Sentences with phrase «first points of his life»

Though he had never picked up a basketball, let alone competed in organized athletics in Nigeria («I'd always been the person who cheered at events,» he says), Festus joined a low - level AAU team and scored the first points of his life at age 15.

Not exact matches

When Emily first told Marge of her intuition, which she'd realized had been present at so many points in her life, including meeting her husband, she said that Marge told her of the house's history of being handed down from fortune tellers to psychics, beginning in the early 1900s.

As a first point of contact, it opens up networking opportunities (online and in real life) which then lead to coverage in media outlets and widely read blogs.

OTTAWA — Rising gasoline and car prices fuelled the first significant spike in Canada's cost of living since February last month, lifting the annual inflation by half a point to 1.2 per cent — still low by historial standards.

Twitter says it wants to do more NFL - style deals — and it points out that it aired more than 800 hours of live - streaming content in the first quarter of this year, including sports, news and entertainment.

The laws of DNA, RNA the living force within cells than makes them more than a collection of atoms and molecules but makes them vibrant and capable of actions point to an intelligent first cause.

I would have the urge to open it as fast as possible, but knowing my christian friends» inability to acknowledge or at this point even understand what truth is, I would first arrange a live PayPerView event with thousands of recording devices and as many people as possible to witness the opening.

He seems, however, to write from the point of view that looks first to government for the solution of the problems of life, and to imply that Lutherans are not doing their share for the common good because they are underrepresented in the upper echelons of politics.

The first thing that must be said, however — a point only faintly adumbrated in the WCC statement's suggestion that Jesus had redefined the family — is that the fellowship of the kingdom of God, though it may be spoken of as a family, is neither generated nor sustained through biological transmission of life nor by the love given and received in the history of our families.

I will respond simply to two of his points which touch the central point of the original article: first, whether or not vowed chastity (or «celibacy») can enable a fuller living - out of the loving of Christ the priest and second, whether the Council Fathers in Presbyterorum ordinis intended more than simply defending celibacy in the Latin rite as a «useful discipline».

The First Letter of Peter perhaps best exemplifies such an exilic ecclesiology, although certainly Paul's letters and Jesus» life point to similar visions of the church's mission.

Obviously it is much more difficult for us to imagine the first appearance of reflective thought at some point in the history of a phylum or race made up of different individuals than at some point in the series of states making up the life of one and the same embryo.

In the end, Paul's message in the first half of his letter to the Romans points to one single truth: Because God has done everything necessary as far as our eternal life is concerned, there is absolutely nothing we (or anyone or anything else) can do to lose our eternal life once we have it.

Whether for the first time he was then convinced that he was the Messiah, whether he had already come to this conviction or had been coming to it and now felt that he had received the seal of God's approval, or whether he did not believe that he was the Messiah at all but considered himself only a prophet and forerunner of the coming one, his baptism was the turning point between his previous life of preparation and waiting and the active ministry in which he would henceforth be engaged.

We discussed the whys and whens of my loss of faith in the first place (I was raised a devout Catholic, at one point considered holy orders as my life's work).

While I could have pointed out that God is at work in the lives of all people to one degree or another (John 16:8 - 15), I first decided to run a spiritual diagnostic to determine his spiritual condition.

Actually Brehvik does not consider himself a christian in his words, «in the strictest sense», so the first part of your point is moot... Secondly I think a fairer statement would be that not «all» muslims are violent extremists, as many who don't live in western countries are, as their book does instruct them to kill any and all who do not procalim allah as the one god and mohammed as his prophet... As far as having extreme passion for one's beliefs, if someone was truly to be an «extreme» christian that person would be completely loving as this was Jesus» command to love both God and everyone... to take that to the extreme would mean «extreme» loving, like the radical kind of love that caused Jesus to endure the cross for the sins of us all... includinig the man who committed this atrocity and yes any and all of the muslim's who have committed similar things.

Nowhere is the author making the point that if people sin willfully, or even if they return to an empty form of religion which accomplished nothing, that this proves that they do not have eternal life, lost their eternal life, or never had it in the first place.

God begets us anew and the first glimmer of life in the newborn child is faith (Piper, Five Points, 35).

So in reference to the orginal article and my first point, I would only echo Pascal's Wager: if I live life accepting of God and «love my neighbor,» but it turns out to be wrong because there is no God, I have no regrets; if I live life unaccepting of God and He does exist, well I guess Ghandi and I will be sharing a room...

As Christopher Lasch also points out, new therapies» solutions are tautological, self - defeating to the extent that they advise people «not to make too large an investment in love and friendship, to avoid excessive independence on others, and to live for the moment — the very conditions that created the crisis of personal relations in the first place» (New York Review of Books [September 30, 1976]-RRB-.

This is to davidnfran hay David you might have brought this up in a previous post I haven't read, but i did read quit a bit about your previous comments and replies at the beginning of this blog, so I was just wondering in light of what hebrews 6 and 10 say how would you enterprite passages like romans 8 verses 28 thrue 39 what point could paul have been trying to make in saying thoughs amazing things in romans chapter 8 verses 28 thrue 39 in light of hebrews 6 and 10, Pauls says that god foreknew and also predestined thoughs whom he called to be conformed to the image of his son so that he would be the first born among many brothers and then he goes on saying that neither death nor life nor angels nor rulers nor things present nor things to come nor powers nor hight nor death can ever separate us from the love of god in christ jesus so how would i inturprate that in light of that warning in hebrews 6 and 10,

The real opposition for Buber is not between philosophy and religion, as it at first appears to be, but between that philosophy which sees the absolute in universals and hence removes reality into the systematic and the abstract and that which means the bond of the absolute with the particular and hence points man back to the reality of the lived concrete — to the immediacy of real meeting with the beings over against one.

Looking at the almost empty bowl of water from the Spring of Siloam in the court of the Temple and pointing first at it and then at himself, he said, «If you will but believe in me, out of your own heart will flow rivers of living water» (7:38, AP).

Now, to go back to the point I left open at the start of this post, what evolution does not explain (nor attempt to) is how the first complex living things arose.

Sometimes the first act of commitment is more dramatic than any others which follow, and the believer looks back to it in gratitude as a turning point in his life.

As far as attending the marriage ceremony of gay people i have two points of view the first is that that is there choice to live how they want to but to me that is clearly not Gods best and sin is sin and needs to be repented of but that is my standard not theres.As far as divorced people remarrying why shouldnt they if they have repented of there past God forgives them not condemns them.As he said to the women caught in adultery do they condemn you and she answers no and he says and neither do i.Go and sin no more.This was not just for the women causght in adultery this lesson was for every one of us he was addressing our sin publically for all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God that being his son Jesus Christ he is telling us that we must make the same decision to go and sin no more to repent in our hearts and the only way to do that is to give our hearts and lives totally to Jesus Christ other wise we are no better than the hypocrites in JESUS day.brentnz

The Catechism does at several points touch on a more synthetic integration of all God's works, commenting that «creation is revealed as the first step towards» the final Covenant of Love (CCC 288) and that» God created the world the sake of communion with his divine life, a communion brought about by the convocation of men in Christ, and this convocation is the Church» (CCC 760).

In fact, the first paragraph of the City of God alludes to the famous passage from the prophet Habakkuk, «the just shall live by faith,» and in book nineteen Augustine cites Habakkuk twice, most notably at a point where he links the just person (iustus) to the justice (iustitia) due God «who rules an obedient city according to his grace.»

Of course from my stand point I refuse to accept that he will be pay in the after - life, thus the reason we don't leave this sort of stuff for «god» to deal with, the courts see it similarly... if god is all powerful and all knowing he would never have allowed this to happen in the first placOf course from my stand point I refuse to accept that he will be pay in the after - life, thus the reason we don't leave this sort of stuff for «god» to deal with, the courts see it similarly... if god is all powerful and all knowing he would never have allowed this to happen in the first placof stuff for «god» to deal with, the courts see it similarly... if god is all powerful and all knowing he would never have allowed this to happen in the first place.

The chief points of change are, first, that the scene has been transferred from the supernatural world of the gods to the earthly sphere of human history; secondly, that It is not a god who experiences the renewal of life (for the God of Israel is not himself subject to death and resurrection, but on the contrary initiates and controls these events) but the people of Israel, who look in hope for restoration when their existence is threatened; and thirdly, that this hope is expressed as a metaphor describing the historical future, rather than as a myth of cosmic renewal.

As he observed: «We now stand at a turning - point in the history of the biosphere and in the shorter history of one of its products, mankind... Man is the first species of living being in our biosphere that has acquired the power to wreck the biosphere and, in wrecking it, to liquidate himself.»

For the present it is enough to say that the first and primary point of Paul's preaching, the point on which all else depends, is not the Messiahship of Jesus, or his resurrection, or his coming again, but the reality of the living God, the Lord of creation, the governor of history, the saviour of men.

The tightening network of economic and psychic bonds in which we live and from which we suffer, the growing compulsion to act, to produce, to think collectively which so disquiets us — what do they become, seen in this way, except the first portents of the super-organism which, woven of the threads of individual men, is preparing (theory and fact are at one on this point) not to mechanize and submerge us, but to raise us, by way of increasing complexity, to a higher awareness of our own personality?

First of all, it should be pointed out that an inability to hear and understand the message of Jesus is not necessarily the same thing as an inability to believe in Jesus for eternal life.

First from the point of view of those who claim the building will be an insult over the event of 9/11, I don't think any one can take away from them that feeling, be it genuine or otherwise, the fact still remains, that a group of radical individuals, who claim to be Muslims, killed innocent individuals from all walks of life; race and religion and country, in the name of Islam.

If one were to draw a diagram with a point at the center to indicate the individual person and a series of concentric circles for his major relations in society, the first circle would represent the family and the second his economic life.

From the starting point of the revelation of the nature and will of God that has come to man through Christ, she has dealt first with the biblical foundations of Christian ethics followed by their application to specific contemporary problems, including self and society, marriage, economic life, race, the state, war, peace and others.

The only one who can not is Lucifer because he do not want to, God heart is not made of iron, if there are evil people alive in this world it is only because God want them to repent to, there are most evil people who as a children or teenager was sweet but because of another being became evil, Only God know what it did make them change or their pain but only one things is sure as God he did have the first seat to see all their pain and live, and to my point of view as a Father it is by no means lesser than the pain he did feel for them or them victimes, like a electric chair.

Then, when I was 18, God intervened in my life, the first of two dramatic turning points.

when i first stumbled on the stages in the life of faith about 9 or so years ago it was a huge turning point for me.

Stephen Crites has this pointed observation about the way in which truth is communicated by ordinary people — including those men and women of the First Century who experienced the Christ event in their own lives:

Claire Lilley, head of child online safety at the NSPCC, said: «Parents are the first point of call for a child when it comes to staying safe in real life and this is no different when it comes to their online life.

In 1837, the first editor of Washington's Collected Works wrote: «If a man who spoke, wrote, and acted as a Christian through a long life, who gave numerous proofs of his believing himself to be such, and who was never known to say, write, or do a thing contrary to his professions, if such a man is not to be ranked among the believers of Christianity, it would be impossible to establish the point by any train of reasoning.»

@ Let us Pray I do nt disagree with you on some of your points but the very last... You are right the military comes first, but you forget that what they do in the miltary is their life, their job....

No, God is intimately involved in our daily lives, but this first point of the chaos theory simply argues that God is such a believer in having true relationships with His creatures, that He gave us true and genuine freedom within creation, so that we can choose to love and serve Him (or not).

Pres. Hinckley's somewhat hesitant public statements on the first half of the couplet were not experienced by the Mormon faithful as signaling some significant «marginalization,» since the pursuit of a divine life through Christ's redemption has always been the point, certainly in the sixty years of thoroughly Mormon experience I can remember.

First, it would be very rare, indeed, for a couple to want to stay with the purpose of trying to as you say in a past post: ``... at one point be a witness in that broader group,» the church, when it was sooooo clear that the church and pastor were firm in their stance that the couple were living in sin.

Nearly 52 percent of first - year students feel isolated on their campus, and Horner points out that many students only form relationships with other students, separating themselves from the people living outside their school.

Point people to Jesus as the giver of eternal life FIRST.