Sentences with phrase «other human beings without»

It's too bad it's so hard to connect with other human beings without a monitor and keyboard these days, isn't it?

Is it possible to have the favor of man and God poured out like crazy on a ministry - and that minister / leader still walk in total surrender and humility and be able to stay in touch with other human beings without thinking he / she / it have been lifted to some elite spiritual status?

Not exact matches

Universal Robots's devices are designed to work directly alongside humans without being confined to a cage for safety, as with many other industrial models.

«Vital Vio is an incredibly exciting company built on a truly revolutionary breakthrough idea — disinfecting without using harsh chemicals or other agents that could cause harm to human health or engender resistance to treatment.

«The job of assembly, which may come naturally to humans, has to be broken down into different steps, such as identifying where the different chair parts are, the force required to grip the parts, and making sure the robotic arms move without colliding into each other,» Assistant Professor Pham Quang Cuong said.

«I have a tough time in any near - term or any medium - term sort of scenario seeing that robots are just going to do their own thing and decide to shoot each other without any interaction [or] human control.»

These tools are most useful for traders because they allow us to look at price activity in an objective way (without the human error that is associated with other types of forecasts).

>> >» Humans are perfectly capable of loving others and doing good deeds without faith to «compel» them.»

And without the protection of the basic right to stay alive, aren't all other human rights sort of arbitrary?

Religions incorporated and codified these basic social values and skills, and quickly learned to take credit for them — as if, without the religion, we would be doomed to not have them — although we see them in every human society, including hunter - gather tribes with no sense of gods as we understand them After many centuries of religious domination, enforced through pain of death, ostracization or other social sanctions, allowing religion to take credit, as well as failing to question other religious claims — has become a cultural habit.

When the U.S. Muslim community sounds out LOUD and CLEAR, without equivocation, and immediately against all forms of terrorism, including all aggressive religious intolerance for human rights, women's right, children, equal protection under the law, the respect for other religions to coexist, the right to free speech, and the ability to separate church from state, IF THEY FINALLY DO THAT AND LOUDLY, then we will begin to feel comfortable that they are truly embracing American ideals and here to join us, not to oppose, defy, or undermine what we hold dear.

That Shakespeare without any predecessors created human types who are themselves without precedent contradicts what we know about his work, namely, that nearly every line in it has its source in some other writing.

«Every human being however has a longing to know both the how and the why and if we begin to think that we can take one without the other we are denying ourselves some extraordinary insights into the Created Order in which we live.»

The plagues also showed His mercy, being tailored to disrupt and humiliate the worship of their pagan deities without causing loss of human life until the final plague, which occurred only after God had exhausted every other option (Graeser, et.

And it's hard enough to cope with human suffering without worrying about the suffering of other animals.

nothing makes the atheist more ticked off more than when you bring up GOD... God gets all the blame for all the tragedy in the world... If there wasnt a god in the first place, humans would not know tragedy or injustice when we see it... it would be a non-issue to us... survival of the fittest would not permit the emotions of love, compassion, empathy... Darwininian theory could not allow any of those and many other of the best of people's capacity for caring to surface... You cant explain it away by synapse or neurons... without a Supreme Being, there would be no sense of justice or injustice, we would not call it anything because there is no Ultimate Moral Standard to compare it.

Without recognition of the Creator, without some apprehension of a good over-all purpose for all human beings in whatever stage of development they may be, to consider all other men as our brothers is no more than a pious Without recognition of the Creator, without some apprehension of a good over-all purpose for all human beings in whatever stage of development they may be, to consider all other men as our brothers is no more than a pious without some apprehension of a good over-all purpose for all human beings in whatever stage of development they may be, to consider all other men as our brothers is no more than a pious phrase.

The other side of human nature, which in this life is inseparably linked with the body but without being identical with it, is variously called spirit, mind, consciousness, ego, psyche, soul, or personality.

The foremost meaning of a sacrament is «that the divine and the human join themselves to each other, without merging themselves in each other, a lived Beyond - transcendence - and - immanence.»

He believed spiritual doctrines opened the mind to a limitless freedom of possibilities, whereas the other is «the worst chain that ever fettered a human being» because without free thought you don't have free will.

Without the Trinity, human could not exist and there would be no reason to love God or each other.

his analysis of sundry maxims and «verbal museums» like Bartlett's supports the claim that quoting is a quintessentially human proclivity: «Can one even think without the words of others?»

human beings, «born free and equal in dignity and rights,» are entitled to human rights «without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

There can not be true peace if everyone is his own criterion, if everyone can always claim exclusively his own rights, without at the same time caring for the good of others, of everyone, on the basis of the nature that unites every human being on this earth.»

On the other hand, without the dramatic and poetic expression of the reversal in God's love play, when Krishna is conquered by Radha and the divine bows to the human, the full reality that the devotee experiences would not be expressed.

And yet, even this limitation is not without its usefulness, for it can surely lead to the appreciative evaluation of other, non-Western expressions of the meaning and destiny of human existence without thereby relinquishing insights to be gained by attention to Christian history and tradition.

Can we reconceive theological education in such a way that (1) it clearly pertains to the totality of human life, in the public sphere as well as the private, because it bears on all of our powers; (2) it is adequate to genuine pluralism, both of the «Christian thing» and of the worlds in which the «Christian thing» is lived, by avoiding naiveté about historical and cultural conditioning without lapsing into relativism; (3) it can be the unifying overarching goal of theological education without requiring the tacit assumption that there is a universal structure or essence to education in general, or theological inquiry in particular, which inescapably denies genuine pluralism by claiming to be the universal common denominator to which everything may be reduced as variations on a theme; and (4) it can retrieve the strengths of both the «Athens» and the «Berlin» types of excellent schooling, without unintentionally subordinating one to the other?

The absence of literal participation would force one to assume that the human self is not essentially social, but is rather essentially alone and capable of existing without other selves.

In other words, without the constant striving of every human cell to unite with all the others, would the Parousia be physically possible?

He who thinks that the world, without any such unity of significance as constitutes an experience, would still have been or might be a real world, and who deduces this from the fact — which spiritualism accepts — that the world without a particular human personality, Mr. X is perfectly possible, must also be one who thinks that if from «himself» those qualities which make him Mr. X were to be subtracted, nothing of the nature of mind would remain — in short, he is one who does not believe that other minds are members of himself.

At the human level, there is what we style «sin» — willful choice, with its consequences, of that which is self - centered, regardless of other occasions, content to remain stuck in the present without concern for future possibilities — and this is an obstacle which is like an algebraic surd.

In our generation there is danger and hope — danger that these noncognitive accouterments will lose their aesthetic harmony and hypnotic power when integrated with the basic prehensions of science, and be reverted into impotent and empty symbols, jarring, ugly, and without force in final satisfactions: hope that the power of Jesus as lure will reassert itself in an aesthetic context devoid of supernaturalism, a context such that (the language now picks up echoes of van Buren) the vision of Jesus, the free man, free from authority, free from fear, «free to give himself to others, whoever they were «1 — such that this vision in its earthly, human purity will lure our aims to a harmonious concrescence, integrating scientific insight and moral vision and producing a modern, intensely fulfilling human satisfaction.

No one could honestly read the letters of the New Testament without becoming aware that not only the writers themselves but scores of other people were looking at life and death in a way in which they had never been looked at before, and were experiencing a contact with the living God unprecedented in human history.

For Kierkegaard there is no «solution» to this paradox, other than the greater paradox of the God - man, who, without ever making the leap into sin, became sin for us, i.e., accepted his human solidarity with us, so that in him we might be reconciled with God through the Atonement.

Human beings harm each other day by day without measure.

And, oh, when the hour - glass has run out, the hourglass of time, when the noise of worldliness is silenced, and the restless or the ineffectual busyness comes to an end, when everything is still about thee as it is in eternity — whether thou wast man or woman, rich or poor, dependent or independent, fortunate or unfortunate, whether thou didst bear the splendor of the crown in a lofty station, or didst bear only the labor and heat of the day in an inconspicuous lot; whether thy name shall be remembered as long as the world stands (and so was remembered as long as the world stood), or without a name thou didst cohere as nameless with the countless multitude; whether the glory which surrounded thee surpassed all human description, or the judgment passed upon thee was the most severe and dishonoring human judgement can pass — eternity asks of thee and of every individual among these million millions only one question, whether thou hast lived in despair or not, whether thou wast in despair in such a way that thou didst not know thou wast in despair, or in such a way that thou didst hiddenly carry this sickness in thine inward parts as thy gnawing secret, carry it under thy heart as the fruit of a sinful love, or in such a way that thou, a horror to others, didst rave in despair.

Even if you didn't, I wonder if, after these last few years, your path has broaden (especially after leaving the church), from being reactive to the church to now also discussing non-church paths, other faiths and sometimes to even doing illustrations about the human condition without referral to religion.

In classical philosophy it is possible to understand how a form is present in a human being without distorting or destroying his humanity, but it is unintelligible how one substance can enter into another without displacing some part of that other substance.

If the teacher is «co-habiting» with another human being, male or female, same sex or other sex, without benefit of matrimony, how does that affect that person's capacity to teach with integrity on the Church's requirement of chastity and abstinence before marriage?

This remainder is far larger in human experience than in most other occasions of experience, but no event is wholly determined without remainder by its past.

You can think of sex» within marriage and in other relationships» as a form of bonding; as a way to deepen and expand the meaning of intimacy; as a type of language even, where human beings can communicate subtly, beautifully, passionately, without words.

What is meant is that implicit in every human experience are all five of these types of experience, and that one can not fully explore any one of the five without coming upon the other four also.

13 It can not mean any existing segment of society, for while some, at least to human eyes, seem nearer the kingdom than others, none is without flaw or fully Christlike.

My answer is simply this, that it is because at present our magnificent Christian charity lacks what it needs to make it decisively effective, the sensitizing ingredient of Human faith and hope without which, in reason and in fact, no religion can henceforth appear to Man other than colorless, cold and inassimilable.

Christians are now called to persuade others (including many within the churches) that our first duty as human beings is to honor and venerate the one true God, and that without the worship of God, society disintegrates into an amoral aggregate of competing, self - centered interests destructive of the commonweal.

Without considering the many thousands of other gods that have been ruled false throughout the ages, the reasons why these gods were determined to be merely human inventions, and applying those criteria to their own deity Christians aren't fairly judging God's existence, are they?

The foreword of the present book includes a 1965 letter from Ramsey to Fletcher: «[T] he candid issue between us is whether agape is expressed in acts only or in rules also, which question is generally begged; or else the structures in which human beings live are attributed to other than uniquely Christian sources of understanding (natural law, etc.) while Christians go about pretending to live in a world without principles.

This «outfront» role, enacted «before the congregation,» is of course very public: administering the sacraments, preaching the word, and being of service to other human beings within and without the congregation.

Jesus Christ, is and it will be forever more the unique object lesson of living, the human being not ever, although we may be Christians we don't leave of to sin, for the very her writing she says Aerquémonos confiadamente at the throne of your handsomeness in order to reach forgiving in order to the perpetual help, in as much as not tenemos one God which not it can feel pity for of we, rather one which fué tempting all over, but without sin, according to the letter at the age of Hebrews, and the apostle John she says, whether various hubiere sin, solicitor tenemos in order to with the parent to Jesus Christ the that's right, not ever not any human being it will be the best object lesson not other than The Christ Jesus, nor Buddah bo Mahoma nor none, we don't follow to humanity rather at a God which fué tempting all over but without sin, not ever we owe put her scope in the humanity not other than in the.

If we do not attribute any special status to the human race, then the goal should be for it to diminish in size to the point where the planet can support it alongside other species without discrimination.