Sentences with phrase «even read most»

Not exact matches

When you take the time to read the latest article or, even better, spend some time casually catching up with a team member over a cup of coffee or lunch, you may not be scratching something off the to - do list, but you're building relationships, learning something interesting, discovering something you likely would not have found out otherwise... and, most important, helping to build the foundation for long - term success.»

And in the course of working with numerous consultants, business owners, startups and even Fortune 500s, I've come to realize something startling: Most of us know what good copy looks like, and what it reads like, but when we put something down, we don't know how to follow the rules.

Indeed most of the definitions you'll find online don't even read like definitions.

In 2002, before the sale of PayPal even went through, Musk started voraciously reading about rocket technology, and later that year, with $ 100 million, he started one of the most unthinkable and ill - advised ventures of all time: a rocket company called SpaceX, whose stated purpose was to revolutionize the cost of space travel in order to make humans a multi-planetary species by colonizing Mars with at least a million people over the next century.

I know that most people will tell you that they aren't influenced by what they read on TechCrunch but the reality is that people are way more influenced by what they read in the press than they even admit to themselves.

Possibly the most important book you can read about investing (even though it has little to do with the nuts and bolts of investing) is a book called Poor Charlie's Almanack that collects the wisdom of Charlie Munger.

And as an added bonus, by reading and reading (and my moving averages converging) I was able to avoid most (got hit for about 5 %) at the market melt and even made up for the losses by investing even more when the market was at it's lowest.

Given that the traditional banking industry is regulated by the federal government, most banks have been slow to accept (and service) legal dispensary and related business activity, even if individuals or businesses are legitimate under state law and attempt to... Read more»

Most weren't worth reading even a few pages of.

For those who haven't had the time to read the legaled - up language of every single privacy policy we encounter (which, considering Carnegie Mellon researchers estimated it would take the average user the equivalent of 76 work days per year to do, is most of us), and even for people like me who do it for a living and still find disclosure gaps, the Facebook — Cambridge Analytica scandal managed to shed a bit of light on the otherwise obscure relationships between some tech companies and advertisers.

only minds can concvive of thoughts, sry if your lacking mr. fake... a thought is one that is transferible by accidenct — those that read or hear even sometimes feel can be instantly takenover by a thought, and as thoughts go — you, I, everyone, hasn't had a original thought in most likely ummm, say a long friggin time, i'd say personally i think being that the species is as old as (provible) 37,000 thousand years old, every thought as been thought since by maybe a few thousand years... and thats a hopeful «thought» being i believe our average person to be generally dumb.

Most of those people back then could not even read.

How such a spirit of sobriety expresses itself, not simply in literary or philosophic reading lists, but in platforms and party rhetoric that can resonate with 21st century Americans, I to a large degree leave to others (our Pete comes to mind), even if my turning here to the example of Solzhenitsyn reminds me that faith in God's promises will be necessary to sustain us in the quite possible event that even our grasping and steadfastly acting upon the «most precise» political prudence might yet fail to stop catastrophe.

The Bible most Americans know was written on the orders of an English King (James) at a time when few common people could even read... his (not His) word...

Ok, I refuse to even read this article because it is the most ridiculous question I have ever heard.

What I meant is that he has actually studied the material, where most Christians haven't even read it once.

But my experience and from things I read, even on this blog site, most, not all, but most don't like Churches teaching biblical morals and ethics.

Wow, so the world's most read book isn't even read at all....

In fact, most true believers read right over it and never even notice the blatant contradiction involved.

While I do not consider myself an expert on all the religious writings of all of the main religions in the world, I have read most of the main religious texts for most of the main world religions, and while it is not uncommon to find violent events being described in these other religious books, no other set of religious writings comes even close to describing the violence and bloodshed that one finds within the pages of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Even more shocking was that I had already read every single one of the Christian books they recommended... and hadn't thought that most of them were all that good.

I thoroughly believe that most christians have never even read the bible.

If the Bible is a myth, it would be the truest and most helpful myth ever written, and I would still read it, study it, teach it, and try to follow it... especially the parts about Jesus, for He (even if he didn't really exist) represents the truest way to be human.

The «absolute» I am trying to promote here is that with a little effort, the Bible does hang together, but most people don't even read it through, I would venture.

The claim that Altizer has been the most influential American theologian in the past few years would collapse if it meant that he was the most widely followed or even read!

Plays are play, as Walter Ong observes, except for the playwright and perhaps some of the paying public.5 Moreover, while most would say that tennis and drama provide at least the occasion for play (even if some tennis players, for example, are not actually «playing»), the list of possible play activities is much broader than we often imagine, including much of life - more, in any case, than just tennis, reading, dancing, etc..

Maybe even the most ardent right wing religious zealots can read this story and finally let it seep into their brains that there is no Jesus, there is no Lord watching over you and protecting you, and there is no devil... there is only human nature and some of it is good and some of it is bad.

As I have read and reread the Apologia, however, I have had to face something that even the most dogmatically inclined evangelical often avoids: the historical nature of dogma.

Even if we can distinguish between Christ's reign as mediator and His reign as king, the most natural reading and logical conclusion is that v. 24 and v. 28 are dealing with the end of His kingly reign.

Many works are consciously designed to accommodate «selective» reading, and most readers over the centuries have experienced the Bible in just this way (including Jesus, who frequently quoted Scripture» even as he hung on the cross).

He even waited until the death of his mentor, the biblical scholar William Robertson Smith, to introduce into his most famous work, The Golden Bough, a new section that subtly damned the Bible with faint praise, even though Frazer had never learned the languages that would have enabled him to read the Bible in the original.

Can anyone explain to me (extra points for brevity and clarity) why the true intentions of this god are not clear enough for even the most simple amongst us to discern from a cursory reading of the text?

Even the most cursory reading of the text reveals a christocentric emphasis.

it galls me to have people tell me what the bible means when most of them haven't even read the part they have.

Most Christians I know haven't even read the Bible all the way through, and I can out - quote them with their own scriptures.

We have read the free exercise claims and arguments put forward by the prochoice lawyers in the current wave of litigation, and in our judgment, these claims would not be meritorious under even the most generous interpretation of free exercise rights under RFRA.

Now again, when most Christians read verse 6 (and some Bible translations even help in this regard), we often add the word «though» or «although» to the first part of verse 6 (cf. NAS, NRSV).

Where most Bible translations accurately translate the Greek as saying something along the lines of «The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God,» the NIV reads Calvinistic theology into this verse, and assumes that the natural man does not even have the Spirit, and so translated the verse this way: «The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God.»

Hell, most Christians don't even abide by the bible or have even read it themselves.

We have organic church, simple church, and missional communities, but even here, in most of the books and blogs I read about this, the emphasis always seems to be that the church is only functioning when the people gather in a certain place at a certain time, usually in a house on Sunday morning.

Rushdoony's prose is ponderous; probably even most Reconstructionists have never read Institutes of Biblical Law.

Along the way to proving his thesis, Jenkins rewrites the book on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics (his reading, and his devastating criticisms of Oxford's influential Jonathan Barnes, set the standard for such scholarship) and he shows how even the most decorated of contemporary «philosophers of religion» (Plantinga, Stump, Penelhaum, et al.) grossly misread Aquinas.

What is perhaps most disconcerting is the fact that even after multiple women expressed their concerns in the comment section, both Jared Wilson and Doug Wilson repeatedly dismissed these concerns with exasperation and condescension, ridiculing the commenters» lack of «reading comprehension.»

For me the difference between the biblical gospels and the later Gnostic gospels was obvious when I read them, even before I was a believer; and there are plenty of reasonable arguments for the case that the four gospels of the Bible are the most accurate historical accounts that we have of Jesus» life.

And I've also found that most «christians» don't even know what is in their bible... read Matthew 6 and get back to us.

I do know about them, and have read them (hundreds of times), and have studied most of them (in great detail), and have even taught and written on many of them.

Most people who make ignorant comments like you haven't read anything even close to Bible scripture.

Even book nineteen of the City of God, read most often because of its presumed political implications, ends with a discussion of the justice due God.

Even the author of the greatest book written on America, Alexis de Tocqueville, didn't think most Americans should read the great books written by the Greeks and Romans.

Most people read translations of the original, sometimes even a translation of a translation.