Sentences with phrase «accept your claim then»

If the towing company does not accept your claim then you can work through your car insurance company.

Not exact matches

Agents who agree would then accept the tokens as payment in exchange for reducing their traditional commissions in U.S. dollars to as low as 1 percent, or an average of $ 225 per token used, the company claims.

If the group in questions claims it is what it is then why can't everyone just accept it and move on?

If its claims are true then that is good evidence for accepting it as the Word of God.

if you really did follow loving everyone as yourself as you claim then you would accept everyone regardless of their catagory they find themselves labeled as.

They've done this before, he claims: Think of «their predecessors who opposed legalizing divorce but lost,» and who then «accepted divorce» in practice if not in theory — for example, by hiring divorcées.

Even if one accepts the claim that memory is an experience of the past, this is rather like saying that if we define dog as a four - legged mammal, then all horses are dogs.

It is obvious that if the Bible is handled as a merely human document, then its claims may be accepted or rejected, its teachings may be in agreement or disagreement with each other, its subject may or may not be found relevant to our belief today.

I have a thought for your kind consideration: If you really believe that each person should be accountable for his deeds ONLY, then by the same logic, you must accept the fact that it is gross injustice to claim that Jesus took everyones sins on his shoulders.

Now this man in Norway claims to be some kind of Christian and you have chosen to now call for all Christians to accept this man as a brother of the faith and then repudiate Christian extremism.

We can not claim to accept the Bible as the Word of God, and then omit sections of a scripture simply to support a stance.

If a person claims to have accepted Jesus but continues to live in sin (adultery, theft, murder, etc.) then that person NEVER trully accepted the Son of God as his savior.

If this aspect differed in kind in the case of Jesus from every other member of the species man, then in the present state of our knowledge it would seem impossible rightly to describe Jesus as a man.17 It may be the case that most Christians (and most Christian theologians) in most centuries have accepted this claim: but most have not shared either our modern sensitivity to the difference between history and mythology or our concern for the principles of logic.

Islam also claims Jesus asked for a volunteer to die for him on the cross, asking 3 times, and each time some young guy stood up and said he'd die for Jesus, Jesus accepted and then floated through the ceiling as the soldiers arrived....

============== Faith has essentially two accepted usages in the English language; atheists In this case discard «A» over «B», then attack Christians in that context only, making a further critical and purposeful redefinition of the word «faith», claiming that proof obviates it.

From âpihtawikosisân: The Canadian government continues to mouth platitudes about its supposed dedication to this relationship, while it slashes funding, ignores our emergencies, pulls out of comprehensive land claim discussions, «consults» with us and then ignores everything we told them, all while pursuing a hard - line agenda which accepts only termination as a result.

On what grounds can we claim to accept God's promise of eternal life and then reject the Scripture's claim that the sign of God's promise is the empty tomb?

If «deeply felt personal experience» is sufficient proof of a claim, then's let's accept that, along with the necessary corollary that all such experiences must be equally valid, such as the gentleman in the asylum who deeply feels he is Napoleon.

If you can not accept the resurrection, then there is no reason, nor hope in claiming to be a Christian.

Then we claim this savior accepted...

I'm sorry but if you want to claim that religion contributed to the healing after 9/11 happened then you need to also accept the FACT that its what fueled the actions of those hijackers.

By accepting and participating in an obvious religious holiday, but then claim to not believe in anything associated with that event accept the commercialism it brings, exposes that person as someone who is confused with thier own feelings.

I am going to weigh in, being a catholic and the whole shabang... First of all this is not infringing on anyone's right to practice their religion... Requiring insurance companies to provide contraception for women does not mean the woman has to use it or purchase it... Catholic hospitals take federal funds for their patients, therefore they are not exempt from employment laws... If the Catholic Diocese doesn't want to provide the insurance claiming religious beliefs, then they can no longer accept federal funded patients... They also know that they will be subjected to discrimination lawsuits based hiring and religious discrimination — non-catholics work there, and therefore are being denied healthcare due to catholic beliefs... Majority if not all Catholic women do, have, or had used contraception in their lifetime... God does not nor does the bible say anything about contraception, since it had not been invented yet — so this is a man - made law, made by a bunch of men, who have never had a menstrual cycle — and the pain that comes with it....

You want us to reject the explanations I listed for logical reasons and then want us to accept the bibles claims which are illogical at their foundation.

If you can't, then there is no reason for anyone to accept your claim that YOUR God exists.

Please tell me you like brussels sprouts, tell me you're not afraid of them, and tell me, that if you claim to not like them, then you'll throw the gauntlet down and try this, and then if you still don't like them, I'll accept it.

Wilshere for all his injuries is far better than both Ramsey and Xhaka.I just don't know the importance of Xhaka in the team if he can't defend.He's the real problem in the squad.Why do fans keep accepting mediocrity?Aren't we tired?It's painful seeing him play every match in our midfield then the same people who claim to love him would come and be making noise about how average he is after a bad match forgetting that he's actually average.I'd easily play Maitland - Niles or Coquelin over Xhaka.They would provide more steel in the midfield.Is it going to take us four seasons to realize how average Xhaka is?The painful things is that by that time many trophies would've have by passed us.

However, if Barca do opt to accept defeat with the signing, then they'll have to be prepared to take a loss on Gomes, as it's claimed that he will realistically fetch around # 20m this summer, thus representing a loss of around # 10m - # 15m as per add - ons that were included in his Barca deal.

The childcare provider will then ask you to sign a form confirming that you accept the place and this will be used by them to claim funding directly from the local council.

Even if one accepts the Dalai Lamas's self - exoneration about his ignorance regarding the C.I.A. involvement then or assumes a change - of - mind, one can understand why the Chinese government still has significant reluctance to concede in further Tibetian autonomy claims.

Then Coulson accepted responsibility for an employee's wrongdoing, about which he claimed to have known nothing, and resigned.

Sensing that this assertion carried little moral weight, Dayan then argued that while Israel was willing to accept partition in 1948, and at that time accepted the Palestinian's moral claim to some of the land, the Palestinians then lost this claim by engaging in violence.

If we accept this premise (which Trump apparently does, since he has repeated the claim several times), then it follows that he would contest the outcome of such fraud.

Even if we accept their claim that engineering graduates are over-represented in the ranks of violent radicals from the Islamic world, it's quite a leap to then assert that «engineers are more likely to have... personality traits that make radical Islamism more attractive».

And then if we have a body of evidence that's somewhere in between these, that will be sufficient for the proponents, but opponents won't be able to accept that claim.

I think you just repeat unsubstantiated claims you find on the internet that you uncritically accept, and you then get a bit frustrated that I and others do not automatically believe them also.

Claiming to accept Phelps» account, Ethan pieced it all together in his head: how Kittridge was at the Embassy that night, first took out Jack in the elevator shaft, and then shot Phelps on the bridge — in reality (seen in flashback while he narrated), Ethan suspected that Phelps was the mole who had caused Jack's death, and then faked his own shooting on the bridge (he used a gun with blanks and then a soaked sponge to rub a blood - like substance on his hands).

But not everyone is accepting of Evie's abilities, and then a mysterious killer begins claiming lives...

Unfortunately, Amazon have been denying problems, then accepting a problem but claiming it is incredibly minor, then different reps have been saying different things, including there are new anti-fraud measures in place and some wanting to investigate the page - flip issue.

Then again, very few studies make the kinds of claims made by the paper's authors — claims the media has accepted without the slightest bit of scrutiny.

Some of these people claim to be so enlighted and liberal, they talk a talk of being colorblind and accepting to all people but, once I mention the places I've traveled to and the experiences that I've had, then that is where the hostility begins.

The scientific (i.e. «apolitical») approach to criticising the idea of sustainability can only go so far, and almost has to accept that, if the «science» relating to some claim about an unsustainable activity is right, then the sustainable agenda more broadly is right.

If these two lines match as closely as Peterson claims in his presentation, then I will be willing to accept his position (knowing that it still could be circumstantial but nevertheless it is what it is).

It's a bit rich to claim an argument for 1.6 c warming from doubled co2 is so compelling the ipcc shoud accept it but then not believe it yourselves

You've decided you don't want to accept the scientific evidence behind AGW so you've fabricated a «CAGW» strawman and are playing the silly creationist game of redefining what evidence is so that you can then claim nothing meets it.

What evidence would you accept then to not claim it wasn't existent at all?

On the other side of things, if the warming resumes despite all of the natural factors that the AGW skeptics claim are aligned against it (PDO, sun, etc.), then can we expect the skeptics to start to accept AGW?

Of course it's always mildly amusing when someone credulously accepts all claims of one type, refuses to accepts claims of another type despite all evidence and then tells us they're simply being fair and balanced.

They then create an activation dependence that trends as kT, where T = Temperature, instead of the accepted Arrhenius - rate law exp -LRB-- E / kT)-- with no backing citation or experimental evidence to support this claim.

If a company claims that such modesty is unnecessary then it surely accepts the burden of ensuring that no male employee, or customer, makes a woman feel uncomfortable.