Sentences with phrase «accept things more»

People need to learn to accept things more, it's very ugly to do that with the game, you lose a lot of what you were meant to be.

Not exact matches

I have constraints in that I have to meet quarterly numbers, which is a good thing — it's certainly good discipline — but it's a bad thing as well because if I wanted to invest, for instance, a $ 100 million to just make my brand name more accepted for two quarters and in the third quarter I'll get traction, that's not an option I would consider without a lot of pull.

The more comfortable we are, the more likely we are to accept things that are just not right.

A laptop can do roughly the same thing, but tablets may be more culturally accepted in the workplace.

On Monday, as Irma weakened over Georgia, Bossert used a White House briefing to offer more hints of an emerging climate resilience policy, while notably avoiding accepting climate change science: «What President Trump is committed to is making sure that federal dollars aren't used to rebuild things that will be in harm's way later or that won't be hardened against the future predictable floods that we see.

They have accepted that if they want to innovate by doing things better and more profitably, they will inevitably stumble at some point.

When it comes to money, John cautioned business owners against blowing large sums on things they don't need — like expensive websites when a Facebook page would be more strategic — and encouraged them to be just as cautious when thinking about accepting funding.

Rather than simply accepting low savings account rates, there are 7 things you can do to get more return on your savings.

Additionally, with more than 1,000 crypto - currencies currently in existence, even if we accept the assumption that they have staying power, identifying which one will be «the winner» is far from a sure thing.

Admittedly, one could make the same argument about gold, but gold has been widely accepted by humankind as a thing of value for more than two - and - a-half thousand years — compared to less than a decade for bitcoin.

I find myself speaking out more and more about the things I can not accept — like the failed war on drugs, mistreatment of refugees, prejudice against the LGBT community, or the fact that the death penalty still exists despite being proven to not deter crime.

One thing more, RIM should accept the fact that the number of apps make impression on the folks mind what Apple and Google are presently doing.

For one thing, sellers will be more inclined to accept your offer if you've been «vetted» by a lender.

Are there more areas in you life where you accept things as important as this with zero evidence?

@justsayin — ok, well the crazy thing about assertions is that they are much more readily accepted when supported with evidence.

The universe is complicated and it can be difficult to accept that we don't fully understand many things, but isn't it even more of a stretch when you add another level of complication?

As for the one god being more valid than any of the other thousands, that things you attribute to him (technically to Jesus), still haven't been proven in anything outside of the bible, which no one of a scientific mind can accept as convincing proof.

But it makes me CRAZY when people still, after more than 100 years, seem to refuse to accept that Mormons and Polygamists are not the same thing.

An important step toward learning to become more objective is learning to accept that things are complex.

But there's much more in this collection, including a memorable dramatic monologue («The Ghost Seer») taken from his verse play On the Rocks, some religious verse («A Vigil»), and his special mix of unforced sentiment and unassuming humor» best shown, perhaps, in «A Dog's Life»: Accept the things you can not change: / The bleating clock, / The nightly go /» dog leash in tow» / around the block... / Forgive the things you can not have: / the supple bod, / taut undergrads, / a nicer pad, / long chats with God.

(E.g., They say things like «Jesus did his 99 %, but I must do my 1 %» or «I'm saved now, but if I sin later, I won't be saved any more» or «I accepted the gift of eternal life, but I can give it back if I don't abide.»)

Let me say one thing more in regard to this presupposition, this idea that everybody accepts.

The only thing he can do is to admit that he is acting so out of his own fears and emotions (not to defend oneself in battle is difficult, more difficult than to accept a death sentence calmly); or else he can say that he is fighting for others, not to save his own life.

But the most amazing thing to me is that there are people who think that the universe is too complicated to exist without having been created, and yet accept that there is a God who exists without having been created, and yet who is more complicated than the universe!

Accepting the most extraordinary claims imaginable based on nothing more than a collection of this mythology that was cobbled together during the Dark Ages is a pretty foolish thing to do.

The best way to protect America is to warmly welcome law abiding citizens of any faith, such a rare and wonderful thing about us, something we can hold up as unique and special, something that does nt provoke but binds loyalty.Being different, more accepting and loving than the ugliness found in anti-Christian cultures, is our greatest strength.

More fundamentally, how is it acceptable to tell religious minorities that things are comparatively good for them because they can «choose» to accept oppressive and demeaning treatment and manage to survive?

If we were to accept the presence of God in our lives, we would move more slowly, eat more slowly, take time for loving each other, and act with curiosity and sensitivity to all things.

Although not included, strictly speaking, among the «last things», an intermediate state — commonly called «purgatory» in the Western Catholic Church — is also part of the more widely accepted picture.

Somehow, a belief system that teaches people that they are the center of all the universe, created in the image of the most perfect being imaginable, strikes me as a bit more of an ego trip than accepting that we aren't destined to live forever because of our «specialness», but that we live our short lifetimes and die like every other living thing on the planet, our bodies decomposing and ultimately entering the food chain once again, on a tiny speck of a planet in an ordinary, remote backwater of the universe.

I have a difficult time accepting that islam is peaceful, or that islam is anything more than a bunch of lunatics running around preaching when I hear about this sort of thing.

Before I state it, however, I must say that there is no reason why the more traditional position, both about life beyond death as a subjective (and hence personal) reality for each of us and also with respect to the traditional portrayal of the «last things» (including an intermediate state), may not be accepted by those who find it compelling.

He does not see what we today are growing more and more to believe and accept: the connectedness of all things.

The reason for this transition, Luke indicates, is not because God has now «chosen» the Gentiles instead of His other «chosen» people, the Jews, but because the Gentiles were more open to hearing, considering, examining, and accepting the things Paul preached to them, while the Jews are more set in their traditional ways and beliefs, and so are less willing to consider that they might be wrong.

We do more than «accept» Jesus in that process, we make a personal covenant with the God who made us that acknowledges that we are sinners, born into sin and if we'd been Adam, we'd have done the same thing.

Because this is so very easily refutable one can regard such attempts as nothing more than pure propaganda aimed at a believing audience use to accepting things at face value.

That our culture and the Court have come to accept the moral liceity of both contraception and sodomy does not show that the «essence» of human sexuality and marriage have changed — indeed, what is essential to something can not change, belonging as it does to the nature of the thing — but that our prevailing sexual culture has grown ever more unnatural, irrational, immoral, and destructive of human flourishing.

I think if we simply accepted that this was the best they could do at the time, then we could focus on more important things like feeding the poor and supporting orphans.

If people would just accept instead of telling others they are going to hell for some perceived «sin», things would be a lot more kopacetic.

Its time more Christians learn the real thing rather than just accepting alter calls!

Just one more thing why would anyone who does not believe in youe make believe god accept that fantasies rules?

Ms.johnie, sorry i don't accept your demented stories, about our lord, the man came from God performed miracles every day being clean all the time would be nothing idiot, plus one more thing the bible warns us about cretins like YOU!!!

Not only would that allow the individual (of any age) to see things as they do, but maybe it would allow more inner peace which in turn could allow people to accept and understand one another more as well.

The important thing is to understand that such passages and exegeses predisposed the Christians to accept the political power as more or less valid.

You just can't accept the fact that you are NOTHING special, no more important than any other living thing on this planet.

But, if — a more likely «if» — we view the bible as the «living, breathing Word of God», then the idea that it (i.e. God) was entirely context - bound and it (i.e. God) settled for things we now view as horrendous and evil and it (i.e. God) accepted and condone injustice because it (i.e. God) was extremely limited in what it could achieve, then we have a massive theological problem.

I don't think it's so much about the levites being paid for their service it's about us doing what's right toward Pastors that must feed and tend to the flock of GOD if GOD has called them.JESUS even said in luke 10:7 that the laborers are worthy of their wages.In luke 8 1 - 4 it's says even JESUS HIMSELF recieved financial support from the women who ministered to him with their possessions.Now most people today would say he should have been ashamed of taking money from those poor women but JESUS accepted their support and they was blessed for sowing onto the LORD»S work.1 Corinthains 9:1 - 15 says dint muzzle the ox while it tread out the grain was GOD talking about oxes no he was talking about those who labor in the ministry.Who goes to war at their own expense.Or who goes to war but pay for their clothes, guns, etc.No one because the goverment if that country provide these things because of the soilders service.Who plants a vineyard and don't eat from it.Who tends a flock and don't drink the milk of it.I think it's just spiritual sense to support a pastor that's teaching you the word, casting out devils, laying hands and healing is manifesting in people lived, going to hospitails, prisons, and house calls to pray for the sick and shut in, going to graduations and funnerals, praying and fasting for himself and the flock.I think a person who think a pastor shouldn't be paid for their service either don't know they need to be paid and need to be taught or they are demonic in their thinking and either hate GOD, PASTORS, AND GOD»S PEOPLE.Why do nt you hear people saying anything against the dope dealers, strip clubs, dope houses, liquor stores, etc.It's only when people give into the LORD»S work that evil minded or misinformed people have a problem with it.No sir we don't have to use the old testament to show that we should support out pastors.You don't use the law, love tells me to support the pastor.Under the new testament LOVE is the greatest of all.Love for GOD and man.If GOD asked for 10 percent under the law to support the levites who didn't have all the responsibilities of Pastor today.Church rent, gas for vans of thd church, insurance fir the church and church vehicles, feeding and clothing the poor, light, gas, and water bill, mantience on the church or vehicles, not to mention the Pastor own house, cars, children, insurance, etc.If would be foolish for one to think that a pastor should take care if his house and GODS HOUSE without people supporting the work of the KINGDOM OF GOD.If we love GOD we are going to support HIS KINGDOM and HIS PASTOR.If under the law GOD asked for 10 percent how much should we give under the LOVE COVENANT?Example I love my wife and if I had 300 dollars I would surley give her more that 10 percent which would be 30 dollars because I love her.The law says you must give LOVE says I chose to give because I love GOD and man.Again we don't have to use the law just love and spiritual sense because hate and a carnal senses will not understand.Now I have given you scriptures please do the same when you respond not your opinion.Please respond right away I await your answer.GOD BLESS.

The peasants who have now banded together in Swabia have formulated their intolerable grievances against the rulers in twelve articles, and have undertaken to support them with certain passages of Scripture... the thing that pleases me most... is that they offer to accept instructions... Since I have a reputation for being one of those who deal with the Holy Scriptures here on earth, and especially as one whom they mention and call upon by name in the second document, I have all the more courage and confidence in openly publishing my instruction.

It is all too easy to accept unthinkingly the assumption that if some increase in government is good, even necessary, then more of that necessary good thing must be even better.

I now relate even more and am having to accept my own ways of doing things too.