Sentences with phrase «in view of the writer»

In the view of this writer I would recommend looking into natural hygiene products that contain essential oils known to be effective against skin infections.

One guide includes advice on such points as how to structure a pdf document so as to facilitate the reader's navigation through it, why and how to link to cited authority, and how to set the document's original display in view of the writer's uncertainty about the screen real estate it will occupy.

Not exact matches

Holiday rightfully calls out the page - view - hungry game of blogging in which writers are forced to churn out a dozen attention - grabbing posts a day regardless of whether or not anything truly attention - grabbing is happening.

You acquire the skill that is indispensable to all artists and entrepreneurs — the ability to switch back and forth in your imagination from your own point of view as writer / painter / seller to the point of view of your reader / gallery - goer / customer.

A good writer views his or her work as a business, one that is worth investing in — and part of that investment involves joining professional organizations.

Robbins» epiphany came in the nick of time considering that the DOL rule is due to be released Wednesday, inevitably placing a premium on advisors who toe the fiduciary line, says Michael Kitces, writer of Nerd's Eye View.

The extent of her contributions as producer - writer - director, for which she's gained respect within the industry, is still unknown to the general public — not to mention her talent for sketch comedy, which is on view in her movies.

In view of our unsettled exporting future, this writer decided to look for potential export markets which do NOT fall into Canada's established and traditional markets.

We are actively in the process of hiring additional freelance writers with a view to making the relationship more permanent very quickly thereafter.

It's to persuade producers and writers to include balanced, accurate and nuanced views of Muslims in their work.

Mankowski, who holds quite different views on ordaining women, agrees with Weakland that it would have been much better if the writers of the pastoral came right out and said what they mean by lamenting the sins of sexism in a hierarchical church.

Also, I couldn't quite get this into words as I was writing before, so: I am believe that I am correct in my view of Scripture as it has been handed down to me from teachers, preachers, writers and others; I believe that I am correct in my beliefs about who God is, and about His self - revelation, in the same way that all people believe that the opinions they hold are true.

While the majority of writers continued to suppose that no real changes were needed, the minority who shared my view that the world was heading for disaster had little to offer in terms of constructive suggestions.

Because of the common material in the first three gospels and because the writers look at Jesus from the same point of view, these gospels are known as the «synoptic» gospels.

Hence we must conclude with Professors Branscomb, Lohmeyer, Werner, Bishop Rawlinson, and other recent writers, that Mark's point of view is that which was «in general characteristic of the Gentile - Christian Church of the first century,» but that it was not, «in the narrower and more distinctive sense of the words, a «Pauline» Gospel.»

Both their spiritual pretensions and their fantastic view of Christ made them an unwholesome influence in the Asian churches and roused more than one Christian writer to dispute their claims.

Richard Dawkins, in his celebrated book, The Selfish Gene, exemplifies the same position.3 And a similar reduction of biology to a molecular science may be found in the writings of E.O. Wilson, Ernst Mayr, Jacques Monod and numerous other highly respected scientific writers.4 In Chance and Necessity, for example, Monod gives one of the most forceful renditions of the view that biochemical analysis is «obviously» the sole avenue to understanding the secret of life.5 Decades ago Jacques Loeb had already set forth the program of inquiry still emulated today by many biologistin his celebrated book, The Selfish Gene, exemplifies the same position.3 And a similar reduction of biology to a molecular science may be found in the writings of E.O. Wilson, Ernst Mayr, Jacques Monod and numerous other highly respected scientific writers.4 In Chance and Necessity, for example, Monod gives one of the most forceful renditions of the view that biochemical analysis is «obviously» the sole avenue to understanding the secret of life.5 Decades ago Jacques Loeb had already set forth the program of inquiry still emulated today by many biologistin the writings of E.O. Wilson, Ernst Mayr, Jacques Monod and numerous other highly respected scientific writers.4 In Chance and Necessity, for example, Monod gives one of the most forceful renditions of the view that biochemical analysis is «obviously» the sole avenue to understanding the secret of life.5 Decades ago Jacques Loeb had already set forth the program of inquiry still emulated today by many biologistIn Chance and Necessity, for example, Monod gives one of the most forceful renditions of the view that biochemical analysis is «obviously» the sole avenue to understanding the secret of life.5 Decades ago Jacques Loeb had already set forth the program of inquiry still emulated today by many biologists:

And perhaps it is in these vital areas that it will be most difficult to find new writers to communicate the issues from a religious point of view.

It is the writer's view that Jesus did hold to some aspects of the apocalyptic expectations of his time and may have thought of himself as the heavenly being sent by God to usher in a new order.

As one Roman Catholic writer was at pains to point out for the benefit of the pope in view of Khomeini's approach, the church does not live in the Middle Ages, and Muslims ought to be told so.

The dominant interpretation, derived from Franco - German scholarship of the nineteenth century, emphasized material aspects: political contest and domination in the Near East; the social structures of the Levantine crusader principalities viewed, especially by Francophone scholars, through the lens of modern colonialism; cultural confrontation and exchange through settlement and trade, a topos made familiar by eighteenth - century Enlightenment writers seeking to integrate the Crusades into a narrative of European progress; military adventurism that exposed the mentality of crusaders — heroic, passionate, devout, or misguided according to taste.

One of these dubious deterministic friends of religion is a former student of mine named Huston Smith, a pleasant, likeable person, who enjoys his complex view, in which he finds places for a number of recent writers, though he knows how little some of us agree with it.

My constant purpose was and is to adumbrate on every subject I handle a genuinely canonical interpretation of Scripture - a view that in its coherence embraces and expresses the thrust of all the biblical passages and units of thought that bear on my theme - a total, integrated view built out of biblical material in such a way that, if the writers of the various books knew what I had made of what they taught, they would nod their heads and say that I had got them right.

It is fashionable these days for Scripture scholars to look for substantive differences of conviction between biblical writers, but this is in my view an inquiry as shallow and stultifying as it is unfruitful.

Yes, I am a male worship leader and writer and not once in all the times that I have ever played or heard this incredible song, have I viewed it through the eyes of pervert.

The writers saw themselves as ethnographers, in James P. Spradley's definition of the term: «The purpose of ethnography is to grasp the native's point of view, his relation to life, to realize his vision of his world» (The Ethnographic Interview).

It is, in particular, the second of evangelicalism's two tenets, i. e., Biblical authority, that sets evangelicals off from their fellow Christians.8 Over against those wanting to make tradition co-normative with Scripture; over against those wanting to update Christianity by conforming it to the current philosophical trends; over against those who view Biblical authority selectively and dissent from what they find unreasonable; over against those who would understand Biblical authority primarily in terms of its writers» religious sensitivity or their proximity to the primal originating events of the faith; over against those who would consider Biblical authority subjectively, stressing the effect on the reader, not the quality of the source — over against all these, evangelicals believe the Biblical text as written to be totally authoritative in all that it affirms.

It has always been an insoluble problem for harmonists and writers of the life of Christ; and it is clear from the way Matthew — and perhaps John — and even Luke used the materials of the Gospel of Mark that they, who were its earliest editors and commentators, did not view the Marcan order as chronological or final and unalterable — save in one section, the passion narrative, though even here they did not hesitate to make some changes in order.

In regard to the Bible, one group of writers has sought to move away from the rigidity of fundamentalism to a position basically akin to the neo-orthodox view.

We can rue and remember with nostalgia the time when «Catholic» meant generally one sort of writer, but in my view both the Church and its literature are far better off with far more practitioners making far more sorts of art.

Even accepting this presumably lesser view, complications are not yet at an end; for it was freely recognized by Hebrew writers that this theory was threadbare; we are told in no uncertain terms that the nation was not of common ancestry.

Incidentally, the view that there are levels of meaning to reality is quite scriptural, since New Testament writers saw deeper meaning to Old Testament history in the light of New Testament history.

But, in my own view, the writer's taking of such «editorial» liberty amounted to a flat statement that the founding fathers and Rockefeller's own people, in talking about a «cure,» were using «misleading» terms in their early statements and work.

Here we see unknown writers in the hills of ancient Judah, seated in simple homes that from the point of view of our present - day luxury might be regarded as little better than hovels, surrounded with furnishings more bare and austere than those of a medieval monastery, equipped with simple reed pens and rolls of papyrus, or perhaps with broken sherds of old pots, as they slowly indite in awkward, ancient Hebrew characters, words that have run like fire and are potent at this distant day.

His view is that Paul basically gave himself free reign here at the start of his teachings to the gentiles (see also 1:1 a: «Paulos, apostolos ouk ap anthroopoon, oude di anthroopon, alla dia Iesou Christou, kia Theou patros...») and then started preaching his own theology heavily influenced by his own biases and preferences — not that any of the writers were ever completely exempt from it of course, but still the writer felt Paul was quite fundamentalistic at times about certain things he had some clear opinions about, e.g. about relationships and women's position in the church etc, which he then propagated as part of the gospel.

As part of the Rally to Restore Unity, I asked some of my favorite writers and thinkers to respond to this prompt: «In three to five sentences, tell us about a meaningful relationship you've maintained with a fellow Christian who doesn't necessarily share your theological or political views.»

The writer has in view the disturbed political situation of the late fifties or early sixties, the «wars and rumours of wars» upon the eastern frontier of the Empire, the famines and earthquake shocks recorded under Claudius and Nero, and the growing isolation and unpopularity of the Christian Church; but he is concerned to assure his readers that» the end is not yet.»

I shall do this not because there are not significant differences in the way various New Testament writers interpreted what Christ had accomplished, but because there will not be opportunity to present at all adequately each of these divergent views; and if one must choose, Paul's view is by every criterion the most important.

Earlier writers had recognized that Volkmar went too far in his attempted demonstration of Mark's dependence upon Paul — he found evidence of such dependence on almost every page of the Gospel — but his view was such a welcome relief from the one - sided Tübingen theory, according to which Mark was a «neutral» in the great apostolic controversy over Jewish Christianity, that the main thesis of Volkmar was accepted without careful scrutiny of his supporting arguments.

I am a musician and a writer, plus a dabbler in drawing and other artistic «crafty» endeavors so I always interpret things from a deep emotional point of view which hasn't always worked in my favour (at least it didn't in the church I attended) and alienated me from non-artistic people who called me too sensitive and too picky and too obsessive and too emotionally involved with just about everything I did, or tried to do.

And that, in this writer's view, is to end up playing into the hands of those who, historically and at present, intimidate Christian schools into secular conformity.

The point is if Christians reacted the same way Muslims do, we would all be uniting in a huge riot to string up and kill the writer of this story, along with anyone associated with them, or any one that shares a view point different than Christianity.

It is equally easy and false to take a docetic view of revelation: to suppose that the content of the scriptures, for example, is, just simply, the thoughts of God, the human writers contributing no more than a pen for God to write them down with; or to imagine that a person or a group of people or an institution can, as it were, throw a switch from time to time and become a transmitter of revelation from an external divine source: a group of bishops, for instance, when assembled in council, or a pope when defining a dogma ex cathedra.

I came to believe that the Bible always reflects the writer's view of God and the world, like you said in this episode.

In an interview with Harry Cook, the religion writer for the Detroit Free Press, Smith articulated the theology of supersession as warrant for his views:

(It is also interesting that Acton apparently does not share the editorial writer's view of Pope Gelasius as one of the «critical moments» in the emergence of democratic thought; I have come across no mention of Gelasius in any of Acton's very erudite writings on this subject.)

The Holy See's press office Saturday urged the public to read the latest Vatican - related diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks with «great prudence,» claiming the allegations cited in the documents reflect only the view of their writers.

I genuinely was interested in this subject because of late it has somewhat been playing on my mind and so sought to discover the truth on the matter and so sought out discussions and literature by christian writers that I might examine their different stances on the issue and try to find a moral cross-section as I think is appropriate for all questions since the ranging views are like politics ranging from far left wing to far right wing views.

Even in Islam, the most important Islamic writer in Pakistan, Iqbal, was a Bergsonian who took a process view of God.

This paper is descriptive and interpretative; it is an attempt to convey my understanding of the views of nature found in the biblical writers.