Quotes About Understanding

People are much deeper than stereotypes. That's the first place our minds go. Then you get to know them and you hear their stories, and you say, 'I'd have never guessed.'

If you call 'religious' a man who believes in what I call a Supermeaning, a meaning so comprehensive that you can no longer grasp it, get hold of it in rational intellectual terminology, then one should feel free to call me religious, really.

Richard Rohr is a theologian that I read.

Few parents are aware of the difficulties that beset the minds of the little philosophers and theologians who sit upon their knees or play at their feet; and many a parent could not comprehend the disturbance, if he were aware of it.

People, and especially theologians, should try to familiarize themselves with scientific ideas. Of course, science is technical in many respects, but there are some very good books that try to set out some of the conceptual structure of science.

It connects with the theologians' point that you can say what God is not, but not (easily) what He is.

Theologians have a great problem because they're seeking to speak about God. Since God is the ground of everything that is, there's a sense in which every human inquiry is grist to the theological mill. Obviously, no theologian can know everything.

The people that usually have the most trouble with my books are the ones that pick them apart from a theological point of view.

I didn't study theology out of piety. I studied it because I wanted to know.

I feel that the Christian experience and the Jewish one have much to give each other. If this open society continues and there is no return to political anti-Semitism, then this encounter, deeper than any theology, may happen.

Theology in general seems to me a substitution of human ingenuity for divine wisdom.

A mystery, in Christian theology, is what God knows and man cannot, and must instead believe.

Scientists don't read theology; they don't read philosophy. It doesn't make any difference to what they're doing - for better or worse, it may not be a value judgment, but it's true.

I've done a lot of research on science and theology to try and get a better understanding of what happens to the human soul or what potential it has.

Math does come easily to me, but I was always much more interested in what theorems imply about the world than in proving them.

The Limbaugh Theorem was not about me giving me credit for something. It was simply sharing with you when the light went off.

We need less theoretical debate and more practical application and acknowledgment of what Europe can and does do so that it is brought home to people in a relevant way.

Most people don't have time to master the very mathematical details of theoretical physics.

The amount of detailed information which an individual has at his command and his theoretical elaborations of the same are mutually dependent; they grow in and through each other.

Fiction and essays can create empathy for the theoretical stranger.

A good theoretical account must explain all of the evidence that we see. If it doesn't work everywhere, we have no idea what we are talking about, and all is chaos.

Practical knowledge of what works and what doesn't work is much better. Theoretical knowledge is important, but I think practical knowledge works better.

Physics has a history of synthesizing many phenomena into a few theories.

The overwhelming majority of theories are rejected because they contain bad explanations, not because they fail experimental tests.