Sentences with phrase «questions on the nature»

In others he is closely questioned on the nature of his experience of an inner call, the manner in which he received it, and the effect it has had on his life.

All of the drawings are unified through a sense of disquiet, the geographic remoteness and formal isolation of their subjects raising questions on the nature of the enclosure, be it physical or ideological.

But the episode has once again opened questions on the nature of democracy.

Not exact matches

As a great example of the inherently holistic nature of social marketing, Heidi relies heavily on her existing blog content to make sure that questions get a thorough response in a way that would not be possible by just answering the question on LinkedIn alone (as of this writing there's a limit of 4,000 characters for responses).

Why does the same science that rejects or supposedly debunks religion because of the preposterous idea of an almighty, all - knowing, always present creator, yet licks their lips at the thought of an ultra intelligent extra terrestrial with the capability to answer question break the laws of nature, have mind reading capabilities, so on and so forth?

To be sure, valid questions may be raised about whether Enlightenment justifications based on insecurity in the state of nature can truly ground human rights.

The philosophical significance of his own attitude to transgenderism seems lost on him: Transgenderism raises fundamental questions about the nature of the human person — indeed, about whether one can even speak in terms of human nature anymore in any universal, meaningful sense.

Even in classical theism, the question of whether God is «above the law» is deeply complex and quite possibly aporetic, since if God has a nature, it seems to follow that God is dependent on that nature.

I think the idea that the «nature» of Christ was ever a question or that it has had a huge impact on current events is such a minefield (this article is a perfect example) that it is, and has been, ignored.

Those questions involve the nature of the PRC regime; the doctrine and canon law of the Church; the impact of such an agreement on Vatican diplomacy in promoting human rights; and the Church's twenty - first - century mission in China.

Assuming it was Christianity, it ameliorated many of the harsh realities of human existence, such as your own death, the death of a loved one, injustice, feelings of being at the mercy of the forces of nature, and so on, gave you answers to questions about life, and so on.

This essay focuses on the nature of self - interest, and that is a different question than whether self - interest is the only possible end of human action.

In his fair and generally sympathetic review of my book Bergson and Modern Physics, David Sipfle raised some important and significant questions which clearly show how extremely complex the questions concerning the nature of time are and how difficult it is to agree on their solutions even for those who share a basic philosophical view.

Rather because it excludes faith it also excludes philosophical reason, thereby deciding all ultimate questions in advance on the basis of a liberal philosophy of nature and reason so ubiquitous as to be invisible.

«And to focus more precisely on the issue of «scientific evidence,» the sciences, ordered by their nature and method to an analysis of empirically verifiable objects and states of affairs within the universe, can not even in principle address questions regarding God, who is not a being in the world, but rather the reason why the finite realm exists at all.......

Although the passage on page 88 about the «super-jective nature» reads easily as implying the doctrine in question, I agree that it may not have been intended to do so.

So, in that case, the question is about how much of the gender difference is nature versus nurture, and I tend to fall on the side of nurture.

The belief that the Incarnate One possessed both human and divine natures raised a few additional questions on this matter: Did Christ's divine nature also have an external appearance through its union with the human one?

4 The answer to this question will depend (as Deleuze clearly recognizes), not simply upon an analysis of the nature of monadic units, but on confronting the issue at its most sensitive point, namely, with respect to the difference between the Leibnizian God who «compares and chooses,» and the Whiteheadian God who «affirms incompossibles and passes them through.»

The question is presented as part of a larger discussion on the nature of philosophical and imperial authority, yet it is clear that the imperial part of the argument is not necessary to its main thrust, as a result standing out all the more.

The process thinkers of our time who have turned their attention to the religious question — the process theologians, as they are usually called — are sure, however, that there is another and sounder conception of God, one which makes love the clue to the divine nature and manner of working in the world and one which is also in accordance with what we know to be going on in that world.

It is the need to get further light on this question which has led in the twentieth century to a radical rethinking of the nature of pastoral care.

Critiques offered in such responses more often than not say more about the critic's adherence or not to the Church's teaching on the subject in question than they do about the incessant nature of discussing the topic or its complexity.

The three questions can serve as horizons within which to conduct rigorous inquiry into any of the array of subject matters implied by the nature of congregations, disciplined by any relevant scholarly method, in such a way that attention is focused on the theological significance of what is studied:

If the history of nature is a result of unilateral, divine control, then God's love must be questioned, for the history of life on earth does not readily attest to the existence of an all - controlling and all - loving God.

Since I have not in fact» «changed my mind» in any basic way on the availability, of a positive response to all three questions, I will here move on to the more difficult question of the public nature of systematic theologies.

And while mankind came to learn about a God through religion it is highly likely because of mankind's inquisitive nature we would have still question our existence here on this earth regardless if religion was around.

of the commentary here is based on the assumption that there is a single true, correct answer to the question, «Does God exist, and if so, what is the nature of God?»

On the question of the nature of God, there seems to be little prospect of achieving conceptual rapprochement.

It's not just life / human nature / NATURE??? There are a lot of beautiful things in this world, but there is the uglier side as well... and to blaim it all on God — good or bad... well you might as well be living in the old testament... I am surprised there aren't still animal sacrifices to the angry, wrathful god that so many believe in... Oh, another question to the thumpers who believe that «God can be cruel» (And I really don't think Stephen King would say any of his work supports that)... So is God actually «perfect&rnature / NATURE??? There are a lot of beautiful things in this world, but there is the uglier side as well... and to blaim it all on God — good or bad... well you might as well be living in the old testament... I am surprised there aren't still animal sacrifices to the angry, wrathful god that so many believe in... Oh, another question to the thumpers who believe that «God can be cruel» (And I really don't think Stephen King would say any of his work supports that)... So is God actually «perfect&rNATURE??? There are a lot of beautiful things in this world, but there is the uglier side as well... and to blaim it all on God — good or bad... well you might as well be living in the old testament... I am surprised there aren't still animal sacrifices to the angry, wrathful god that so many believe in... Oh, another question to the thumpers who believe that «God can be cruel» (And I really don't think Stephen King would say any of his work supports that)... So is God actually «perfect»?

The Whiteheadian answer to these questions is simply that the past is preserved as objectively immortal in the consequent nature of God and has what efficacy it has on the present as a result of the role played by God at the birth of every actual occasion.

In recent discussions with Green, Hauerwas, Placher, Tanner and Marshall, I focused on these questions: Is postliberal theology distinguished fundamentally by its position on the nature of religious truth?

Where the taboos were simply pushed aside by reason, as in India and Greece, rational reflection on the nature of the good life became possible, but the sense of ought, expressed so powerfully in the taboos, remained unrationalized, whereas among the Hebrews the question of what one ought to do preoccupied rational attention.

If one were to generalize on the nature of the topics addressed, one would note a marked focus on questions of individual morality, human rights, and strong, limited government.

«65» In the paragraphs which follow, it becomes clear that behind Wallis's question is his belief that traditional evangelical thought has failed to deal with our fundamental human nature as social beings, choosing instead to center on the solitary individual vis - à - vis God.

But soon after the death of Muhammad political questions relating to his rightful successor were raised, and with them arose certain theological questions concerning the nature of the true Imam (Muslim head of state), the meaning of faith, sin, infidelity, punishment in the Future World, and so on.

It is not a question of «attacking the Bishops» but of calling for a necessary regrouping in the face of an unprecedented onslaught on the truth of our human nature.

One of the most perplexing of these questions has centered on the nature and use of myth.

In speaking about his views of eternity on Wednesday, answering a question from a caller based in Atlanta, Romney was echoing Mormon beliefs about the eternal nature of human existence.

I'd also point out that the orthodox Church has always embraced a wide variety of views on a number of topics, including the question of the nature and content of God's foreknowledge.

Titled «The Basic Viewpoint and Policy on the Religious Question During Our Country's Socialist Period,» it reasserts the standard Marxist view of religion as a response to the human fear of the terrors of nature — a response manipulated by class societies to rationalize the power of the upper classes and justify the plight of workers and the poor.

These questions are not without significance, touching on the person of Christ and the nature of faith, and the answers will only come from an engaged discussion of the authority of Scripture, the historical witness of the church, and the clarity with which the councils, creeds, and confessions give expression to the teaching of the Bible.

The opening pages must have included a notice about Jesus» appearance and questions introducing a dialogue on the nature of matter and sin.

Moreover, scientific and technical progress in the next ten years will introduce unprecedented achievements In this field and it is no exaggeration to assert here and now that teleconimuni - cation will play a primary role both on the national and on world levels and it could also be pointed out that the most difficult problems are not generally of a purely technical nature and that telecommunications questions should more and more command the attention of governmental authorities at the highest level. . . .

Whether and how far these reflections concerning a positive relation between spirit and matter may be significant when it is a question of asking in philosophical and theological terms whether an ontological connection between man and the animal kingdom asserted by the natural sciences to be a fact, is open to an explanatory interpretation on the basis of the nature of spirit and matter, can only be judged after we have examined some aspects of «becoming» in general.

At the time Thornton had closely read The Concept of Nature (1920) and Principles of Natural Knowledge (2d edition, 1925), tended to interpret Science and the Modern World (1925) in line with these earlier works, and was acquainted with Religion in the Making (1926) though somewhat unsure what to make of its doctrine of God.2 He took comfort in Whitehead's remark concerning the immortality of the soul, and evidently wanted to apply it to all theological issues: «There is no reason why such a question should not be decided on more special evidence, religious or otherwise, provided that it is trustworthy.

First, a summary of the official pronouncements of the Church on questions regarding man and his nature.

But while Paul's testimony is, historically speaking, of first - class value, when it comes to the question of the story of the empty tomb and the physical nature of the resurrection, his words, far from bringing firm confirmation of the «bodily resurrection», are open to a variety of interpretations, and, on the whole, point to quite a different view of resurrection.

For far from being a deviation from biblical truth, this setting of man over against the sum total of things, his subject - status and the object - status and mutual externality of things themselves, are posited in the very idea of creation and of man's position vis - a-vis nature determined by it: it is the condition of man meant in the Bible, imposed by his createdness, to be accepted, acted through... In short, there are degrees of objectification... the question is not how to devise an adequate language for theology, but how to keep its necessary inadequacy transparent for what is to be indicated by it...» Hans Jonas, Phenomenon of Life, pp. 258 - 59; cf. also Schubert Ogden's helpful discussion on «Theology and Objectivity,» Journal of Religion 45 (1965): 175 - 95; Ian G. Barbour, Issues in Science and Religion (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice - Hall, 1966), pp. 175 - 206; and Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962).

The only relevant question for the theologian is the basic assumption on which the adoption of a biological as of every other Weltanschauung rests, and that assumption is the view of the world which has been molded by modern science and the modern conception of human nature as a self - subsistent unity immune from the interference of supernatural powers.