Sentences with phrase «not articles of faith»

Upon closer examination I think many will have to agree that actually many views such as how high or low taxes should be, etc. are not articles of faith by any means and as such require flexibility and pragmatism.

According to catholic teaching, the existence of hell, of a state of eternal damnation, is an article of faith (as indeed, given free will and evil, it is a logical necessity); but that some human beings are or will be in fact damned is not an article of faith (though again logically it must be regarded as a possibility): hence Pere Teilhard's prayer further on in this passage.

If we can really assure ourselves by natural reason that God exists then that is not an article of faith, and the same goes for Christ's divinity, if, as apologists claim, we have good rational grounds for thinking that he claimed to be divine, that he was neither mad nor a fraud, and that he rose from the dead.

Not exact matches

As further exposition of how blind compliance to authority and the «It Won't Happen to Me» belief pattern work together to prevent us from taking the protective measures we need to take right now, consider a November 2014 article in which a financial analyst stated, «it's time to ditch your golden faith, embrace the truth — and make gold a barbaric relic of your portfolio's past.»

Another article of faith is that the Communist Party won't allow housing prices to collapse.

This article does not apply to any visual or sound radio broadcasting station, to any internet service provider or commercial online service, or to any publisher of a newspaper, magazine, or other publication, who broadcasts or publishes, including over the Internet, an advertisement in good faith, without knowledge of its false, deceptive, or misleading character.

Having faith isn't something that always comes easy easy, in fact this article is a good example of that.

I just have one issue with the article: why do some think that people of Faith are not practical as in the given example of helping someone who is sick — praying for them vs. doing something for them?

As a writer, and a Christian, myself I am not sure I buy all this man of faith talk in this article.

I'm not sure if this writer (Mr. Blake) is using a lot of literary license in this article — but the war between true faith and true evil is the plot of most MOST books, not just King's.

The point of this article, and my take also... is that my faith and how I conduct myself don't change based on whether or not Judas is or is not in Heaven.

Moreover, B'nai B'rith seems not to understand that, in asking the SBC to «repeal» its resolution, it is asking Southern Baptists to abandon what is for them an article of faith, namely, that it is the obligation of Christians to try to bring absolutely everybody, including Jews, to a «saving knowledge of Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.»

Her position on this matter, as expressed in this article, however, is most definitely not Catholic, and I re-iterate that if she truly believes this, there are other faiths which are consistent with her beliefs, and she should be intellectually honest and choose one of them.

and by that i mean the clergymen, not the author of the article, i believe in the good faith you good people have with the loss of your loved ones... god bless

She can not author an article purporting to defend the catholic faith when actually it is simply her version of «her» catholic faith.

I have a feeling that the faith of these chick filet folks really outweighs what anyone reading this article thinks or whether or not a bunch of gay activist will buy their product.

The article was on the author's faith, but she showed how that faith can be expressed in a manner unthought of to some and not always in sync with dogma.

Also, faith can be held in many contexts, but for the purpose of this article, some can't see the forest for the trees.

the negation of ideology, the political secularization of the doctrine of original sin, the cautious sentiment tempered by prudence, the product of organic, local human organization observing and reforming its customs, the distaste for a priori principle disassociated from historical experience, the partaking of the mysteries of free will, divine guidance, and human agency by existing in but not of the confusions of modern society, no framework of action, no tenet, no theory, and no article of faith, a distrust of the systems and processes of the idol of self and of the lust for power and status, scorn to all approaches of ideology and meta - narrative.

Funny that the article doesn't mention «Children of the Corn,» which is displays a grotesque, cruel religion with many parallels to radical Christian faiths.

Many of you said those of us of faith are deluded, but to take the time to read articles about things you do not believe and then to take the time to write comments that would alienate those who do believe for the purpose of somehow making them not believe seems pretty deluded to me.

There is widespread agreement with the view presented in the article on homosexuality in Baker's Dictionary of Christian Ethics (edited by Carl F. Henry [Baker Book House, 1973]-RRB-, which declares that «those who base their faith on the OT and NT documents can not doubt that their strong prohibitions of homosexual behavior make homosexuality a direct transgression of God's law.»

It is amazing how many people who do not believe in God go out of their way to click in the religious or faith articles and stereotype and bully those who have faith.

Again, we can ask whether the spate of hate - speech and «equality» legislation in Britain and other European countries — not to mention the restrictions on public manifestations of faith, the right to which has been upheld again and again by both domestic and European courts — also falls foul of this Article.

Please read the article - «There is no honest person of faith who doesn't have doubts»

Article 38 of the country's interim constitution says that «no person shall be coerced to adopt such faith that he / she does not believe in, nor to practise rites or services to which he / she does not voluntarily consent».

As seen in the chiastic structure noted above, the parallel statements «not of yourselves... the gift of God» are not explaining «faith» but are explaining «by grace you have been saved» (See the excellent article by Rene Lopez called «Is Faith a Gift fromfaith» but are explaining «by grace you have been saved» (See the excellent article by Rene Lopez called «Is Faith a Gift fromFaith a Gift from God?

Your average Catholic doesn't profess every article of faith the Pope demands.

In this way the resurrection is not a mythological event adduced in order to prove the saving efficacy of the cross, but an article of faith just as much as the meaning of the cross itself.

My piece was not a «lament,» but essentially a defense of Pope Benedict (as was my brief follow - up here) against just the type of over-the-top criticisms cited elsewhere in Allen's article, even as I raised one respectful question about the pope's prudential decision not to meet with leading dissidents — a legitimate, good - faith debate among sincere Catholics.

That basic article of faith does not, however, imply that human beings know God's plan in detail.

No; the real difficulty is that the resurrection is itself an article of faith, and you can not establish one article of faith by invoking another.

It is effectively an article of «faith» for the materialist to believe that everything must be reducible to material laws, even when they can not explain how things such as human consciousness and free will fit into the deterministic patterns of matter.

Maciel can not be made an article of faith.

Given the sufficiency of Scripture, «whatsoever is not read therein,» declares Article VI of the Thirty - nine Articles, «nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.Article VI of the Thirty - nine Articles, «nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.»

Although, as a believer, I appreciate some of the article's perspectives on the relationship between science and faith, I do not agree that the Big Bang vs Steady State distinction offers any proof of God.

I don't understand why atheists follow articles about faith, only to seek to offend people who may agree with one or more points of the article.

Money & Chooch, did you read the article??? This very article gives examples of how Pres Obama, claiming he is a christian, is mocking the faith — as it is obvious that he is not.

Creationism is a theory and article of faith — and not wholly inconsistent with the scientific method.

The only thing that bugs me about this guy is that there are more people than not who are teetering on the brink of faith in Jesus, and all this guy does is try to knock people away from faith... This is his word against Gods word, I've been reading these articles they've been posting, and nothing he's said has any biblical foundation whatsoever...

Once people accepted as an article of faith that modern science could explain the totality of our world, they had to say that anything which fell outside the scope of science isn't real.

My understanding of the article is that he wasn't giving up his faith, but merely acting as though he were not a believer.

Yet even at the height of their reforms, they could also argue in the Augsburg Confession that «the churches among us do not dissent from the catholic church in any article of faith.»

The Thirty - Nine Articles of the Church of England say, «We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings.»

If this article has struck a nerve then see if the integral understanding brings clarity to the conflict that does not make a polarity out of old / new, spirituality and religion, self and society, belief and faith, practice and self feeling.

If your faith is so weak that it can not stand up to being looked at from an objective, historical, evidence based perspective, then this article is the least of your problems.

There is a notorious historical problem surrounding the defeat of Sennacherib.3 Our point here is simply that this tradition, historical or not, was an article of Israel's faith.

I am not saying disappointment on your article, my only point is that its faith, and only God can judge the correctness... The word of God cultivates the mind, and the seed of faith should bloom in its natural way, urging anything to study by words and its meaning is in - vain because the use of that will not gain you anything from God, but yes maybe in politics and people like you.

We may end our article where we began it, by quoting from the Novena of Cardinal Newman: Philip, my holy Patron, who wast so careful for the souls of thy brethren, and especially of thy own people, when on earth, slack not thy care of them now, when thou art in heaven... Be to us a good father; make our priests blameless and beyond reproach or scandal; make our children obedient, our youth prudent and chaste, our heads of families wise and gentle, our old people cheerful and fervent, and build us up, by thy powerful intercession, in faith, hope, charity and all virtues».

«The resurrection is not a mythological event adduced in order to prove the saving efficacy of the cross, but an article of faith just as much as the meaning of the cross itself....