Sentences with phrase «very nature of human beings»

The epistemology of control has its roots not only in our Western philosophical tradition, but also in the very nature of human beings.

Not exact matches

«And you wonder where he gets all of the time and energy and discipline to do it because human nature says that after you've been good at something for a very long time, you typically either get distracted or your intensity or focus wanes.

There's Arkansas, bounty hunters, snakes real, human, and symbolic, being rescued from a snake pit by a very errant knight, a display of the gratuitous slaughter that comes when you take the law in your own hands, a deep commentary on place, displacement, the state of nature, and the techno - forces of the modern world and modern government, solidly American thoughts on law, property, justice, and keeping your word, and so forth and so on.

In «My Own Life,» a short autobiography composed shortly before he died, he wrote: «I had always entertained a notion, that my want of success in publishing the Treatise of Human Nature, had proceeded more from the manner than the matter, and that I had been guilty of a very usual indiscretion, in going to the press too early.»

All are dislocated by the very nature of human existence which necessitates one's being a wayfarer.

This not only helps to explain religion's primordial, irrepressible, widespread, and seemingly inextinguishable character in the human experience, it also suggests that the skeptical Enlightenment, secular humanist, and New Atheist visions for a totally secular human world are simply not realistic — they are cutting against a very strong grain in the nature of reality's structure and so will fail to achieve their purpose.

Since we come from God and are going to God, we can say that the human person is, of his very nature, a religious being.

With all due respect if these are the things you learned by observing Osteen you aren't a very astute observer of human nature.

We shall probably never be very good in praying, but that is simply a fact of our feeble, sinful, finite human nature.

The cognitive dissonance it inspires brings out the best and the worst of human nature — a concept that is flabbergasting to Naturalists as religious faith, by its very definition is unquantifiable, unprovable and totally subjectice.

First, since process thought concerns itself with the totality of human experience, it must necessarily take very seriously the fact of the religious vision and the claim of countless millions of people of every race and nation and age to have enjoyed some kind of contact with a reality greater than humankind or nature, through which refreshment and companionship have been given.

Jesus taught us from a position of authority, one very firmly rooted in his sinless nature and actions as a human being.

That's a problem, and while I don't think that revelation diminishes anything in the New Testament, it speaks to the very human nature of The Bible.

He will not require not merely that the new knowledge be used as the foundation of the proof, but that the very spirit and atmosphere of the new knowledge enter in such a way into thedemonstration of God's existence, that the complexities and confusions of human thought engendered by the new knowledge shall be resolved in harmonious unity in the postulate of God's existence, nature, and relation to created being.

This, of course, is not to say he is not rightly esteemed truly human, a man of flesh and blood with the peculiar Biblical force of that phrase; indeed it might be claimed that the very stress laid on the limited character of his experience makes us more vividly aware of the reality of his human nature.

Any honest survey of the situation makes clear that there are very considerable differences in the movement of God in and through nature, history, and human life.

Let us speak of a whole life of sufferings or of some person whom nature, from the very outset, as we humans are tempted to say, wronged, someone who from birth was singled out by useless suffering: a burden to others; almost a burden to himself; and yes, what is worse, to be almost a born objection to the goodness of Providence.

If it is true, as Holloway argues, that the very foundations of matter and the identity of human nature are aligned upon the coming of the Word made flesh, then a society which is uncertain about the existence of God and whether Man has any meaning or purpose must be subject to crisis, alienation and chaos even more inevitably than CiV is able to show.

Second, if our knowledge of God is based exclusively on the history of Jesus Christ and not on pre-Christian philosophies, then the human attributes of Christ in time also tell us what God is in his very nature and being as God.

your understanding of the change process is very simplistic, because your mind is not open, you specifically believe already in the traditional doctrines, Dogmas as shown in thousands of years of history evolves, and the need for input variables, meaning the diversity of religious belief is necessay because nature through his will is requiring this to happen, we are being educated by God in the events of history.In the past when there was no humans yet Gods will is directly manifisted in nature, with our coming and education through history, we gradually takes the responsibilty of implementing the will.Your complaint on your perception of abuse is just part of the complex process of educating us through experience.

Certainly, similar to secular society the Church, too, rests on certain presuppositions which are not produced by the free decision of her members and their free association as such, but are the very conditions of her existence, namely human nature, the saving will of God, redemption through Jesus Christ, the general call of all men to the Church and the resulting «duty» to belong to her.

When, for example, at first in the 19th century down to Pius XII the Church adopted a very reserved attitude to any inclusion of the human bios in the idea of evolution, that was motivated, and rightly so, by a fundamental conception of the nature of man which for good reasons required to be defended.

While any knowledge of God must indeed be conditioned by human experience, Ashbrook and Albright actually claim much more than this: that the brain not only patterns our experience of God, but its very structure can inform us of God's nature.

Amid our self - structuring dependent origination, which in Zen is the very nature of the true self, we ought to respect as much as possible the capacities of others, both nonhuman and human, to originate dependently in their own self - structuring ways.

Indeed, the very nature of Catholic teaching has occasioned this type of challenge, for the church maintains that its teaching is based on the natural law, which in principle can be rationally apprehended by all human beings.

«Work,» the authors write, «is much more than just a need to keep busy or bring home a paycheck... [It] is a fundamental dimension of human existence, an expression of our very nature.»

Thus both history and the very nature of the sexual question have guaranteed that the church will be more involved in this area than in most other areas of human life.

The relationship of the finite creature with the supremely worshipful and unsurpassable deity is being affirmed; and along with it there is also affirmed the possibility of its becoming on occasion a matter of conscious knowledge on the part of the human, as it is always a present reality in the very nature of God himself.

There is no longer serious doubt in my mind that human life exists within the womb from the very onset of pregnancy, despite the fact that the nature of the intrauterine life has been the subject of considerable dispute in the past.

You charge me also with saying, again pleading the support of the scriptures, that though we humans have many kindly affections, love of children, love between men and women, love of country, all these too are corrupted and defiled; and that though we have very agile minds, able to penetrate into the mysteries of nature, we put this gift and attainment to ignoble uses.»

Even the statement that «nature is objective» and presumably neutral toward human meanings, is the product of an historically rooted perspective, the very one that we called dualistic in the previous chapter.

It's just common, human nature to look, as well as, normal human reflexes to look out of first curiosity, and then feel very uncomfortable and try not to look knowing consciously in your mind what is taking place.

If we engage in the «de-mythologizing» of the Revelation to St. John the Divine, as we must also «de-mythologize» the creation stories in the book Genesis in the Old Testament, we realize that what is being said is that as human existence and the world in which that existence is set has its origin in the circumambient, everlasting, faithful Love that is nothing other than God — we recall Wesley's hymn, quoted a few paragraphs back, that «his nature and his Name is Love», and Dante's great closing line in The Divine Comedy about «the Love that moves the sun and the other stars» — so also the «end» toward which all creaturely existence moves is that very same Love.

The very extravagance of them shows that Jesus was well aware what a lot he was demanding of human nature when he substituted «Love your enemies» for «Love your neighbor.»

It first displaced the idea of a natural order to which humanity is subject and thereafter the very notion of human nature itself.

I think the knowledge of human nature and psychology is also very important in the interpretation and the interpreter.

He can not enjoy the luxury of speculative detachment from the issues that fact the human community, since the very nature of what he investigates is conditioned by his investigations

... you can claim free will and by so cover all of the human actions done to the world but how can say that god is real and controls nature when nature has killed more purely innocent lives then anything in history ever... if god was just and comp@ssinate why send the wave that killed 300 thousand, why create the plague that killed nearly 75 million in the middle ages when nearly everyone was a VERY devout believer....

Conservatives cherry - pick those passages that support their conservative view of God based on their conservative ego, and vice versa, where liberals are concerned... and there is NO way to ascertain which is true, except on a wholly subjective, personal level, thus it will never be proven objectively, since Spirit, by it's very nature, has absolutely nothing at all to do with the flesh and whatever seems to be happening on this earth, because Spirit is completely opposite, and therefore invisible to the naked human eye, being of the mind only, and therefore unprovable.

As Kenneth Cragg, an Anglican scholar who has spent a lifetime in the study of Islam, says, «The heart of the Christian revelation is the «event» of Jesus as the Christ, acknowledged as the disclosure in human form of the very nature of God.

A very helpful introduction is Birch, L. Charles, Nature and God (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1965); also by the same author, «A Biological Basis for Human Purpose,» Zygon, 8,1973, pp. 244 - 260); «Nature, Humanity and God in Ecological Perspective,» in Shinn, Roger L., ed., Faith and Science in an Unjust World: Report of the World Council of Churches Conference on Faith, Science and the Future, Vol.

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

It is not merely to be used for the actualization of certain accidental perfections which serve as ornament for human nature; it is for the constitution of the very substance, the very meaning of man.

We need a vision whereby the very identity of Christ, in his human and divine natures, as the physical and spiritual centre and fulfilment of creation, is the basis of his active redemption of us since sin.

It may be said, speaking in very general terms, that in asserting the zoological nature of the Noosphere we confirm the sociologists» view of human institutions as organic.

This world of ours is a new world, in which the unity of knowledge, the nature of human communities, the order of society, the order of ideas, the very notions of society and culture have changed and will not return to what they have been in the past.

lol, yes clay i am an atheist... i created the sun whorshipping thing to have argument against religion from a religious stand point... however, the sun makes more sense then something you can't see or feel — the sun also gives free energy... your god once did that for the jews, my gives it to the human race as well as everything else on the planet, fuk even the planet is nothing without the sun... but back to your point — yes it is very hypocritical of me, AND thats the point, every religious person i have ever met has and on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the group.

There is the dogmatic principle which argues that supernatural truths committed to human language are necessary and definitive of their very nature.

I've always found it curious that Christians so passionately defend the sanctity of life, when so many seem to think that human beings are, by their very nature, an affront to God.