Sentences with phrase «logical person who»

I'd describe myself as a fun, versatile combination of Mr. Spock, Will Ferrell, and Plato - which means that I'm a logical person who possesses a goofy sense of humor and a love for truth and never - ending knowledge.

I don't think you will meet any logical person who says so.

These people are generally intelligent, logical people who at one time realized how bogus and cult - like Mormons are.

Not exact matches

«We knew we wanted to focus on the process of getting ready for a race weekend, which is a logical storytelling structure for people who follow the sport and for those who don't.

Accessories specifically tailored to people who suffer the ailments of old age is a logical extension of this larger trend.»

And, if you are unclear who is the right person — ask to be pointed in the right direction, or send outreach to all logical candidates, until you find the right person to engage with you.

I offer my art online and even though you gave specific steps, I'm unsure who exactly to target for this kind of product (beyond» people who like bright colours» and» between age 30 - 45», maybe more women than men)... My brain is creative but not logical!

«She's on the board, so she's a logical interim choice, but not a person who's going to be driver for HP as it transitions to a software and services kind of model,» Gruia added.

This day and age is a time of trials and tribulations people really need to be patient and give a careful, logical unbiased look at the world and see who is really causing the problems in the world and where they stand in believing it.

What logical, caring person can support slavery, discrimination against women, discrimination against gays, discrimination against the handicapped, beating children, beating elderly female slaves without punishment, supporting a god who would let the family of his greatest supporter be killed to WIN A BET, etc..?

Everytime religious people post something about God or something out of their belief, there comes the Atheists storming it with their typical (hateful, profane, disrespectful but in - fairness articulate, itellect, scientific and logical) replies and name callings such as; «2000 years religious numbnuts», «oxymorons who keep asking of sky daddy's help», «idiots who was fooled by a magical being in the sky» and so on and so forth.

This would mean, by logical standards, that the people who did move to the Western Hemisphere would have had to have abandoned their culture, their tools, and even their god, for there is no record of monotheism in the Western Hemisphere.

A lot of people who believe in the individual election to eternal life view say they do not believe in double predestination because of how repulsive it is, but to me, it seems the logical conclusion.

History is full of people like yourself — yes intelligent, rational and logical — who dove into scripture to rip it apart and wound up being theologians and biblical scholars and Jesus followers.

The logical extension of eternal security is that people who give themselves over to evil must be accepted into heaven.

I come from a family of very logical, rational people who are also religious, though not at all fanatical.

He stated that people who aren't logical enough for him should have NO SAY.

Meanwhile the opposing side is made of largely a lot of seemingly logical «smart» often well educated people who are ironically no where nearly as «smart» as people out there generally think or realize so it literally becomes a debate of ignorant verses stupid on both sides which I do as a footnote occasionally find mildly entertaining.

Health care in a barn is logical and acceptable because there were so many people who needed care?!

so there is a logical rational reason for keeping two people who love each other dearly apart?

Anyone who can think a logical, independent thought has to wonder what sort of people put any credence in what this gray - hair, racist, flip - flopping, money - loving thief has to say... he's fleeced his flock just like the other evangelical snake - oil vendors.

The only logical answer to the question as to who could have mentioned all these scientific facts 1400 years ago before they were discovered, is exactly the same answer initially given by the atheist or any person, to the question who will be the first person who will be able to tell the mechanism of the unknown object.

The truth of the word depends neither on its objective content nor on its logical coherence, but on the person who speaks it.

Whether to follow his example or not is a personal choice everyone gets to make, but at least make an informed choice, knowing who Jesus actually was, and what he actually did and is doing, and not assuming the the over 44,000 Christian denominations are all telling the truth — not even logical since they are all saying different things, and the Bible says God's people would be united.

And being «child - free» will come into logical and happy generations of people who worship our planet.

However, I do have a logical problem with people who want to put the Christian Church's «Stamp of Approval» on the sexual act of sodomy.

People who say that observable complexity is proof of design and therefore a designer are only guilty of wishful thinking and do not have a true graps on logical thought.

People who believe in both revealed and natural truth must strive continuously to elevate the public conversation to consider theories, logical conclusions, and coherent first principles.

He has stated elsewhere, for example, that the fact that evil presents no serious logical or probabilistic argument against God's existence or goodness will be cold and abstract comfort to a person who is faced with «the shocking concreteness of a particularly appalling exemplification of evil» (AP 35 - 36).

You know, for someone who considers themselves so «logical» and above everyone of faith, you can't seem to go through a single conversation with a religious person without insulting them.

There are many of us who are logical, caring, non hypocritical people who follow the two great commandments from Christ.

Aesops... threatening people who do not believe in eternal damnation with eternal damnation is logical cancer.

Well, for people who believe the Bible when it says Jesus is coming back, it is quite logical to point out the amount of ignorance they displayed in ignoring a passage that is very, very key to end times studies (eschatology).

A new study has debunked the notion that people who hold strong beliefs are less logical than those who... More

@Hilltop Yes, but this «creator» is interpreted in many different ways by many different people who, in the past, did not have the resources to approach a belief system in a completely logical way.

We need to invent a new word for people willing to believe the writings of unknown authors, of unknown origin, of an unknown but ancient time, which is badly worded, internally AND externally (with modern science) inconsistent, full of statements with no actual arguments to back them up, with the only decently educated people to back it all up are theologians who twist the meaning of words and commit logical fallacies and still only try to prove that SOMETHING must exist, not that christianity is the truth.

It's actually kinda sad that you «logicals» believe the lies from a a man who ordered the deaths of people.

Atheists have to stop saying they are moral & they are logical & then claiming people who disagree are wrong.

But while this logical process was effective in many cases, it ran into trouble with people who responded, «I can't believe what the Church teaches.»

On the other hand, people who are the products of a prevailingly analytical, logical habit of mind - possessors of modern Greek - Western modes of thinking, rather than the ancient Hebraic - Eastern quality of thought - instinctively and habitually find themselves delayed, snagged, or otherwise discontented or dismayed by any absence in the text of specific agreement in detail, by any appearance of the inconsistent, whether overt or only implied.

Karl Barth understood this well when he wrote: «Strange as it may seem, it is still true, that those who fail to understand other churches than their own are not the people who care intensely about theology, but the theological dilettantes, eclectics, and historians of all sorts; while those very men who have found themselves forced to confront a clear, thoroughgoing, logical sic et non find themselves allied to each other in spite of all contradictions, by an underlying fellowship and understanding, even in the cause which they handle so differently and approach from such painfully different angles.

The problem with articles like this one is that, be it writer or reader, people tend to philosophize and come up with their own logical conclusions as to who God is and what He does or does not.

Its more logical to say, there are people who do things for evil reasons, and the majority of people just want to raise their families and live on with their lives in peace.

«Christians are hated by people who claim to be tolerant, logical, scientifically - grounded, and open - minded.»

I'd always thought of myself as quite a logical person, and someone who wouldn't be caught dieting or caught shopping for trends.

there is no doubting that Arsene has helped to provide us with some incredible footballing moments in the formative years of his managerial career at Arsenal, but that certainly doesn't and shouldn't mean that he has earned the right to decide when and how he should leave this club... there have been numerous managers at each of the biggest clubs in Europe throughout the last decade who have waged far more successful campaigns than ours yet somehow and someway each were given their walking papers because they failed to meet the standards laid out by the hierarchy of their respective clubs... of course that doesn't mean that clubs should simply follow the lead of others, especially if clubs of note have become too reactionary when it comes to issues of termination, for whatever reasons, but there should be some logical discourse when it comes to the setting of parameters for a changing of the guard... in the case of Arsenal, this sort of discourse was largely stifled when the higher - ups devised their sinister plan on the eve of our move to the Emirates... by giving Wenger a free pass due to supposed financial constraints he, unwittingly or not, set the bar too low... it reminds me of a landlord who says he will only rent to «professional people» to maintain a certain standard then does a complete about face when the market is lean and vacancies are up... for those who rented under the original mandate they of course feel cheated but there is little they can do, except move on, especially if the landlord clearly cares more about profitability than keeping their word... unfortunately for the lifelong fans of a football club it's not so easy to switch allegiances and frankly why should they, in most cases we have been around far longer than them... so how does one deal with such an untenable situation... do you simply shut - up and hope for the best, do you place the best interests of those with only self - serving agendas above the collective and pray that karma eventually catches up with them, do you run away with your tail between your legs and only return when things have ultimately changed, do you keep trying to find silver linings to justify your very existence, do you lower your expectations by convincing yourself it could be worse or do you stand up for what you believe in by holding people accountable for their actions, especially when every fiber of your being tells you that something is rotten in the state of Denmark

@JJPawn: So next time you attempt to try and confuse or trick forum members using a fallacious argument, make sure it is logical; honest and backed up by undisputed facts, otherwise you will meet people like me who will discredit you.

Ooops sorry, I guess you wanted to keep that quiet, showing a logical reason for restricted spending doesn't go well with people who just want to moan about Arsenal.

I bet he hears you but Wenger probably doesn't pay attention too much, who would sit down and evaluate what a bunch of ignorant people have said when it doesn't hold much logical reasoning?

Then there are the less logical thoughts people like me — who value predictability, organization, and high levels of competence — entertain while we're sitting there, every two or three hours, breastfeeding our bottomless pit of a baby.