Sentences with phrase «meaning of the event»

That's because your memory is designed to focus on the significance and meaning of events in your life rather than the details.

They talk in fragmented ways, without fully understanding the full consequences of meaning of events.

A third view is that miracles are faith - symbols, that they are dramatic representations of the inner meaning of events to those who witnessed them with the eye of faith.

Other variables include a child's history with trauma, the ability of adults to make meaning of the event, and how adults react to the tragedy themselves.

A substance comes into being by means of that event which establishes its essence, i.e., an enduring object comes into being by means of the initial member occasion of that society which first constitutes its defining characteristic.

Increased the organization's exposure by means of events and relationships arranged on a quarterly basis

When the divine meaning of the event is made to depend upon views of Jesus» divinity and when the presence of Christ in the church is made to depend upon a belief in the Resurrection, we cut the solid ground out from under the whole Christian position; we invest the purely speculative with an importance it does not possess and rely on it to perform a function it can not perform; and we open the door to discord and division.

God, the spirit, must give them life; there is no life without the fleshly events, but there is no life either without God's spiritual gift of faith, the ability to discover the true meaning of the events of fleshly history.

The clue to the interpretation of whatever intimations of the divine are given us in our common life is provided by the first century event to which we find ourselves inevitably looking back and by the historical community through which the concrete meaning of that event has been conveyed to us and in which, therefore, the event itself is in a sense perpetuated.

By «mythological» I refer to the suprahistorical elements in the story which came into being within the Christian community as the only possible way to express this transcendent and redemptive meaning of the event.

But they remind us of the fact that the death of Christ was not only the vivid and poignant focus of the church's memory of Jesus (as death is always likely to be in our memory of another), but also that it became almost at once the symbol of what was realized to be the crucial meaning of the event.

The «church» was formed by his followers, who fought like cats and dogs over the meaning of those events.

Like Burris in the theater, they do not understand the meaning of the events that overwhelm their lives.

Human beings naturally cling to life, and the witnessing of the death of others, especially those near and dear, and the anticipation of one's own passing away compel reflection upon the meaning of these events.

I grieve for a lost opportunity whenever I attend a baptism in which the preacher fails to preach on the meaning of the event.

However distinct the metaphysical context in which she defined the meaning of these events, Eddy saw them as having revelatory meaning precisely because they were historical events.

They were «seers», i.e., those who see deeply into the meanings of events.

It is by no means clear that the disciples discerned the meaning of this event.

This is why theological investigation and reflection, insofar as such endeavors are relevant to the situation, are absolutely essential; one learns to think theologically about the meaning of events in his daily life, to look on the world with all its difficulties and problems as God's world, to look on the work of Christ at least in Ramsey's minimum statement («God did something through Jesus Christ»), and then to respond in terms of his developing onlook.

Both Paul's own view and that of Acts represent attempts to understand the meaning of an event which in its actuality and in its effects transcended ordinary categories of explanation.

Well actually, this guy, if you really knew your history, there were HUGE fights after the death of Jesus, (who, curiously enough NEVER called himself «the Christ»), between the Jerusalem community, (which had many EYE WITNESSES in it), and Paul, (who NEVER met, nor heard Jesus say anything), about what was the meaning of those events.

(In a sense, also, the writings of Hesiod and Thucydides in the Greek world are part of the rise of historical awareness, but their histories were primarily chronicles of events whereas the Hebrew historians were concerned more explicitly with the meaning of events.)

The story is true if that representation is true and adequate; it is false only if the meaning of the event is misrepresented or obscured.

Can the heights and depths of the meaning of the event be expressed in any other way?

What an opportunity for the Churches to interpret the meaning of this event!

Thus although the event took place on earth, the story, which embodies the meaning of the event, begins in heaven and ends there.

The story is not an account of the event, but a representation of the meaning of the event.

Finally, and equally appropriately, Exodus preserves the record of the physical structures and objects by which the meaning of the event was kept alive and contemporaneous, and through which the torah was preserved and expanded.

Would it simply say that the meaning of events is different when seen in the context of a biblical view?

It is what faith decrees to be the essential structure and meaning of the event.

It is the meaning of the events that is of supreme importance to the author of the Fourth Gospel.

Purely formal evaluations of the meaning of an event or a person in the immediate historical sequence are of course necessary; but a judgment of value depends upon a point of view which the writer imports into the history and by which he measures the historica1 phenomena.

Chapters which follow deal with a scientific presentation of the event, with the hope that it can strengthen and inform those persons of faith who must deal with the meaning of the event as a revelation of God.

The differences among the books and among the individual authors are due to the varying ways in which these authors understood the meaning of the events and the divine plan, and to the varying circumstances in which they wrote.

What he meant, I think, is that the meaning of an event can not be separated from the way in which it is framed.