Sentences with phrase «reason is the answer to their question»

But that reason is the answer to their question.

Not exact matches

For obvious reasons, Snowden's whereabouts are still unknown, but the 29 - year - old was able to find a secure Internet connection to answer questions from the public.

This is one reason it's smart to do lots of homework: You'll already know the answers that can easily be found online, and you may have ammunition to come up with some intelligent questions.

The best comprehensive research that helped to answer the «reasons for success» question that I could find was from The Ecommerce Genome by Compass in their Startup Genome report, which looked at 650 internet startups.

Here were people who hadn't even given me an opportunity to present to them and answer their questions, pointing to seemingly every reason under the sun my idea wouldn't work.

The reason these guys are interested in it is if they continually answer questions that are valid, people may want to come and hire them for their services.

There's no particular reason to think Zuckerberg would know the answer to either of her questions, and he said he didn't.

Investors: for compliance reasons I am unable to answer specific questions about stocks or funds via email.

Well, the answer for that question really depends on your needs because there are lots of reasons that people need or want a baby carrier and they should all contribute to your decision making.

With so many ways to use live video, from upcycling written or non-video content to giving your audience a peek behind the scenes to question - and - answer segments, there's no reason your video strategy should be overly predictable or one - dimensional.

These question and answers in the reports provide useful information to the users about the reasons behind the launch of the ICO, the vision of the platform launchers, information about the distribution of tokens, what problems the platform is designed to solve, and the benefits the platform offers to investors.

Entrepreneurs take out business loans for an unending variety of good reasons, so there's not necessarily a right or wrong answer to this question.

But it's not terrible to start with the established winners and ask that question - the answer may in fact be, «nope, there's a reason these folks are the top choices.»

perhaps the only way to answer either of these questions is if there indeed is an afterlife, which is a large part of the reason i continue to hope for and believe in god and life after death!

If science can not answer a why question, it has been the case 100 % so far that nothing else has an answer either, and there's no reason to think this will change anytime soon in any foreseeable future.

There are no answers to these basic questions, for the simple reason that the whole idea is made up.

All the more reason, then, to be grateful to two Catholic University professors for having assembled a florilegium of brief texts from a century of Catholic social doctrine, and then artfully arranging them as answers to the real - world questions asked by business people trying to live their professional lives vocationally.

And for some reason you are insisting I answer questions to something I don't think I ever stated.

I absolutely agree, but a primary reason people make up gods is to have answers to questions they can't otherwise answer.

Furthermore, they seem happy to accept one unanswered question in return for being able to use God to answer any number of other questions, at least until better answers can be found through science and reason.

The same reasons BC condemns the readers and contributors to this forum — that we think, question, use our own God - given intelligence and reasoning skills, don't accept the easy answers, and are accepting of differences which create no harm — are the very things that make that notion quite bizarre.

In response to your question as to what my reasons were I have a very simple answer.

One major reason that institutions are inherently conservative is that continuing in existing ruts is far easier and less demanding than asking searching questions and allowing ourselves to be reshaped by the answers.

The main reason I abandoned Christianity to become an atheist is that I just couldn't keep rationalizing all the time when the one obvious answer, «there is no god» so effectively addressed all these questions.

The answer to this question leads us to the next reason the Hebrew Scriptures are unique, which we will consider tomorrow.

Concerning matters not explicitly clear in the Qur» an, the Sunnah is the secondary, supplementary source; and when the answer to questions needs further clarification the third source for Muslims is reasoning about the intent of the Qur» an and Sunnah by those men who are recognized as having the training and experience which qualifies them to reason properly.

The Little Apocalypse was added for a similar reason: it satisfied in some degree the urgent demand for Jesus» own answer to the question of the date of the Parousia and the «signs of the end.»

, the idea of natural reasoning upon nature is completely absent - yet this is a key dimension of the classic and Catholic answer to the question posed.

There are three basic reasons: First, when people visit a church, they generally don't have someone there to answer their questions and refute their misconceptions.

And, as Pope Benedict again has said, this fundamental question, which isa question we have to answer with our intelligence sustained by the light of faith, is that if we discern reason in the world, in nature - if nature is understandable - the question arises; where does this come from?

It seems probable that failure on the part of many ministers to find adequate answers to this question is one important reason why organized religion has not made a larger contribution to the solution of the problem.

There is ample reason to believe that these questions have been answered unconsciously by the institutional church, but they have not yet in most instances been faced consciously.

Until you make your case in support of your imaginary friend, there is no reason to spend even another second trying to answer your question.

Our reason and logic may be too poor to answer all vexing questions, but they are the best we have.

If we don't know the answer we should say «I don't know» but I can not imagine a good reason not to face questions people ask — whether they are Christians or not.

Is it there simply to look up the correct answers to questions that we, for some reason, already know?

The second error is to suppose that there is no right (or rationally superior) answer to important moral questions on which people disagree, or that the right answer can only be known by blind faith, not by reason.

It is clear to me that the answer to the mental health practitioners» question is also the same answer to the reason why I failed to realize what was happening to my mind sooner.

There is a good reason to suppose that there may not be an answer to this further question.

Bishop Paulose says, «It is by this reasoning, namely by a bold effort to answer the question of how Jesus Christ can become lord even of the religionless, that Bonhoeffer arrived at his conclusion that the church should work out and proclaim a «non-religious» interpretation of Biblical and theological concepts».

Therefore, anyone with a shred of logic or reason in them needs to realize that there is only one answer to the god question.

Of course, postmodernists have a standard answer for this kind of questioning, namely, that those of us who think and talk this way are imprisoned in premodern categories, and enslaved to the linear mode of reasoning.

I think the reason God has allowed portions of scripture to be «unclear» on divisive issues is that this whole Jesus following thing is not about finding answers to every question.

One reason I think the Bible is such a powerful conversation - starter is that it asks the questions that are most important to humanity without providing neat and tidy answers in response.

And it is for that reason that when we ask our question about the value of religion for human life, I think we ought to look for the answer among these violenter examples rather than among those of a more moderate hue.

No, the more basic reason for the challenge is that this very issue of theism or atheism is too complex to admit of the simple either / or kinds of answers apparently called for by the question emblazoned on the cover of Time for Easter 1966.

What is necessary, Niebuhr declares, is»... a critique of historical reason, a reason that will not seek the possibility of biblical history in the conditions of natural science or idealistic metaphysics, but rather in the answer to the distinctive question, how do we know historical events.»

They see it as a slap in the face for some reason (I'm not against them, though, just the idea that somehow a 2000 - year old Middle Eastern carpenter «died for me» (they never have a good answer as to what that really means)-RRB- and question why they spent so much money on my Catholic education.

And the reason for this goes back to their answer to the question, Where is God?

in my opinion I believe that religion was brought on by a group of people who realized if they gave the weak a reason and answers to questions that could not be answered then they would rise above.