Sentences with phrase «because human beliefs»

Not exact matches

Belief in the hot hand is just a delusion that occurs because we as humans have a predisposition to see patterns in randomness; we see streakiness even though shooting data are essentially random.

Anytime one religion interferes with another religion, or the life of humans, I tend to take it a little more seriously, not because I believe in their beliefs, but because their beliefs can cause me death.

So how do you go from that reasoning to «Since it wasn't accidental then it must have been this ancient male diety named (fill in blank depending on religion) who loves me and knows me and cares for me and wants me to perform rituals that have nothing to do with morality like prayer, not eating certain things, sabaath and many more just because he said so, even though we have no record of him saying anything, just records of humans who wrote things down that they claim he said, but I want to believe it all so badly I will base my beliefs on no other evidence than «it just can't be accident».

Once we devalue a human life because of a different belief or skin color we have lost our ability to be human.

Atheists aren't innocent either: eugenics, the belief that certain races do not deserve to live because they could hinder the evolution of the human species.

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.

To describe a work as an autobiography merely because of the first - person pronoun effaces what distinguishes autobiography: the belief in the existence of a stable self and the meaningfulness of human action.

And to say that Biblical teachings are invalid because there are other similar beliefs that have older known written sources invalidates the Biblical teachings also should take into consideration that for certain Biblical believers that all those truths whether they are known to have been placed in the Bible first or known thus far to have been placed elsewhere that they believe that they all come via deity who at the beginning of human history on this world dispensed those truths to humanity and that to those who believe in the biblical teachings believe that through time they are more complete than those of other ancient beliefs due to God restoring those truths through revelations given to later prophets like say Moses and other later Old and New Testament prophets and apostles.

Barbara and Randy: I think that all human beings — regardless of their acceptance of an existent God or any religious belief — are capable of kindness, generousity, and unselfish love because all human beings are created in God's image.

Evolution should destroy your belief because it shows you we as humans are not special, still you push god further back.

Obviously, that biblical law was written by ignorant men, and because humans are changeable, we have «evolved» our beliefs on such things and do not recognize what the biblical laws require — because they are immoral.

The ridiculous assertion that because Christians follow their religion they are somehow outside of basic human rights is absolutely criminal... We are doomed if what you three have posted becomes the common belief.

Belief in gods is rampant, not because the case for their existence has any merit, it doesn't, but because humans have an uncanny ability to delude themselves, and be deluded.

but if anyone truley had God in thier heart and had faith in the Lord... simply by folding your hands and asking God to enter your heart... (try it he will be there for you, and you will feel the joy of His love), then they would never do things like this... he obviously was not a person who loved God because No one with God in thier heart would want to do thing s like that... you HATE sin when you truely love God, No ones perfect though, even those who belive in God we all stray from our beliefs, its human nature and the devil takes advantage of this.

I have no problem saying that an intelligent person could believe, and this is because humans tend to compartmentalize their beliefs, and give special exceptions in terms of standards of evidence to the belief that they were either raised with, or feels most comfortable to them.

Pope Benedict again reminds us: Many people today have a limited idea of the Christian faith because they identify it with a mere system of beliefs and values rather than with the truth of a God who revealed Himself in history, anxious to communicate with human beings in a tête - a-tête, in a relationship of love with them.

Non-rational aspects of belief are to be defended because God transcends every possible human understanding.

actually there is no free will, because we humans is part of god, our conciousness is his.therefore everything we do has a purpose only beyond our immediate comprehension or understanding.the problem lies in our concept or belief of the absoluteness of the philosophy of science, which by itself is part of gods evolutionary process, atheists has this mentality, but since they are part of the process so its gods will through us.

Faith based beliefs don't afford such a luxury as admitting they are wrong, because they don't rely on evidence, but on human «feeling.»

I also know that humans by flawed default will interpret the words as they morally see fit, because it is in our nature to judge others against ourselves and our own ethics, beliefs, and morals.

your understanding of the change process is very simplistic, because your mind is not open, you specifically believe already in the traditional doctrines, Dogmas as shown in thousands of years of history evolves, and the need for input variables, meaning the diversity of religious belief is necessay because nature through his will is requiring this to happen, we are being educated by God in the events of history.In the past when there was no humans yet Gods will is directly manifisted in nature, with our coming and education through history, we gradually takes the responsibilty of implementing the will.Your complaint on your perception of abuse is just part of the complex process of educating us through experience.

- Hitler killed the Jews because he thought they were less human because of their religious beliefs.

It acknowledges a human contribution in the formulation and transmission of religious beliefs, while accepting the possibility of divine revelation.4 Because God's communication is being received by humans, there will always be an element in the whole process of understanding God's revelation that is open to change and development.

The basis of your belief system appears to be that, you will go to a place of eternal fire and torture, unless you accept that 2000 years ago god sent a piece of himself to Earth in human form (Jesus) knowing in advance that this Jesus would live, be crucified, died, then come alive again, then ascend to heaven to rejoin himself, and that this was the only way that humans could be cleansed of the evil that is inherent in them because a rib woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat an apple.

Posner even indicates some sympathy for those who want to prohibit those other abortions: «I do not mean to criticize anyone who believes, whether because of religious conviction, nonsectarian moral conviction, or simply a prudential belief that upholding the sacredness of human life whatever the circumstances is necessary to prevent us from sliding into barbarism, that abortion is always wrong and perhaps particularly so in late pregnancy, since all methods of late - term abortion are gruesome....

Gods will is for us humans today to evolved to a level of conciousness that will prepare us for the challenges of our future survival, Scientists now predicts of hardships in the future due to over population and changes to the natural environment.and that is happening now with activists through out the world are reminding us of protecting nature.That is why we need a phsychological revolution to hasten the evolution of consciousness that will address the problems.Ideological and philosophical enlightenment had the past great minds to develop ideas and belief because God sent them to reality in their times.Abraham, Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, and many other religious leaders to teach humanity the doctrines that God willed to be appropriate and applicable in those periods of their existence, Also great philosophers in another dimension of social involvement were born to interprete and connect philosophically as the second element of our conscience, Kant, Marx and countless of them also were born.To complete the triangular structure or dimension of our conscience is knowledge.

I use the word «named religions» because there are countless moral and social belief systems private to every human which does not have a name...

Just because a person doesn't hold a belief in gods doesn't mean they have no beliefs or that they aren't serious about the betterment of human lives.

the belief on the existence of the devil was concieved by theologians of the past thousands of years, there was no other way of explaining the bad experiences of people in the past because we were not educated yet to the kind of what we have now, Why this happened because that was part of the learning process that God wants us to know, in pathrotheism, we are part of God, and He himself is evolving because He is the universe, We are now the conscious part of Him, our destiny in accordance to his will also be His destiny because it is His will.Although He prepared first all the material reality of the universe ahead of us, The experiences for us humans including the supernatural is just part of nirmal process for learning because its natural process, today we reach a point of not believing the practices of the past, but it does not mean its wrong, Just like a child, adults loved to tell mythical stories to them, because we knew children enjoys it as part of their learning process.

I believe it is determined by society, and that societies tend to develop similar beliefs on what is right and wrong because humans are social creatures, pretty much incapable of surviving on their own in the wilderness (we are useless predators when unarmed).

These people fully believed they were in the right, because they thought God had directed them to commit these crimes against their fellow human beings, and they were largely unwilling to even begin questioning their long - held beliefs.

Mainly, because in all the verbiage about freedoms of beliefs there is something so important, so blatantly acute yet everyone do not even mention it, except - oh genial me: Why would anyone in the whole world support any type of creed / belief / religion where a whole lot of humans — as in millions of human women — are not allowed to go to school, to even just read and write - less become a teacher, doctor, lawyer, president of their own companies, their own countries, mutilated by the millions when they reach puberty, WHY is this allowed?

No evidence of the human origins of religious belief will upset the religious believer, because he can always appeal to a very convenient, and convently mysterious, relation between God and a defective humanity.

You said «The reality is that Atheists post on a Belief Blog because it is a place to challenge the conceptions of Religion which we feel are a detriment to human society by proporting magical thinking»

In return, I ask others to respect me as a human being who lives a very moral life just because that is also part of my belief system.

They present the Church as the Church of those who as sinners accept in faith the human life of all, with its ordinariness and its burdens, so that we experience our own lot as that of the Church, and ourselves as its members in that way; as the Church which is believed because we believe in God, the Church whose belief is not to be identified with what it experiences; above all as the Church which is the promise of salvation for the world which has not yet expressly recognized itself as part of the Church, the Church as the sacramentum of the world's salvation.

In sum, because it treats belief as an atomistic decision taken piecemeal by individuals rather than a holistic response to family life, Nietzsche's madman and his offspring, secularization theory, appear to present an incomplete version of how some considerable portion of human beings actually come to think and behave about things religious — not one by one and all on their own, but rather mediated through the elemental connections of husband, wife, child, aunt, great - grandfather, and the rest.

I would be failing ethically because I take my beliefs to be not merely true, but of profound importance for all human persons.

It could be argued that the Platonic doctrine of the immortality of the soul was simply a refined and highly sophisticated version of that belief in an after - life which had been widespread in the ancient world in one form or another, and which Israel had come almost completely to abandon because of her psychosomatic view of the unity of the human individual.

The church held fast to this belief because it held fast to this Jew, to his flesh and not only to his spirit, to his Jewish flesh on the cross, to a flesh in which God was present, incarnated, penetrating the world of humanity, becoming human.

Because belief empowered and shaped political life, they granted all religions the right of free exercise, and knowing the human desire to dominate, they courageously insisted that government not infringe upon religious life.

The panexperientialist version of physicalism can affirm this belief because its «physical entities» are phyk4 - riseatd entities, and because there are various levels of such entities, one level of which is that of the dominant occasions of experience constituting the human mind.

Turning away from orthodox Christianity because of the emotional excesses of frontier evangelism, he found it easier as a young man to accept what was called the Doctrine of Necessity, which he defined as the belief â $ ˜that the human mind is impelled to action, or held in rest by some power, over which the mind itself has no control.â $ ™ Later, he frequently quoted to his partner, William H. Herndon, the lines for Hamlet: â $ ˜Thereâ $ ™ s a divinity that shapes our ends, rough â $ «hew them how he will.â $ ™ â $ œFrom Lincolnâ $ ™ s fatalism derived some of his most lovable traits: his compassion, his tolerance, his willingness to overlook mistakes.

lol, yes clay i am an atheist... i created the sun whorshipping thing to have argument against religion from a religious stand point... however, the sun makes more sense then something you can't see or feel — the sun also gives free energy... your god once did that for the jews, my gives it to the human race as well as everything else on the planet, fuk even the planet is nothing without the sun... but back to your point — yes it is very hypocritical of me, AND thats the point, every religious person i have ever met has and on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the group.

This anecdote communicates a simple but dynamic truth about growth that is often overlooked — that a major dreamsquelcher which causes us to postpone our potentializing indefinitely is the belief that «I can't do what I'd really like to do because...» If you feel some serious inner or outer obstacles to making creative changes in your life, welcome to the human race!

In a recent interview with the Washington Post (part of their ominously titled «Voices of Power» series), Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius discussed Archbishop Joseph Naumann's request that she not present herself for communion because of her public support for legalised abortion: «Well, it was one of the most painful things I have ever experienced in my life, and I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state, and I feel that my actions as a parishioner are different than my actions as a public official and that the people who elected me in Kansas had a right to expect me to uphold their rights and their beliefs even if they did not have the same religious beliefs that I had.

It is easy to stand and prophecy that in the future there will be strange new religions, that people will do things foreign to our understanding, and swear that our gods will not be pleased... and be correct... because it is the nature of human beings to change, to modify our beliefs to fit our experience, to seek out new understanding, change the way we dress and do our hair, and unfortunately, it is in our nature to fight over stupid crap like land and religion.

If my heart is lonely but my gut says walk away because of my human emotions, I will walk away when things seem kinda strange or fits into my beliefs / standards / past lessons / set boundaries to live by.

It is because of this doctrine that certain Islamic countries objected to Article 18 of the 1948 International Declaration of Human Rights, which declares (among other things) that «everyone has the right... to change his religion or belief.»

And religous people are more likely to violate the rights of others in our secular society because their beliefs are often held to be «above human law».