Sentences with phrase «who accepts the claim»

The atonement of the world is anticipated, Pannenberg says, in that those who accept the claim of the Cross and live for the unity that it promises are free to live at one with God and neighbor.

Personal Injury Protection Personal Injury Protection is not used in all states, but it is designed to get you the medical care you need immediately after an accident, allowing the insurance companies to work out who accepts the claim after the fact.

Not exact matches

Many fights happen between migrants, who are coming into Europe searching for better economic opportunities — and will likely see their asylum claim rejected — and refugees, who are fleeing war and persecution and are almost guaranteed to have their asylum demand accepted.

Agents who agree would then accept the tokens as payment in exchange for reducing their traditional commissions in U.S. dollars to as low as 1 percent, or an average of $ 225 per token used, the company claims.

The company also claims that these coins will rise in value, making them worthwhile assets for the agents and brokers who accept them.

(I have friends who would claim that part of their healing in this area was to learn to accept and embrace their homosexuality.)

Homosexual people will be accepted as equal, full human beings, who have a legitimate claim on every right that both church and society have to offer any of us.

You make the claim that there is a god, I say I don't accept your claim due to the lack of evidence provided... seems to me the one making the claim is the one who needs to provide the evidence.

The theory of evolution is also embraced by many who claim to accept the Bible as the word of God.

A prolepsis, as he uses the notion, is simply a claim staked out in history, which, when and if history is fulfilled, will be verified or falsified, and which is of such a nature that those who in the meantime have accepted it will all along have been living appropriately to the truth that will at the end be discovered.

Most Christians don't understand how others might see it as hate when they make the claim that their heaven & heII exists and that those not invited to heaven are going to go to heII to be tormented and tortured for eternity and the only way to salvation is to accept their God as your Lord and Savior... They think to themselves that they are just trying to help by condemning those they dislike and who don't worship the same way they do, but that doesn't change it from what it is, «hate filled».

If you accept that this a general day of judgement for a specific person, e.g., a Congressmen who gets caught emailing pics of his parts, and claims that it is due to an addiction, it is nonsense.

@david johnson... and non religious... the indifferent probably well over 990,000,000 who do not by their indifference accept atheist theory, but atheists try to claim them to bolster their numbers.Atheism has always been the stuff of frauds.

It is sad and disturbing that in this day and age (in California believe it or not) I have to keep my beliefs (or lack there of) a secret so, as not to be discriminated against by the very people who claim they are accepting of others.

They've done this before, he claims: Think of «their predecessors who opposed legalizing divorce but lost,» and who then «accepted divorce» in practice if not in theory — for example, by hiring divorcées.

Cain becomes angry when God accepts Abel's sacrifice rather than his own (Gen 4:5), and after he kills Abel, claims that it is not he who is supposed to take care of Abel, that he is not his brother's keeper (Gen 4:9).

I think David believes that God accepts jokes... he's the only ex-pastor who claims to stand naked before God...

They are still stuck in the Old Testament and though they claim to know Yeshua, they haven't met Him yet, not everyone, but the ones who judge and can not accept another human being for what he or she really are.

Reinforcing in advance the claim I have put forth at the end of Part Two, Hartshorne went on to point out: «Just as the Stoics said the ideal was to have good will toward all but not in such fashion as to depend in any [221] degree for happiness upon their fortunes or misfortunes, so Christian theologians, who scarcely accepted this idea in their ethics, nevertheless adhered to it in characterizing God.»

Do you accept the testimony of people who claim they were abducted by aliens from outer space?

And given the way in which sex and gender now lie at the heart of contemporary notions of identity, the law could effectively require churches to accept any and every identity claim of every person who passes through its doors.

Austin Do you accept the testimony of people who claim they were abducted by aliens from outer space?

After reading these blogs for several years now I can honestly say the posters who get the most heated and angry and violent in their comments at least claim to be Christians, though I will accept that some may be poe's or trolls.

It IS funny, because many people who claim that they are «scientific» just blindly accept «Corporate Science» aimed at keeping them logically ignorant, meaning, they can use logic and reason (and even rhetoric if you know your Trivium) to argue well for false ideas.

There are also those who claim the same faith but pick and choose what tenets of that faith they want to believe and follow and they are the «unorthodox» (Not adhering to the accepted or traditional and established faith) or «liberal» (Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian views).

I call a great character one who by his actions and attitudes satisfies the claim of situations out of deep readiness to respond with his whole life, and in such a way that the sum of his actions and attitudes expresses at the same time the unity of his being in its willingness to accept responsibility.

«Considering the number of boys who were educated at St Peter's, the Verona Fathers absolutely do not accept that claims from 12 individuals demonstrate a culture of abuse at the seminary.»

For anyone who is not already predisposed to believing that the imaginary is real, if his attention is called to the distinction between reality and imagination and he is explicitly reminded that the imaginary is not real, he's not likely to accept claims about imaginary things as truth.

And you are talking, in the main, to people who proudly claim to accept nothing without proof (or maybe nothing extraordinary without extraordinary proof).

These are claims that no one who confesses Christ as Lord can accept.»

Given current lack of evidence for proof of anything supernatural, will there be leniency for those who simply and honestly claim, «I don't know», granted there is a supernatural, and that the Christian God is the true God who did present us with an ultimatum to accept him or not, expecting us to wage the eternal fate of our soul?

There are «Christians» in this book, and there are «almost «Christians,» the latter term apparently reserved for those who could not claim to be «in Christ» even when they accepted the tenets of Christianity.

If «deeply felt personal experience» is sufficient proof of a claim, then's let's accept that, along with the necessary corollary that all such experiences must be equally valid, such as the gentleman in the asylum who deeply feels he is Napoleon.

If the majority of society put half of the effort into developing their intellect and forming their own beliefs that many put into living a life controlled by what any random man who claims they are spreading God's message, perhaps people would actually come to their own conclusions rather than simply accepting the ones presented to them as the one and only truth.

It's simply incoherent to accept people who have broken a vow they took willingly before God, and yet condemn in the harshest tones a group of people who don't even claim for the most part to be christians.

In light of such claims, it is perhaps not surprising to encounter these study questions on the scrolls: «Describe the impact of this discovery on those who do not accept the authenticity of the Bible» and «Determine the evidence from the Dead Sea scrolls confirming the claims of Jesus as the Bible describes him.»

But when Marwan came into this church, he couldn't accept the fact that these other guys who claimed to be Muslims were rampaging through this place, destroying the signs and icons of his Christian friends, his Christian compatriots, his Christian neighbors.

Muslims — who do not like to be called Muhammadans because they think it implies a misunderstanding of the place of the Prophet in their faith — have themselves tended to encourage oversimplification by claiming that Islam may be quickly grasped by accepting the Fundamentals and following the simple list of Consequences they imply.

No where did I see any evidence of «censorship» of those who didn't accept polywater like you seem to be claiming.

I had to learn to look beyond smiling faces, empty rhetoric, to asking myself why those who want to get very close very quickly or those who say one thing like claiming no strict rules about becoming a full accepted member somewhere only later on to start hearing of expectations and the guilt tripping brain - washing used.

So how can ANY atheist who accepts evolution claim to be more «moral»?!??!?!?!?!? The religion of atheism is seriously messed up beyond belief.

By accepting and participating in an obvious religious holiday, but then claim to not believe in anything associated with that event accept the commercialism it brings, exposes that person as someone who is confused with thier own feelings.

This claim, in theory and practice, is as exclusive as any made by certain religions in history, and has the same tragic consequences on the life of other people who refuse to accept such claims.

I am going to weigh in, being a catholic and the whole shabang... First of all this is not infringing on anyone's right to practice their religion... Requiring insurance companies to provide contraception for women does not mean the woman has to use it or purchase it... Catholic hospitals take federal funds for their patients, therefore they are not exempt from employment laws... If the Catholic Diocese doesn't want to provide the insurance claiming religious beliefs, then they can no longer accept federal funded patients... They also know that they will be subjected to discrimination lawsuits based hiring and religious discrimination — non-catholics work there, and therefore are being denied healthcare due to catholic beliefs... Majority if not all Catholic women do, have, or had used contraception in their lifetime... God does not nor does the bible say anything about contraception, since it had not been invented yet — so this is a man - made law, made by a bunch of men, who have never had a menstrual cycle — and the pain that comes with it....

The charges were brought by Stowell's family members, who appear to have been worried that Josiah would accept Joseph's religious claims.

When Christians claim that a particular doctrine must be defended at all costs or else Christianity is doomed, those who can not accept the particular doctrine can hardly be blamed if they assume this must be so, and, as a consequence, surrender with reluctance all allegiance to the Christian faith.

It is true that there are immoral people who claim to be Christians, and the bible does talk of this... if you sin after accepting Christ you are like all other Christians.

Nor can I accept the answer of the religionists who claim that we can and should simply continue to speak «religiously.»

Is it appropriate to judge someone who ignores all of the accepted evidence and claims that the earth is flat?

I have a BIG problem with «having to accept» so many blatantly illogical and impossible claims such as the very claim that this so - called «god» communicated directly with ANYONE who says they «hear voices»!?? HMMM?