Sentences with phrase «by accepting a religion»

The only way to find compatibility in such a worldview is by accepting a religion with no authority on the most meaningful matters of human existence.»

Not exact matches

Well, yeah... and I mean if what someone is really trying to achieve with this is to reduce practices that in any way, shape or form could indicate that someone bears them or their faith ill will... I don't think publicly humiliating people who would take the time to look up your dead ancestor's name and then take the time to drive to a temple and then get immersed in water on their behalf so that they (by their belief) have the option to accept your religion post mortem is really misguided and contrary to the spirit of freedom of religion in what it advocates.

once a cult is accepted by society, it is called a «religion».

I think a person who lives by the examples that Christ did, is far more important than organized religions demand that you «accept» him.

Folks want to be accepted by religion, society, etc...

when cults are accepted by society, they're called religions.

(membership is a religion is either professing a belief in it and / or being accepted by it)

Teachings are accepted by the authorities of your particular religion and handed down over time.

That is, if Wilson's purely functionalist explanation of religion were to become widely accepted by religious people, it would then be rendered false» for the adaptive features of religions depend, on Wilson's account, upon religious people thinking it false that their religions are best understood as adaptive social organisms.

But, if you find an answer not deemed «correct» by your religion, and accept it as the truth, then won't you probably find yourself outside of that faith?

Today, the religions of Christendom display a similar disrespect for the truth of the Bible, by giving preference to scientific theories, such as the Catholic church accepting evolution.

Isn't a religion that accepts Christ, by definition, Christian?

But to preclude the imposition of a priori evolutionary categories on the nature of religious belief, let us accept the definition of religion as given by the historians and sociologists of religion.

«First we affirm that we desire to follow Scripture alone as a rule of faith and religion, without mixing it with any other things which might be devised by the opinion of men apart from the Word of God, and without wishing to accept for our spiritual government any other doctrine than what is conveyed to us by the same Word without addition to diminution, according to the command of our Lord.»

'' The great trouble with religion — any religion — is that a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, can not thereafter judge those propositions by evidence.

oday's Christians tend to be followers, accepting of the notion that religion is just a box built by someone else into which they must stuff their spirit.

In contrast, constitutional stipulations that are substantive contradict the provision for constitutional change because they falsely assert that they must be explicitly accepted by any political participant who seeks to change them democratically The contradiction becomes fully apparent if we recognize that the argument for permitting substantive constitutional prescriptions also permits an established religion.

All the death and destruction comes from the right wing fundamentalists of each religion who are too immature and insecure to accept living side - by - side with people of other beliefs.

I say knowing and not accepting is worse, and that is what the so - called Christian right is doing by continually questioning his religion.

If any other minority (color / religion), has accepted Obama's treatment by the foul - mouthed, extreme right, as an example of what to expect, then I doubt whether, many would have the courage, to emulate him.

@ Hector — You have to be open minded to accept Faith and the Christian religion given 2000 years ago by Jesus Christ.

Endowment with reason and conscience, and hence that a human person is a rational and moral being, is commonly accepted by all peoples, whatever their philosophy, ideology or religion.

«The immediate outcome was an offer by Sardar Patel and accepted by the Assembly that religious freedom in its full sense including the right to propagate religion should be written into the Constitution, not as a minority right but as a fundamental right of human person» (MMT, Social Reform amongst Indian Christians.

As we read this history, the furor over stem cells was fueled by numerous factors: the near - universal human desire for magic; patients» desperation in the face of illness and their hope for cures; the belief that biology can now do anything; the reluctance of scientists to accept any limits (particularly moral limits) on their research; the impact of big money from biotech stocks, patents, and federal funding; the willingness of America's elite class to use every means possible to discredit religion in general; and the need to protect the unlimited abortion license by accepting no protections of unborn human life.

You won't accept the baloney from a used car salesman so why accept the baloney from any religion conceived, promoted, and FREQUENTLY revised by man?

Once you accustom yourself to accepting invisible magical forces to explain things, it's only a matter of time before you are ensnared by some religion.

By true religion he meant naturalistic religion, which accepts that «man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.»

Sorry... I'll just have to accept the reality that christianity was created by men to control men just like all other religions.

when cults are accepted by society, they are called religions.

And, as time went on, the more open - minded learned of the pomp and magnificence of the religion of their captors and the might of supreme Marduk before whom, by the accepted test of arms, Yahweh's puny strength had but mocked his people's need.

So now since no religion accepts these acts which are forbidden by God as a one of the biggest sins then would that mean establishing them a new party, religion or would be joined as to under the umbrella of Druids?!

Is the church composed only of those who call themselves Christians, or followers of Jesus, and who accept a certain dogma; or does it consist of those who dwell in the Spirit, by whatever religion or label they identify themselves, those who live according to the principle of love for one's fellow man, and of recognizing the holy spirit within each?

These friends understand that I do not accept many of the beliefs of their religions, so therefore do not feel it necessary to live by those beliefs.

After many years of confusion instilled by my religion, which is done I believe on purpose, I began to accept science instead of myth as fact.

Most christians will not accept that Genesis is not supported by evidence as it undermines credibilty for their personal god and for the original sin which is the basis of the religion.

They were all invented at some point by humans and if you are going to believe in any of them you have to accept some pretty far fetching stuff, like you can't question god and the likes, so step into religion and the door slams shut behind you and you will never see the light of day again.

Unfortunately, some adults are restricted by childhood ideas and feelings about religion — beliefs they can no longer accept as adults.

Jane, Buddhism is one of the great religions of the world, in panthrotheism it is one of all religions that God had willed to serve humans who believes on its doctrine.But since we are all humans, we have to experience all the trials of life so that in the future when His Will shall be implemented by us, the wisdom of experience of all religions will be the basis of our decisions.Thats why genocides, wars,, pestilence, natural calamities, and all what we percieve as injustices, such as tyranny, persecutions and all the negative events in history is part of His will, because in panthrotheism, there is no devil or satan.everything has a reason.and we have to accept it, Remember that He is not faith selective but performance appreciative, it is the good things you do that He wills.

It is characterized by refusal to accept this break up of traditional integration and the relative autonomy of society and politics, and a desperate attempt to bring them again under the tutelage of religion.

This constituency includes persons now repelled by organized religion because they can not accept certain positions (such as opposition to evolutionary theory or to birth - control practice) which they have been exposed to in some churches and which they assume characterize all churches.

If you have accepted God (as defined by any religion) as you're Saviour, I'm happy for you.

By citing historical instances of religion - based bigotry and prejudice, you allow people to be more comfortable with atudinal change — they realize they are not stepping out alone against a commonly accepted viewpoint but rather following historical progress toward justice and equality.

By the way - Hippies and New Agers - the Dali Lama, whos religion and philosophy and practices like mediation and meatless diet, Yoga, etc — you all have embraced — clearly states abortion is killing and not accepted by the Buddist religioBy the way - Hippies and New Agers - the Dali Lama, whos religion and philosophy and practices like mediation and meatless diet, Yoga, etc — you all have embraced — clearly states abortion is killing and not accepted by the Buddist religioby the Buddist religion.

Your statement reminds me of a satirical remark by Steven Colbert: «And though I am a committed Christian, I believe that everyone has the right to their own religion — be you Hindu, Jewish, or Muslim, I believe there are infinite paths to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior.»

The second approach to comparative religion at Chicago was advocated by George Burman Foster (d. 1918), who accepted a widely held three - layered scheme: (1) a narrow history of religions — conceived to be the simple historical study of «raw» religious data, often colored by an evolutionary ideology — toward (2) «comparative religion,» which aims to classify religious data and culminates in (3) a philosophy of religion (or a theology) that provides a meaning for the comparative religion enterprise as a whole.

They will not want to be told that it is not the «fault» of people like themselves that they are either «unaware of or do not accept» the true religion ordained by Jesus Christ.

Their definition of what it means to be a Christian can certainly be open for debate, but it is not discrimination to have a definition of what it means to be a member of a religion and live by those standards, just like it is not discrimination to have Greek standards, unless everyone who has ever been in a Greek organization is saying that every Greek Fraternity or Sorority must accept everyone who applies.

So, kudos, Lady... Me, I have this odd memory that prevents me from accepting a religion that once said that black people were «unfinished by the Lord», a sort of» failed attempt»... I suppose that opportunism will lead anyone anywhere, even where one should not go... (smile).

«A man's religion,» Radhakrishnan rightly observes, «must be his own and not simply accepted on trust or imposed by authority.

This claim, in theory and practice, is as exclusive as any made by certain religions in history, and has the same tragic consequences on the life of other people who refuse to accept such claims.