Not exact matches
In an era
of religious war, intolerance, and oppression
of of non-believers all over the world, the news media should stay away from this
sort of thing.
If you condemn these
sorts of behaviors in
religious people, then you are condemning the
things that God also condemns, and you have not abandoned God, but have been following Him.
Also, I should say that it seemingly puts Jesus is the company
of other great philosophical and
religious teachers who essentially say the same
sorts of things, in their own contexts and in their own times as to how to find «eternal life» a phrase I think speaks
of a qualitative type
of life, a flourishing, if you will, both now and after death.
Unlike the work
of bulldozers, which Berry calls «a powerful generalizer» that works against the impulse «to take care
of things, to pay attention to the details,» «good work is always modestly scaled, for it can not ignore either the nature
of individual places or the differences between places, and it always involves a
sort of religious humility, for not everything is known.
And maybe some franchises are different, but the one in SC where I worked most certainly didn't encourage me to pray or do any
sort of religious - based
thing (though Divine Intervention was almost always necessary to get through the lunchtime rush).
Tickle explains that, in reaction to the gathering center, many Christians will retreat to their respective corners, or
religious traditions, which isn't an entirely bad
thing because it serves as a
sort of ballast to keep the boat
of Christendom from tipping during the upheaval
of the Great Emergence.
But the main
thing we discovered about this group
of students was a
sort of built - in timidity and inarticulateness about their own
religious life.
It's insulting to all
religious groups to be putting up this
sort of thing.
Doesn't this
sort of thing, people suspending and assuming
religious belief at will, suggest that
religious belief is unfounded?
Psychological studies
of young children have shown that the closest
thing we have to an «intrinsic» set
of religious beliefs is a
sort of animism where we anthropomorphize everything.
Isn't
religious dogma exactly the
sort of thing many secularists don't want tolerated?
And in the interest
of full disclosure, they are some kind
of religious movement / cult, so if you're wary
of that
sort of thing, take heed.
Marriage can remain a mere ceremony
of religious significance for those who are into that
sort of thing with no legal constraints on the participants.
Those are people staying together because
of the kids, for finances, for
religious reasons, all
sorts of things but they are not the couples that we see from time to time and we go wow I want that marriage.
The following translated details come from Gematsu... - Dragon Quest Builders 2 is set in the world
of Dragon Quest II following the events
of its story - corrupt cleric Hargon and the God
of Destruction Malroth were defeated by the descendants
of the heroes, and peace visited the land - a
religious order that inherited Hargon's intentions appeared with the intention
of eradicating the Builders - peace that came after Hargon's death collapsed with the rise
of the «Hargon Order» - Hargon Order spearheads the destruction
of towns and castles all over the world - earth falls into ruin, and there are little remains left
of peoples» lives - but for a
religious order whose goal is to destroy the world, a Builder with the power to create
things is a major hindrance - protagonist
of Dragon Quest Builders 2, a Builder, was captured by the Hargon Order and thrown into jail - previous update introduced a boy named Malroth, who has the same name as the God
of Destruction Malroth - Weekly Jump teases that there seems to be some
sort of secret surrounding him
You can point the finger at all
sorts of participants in this battle, but I believe (and we have been examining and discussing at length on this site for more than 8 years now) the principal drivers
of the polarization are coming more from: (1) the corporate energy interests who are protecting their profits against regulation and other policies that would move the system away from fossil fuels, and using their clout in the political process to tie
things up; (2) right - wing anti-government and anti-regulatory ideologues whose political views appear threatened by scientific conclusions that point toward a need for stronger policy action; (3) people whose
religious or cultural identities appear threatened by modern science; and so forth.
Lastly, the idea that all «
religious» people, by which I assume you mean people who believe there is a God, go to church, that
sort of thing, think only with a certain mindset, that is, a non scientific mindset, believing or disbelieving based entirely on blind faith, and never facts, is shown wrong by people like G K Chesterton and especially C S Lewis.
Indeed, when it comes to family planning and unrestricted access to modern contraception (and the unhindered agency to use a preferred method
of contraception),
things like misinformation about side - effects, lack
of knowledge about the benefits
of small family - size, and
religious or male opposition to contraception form a
sort of scaffolding that keep fertility rates higher than they would otherwise be.
For a man who professes to despise this
sort of thing, he really does appear to abide by the kind
of simplistic tenets more commonly found among
religious fundamentalists.
She's an avowed modern natural lawyer, so you can
sort of see how Mr. Vellacot got
things twisted in his head the way he did, because your classic, historical natural law theory was espoused by people like St. Thomas Aquinas, who's views on law were certainly well - integrated with his
religious beliefs.
That
sort of thing — I would have thought — is not readily justiciable, and is best left to the
religious community itself to
sort out in its own way.