Sentences with phrase «of human understanding rather»

They understand logical limits as arising out of the limitations of human understanding rather than being based upon the nature of existence (Griffin, «Response» 257).

Not exact matches

It's crucial you understand the value of coming across as relatable and human rather than hiding behind a corporate wall.

There are a variety of reasons for this gap in understanding: The time gap between discovery research and the translation of that discovery into a therapeutic or a commercial product can take decades, and public and political attention spans are short; the natural human inclination is to pay more attention to things that don't work rather than things that do.

Maybe have a little humility and admit you can't understand, rather than pretend you can demolish — in your mind — a human legacy that has endured through thousands of years and continues to this day to inspire and transform people from all walks of life and faiths.

Rather, I have always taken his question to suggest that only the most rigorous theological approach will be equal to the challenge of understanding what bas undoubtedly been the most complex interreligious relationship in human history.

You will run into trouble whenever you parcel out God's Word, rather than understanding the Bible as a progression of revelations and solution to the human condition, with the common thread and purpose of Jesus Christ running throughout from beginning to end, to further the glory of God.

But though I will argue for this teleological view of nature and human nature from empirical premises and from reason, my purpose here is not to debate or attempt to prove this point, but rather to illustrate how some teleological understanding of nature and human nature is a necessary premise for the idea of environmental stewardship.

One might go further and point out that the concept of «person» helps us understand human dignity as something deriving from the fact of one's intrinsic being» rather than from the extent of freestanding autonomy, the «quality of life,» that a person might demonstrate.

And even if there is generally an improved understanding of God, to say that this is because of a progressive divine revelation rather than because of our own increased understanding through the years is tantamount to saying that our earlier ignorance is God's fault for not revealing more sooner, It hardly seems necessary to blame human ignorance on a divine coyness, or to picture God rationing out carefully increased doses of self - revelation.

The union is to be understood as the taking up of human nature into the divine rather than of the lowering of the divine nature to the conditions of the human.

Everything in the Jewish and Christian understanding of God would be lost if God were thought to be a static and inert being rather than the living deity who acts in nature, history, and human experience.

I would suggest that Caryn and NP are arguing that human beings sit in judgement of the scripture and God, or rather «god», since a God whom we fix to our understanding can't really be «God».

Our belief in God «is built up, rather, out of a number of metaphysical moves and claims which, when they cumulate into a full - blown understanding of reality, and of the human place in this reality, constitute a theocentric world picture.»

In spiritual healing as Eddy understood it, the human mind does not «do» something to another mind; rather, it witnesses through prayer and self - purification to the presence of the God supremely revealed through Jesus Christ.

I shall not endorse Royce's own conception of the Trinity in this book, since it is more Sabellian or modalistic than genuinely Trinitarian.3 Rather, my intention is first to summarize Royce's understanding of human community, then to make clear how it corresponds to a democratically organized structured society within a Whiteheadian perspective, and finally to apply this understanding of community to the Trinity in order to clarify the notion of God as a community of divine persons.

Whitehead's philosophy requires a broader conception of time, for example, one which will allow for the reality of the past in the present, a concept that the traditional metaphysician would likely judge as intuitively false, leading to the additional judgment that much of human experience is appearance rather than reality, a position which we reject, having come to a greater understanding of Whitehead's metaphysics.

To understand the Bible as a human product rather than as a divine product makes all the difference in how Christians understand worship, their relationship to God, their concept of mission and evangelism, and their attitude to people of other faiths.

Rather than ground their discussion in biblical reflection and careful observation of play itself, Christians have most often been content to allow Western culture to shape their understanding of the human at play.

The difference between I - it and I - Thou is not carried over from the German to the English in translation, but the difference is important in indicating the two stages of Buber's insight into man — first, that he is to be understood, in general, in terms of his relationships rather than taken in himself; second, that he is to be understood specifically in terms of that direct, mutual relation that makes him human.

That is, when men had learned to understand God as a person and his will as a body of moral teaching, they continued to recognize his supreme importance for human life, but his actual present effectiveness became a matter of belief rather than of immediate apprehension.

It appears that McGrath has got too sucked into the Popperian insight that human understandings of the world are «theory laden» (p. 61)-- wherein human culture rather than human nature is made not just intrinsic to explanations of observations, but determinative.

If such talk is construed objectively, as asserting that God is in some way the object of human experience, the fact that «God» must be understood to express a nonempirical concept means that no empirical evidence can possibly be relevant to the question of whether the concept applies and that, therefore, God must be experienced directly rather than merely indirectly through first experiencing something else.

Gaudium et Spes, as the constitution is normally referred to, based many of its reflections upon the following insight: «The human race is passing from a rather static concept of the order of things to a more dynamic, evolutionary one» (n. 5) Its authors, as well as Ronald Knox 20 years earlier and to some degree Rene Descartes 350 years earlier, recognised that such an understanding was invited by the method of the new sciences.

Such a commitment to Jesus amid the claims and counterclaims of a secular society needs to be understood rather than disparaged, and, if possible, directed toward a larger vision of Jesus and his message for the totality of human life.1

That God's love, manifest in diverse ways throughout the duration of the universe, might come to a full and unsurpassable self - expression in an individual human being who lived and died in the Middle East almost two thousand years ago does not seem incongruous with what we now understand about the nature of an evolving universe, especially if we regard religion as a phenomenon emergent from the universe rather than just something done on the earth by cosmically homeless human subjects.

This is not to say humans will worship Science as a Deity but rather, the understanding of the relationship between all things will be far clearer than the perspective humans have now that Science and Spirituality are two separate things.

It is simply because Germany's leading exegetes have correctly understood the demythologized meaning of the New Testament kerygma, that they have looked through the kerygma not directly to a principle inherent in human nature, but rather to Jesus as the event in which transcendence becomes possible.

In the process, Kugel also asserts that the existence of religion is best understood through the limitations of human existence rather than through the order in nature that points toward a Creator.

What he opposes most stridently in this book is not religious doubt itself or attempts to understand religion as a human construct or a biological phenomenon, but rather what he sees as a very artificial and incomplete view of human nature and its purpose: the very presumption that religion can be explained away as unnecessary and that such materialistic perspectives could be definitive or anywhere near ultimately satisfactory for beings who are obviously designed to crave so much more than mere birth, death, and extinction.

Rather, it reflected a less individualized understanding of existence, in which what persisted were impersonal processes that gained particularized expression in human experience.

I favor the interpretation that in the beginning, God didn't create physical light, but rather the «Light of Understanding» in humans who were still not much more than animals.

The recommendation made by the United Church's Executive Council in 1973, if difficult to implement, is the appropriate stance: «It [the Executive Council] recommends to associations that in the instance of considering a stated homosexual's candidacy for ordination the issue should not be his / her homosexuality as such, but rather the candidate's total view of human sexuality and his / her understanding of the morality of its use.»

From this we learn that the beatific vision does not cancel out our personality or God's, but rather gives us the measure by which we may understand all human possibility, and it places sociability at the heart of divine union, It is a profoundly ecclesial vision.

Rather, the contrast term was some other way of understanding, having to do with guiding human action («practical» understanding) and with making things («productive» understanding).

But insofar as there is real discontinuity, insofar as the apprehension of the holy is direct and not mediated by the community, or insofar as the understanding of the human situation is the result of radically independent reflection, we have to do with a prophet, a seer, or a philosopher, rather than with a theologian.

I think it boils down to a truly uninformed, ignorant understanding o lactation and human biology / infant needs rather than any hatred / disdain of women as females.

Rather, the solution lies in reframing your understanding of your parenting identity — the part of you that became the steward of another human.

The human relationship between the child and the teacher is the basis for healthy learning, for the acquiring of understanding and knowledge rather than just information.

On the basis of her experience, Hannah Arendt concluded that human rights — understood as rights obtained regardless of one's citizenship — were a noble idea, but rather scarce in reality.

[2] Rather such practice often masks the extensive human rights abuses committed by the Ugandan army during the war by accentuating only the «local» dynamics of violence and redirects popular understanding of the conflict away from the structural inequalities held up by the Ugandan state and its foreign backers.

«Motivation to listen carefully and courteously to the teacher or one's fellow pupils rests on a desire to win a free can of cola rather than from a growing understanding among class members of their interdependence as human beings,» it added.

Experiments in the 1990s indicated that great apes and some monkeys do understand deception, but that their understanding of the minds of others is probably implicit rather than explicit as it is in adult humans.

Spelke, an unabashed optimist, believes our growing understanding of cognitive abilities will eventually reduce, rather than inspire, divisions about our human qualities.

Rather than saying that something like the human eye is too complicated to understand, so a supernatural intrusion must have enabled it, we are saying that it is possible because of a scientific theory that has been under development for 150 years and has been reinforced by the fossil record and now by the molecular record.

Just as humans benefit from having five senses rather than just one, employing a variety of intellectual approaches vastly expands our ability to understand the complex world around us.

Nevertheless, he stops short of concluding that it is a «universal» or «hard - wired» feature of language, rather than a strategy that humans have developed over time to make themselves better understood.

In the course of human progress, it has been far easier to understand the things we make, rather than what makes us.

To use human DNA in a cow's egg will only create confusion rather than understanding of reproductive technology.

It would rather seem that humans were feeding both themselves and many other animals deficient diets because they didn't understand the laws of nature.

What sets me apart from most nutritionists is my passion for science and a thorough understanding of the human body, which enables me to treat the root cause of imbalance, rather than Band - Aid the symptoms.