Sentences with phrase «questioning other concerns»

The particular topic of that post was around infant formulas and it really got our minds questioning other concerns that we are thinking plenty of parents have as well as we do.

Not exact matches

Respecting other's opinions and listening to real concerns and questions - not barking out orders and expecting people to follow, b / c they may for a day, month or so, but eventually they will leave, as they will not respect you, nor feel that you understand their position.

Great employees have a feel for the issues and concerns of those around them, and are willing to step up and ask questions or raise important issues when others hesitate.

Remarkable employees have an innate feel for the issues and concerns of those around them, and step up to ask questions or raise important issues when others hesitate.

Try to understand the other person's point - of - view, concerns and feelings by asking more questions.

The main question that Prince is concerned with is whether double amputees and single amputees should compete against each other at all.

Be sure to address any issues of concern and any other questions that pop up.

Those concerns followed others raised Monday by an analyst who questioned what he called a lack of innovation in Under Armour's product pipeline that could help stem declines in U.S. sales.

Since the July 2013 Lac - Megantic fatal train disaster and other recent incidents involving oil by rail, Transport Canada has faced questions about whether it adequately addressed safety oversight concerns surrounding the transportation of dangerous cargo, which were repeatedly raised in internal audits.

The release on websites this week of what appears to be top - secret computer code that the National Security Agency has used to break into the networks of foreign governments and other espionage targets has caused deep concern inside American intelligence agencies, raising the question of whether America's own elite operatives have been hacked and their methods revealed.

DOL notes that like the FAQs issued on Oct. 27 on the Prohibited Transaction Exemptions, the FAQ for advisors focuses particularly on specific technical questions raised by financial service providers, and it is limited to investment advice concerning plans covered under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, IRAs and other plans covered by Section 4975 (e)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on NBC's «Meet the Press» that he questioned «the use of this really sketchy firm Cambridge Analytica,» but Facebook «blew that off» as they did other concerns over Russia's actions.

The Yale Law School graduate is seen as showing genuine concern about others at the company, which raises the question: Why did he stay at a company that has come under fire for its questionable and sometimes illegal practices?

Others question whether the investigation is really motivated by security concerns, or whether it is a veiled effort to protect U.S. companies from foreign competition.

This act has now become the law of the land and requires that patients on admission to a hospital or other institutions in receipt of federal health care funds be questioned about Advance Directives» which are a Living Will, Health Care Agent, Durable Power of Attorney» so that if unable to express an opinion, the patient's wishes concerning life - sustaining technologies will have been made known.

He «was one of the first great teachers to proclaim the basic principle of individualism» the inviolate sanctity of man's soul, and the salvation of one's soul as one's first concern and highest goal,» but «when it came to the next question, a code of ethics to observe for the salvation of one's soul... Jesus (or perhaps His interpreters) gave men a code of altruism, that is, a code which told them that in order to save one's soul, one must love or help or live for others.

The document criticizes «doctrinal or disciplinary security,» «an obsession with the law,» «punctilious concern for... doctrine,» «dogmatism,» «hiding behind rules and regulations,» and «a rigid resistance to change,» while reprimanding those who «give excessive importance to certain rules,» overemphasize «ecclesial rules,» believe that «doctrine... is a closed system,» «feel superior to others because they observe certain rules,» have «an answer for every question,» wish to «exercise a strict supervision over others» lives,» «long for a monolithic body of doctrine guarded by all and leaving no room for nuance,» believe that «we give glory to God... simply by following certain ethical norms,» and «look down on others like heartless judges, lording it over them and always trying to teach them lessons.»

And not just him, but the millions of other people around the world with similar questions and concerns?

the reminder that Orthodox theology continually refreshes its thinking by reference to the early Church Fathers, who were much concerned with the question of God's activity in the other sects and traditions and in the wisdom of humankind.

The series, entitled The Church and Other Beliefs, features a host of good speakers addressing important questions concerning the nature of the Church and its relationship with other religOther Beliefs, features a host of good speakers addressing important questions concerning the nature of the Church and its relationship with other religother religions.

While I definitely agree that his response is great in many circumstances and (without knowing the context of that conversation) may have been the perfect thing to say at that moment, I think calling this statement «a template that can be used to respond to questions concerning sexuality, gender and other important issues» reduces a very complex issue down to a very simple response that doesn't really answer any questions for anyone.

But in one short response that just took a minute, Bell provided an affirming answer as well as a template that can be used to respond to questions concerning sexuality, gender and other important issues.

I conclude that Craig and the process theist are at an impasse so that if a decision is to be made concerning the cognitive superiority of either the kalam or process theistic models, this must be made by appeal to issues in philosophical theology other than the question of the extension of the past.

The former would relate to the question of the completeness of Whitehead's system, and the latter would concern the justification of Whitehead's particular delineation of these kinds vis - à - vis that of other systems.

The first question concerns the final judgment; the other concerns the ultimate correcting of injustices.

The questions about religion and public life, those calling for «public» discussion, no longer focus on the verifiability of religious speech but concern quite other issues: methods of understanding and describing the religious realities, old and new, that we see appearing around us; useful criteria for assessing these religions and for defining and comprehending this new set of powers in our public life; and ways of protecting vital religious groups from the excesses of the public reaction to them, and protecting the public from the excesses of powerful religious groups — hardly questions a secular culture had thought it would have to take seriously!

As Whitehead and Lonergan, among others, emphasize, our creative conscious participation in reality and life generates the concerns and emphases of our questioning.6 The heuristics of such a participatory and empowerment notion of understanding and scientific performance correlate with an understanding of reality as an ecologically inclusive wholeness, the emergent probability of which is oriented towards ever greater freedom and justice (LL 79 - 109, I 115 - 39).

My changes and current views on these questions are causing me to be more concerned about following Jesus, making disciples, caring for the poor, feeding the hungry, loosing the captives, living on less, loving others, and making friends with people on the fringes than ever before.

1) We're highly evolved primates 2) We have overactive imaginations 3) Our greatest evolutionary asset, our large and highly-folded brains, are also responsible for an insatiable curiosity 4) As a species, and a survival tactic, we make things up to comfort ourselves in difficult times 5) As a complex societal species, we create commonalities and «traditions» with others in our clan / tribe / community 6) These «traditions» result in security, trust, and strong relationships that make the collective more able to survive than the individual 7) These common beliefs also act as a means of numbing the brain to questions and concerns without legitimate or tangible answers 8) Religion is simply a survival mechanism 9) When we die, we simple «are not alive» anymore.

Our question concerning Professor Nygren's work does not involve any rejection of the idea that in agape Christianity has a conception of God's love which does transcend other religious motifs.

The teacher's approach to such problems might start from three assumptions: (a) the teacher should be concerned with how science fits into the larger framework of life, and the student should raise questions about the meaning of what he studies and its relation to other fields; (b) controversial questions can be treated, not in a spirit of indoctrination, but with an emphasis on asking questions and helping students think through assumptions and implications; an effort should be made to present viewpoints other than one's own as fairly as possible, respecting the integrity of the student by avoiding undue imposition of the lecturer's beliefs; (c) presuppositions inevitably enter the classroom presentation of many subjects, so that a viewpoint frankly and explicitly recognized may be less dangerous than one which is hidden and assumed not to exist.

«To be religious,» said theologian Paul Tillich, «is to be grasped by an ultimate concern, a concern which qualifies all other concerns as preliminary and which itself contains the answer to the question of the meaning of life.»

On this level, therefore, as well as on many others, as far as Hartshorne is concerned, the analysis of man «drives on (Tillich) to the question of God.32 Moreover, once one attains the vision of all things as united in the mind of God, he has reached the ultimate Hartshornian rational basis for feeling sympathetic respect for all creatures as contributing to the life of God.

Our present question does not mainly concern the difference between the reflexive relationships named above: the relations of things and attributes on the one hand, those of substances and their interactions on the other.

Others seem driven by «certainty» — if there are questions concerning the Bible, they view it as an «either or» moment, and decide deeply in favor (or deeply against) the Bible.

Not only is it proper to ask whether one pole in these tensions has priority over the other, but, obviously; the question remains concerning how these poles function in influencing what happens in creative activity.

Hence we are, on the one hand, confronted with an abundance of material, rich in analysis and content from a variety of perspectives that can offer to the Indian church sensitive viewpoints and creative directions for the understanding and practice of mission in India today, and, on the other, still confronted with the reality that, in so far as the mission question is concerned, an agreed upon standpoint, either in theological or practical terms continues to be elusive.

Out of concern for the will one reaches not only the whole range of existential issues, but also those questions which arise from human involvement on the one hand with evil, and on the other hand with hope.

Gil you have asked some very good questions why does bad things happen in the world i personally do nt know God did nt explain to Job either why he had to suffer.What i do know is that God desires that none of us should perish but that all would have eternal life in him through Jesus Christ.This world will one day pass away and the real world will be reborn so our focus as christians is on whats to come and being a witness in the here and now.Both good and bad happens to either the righteous or the sinner so what are we to make of that.What we do know is that God will set all things right at the appointed time the wicked will be judged and the righteous will be rewarded for there faith isnt that enough reason for us to believe.Free will is only a reality if we can choose between good and bad but our hearts are deceitfully wicked we naturally are inclined toward sin that is another reason whyt we need to be saved from ourselves so what are we to do.For me Christ died and rose again that is a fact witnessed by over 500 people that were alive at the time and was recorded by historians how many other religious leaders do you know that did that or did the miracles that Jesus did.As far as the bible is concerned much of the archelogical evidence has proven to be correct and many of prophetic words spoken many hundreds of years ago have come to pass including both the birth and the death of Jesus.Interested in what philosophy you are believing in if other than a faith in Jesus Christ so how does that philosophy give you the assurance that you are saved.Its really simple with christianity we just have to believe in Jesus Christ.brentnz

The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays.

The good stuff in question mostly concerns a mysterious aristocrat named Alexandra (Sigourney Weaver), who is consorting with a lot of the leftover villains from the other shows and is clearly up to something, though the show is mighty cagey about what.

They usually take place outside the Divinity School, and they are intended, not for specialists in religious studies of any kind, but for a general audience of people, mainly, but by no means exclusively, undergraduate, whose courses of study may lie in other fields, but who are interested in listening to a non-technical presentation of questions with which theologians are concerned and perhaps also in taking part in discussions which are arranged to follow the lectures.

Probably the same holds good of many other questions with which the ecumenical dialogue is concerned.

Instead of the preaching of Jesus the preaching of the early church would call for explanation, and since the investigation really concerns the content, meaning, and validity for us of what is taught in the gospels, the question of how much the historical Jesus and how much other people have contributed to that content is of secondary importance.

The foreign debt continues to be an issue and new voices have began to sound the need to look for ways to face it; (ii) At the national level two questions are concentrating increasing attention: one is the reassessment of the necessary role of the state to correct the distortions of a runaway market (currently discussed in Europe and in the discussions about the role the initiatives of «an active state has played in the economic development of Asian countries); the other is the need for a «participative democracy over against a purely representative formal democracy: in this sense the need to strengthen civil society with its intermediate organizations becomes an important concern; (iii) the struggle for collective and personal identity in a society in which forced immigration, dehumanizing conditions in urban marginal situations, and foreign cultural aggression and massification in many forms produce a degrading type of poverty where communal, family and personal identity are eroded and even destroyed.

There would be questions of systematic theology, for example those concerning the nature of justification, the validity, and knowledge, of the natural law within Christian morality, the possibility and recognition of an individual call coming directly from God to the conscience in a concrete situation, and the question of the relation of such: a call to universal moral principles, as well as many other questions with which the ecumenical dialogue will have to concern itself.

I'm not concerned with those questions here — topics for other pieces — but only with the core claim of distributism.

I think I was trying to prove that a selfless concern for others was not a Christian monopoly, which of course it isn't, though the question of its true origin must remain contentious.

But, Catholics do believe that we can ask Mary to pray for us, and we do believe that Christ has assumed her into Heaven and given her honors above that of any other creature (more on this when we get to the question concerning women in the Church), and we do believe that she has a (subordinate) mediator - like role (but before your alarm bells go off, please read this article by Taylor Marshall for a proper understanding of this.

That is, in response to the question: Why should I be concerned about the happiness of others?