Sentences with phrase «correct in»

Logically he is also correct in maintaining that we have obligations to others that hold independently of how we happen to feel.

I believe Pastor C had it correct in regardsto the pastor being synonymous to the elder.

Although Griffin is correct in this preliminary assessment of modernity he goes on to contrast Whitehead's constructive approach to deconstruction or, as he calls it, eliminative postmodernism (VPT 31; 41).

But in this case I believe that Whitehead is correct in stressing the need for endurance as well as novelty, order as well as spontaneity, partial determination from the past together with free creativity in the present, as essential for value - intensity.

You are correct in saying that Jesus said he did not come to abolish the law or prophets, but you left out the important part about Jesus coming to fulfill instead of abolish.

The best response to the Religious Right, therefore, is to acknowledge that it is correct in believing that secularism does not deserve to be our enforced national faith.

She was no more correct in answering the question than she was when she said that yesterday was Elvis Pressley's birthday.

It is more preposterous to think that 17 percent are correct in saying there is no God then it is to believe in a God.

The trick Richard Dawkins uses — to stop the clock at every correct iteration and retain it for the next one to arrive — is the work of a mathematical simpleton I'm afraid to say, because taking a protein for example, the correctness of the components — their placement and the exact amino acid used — is only correct in the context of the final structure.

If W. H. Auden is correct in his assertion that the day's events in the life of an average person could fill a novel, an account of the activity of a congregation in the same period might occupy several shelves.

To be sure, in the Old Testament no gods of Sheol are specifically named, but Dr. Paton is probably correct in thinking that we have the faded reminiscence of them in such personifications as «Death shall be their shepherd» (Psalm 49:14) or «He shall be brought to the king of terrors.»

As I now see it, you are correct in saying that God is no longer angry with us.

Non-believers in your personal belief do not need to believe such and they are correct in their belief.

While I would admit that scientific materialists are correct in their rejection of certain rigid forms of teleology, I shall argue here that their opposition to a universe imbued with value and significance flows in part out of a naive notion of human perception.

Yet if Palmer is correct, as I think he is, in taking objectivism to be the epistemology that informs the practices of the modern university, and if I am correct in suggesting that James and others had already fashioned powerful alternative theories of knowledge as early as 1880, a vital historical question arises.

Accordingly, Whitehead might have been completely correct in relation to psychogenesis if he considered the object perception of reality as the result of human practice, that is, of the understandable association with artifacts and particularly with machines.

The proponents of the linguistic turn are correct in pointing to the interconnectedness of every word with other words in the linguistic system of which it is a part.

The judge was correct in dismissing the case IF there really wasn't enough evidence.

Here's the deal: We both think we are correct in the views we hold.

I don't know if I'm really correct in saying this but I want to say something publicly.

At the same time, while Prof. Novak is correct in saying that Maimonides wanted Jews to suppress the desires of the body, that, I would submit, is the Greek rather that the Jew in him.

Callahan is also quite correct in recognizing the crucial moral difference between killing and allowing a person to die his or her own death, inasmuch as it can be morally right to withhold or withdraw life - prolonging measures when their employment is unduly burdensome and / or useless.

You are correct in that if the slave dies then the owner is guilty of murder.

But, in my judgment, Leclerc is correct in pointing out the implicit lacuna in Whitehead's thought in the matter of the ontological status of societies.

So these early church leaders were choose books based on their ideas of what constituted correct theology, and I am not sure they were correct in their theology, which raises serious questions about the books they chose.

1785], (Bulst, 23) the Protestant theologian Paul Althaus is quite correct in pointing out that Catholic theology of the past has had an overly intellectualized and depersonalized notion of revelation.

So those radiometric datings are correct in saying that the soils physiological age is X.

Although it is true that «more theological consensus is needed to restore unity than to preserve unity» and that there is consequently a certain difference between classical reception and present - day ecumenical reception, Edward Kilmartin is correct in saying that «as in the case of Nicaea 1, Chalcedon and the rest of the so - called ecumenical councils of the first millennium, reception took place through a more or less complicated process.»

As you know, there were a number of intrinsic political issues in play during this period: the tariff, oft overlooked by the politically correct in the continuing effort to locate Southern apologists on the side of pro-slavery, the compact theory, and Nullification, an issue that is again in the public square.

Therefore, people claiming to be be correct in their understanding, are by definition incorrect.

Remember, no matter what you believe, I am correct in saying a very large number of Christians believe that the holy ghost (giver of divine wisdom and much more) only lives in believers.

But when an intuition - based philosophy is the only basis of making moral determinations, it can be correct in one case but fail in another.

I'm probably beating a dead horse on this one... You're correct in that it doesn't imply the non-existece of god, but if that's the only argument / evidence for god, then your case isn't very strong.

Yes, of course you are correct in saying a very large number of «Christians» believe that the «holy ghost» only lives in so - called «believers.»

Do you think that the folks in any of those sects are thinking that they are any less correct in their interpretation of the Bible?

Ayn Rand was totally correct in every philosophical area.

The people you arer talking about are intrepreting the Bible the way it has been traditionally read for eons and if they are right they are biblically correct in what they are saying.

Whether they are correct in these assumptions is subject to dispute.

Jeremy — I do believe that you are correct in observing that most Christian churches do not have the proper understanding of God's character.

Yes, you'll also find some «classical theism» in the volume» Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Aquinas» but Ed is correct in that it fills only very few pages.

I find the mental gymnastics that Theo Philio constantly performs to appear absolutely correct in all things to be very entertaining.

you have never listen to him... but he is correct in one thing... Liberals HATE freedom of speech UNLESS it's a LIBERAL speaking.

If the TSA asks you to remove something for screening, and you say «no,» you are correct in that you will not be allowed to board the plane period.

All Religion Is Evil wrote on August 7, 2011 at 1:02 pm, «Grinnan is correct in saying that we are hard - wired to be storytellers.

After all, to believe this fact, we must also believe that there is a God, that He loves us, that He has revealed Himself to us in Scripture and through Jesus, that the Bible is correct in what it says about all these things, that Jesus truly is able to offer us eternal life, and on and on it goes.

His explanation of salvation, while correct in that the usage concerns more than the afterlife, falls way short of the multifaceted meaning found in the Bible (e.g. the late John Stott's book The Cross of Christ).

John Calvin was correct in his saying that humility is the first.

I think that maybe there is a slight possibility that you are correct in your mental imagery of your descriptive description of the God denying atheistic, dogmatic and evasively exploiting, dim lit spirit deprived synthetic reality of an aggressive mockery.

I believe he is correct in his observations and hope that he might pursue the question.

If we accept that the Sanhedrin was correct in convicting Jesus pursuant to Deuteronomy 13, then the «Jews» (in the Johannine usage) were acting rightly then and later in rejecting Jesus.