Sentences with phrase «with religious names»

Not exact matches

And to the guys at Sweet Jesus... don't make jokes or have fun with the name of a religious figure.

Your stuff is old, this atheist started years ago with Madalyn O'hair which tryed to pull everything religious out of the school in name of satan and it ended up with school have metal detecters now just to get in.

I think more effort and resources would be more effectively and more critically placed into keeping our government secular, keeping Creationism out of the science class, and religious fundamentalism away from interfering with women's reproductive choices — just to name a few priorities.

There is much that could be said about this, but I will stick with one thing, based on discussion at about the 2 minute mark: When atheists insist that atheism does not drive behavior, and then then campaign on behalf of atheism, ridicule religion and religious believers in the name of atheism, seek to change laws in favor of their atheistic positions, recommend the extermination of religion, and practice falsehoods like Dawkins's in support of atheism, they prove that their atheism drives their behavior and that their premise is false, disingenuous, and (as far as I can tell) useless for anything but giving atheism rhetorical cover from being implicated in atheists» atrocities.

How much hatred is shown on here for people with religious beliefs, and the hatred is spouted in the name of tolerance and equality.

In Zechariah 8:19, «truth & peace» go hand - in - hand, which necessarily conflicts with many contemporary concepts of «Christian truth» that sow heartache, resentment, conflict & oppression in the name of cultural or religious warfare.

you sir are practicing a religion one that means so much to you that you use it as your online name also please show me where I call you a fool or is telling someone not to make a fool of themself the same as calling them a fool which would mean you are very religious as far as Colin he said nothing that related to the debate I was in with you... we are talking about Atheism as a religious view not debating the existence of God now look over the definitions I have shown you and please explain how Atheism does not fit into the said definitions And you claim that evolution is true so the burden of proof falls in your lap as it is the base of your religion.

In other words with all the things going on in the world this long winded ambiguous rant about the religious beliefs of a horror writer whose name I've barely heard mentioned in the last decade is being presented as the most important information people need to know at this particular time.

According to Barnabas Fund, although the Security Council resolution does not specifically name any ethnic or religious group, it has been widely recognised that Yazidis, Christians and Shia Muslims have been specifically targeted, with US Secretary of State John Kerry last year specifically referring to this as «genocide.»

Everytime religious people post something about God or something out of their belief, there comes the Atheists storming it with their typical (hateful, profane, disrespectful but in - fairness articulate, itellect, scientific and logical) replies and name callings such as; «2000 years religious numbnuts», «oxymorons who keep asking of sky daddy's help», «idiots who was fooled by a magical being in the sky» and so on and so forth.

Confession time here: although I don't usually end up at places such as drunken parties, stripper bars and porn shops while hanging out with friends, since those activities and places hold little appeal for me, I know I need to stay away from certain «religious» people, those who seem to love only themselves and who seem hell - bent on being nasty to people they describe as «sinners», supposedly in the name of truth - telling.

And especially after the Noachian Flood, did false religion take a leap, with false religious doctrines and practices such as the trinity, immortality of the soul, that God torments people in a «hellfire», the establishment of a clergy class, the teaching of «personal salvation» as more important than the sanctification of God's name of Jehovah (Matt 6:9), the sitting in a church while a religious leader preaches a sermon, but the «flock» is not required to do anything more, except put money when the basket is passed.

If you are a non-US writer who has come up with a new religious doctrine and have insufficient funds to promote your writings, the only chance you have is if someone in the US happens to read about you, is interested in what you wrote and has the potential to mention your writing and / or your name in the US mainstream media.

Yes, you are correct that the religious leaders of Christendom gave their blessing to its members to kill others «in the name of Christ», such as Catholic Dominican inquisitor Tomas de Torquemada (1420 - 98) of Spain, who ruled tyrannically for 15 years (1483 - 98, with the blessings of Pope Sixtus IV [who praise him for «directing his zeal to those matters that contribute to the praise of God»] and Innocent VIII) and saw that over 114,000 (of which 10, 220 were burned at the stake) people were put to death.

(Updated) USCIRF's new list of religious freedom violators has familiar names, but contrasts with other lists.

There is no doubt in it that you have not created yourself someone or whatever your believes are you have been created you can call it whatever name you choose and there are physical laws in that universe so you can call that force behind those fundamental laws is The Creator so Creator is not an issue it is religious practice we may disagree with each other

A very close second is dealing with all the nasty, name - calling religious zealots who have nothing better to do with their time than to attack those who do blog.

Not with standing the hard work of the State Department's Office of International Religious Freedom, it would be difficult to name a single country where that policy....

but if I make my anti religious beliefs public along with naming my employer.

The religious think they get to determine objective beauty along with objective morality as they have deemed many many paintings inappropriate and have gone through periods of art burning in the name of their ignorant god.

John 3:3 is found near the beginning of a conversation Jesus has with Jewish religious leader named Nicodemus about how to be born again.

We take our inhuman behavior; we bless it with religious phrases and religious jargon; then we beat on one another in the name of God so that Catholics and Protestants feel justified in killing each other in Ireland, and Christians and Moslems do likewise in Lebanon.

But at the same time, moral issues of major proportions are the daily bill of fare in newspapers and on television, and our nation seems infected with social problems that have a deep religious dimension: poverty, pollution, discrimination, runaway technology, to name a few.

As an athiest, when I read the copy of the Qu «ran I own (I like to collect religious tomes, especially older copies) I see the term «fight» being more on par with «resist» given that the chapter's name is Repentence.

Thus Vatican II stated: «In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent of soul.»

He soon took on the name Francis and founded a religious order devoted to not only helping the poor but giving up all worldly possessions to live with them.

It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting and commanded world - wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life - long teachers, academics and scholars.

If there is a religious debate as arguement / it always ends with the religious groupings / in taking hands / praising the name of Jesus / or whomever having as an religious idol then as one turning their anger upon the poor atheist.

Your point seems to be that — since he didn't act with the full support and assistance of Christian religious leaders — it follows that Muslim terrorists — who call out to Allah as they attack, and who * DO * have the full support and assistance of certain extremist Muslim leaders — shouldn't be presumed to be acting in the name of Islam.

My dear friend, with all the christian love I can muster fror you, with all the religious, political and sociatal problems you must endure in this country, why in God's name don't you pack your belongings and move back where you came from.

Unfortunately, contemporary culture presents us — all too insistently — with issues which require a determined biblical and theological response: the continuation of the abortion regime; the intensifying pressure to acknowledge the legitimacy of same - sex «marriage»; the attacks on the religious liberty of Christians, forcing them to support practices offensive to their faith; and, most recently, «assisted suicide» now masquerading under the name «the right to die with dignity.»

All those religious folks will tell you many people using their name are religious, but they will quickly qualify that with, «But they are not real Christians / Muslims / Buddhists.....»

@Ron: Through my years I have found it impossible to have a logical argument with religious people, so now I just resort to name calling.

My working definition of the congregation is this: A congregation is a group that possesses a special name and recognized members who assemble regularly to celebrate a more universally practiced worship but who communicate with each other sufficiently to develop intrinsic patterns of conduct, outlook, and story.9 We can sharpen our appreciation of congregational structure by comparing its thick culture with that of other religious associations.

It does not matter whether we locate this power or presence in ourselves or in the heavens, whether we use the name of Nature, Jehovah, Christ, Mohammed, or Buddha, and whether we affiliate with a religious group or have only our own relationship with this Energy (Kavanaugh, Magnificent Addiction, p. 201).

According to the Shi`as, they have had virtues and attributes which have been superior to those of anyone in their time; they were endowed with greatness and the ability to perform miracles; they were infallible and innocent; each one was introduced by the previous Imam as his immediate successor; the Prophet referred to them by name and designated them by number; they gave the best and clearest statements concerning the origin of man and the Day of Resurrection; and after the Prophet they were the best authority to speak about religious affairs and conduct in the affairs of this world.

Without proclamation, the symbols (crossresurrection - incarnation) lose their tensive, religious reality and become occasions for other kinds of reflection... Only with a sense of the religious - event reality named proclamation is the New Testament recognized anew as the Christian classic text, the scripture.

you sit there in your home having nothing to do with anything that happened, then blame someone else who is in that same position for what happened, and he has to condemn it, and apparently he's guilty because of his religion... and about «no other religious freedoms in muslim countries»... you cant name a SINGLE muslim county that denies religious practice... not a single, including saudi arabia... just because they don't premit building religious buildings doesn't mean they don't respectively let you practice whatever you want to practice... unlike in some WESTERN countries they are banning religious practices such as; the headscarf!

Paul found this an important criterion, for he had to contend with all sorts of claims made in the name of religious experience (I Corinthians 12 - 14).

In fact, with Proudfoot's two - term option his own book begs for a more sophisticated approach — for while it denies realism in the name of a contemporary hermeneutics of suspicion, it claims to offer a realistic account of past scholarship on religious experience.

When we recognize, as Rollins writes, that «negation is embedded within, and permeates, all religious affirmation... that a desert of ignorance exists in the midst of every oasis of understanding,» we can more humbly dialog with those with whom we disagree and avoid using God's name carelessly by inserting it into our presuppositions.

Jeff: This is what causes division as we go about doing even good things, out of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil to set up another sect out of our carnal nature; above is the outcome; Jesus came to cause division among men that tries to become their own god and sets up camp, even for them that call themselves Christian, for them that have went from Him and His Words, even that are not of His Spirit: Jesus said; the Words that I speak are Spirit and Life, That means the Words of man can only bring forth death: Therefore; if we do not have His Spirit in us, then we too can only speak forth death: This is what it is to be a believer, we truly believe our Lord: I can see what the Catholic church and her daughters are doing to form a religious Babylonian city: Even as God caused a division in Babylon in the past because the peoples became great, so to is it now with all of the man made sects of religion: But when we are filled with the Spirit of God then we can not help but to live for God: It is written; those who are led by His spirit are His children: Thank - you Jeff: Those who are of His Spirit will know these truths, those who are not of His Spirit truly believe a believer is as they and can not know what we speak, because they live in unbelief: Thank - you again Jeff; In Jesus Name Alexandria: P.S..

Probably has something to do with the religious right's penchant for invoking his name to legislate hate and bigotry.

There are announcements of the deceased, usually decorated with the face of Christ or the Madonna; there are small statues of various saints imbedded in the walls of the older buildings; banks have religious statues and crucifixes; religious memorials are on the sides of roads, just to name a few.

Therefore, God has nothing to do with 1) people deciding to drive drunk and killing someone in a crash 2) Family values Republicans and John Edwards sleeping with their girlfriends 3) Religious nuts blowing themselves up in the name of God, etc. etc..

Please note: Ten years after a U.S. - led war to topple a dictator and establish the rule of law, things are so bad that a U.S. government commission has named Iraq as a particularly worrisome country with respect to religious freedom.

Or is the modern religious Christian so numb with guilt that he can no longer name his condition, and must relapse into a state of immobility and silence about guilt if only as a means of existing in its presence?

site the washing of the feet and the drying with the hair... that my friends is a marriage ceremony in Judaic law and custom of that period and yes they did have a daughter named Sarah) but... not it seems to be a shock to many who really did not dig into their own religious dogma... blind faith is great if you can achieve it... normally people today need to inspect... inspect and you find the truths... then you will have faith based on the truth, not twists and turns and the human politics of history that changed historical truth.

If religion is concerned with ultimate Truth or God, it can not but have its implications for the whole of life, private and public, and therefore the fundamental human right of religious freedom should include the right to express religious faith in prophetic ministry in society and politics in the name of justice.

In Jesus time, these religious leaders were more concerned with the outward appearance than feeding their «flock», even calling the common people a disdainful name, am - haarets (Hebrew) or «people of the land», looking down on them.