Sentences with phrase «deity claims»

All I know is what's mine is mine and if any man or deity claims otherwise, they'd better be prepared for a fight.

On top of that, one of those deities sits to the side of another, while the main deity claims to have sent himself thru a virgin as a human form to return to himself but sitting next to himself after a ritualistic and bloody human sacrifice.

I specified that they are a-theistic (not believing the theism / deity claims) regarding your Jesus and / or the god of Abraham.

Along with your right to say hateful things, comes the fallout of others» right to ridicule or even offend you and / or whatever deity you claim to speak for.

Obviously, the specific deity claimed to exist in Biblical texts is disproved automatically by the contradictions in the dogma.

It would be like calling something that is special «Exclusive» and then assigning that name to your invisible deity you claim personifies that something special, so now you worship a being you call «Exclusive» and then later in history that word gets shortened for ease of use to «Exclu» which gets printed on money and shoved into our Pledge «One nation, under Exclu, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.»

Not exact matches

There is no evidence to support such claims or need of deity in understanding nature.

If I recall, and I'm sure I could find a post or two to support my recollection, it's the believers that seem to state they know exactly what a deity is thinking even while claiming that people can't know what a deity is thinking.

Yet another self proclaimed clown who claims to be running for prez cause some deity said so... well Rick, maybe that same deity will vote for you (but I doubt it).

Atheism makes claim that in our darkest hours we are the ones with the ability to move forward, that we can make those paths and not wait for a deity to come upon us and clear the land of its evils.

i suppose it's possible that some deity exists without anybody being able to perceive it, but having an entire worldview hinge on this possibility seems reckless, especially when we attribute a bunch of specific claims, details and an ever - evolving incredible story to this purportedly imperceptible being.

I always put it this way: I am an atheist in the sense that I reject all man - made truth claims about a deity.

Most atheists do not make any absolute claims about the existence of deities.

Yeah, well, humans who make up stuff, and claim a deity says it, need medication.

I think you will see quite a few posts by believers on here that claim that prayer works, that they have had dozens of prayers answered personally by a deity.

Why do Christians arrogantly claim that it's impossible to be moral without believing in their deity?

In that same general pattern, Islam wanted to claim Yahweh from their neighbor's religion as the same deity as Allah.

To argue that historians might judge such and such to be a miracle because they believe antecedently in the religion that regards such miracles as signs of the intervention of its deity is to open the floodgates for all religious claims to miracles and, indeed, even to nonreligious «miracles» such as the widespread reports that people have seen Elvis Presley.

And when you think through and appreciate «how imperfect humans are», you should realize that the «perfect» deity, that Christians claim created humans, obviously does not exist.

Now, if God is a mass murderer, and the Bible claims murder is a product of Satan, then wouldn't it only be logical that, if you believe in a higher deity, that it would have to logically be Lucifer?

10 — Christians don't feel outrage about other claims of deity, they just believe that those claims are wrong.

The Roman Empire had tried every other way to stop the spread of this new religion which threatened the «deity» of their Caesar and their Caesar's claim to ultimate authority.

But to the writer God is no longer an anthropomorphic deity in the old sense; he is the one God, omnipotent and altogether righteous, transcendent in majesty and in rightful claim on man's devotion; and his holiness is expressed in his exclusive right to Israel's worship and service.

But, on the other hand, it is quite unjustified for theists to hold that we must tolerate or swallow the paradoxes or explain them away (by feats of ingenuity so subtle, and verbal methods so remote from intuitive insight or definite logical structures, that only deity could know with any assurance what was taking place), giving as justification the claim that the alternative position of atheism is even more paradoxical (lacking, it may be urged, any principle of cosmic explanation at all).

For it to matter to me, I'd have to believe the claim of men, that a deity exists, and that this deity somehow influenced the men that wrote the various books of the Bible, and that the men who chose which books should be in the Bible somehow had superior knowledge about the universe that the rest of us lacked.

By any such means a claim of man on God would again be established, and man» s attitude toward God would be that of raising himself to deity.

And even when the Messiah is palpable, even when the leader «tangibilificates» deity, as Father Divine claimed to do, a kind of burdening metaphysical claim accompanies him.

Claiming that there «had to be» an agent, which is a unsupported assumption, the author then automatically leaps to the conclusion that «God» (by which the author surely means the Judeo - Christian deity) had to be involved.

You are the one making the claim of an eternally existing deity.

This, he claims, is in accordance with the Scriptures, which declare that only at the end of history is the deity of God unquestionably open to all - an event.

But since an atheist is one who believes that there is no deity, it is clear that claiming him to be an atheist is incorrect.

If, as the believers claim on a daily basis, this deity is able to affect changes in our physical plane, such as saving junior when no doctor could, or getting Sally that raise she was praying for, then this interface between its realm, and ours, should be, and must be detectable.

only God can forgive sins... He made many other claims of deity, proving them and accepting worship!

This deity and two others associated with him in the opening section, says Dr. Holtom, furnish the basis of a claim by some nineteenth and twentieth century Shinto scholars that Shinto believes in a trinitarian monotheism.

The fact is that when you remove the invented deities who some claim have made rules as to our s e x ual activity, the stigma and guilt and shame drop away and we can get on to the very rewarding job of living and being good to one another.

Luv how your claimed omniscient deity still needs to test his subjects.

guideless, luv how your claimed omniscient deity still needs to test his subjects.

Agnosticism — the view that the truth of certain claims — especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims — are unknowable.

I too was going to point out the common yet ridiculous claim that ethics couldn't exist in the absence of a deity.

As I read Hartshorne, he maintains that «God is not spatially localized» (Schilpp, 545) and the meaning of this phrase is that God is everywhere — «God is not spatially separated from things» he has written (Schilpp, 545), and in a recent book he claims that deity, the universally immanent, is everywhere.5 Given this assumption Hartshorne is then able to say that since God, being everywhere, includes the regional standpoint of every temporal actual entity, he must intuit all occasions wherever they are as they occur» (Schilpp, 545).

This manifests itself not only in the way in which Aristotelian notions of the «unmoved mover» or neo-Platonic ideas of «being - subsisting from - itself» have been taken to be the proper definition of what is meant when we speak of «God», but also in liturgical language where all too often the basic concept implied or (as most often seems to be the case) affirmed is the utter immutability of deity, along with the rigidly legalistic moralism which it is suggested should mark those who claim to «obey» the divine mandates.

Atheism makes no claims, it just is a statement that the individual does not believe in any deity.

The bible is wrong over and over again and while some claim to find spiritual guidance, they apparently don't mind worshiping a deity who demands children and infants be slaughtered.

Pilate was a brutal and ruthless leader, Jesus was apparently a very popular speaker (even if you ignore the miracles and claims to deity) with a following, the outcome was pretty easy to guess - either Jesus shut up and went along with Rome (not likely) or Pilate was going to have him killed (very likely).

This fact tells us that whatever we may claim for Jesus Christ is not the denial of nor contradictory to the wider creative purpose and activity of deity.

The burden of proof is on those who make an affirmative claim regarding the existence of some deity.

By claiming the male experience to be normative for faith, and by naming the deity as male, we have overemphasized strength and aggressiveness and denied — indeed, repressed — many expressions of faith that focus on God's self - giving, self - emptying love.

many of the people who claim «spiritual but not religious» still believe in a deity — maybe not your Abrahamic one but a deity nonetheless.

It is written in the book of Dawkins 2:28 - 34 «Then shall the bearers of false witness claiming supernatural phenomenon and worshipers of deitys fall upon the righteous with their knives and swords, tearing my people apart who did nothing but point out that their God's did not exist.

Those making claims that something exists (e.g. the existence of a deity) are the ones responsible for providing the evidence, not those who deny the claims.