Sentences with phrase «meant by your belief»

But belief in objective truth and belief in objective right are part of what we mean by belief in God.

Not exact matches

«Men are affected by the belief that any level of same - sex attraction must mean you're gay.

By the early 20th century, bandwagons were commonplace in political campaigns, and «jump on the bandwagon» had become a derogatory term used to describe the social phenomenon of wanting to be part of the majority even when it means going against one's principles or beliefs.

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.

The utilitarian belief that «human goods can be measured against each other by means of some quantitative scale is the belief that human goods can be assessed in a way analogous to that by which commodities have a monetary value.

Now, if their religious belief is that they must sacrifice you to appease some random force or god, by all means complain and ask for their beliefs to be stopped, but in that case you may want to run away before doing that.

We have at last outgrown those who had outgrown God (though in our present state of intellectual confusion that by no means guarantees a return to orthodox belief).

I know it is comforting to think that, and by all means, if it makes life for you easier, then fine, believe... but you can not logically argue with Atheists and expect not to look foolish on the subject matter because your belief is not based on logic.

Ancient Christian so - called persecution at the hands of Romans is also used today as an excuse to persecute others who don't adhere to their beliefs, even by violent means.

That however does NOT mean that the bible is not true (An ad hominem (Latin for «to the man» or «to the person»), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it)

Atheist reject the idea of a god and believe their view to be true or they would be agnostic unless they choose no stance at all of a god that of which would require unknowing of what the term «god» means so it would fall under a belief and since they can't prove that a god doesn't exist then by definition it requires faith for their view, meaning it would effect their view of the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe if a god was proven to be true.

I just don't see how putting on a hat clearly designated by the employer as uniform necessarily means that the individual is «practicing» a belief or «celebrating» a holiday.

Whatever one's beliefs, we are starting to recogize that supernaturalism in any form is not a reliable means to build a universal consensus.Any proposition that relies on faith can and will be twisted by unscrupulous individuals for their own gain.

Amazing, such rationality presented by you... oh wait, not really rational to poke fun at your human being unless your own self esteem is so low that the only means to feel superior to your fellow human being is to belittle them for their beliefs... kinda like what the religious do to you.

I meant how can you claim your beliefs are VERIFIED by the words of certain writters when other people with very different beliefs consider THEIR beliefs to be verified by the words of others?

I respect your views and beliefs and by know means wish to take away your choices and rights according to your beliefs, also i'm glad we live in such a land that grants freedom of religion and will gladly fight to keep that right for us all.

In the option he favors — faith seeking understanding — what he means by «faith» is really belief.

Rejecting the obvious insane assertion by religiots that there must have been some creature that farted it all into existence, doesn't automatically mean a firm belief in anything else.

``... [the] gulf between the Church and the scientific mind... widens with each generation, and modern means of diffusing knowledge by the press, radio, and film, have brought us now to such a pass that the Christian, and especially the Catholic, whose beliefs are enriched in their religious manifestation by the ceremonies and practices of a most ancient past, finds himself considered the initiate of a recondite cult whose practices are not only unintelligible to men around him, but savour to them of superstition and magic.»

That declaration is often hard to come by, many declaring truth when they mean belief and so forth.

To Jesus, «by faith alone» did not mean «by belief alone.»

For many, the word has nothing to do with a spiritual context... I embrace the term evangelical, if by that we mean a belief that we together can actually work for change in the world, caring for the environment, extending to the poor generosity and kindness, a hopeful outlook.

I wish some Calvinist would answer why do you accept this belief system just because you believe in the sovereignty of God doesn't mean He doesn't allow things to happen by its own accord

To see belief not as a set of beliefs but as a story, an experience of coming to belief, means that theological reflection ought itself to be shaped by the story, take to itself, both in form and content, the story.

Thus, in Islam there is an intimate interrelation between belief and the code of laws governing all conduct, and those who deny this can by no means be considered to be Muslims.

Yet such as it is — and the more certainly so, the more clearly we recognize just what the book is — it remains an extremely valuable document of primitive Western Christianity; though it by no means provides us with all we wish to know about the life and teaching of our Lord, or the life and teaching, activities, and beliefs, of the early church.

Among the cultural forms studied by the anthropologist are ones that explicitly embody spiritual meanings, including the beliefs, practices, and institutions of religion, some forms of which appear in every known culture.

Most of those that survive will do so by tempering their beliefs with the realities science discovers, and evolving to continue giving their life meaning by adjusting to the facts.

If for example the Christian Gospels are considered by themselves without any background of definite belief, or any authoritative norm of interpretation, all sorts of meanings can be put upon the bare words, the more so if the critic is ready and willing to make the early disciples of Christ neurotics, hysterics, or downright liars as the occasion may demand.

Unfortunately all religious people, regardless of their religion, are obsessed with pushing their beliefs on others by any means necessary.

What we mean here is myth in its everyday, nontechnical sense as understood by you and me: a story that is told as if it were literally true, but which is no longer accepted as factual, and which explains or symbolizes a belief or insight.

Kev, I don't know what you mean by «it,» when you were describing belief without proof (faith) and you say «it» is better than «nothing.»

your understanding of the change process is very simplistic, because your mind is not open, you specifically believe already in the traditional doctrines, Dogmas as shown in thousands of years of history evolves, and the need for input variables, meaning the diversity of religious belief is necessay because nature through his will is requiring this to happen, we are being educated by God in the events of history.In the past when there was no humans yet Gods will is directly manifisted in nature, with our coming and education through history, we gradually takes the responsibilty of implementing the will.Your complaint on your perception of abuse is just part of the complex process of educating us through experience.

a set of values, beliefs, and structure in a person's life in order to give them direction and a sense of right and wrong is fine, but organized religions are no more than large corporations, and like any large corporation are only focused on their bottom line... trying to control the public and extract as much money as they can from them by any means necessary... promoting fear, uncertainty, hate and a sense that they alone can offer salvation... for a price (although they are very cleaver about getting to this hidden and unspoken cost... after all these hundreds of years they have perfected their craft well!)

But Buber believes that Paul means by faith belief in a truth, a kind of objective knowledge, whereas surely for Paul faith in Christ is never separated from love to all the members of the body of Christ and to every man.

Am not anti-Christ nor Anti-Jewish just like all Muslims am a monotheist so must be rather Anti-Polytheists & Disbelievers... but believe me it is not hatred but rather pityness for the innocents and hardness towards the wicked transgressors... Guess that is all about it unless few of our brother got the message wrong!?! Since we learned from the Quran verses that there will be in paradise from the Jews, Christian and others from other beliefs... and since God forgives any thing else other than to assign for him partners as polytheists do, then that means many of Christians and Jews are monotheist towards God although might show otherwise of fears from dominant doctrine... As it seems few Christians have realized some how they were wrong some where, then had to introduce that Trinity to correct it to show as if monotheist but made another mistake by having God the One Divided into Three then and remained Divided as Three as now and for eternity...!?

And none is more real than that which comes to light in Cary's explanation of what Luther actually means by «faith alone,» namely, a simple, firm belief that our sins are absolved when we hear the divine words to that effect pronounced in the sacraments of Baptism and Penance.

They can't support their beliefs by any reasonable means, yet they deem themselves fit to judge others from those beliefs or attempt to put others in the midst of their religious infighting.

And to Disturbance, If Pascals Wager does not demonstrate why Atheism is an inferior position to a belief, then please, by all means, prove me wrong.

What he means by that, bucky, is that unless everyone agrees with his religious beliefs, he and those who «think» like him perfectly prepared to use violence again those who disagree...

If you want to believe in your god, then more power to you, but don't make yourself look stupid by trying to refute scientific fact based on what someone told you or what you've read in an outdated book written to scare and control mankind though fantastical and highly embellished stories meant to inspire fear and obedience to ancient laws and beliefs.

This may mean what through the influence of Professor C. H. Dodd has come to be called realized eschatology, the belief that Jesus had brought the Kingdom to fulfillment in his own person and he was thereby affirming his messiahship.4 It seems to me more probable that Jesus meant primarily though perhaps not solely to declare the possibility of entrance into the Kingdom here and now by repentance, the acceptance of God's forgiveness, and the assumption of the obligations of discipleship.

With all the evidence, religious people ought to be intelligent design (I mean god - guided evolution by this) supporters at worst, though I would hope that after some serious thoughts on the moral paradoxes induced by belief in the «divine» people would come to their senses.

If by «$ 10 trillion» you mean «some number made up by a Fox News pundit that reinforces my unfounded beliefs» then yes, I agree these regulatory proposals are terrible!

Why not let people be comforted by the thought of meaning behind it all through the belief in God?

Latest was explosions in India marked as «Islamic Jihadists» and another in Pakistan although I was surprised that it was not marked as «Hindu Jihadists»... That would have had both Great Countries confront each other serving the purpose of other competing nations over the Rich Indian Peninsular... Believe me no nation fall back unless people of her own are traitors to it's nations principals and beliefs for the reason of Hate, Envy, Revenge, or Greeds towards material wealth even if by selling their Dignity and integrity or their family, tribe, community, the nation and the country it wouldn't mean much to them... and those can be found among every level of the one Society...

By «fully rational» I mean achieving coherence or self - consistency (which, for the purposes of this essay, I equate), having no beliefs that contradict other beliefs or logical deductions therefrom.

There never was a time in History that atheists exist, only in this present stage of our intellectual developement that they deny His exisrence, but it can be easily explained that they are just part of the dialectical process of having to have two opposing arguments or forces to arrive to the truth, The opposing forces today are the theists or religious believers of all religions and the other are the atheists who denies religion, The reslultant truth in the future will be Panthrotheism, the belief that we are all one with the whole universe with God, and that we Had all to unite to prepare for human survival that will subject us humans in the future.Aided by the the enlightend consevationist, environmentalists, humanists and all of the concerned activists, we will develop a kind of universal harmony and awareness that we are all guided towards love and concern for all of our specie.The great concern of the whole conscious and caring world to the natural disaster in the Phillipines,, the most theist country now is a positive sign towards this religious direction.Panthrotheism means we will be One with God.

This is not to say, however, that a vision of reality is like a «basic belief» as defined by Alvin Plantinga and others, meaning that it need not be justified.

The word «Christian» literally means «little Christ,» how does someone who acquires fame by bashing the belief of others (he may be a scholar but as the author noted, most people have only heard of him because of his uncouth mannerisms) come anywhere close to Jesus?