Sentences with phrase «n't refer out»

I don't refer out anything.

Not exact matches

«We had a pen they didn't know about and we were taking little scraps of paper and trying to hand out notes to anyone and everyone that wasn't one of the guards or commanders involved in killing Martyr,» Coleman said, referring to their aborted daughter.

«Given marijuana is not legal anywhere in Australia, we would refer anyone who we suspect to be bringing marijuana out of the U.S. to a Customs official,» said Annabelle Cottee, a spokeswoman for Australian airline Qantas.

Those thrown out of work would have difficulty finding new jobs, as their existing skillsets are not otherwise in demand, a phenomenon economists refer to as structural unemployment.

Abe had put a lot of personal political capital at stake in beating on the agricultural lobby, and not just the farmers... but the [agricultural] banks, pension schemes, all the rest, to get support for a US - led TPP deal, and then Trump pulls out,» Bremmer said, referring to the Trans - Pacific Partnership, a sweeping trade deal, spearheaded by Barack Obama, that Trump exited days after taking office in January 2017.

Some banks weren't able to lend for a while because of TARP,» Geshwiler says, referring to the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the federal government's program for bailing out banks hit hard in the financial crisis.

Conway pointed out that Trump didn't mention the #MeToo movement or Porter's name in the tweet, and said he was referring to allegations in general.

«That verbiage probably scares theater owners,» Bock said, referring to Amazons» plan to narrow the window between theatrical releases and streaming availability, adding that the theater chains could take some solace in Amazon's decision not to go for simultaneous release or just putting films straight out on video.

Find out if the firm offers training for media interviews, and if not, ask if it can refer you to an experienced media coach.

You'll likely want to refer to the aforementioned Creator Handbook to figure out what you can and can not offer, as there are some restrictions you'll need to be aware of.

Although we refer to our credit score as one number out of 850 points, you may or may not know that you actually have different credit scores — three credit scores, actually.

Banks were bailed out in full following the crisis, and now that they are worried about loaning into this market and holding loans on their books, referring to loans which would not be guaranteed by either of the GSE's.

We shall not be liable or responsible for any damages, or claims, or losses, or injuries, or delays, or accidents, or costs, or business interruption costs, or any other expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys» fees or the costs of any claim or suit), or for any incidental, or direct, or indirect, or general, or special, or punitive, or exemplary, or consequential damages, or loss of goodwill or business profits, or loss of digital currency or digital assets, or work stoppage, or data loss, or computer failure or malfunction, or any other commercial or other losses directly or indirectly arising out of or related to our Terms; the Privacy and Transparency Statement; any service of tgtcoins.com; the use of tgtcoins.com; the use of tgt tokens; any use of your digital assets or digital currency on tgtcoins.com by any other party not authorized by you (all of the foregoing items shall be referred to herein as «Losses»).

Instead of seeing all these IPOs on Wall Street where Wall Street takes a huge fee, we're starting to see this new phenomenon referred to as Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) which are these businesses coming out and not paying fees to Wall Street, but coming out and issuing a coin, almost like a crowdfunding where people that put money in get a coin which inherently is a piece of the system.

The findings from the Kauffman Foundation, which studies entrepreneurship, suggest more individuals are landing jobs and not opting to start businesses out of necessity — a group referred to as necessity entrepreneurs.

In technical options parlance this trade might be referred to as «an out - of - the - money call butterfly spread paired with a long put» (Do NOT attempt to say that three times fast).

Out of the entire Bible, there are only 6 verses that even refer to it and most of these passages are about male prostitution and other practices that don't at all resemble current homosexual orientation.

Isn't this the same baby that she used as a reason to set out an attack on the word «retarded» (which I happen to agree is insulting, but still an interesting thing to generate the impassioned attack she had), despite the fact that accounts from multiple people have her «jokingly» referring to Trig as her «retarded baby»?

If a Bible verse (or discovery) is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical or metaphorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is an ancient cultural anomaly; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; is a mystery of god or not discernible by humans; or is just plain magic.

The only time I refer to myself as «spiritual but not religious» is when I'm filling out an online form and it offers no options for religion that fit me better.

If a Bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either; (i) taken out of context; (ii) symbolic, allegorical or otherwise means something other than it says; (iii) referring to another verse somewhere else that rectifies the error; (iv) a translation or copyist's error; (v) a mystery of God not discernible by we mere humans; or (vi) just plain magic.

If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is a translation error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernable by humans; or is just magic.

If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is an ancient cultural anomaly; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernible by humans; or is just plain magic.)

«Going out» referred to a daily living and moving and interacting, not merely an invitation to church.

It turned out that the Pope had not referred directly to homosexuality at all.

They're not after «assault riles», which an AR - 15 is not (AR refers to the first two letters of the makers name), they're out to disarm the people of the United States completely.

Men can not be understood without Christ, as John Paul II never tired of pointing out, referring to the words of Gaudiumet Spes (22):

However the NIV inserts a word not in the Greek, so 4:6 reads «this is why the Gospel was preached even to those who are now dead...» The translators admit the «now» is not in the Greek but say that they put it there to make clear that the passage doesn't refer to post mortem opportunity which they claim is ruled out by Hebrews 9:27 «it is appointed unto to man once to die and then comes judgement».

As Rachel Held Evans has pointed out, nearly all of the Bible's instructions regarding modest clothing refer not to sexuality, but rather materialism (Isaiah 3:16 - 23, 1 Peter 3:3).

And it might seem that the person was not double - minded who wills the Good out of fear of that punishment, since he refers the punishment to eternity, therefore to the same place where the Good has its home.

If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernable by humans; or is just plain magic.

Jesus was very clear — it is not what goes into a man that makes Him evil (referring to a set of laws if you like), but what comes out of the man.

First of all, it would read «out of the chute» not «out of the shoot,» and second, why would you refer to Eve that way?

That would depend on what religion you are referring to since not all religions believe the same thing when it comes to life on other worlds or even sentient life on other worlds, and perchance if that sentient life out there is human or even humanoid, it may even verify those beliefs.

In this sense, Mbiti rightly refers to the Zamani as a realm of «collective immortality» when he says that, «the living - dead do not vanish out of existence: they now enter into the state of collective immortality» (ARP 33).

Sociologists of religion like Max Weber and Émile Durkheim have observed that being religious in this broad sense refers not to a matter of personal choice but to a fundamental human drive to make sense out of reality.

3Eslick points out that at the crucial passage in Process and Reality in which Whitehead says Descartes» concept of substance is a true derivative from Aristotle's, Whitehead refers the reader not to Aristotle's Categories but to W. D. Ross's book about Aristotle (SCCW 504).

You had to opt out to not be part of his community (this is where the «parish» idea got developed into it's modern understanding, and historically why some areas of the US still refer to geographic areas of their cities as «parishes»... if you live there, you're part of the parish.)

For example, it is a general or pure possibility that I might win the 100 - meter dash in the next Olympic Games, but this is not a real possibility given my creaky joints, advancing years, etc. «Real potentiality» refers to those possibilities for the ingression of eternal objects which still remain after one strikes from consideration the impossibilities which the conditions of a given, factual world eliminate from the horizon of any particular actual entity or set of actual entities arising out of that world.

To your last point, when I said choice is an illusion, I wasn't referring that it is impossible to make that choice, but rather that there is a «right» choice and a «wrong» choice, the «right» one being that you worship god, regardless of how weird some of the rituals might be, making you a little more than a robot, acting out a script your given, we're just slightly better because we can justify why we're acting out a command, but it takes years to understand that justification, in the beginning, you do these rituals because you're given a script and if you don't want to do it, tough.

The author uses the words «sin willfully» (note that in the Greek it does NOT say «go on sinning») which can be taken out of context to mean just about anything, but IN context it specifically is referring to the forsaking of Christ in the face of persecution.

We refer to true worker ownership with advise and consent powers, not the pseudo-ownership plans sometimes used to facilitate management buy - outs of corporations.

@NAH, can rebut each of Colin's points in a reasonable manner, specifically let me call out two (both sort of related)-- the Christianity refers to only 600 years of history, and only refers to a small geography (not even the entire earth)-- why «leap of faith» argument is valid for Christianity and not for other independent faiths, which have many contradictory beliefs compared to Christianity, and if they are equally valid, how can they all be equally valid

But the evangelist points out with emphasis that this is not the resurrection to which the Gospel primarily refers.

Specificity means that a particular label applied to a person is to be used solely to refer to the limited and specific functions to which it is pertinent; it is not to be spread out to become an umbrella concept coloring everything he is and does.

I think the approach by Gordon Johnston is healthy and sound: he points out that while the texts and passages that are typically used to refer prophetically to Jesus Christ were not exclusively and directly prophet for the original Jewish audience, the promises and hope that are contained within these texts were never ultimately or completely fulfilled in any human king or historical era, and so always left open the expectation for something (or Someone) more.

He pointed out that many of the Psalms are not from the time of David and several of them reflect the Maccabean period; while only three or four Psalms refer directly to the Messiah and His times.

All immediacy, in spite of its illusory peace and tranquillity, is dread, and hence, quite consistently, it is dread of nothing; one can not make immediacy so anxious by the most horrifying description of the most dreadful something, as by a crafty, apparently casual half word about an unknown peril which is thrown out with the surely calculated aim of reflection; yea, one can put immediacy most in dread by slyly imputing to it knowledge of the matter referred to.

If a bible verse is detrimental to the cause, it is either: taken out of context; is allegorical; refers to another verse somewhere else; is a translation or copyist's error; means something other than what it actually says; Is a mystery of god or not discernible by humans; or is just plain magic.»

As Peter Alexander has pointed out, these conditions do not apply to «science and religion».12 They do not refer to the same entity.