Sentences with phrase «human interpretations of»

Says Booker, «Through my work, I respond to visual phenomena occurring in nature as well as human interpretations of these naturally occurring forms.»

Every witness we offer, each political solution we try in anticipation of the manifest reign of God, reflects our finite, all - too - human interpretations of our inspirations and visions.

What I DO N'T do is accept, without question, the fallible human interpretations of God.

I reject no portion of Scripture, but I do reject some human interpretations of Scripture.

Liza, even if the Bible were «inerrant» our all too human interpretation of it isn't.

Religion is just a humans interpretation of it..

I suppose if we could revisit ourselves in a thousand years, look at the historical recordings of ourselves, we will see there are factual basis, but sprinkled with human interpretation of our present time now by those who have appointed themselves as the keepers of what we do, just as the recordings of the Bible were done by those appointees trying to capture there presnt now... yet sprinkled with their best interpretation of what they new then.

Although God is infinite, the historic channels for his self - revelation and the human interpretation of this self - disclosure are both finite.

But the human interpretation of that evidence can be very wrong indeed

In the end (which is actually near the beginning of the manuscript), Goldhaber notes that VAMs are «distinct» as compared to classroom observations, because they offer «an objective measure that does not rely on human interpretation of teacher practices, and by design, [they offer] a system in which teachers are evaluated relative to one another rather than relative to an absolute standard (i.e., it creates a distribution in which teachers can be ranked).

I.e. tech is not a complete answer, even the very best AI systems need human interpretation of the findings.

Not exact matches

«My interpretation is that there is still an openness to him,» says Jacqueline Breslin, director of human capital services at TriNet, an HR outsourcing firm that conducted one of the surveys.

One interpretation for the severity of rebuke is that the master's investment was primarily human, not monetary.

The Bible is a book, and was «edited» by humans for the telling of a good «story», as with any «good book» there can be many (mis --RRB- interpretations of the text.

I don't know of any legitimate theologians or Scriptural interpretations vouching for humans and animals and tools to get married.

After reading several of the posts on the «interpretation of mythical texts into a book called the bible» one is left to wonder how a being who is supposed to have created the universe would permit what is often referred to as «his inerrant words»... to get so screwed up... you would think he / she / it would have been keeping a close eye on a book that he / she / it wanted to have in print for... mass distribution... it is not not a womder the bible is messed up the way it is... it is a «human» construct... only humans could mess a book up that badly... gods do nor make mistakes... except for Rick Santorum

Brennan's pursuit of amending the Constitution through interpretation by unelected officials would cause him, among other things, to vote repeatedly to strike away the legal protections that a world dead and gone had traditionally afforded unborn human beings.

Fairy tales without consequence also lose the potential for metaphor — in interpretation, werewolves» involuntary transformations could symbolize countless human realities, from mental and physical illness to fear of our own sinful natures.

Unfortunately, flawed humans sometimes render flawed interpretations of it.

In some cases this appeal to inner intuition might take the form of the claim that each of us has a «non-sensuous experience of the self» which is «both prior to our interpretation of our sense - knowledge and more important as source for the more fundamental questions of the meaning of our human experience as human selves» (BRO 75).

He criticizes textualism (a mode of judicial interpretation) by citing the author's attempt to «show how lawmakers are engaged in the creative work of ensuring that natural law... is given effect in our human living.»

That is, we must establish a new concept based on a balance between these two ideas, thereby achieving an interpretation of the harmonious relationship that is aspired to between human being and the rest of nature.

Metaphysical realism, understood in a processive way, requires this triple sense of objectivity: novel human doings in need of guidance, long - enduring systems of belief that provide the schemata of interpretation by which that guiding can be done, and opportunistic skill in sculpting act and theory, fact and canon, into a coherent, fruitful basis for intelligent action.

Given these historical errors and oversights in both our biblical interpretation and our artistic engagement, we must support efforts to study and present a true, uncompromising picture of both the glory of God's creation and the depths of human folly.

The categories suited to the interpretation of nature are treated in Sein und Zeit as restrictive and devolved forms of the existentials of Dasein, and in general it is denied that nature has any Being outside of the ecstatic - horizonal disclosure space of human historicality.

Cardinal Ruini spoke of «false interpretations» of cosmic and biological evolution which «contribute more than a little to a purely naturalistic understanding of man» and which also lead to «the denial of the existence of a personal God distinct from the world» and the denial of «the transcendence of the human subject, made in the image and likeness of God».

It concerns the interpretation of what humans perceive.

So today, if a teacher begins to argue from Scripture that Jesus was either not fully divine or fully human, we'll rehearse the biblical passages and the traditional interpretations of those passages that have stood the test of time.

This model invites students to see the New Testament as the product of a profoundly human process of experience and interpretation, by which people of another age and place, galvanized by a radical religious experience, sought to understand both that experience and themselves in the light of the symbols made available to them by their culture.

It takes seriously the fact that humans always seek to understand and interpret their experiences, but that certain experiences force more radical and inclusive types of interpretation.

While this relativity can be interpreted to mean that values are wholly defined by the circumstances of culture and are merely expressions of cultural exigencies, the insistent pressures of the human conscience, oftentimes in contradiction to accepted cultural norms, render this interpretation doubtful.

For example, a realistic interpretation of the sentence, «The stone is gray, is that there exists independent of human experience an entity called a «stone» qualified in a distinctive way such that the term «gray» is appropriate to it.

And we have an interpretation of human existence as a movement toward love, accepted willingly or rejected selfishly with the inevitable consequences of human fulfillment or nonfulfillment.

In Israel, humans tended to distinguish themselves from the rest of nature, as did many interpretations of the book of Genesis by Christians.

In becoming a model, it has engendered wide - ranging interpretation of the relationship between God and human beings; if God is seen as father, human beings become children, sin can be seen as rebellious behavior, and redemption can be thought of as restoration to the status of favored offspring.

Consider, above all, the activity of what Whitehead calls «the final percipient occasion», i.e., the present occasion of human experience, in integrating its present visual experience, with all the complex interpretation involved therein, with previous experiences.

But neither the action itself nor its symbolic interpretation produces the effect it claims - that of benefiting life - making the ritual a violation of the deep convention protecting human life.

-- based on your interpretation of it, of course, which is the human method when reading a book.

Whereas Marx defined transcendence as the human beings» possibility to move towards the future with freedom and choice, so that they could shape their own destiny, Bonhoeffer gave a this - worldly interpretation of transcendence in which the experience of transcendence is Jesus «being there for others».

But we could too easily replace this shallowness by another, cruel as sentimental attitudes inevitably are, which leaves out of account the presence in human life of the sheerly irrevocable, of that which has been done, and it is now too late to undo, of the damage inflicted on others that can not be put right and that no interpretation can possible render edifying.

In every instance, however, whatever cast its story takes, a congregation derives its world view from the struggle of the entire field of human interpretation.

First, it must again be stressed that the eschatological message of Jesus, the preaching of the coming of the Kingdom and of the call to repentance, can be understood only when one considers the conception of man which in the last analysis underlies it, and when one remembers that it can have meaning only for him who is ready to question the habitual human self - interpretation and to measure it by this opposed interpretation of human existence.

Any single work of literature is a recognizable bit of the gigantic circle of human interpretation.

However, combine this with the irrefutable observation of humanity that would see human evil as universal in its scope, and combine this with the fact that the VAST majority of human beings disagreed with your interpretation of essential human goodness, and the force of the conviction steels itself.

There is no sign that is not also a human act of interpretation, and there can be no riskier way than this to enter into the realm of signs.

Mathew's «Noble Lectures,» published under the title The Spiritual Interpretation of History, were an eloquent account of the march of human history toward this personal end.

What power is it that is prepared to trust that a human will choose the latter, infinitely less plausible interpretation, and then graciously cover over the vulnerability of his bride - to - be and allow the sign to flourish?

Again: how extraordinary is a power that is gentle and confident enough to enter into the practical consequences of a human act of interpretation?

The problem may not be with rights per se, whose articulation is invaluable to our conception of modern republicanism (and may even help more fully articulate what is true about Christian morality), but with an interpretation that takes rights as the whole of moral discourse and therefore, understands the abstract Lockean individual to be a comprehensive account of the human person.

We are certain that there can be no conflict between true science and true theology since God is the source of all truth; conflicts only arise from discrepancies in human knowledge, understanding, and interpretation.»