Sentences with phrase «good teaching point»

One thing the Libby case presents a good teaching point for is that the ability of a judge to consider uncharged conduct or crimes (or for that matter acquitted crimes) in sentencing is one of the main drivers of uncertainty in the Sentencing Guidelines.

Not exact matches

Sinek said he also advocates for teaching kids independence and resilience; the best teachers I've found on these two points are former Stanford dean of freshmen Julie Lythcott - Haims and former Navy SEAL commander Eric Greitens.

One team created a takeoff on Reader's Digest, teaching about customer service under such familiar headings as «Laughter, the Best Medicine» and «Points to Ponder.»

So if you're constantly negative, you'll soon excel at spotting problems and deficiencies, while if you make it a point to regularly count your blessings, you'll teach your brain to tune into all the good in the world.

Also, whilst teaching a course on keyword research recently for Mixergy Premium [1] someone in the comments pointed out that in between Andrew and I recording the video and it being launched on the site, Google had released a new «Keyword Planner» tool which, in my opinion, is FAR better for keyword research.

A student credit card designed to teach good spending habits and reward students with bonus points for on - time payments.

Leblanc, Richard, «Good Teaching: The Top Ten Requirements,» The Teaching Professor (June - July 1998), 1,7 and reprinted in: Insight: Advanced Learning Through Faculty Study, newsletter of the Teaching Excellence Centre, Rutgers University, Camden Campus (Fall 1998), 1, 2; The Point, newsletter of United Faculty of PBCC, (November 1998), 6; Briarcliffe College Faculty Newsletter, Briarcliffe College, Bethpage, NY (January - February 1999), 2; and Focus on Teaching, Newsletter of Buffalo State University of New York (Spring 1999), 2.

Joni made a good point that possibly these people think they are doing the right thing or what they were taught.

The Catholic Church's teaching, which I hope to follow, is underspecified on this point (and its history is, well, complicated).

i beleive there is good out there, and as a Mom i want to make sure i live me life in a way that will make my daughter proud of me so i will introduce Church to her and i will teach her the commandments because whether or not Moses came down from the mountain with two tablets in his hands they are a good starting point to instill good morals.

Just point to a comprehensive moral system that is better than the teachings of Christ.

Good points, religious evolution — Anybody who believes they have the «one true path» has simply not awoken to the realities of what Christ taught.

At what point would you finally let go of it, knowing that it was written by a man that was just trying to teach his people some good values and that there really is no skydaddy?

Those who teach this view have some verses which seem to indicate «salvation» lasts forever, but those who are opposed to «Once Saved, Always Saved» point out numerous verses which say that «salvation» depends on continued obedience, faithfulness, and good works.

I would lean against the side of the tub into Brian's arms for the contractions (he thanked his high school football coach often for teaching him a good three - point stance as he maintained it for almost 2 hours!).

Well, I don't think the Apostles taught as roaming Rabbis because: a) they weren't rabbis (well, Paul was) b) I forget the other pWell, I don't think the Apostles taught as roaming Rabbis because: a) they weren't rabbis (well, Paul was) b) I forget the other pwell, Paul was) b) I forget the other point

In fact, passages use for this purpose definitely and obviously do not teach a 7 year pretribulation rapture, as most good dispensationalist commentaries will point out.

Biblicism falls apart, Smith says, because of the «the problem of pervasive interpretive pluralism,» for «even among presumably well - intentioned readers — including many evangelical biblicists — the Bible, after their very best efforts to understand it, says and teaches very different things about most significant topics... It becomes beside the point to assert a text to be solely authoritative or inerrant, for instance, when, lo and behold, it gives rise to a host of many divergent teachings on important matters.»

The first point to acknowledge in considering this view is that the Church has always taught that it is incompatible with an authentic sense of moral responsibility deliberately to choose what is known to be morally wrong, however good and desirable one's further purpose might be.

Jesus had some good lessons and taught some good points, virtually none of which are followed by so - called Christians today.

As we pointed out in chapter I, above, it is here that the modern attempt to reconstruct his teaching has been most successful and, today, the best - known feature of that teaching is its incomparable use of simile and analogy.

@US Patriot If a person follows the teachings of Jesus to his best ability, maybe even without knowing about Jesus, I think only God can judge whether he is Christian enough, but I don't mind you disagreeing on that point.

Sorry about the tangents, but it's always a great point in a post to quote the great Thoreau, I think he captures the heart of what I desire in all humanity: «A truly good book teaches me better than to read it.

In my own teaching of theology I find it best to use, rather than a single textbook with a single point of view, a reader which presents several angles of interpretation on specifics and on the whole because it forces students confronting a plurality of systems to decide for themselves what the Scriptures say.

My point is that it is better to be taught HOW to think (critical thinking skills) as opposed to being taught WHAT to think (dogma, woo, superstition, religion, bullshit indoctrination).

Our confusion then may be caused, as the good Bishop Berkeley put it regarding another matter, that we «raise a dust and then complain we can not see»; yet it is also due at points to a real lack of consistency in what the records tell us Jesus taught.

If Jesus did not rise from the dead, as you point out, following Jesus» teaching and example is still the best way to live.

More important and more difficult to deal with than such differences in teaching on will and freedom, however, is a wall known only too well by those of us who have worked with Omega to help it make its Point: the wall of what Catholics are tempted pridefully to call pietistic faith and what Protestants are tempted cynically to call superstition.

The number of Muslims in every nation that were globally pointed out might be correct, but the question here is, whether these numbers of Muslims are aware well about the teachings of Islam in the right way with out extremism?

Perhaps Ridley Scott is making a point that movies like Lawrence of Arabia teach human excellence in its complexity better than his own movies do — even a classic like Alien.

But there is a further point: the maxim «Like father, like child» holds good here, and it is in the application of this principle that we can recognize an emphasis which is characteristic of the teaching of Jesus.

well just thinking about these wars in the muslim / mid-east world over religious differences (which may reflect mental states in many ways) in a world where most realize that living in the present moment is best way to happiness and being in the moment in non-strife and awareness through the teachings of masters such as found in the buddhist, taoist, zen, etc., etc., etc. spriritually based practices of religious like thought and teachings, etc. that to ask these scientifically educated populace whom have access to vast amounts of knowledges and understandings on the internet, etc. to believe in past beliefs that perhaps gave basis and inspiration to that which followed — but is not the end all of all times or knowledges — and is thus — non self - sustaining in a belief that does not encompass growth of knowledge and understanding of all truths and being as it is or could be — is to not respect the intelligence and minds and personage of even themselves — not to be disrespected nor disrespectful in any way — only to point out that perhaps too much is asked to put others into the cloak of blind faith and adherance to the past that disregards the realities of the present and the potential of the future... so you try to live in the past — and destroy your present and your future — where is the intelligence in that — and why do people continually fear monger or allow to be fear — mongered into this destructive vision of the future based upon the past?

We said no, because we don't see any point in denying well - established scientific findings that in no way deny anything the Church teaches.

So, while I am not convinced either way at this point, I believe those who are challenging the teaching that those in second marriages are most often, apart from some biblical allowances, in sinful situations, may have a good point.

He correctly points out that hymnody has had a powerful influence on Anglican consciousness, with hymns providing a teaching modality as well as beauty in the worship of God.

In short, I think our goal should be to have biology and evolution taught in a way that points to what we don't know as well as what we do.

But his words were bound to be misunderstood in Rome, as well as distorting his teaching in a way that for generations has allowed Catholics anxious to challenge the magisterium on some point of faith and morals to claim that they have Newman on their side.

It is said that you can not teach anyone what they do not know already; and Jesus, being a good teacher, has reached back into the tradition that he shares with the young man and pointed out what both of them know: If you would be like a tree planted by rivers of water, learn to know, love, and obey the Law of God.

When we have recognized the fact that in general structure the catechesis of early Christianity followed the lines of other ethical teaching of the time, we shall be better prepared to recognize the points at which specifically Christian motives and sanctions are introduced.

«Remenber all scpritures are inspired words from God, my point is, Jesus wants us to be more than religious, but obedient.Jefferson is just stating that American Churches have become more corrupted with its religious practices that they have forgotten about jesus along the way.The church has taken scriptures and have use them according to what is pleasing to themselves.Jesus wants us to forget about what is pleasing to ourselves and follow him, be like him, love him (means be obedient to him) and ignore what we have known as religion.I define religion as jefferson is using in the video as an act of man pretending or decieving himself into believing that he know God and that he is better than others.He shows that by what he know / pratice not really whats in his heart and by serving how we choose which is pleasing to us, so we use God as a vessel praticing holy rituals teaching what we have made tradition and we have a eternal life with God.God created religion in order for us to remenber him and have a personal relationship with him through his son regardless of the many mistakes we have made in the past.We need to remenber God Forgets our past «he sperate our sins from us as far as the east is from the west».

The articulation of the Faith synthesis would benefit from better indicating how its teaching on this point develops rather than rejects the theology and teaching that has preceded it.

I think Jeremy you did a good job pointing out that that line shouldn't be drawn for others we should live in a «manner that life is a contest to see who can be the most gracious, loving, kind, and forgiving, and teach others to do the same.»

Theravada Buddhists now point to What the Buddha Taught, by Walpola Rahula, a Ceylonese Bhikkhu (monk), as the best introduction to the central ideas of Buddhism, whether Theravada or Mahayana.

I think Greg makes a good point that in context, Paul is responding to a false teaching that denied the resurrection (1 Cor.

But what chiefly I wish to suggest is that while I for one welcome the disappearance or «muting» of the traditional teaching about the last things, I also think that they did point to important truths about human life as well as about Christian faith.

a rather pointed open letter implicitly, but very clearly, characterizing Catholic teaching on sexual morality and marriage (and, perhaps, on abortion as well, though that is a little less clear) as «repression,» and implicitly characterizing the Archbishop himself, who is a strong defender of marriage, chastity, and the sanctity of human life, as an oppressor.

The same God is the author of our natural intellect as well as revelation, as classical Catholic theology so often reminds us, so we should not be surprised if what the Church teaches makes wonderful sense also just from a purely natural point of view and people end up doing what the Church recommends, not because she recommends it, but just because it is the most sensible thing to do.

That's exactly the opposite of the pattern you'll find in the scriptures, and at the best points of the tradition... I don't think that every Christian knows how to communicate the gospel clearly, but I know every Christian can, because I was taught to.»

Franks points out that children are good for marriage; having children is what teaches us selflessness.

But one thing is clear: though the website gives the Church's immemorial teachings about marriage (and does it, it seems to me, mostly rather well) the point is that this is very clearly - as the Church's constant restatement of its unchanging beliefs for each new generation always is - a response to our current situation.