Sentences with phrase «for interpretation does»

Not exact matches

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such forward - looking statements and that should be considered in evaluating our outlook include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) our ability to continue to grow our business and execute our growth strategy, including the timing, execution, and profitability of new and maturing programs; 2) our ability to perform our obligations under our new and maturing commercial, business aircraft, and military development programs, and the related recurring production; 3) our ability to accurately estimate and manage performance, cost, and revenue under our contracts, including our ability to achieve certain cost reductions with respect to the B787 program; 4) margin pressures and the potential for additional forward losses on new and maturing programs; 5) our ability to accommodate, and the cost of accommodating, announced increases in the build rates of certain aircraft; 6) the effect on aircraft demand and build rates of changing customer preferences for business aircraft, including the effect of global economic conditions on the business aircraft market and expanding conflicts or political unrest in the Middle East or Asia; 7) customer cancellations or deferrals as a result of global economic uncertainty or otherwise; 8) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which we operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; 9) the success and timely execution of key milestones such as the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals, including our ability to obtain in a timely fashion any required regulatory or other third party approvals for the consummation of our announced acquisition of Asco, and customer adherence to their announced schedules; 10) our ability to successfully negotiate, or re-negotiate, future pricing under our supply agreements with Boeing and our other customers; 11) our ability to enter into profitable supply arrangements with additional customers; 12) the ability of all parties to satisfy their performance requirements under existing supply contracts with our two major customers, Boeing and Airbus, and other customers, and the risk of nonpayment by such customers; 13) any adverse impact on Boeing's and Airbus» production of aircraft resulting from cancellations, deferrals, or reduced orders by their customers or from labor disputes, domestic or international hostilities, or acts of terrorism; 14) any adverse impact on the demand for air travel or our operations from the outbreak of diseases or epidemic or pandemic outbreaks; 15) our ability to avoid or recover from cyber-based or other security attacks, information technology failures, or other disruptions; 16) returns on pension plan assets and the impact of future discount rate changes on pension obligations; 17) our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance debt, including our ability to obtain the debt to finance the purchase price for our announced acquisition of Asco on favorable terms or at all; 18) competition from commercial aerospace original equipment manufacturers and other aerostructures suppliers; 19) the effect of governmental laws, such as U.S. export control laws and U.S. and foreign anti-bribery laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the United Kingdom Bribery Act, and environmental laws and agency regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad; 20) the effect of changes in tax law, such as the effect of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the «TCJA») that was enacted on December 22, 2017, and changes to the interpretations of or guidance related thereto, and the Company's ability to accurately calculate and estimate the effect of such changes; 21) any reduction in our credit ratings; 22) our dependence on our suppliers, as well as the cost and availability of raw materials and purchased components; 23) our ability to recruit and retain a critical mass of highly - skilled employees and our relationships with the unions representing many of our employees; 24) spending by the U.S. and other governments on defense; 25) the possibility that our cash flows and our credit facility may not be adequate for our additional capital needs or for payment of interest on, and principal of, our indebtedness; 26) our exposure under our revolving credit facility to higher interest payments should interest rates increase substantially; 27) the effectiveness of any interest rate hedging programs; 28) the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting; 29) the outcome or impact of ongoing or future litigation, claims, and regulatory actions; 30) exposure to potential product liability and warranty claims; 31) our ability to effectively assess, manage and integrate acquisitions that we pursue, including our ability to successfully integrate the Asco business and generate synergies and other cost savings; 32) our ability to consummate our announced acquisition of Asco in a timely matter while avoiding any unexpected costs, charges, expenses, adverse changes to business relationships and other business disruptions for ourselves and Asco as a result of the acquisition; 33) our ability to continue selling certain receivables through our supplier financing program; 34) the risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign current exchange rates, impositions of tariffs or embargoes, compliance with foreign laws, and domestic and foreign government policies; and 35) our ability to complete the proposed accelerated stock repurchase plan, among other things.

My interpretation of Friedman's rule is for the Fed first to do no harm.

It suddenly dawns on employees that they don't understand the criteria by which they're evaluated, or how to make the case for their interpretations of their achievements.

Always look for alternative interpretations of situations that didn't turn out the way you wanted.

When Olayan first sought to integrate OFC in 2001, there was no playbook for a company like hers to hire women — and plenty of obstacles to doing so, since labor law and social customs left a lot of room for interpretation and confusion.

If you are going to discuss something personal such as mental health, a death, etc., then make sure you don't leave your content up for interpretation.

More than 95 % of the assessment is based on her interpretation of the tests, and she intentionally doesn't ask the candidates for any self - analysis.

In doing so, Judge Weinstein effectively affirmed the CFTC's 2015 finding that bitcoin and other virtual currencies are «properly defined» as commodities, a pivotal interpretation that could set a standard for cryptocurrency prosecution at large.

«We have been working with our legal counsel at Dentons LLP for almost a year to ensure we are compliant with the existing securities regulations in Canada,» Pastoll said, adding that Lending Loop doesn't intend to challenge the regulatory interpretation that extending peer - to - peer loans could constitute dealing in securities.

Digital Rating Agency does not undertake any responsibility for any consequences, interpretations, judgements, recommendations and other actions directly or indirectly related to the rating score, the rating operations conducted by Digital Rating Agency, any summary and conclusions contained in the rating report and rating releases, or the absence of abovementioned.

In doing so, the SEC staff has disregarded the reasonable and principled approach that had governed SEC rulings in this area for decades and replaced it with a radical interpretation.

Did you go to the original text for the interpretation of the word «day»?

There is some utility in drawing distinctions, no doubt, but your distinctions are tinged with disdain for fellow Christians who don't subscribe to your particular interpretation.

I don't know of any legitimate theologians or Scriptural interpretations vouching for humans and animals and tools to get married.

He (and Radical atheists who don't know better) got that from Rev. Ussher, a 19th century Seventh - Day Adventist pastor famous for his failed predictions for the rapture date, and wild Biblical interpretations.

Christians believe that a mortal person has an immortal soul, and that this immortal soul can be provided with a resurrected, «sanctified» (which effectively means purified, unblemished, and apparently lacking genitalia) body... the term Eternal Life tends to be used to describe the idea that a «True Believer» in Christ (a term open to many, many interpretations) will have their immortal soul implanted in that resurrected body and they will get to live for all time with Christ, apparently singing a lot and doing very little else.

Funny how IDers don't claim to be creationists, yet both have the EXACT same language and interpretation of evolutionary theory verbatim, go to the same church, watch the same videos, use the same arguments, vote for the same leaders, listen to the same pastors, and quote the same scripture, etc...

After reading several of the posts on the «interpretation of mythical texts into a book called the bible» one is left to wonder how a being who is supposed to have created the universe would permit what is often referred to as «his inerrant words»... to get so screwed up... you would think he / she / it would have been keeping a close eye on a book that he / she / it wanted to have in print for... mass distribution... it is not not a womder the bible is messed up the way it is... it is a «human» construct... only humans could mess a book up that badly... gods do nor make mistakes... except for Rick Santorum

It, or our interpretation of it, has done a lot of harm, cut the number of potential ministers in the church in half and has been applied unequally depending on the need for ministers — e.g. foreign missions.

The lesson many of them took from Of Grammatology was that the tradition didn't have the authority their older teachers claimed for it, and that «textuality» leveled culture to a single plane of production and interpretation.

Does anyone else see this as Chris admitting that he only has subjective interpretation and well - wishes as reasons for his belief?!?

I have always thought that this theological interpretation of Pentecostalism did not have much going for it and I'm glad that Hailemariam adds another piece of evidence against it.

But for some reason, you don't seem to recognize this when it comes to yourself and your particular interpretation of the bible.

Somehow I find it hard to look to you for an interpretation of any literature, including the Bible, if you're so stupid that you don't know «it's» is a contraction for «it is», you drip.

It is just your interpretation of God's will, so don't be so presumptous to speak for God when you could be wrong about your interpretation and be misleading millions just like Camping, making yourself into the very person you opposed and judged.

Martin points out, for example, how Evans argues «on faith» that Jesus possessed foreknowledge, but then endorses an interpretation of a New Testament story in which Jesus expected something that did not happen.

Metaphysical realism, understood in a processive way, requires this triple sense of objectivity: novel human doings in need of guidance, long - enduring systems of belief that provide the schemata of interpretation by which that guiding can be done, and opportunistic skill in sculpting act and theory, fact and canon, into a coherent, fruitful basis for intelligent action.

One thing I appreciated about this brief overview was Wright's reminder that the Reformers didn't settle Christianity or biblical interpretation once and for all.

And once we sink our beliefs into something that does not leave room for individual thought and interpretation, we are all lost.

(I got a little taste of these «fantastic and highly speculative theories» when I was doing research on historical interpretations of Song of Songs for my upcoming book on biblical womanhood.

But despite the pitfalls of individual interpretation going wild, evangelicals don't in practice believe every passage is up for personal interpretation.

In her review, Keller says, «You began your project by ignoring (actually, by pretending you did not know about) the most basic rules of hermeneutics and biblical interpretation that have been agreed upon for centuries.»

He developed the idea less than did James or Bergson for the interpretation of extraordinary experiences, but his account opens the way, equally with theirs, and with greater precision, for such extension and application.

I frequently cringe when I hear people use someone's or some group's interpretation supposedly of the Bible to bring «bitterness, strife, and division» to a situation, and feel righteous for having done so.

A Resurrection of his physical body, such as is implied by the empty tomb and by some of the stories in the Gospels of his appearances, would point towards a docetic Christ who does not fully share the lot of men; unless, indeed, bodily corruption were to be regarded as being bound up with the sinfulness of man which Christ did not share (but, unless we accept an impossibly literalistic interpretation of Genesis 3 as factual history, it is impossible to hold that physical dissolution is not part of the Creator's original and constant intention for his creatures in this world).

and I imply that the Bible exists in a vacuum, that it does not rely on tradition for its compilation and preservation, and that it is not subjected to reason or experience for its interpretation.

Many women have responded by listening, and with affirmation and encouragement, jus as Sian has done with saying she longs to be critiqued, does not want to have critique held back from her for her being a woman and was appropriate in affirming the critique of the «feminist» interpretation of scripture I made as described.

Mark and Matthew say that Jesus reproved the disciples also for not remembering the miracles of feeding the crowds, Matthew adds an interpretation different from Luke's: «Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.»

As I looked out over the 180 people taking New Testament interpretation, I saw folk who had never been to church in their lives, and for whom the YDS chapel was their first parish; who certainly did not know the Nicene Creed and probably not the Apostles» Creed.

’25 Bloch believed that «the ultimate, enduring insight of Marx is that truth does not exist for its own sake but implies emancipation, and an interpretation of the world which has the transformation of the world as its goal and meaning, providing a key in theory and leverage in practice».26 Drawing on this tradition Moltmann writes that unless truth «contains initiative for the transformation of the world, it becomes a myth of the existing world.

As you can see, Christians advocating for the preservation of slavery did not characterize their abolitionist opponents as simply disagreeing with them on the interpretation of the biblical text, but instead tended to accuse them of not taking the Bible seriously at all.

I have heard a gazillion interpretations for this text in James, each of them... consciously or unconsciously... a pathetic attempt to explain something we simply don't understand.

So, it is Christ his life, example, character and teaching who is our guide and our primary lens, not only for biblical interpretation but for doing life.

You say the Bible is the «Holy Word Of God» and must be followed for verses / interpretations that support your PERSONAL position on a subject, but IGNORE the Bible when passages do not support your positions, and you have no respect for freedom of and from religion and Separation of Church and State.

Non-literal interpretations of Genesis 1 - 2 did not originate in response to evolutionary theory, but have been around for a long time.

While this does not mean that Jesus could not have used the figure in this way, it does lend weight to an interpretation in which the shepherd is not a symbol for God, but rather the whole situation of the story is analogous to the situation of the ministry of Jesus.

We do not simply create the nonhuman realities — plants, animals, and inorganic materials — that we interpret; rather we experience these realities as given to us for interpretation, and in their givenness values are disclosed.

Your interpretation if founded in hatred and bigotry you don't know real truth because you're too full of hatred for that.

At the other extreme are those who advocate for saying the sinner's prayer, subscribing to a long list of beliefs / interpretations of Scripture, living certain ways and doing certain things (such as attending church so many times a week).

Their individual interpretations, however, do not differ sharply from one another, as sometimes happens in human communities, for two reasons.