Sentences with phrase «by believing in sky»

Once you make the quantum leap into «Wonderland» by believing in sky - fairies, what difference does if make if you believe in one or many?

Once you make the quantum leap into Wonderland by believing in sky - fairies, what difference does it make if you believe in one or many?

Not exact matches

But just as Roman children grew up believing i n the far out exploits of the Roman gods and Greek children grew up believing in Greek gods, children today grow up believing that a virgin was impregnated by a god, that this god died and was reborn, that this god later flew up into the sky and vanished, and on and on and on.

To the religinuts: If by god, you mean the force behind the big bang then most atheist believe in god and we can have a discussion... if you mean that you join dead jesus» fan club and follow his club rules, (which were written by... strangers) you go to disney land in the sky forever....

Q. 4 It is only acceptable as an adult to believe childish Bronze Age mythology like talking snakes, the Red Sea splitting, water turning into wine by magic, mana falling from the sky, a man living in a whale's belly, a talking donkey, superhuman strength, a man rising from the dead and angels, ghosts, gods and demons in the field of:

Do you want to go back to the dark ages when humans believed that the earth was the center of everything because the bible mentions that god stopped the day by stopping the sun in the sky?

@J3sus Sandals, Bennington is the school NOT populated by students who believe in a deity in the sky, turning water into wine, healing the dead etc..

There is an example of circular reasoning by SeaVik and neverbeenhappieratheist above that «proves» I believe in a sky fairy / wizard.

I don't are if you believe in some robed guy in the sky or little people in your flowerpots... if you want to engage with the real world, you have to play by real world rules.

The only reason the Polish family risked saving Jews is because they believed in the morality set forth by the «Bronze Daddy In the Sky.&raquin the morality set forth by the «Bronze Daddy In the Sky.&raquIn the Sky.»

Just like you explain away the bothersome aspects of believing in imaginary sky gods by quoting scriptures.

They give me and my goons (priests) 10 % of their money and believe in some old story... Oh by the way, my buddy is the one who pulls the sun across the sky in a chariot.

So «random atheists» who swear by themselves that God is a «sky fairy» and the Bible is a farce have their own bible and believe in Satan, who technically was created by the non existent «sky fairy?»

I think that if God reveled itself in a massage worldwide, that can be heard by anyone in any language, and even by the deaf, with and image in the sky that can be seen even by the blind, then everyone would believe in the same God.

Does this new finding prove an invisible, all powerful, magic man who lives in the sky had an evil talking snake tempt a woman, made from a rib, to disobey him, whereby he put a curse on all future humanity, then later changed his mind and decides to lift his curse by impregnating a human woman with himself and having himself tortured, killed, and raised from the dead, so that if you believe all that, you get to live forever in heaven after you die, but if you don't, he will torture you forever in hell?

it takes more faith to believe in a theory based on facts than to believe in a magical all knowing person in the sky thats from a book written by men that heard voices?

Never mind all that data collected and analysis done by scientists over the last 300 years, I choose to believe in a magic invisible sky man who created the Earth in 6 days, one who keeps me under surveillance 24 hours a day 7 days a week from the time I'm born until the time I die because I'm just that important to him, a god who will convict me of thoughtcrime, even while I'm asleep, if I should ever doubt his existence.

religious people are some of the smartest people in the world but they still believe in a magical sky fairy and in the wors of a bronze age story book written by goat herders with no concept of science.

The theory that all 7,000,000,000 human beings are simultaneously being supervised 24 hours a day, every day of their lives, by an immortal, magic, invisible being in the sky for the purposes of reward or punishment in the «afterlife» is widely believed by:

If you don't believe in a magic sky daddy do you think you fool him by going to a Church and going thru the motions?

So, please by all means, tell me how this m0r0n's death is in ANY way my fault because I don't believe in your magical sky daddy?

I don't mind being called a loser by somebody who believes in talking snakes and invisible diseases (sin) in invisible body parts (soul) and a big magic sky daddy created everything with a magic spell..

I think that many of the people who check the box marked spiritual but not religious are atheists who don't want to upset their religious family and friends by admitting that they don't believe in the spirit in the sky.

(iv) how fvcking ludicrous it is to believe that a Bronze Age sky - fairy invented by Palestinian goat herders reads your mind and alters what would otherwise be the course of history in small ways to suit your whims.

They are undoubtedly correct that virtually all pre-1900 scientific breakthroughs were made by people (Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims and Buddhists) who believed in sky - gods and life after death to varying degrees.

We are surrounded by idiots who believe in a magic sky god, his zombie kid and the holy spirit (which is yet to be defined).

I guess if you are going to believe in an all knowing, all powerful sky daddy, reading an old compilation of 60 different books from 40 different authors put together by a group of supposedly reformed pagans 1600 years ago would just be putting your faith to the test, I mean a person with faith needs no proof.

Is is that same trait that allows you to believe in the invisible man in the sky and lead your life on a book of fiction written by humans about the invisible man in the sky.

People who believe in imaginary men in the sky who answer prayers if people ask in threes are delusional, and most of them have political agendas and want the rest of the country to live by their cult's tenets.

I tend not to believe anything anyone tells me until it can be proved by evidence or I can see it for myself (like the story bout some bearded guy up in the sky waiting for me to die so he can have me sit next to him forever) If it is true the institution where he studied should be closed down and the person who handed him his diploma should be taken out and shot (just kidding).

Ajax do not want him on loan.He is bashed too much and i think he should leave to ajax.He may be error prone but has done his best in having to be behind some terrible defending over the years.I admire his bravery.He was 19 years when he played his first game and to me its just a matter of time before he becomes world class.The defence barely helped him in his first and second season here to be honest and he also did not help himself by making a lot of mistakes.But i believe that Szczesny will be a legendary keeper one day.He just has that kind of something i do nt know but something about him makes me feel he can be so good.He should just leave and rebuild his career at Ajax if possible.He should know that he has the potential and by getting his head in the game and focusing the sky will be the limit.

The 24 - year old Brazilian has had his release clause activated by Liverpool, believed to be in the region of # 20million according to Sky Sports.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

As noted by Sky Sports, Wise has urged Chelsea to swoop as he believes that the England international is a much better option than some of the signings that the Blues have made in recent transfer windows.

As reported by Sky Sports, Zoran Mamic has not taken kindly to what Wenger has been saying this week about the doping problem that he believes is present in modern football and the failure of the current UEFA rules to deal with it.

Perez, preparing to take part in his home race, was asked by Sky Sports F1 where Hamilton ranked amongst the best and the Mexican believes that there is nobody better than the World Champion in - waiting.

A new study shows clouds are playing a larger role in heating the Greenland Ice Sheet than scientists previously believed, raising its temperature by 2 to 3 degrees compared to cloudless skies.

Outside your cottage you are surrounded by beauty, tropical gardens with an emphasis on unusual species, extensive decks, a variety of tropical fruits, scenery that changes as the sun rises over the ocean and then sets over the mountains, the moon over the ocean, the milky way in a bright and brilliant night sky that is hard to believe.

If you choose to believe that the Wall Street Journal, Audi, Fluor, the US Patent Office, and venture capitalists chipping in $ 100 million were all suckered by pie - in - the - sky I guess that's your opinion and there's no more I can do to change it.

In fact, I will add to your point: If you look around, you will rather frequently see that while many «skeptics» talk about how «skeptics» are not monolithic in belief (something that is certainly true), many times «skeptics» frequently speak of «skeptics» as if they are monolithic (e.g., by saying that «skeptics» don't believe X or Y), or selectively exclude some «skeptics» from their definition of «skeptic» because of inconvenient beliefs (e.g., «Sky Dragons») in an attempt to describe «skeptics» in some uniform fashioIn fact, I will add to your point: If you look around, you will rather frequently see that while many «skeptics» talk about how «skeptics» are not monolithic in belief (something that is certainly true), many times «skeptics» frequently speak of «skeptics» as if they are monolithic (e.g., by saying that «skeptics» don't believe X or Y), or selectively exclude some «skeptics» from their definition of «skeptic» because of inconvenient beliefs (e.g., «Sky Dragons») in an attempt to describe «skeptics» in some uniform fashioin belief (something that is certainly true), many times «skeptics» frequently speak of «skeptics» as if they are monolithic (e.g., by saying that «skeptics» don't believe X or Y), or selectively exclude some «skeptics» from their definition of «skeptic» because of inconvenient beliefs (e.g., «Sky Dragons») in an attempt to describe «skeptics» in some uniform fashioin an attempt to describe «skeptics» in some uniform fashioin some uniform fashion.

Those in the Air Force patrolling our skies know on any given day they could be forced to shoot down an airliner full of innocent people if they believe that airliner may be controlled by terrorists who may use it to take even more lives.

Despite recent reports of sky - high pay packets received by a few leading in - house lawyers, GCs believe they are not paid enough.