Sentences with phrase «then claim you do»

You finally agreed that God caused it, just like the Bible SAYS and then you claim I didn't know the Bible.

You can not point a gun and someone and then claim you did not intend because you believed he gun to be unload.

But then claiming he did not intend to send the answers to Artvoice.

Most people overdo it with the Melatonin and then claim it doesn't work.

Kinda just like EA bringing Need for Speed Most Wanted a year later to Wii U then claiming it didn't sell well on the system... it's almost becoming a running joke at this point.

Not exact matches

Dr, Klaus claimed that if you constantly applied this idea - of only doing your most valuable work and then spending time creating more of your most valuable work - you could double your income in a few years.

At one point, Trump even singled Tur out during a rally, falsely claiming she didn't accurately depict the then - candidate's crowd sizes.

The right thing to do when confronted with a mistake is to own up to it, not to make a series of bizarre claims in defense then insult the profession of the people who correctly pointed out the error.

If Browder's claims are accurate, then, Russia's interference in the U.S. election may have had as much to do with defending Vladimir Putin's vast personal wealth as with advancing Russian state interests.

«It could cost a company more to qualify a product and do all the paperwork to claim NAFTA then the one or two per cent they pay in [WTO] duties.

Bowman says there's a developing body of case law around people who have claimed personal injury for insurance and then, when they're supposed to be bedridden, have posted photos of themselves doing something physical, like skiing.

Her ruling claims the settlement does not provide an adequate technical explanation of Google's workaround, which involves scanning in - transit emails for security purposes, and then later parsing them for advertising data.

In an interview with Fox News» Sean Hannity, Trump noted that the stock market has done well during his first year in office, then claimed that «maybe in a sense we're reducing debt.»

The senders claimed to own a patent that covered the concept of scanning a document and then sending it by e-mail — something almost every firm does.

Until then, don't listen to activist investors claiming they can unlock value unless they articulate a focus on ROIC and long - term cash flows.

Broaddrick claims she was traumatized by the incident and scared of Clinton's influence, and so didn't report the rape, or tell her then - husband, Gary Hickey.

But if you didn't know that was an option in the first place, then you miss the opportunity to claim it.

Rather, she resigned because she had «inadvertently misled» lawmakers about the deportation targets — first by claiming they didn't exist, and then by saying she wasn't aware of their existence.

Essentially, Mr. Alamo failed to file a tax return for 2009 and then claimed that he didn't receive a notice of deficiency from the IRS.

The techniques include claiming outrageous statements were jokes or misunderstandings; saying and doing things and then denying it; blaming others for misunderstanding their intent; disparaging others» concerns as over-sensitivity; and other forms of twilighting the truth.

A: The notion is that they're less distortionary because they don't double - tax savings by taking money first as income tax, then claiming still more as capital gains taxes.

HAA, anything God does can be taken and then claimed that «evolution» did it instead.

Or do you get to just make claims, have them proven wrong, backpedel and say thats not what you meant, then present a new idea you think science will never be able to prove only to be proven wrong almost before it's out of your mouth.

You and Topher are doing the same thing: you claim that the Bible is absolute truth, but then claim that the problem area are because humans wrote it and got the details wrong.

care yo address my prior question where you claim most non-believers don't call believers morons... and then literally a few comments down your doing exactly that... hypocrit.

So how do you go from that reasoning to «Since it wasn't accidental then it must have been this ancient male diety named (fill in blank depending on religion) who loves me and knows me and cares for me and wants me to perform rituals that have nothing to do with morality like prayer, not eating certain things, sabaath and many more just because he said so, even though we have no record of him saying anything, just records of humans who wrote things down that they claim he said, but I want to believe it all so badly I will base my beliefs on no other evidence than «it just can't be accident».

This is what helps you to understand that the account is the truth, that when you claim «nothing» can do the impossible, and then claim God can't do something relatively insignificant compared to that, then you are being very biased against God, and giving incredible amounts of credit to «nothing» at the same time... that is unrealistic in the extreme.

If you claim to be a «Christian» then I think you should look hard in the mirror and ask yourself... «what did Jesus say about this?»

My point was that if you propose that, as a society, we teach children that there is no God, then you are doing what you claim to oppose: indoctrinating children with what is your personal belief.

If you don't share it, then the only injury you can claim is that they hold their belief doesn't somehow magically put yours at the apex of correct.

A better strategy would be to point out how one doesn't need religion to be a moral person, and then demonstrate how some of the people that claim to be a beacon for religious zealots (the GOP) practice an existence devoid of morality.

Ok then, if he is so God - damned stupid that he does not even have the brains to do that, why is claiming to know the origens of existence then?

Hey, look, what if a big invisible sky wizard chanted magic spells to make the universe and then sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself so he doesn't have torture you forever and ever in an eternal torture pit he made himself even though he claims to love you but won't take five seconds to prove himself beyond doubt like he decided to do with math and chemistry?

If as you say you have talked to others who claim to be Atheist the way you describe it then they are IDIOTS who also don't understand Atheism and yes at that point since they are claiming «no God» to be true, then by all means call their point of view a «religion».

If modern Christians have a sense of martyrdom as you claim then please feel free to debate them in the here and now... I don't hear a lot of Christians saying «you can't say / do this because 2,000 years ago Rome was busy killing us.»

If all of that water was contained inside the Earth (as many Christian «claim» is the case when they get desperate because the other options clearly don't work), then you wouldn't have been able to walk on the surface because the Earth's crust would have turned into a literal quicksand soup.

using your argument we would had civil rights in this country just because goverments make certain practices illegal does tat mean that what the goverrmet s doing is moral and just, The fact s the goverment attempted to use Christaniaity to bolster it claim to power through this we have the start of the Roman Catholic Church one of the most insidious evil organzations on this planet which as doe more to oppose ad kill true follewers of Christ then ay group o this planet.

SInce you clearly have some loose screws, you keep directing people to your website, then call them morons for going, then say do your own work, but if I do you claim I am a moron.

You lambaste Matt Walsh for claiming to be a «Speaker of Truths» then go on to post what I can only assume what you believe to be true, or «Speaking the Truth» unless you do not believe what you speak.

If Warfield is not concerned with Catholicism, then why in his discussion of the kind of «faith healing» promoted by men like A. J. Gordon does he claim that it creates a class of «professionals» who stand between the soul and God and that «from this germ the whole sacerdotal evil has grown»?

This led Luther eventually to conclude that the Roman Church was irrevocably committed to the claim that the authority of the pope stood even above Holy Scripture and it was in this context that he came, over the next several years, to believe that the papacy was the prophesied Antichrist of the last days, a conviction he then held to his dying day with a literalistic fervor that his modern interpreters have rarely been willing to take as seriously as he did.

What we don't know is if the god hypothesis is correct, and likely not, so claiming some «god» had something to do with it... pointless until you can show this «god» of yours to exist... until then, it is baseless belief.

If you're going to claim that we need an objective reason to evaluate morals against, I would then say that no one has this objective standard until they demonstrate that they do.

He will claim that he does, and claims he «knows» but then admitted he could have been decieved.

They claim to own the moral high ground because they are christian then do things that are un-Christ-like.

How can you make such an ignorant and blatant «over-generalization'to claim this fallacious If / then logic which goes like this... (If) you disrespect (a)(muslim)... (THEN)(they) kill 3,000 people., blah blah, blah... So... If I should go out and disrespect a muslim, which I wouldn't do, but if I would (hypothetically speaking) 3,000 people are going to diethen logic which goes like this... (If) you disrespect (a)(muslim)... (THEN)(they) kill 3,000 people., blah blah, blah... So... If I should go out and disrespect a muslim, which I wouldn't do, but if I would (hypothetically speaking) 3,000 people are going to dieTHEN)(they) kill 3,000 people., blah blah, blah... So... If I should go out and disrespect a muslim, which I wouldn't do, but if I would (hypothetically speaking) 3,000 people are going to die...?

When it is satisfied, «gods do not exist» will then be a claim that requires proof.

Now if Taliban or AlQ did that then how can they be Muslims or Claim to be Muslims or we as Muslims be be lamed for their acts that are non of Islam as a religion??

I think what he is trying to say is that believers claim that if atheists don't believe in God then why do they call God evil?

i did read page 2 and i know what im talking about you obiosly do nt because you all think hitler was a christian and he wasnt because im a christian and i know for a fact christians do nt act like that you can claim it all youd like but you should of read more up on history and if you think hitler was a christian your wrong because even if he said he was a christian then he wasnt a real one