Sentences with phrase «accept anything but»

In a climate where most agents won't accept anything but e-queries, and (at least in my experience) almost never condescend to hit the «reply» key, I'm not sure the idea of choosing or not choosing to self - publish makes much sense.

Will not accept anything but trade or cash don't scam me with your out of country BS.

Im a homebody love cuddlinging Im submissive but not stupid I do nt have time for mind games or someone selling me a dream.Im ot perfect but doubt anyone is I can accept anything but lies Im honest and very...

if you boys desire to get ripped immediately without spending a single another minute in the gym, then you should check out this video tutorial SIXPP.COMIt's a very funny thing about life; if you refuse to accept anything but the best, you very often get it.

The Israeli lobby in the United States will not accept anything but a veto at the UN and Obama is now looking at the next elections and would not want to anger it.

They need a manager who won't accept anything but first.

«It would have been our only chance to make a statement in front of the biggest audience that we weren't going to accept anything but the maximum punishment,» Curry said.

Real Madrid and Barcelona never accept anything but a win, why can't we have that mentality?

She clearly is unable to accept anything but her own.

I started w her in the bassinette, and there was no way she was accepting anything but sleeping next to me in bed by her food source.

Not exact matches

«Woods has not done anything illegal — the list is endless of public figures, especially males, who do this, but Americans accept this stuff.

But like anything worth having, getting your start - up accepted by the best accelerators is a matter of winning a competition.

If you've ever felt overwhelmed by accounting minutiae, you won't want to miss this tape's wonderfully accurate discussion of why generally accepted accounting principles are anything but user friendly.

Anything but accept the fact that their candidate wasn't what the people wanted to vote for.

And so I think what we're going to try to do in our program is to be skeptical of the whole Cryptocurrency movement and be open to the potential benefits that it offers, but not like we're not going to accept anything just uncritically.

But the unpleasant reality that I have had to accept is that there will be no «new» Donald Trump, just the same candidate who will slash and burn and trample anything and anyone he perceives as being in his way or an easy scapegoat.

The small but producing mine is being listed by an unknown seller on BitPremier, a so - called bitcoin marketplace for all things luxurious — the advertisement does not confirm if the seller will accept anything else besides bitcoin.

What dismays me about Miley Cyrus is the same thing that dismays me about the current trend of instantly going to the allowable limit (and a bit over) in dress and act: I get the feeling she feels like she's proving something; that this is not an artistic statement of anything but rather, that she feels like she needs to do this to be accepted as a female singer and entertainer.

but you can not blame other as you have the brain to think before you accept anything as you do use your brain / intelectual to go to a good school or find a better job etc...

I accept that in your mind you friend is as real as anything you experience, but that doesn't mean it's real outside your mind.

But just as no one here would accept my testimony of how much the Great Pumpkin loves me and cares for me (Peanuts 3:16), I will not be able to accept such platitudes as anything other than empty emotional outbursts.

Yup that the excuses you have to tell yourself so you can accept where you are at in this world, but the reality is if you could choose to do anything in the world regardless of money or any other limitations you would not be living the life you have now.

Most likely it was one or both of your parents, and it happened at an age when you pretty much accepted anything they told you without question, but that's not essential for what I'm about to describe.

Tell me if I'm wrong but I was told that a person could do anything and then just accept jesus and you would get into heaven.

Like all skeptics, you can deny anything, not just God, but you chose to deny God, while accepting that... anything... your car was repaired adequately and not tampered with... or the food was not older than the package says... or it really is a live broadcast... pick anything that someone tells you, and you had the choice to believe them, or not, based on you choozing that for yourself.

If we are to speak truly to our age, therefore, we can assume, not (1) the complete ignorance of Christian principles, such as existed in the decaying civilization of early Greece and Rome; (2) the thoroughgoing knowledge and acceptance of Christian principles, such as existed in the time of most of our grandparents; or (3) the vigorous antagonism to the gospel, such as now exists among those who accept either the Marxist or the Fascist interpretation of history; but (4) a vague and tenuous residuum of Christian piety, devoid of any intention of doing anything about it.

But it's telling that the first comment from, you, Steve, when David suggests not even cracking down on, but simply not being apethetic to abuse of people in churches, is that there is no utopia, so just accept it and don't bother trying to change anythiBut it's telling that the first comment from, you, Steve, when David suggests not even cracking down on, but simply not being apethetic to abuse of people in churches, is that there is no utopia, so just accept it and don't bother trying to change anythibut simply not being apethetic to abuse of people in churches, is that there is no utopia, so just accept it and don't bother trying to change anything.

The Christian who, having accepted the communist regime in the U.S.S.R., protests the violence of that regime, should be «all things to all men» — not to show that a Christian will acquiesce in anything whatever, but to lead some of his compatriots to Christ; that is, in this connection, lead them to renounce violence.

He or she might agree with some of the Bible's teachings if those things line up with his view of life, but he or she doesn't accept anything just because «it's in the Bible.»

In the end, if the Bible teaches us anything, it is that each one of us is loved by God not because of how right we are but because God graciously and mercifully accepts us, sometimes despite the positions we adopt.

But if it were accepted, would there be anything left of the classical idea of God as omnipotent besides the term?

All of mankind has benefited from Science, but Dogmatic Folks weaned on Religion refuse to accept anything that threatens beliefs.

But I guess if they just accepted Galileo's discoveries, it's a little early to be expecting anything here.

The only widely accepted prohibition during the first Jihad was to not murder the «people of the book», that would be Jews and Christians, but all of the people of the book would have to under Muslim rule and could not do anything against Islam.

Not a single one of these can be proven or disproven, yet to be anything but agnostic is to accept one of them with zero emperical evidence.

But if we try to accept that, I don't see how we can think anything about anything - words like «love» «good» etc. lose all meaning.

He says that if the Bible teaches us anything about God, it is that we learn about God and develop a relationship with Him, not by simply accepting everything the Bible says, but by actually engaging with God in a spirited (both senses of the word are intended there) discussion about the Bible.

I highly doubt you have any objective, factual, independent or verifiable evidence, evidence that would stand up to the scientific method or be accepted by a court of law as anything but hearsay.

There comes a time when you need to accept that beating yourself up isn't changing anything but your ability to draw meaning from today.

In a time when anything can happen — and usually does — the question is not which point of view is true, but which one we should accept, and then, with God's help, try to make come true.

Lilu, this is as opposed to all the Christians that tell me i'm going to burn in hell for all eternity not because of anything i do, but merely because i do not accept on faith alone that their unsupported version of god is right and all the other unsupported versions of god are wrong?

II know that Jefferson accepted the Bible, except for anything miraculous (In fact he commissioned a Bible with all supernatural removed), but I find it hard to avoid some things that can not be explained in my personal life.

God, for Tertullian, is one, but not as exclusively one as Jews believe, being also three; father, but unacknowledged by Jews; merciful, forgiving even Jews; just, punishing especially Jews; wise, even in dealing with sinful Jews; consistent, despite the Jews; humble enough to accept death from Jews; patient, despite impatient Jews; revealed, but Jews fail to understand; lord of history, and proves it against Jews; limitless, except that God can not now ask anything Jewish.

The apostles are other examples.We can not BE His examples but it is better to strive toward that goal than to accept anything less than God's standard of true righteousness.

If one lived in a region where sinkholes were common, or in a warzone, we would consider doubt of these faiths justifiable, but otherwise, these faiths are more or less accepted as reasonable, and anything else is delusion (and, perhaps, rightfully so).

You think you are in control of your life but you are not and until you accept the one that voluntarily shed blood for you, you will go through life without fulfilling your true purpose of anything, except what the enemy of man dictates to your heart.

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.

So if you use a Catholic hospital, but do not accept the Catholics angry about this mandate and say fine, no tax dollars or anything for you, you can not use that hospital.

I could go on but why bother... why don't you just admit you do not wish to accept anything the Bible says and will not even open your mind to the fact that Science could support Creation.

When I ask you what type of proof you require, your answer is to define what you will NOT accept as proof (anything having to do with human invention, testimony, etc.), but when it comes to what you WILL accept as proof your response is «God should know exactly what would work for me.»