Sentences with phrase «of arguments»

Perhaps if atheists change the verbiage, it wouldn't be offensive to Christians and many of these arguments wouldn't start.

These are the kinds of arguments that make Christians sound stupid.

The truth of his arguments, on the other hand, is dubious.

There were a lot of arguments as to which books would go into the bible, the Catholic Bible.

Isn't that one of the arguments Atheists use.

I wish rather to call attention to a peculiar aspect of one of the arguments used to support the latter view, since I think it betrays an inadequacy in all current Whiteheadian views which has not been appreciated.

And the vast majority of arguments was not concerning the inclusion of books that are in the Bible; it was about excluding ones which are not today, ones which, again, the overall Church agreed were not canon.

One of their arguments against Jesus is the very verse above (Mat 12:40).

Add to that the variety of doctrines / Theologies within orthodox Christianity... with Consensus on a very small Core of Truths: God Is, We are not God, Jesus Christ is the Messiah and Salvation is Through Faith / Belief in Him... there is much that lacks Consensus and there are mountains of arguments and counter-arguments for each doctrinal / Theological position.

The «Moral Majority» Christian right made these exact same kinds of arguments last century when it came to inter-racial marriage.

They know a lot of arguments and sound bites.

She uses as bases of her arguments the philosophies of «early Christians,» which I feel bears no weight as they were not the prophets who understood and wrote the holy scripture.

Robert Miller worries that one of the arguments in my post on Amnesty International is philosophically unsound.

The belief in question is not really an input to the discussion of workplace harrassment, but people seem to be placing it at the core of their arguments.

Based on some of the arguments Grossman made about how administrative efforts to prevent sexually transmitted disease actually lead to more sexual activity, more disease, and more psychological distress, Nava penned an op / ed for the Daily Princetonian questioning the campus's programs on condom distribution and sexual health titled «Princeton's Latex Lies.»

Yet in Michael's choices of projects, and in the particulars of his arguments, one sees three overarching propositions constantly at work.

I've heard all these things before, from BOTH sides of the arguments.

I have never found a single one of his arguments that wasn't either a logical fallacy or an obvious misuse of math.

None of these arguments give the Israelis the right to continuously violate the basic human rights of the Palestinian people who live in abject poverty.

You raise a very good point that escapes most theists and that is while they argue against atheists for not believing in their god, they forget that most of those arguments could be applied to them by somebody of another religion.

@ Steven: the same sorts of arguments were made about the inherent goodness of man in the late 19th & early 20th century.

It's a bloated, constipated set of arguments that consist of poorly constructed and otherwise really - bad - for - the - soul material.

The BBC's online article, and the brief accompanying video that was presumably aired on the network, were both a bit sketchy in their account of the arguments made by the two sides.

I've heard lots of arguments about why everything Matt Walsh publishes should be deleted, recycled, and then the hard drives they were deleted from melted down into slag and thrown into an active volcano to ensure that none of his radical ultra-conservative garbage is ever recovered, but all of them seem to center around the idea that because he is condescending, he is wrong.

This so reminded me of the arguments against running years ago.

So why should my choice of diction, used in appropriate context no less, devalue the strength of my arguments?

@ David By definition, Michael isn't actually a troll, since all of his arguments are logic - based arguments and pretty reasonable considering his standpoint, unlike the gross logical fallacies put forth by Cecilia Davidson (ULTIMATE ABILITY: you're wrong about everything because you're a bigot.

You are probably already aware of the arguments for / against the Gospel of John — so, I won't go into them here.

He is particularly dismissive of arguments making use of the slippery slope, even as he unwittingly makes them credible.

It is absurd, but it is also an accurate reflection of the arguments advanced by the putative defenders of artistic freedom.

A thorough review of the arguments for and against abstinence programs in Uganda specifically is available on the Human Rights Watch website.

Some of her arguments are historically....

You'll find exactly the same kinds of arguments about racial integration in the armed forces that you're hearing now about gays in the miltary.

Ken really exposed the arbitrariness of his arguments when he admitted that he cherry - picks which portions of the Bible he accepts as literal and which he accepts as figurative.

It's rather telling that most of her arguments come from non-Biblical sources, fables, and legends.

One of the arguments against integration was that whites shouldn't have to worry about black soldiers (who, it went without saying were unable to control their lust) attacking their wives in quarters.

------- Trey, I am very aware of you arguments, and capable of counter points.

In the midst of it all, investors face a confusing mix of arguments — some that stocks are significantly undervalued, some that they are dangerously elevated; some that sentiment is overly defensive, some that it is overly euphoric.

Ultimately, though, the particulars of their arguments are irrelevant.

But he brushed off these concerns with a range of arguments that critical masses of voters evidently found persuasive.

These faceless bureaucrats must also be told to stop their spin about freezing Iron Dome because of the arguments they love to carry out via the media with Ministry of Finance budgetary division officials.

Trump's lawyers have made a number of arguments to try to get Zervos's suit dismissed, but the most important has to do with the fact that Zervos is suing in New York state court.

I'd like to get rid of a few of these arguments quickly.

The intensity of those arguments increases as growth rates decline.

While the committee grilled Zuckerberg about why he wanted a special class of stock, Andreessen sent the CEO text messages to explain which of his arguments weren't working and why, according to messages quoted in court filings.

One of the arguments that I continue to hear is that Alberta and Canada should not implement a carbon tax because Donald Trump does not support a carbon tax.

Carl Cohen argues that the argument that civil disobedience implies contempt for the law is «among the weakest» of the arguments against civil disobedience:

However, each of these arguments has a weakness.

For instance looking at the discussion on the editor's «talk page» and the Bitcoin Cash article's revisions page many of the arguments and edits revolve around calling the cryptocurrency `

They consider a range of arguments for owning gold, such as: (1) gold hedges inflation; (2) gold hedges currency decline; (3) gold is attractive when other assets are not; (4) gold is a safe haven in times of crisis; (5) gold is a de facto world currency; and, (6) central banks and investors in aggregate are still underweighting gold.