Not exact matches
Unfortunately in my case, I've probably gone to excess the other way... after 43 years
of being (in my
view) threatened with hellfire for every cotton - picking thing (including the «sinfulness»
of being born in the first place because it's a well - known scriptural fact that every
human is born sinful and separated from G - d, with a heart that does nothing but desire evil and no way to please G - d even when righteous), threatened with being «left behind» in the rapture (should I fail on some doctrinal (belief) point at the crucial moment)... I refuse to consider ANY
possibility of hell at all.
...
viewing morality not simply as individual perfection but as part
of a social context... tile concept
of universal
human values which are valid through history and across national, cultural lines respecting different political and cultural
possibilities, but at the same time acknowledge some common goals.
The orthodox
view is that all
possibilities are created by God, but that
human beings have the responsibility to «acquire» actions out
of the
possibilities, thereby becoming accountable.
Nominalists share with Scotus the voluntarist understanding
of divine and
human will, the unboundedness
of possibility, the
view of creation as an order imposed by God's arbitrary will, and the rejection
of the doctrine
of analogy.
These assumptions, which have their origins in a theologically motivated rejection
of a classical understanding
of God and creation, lead by an easy path to the
view that
human beings fully realize themselves by producing concepts that give us mastery over limitless
possibilities — first mastery over nature, then over ourselves.
He called his
view «materialistic,» in so far as «it does not allow the
possibility of any
human thought without a brain and a movement in this brain.»
In arguing against the
possibility of attaining to a neutral standpoint on matters
of concern to religious persons, one begins with the axiom that all
human activity — and so, by extension, all scholarly activity, all religious activity, and all interaction among serious religious persons — both implies and evinces a commitment to some particular metaphysic, some
view as to the way things are and as to how
human activity should proceed in that context.
From the
human point
of view, such unreceptiveness automatically cuts off the
possibility that the Bible can be the Word
of God to us.
Are those with such a limited
view of the
possibilities of human society really likely to be motivated to sustain a constant vigilance against injustice?
Focussing on the notion
of prehension as the basis
of a concept
of «shared existence,» Cobb stresses the
possibility»
of an «ecological theology» to counter the Kantian overemphasis on the
human point
of view.8 A fuller discussion
of Whitehead's ecological dimension is to be found in an article by John B. Bennet.9 Bennet suggests three possible sources
of Whitehead's value to ecological thinking.
Reinhold claims that a tragic
view of history is necessary to help the Christian negotiate the gap between the ethical ideal and the
possibilities attainable by
human collective action.
But, from the Bible's point
of view, even more disquieting is the
possibility of human freedom, symbolized by the tree
of knowledge
of good and bad.
In
view of the increasing vulnerability
of contemporary societies to a broad range
of social risks, including the
possibility of total
human extinction, the
human rights regime needs to incorporate a broader concept
of global
human security.
The mythological
view of the world has gone, and with it went the
possibility of speaking seriously
of a Heilsgeschichte: a historical «drama
of salvation,» in which God is said to have acted at a certain time in this world to change the state
of human affairs.
He emphasized the active, integrating self (rather than the frail, victimized ego); held to a «soft» (rather than a «hard») determinism; had a strong interest in future, goal - directed strivings (rather than origins); emphasized the organism as a whole centered in the self (rather than a conflict
view of personality); regarded the striving for worth and power (rather than sexual striving) as the central dynamic in mental health and illness; emphasized the
possibilities for continuing change in the later years (rather than regarding the early years as utterly decisive)(2) It is clear from these motifs in Adler's thought that his vision
of human beings was positive and growth - centered.
What is required is a
view of human love and
human interaction that is comprehensive, mature and realistic, one which recognizes our non-material, spiritual nature and the
possibility of change in our behaviour.
On St. Thomas's
view, freedom is in fact the great organizing principle
of the moral life — and since the very
possibility of a moral life (the capacity to think and choose) is what distinguishes the
human person from the rest
of the natural world, freedom is the great organizing principle
of a life lived in a truly
human way.
Creed has designed the base
of his sculpture as a social space, a stepped platform on which visitors may gather to enjoy the
view — and perhaps debate the limits and
possibilities of human understanding.
Questioning the
possibilities of the
human brain to perceive different types
of information, Oppermann's work puts on probe those who are
viewing her paintings.
My personal
view is that (too) many skeptics adopted Beck's graph, simply because that, if real, would invalidate any
human cause
of GW, without checking the facts first, or even thinking about the physical (im)
possibility of 80 ppmv CO2 increase and especially decrease in less than 7 years...
Glass, then, is kind
of a legal Rorschach test: where you stand on his admissibility likely depends on your
view of the
possibility of human redemption, rehabilitation and the role
of the lawyer in society.