Sentences with phrase «impossible for a human being»

Because it is impossible for human beings to be free if their currency is a fraud and they are at the same time prohibited from owning honest money.

Faith = the ability to believe in something in spite of the fact that science can PROVE what you believe in is impossible (it is absolutely impossible for a human being to die, be dead for 3 days and rise from the dead, still haven't been able to get someone to walk on water, and if I could turn water into wine, I'd work from home).

This double finitude implies that self - sufficiency is impossible for a human being.

The grace of God is so outlandish and foreign to every human way of thinking and living, I believe that it is absolutely impossible for any human being to place too much emphasis on grace.

Don't care what anyone says — near impossible for a human being to referee a modern match with any degree of certainty.

These types of would be nearly impossible for a human beings to conduct manually considering the human mind is not imbued with such computing prowess.

It is impossible for a human being to not have a skill.

Not exact matches

Considering the large number of recording artists who will be in attendance at the Grammys, and the many thousands of photos and videos that will be taken during the event, the Recording Academy will be able to rely on the Watson artificial intelligence platform to sort through reams of content and «create unique fan experiences» with the type of speed and efficiency that would be impossible for humans to do manually.

NASA has been a household name for Americans since the»60s when it achieved the seemingly impossible, landing humans on the Moon.

«The harmful misconception about entrepreneurship in our region is that an entrepreneur is some sort of young genius who has an idea impossible to understand for the normal human being,» Fadel says.

But with all these AI touchpoints come data deluge and complexities — making it impossible for humans alone to analyze, optimize and execute on it.

I personally ping - ponged back and forth between religion and non-religion for a long time before accepting that we humans are truly only guessing at things, and likely inventing things, that are impossible to know for sure.

It is hard to believe and seems impossible for humans to do such things.

It's more important because, as Hart rightly diagnoses, the modern mind is trapped in various false dichotomies — like thinking one has to be a personal theist or an anti-theist, or that the human person is either a ghost in a machine or a machine - generating ghost — and these false dichotomies themselves make it impossible for us to think rationally about topics such as natural law.

The narrator of The Fall thus explains the death of Jesus in light of an inherent human guilt: it was just as impossible for Jesus to justify his existence as it is for any one, so that the real reason why he went to his death is that he knew he was not altogether innocent.

Given the realities of human diversity, it is next to impossible for us to engage in intimate spiritual fellowship with people whose vision of Christianity we find skewed.

On the other hand, it is through His human nature that Jesus suffers — it is impossible for the divine nature to suffer.

For example, He works miracles through His divine nature — it is impossible for human nature to work miracles (that's why they are miraclesFor example, He works miracles through His divine nature — it is impossible for human nature to work miracles (that's why they are miraclesfor human nature to work miracles (that's why they are miracles!).

According to our present knowledge of physics, as already pointed out, the Second Law of Thermodynamics presents us in the material realm with the picture of a running - down universe which will ultimately be impossible for human life.

For while we are thus speaking foolishly of human relationships, we may suppose a difference of mind between them such as to render an understanding impossible.

It seems incredible to them, for example, that the marvelous, intricate, and dynamic adjustments constantly made by the cells in the human body, apart from which human life is impossible, are somehow self - explanatory.

Again, the unspoken assumption is that what is important in the differences between religions has nothing to do with how close their theological descriptions of God correspond to reality, either because those differences don't exist or because they are impossible for us to judge, differences too subtle to be detected by us, lost in the «noise» of our human limitations, personal history, genetics, and so on.

With his overwhelming sense of fallen human nature, Melville grants little room for the operation of grace, and the reformation his characters become convinced they need is usually impossible for them to obtain.

But life is not found here either, for sex is one human being sharing with another on the deepest level, and this is patently impossible when love and community are separated from sex or when one relates to a sex partner as a thing, as impersonal as a partner from a rent - a-body agency.

Whether by «perfect» we mean simply sinless, or whether we mean perfect in knowledge and love and judgment and other aspects as well, it is simply impossible for anyone who is human to be this.

If we are «collectively destined» for God's kingdom, then divine rule already exercises «determinative efficacy» and human freedom becomes ipso facto impossible (TWP 67).

Yet even if we were to grant to human beings the capacity for full empathy of emotion, it would still be impossible for a single human being to feel contradictory emotions.

To speak of sexual undertakings in the way implied by the traditional marriage rites of the churches is to deny people access to a basic human good from the start and for reasons that are difficult if not impossible for modern people to grasp.

If, as I think orthodox Christianity ultimately teaches, and as Solzhenitsyn's «Father Severyan» plainly teaches in November 1916 (excerpted here), that humans are inherently prone to violence (and that the lesser evil of state - derived war is the price we pay for living not in anarchy but in «sword - bearing» states), then not only is 1) contrary to the New Testament's real teaching, but 2) is impossible and 3) requires a coercion that will bring with it very deleterious consequences.

Yet since this is God's Last Will & Testament, and since God can not die, it was impossible for the Will to come into effect unless God became human and died as a human, which is what He did in Jesus Christ.

Unless the discussion in the preceding pages has entirely failed to make its point, it will be plain that what is being proposed in this book is (as I have said) a «de-mythologizing» of the inherited notions of «life after death», with their (to many of us) impossible assertions; and also the «re-mythologizing» — or better, the re-conceiving — of their implicit intention so that we may have a valid way of affirming the value and worth of human existence, its significance and importance for God, and its preservation in God as a reality which has affected the divine life and in God has acquired an enduring quality which nothing can take away.

Being human being we have a limited knowledge, we experiences impossibilities due to of our limited vision, thinking and approach but there is nothing limited or impossible for the CREBeing human being we have a limited knowledge, we experiences impossibilities due to of our limited vision, thinking and approach but there is nothing limited or impossible for the CREbeing we have a limited knowledge, we experiences impossibilities due to of our limited vision, thinking and approach but there is nothing limited or impossible for the CREATOR.

With that discovery it becomes impossible even for a moment to take seriously either a realistic metaphysics according to which metaphysical propositions state our empirical knowledge of the categorical characteristics of reality, or an idealistic or psychological metaphysics according to which these depend upon the way in which the human mind as such is always and everywhere constructed... We must start again at the beginning and construct a new metaphysical theory which will face the facts revealed by history.

Once one has given up as incredible and impossible (save for mythological purposes) the Greek idea of a god who comes down to earth and walks about as a human being, there are two possibilities open for the interpretation of Jesus Christ.

It is statistically impossible for so many things (i.e. life forms, plants, water, etc.) to have formed in concert and become what we now know as human life.

If it is always and everywhere difficult for human beings to hold in their minds seemingly contradictory tenets of Christianity, Silence makes the task feel impossible.

It is impossible for any human to look at anything «objectively», we all carry a perspective with us that is influenced by a mountain of factors.

Reinhold Niebuhr is less dualistic in that he stresses the relevance of love as an «impossible possibility» to every human situation, but he warns so continually against a sentimental substitution of love for the requirements of justice that the major impact of his thought is a dichotomy in which again justice, and not love, is the determining principle of social ethics.

The well - known phrase «impossible possibility» stands here in Niebuhr's thought for the warning that the pure love of God transcends human possibility.17 At the same time an element of uncalculating sacrificial giving of the self to the good of the other is possible for man.

However, where members find an affinity with one another primarily because of family and class affiliation, they will find it almost impossible to see that «the brothers and sisters for whom Christ died» are the whole human race.

As I have come to learn, it is impossible for a woman to get through a pregnancy without being acutely aware of the presence of another human life inside her own body.

The new Gender Architecture - a giant with clay feet standing on sand, not on the firm ground of reality and what is good for the human person, will sooner or later collapse, even if now, it seems virtually impossible to escape the cultural, political and anthropological tsunami it will inevitably provoke.

To give one specific example, it is surely impossible for us to conceive of what an electron's experience would be like, but we must conceive of it as some kind of experience or not conceive of it at all.1 Therefore, it is probably less misleading to state that human experience is the one keyhole through which man may catch a fleeting glimpse of the vast panorama of the universe instead of the clue that solves the riddles of the cosmos.

Therefore, humanism denies the possibility of a permanent unity between man and nature; and it asserts that, in the long run, no human actions or values will make any difference whatever.9 And Hartshorne expostulates that such a creed is impossible for man to live by.

Since the Christian Faith holds that as a law or an ideal, it is impossible of realization because of human alienation from God and that where it is realized even partially in history, it is realized as the result of the Divine Forgiveness freely given in Christ providing the motivation for mutual forgiveness among persons and peoples in their historical setting.

A simple truism, for a human to be happy when surrounded by misery is impossible.

The Biblical version — Impossible, since God hasn't bothered to provide a way for many of his human creation to be aware of the bible.

The human molecules are tightly packed together, and the more this is the case the more impossible it becomes for them, owing to their nature and structure, not to merge both physically and in spirit.

Actually, if you study the words spoken by Jesus and His responses (with objectivity of course which seems to be impossible for you), He is quite brilliant and remarkably lving and logical over the selfish dumb humans.

For Christians, this is an impossible position because of our understanding of the Imago Dei — the image of God, which has been uniquely gifted to human life.