes from the evil demiurge who trapped humans in materiality.
But the Bible from beginning to end is complete and whole for what we need as humans to know what it is that God expects from us and what he will do to change this wicked old system into his glorious new system ruled by Christ his son.
Humans from Adam + Eve (and incest), really old people, parting oceans, languages from fallen towers, feeding thousands from few bread loafs, virgins giving birth, rising from the dead.
To an alien life form living on another planet billions of light years from us the death of an 8 year old human, while tragic to us, might be linked by what Einstein called «s p o o k y action at a distance» to an alien birth making it one of their most joyous occasions.
I don't agree with the old «humans evolved from monkeys» deal though, for 2 reasons.
From the stupid child to the wisest old man, they are in the soul of every human being.
(For instance, on the very day on which I write this page, the post brings me some aphorisms from a worldly-wise old friend in Heidelberg which may serve as a good contemporaneous expression of Epicureanism: «By the word «happiness» every human being understands something different.
Creation from nothing, the origin of death among humans, the murder of Abel by Cain, a cataclysmic flood of judgement, the righteous judgement of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Mosaic origin of the Torah, manna from heaven, the reliability of Deuteronomy, the driving out of the Canaanites, Isaiah's authorship of the servant songs, and so on — it's almost as if Jesus and his followers went out of their way to validate all of the most awkward apologetic curveballs in the Old Testament just to make life difficult for post-Enlightenment Western interpreters.
Okay, so, overturning an old law that forbids women from riding bicycles may not exactly be a giant leap forward for human rights, but from North Korea, it might as...
Okay, so, overturning an old law that forbids women from riding bicycles may not exactly be a giant leap forward for human rights, but from North Korea, it might as well be the Emancipation Proclamation.
Yeah this coming from the same crowd that includes Sarah Palin who believes the earth is 6000 years old and dinosaurs and humans co-existed because she saw a dinosaur footprint and a human footprint on the same fossil!
For century after century, spreading slowly to every continent and country and among every race on earth, this action has been done, in every conceivable human circumstance, for every conceivable human need from infancy and before it to extreme old age and after it, from the pinnacles of earthly greatness to the refuge of fugitives in the caves and dens of the earth.
For example, the idea of «a person» is, on the one hand, strange to the Old Testament and, on the other hand, often indistinguishable today from that of «a human being.»
From our human perspective, a God who enters into human affairs in the way that God did in the Old Testament looks guilty.
It is the Reason of Plato at work, freeing us from old, stale habits of thought in the expectation that out of the resulting conversation, from the very turmoil and confusion of interpretations at war with one another, can emerge in good time a better understanding and a better practice of what it is to become and be within human communities.
He was not, for example, particularly hospitable to the American realists» attempts to reconceive the very notion of experience upon which empiricism should be founded, preferring instead to join Moore and others in England in a virtually uncritical acceptance of the older «commonsense» notion of experience as human (and usually visual) perception derived from their seventeenth - century cultural predecessors Locke and Hume.2
While Paul's thought is by no means always clear, and perhaps from letter to letter not always exactly the same, it is nevertheless certain that his concept of resurrection can be clearly distinguished from that of the traditional «bodily resurrection».27 Paul does not speak in terms of the «same body» but rather in terms of a new body, whether it be a «spiritual body», 28 «the likeness of the heavenly man», 29 «a house not made by human hands, eternal and in heaven», 30 or, a «new body put on» over the old.31 In using various figures of speech to distinguish between the present body of flesh and blood and the future resurrection body, he seems to be thinking of both bodies as the externals which clothe the spirit and without which we should «find ourselves naked».32 But he freely confesses that the «earthly frame that houses us today ’33 may, like the seed, and man of dust, be destroyed, but the «heavenly habitation», which the believer longs to put on, is already waiting in the heavenly realm, for it is eternal by nature.
From the valley the mountain rises sharply, carrying the eye upward to the proud old city that has crowned that spot of ground for more centuries than any other human habitation can claim.
How can it claim to bridge the divisions in human society — divisions between Greek and barbarian, bond and free, between white and black, Aryan and non-Aryan, employer and employed — if, when men are drawn into it, they find that another division has been added to the old ones — a division of Catholic from Evangelical, or Episcopalian from Presbyterian or Independent?
Your flawed book claims humanity is a mere few thousand years old while actual evidence from cave art to DNA show humans origins are much much older by a factor of 10.
The aristocrats of old thought of themselves as different kinds of beings from most human beings, but they deluded themselves.
Lessons will also be drawn from the courageous example of the Salvadoran people as they work to challenge the old order and replace it with a system more responsive to human needs.
If in the Old Testament, in Judaism, and in the New Testament, the unworldly takes the form of a future hope, of eschata — «last things» in the traditional sense — that is only one among other possible conceptions of man's relation to the unworldly, though no doubt it enshrines a genuine insight into human existence, namely that from a human perspective the eschaton can only be future.
-- Even though it's only a week and a half old, in this experiment, those who are deeply religious and claim to be «Good people of God» who should love all their fellow humans have removed the income from this man's life with complete disregard for the well - being of his family members as well.
[40] For him all human learning and philosophy is ultimately derived from Moses, who is «older than all writers.»
For him all human learning and philosophy is ultimately derived from Moses, who is «older than all writers.»
As the messianic events of liberation in the Old Testament were not a result of human efficacy but rather a gift, an act of power that transcended the given possibilities of history, the Christian communities saw in Jesus an act of God's freedom... the power that creates a new future is something new, it is freedom from beyond history that is freedom for history.
«So let me get this straight, you have two - way conversations with invisible spirits, you think the earth is 10,000 years old, you believe the world was once covered in water (about 5,000 years ago), you believe your invisible sky father came to earth in human form after a virgin birth, then rose as a zombie, from the dead, then ascended into an invisible sky city... all because the first people on earth ate and apple before proceeding on with decades of incest... am I getting this?»
The personal characteristics of the change are to be seen in a sense of liberation from old rigidities and fears, a lessening of defensiveness, more openness and courage for human relationship, and experimentation in meeting old and new situations.
To speak so does, I think, demand a high measure of participation in its story, and an effort to understand it first in its own terms — to grasp the Old Testament's own fundamental assertion that its story from beginning to end is the account of the historical action of God seeking the reconciliation of man and God, the human and the divine, the creature and the Creator.
In the Old Testament, God is known as Creator only because he is first known as Sustainer - Redeemer.27 The creation faith of the Old Testament nowhere gives the impression that its Primary interest is in origins as origins; rather is it a faith that speaks from, and back to, historical human existence and in its articulation is concerned to say what man is and what in that faith his existence means.
From such influences came an established doctrine, the orthodoxy of a large part of the Old Testament, that all human suffering presupposes corresponding sin.
As in the Old Testament, therefore, the idea of God had been progressively formulated, not so much in the light of philosophic disquisition as in the light of his mighty acts for Israel, from the deliverance out of Egypt to the least and latest sign of his effective control over human affairs, so in the New Testament the idea of God was centered not in a concept but in a deed.
And so Old Adam still will have his day As celebrant at feasts some people keep For flesh and blood that never wake from sleep, This bread and wine of human show and play.
@World..., I'm still trying to reconcile the statement,»... atheists want to take a limited 2000 or so year old childish concept of God and refute it...» with «Nothing has ever changed about God, just human ability to fully perceive and understand IT...» What is the «limited 2000... year old» concept of God that atheists want to refute and how is it different from the current concept of God.