Sentences with phrase «validity of many»

Not to mention, whether Christianity stole from other religions has no bearing on its validity or the validity of its core belief (i.e., a belief in a god).

Consequently, we can not judge the validity of religious beliefs by asking whether they are true or whether they are consistent with some other beliefs or principles.

More and more we are coming to grasp the validity of W.H. Auden's line «We must love one another or die.»

Faith, is the only way there will be validity of God to anyone.

Instead, we must judge the validity of religious beliefs by asking whether they help fulfill this purpose.

The question is whether the usual talk of immortality is a possible or even desirable way of assuring the validity of such a conviction about love and its meaning.

Do I, the champion of reason and common sense, maintain that reason, believability and even truth can not judge the validity of religious tenets?

How can a debate about how a nun should serve God turn into a debate about the validity of Christianity or religion in general?

«31 The idea of the particularization of the validity of expressions of religious experience will have to be followed out in epistemology and in the theory of religious experience.

- The fact that there are «other» beliefs has no bearing on the validity of «this» belief.

Being interesting and inspiring is however not a criterion of validity of a scientific or philosophical theory.

No one cares about the validity of any particular religion because it has no bearing on the (1) the validity of religion in general, (2) the existence of a god, or (3) whether there is a universal morality.

Any church leader who questions the validity of a religious presence on college campuses should read this book and reassess that notion.

Regardless of the possible existence of a preacher man who made some headlines, there is plenty of reason to question the validity of the gospel accounts in the Bible.

Corrections do not prove the validity of the original and neither do gravity waves, there are numerous possible origins for the current state of the universe.

Sorry this is such a long post, but I felt that providing an example of a «scientific disproving» of evolution as well as the circ.umstances in which it was given would be instructive as to the validity of the hypothesis.

With regards to creation / evolution, that isn't something that determines the validity of the Bible as many Christians, (even pastors / priests) believe in millions of years old earth.

And both Fuller and Young Life appear to have closed ranks behind Jewett — at least to the extent of affirming the validity of his position as a needed option in the emerging discussions.

He rejects metaphysical idealism which denies the validity of the material aspects of reality, just as he rejects dialectical materialism in its totally mechanistic form, as it denies the spiritual aspects of reality.

But his book and its analysis need to be placed in context to judge the validity of the «historian's perspective» that he claims.

using the verses from bible to verify the validity of bible and thus proving it as word of god doesn't work..

I gave numerous evidences for the validity of the Bible in its entirety.

The general position of these writers, whose contributions vary considerably in approach and quality, is that Jesus made no claim of divinity for himself and that the doctrine of the incarnation was developed during the early centuries of the Christian era as an attempt to express the uniqueness of Jesus in the mythological language and thought forms of the Greek culture of the time.While recognizing the validity of the patristic theologians» work, which culminated in the classical christological definitions of Nicea and Chalcedon, the British theologians question whether these definitions are intelligible in the 20th century, and go on to suggest that some concept other than incarnation might better express the divine significance of Jesus today.

another one them tried to make a case for evolution using principles of adaptation and then claimed that even though it did not fit into the evolutionary timescale it was the methods used that proved the validity of the experiment.

Your assertions give nothing to the validity of it, and does no good to anyone actually looking for the truth.

I'd suggest that anyone wishing to assess the validity of your claims need only ask himself or herself, «What is the credibility of the evidence presented by noahsdadtopher?

«What» is the all encompassing 1st Cause for the creation of all things in existence, but proven with empirical validity of an oxymoron «infinitely perfect» character trait?

Implicitly denying the validity of the promise of divine protection, he seeks to guarantee his own security during an emergency sojourn in Egypt (12:10 ff.)

If you want to dispute the validity of these premises (and I'm not saying they are or aren't valid), you have to put that in another proposition, with the premises and reasoning that lead to them.

The student is helped to acquire the aptitudes needed in order to do history or philosophy or a social science as aptitudes needed to inquire critically into the validity of Christian witness.

And, as we will see, Jesus» fate threatens to cancel out the validity of the promise.

The defining interest in systematic theology is the unity of the three dimensions of critical inquiry into the validity of Christian witness.

To grant the validity of the charismatic movement undercuts their very rationale for existence.

The primary answer is that modernist thinking assumes the validity of Darwinian evolution, which explains the origin of humans and other living systems by an entirely mechanistic process that excludes in principle any role for a Creator.

I just love the zealots who are trying to dipute the validity of carbon dating, saying its «only» valid for 10,000 years or so.

Theology, he says, is «critical inquiry into the validity of Christian witness» (21).

All the theists, who work for Walmart but like to post on the Inter-webs, will now call into question the validity of radio carbon testing.

Critical inquiry into the validity of Christian witness is not a simple activity.

The criteria of logical validity doesn't apply to the validity of the premises, only to the reasoning.

It is also not to test the validity of the feelings of minorities in America.

Because theology is critical inquiry into the validity of Christian witness in every respect (faithfulness to itself, truth, fittingness), historical, philosophical, and practical theology are necessarily «in reciprocal relationship to each other» (67).

Actually, modern science put a lot more of effort into discrediting discoveries that point to validity of claims made by religion, than the opposite.

How are we to judge the validity of his interpretation?

The validity of the premise has nothing to do with the validity of the reasoning!

Who are you or who am I to question the validity of how an individual develops their world view?

No, the civilized world or Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire) realized the validity of Christianity and the falsehood of paganism.

There are no verses, and no verses that can be cobbled together, which suggest it is a sin to question the validity of Bible.

The leading question in every course dealing with any subject matter must be this: How does this subject matter (be it «logic, or Mexican - American history, or the sociology of religion») contribute to assessing the validity of Christian witness?

If, as I think can he argued, neither of these considerations is a cogent argument against the Possibility of any sort of metaphysics of Entity, then the question of the validity of Whitehead's rejection of Aristotle's notion of substance takes on special importance.

Validity of the premises has nothing to do with valid reasoning, buddy.