Sentences with phrase «only present our experience»

For God has only his present experience, which includes his memories and his anticipations.

It takes the experience of lesbians — who are proudly and fully complicatedly lesbian — and says: «We can not only present our experience, we can actually present everyone's experience.

Not exact matches

They will be there not only to contribute conceptual ideas but also to help you present users with an experience that is efficient and pleasant from a user flow, navigation, and technical perspective.

It's probably not going to be possible to have a jury of people that have never heard of the bands, that have never heard the music, but the real question is, even with that understanding, can they only focus on the evidence that's being presented by the parties at trial and only use that evidence and nothing from their own life experience outside of the courtroom to make that decision?

Futurist, change management specialist and «X: The Experience When Business Meets Design» author Brian Solis sits down with The Young Turks» Cenk Uygur to talk about the past, present and future and how more and faster change is coming, and the only question is whether you're going to be a part of that change or a victim of it.

We arrive at a more attractive scientific generalization if we dismiss the apparent dualism between perception of the sheer present and memory of the past, and adopt instead the view that only the past literally gets itself experienced in its concrete actuality (MMCL 444)....

The factors of chief importance in the development of this theology were: (a) the Old Testament — and Judaism --(b) the tradition of religious thought in the Hellenistic world, (c) the earliest Christian experience of Christ and conviction about his person, mission, and nature — this soon became the tradition of the faith or the «true doctrine» — and (d) the living, continuous, ongoing experience of Christ — only in theory to be distinguished from the preceding — in worship, in preaching, in teaching, in open proclamation and confession, as the manifestation of the present Spiritual Christ within his church.

In other words, has your present income given you past experience / possessions, etc., that you are only now paying for?

Altizer's historico - existentialist period was characterized by a dialectical affirmation of the world of experience, which maximized a radical thrust into the profane only to transfigure its present form.

Other methods may give «religious» experiences, but only Christianity insists that the life of the spirit must be expressed within the terms of the present human predicament.

This traditional form of faith is the product of a divided consciousness: it can only know redemption as a reconciliation with an Other lying beyond itself, and must experience the actuality of the present as a world merely awaiting its transfiguration.

That original Islam is only hinted at in the Qur» an and the Hadith, which were written years after the prophet Mohammed had his mystical experience — just as the original precepts of Christianity are minimized and only obliquely presented in the New Testament and its «authorized» translations, interpretations and commentaries, which were written over many years, well after Jesus» ministry and Paul's mystical experience.

Also, attention to the experience of women has brought to light much about the past and present and the nature of reality in general that could have been learned only in this way.

As I analyze the human experience of time, the past flows into the present, not only our own but the past of the whole universe.

This experience taught me that if I present heaven only as an abstract realm where we are lost in wonder, love and praise before God, I may have said what is most important, but I have not said enough.

It is an interpretation that is intended to make sense of and give sense to the persisting fact that Jesus is not only a figure of the past but in some profoundly real way a present factor in the experience of the human race.

I think we'll still enjoy all the things we do now, along with things we can only dream of experiencing in this present life.

This activity can be effectively performed only as past experience can cumulatively provide help in the interpretation of present experience.

Tommy God has already forgiven you for your sin the moment you asked Jesus into your life and confessed him as Lord.From that point he paid for your sin in full past present future.It is not sin that stops us from being with the Lord so you are saved.The problem you are experiencing is the battle for your life in the here and now satan is out to destroy you and he knows our weaknesses.If you are honest there were already issues in your life that you struggled with and never got the victory over.So where do you go from here as i found myself in the same situation i was a christian but walking according to the flesh.God does nt change his mind he always loves us but because of our choices we distance ourselves from God.The issue is that we like sin thats our wicked hearts and to be fair we cant change our nature only Christ can do that our old nature must be crucified with Christ.The stumbling block is our pride we have to admit that we cant do it For me that was terribly difficult i was so independent thinking i could do anything but the truth was a made a real mess of things.I sense you are at a crossroads and are feeling desperate and confused.So as a brother in the Lord you need to confess your sin to God and tell him that you are weak -LCB- we all are -RCB- and that you cant do it in your strength -LCB- None of us can -RCB- but ask him to send the holy spirit to help you deal with the temptations and the sin that you struggle with and he will help you to change your life he will empower you as he did me.Rather than look at who you are look to Christ and walk in him and he will make you a new man and sin will not have dominion over you.Jesus came to set us free from bondage.Having once been a slave to sin i know what it is like to have been set free by the power of God and that is what Christ is offering you today.All it takes is a desire to change or repent and admit we cant do it and trust him to give you the strength to walk in him regards brentnz

But only our own specious present is directly experienced with any vividness; and it is from this direct experience that philosophy must, according to process philosophy, seek to generalize its understanding of the non-human world.

Further, that determination can not be only the influence of a past decision upon present experience; for then the present experience would still be fully determined from without, and the past decision in its turn would have been a product of determinism and chance.

For if the data of experience consisted only of universals, then the experiencing subject would have to infer the existence of other individual actual entities, just as Descartes claimed to infer the existence of a real man in the street from the sense - data present to his eyes.

Omniscience can only be used to express the at present apparently limitless possibilities of intelligible ordering of experience.

The distinction Hartshorne insists on making here as applied to our present question can be expressed by saying that, whereas mere experience or feeling of God can be not only direct but immediate, high - level thought or cognition of God, being mediated, as it is, by the conscious judgment or interpretation of such feeling, is of necessity mediate.

I gladly record my debt to Arthur Cushman McGiffert, Jr. and Anton Boisen, whose course, «Experience and Theology,» in The Chicago Theological Seminary opened up the relation of theology to psychology for me; to Seward Hiltner, Granger Westberg, and my present colleague, Earl Loomis, with each of whom I have taught courses on the relation of psychiatry and theology; and to William Oglesby of Union Seminary, Richmond, not only for his encouragement in the project I was undertaking, but for helpful criticism of the lectures.

But I would not call dying and rising again with Christ a subjective experience, for it can occur only through an encounter with the proclamation and the present act of God in it.

Let it be acknowledged then that Josephus is not a first - class historian; but the failure to recognize the validity of his facts, especially in that part of his work which lay largely within his own experience and recollection, and the truth of his interpretations, as far as they go — he is never exhaustive — is surely responsible for the neglect of his writings by too many interpreters of the New Testament at the present time, and for the rise of theories which leave not only Josephus but likewise the New Testament out of the reckoning.

One step behind Mark or Q, indeed several steps behind Mark or Q, we are still only reaching the preaching, teaching or apologetic of the early Church; and the main source for the content of this is not historical reminiscence of Jesus, but present experience of the risen Lord.

Furthermore, even the identification of the putative content of experience proves to be normed by whatever hermeneutical analysis is employed, for one can only imagine, much less recognize as present, what one can come to identify somehow.16 Finally, some hermeneutical analysis is also presupposed by and, therefore, normative of any argument from experience, whether of the individual or the communal type, since it is only experience as interpretable in terms of some description or other to which one can ever appeal either for the mutual corroboration of such descriptions or for their illustration of a theistic interpretation.

First, he distinguishes from classical empiricism a revisionary description of experience according to which sense perception is neither the only nor even the primary mode of experience, but is rather derived from a still more elemental awareness both of ourselves and of the world around us» (PP 78).6 On Ogden's analysis, both the classical and this first type of revisionary empiricism «assume that the sole realities present in our experience, and therefore the only objects of our certain knowledge, are ourselves and the other creatures that constitute the world» (PP 79) 7 With these «two more conventional types of empiricism» he contrasts a «comprehensive» type of revisionary empiricism distinguished from them by its consideration of the possibility (and then also by its claim) that the internal awareness it asserts together with the former revisionary type is «the awareness not merely of ourselves, and of our fellow creatures, but also of the infinite whole in which we are all included as somehow one» (PP 87, 80, 85).

I'd agree, but add that it takes faith and humility, and the resulting spiritual experience, to understand not only scripture and theology but also all the human errors that have been made in presenting them.

Neither the sense of possessing the other, nor that of surrendering oneself to the other, can be present; only the experience of an appetite satisfied - but in a way that effects no union, which is empty and non-communicative, marked by one - sided appropriation rather than conjugal sharing.

Only then does one have what James calls «pure experience» (in the «instant field of the present,» before distinctions of subject and object have been made)(ERE 23), or what Dewey calls «an experience» (subjectively) or «that meal» (objectively)(AE 35 - 37, emphasis in original), or what Whitehead calls «the individual «It» with its own significance» (AI 262).

Hence the full analysis of these animals requires not only the recognition that all the entities that make up their bodies are internally related to other such entities but also that there is present another set of entities of a much higher grade of experience which constitute the psyche, soul, or mind of the animal.

This becomes clear when Hartshorne continues in a vein that runs through realistic epistemic claims of any sort, including the Whiteheadian: «On the other hand, if what I have in present experience is not the past itself but a newly created substitute or image, then the door is open to solipsism of the present moment, and only arbitrary fiat will keep that door closed» (italics added).

Only a religious ground could account for the decisive role of subjective experience in Whitehead's cosmology, for it is simply ignorance to think that anything like a subjective experience in this sense is present in quantum physics.

But exactly what he said and exactly how he acted is filtered, for all of time, through those who saw and heard him: «The only knowledge we possess of the Christ event reaches us via the concrete experience of the first local communities of Christians who were sensitive of a new life present in them.»

Whitehead's discussion of subhuman actual entities follows from the principles discussed above, viz., that there is only one genus of actual entities, that one's present experience constitutes the standard for defining actuality, and that subhuman actualities can be conceived in terms of the primary elements in human experience.

Only those that we have experienced in our own community of faith and those presented to us by our predecessors as they reflected on their experience in the community.

That past world, and especially his own personal past, not only presents Simpson with certain data — and this any realistic phenomenology of experience must recognize — sets itself forth as desirous of certain conceptual syntheses of those data and their implied concrete expressions, e.g., honesty, respect for social order, obedience to duly established authority, etc..

Munich professor of theology Wolthart Pannenberg, sounding strikingly like a social scientist, has observed that «it is only by symbols and symbolic language that the larger community to which we belong is present in our experiences and activities.

The Christian Yes to Jesus» messiahship, which is based on believed and experienced reconciliation, will therefore accept the Jewish No, which is based on the experienced and suffered unredeemedness of the world; and the Yes will insofar adopt the No as to talk about the total and universal redemption of the world only in the dimensions of a future hope and a present contradiction of this unredeemed world.

For our present purposes, however, let us consider only one: God should be primarily experienced as creative, but Hartshorne's proposal means that God is prehended only as created.

I believe that God is present in the experiences not only of joy, growth and becoming, but also in the experiences of loss, adversity, diminishment and death.

Thus the immediate moment of experience, the specious present, includes all the preceding presents of the self but the succeeding ones only in the vague outline constitutive of futurity.

Freedom is an indetermination in the potentialities for present action which are constituted by all the influences and stimuli, all «heredity and environment,» all past experiences, an indetermination removed only by the actuality (event, experience, act) itself, and always in such fashion that other acts of determination would have been possible in view of the given total conditions up to the moment of the act.

In one sense, then, the past determines the present moment of experience, in that it is the only data available for the present; in another sense, the present moment of experience is free to determine how it is to become.

Thus, too, Christendom has known the most terrible guilt in history, and as a religious Christianity has progressively and ever more fully reversed the movement of the Incarnation, the Christian God has increasingly become alien and abstract, until in our own time he has only been present and real in actual experience in a totally alien form, and the whole body of Western humanity has been initiated into a radical and total state of guilt.

However, Buddhism does not finally acknowledge the inescapable causal efficacy of the past, an efficacy only partly subject to the control of the present occasion of human experience.

The variety of sense experience was only the variety of ways in which the one metaphysical reality, Brahman, presented itself superficially to men.