And I became free to
actually see the truth and joy behind some of the things.
Not exact matches
It is possible to
see and
actually have respectful two way conversations with people you disagree with and recognize there are elements of
truth in both.
According to the Old Testament, he and his angels used to walk the Earth and had to
actually see something in person to know the
truth of it.
I
see the possibility of several ways of talking about
truth: perceived
truth / believed
truth (I believe x) vs accepted
truth (we all accept that x is true) vs literal
truth (x is
actually true) vs hypothtical
truth / relative
truth (for the purpose of y, x is true; or, assuming y, x is true) vs semantic
truth (it is true that the word «x» refers to the idea «y»).
But politicians shying away from speaking the
truth about behavior, about morality — this has
actually helped to cause the social problems we
see around us.
Actually, you often
see it in science, the difference being that in science it's just a theory until you can confirm it, whereas in religion and politics it tends to be elevated immediately to the status of fact and
truth without any verification.
Actually the two have been brought together in the history of Christian thought which Professor Nygren traces so superbly in his study, but all attempts at synthesis, including that of St. Augustine with his doctrine of love as caritas, and that of the medieval theologians and mystics who
saw the problem and tried to make a place for unselfish love within the Christian doctrine, really obscured and corrupted the fundamental Christian
truth which was recovered by Luther in the Protestant Reformation.
Actually the rational scientific analyses of the situation will not only be partial but also be distorted, because the human reason seeking to observe the situation is not unconditioned enough to
see the full objective
truth of the situation.
Usually when we have a wide field we rejoice, for we then
see masses of
truth together, and often get glimpses of relations which we divine rather than
see, for they shoot beyond the field into still remoter regions of objectivity, regions which we seem rather to be about to perceive than to perceive
actually.
The fact you
see the God believers have a personal relationship in a twisted manner that has no resemblance to the God they know and love does not change the
truth of what they
actually see and know.
Actually, I don't
see him expressing his faith so much as explaining the
truth.
SO like I said, I can
actually see criticizing the decision, but in
truth it's not a First Amendment issue.
If he does
see it, he makes his choice, which is his real responsibility, according to the insight that all that God permits is not
actually possible within the sphere of the right and
truth of God.
The
truth is that most beginning bettors will take the deposit bonus, but will
see their account balance hit zero before they
actually qualify for their bonus.
Yh right.Dont talk like that its irritating like the are no strikers out there better than him.It is a saying that the
truth will set you free.Giroud is on the level of average but arsenal have made him look very good only a few will
see it.Those who
actually watch his every move even without the ball and on it.If i mention the strikers i will take over Giroud some of you here will call me stupid.Listen if Wenger cant sign a striker he should just get Charlie Austin he can finish off chances and he is a good striker, He can be world class if he works hard.Only a matter of time before he proves to the world what they have been but its like just his name does not excite fans.He is even light ahead of Giroud and a neutral would be saying the same thing if he was watching them on tv always.
But you choose to overlook the facts from much of the last decade, which you need only eyes, not «cherry picked stats» to clearly
see are what
ACTUALLY IS THE
TRUTH.
I think i will just wait &
see one way or the other.All these sources get on my tits.Maybe the source doesn't want to tell the
truth just in case another source passes it on to his top source at another club.And then we have sources all trying to out do each other in sourcieness.Dont think thats a word
actually
Actually not that much in
truth so you may want to
see what you can gift from your own home or from a thrift store.
As we've said here before, 140 characters is a lot of room in which to stick a foot in one's mouth, though I bet the Senator's supporters wouldn't
actually see this one as a gaffe — to them, it's speaking
truth to power (and note that Grassley's even featured his feed jokingly in a campaign video).
You
see, there are a lot of unsolved problems with the alternative and going by the right to remain silent is at least the much more practical solution although sometimes you are
actually ordered to testify and tell the whole
truth.
The importance of
seeing the evidence of theory can not be underestimated said Dr Mason: «In recent years there have been a lot of developments theoretically but unless you
actually tie that down with observations you can speculate widely and move further away from the
truth, not closer, without knowing it.»
And among folks who study propoganda, in case you are interested in what people who
actually study it think, it need not necessarily involve a willful distortion of the
truth,
see for a brief intro:
What's better is that you not only get the downloadable
Truth about Six Pack Abs program... you
actually get the 4 powerful Fast - Fitness Audios and the 5 Keys to Guaranteed Fat Loss DVD all included in one rock - bottom price...
see below for more details!
However, while the more cynical might
see these statistics as just an indictment against dating online, it
actually speaks of a sadder
truth.
This disc's allegedly 2.40:1 transfer of the film — I can't yet screencap Blu - ray to verify —
actually errs on the opposite end of the spectrum,
seeing as it's conspicuously free of grain;
truth be told, video-wise, it doesn't offer a tremendous improvement on the DVD of 2002.
You don't have to
see any of the other films in the series to understand it and, in
truth, it may
actually easier to follow if you haven't.
Atomic Blonde is a violent film that played with reality, often obfuscating the
truth through an unreliable narrator and the revelation that reality is simple what we
see and hear, and that might not
actually be the
truth.
Fittingly for Dern, it's a coming - home movie, though many of the
truths are
actually learned and
seen through through the eyes of David, who sometimes seems to be the only rational person around for a country mile.
Director Sarah Polley's goal may at first seem to be uncovering the
truth about her mother, but as the film progresses, we can
see that it is specifically her family's memories of her mother that she is
actually interested in.
As someone who feels neither allegiance nor antipathy toward either of the increasingly polarized camps (I
actually like and respect both Linda Darling - Hammond and Jon Schnur), I
see the partial
truths in each side's argument.
The next thing I would like to point out, is that STGRB is one of the first sites to
actually bring the very serious issue of ANNONYMOUS online cyber bullying, into a public arena where decent people can
see the
truth of it with their own eyes.
I just want to hear a publisher either admit it, or try to talk in circles without
actually answering it (so authors who either might not know, or are on the fence, will be able to
see the
truth about which side publisher execs are on).
I'd like to think I've learned my lesson, that I won't ever again invest in a big idea without validating it and
seeing if anybody is
actually willing to pay for it, but the
truth is, when you do something new for the first time, even if you're pretty sure things will go well, you never know for certain.
While you may worry that your dog will
see their crate as a «jail cell,» the
truth is
actually quite the opposite.
Hell, even people who normally disagree with me
actually saw what I said to be the
truth and agreed with me on it.
Some versions of the
truth are influenced by what we
actually see and what we tell ourselves we
see.
And among folks who study propoganda, in case you are interested in what people who
actually study it think, it need not necessarily involve a willful distortion of the
truth,
see for a brief intro:
Or is it that when you stated that I was making certain presumptions, you
actually meant that I was «assuming» that modern science is true when you know for a fact that if is some sort of horrible Kantian abomination designed to prevent the ordinary man from
seeing the
truth of the Omphalosian - spun version of Objectivism which you hold above all else?
People who have
actually bothered to investigate the
truth about climate change are going to ignore it or roll their eyes when they
see it.
Now that the rampaging hordes attention has been turned from the climategate e-mails and code to the IPCC report and the money trail, I expect we will continue to
see this mare» snest unravel into the pack of half
truths and lies it
actually is.
I
see your 2 cents worth of chariy & clarity and raise you
truth and honor of those who
actually provide something of value to society.
For all the distortion of his words by the MSM, if you
actually listen to what Trump says, you will
see that he speaks the
truth.
(
Actually, the
truth is, I've
seen almost no press at all about the THJ2016, other than a few Turning Tiny book release advertisements... weird, but that's another topic) This announcement here on THB is the first I've heard of the IRC 2018 Appendix V effort.
If some third party believes that some document represents the
truth because they
see your signature on it, and the contents of the document isn't
actually true, and they lose money because of it, that is most likely fraud.
The reason why I say stories is because we
see a behavior or we believe something to be true based on some sort of
truth that we
actually experience.