Sentences with phrase «necessarily mean»

Even if you think the Bible, Koran, Torah, etc. are a bunch of bunk that does not necessarily mean there is not a creator that set this universe in motion.

This is just one example, of course, but it is just one example of scripture using «all» language in a way that doesn't necessarily mean «all».

Being spiritual does not necessarily mean that you have to believe in a «God».

I would like you to know that being «not terribly famous» doesn't necessarily mean that you're obscure.

Even if your football team does not play up to their ability, this does not necessarily mean they will lose the game this weekend.

Just because something comes packaged in authority, leadership, power, and control, it doesn't necessarily mean it's true.

This does not necessarily mean that Kantians deny the possibility or likelihood of such an end.

The Force Awakens confirms that blowing up two Death Stars doesn't necessarily mean good times are here to stay, which is why a whole new generation is going to have to look to Luke, Leia and Han to learn how to be heroes in their own time — learning from them, and applying their wisdom to a modern era.

So, it's that kind of find, which doesn't necessarily mean this isn't a Beatles song, but there's really no way to prove it one way or the other until Sir Paul weighs in.

So if the goal is to become «fully human,» would that not necessarily mean fully reflecting the image of God?

When Brendan Cox, a British campaigner (and widower of the politician Jo Cox), who had become a media star, was accused of sexual harassment, he felt the need to say that his record «doesn't necessarily mean I'm innately a bad person.»

fishon: when i say resolution, i don't necessarily mean we come to intellectual agreement.

The fundamental point, once again, is that variety in expression does not necessarily mean incommensurable or opposing positions.

But the fact that a bodily resurrection could have certain implications for people of the first century does not necessarily mean it can have these same implications for us today.

However, this does not necessarily mean that everything is going to be fine now.

He concludes that more attention to the Bible did not necessarily mean more virtuous action; that personal engagement with the Bible did result in self - sacrificing service, but also in divisive hubris, mistaken interpretations (such as the identification of America with ancient Israel), and blindness to social evils; and that Protestant spiritual individualism undercut corrupt hierarchies and supported democracy, but also promoted political excesses and violent anti-Catholicism.

Cultivating the art of love - making doesn't necessarily mean that a couple will increase the frequency of intercourse, although that may result from its becoming more enjoyable to both.

Singleness isn't necessarily the symptom of some big flaw, just as being in a relationship doesn't necessarily mean you're healthy.

... just because a police officer is in your service in uniform doesn't necessarily mean that somebody in the room is in trouble with the law.

Our mainline contribution has integrity, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be the dominant expression of Christian faith.

But thankfully, as we have already seen, this does not necessarily mean that you have to pass out gospel tracts, go door - to - door, or preach on street corners.

So I'm sending out an alert: even though this seems difficult for some people to understand, when space is given for a person to share their experiences and be heard and even believed, this does not necessarily mean I am taking sides.

But then being good does not necessarily mean having more knowledge of many facts.

But just because something MIGHT exist, doesn't necessarily mean that we have to suspend our judgement on what is MOST LIKELY to exist (or not).

Rejection of the naturalistic fallacy does not necessarily mean that modernists discard natural law altogether, however.

Taking note of the altered world - consciousness of human beings in this century, according to which Being is to be understood in strictly interpersonal terms, Mühlen suggests, first of all, that the classical expression homoousios, as applied to the Son's relationship to the Father, does not necessarily mean that the Son is of the same substance as the Father but only that he is of equal being (gleichseiendlich) with the Father (VG 13).

@Sam, he attended Catholic school but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

It doesn't necessarily mean the previous information was wrong, it was just incomplete.

First, the big bang DOES NOT necessarily mean the Universe had a beginning.

Conflict doesn't necessarily mean violence.

While we may have the light of Christ within us, it doesn't necessarily mean we know the whole truth; not everything is illuminated.

Believing that an historical figure Jesus existed doesn't necessarily mean that one is a «believer».

A «relationship» does not necessarily mean sex, but it might.

The second study is Dutch, which doesn't necessarily mean that it applies anywhere else.

«For these men the term «monogamy» simply doesn't necessarily mean sexual exclusivity... The term «open relationship» has for a great many gay men come to have one specific definition: A relationship in which the partners have sex on the outside often, put away their resentment and jealousy, and discuss their outside sex with each other, or share sex partners.

Even if the Kansas City Chiefs do not play up to their ability, this does not necessarily mean they will lose to Jacksonville.

This doesn't necessarily mean they are indifferent or callused toward those who suffer.

While litotes states something positive in a negative way, this does not necessarily mean that the opposite statement is necessarily true.

That perhaps there is logic to at least be open to consider the possibility that us, life, nature, the universe, and everything may have come about through design in some sort of fashion or another and just because you may not understand it all doesn't necessarily mean that that there is no purpose behind it all.

I started accepting the label «atheist» when I realized it doesn't necessarily mean that at all, and also when I realized not only that the God claim could not be demonstrated, but also that there are sound reasons for doubting it.

It does not necessarily mean observing the rules or codes recognized in any human society, except insofar as these represent the attempt of that society to make actions express the nearest thing to full realization of affected interests which is possible to the average human being.

This does not necessarily mean everything is changing, only our ability to understand it.

The study pointed out that «none» needn't necessarily mean «atheist» as much as it implies a dissatisfaction with mainline denominations.

Just because it's legal doesn't necessarily mean it's right.

But it doesn't necessarily mean leaving the organization as a whole.

Does the fact that a position is found in Plato necessarily mean that it could not have been held also by Aristotle?

«A Creator» doesn't necessarily mean the anthropomorphic God of Abraham.

Greatness does not necessarily mean success: some of the greatest saints have been failures in the short term (Thomas More, Edmund Campion, the Japanese martyrs).

The first doesn't necessarily mean you have to leave the organization.

«While many evangelical voters say they «strongly» support Trump over Clinton, this does not necessarily mean Trump is their ideal choice for president or that they are convinced he shares their religious convictions,» Pew stated.