Sentences with phrase «n't written a teaching»

Don't write a teaching statement that lays out an astronomical amount of work, e.g., «I will meet individually with all my students every week and do service learning projects in the community and design projects for local science museums.»

Not exact matches

«If there's a subject you're not familiar with, just be honest with that person and nine out of 10 times they'll teach you about it,» Michael Wong writes.

After finishing Antioch College at age 19, Shel had to come to terms with his own work history: career paths not only in writing and marketing / PR, but also in radio, teaching, arts, food service, office systems, community organizing, and environmental issues.

The store, located in an old tattoo parlor, has traces of 826NYC: They teach kids writing in the back, and the space doesn't spare on the whimsy, with an artificial bird sanctuary, and a «bird adoption agency» near the checkout counter.

Write everything down... That is a million dollar lesson they don't teach you in business school!»

I teach a class at Princeton on how to grow ideas into self - sustaining enterprises and I could not find good materials to use for my class so I wrote this book.

I have not retired yet — I'm still teaching economics, writing an investment newsletter and speaking at conferences — but like many of you, I'm concerned about making sure my wife and I have enough to live on if and when we decide to retire.

«I'm an accidental author and teacher because I'm not trained in writing and I'm not trained in teaching,» Miles says.

«My apologies for the silence over the last month, but I am in the final stages of completing my book and there is just not enough time in the day to juggle investing, teaching, book writing and coming up with insights worth sharing.

All of this occurs, of course, in the name of academic freedom, the guarantee that professors will not be sanctioned for the substance of what they write and teach.

ReadWrite — Unlike most of the other blogs in this category, ReadWrite doesn't necessarily teach you about content marketing so much as it gives you content to write about.

belonging to a sect that goes as far as to write it's own version of the ten commandments (yes the catholic ten commandments are different to those in the bible) means you are not in line with the teaching of the bible.

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

The Christian Bible was written by men, not women, and then rewritten time - and - again over the last several hundred years, by men, when the Bible failed to support the teachings of those «men».

It is written; «If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness»

As denominationalism has taught us, if you don't love the bible and its teaching, just go out and start your own church and write your own «bible!»

Tietjen himself writes, «I did not appreciate what I thought was less than candor in the seminary's repeated claims that nothing had really changed in C [oncordia] S [eminary] teaching.»

Women were not taught how to read and write is was strictly reserved for males.

Addressing God as always, Augustine writes, «You taught him to put his confidence not in himself but in You.

southerneyes44, you wrote «Germany doesn't teach about him» in regards to Hitler That's a ludicrous assertion as is «Theories in science change with the newspaper.»

How is it that an inspired woman could write scripture (e.g., Mary's song), and an inspired woman could determine for both a king and a high priest whether something is scripture (e.g., the prophet Huldah in 2 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 34)-- or at least could do these things in the time of the Old Testament — but an inspired woman can not now teach about God?

... while Paul VI did write that it was his responsibility to sift the material he had been given by many advisers, including the papal commission on marriage and fertility that Pope John XXIII had established and that he, Paul, had expanded, he also made clear that the teaching of Humanae Vitae rested, not on the personal conscience of Giovanni Battista Montini, but on the mature conviction of Pope Paul VI as custodian and servant, not master, of the Catholic tradition.

John Greco writes a column for RELEVANT about a miracle Jesus notably didn't perform for his cousin John — and what it teaches us.

An unbiased scientist would realize this oral tradition was put to writing 3,400 years ago as an teaching point to a chosen people not a lecture series at MIT.

The evidence indicates that the written sources of our Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are not later than c. AD 60; some of them have even been traced back to notes taken of our Lord's teaching while His words were actually being uttered... We have then in the Synoptic Gospels, the latest of which was complete between 40 - 50 years after the death of Christ, material which took shape at a still earlier time, some of it even before His death, and which, besides being for the most part 1st hand evidence, was transmitted along independent and trustworthy lines.»

I don't agree with everything he writes but one thing that makes a lot of sense is that the Gospel of Prosperity puts the buck first, which is fundamentally at odds with the teachings of Jesus.

My father also taught me, even when I was a child, that Bruce R. McConkie, who wrote some unflattering stuff about non-whites in «Mormon Doctrine,» stood in Conference after the 1978 announcement and said he had obviously been wrong on those points, and he retracted everything not in keeping with the Brethren's announcement.

Christians have voted to put their God's name on everyones money, add «Under God» to the flag salute, force schools to teach intelligent design with absolutely no scientific basis along side the sciences, voted to write their moral laws on the fronts of public courthouses and tax funded buildings, voted to ban certain people from living together, being intimate or raising children because their orientation didn't fit with their bible beliefs.

You who can not simply accept the Bible's teachings for what they are, in the time that they were written, and follow God, are just plain ignorant.

In the beginning Joseph Smith didn't teach polygamy until Brigham Young suggested it and then then he wrote it in to a later edict.

Jesus Christ didn't write the Bible his disciples did and therefore I conclude that most people in the world are illiterate and will be saved by the preaching and teaching of the only one real church of catholicism founded in Rome, Italy by Peter the first bishop of Rome.

Yeshua was the living Torah so the way he taught was the way it was written not the Greek miss translation

I would agree with Hope Griffin, that not all of what you wrote I agree, but, again, the holy spirit in us will teach us how to discern between wrong teaching and a good one, the lie and the truth....

I taught middle school art and I was written up in my permanent record because a nasty little boy took a postage size stamp picture containing a nude by a famous artist (2 dots represented the breasts so it was not graphic by any means) and added nasty things to it.

If the Bible is a myth, it would be the truest and most helpful myth ever written, and I would still read it, study it, teach it, and try to follow it... especially the parts about Jesus, for He (even if he didn't really exist) represents the truest way to be human.

The novel has a lesson, a moral, to teach, not unlike the lesson of Uncle Tom's Cabin, and one doubts whether it would have been written apart from social outrage; it can be taken as propaganda.

Starting with no grammar or dictionary, indeed not one written word to aid them, missionaries have learned the oral language, often without benefit of any interpreter — definitely the hard way — worked out an alphabet, reduced it to writing, prepared a grammar and dictionary, translated some portions into the newly written tongue, then had to teach the natives to read their own language in order to read the Bible.

And again: «Let us hear the church when it teaches and admonishes,» he writes, «but one must not believe because of the authority of the church.

And the book also offers a deliberately wide array of approaches to trinitarian issues, including not only historical and systematic theologians, but biblical scholars and analytic philosophers of religion, writing from a variety of theological and communal points of view» Roman Catholic, Protestant, and, in one case, Jewish (the New Testament scholar Alan Segal, who contributes an instructive if somewhat technical chapter on the role of conflicts between Jews and Christians in the emergence of early trinitarian teaching).

Mark is not writing history or biography, not even giving an account of Jesus» teaching.

it was a collection of oral and written tales form the area that the people who wrote it hoped would teach morals to jewish children.as the pagans that lived around them did not have theytype that the first century jews would have aproved of.

At the same time the Elder writes another short letter, our Second John, to the church to which Gaius belongs, urging its members to love one another and to live harmoniously together, and warning them against the deceivers who teach that Christ has not come in the flesh.

This is at odds with the teaching of liberation theology, where you had black theologians like Dr. James Cone who wrote that the gospel is essentially for the oppressed and not the oppressor.

'' Once you remove man's dogmas and get back to the teachings of Jesus Christ» Which is one of man's dogmas... Men wrote the bible.You haven't removed anything, you have accepted one of man's dogmas as if it were truth.

Words written in bible represent mind set of a hindu, secular, crook self centered writer hundreds of years after Easu, anointed one, corresponding not to essence of teachings, but plot to justify hindu Mithra ism, pagan savior ism, in violation of spirit of true teachings.

It is not hard to believe that the Pentateuch, for example, was not written down by Moses at all, but yet is mostly comprised of what he taught.

«After thirty - five years of studying and teaching the theology and history of the Church,» writes Eamon Duffy, «I find myself living more and more out of resources acquired not in the lecture room or library, nor even at the post-conciliar liturgy, but in the narrow Catholicism of my 1950s childhood, warts and all.»

But a couple of bona fide scholars — not professors teaching religious studies in universities but scholars nonetheless, and at least one of them with a Ph.D. in the field of New Testament — have taken this position and written about it.

God can foresee the possibility that tonight I shall continue writing this book or prepare for the class I am teaching tomorrow or watch «Magnum, P.I.,» but she / he can not foresee which of these alternatives I shall choose.

I am intrigued that when Jesus stated ``... but not so among you, rather, you are to call no man your father... teacher... mentor... for you are all brothers», I think the model of «teaching» changed deeply into a model of equal disclosure and honesty, using perhaps the written Bible as a launching point for that disclosure and honesty.