Sentences with phrase «believe in something which»

I just don't happen to believe in something which is completely intangible.

I also can not believe in something which doesn't even have a coherent, non self - contradictory definition in the first place.

I honestly don't understand why people have to feel the urge to belong to the «god» club and pretend they believe in something which they will never see and will certainly never «know» to exist.

But the issue here is blown out of proportion because Chick - Fil - A believe in something which LGBT doesn't believe in.

Jeremy Corbyn believes in something which can not be reduced to psephological calculations.

Not exact matches

But by agreeing to do something they might not like or might not believe in, they run the risk of either being good at something they don't like to do, or not doing well because they are unhappy — both of which are bad outcomes.

This is the most straightforward approach, in which a contribution is made to a project or cause, and the donor doesn't receive anything in exchange other than a good feeling for supporting something in which they believe (and perhaps a tax write - off).

This isn't always easy, but it's something in which I strongly believe.

Here is a simple one page template that I believe can be extremely helpful for starting the new year off on the right foot, which is something my mother always used to say to me in days gone by.

I used to believe that myth too, but eventually got to the point I couldn't keep rationalizing a belief in something for which there was absolutely no evidence.

Something about their consecrated life kept the rest of us on the right track, reminded us of the mystery in which we believe.

You actually do believe in something that has no evidence in support of your belief (i.e. you believe in a possibility of something outside existence which is an impossibility)

It is the DEFINITION of «faith in something despite the presence of all evidence to the contrary» Indeed, it takes FAR more faith to be an atheist, than a Christian for you are believing that which is impossible to demonstrate..

My only assertion is that it isn't reasonable to believe in something for which there is no evidence.

Stay ignorant that is your choice, which is why you believe in something that doesn't exist and is based on fiction.

The similarity ends with the way of phrasing it however, because I «believe» in evidence, not in something like «faith» (or «brainwashing» I would say) for which there is no evidence, and in fact there is MUCH EVIDENCE to conclude «faith» is a form of mental illness.

If you're a non-atheist, you believe in something far - fetched for which there is absolutely no evidence to support.

a: allegiance to duty or a person: loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions 2a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust 3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially: a system of religious beliefs

It actually doesn't take faith to not believe in something for which there is no evidence.

Not to mention this «all loving» and «all just» god willing to torture you for all of eternity just for the crime of not believing in something for which there is no evidence.

If you don't believe in sin, then why do you have a problem with anything having to do with something in which you don't believe?

On this properly ontological level of this originally Aristotelian treatment, which Mason does not seem to put in question, Heidegger would point out a naive and inexplicit» commitment to disclosedness against the horizon of ecstatic - temporal presence (Anwesenheit, parousia)-- which is something very different from believing in the «instantaneous now.»

The philosopher Hegel believed that institutions are something from which the Spirit has flown, and that they use free people as cogs in their machines.

Does it really matter, in any case, whether Mendelssohn's reconciliation of Judaism with liberalism was something in which he truly believed or was merely tactical?

This scandal serves as a confirmation of something many Hollywood critics have long believed: that Tinsel Town is a sewer of moral degradation and corruption, in which the innocent are abused and then silenced and discarded.

But when this universe dies my particles will become the nothing and that leads me back to believing in nothing which is certainly something.

If atheists are so happy and confident with the choices they have made, why are they so apparently unhappy (judging on the venom in their posts)» Have you ever had the opportunity to live in a society in which 90 % of the populace believe in something that you find to be fanciful in the extreme?

Snow... you stated, «I agree that atheists believe in something (which is that there is no god controlling).»

logically, I agree that atheists believe in something (which is that there is no god controlling).

Vs you which it is best to believe in something false than not believe?

And even though I am a scientist, I also do not believe that observable reality is something in which I should place something called «faith.»

But I've been considering looking for a non-evangelical church in my town which doesn't upset me and is more liberal, just so I can have something to keep my faith strong, because I'm battling to believe on my own.

Hauerwas insists that the first task of the church is not to make the world more just, but to make the world the world — by which he means that the best favor the church can do for the world is to live as a different sort of people, and thereby at least offer the world something interesting in which not to believe,

I then realised I did not mean that, but I wanted to use the word «satanic» in order to say something positive about the holy spirit (which I do believe).

The danger of believing that there is something more after death, an after - life for the soul is that you will put off being the best that you can be now in hopes of avoiding expending some effort and sliding in under the wire to a Heaven which no one can prove exists or does not exist.

What the Girl Scouts decided was that if the girl in question believed in something that allowed for the same traditional Scouting function of religious education — religious and spiritual self - cultivation based on the principle of a moral order of which the Scout can be a part — she could substitute her preferred name for that instead of using the word «God.»

Whatever doubts may exist about the sources of this democracy, there can be none about the chief source of the morality that gives it life and substance... [From the Hebrew tradition, via the Puritans, come] the contract and all its corollaries; the higher law as something more than a «brooding omnipresence in the sky»; the concept of the competent and responsible individual; certain key ingredients of economic individualism; the insistence on a citizenry educated to understand its rights and duties; and the middle - class virtues, that high plateau of moral stability on which, so Americans believe, successful democracy must always build [Seedtime of the Republic (Harcourt, Brace, 1953, p. 55)-RSB-.

It is Polanyi's theory of tacit knowing, therefore, I believe, which can start us on the right path, coalescing as it does with the existential - phenomenological approach of Merleau - Ponty, and it may be, in large part at least, something not unlike the philosophy of Process and Reality that will emerge.2

The word which got translated into Latin as «credo» did not really mean «I believe this as actual fact» but something more like «I put my faith in, or I commit myself to, or I follow the teaching of...».

The band has given zero clues as to when or if a new album is going drop, but they have recently started appearing on lineup lists for a couple different summer festivals, which leads us to believe something is in the works.

As a scientist and Christian, who knows alcoholics, I choose to believe that conscious life is a sort of test of its ability to submit itself to something which can never in this Universe be proved exists with empirical evidence.

In deism, you still have to believe in some supreme creator being, which is something that any genuine skeptic really ought to reject on the basis of there being no evidencIn deism, you still have to believe in some supreme creator being, which is something that any genuine skeptic really ought to reject on the basis of there being no evidencin some supreme creator being, which is something that any genuine skeptic really ought to reject on the basis of there being no evidence.

I can not believe (or have faith) in something for which there is no physical proof.

It is next usually displayed in the anarchy of general education requirements, which encourages students to believe that a knowledge of civilization's architecture is something that can be readily self - assembled.

I have tried to say something about the sort of thing it is for a Christian to believe in God and about the way in which this belief is rooted in a living historical tradition.

So in seeking to evaluate these pieces of literature, which claim to portray God, I must evaluate what their portrayal of Him means and if that is something which I am prepared to believe in or accept.

So its ok for him to prove his points (which btw science can not prove something to be real when it comes to THEORIES which is what evolution is, which i believe to be true), yet when someone wants to believe in something that they see points to proof in thats not ok?

which is something EVERYONE should do; research, ask questions, learn about what you believe in.

It was something celebrated in the later history of the Hebrew people, a ceremony through which ancient nomadic folk from the wilderness believed that God was coming to them in the form of a cloud.

«On the whole, conservative churches tend to be stricter in terms of what they require people to believe and their demands upon them, something which generally makes an organisation stronger.