Sentences with phrase «because claims of faith»

I don't want to burden this post with all of the psychology behind that statement, but you should find a way to get used to that because claims of faith are always under assault of reality.

Not exact matches

Then there's a local preacher, Matt Jamison, who insists that what happened couldn't be the Rapture because it claimed flawed humans of all faiths and ethnicities.

While Iran's government claims to promote tolerance, it continues to imprison many of its people because of their faith.

Your comment is interesting because in the midst of begging for respect for your own views and claiming to respect the views of atheists you imply without faith or the «spirit» they lack strength, will, a positive outlook, morality and a desire to do good.

I would do this because I would realize that the claims of the Christian faith stand or fall on the validity of that revealed propositional truth we call the bible.

Because these claims are NOT claims of faith.

One of the most common «attacks» by Christians is they are a religion or faith too, because they claim atheists have put up signs, or banners, and now, made movies.

Stephen Baldwin has claimed that Hollywood casting agencies and producers have refused to work with him because of his Christian faith.

(A decision for same - sex marriage by a state could as in the case of Massachusetts, preempts the debate in that state, but it is less far - reaching because it leaves other states to arrive at a different conclusion — unless, as some same - sex - marriage proponents have claimed, other states are required to recognize such marriages under the Constitution's requirement of giving «full faith and credit» to other states» proceedings.)

That wasn't the case, however, for another part of Stark's theory — his claim that males who shun faith and worship services do so because they get a kick out of risking hellfire and damnation, or at least the loss of a heavenly afterlife.

Now, here's where I suspect Challies and I may agree: Because we believe Scripture to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice and a trustworthy testimony regarding Jesus Christ, we would be right to be highly suspicious of anyone whose claims about their experiences with God run contrary to the teachings of Scripture.

Thick faiths like Catholicism are in tension with reason because of their complexity; other evidence might conflict with claims from the faith.

I might as well claim that your heart pumps blood because invisible unicorns squeeze the sides of the muscle with their invisible wings, but you have to believe by faith because there's no way to detect them.

Terrorists or dictatorships who persecute innocent people because they claim it's part of faith are not welcomed — their use of Islam as a scapegoat, does not make Islam what they portray it to be, in fact those false persecutors will be punished themselves by God, «God is the only judge.

Panthrotheism does not discriminate or believe the bible is wrong, in analogy no one can claim that our human ancestors are wrong because they were naked or ate raw meats.We have now to accept that we are evolving.What is important that we survive.and still love each other in general despite conflicts.No one is wrong in believing and practicing any religion that is pro life.Some people thinks that any contadiction to classical faith is wrong, un aware that humans survive the trials in history was because of change and adaptation, in short evolution.its not anti religiom

Such an identity appears to be possible because, as Walsh claims (most clearly and emphatically in The Third Millennium: Reflections on Faith and Reason), following Heidegger and Voegelin, the transcendent must be utterly «differentiated» from our worldly or secular existence: the withdrawal of the divine into utterly transcendent mystery relieves existential - theological practice of any ends «higher» than humanity.

Once all the disclaimers have been made — that many religious beliefs are supremely difficult to test for truth because they refer to the supernatural or to that which it is beyond our mental powers to discern, or because (in the case of faith) they are values and not truth - claims — once all this has been said, we still have to admit that yes, of course the question of truth enters in here.

Let's not forget that Christianity, Judaeism and Islam all are Abramic faiths, claiming the same founding principle embodied in Abraham: the willingness of a man to kill another man because God told him to.

Simply because we currently «do not know», those of faith wish to bash atheists and claim «but we of faith do know the answer!»

In your definition of «dead faith» can a pornstar that claims that she is a believer and trusts in Jesus, but still participates in pornographic movies and does not even try to stop it, still be saved because she have dead faith and not «non-existing faith»?

The philosophers of the «Age of Reason» called the Middle Ages the «Age of Faith,» and claimed that because «God did it!»

A Christian has shown reporters cross-shaped staples embedded into his thighs and claimed he received the wounds from security agents because of his faith.

Muslims — who do not like to be called Muhammadans because they think it implies a misunderstanding of the place of the Prophet in their faith — have themselves tended to encourage oversimplification by claiming that Islam may be quickly grasped by accepting the Fundamentals and following the simple list of Consequences they imply.

I can't prove God's existence just as much as scientist can't prove the big bang... there is evidence of both but to reach a conclusion takes faith... one side leaves hope and the other does not... maybe I'm agnostic too because I don't claim to know everything about why I'm here, I have to have faith... Honestly, I'm sick of the extremes on both sides... the conservative judgmental Christian, who never thought through things as to why the believe what they do (ie Dinosaurs, cavemen, evolution, etc.) and the intellectually arrogant atheist and humanists.

So, then you are making the argument that you are right because you are just challenging his view then can he or another of Faith just make the same argument that there is a God because you can not offer proof that there is not a God... basically that the Faithful are refuting your claim that there is not a God?

It's funny, because I am a scholar of the very faith you claim, and which you claim I know nothing about.

Barth claimed that such knowledge was impossible and an obstacle to true knowledge by faith (the analogia fidei), because it tempts us to substitute a philosophical construction for authentic revelation of the living God.

Yet the portrayal still holds good, he claims; and he goes on to say that it is precisely because he is trying to think and write as a responsible Christian theologian that he feels obliged to affirm that such personal persistence is not in and of itself, by necessity, utterly integral to Christian faith.

What happens if an opponent of the faith objects to this dogma claiming that it is a contradiction because, as he understands it, the dogma claims that three equals one and, as any first grade student of mathematics knows, three does not equal one, but three.

Because Mary and Joseph were called both to form their son in the faith of Israel and to give up, even renounce, their human claims on him, so that he might be what God the Father intended and the world needed.

The majority of the Christian faith disagrees with you because your claim is both absurd and defenseless.

If your claim were true, then suicide attacks would be ok because they are only taking such action because of their faith.

Moreover, because religions are distinctive historical developments, a central task for theology within each particular tradition is the assessment of how well any theological claim coheres with the normative witness to faith of that unique tradition.

Such a claim is always anathema to syncretists, because it is a cardinal article of their faith that God would never condescend to reveal Himself in a particular way, at a particular time and place, and to a particular people.

Of course it would be silly to suggest that winning any game, cup or otherwise, isn't good for the club, but let's remember just how problematic FA Cup success has been for this club... I'm certainly not going to suggest I didn't enjoy seeing Arsenal win, I'm a fan of this club first and foremost, but how bad are things when you find yourself secretly wishing that your own team lost so that just maybe real change would finally come... I resent this team for even making me feel such thoughts and it's going to take a lot of effort on their part to earn my trust again... this club has treated the fans so poorly that it has created an incredibly fragile and toxic environment, so much so that a «what have you done for me lately» mentality has emerged... fans rise and fall depending on the results of each game because we don't have faith in those in charge to make the necessary changes to personnel and tactics... each time we win many fans attack any dissenting voices and make unrealistic claims about the players, the manager and the potential for unprecedented success... every time we lose the boo - birds run rampant, calling for heads to roll and predicting the worst... regardless of what side you fall on, it's not your fault, both sides are simply overcompensating for the horrible state of affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiOf course it would be silly to suggest that winning any game, cup or otherwise, isn't good for the club, but let's remember just how problematic FA Cup success has been for this club... I'm certainly not going to suggest I didn't enjoy seeing Arsenal win, I'm a fan of this club first and foremost, but how bad are things when you find yourself secretly wishing that your own team lost so that just maybe real change would finally come... I resent this team for even making me feel such thoughts and it's going to take a lot of effort on their part to earn my trust again... this club has treated the fans so poorly that it has created an incredibly fragile and toxic environment, so much so that a «what have you done for me lately» mentality has emerged... fans rise and fall depending on the results of each game because we don't have faith in those in charge to make the necessary changes to personnel and tactics... each time we win many fans attack any dissenting voices and make unrealistic claims about the players, the manager and the potential for unprecedented success... every time we lose the boo - birds run rampant, calling for heads to roll and predicting the worst... regardless of what side you fall on, it's not your fault, both sides are simply overcompensating for the horrible state of affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof this club first and foremost, but how bad are things when you find yourself secretly wishing that your own team lost so that just maybe real change would finally come... I resent this team for even making me feel such thoughts and it's going to take a lot of effort on their part to earn my trust again... this club has treated the fans so poorly that it has created an incredibly fragile and toxic environment, so much so that a «what have you done for me lately» mentality has emerged... fans rise and fall depending on the results of each game because we don't have faith in those in charge to make the necessary changes to personnel and tactics... each time we win many fans attack any dissenting voices and make unrealistic claims about the players, the manager and the potential for unprecedented success... every time we lose the boo - birds run rampant, calling for heads to roll and predicting the worst... regardless of what side you fall on, it's not your fault, both sides are simply overcompensating for the horrible state of affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof effort on their part to earn my trust again... this club has treated the fans so poorly that it has created an incredibly fragile and toxic environment, so much so that a «what have you done for me lately» mentality has emerged... fans rise and fall depending on the results of each game because we don't have faith in those in charge to make the necessary changes to personnel and tactics... each time we win many fans attack any dissenting voices and make unrealistic claims about the players, the manager and the potential for unprecedented success... every time we lose the boo - birds run rampant, calling for heads to roll and predicting the worst... regardless of what side you fall on, it's not your fault, both sides are simply overcompensating for the horrible state of affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof each game because we don't have faith in those in charge to make the necessary changes to personnel and tactics... each time we win many fans attack any dissenting voices and make unrealistic claims about the players, the manager and the potential for unprecedented success... every time we lose the boo - birds run rampant, calling for heads to roll and predicting the worst... regardless of what side you fall on, it's not your fault, both sides are simply overcompensating for the horrible state of affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof what side you fall on, it's not your fault, both sides are simply overcompensating for the horrible state of affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof affairs that have been percolating for several years... it's hard to take the long view when those in charge have lied incessantly and refuse to take any responsibilities for their own actions... in the end, we are trapped by the same catch - 22 that ManU faced upon Fergie's exit... less fearful of maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof maintaining the status quo than facing the unknown, which was validated, wrongly or rightly, by witnessing the difficulties they have faced during this transitory period... to be honest, the thing that scares me most is that this team has never prepared whatsoever for this eventuality, which considering our frugal nature and the way we have shunned many of our most revered former players is more than a little disconcertiof our most revered former players is more than a little disconcerting

there is some suggestion that wenger is backtracking on his fervent stance regarding what players would be staying at the club for the remainder of the season... some might deduce that this is all part of a much bigger, more elaborate plan... by shifting the blame wenger is attempting to, not so slyly, flip the narrative... by doing so he hopes to evoke empathy from his most ardent supporters, while attempting to rally any fence - sitters, whose faith was waning unless a more legitimate agent of blame emerges... unfortunately, and incredibly insulting to the fans, when wenger attempts to spin a tale and / or tries to eat his own words, he doesn't seem to play it all the way through in his head, so invariably gaping holes emerge... say we believed his version of the truth, would that not make him either an incredibly well - paid custodian of destruction or a spineless jellyfish because what manager worth his weight in salt would stay at a club that didn't give him final say after 20 years of supposed «success»... no matter the answer, neither bodes well for us... how ironic, in a way, since many pundits claim this team has lacked a «spine» for some years now... so whether we win, lose or draw on Sunday is frankly immaterial, as the problems will remain, and although it will be easier to digest if we left the Pool with 3 points, it might just be the worst result for the betterment of this club... a fact that both breaks my heart and baffles the mind

Gaskell claimed the university did not appoint him director of their student observatory because of his Christian faith, despite him being the best candidate.

Legal The Malaysian cartoonist Zunar has appealed a court decision upholding his 2010 arrest and detention, claiming police acted in bad faith when they arrested him under the Sedition Act because of his book Cartoon - O - Phobia, which had not yet been released at the time of his arrest.

In «Not Evil Just Wrong,» they challenge the claims made in Gore's film and conclude that the film is not worth screening in schools because it is shown there as «an article of science, not faith.»

Regarding your question this means that any idea that has no existence in this way is a juxtaposition of personal thoughts out of the memory of a conditioned mind, and because you have spoken your personal claim, for that you can not give any proof, the source of the point of lacks in logic which people used to call faith is your personal mind.

In «Not Evil Just Wrong,» they challenge the claims made in Al Gore's film and conclude that the film is not worth screening in schools because it is shown there as «an article of science, not faith.»

In a different paragraph of its letter to the ITC, Google claims that import bans «must be» the consequence of a finding of a violation «because, in the absence of the availability of exclusion order, implementers have little incentive to negotiate in good faith towards the completion of a license on [F] RAND terms».

Insurers facing bad faith and extra-contractual claims seek out our firm because of our ability to provide a proper risk analysis.

Product liability personal injury claims If you have suffered an injury because of a faulty product that you bought in good faith, you might be able to claim compensation with the help of the Kansas personal injury lawyers at Ketchmark and McCreight, P.C..

The availability of an increased punitive damage award in a wrongful dismissal action because of a bad faith employer policy was recognized in Hodson v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce.2 The Divisional Court considered an appeal of an order striking paragraphs in the plaintiff's statement of claim that alleged that the Bank had an ongoing corporate strategy of terminating employees for cause to avoid having to provide unwanted employees with a severance package.

Whether you have suffered because of an agent's negligence or you feel that your claim was denied in bad faith, our insurance litigation lawyers are committed to protecting your interests.

ERISA laws make it more difficult to pursue a traditional bad faith claim, and because of this, many group health insurers routinely deny legitimate claims.

Step 5: Win at trial in front of a judge that somehow didn't get the memo that the Washington Supreme Court in Chaplin eliminated the need for Selby's to even make their adverse possession claim «in good faith under a claim of right»... certainly because the attorney didn't bother to raise this point... along I suspect with hiring a surveyor to testify as an expert witness.

However, they claimed that — because of the extent of its control of GM Canada — GM US was a «franchisor's associate» under the Act and was bound by the duty of good faith under section 3 of the Act and at common law.

The court rejected the member's argument that because the enabling statute in that case (the Law Society Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L. 8) protected officials for any acts done in good faith, the investigator was only protected to the extent of his acting in good faith, but not immune to a claim that the member had acted with malice.