Sentences with phrase «view of these things by»

Although I have been thinking these things for some time, I must admit that I was galvanized into a clearer view of these things by the recent article «Scan this Book!»

Not exact matches

He could try and do this (assuming he becomes president) by doing a number of things, including stacking the court with judges favorable to his views.

Despite having previously said he did think a deal would be possible by December, he said last night: «After my meetings here in London my main message is I am more optimistic, there is progress... That is the most important thing because the perspective from a European point of view towards London was in the last weeks not so clear.»

I would tend to give more credence to the competency of their views than those of housing bears who post analyses and charts at the click of a mouse, all the while unconstrained by due - diligence standards or even such things as the peer - review process that serves academia so well.

And FWIW, if you haven't read The Great Rebalancing yet, it might change the way you view things at the moment — I know it did wonders for my understanding, althoguh I keep forgetting important parts of it and have to relearn them by reading Michael's (unfortunately infrequently) blog posts.

This list of things mentally strong people don't do resonated so much with readers that when it was picked up by Forbes.com it received ten million views.

John Mack, former chairman and CEO of Morgan Stanley, spoke with Bloomberg Television's Erik Schatzker and Stephanie Ruhle on «Market Makers» about Vikram Pandit's departure from Citigroup, saying that «there was a view clearly by shareholders that change was a good thing.»

We, on the other hand, view it with hope: because more than anything, the events of the past few days show that the truth is getting out — the truth that capital markets simply can not exist under the authoritarian rule of central planners, the truth that the stock market is a casino in which the best one can hope for a quick flip, and finally the truth that our entire socio - economic regime, whose existence has been predicated by borrowing from the uncreated wealth of the future, and where accumulated debt could be wiped out at the flip of a switch if things go wrong in the process obliterating the welfare of billions (of less than 1 % ers), is one big lie.

It is truth that God has troubles within the fractal paradigms of inter-cellular cosmological wherein «activists» sometimes revolt against the grains of our embodied sanctifications creating many undulations of travesties not uncommonly viewed by us celestial beings as being viral and bacteriological in the way we understand things to be and become.

Always was and is and will ever be no matter what matters of materialized shapes to tend to seemingly clutter up His spiritual abundancy It is truth that God has troubles within the fractal paradigms of inter-cellular cosmologies as protruding «activists» are sometimes revolting against the grains of our embodied sanctifications creating many undulations of travesties not uncommonly being viewed by us celestial beings as being viral and bacteriological in the way we understand things to be and become.

It is truth that God has troubles within the fractal paradigms of inter-cellular cosmological «activists» sometimes revolting against the grains of our embodied sanctifications creating many undulations of travesties not uncommonly viewed by us celestial beings as being viral and bacteriological in the way we understand things to be and become.

Rather, it is a set of Lochner - like expansions (in my judgment) of the Founders» understanding of natural rights (which itself may be the correct understanding of Locke, or not, and which, to necessarily complicate things even more, itself was usually moderated in practice by most Founders holding elements of the communitarian - classical view) that is the real ground of my distinction between the natural rights conception of liberty and the economic autonomy conception.

its not really atheism or religion that I have a problem with, its the hate, control, and fear that goes along with it that I have a problem with, you say that those who are spiritual are into new agey, crystal ball, stuff, see that's what I'm talking about, you assume to know what something is about when you don't understand something you naturally fear it, your self righteous clouds you, don't you get that by being narrow minded in your view towards things, you really act no better than religious fundamentalists, being spiritual is a lot more than just the new agey, think positive all the time that you think it is, its about being aware of who you are?

the only thing i can sum up from all your views is that you dismiss calvinism for its political incorrectness and note in the same fashion Jesus was dismissed by religious leaders of His days.

Well, there will always be a tension between those who hold a nature - worshiping Pollyanna view of primitive society and want it preserved, vs. those who see the exact same thing and are compelled to help alleviate the suffering of treatable diseases, fear, ignorance, malnutrition exploitation by unscrupulous «moderns» and environmental degradation.»

To know that certain things trigger us, to know that what we can bear and what we can not, to know who is safe and who is not, to know where we are treasured and cared for instead of viewed as liabilities, to know what we experienced was real and it was not our fault, to know we are not forgotten by God, to know our unsurpassing worth and belovedness.

The 15th - century Renaissance scientist Pico della Mirandola articulates this view, by putting these words into God's mouth: «We have made thee [«man»] neither a thing celestial nor a thing terrestrial, neither mortal nor immortal, so that being thine owne fashioner and artificer of thyselfe, thou maist make thyselfe after what likeness thou dost most affecte.»

In this view, we humans have common ancestry not only with monkeys but also with trees and fungi and all other living things by a process of natural chance.

Whitehead's view, in contrast, does justice to the strict demands of the concept of identity: two things are only identical when they are exactly the same.7 A person at two different moments of time is not the identical person; he or she should therefore be understood as composed of many different occasions, and as «one person» only by extrapolation.

Among most Christians and Jews, it is fair to say, the Jewish - Christian dialogue is viewed as something of a curiosity carried on by people who are «interested in that kind of thing.»

The adage is true: No one's mind has ever been changed by a Facebook argument and my perception of people — friends I knew personally — was changing simply because they didn't view things the same way I did.

As Neville recognizes, his own view that God is «beyond the metaphysical categories illustrated in the temporal process» means that he «can not except by devious analogy be called individual, actual, knowledgeable, or a variety of other things Hartshorne attributes to God» (p. 61).

In opposition to the cult of expertise, he recommends a set of «patterns» that have been tested by time and common sense — things like «Zen Views,» «Tapestries of Light and Dark,» and «Open Shelves.»

The vision of Christianity to which it calls people is by and large a narrow view of the way things used to be.

Luther's theology seeks to stay close to the perspective of the self addressed by God's words of judgment and promise; Aquinas» theology seeks to view all things as much as possible from the viewpoint of God's all - encompassing wisdom, in which the human mind is allowed to participate.

I consider myself a christian, with religious knowledge and general knowlege, however I do not hold to a set of views dictated by an organized religion, I believe the organized religions are where we have gone wrong, as someone pointed out earlier to most «religious people» to question ones faith or organization is wrong but that is exactly what the bible tells us to do... test ALL things to see what is true.

There's no such thing as joining AA, but one can join an AA group, and by doing so I have found over the last thirty years enough support to not be chased out of AA for my atheistic views.

You just personally rate things that happen, whether caused by people, or just the Universe working, as good or bad from your point of view.

He has an infinite view of all things, and we try to make sense of God by our own intellectual.

«The man in the Israelite world who has faith is not distinguished from the «heathen» by a more spiritual view of the Godhead, but by the exclusiveness of his relationship to God and by his reference of all things to Him.»

That possibility seems to be ruled out for the theist, whose view of the relation between God and creation has been molded by the general biblical understanding of things.

We must begin, though, with a confession that the idea of a designing and controlling deity whose existence is rightly denied by many skeptics is also problematic from the point of view of a kenotic theology.If God is all - powerful in the sense of being able to manipulate things at will, then the facts of evolution do indeed cast doubt on the plausibility of theism.

The worldly view always clings fast to the difference between man and man, and naturally it has no understanding of the one thing needful (for to have that is spirituality), and therefore no understanding of the narrowness and meanness of mind which is exemplified in having lost one's self — not by evaporation in the infinite, but by being entirely finitized, by having become, instead of a self, a number, just one man more, one more repetition of this everlasting Einerlei.

The whole model and technology rest on a mistaken view of where things are, which has led by strict deduction to an equally mistaken view of what is «really» going on.

Working with Colin McGinn's ideas on consciousness Charlton illustrates the inconsistencies of philosophers who view mind as explainable by science, while suggesting himself that «the presence of mind in nature is not something invisible and hidden except to introspection, but the most palpable thing there is.

As for the scenario with the 15 year old girl, well, that is the very picture of «minimal grace» and the very sort of thing that would be ruled out by my view of optimal grace.

Viewing things that way takes all the pressure off, relaxes us and a by - product of being relaxed and unpressured is that we become a bit nicer!!

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.

The future directed view, by contrast, is that revelation about God and religious truth is a continuing thing and, in fact, a lot more of it is ahead of us than is behind us.

Anyway, despite all the confusion about pre-millenialism, a-millenialism, post-millenialism, the recent invention of the rapture, Paul's confusing statement about «we who remain», the entire book of Revelation not appearing to be written by John because of the Greek used, and the odd way in which eschatological views seem to change in the New Testament Pauline letters, and the bizarrely easy way people like Thessalonians became convinced Christ had already returned in their time, and all the other confusing things about New Testament prophecy — the truth is that it is all trustworthy and you should not question this.

It is indeed this capacity to exist, by belonging to a system of freedoms, which is postulated here; thereby is concretized «that perspective» (Aussicht), evoked from the beginning of the Dialectic, that view «into a higher immutable order of things, in which we already are, and in which, to continue our existence in accordance with the supreme decree of reason, we may now, after this discovery, be directed by definite precepts» (p. 112).

On this view, the only new thing, which is still the old, is the state of motion, and this involves no increase of being, and in it, by definition, the static, fixed element can as little be regarded as something in itself and as a definite reality, as the individual parts in a continuum can be considered separately in themselves as constituting, in that distinct condition, the whole quantitative continuum.

There is certainly a strongly held view, exemplified by popular scientists such as Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard and an avowed atheist, that there is no such thing as free will in the sense of an independent personal entity.

His view is that Paul basically gave himself free reign here at the start of his teachings to the gentiles (see also 1:1 a: «Paulos, apostolos ouk ap anthroopoon, oude di anthroopon, alla dia Iesou Christou, kia Theou patros...») and then started preaching his own theology heavily influenced by his own biases and preferences — not that any of the writers were ever completely exempt from it of course, but still the writer felt Paul was quite fundamentalistic at times about certain things he had some clear opinions about, e.g. about relationships and women's position in the church etc, which he then propagated as part of the gospel.

God's natural order can still be grasped at by the common sense of men of good will, but the full truth and meaning of creation, the separation of the sexes and of human nature, will only ever be in part and obscurely viewed when the determined and determining purpose of the mind of God is recognised in creation, holding all things relative to Himself — and to His plan to enter creation as its Lord and King.

Science tries to do the same thing indirectly, by taking a detached view of the world in which man finds himself, to apprehend that world as a unity and thus to make it a tool for the use of man.

It is overflowing with disorderly arrangements from our point of view, but order is the only thing we care for and look at, and by choosing, one can always find some sort of orderly arrangement in the midst of any chaos.

Jeremy i am surprised you never countered my argument Up till now the above view has been my understanding however things change when the holy spirit speaks.He amazes me because its always new never old and it reveals why we often misunderstand scripture in the case of the woman caught in adultery.We see how she was condemned to die and by the grace of God Jesus came to her rescue that seems familar to all of us then when they were alone he said to her Go and sin no more.This is the point we misunderstand prior to there meeting it was all about her death when she encountered Jesus something incredible happened he turned a death situation into life situation so from our background as sinners we still in our thinking and understanding dwell in the darkness our minds are closed to the truth.In effect what Jesus was saying to her and us is chose life and do nt look back that is what he meant and that is the walk we need to live for him.That to me was a revelation it was always there but hidden.Does it change that we need discipline in the church that we need rules and guidelines for our actions no we still need those things.But does it change how we view non believers and even ourselves definitely its not about sin but its all about choosing life and living.He also revealed some other interesting things on salvation so i might mention those on the once saved always saved discussion.Jeremy just want to say i really appreciate your website because i have not really discussed issues like this and it really is making me press in to the Lord for answers to some of those really difficult questions.regards brentnz

It does this to give the view that «all other things» were created by Christ, instead of what the text says, «all things were created by Christ.»

Two things: he infallibly preserves each successive cosmic and subcosmic event in his perpetual memory, thereby rendering it immortal; and he gives order and guidance through inspiration to the creatures in the next phase of the creative Process.57 Hartshorne adopts the Whiteheadian view that God may really rule the world but that he does so chiefly by persuasion.