Sentences with phrase «not come into question»

For all the ups and downs O'Korn has endured the season, his accountability and desire to succeed should not come into question.

AKB's or AOB whatever your stance should not come into question other than the success of our club..

Not exact matches

If you think you don't have anything to teach, answer this question posed by blogger and podcaster Sean McCabe: «Is what I know more than what I knew when I first came into this field?

This isn't the first time Trump's business dealings have come into question during this campaign.

«With the viability of private pensions and even Social Security coming into question, we realize that Americans need a retirement vehicle that will provide guaranteed streams of income that can not be outlived.

At that price, not only are plans to double output from the oil sands no longer commercially viable, but current production levels also come into question.

 The Harper government's decision last year to write off every penny of the auto aid and thus build it all into last year's deficit calculation (which I questioned at the time as curious and even misleading) has already been proven wrong. Since the money was already «written off» by Ottawa as a loss (on grounds that they had little confidence it would be repaid — contradicting their own assurances at the same time that it was an «investment,» not a bail - out), any repayment will come as a gain that can be recorded in the budget on the revenue side. Jim Flaherty has learned from past Finance Ministers (especially Paul Martin) that it's always politically better to make the budget situation look worse than it is (even when the bottom has fallen out of the balance), thus positioning yourself to triumphantly announce «surprising good news» (due, no doubt, to «careful fiscal management») down the road. The auto package could thus generate as much as $ 10 billion in «surprising good news» for Ottawa in the years to come (depending on the ultimate worth of the public equity share).

Khalid you still have not answered the question of how your favorite being came into existence..

The question assumes that matter came into existence and didn't always exist when that is not the only theoretical possibility.

I'm not sure what I said to lead you to believe that I am «throwing out the most proven and fundamental laws of science» since I'm pretty sure that none of the laws that you mention describe a need for the past to be gone and the future to not exist yet, and I was only forwarding a theoretical possibility with apparently good evidence as far as I can tell to address the question «Why would matter come into existence all by itself for no good reason?»

«canon» wasnt a term that came into being until Council of Nicea, that does nt mean that the divinity of Jesus was an unresolved question until then

But if Christians believe the quoted psalm is not accurate, then that calls the rest of the Bible into question and BOOM, down it comes.

Every structure of secular life both present and to come is called into question by hope, because this is the anticipation of what is not in our power, and the historical and social act of hope is realized in this calling into question, though not entirely.

We have said that the Hebrew faith does not come to a clear resolution of the question of how the suffering either of God or the Servant enters into the redemptive work of love.

To answer this question, let us make a further supposition: when A comes into being, B has not yet come into being.

LOL, you think all people who are spiritual but not religious never ponder bigger questions such as how the universe came into existence or why it exists at all?

These are manifestly questions of historical fact, and one does not see how the answer to them can decide offhand the still further question: of what use should such a volume, with its manner of coming into existence so defined, be to us as a guide to life and a revelation?

It is generally recognized that many blows struck against the pulpit come not because of its peculiar faults but because it is a part of a traditional and entrenched institution, and all such institutions, religious, political, or otherwise, are being called into question.

If you explain the Gospel, that that question doesn't come up, then you probably have added works into the Gospel somewhere.

Phrygian to me i sense that you are struggling with issues in your mind that you cant reconcile and these issues are affecting what you believe in your heart and therefore your faith in God.I had something similar happen to me recently regarding the story of the demon possessed man at one point the demons begged Jesus to cast them into the pigs does that mean that Jesus was implicated with the work of satan.It cast my mind into doubt and then i began to question who God is.I prayed and sort the holy spirit for an answer the answer i got was that Gods character never changes he is always holy righteous and sovereign why else would satan ask for his permission.So the answer was that he allowed satans purpose to prevail so that we can see that satans intention is always to destroy it may well have been that the pigs were his anyway.As they were for the gentile nations who offered the pigs to their demon Gods.Just as satan can not change who he is the destroyer the thief the liar God can not change who he is when we realise that despite what we see going on in the world God is still the same yesterday today and forever.The time is coming when those that have hurt others will be judged for there wickedness as we serve a holy and just God.Just as it was in the times of Noah so it is with this this generation that as the wickedness reachs its zenith then the Lord will return to judge the nations.He is coming again and we need to be ready it is not a time to be caught sleeping.brentnz

Salvation comes from the ability to articulate your belief into an absolute that can't be questioned.

Then the question involves a in that the inquirer in the given case either sees another change co-present with the change of coming into existence, which confuses the question for him, or he mistakes the nature of what is coming into existence and therefore is not in position to ask the question.

It isn't possible for me to go into these stories in any detail in such a short time, so I thought, instead of doing that, I would like to devote my time this morning to addressing some of the main questions people have asked me repeatedly over the course of the last two years, when I was working on the book, and after the book had come out.

Whenever a successor reasserts its having come into existence, which he does by believing it, he evokes this potentiality anew, irrespective of whether there can be any question of his having a more specific conception of it or not.

Such freedom can be allowed in the Christian Church precisely because any questionings as to the manner in which the divine fire came into the world in Jesus Christ, and any analysis of the essential significance of that coming, can not deny the fact that the fire did come and that it is burning still.

Then he comes to his own reply to Spalatin's question: It is absolutely certain that one can not enter into the meaning of Scripture by study or innate intelligence.

It's a tricky question, because when I'm not watching baseball or writing about baseball for my day job, I retreat into a bunker that was developed by NASA scientists to keep baseball from coming in.

Here's a pretty clear video of Harrison mumbling into his hands «f*ck that n ****» when a Frank Kaminsky question comes up to teammate Karl Towns.

Once Bryant's effectiveness came into question, then the team apparently felt he wasn't worth it anymore.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

This is the kind of article that highlights exactly what is wrong with this club as a whole... so the question you're asking is what option would be less shitty... after the firestorm surrounding Wenger's contract last season, which somehow led to his highly questionable re-upping for 2 more years, things needed to dramatically change or the inevitable same old, same old was bound to occur... as of right now the bare minimum has occurred... we knew about Sead long before Wenger's renewal so that can't be considered a part of the «new world order»... so the only real changes are Lehman coming into the coaching staff, which could be positive but he's always been a Wenger lackey so the jury is still out, and the acquisition of Lacazette, who I really like as a player but I question the reasoning behind his signing

Losing begets losing and with little leadership on the field and maybe even less from the manager, I can't see things continuing to go downhill without the manager coming into question by this FO.

Are you really naive enough to believe that Wenger would bring anyone into this current locker room that is going to be given a strong voice... have you not been watching, listening or reading about our club for years... Lehman is a blind Wenger follower, which is the only reason he was even considered... just for a second think of all the strong personalities that have played for this club that have never been seriously considered even though they have expressed legitimate interest in participating in the coaching process... even worse, think of all the former greats who aren't even allowed on the same pitch as Wenger because they have offered their advice and / or criticism to the infallible one... I dare you to find a manager that has distanced himself from his former players as much as this man... it's the very reason why only one player I can think of has ever returned to play for Wenger and that was Flamini, which was hilarious considering we were desperately looking for a top quality defensive midfielder but Wenger could somehow find no one better than Flamini in the whole wide world... let's face it this club was simply trying to appease it's disgruntled fans by declaring that Wenger would no longer be given Ca rte Blanche when it came to the backroom staff so they probably asked him to give them a list of those who he would allow in the locker room... on that list he wrote Lehman, Pires and Bergkamp, likely because the first two are the only former players who haven't publicly questioned his horrible decision - making and the last one because he won't get in an airplane

The way the question is set clearly indicates that Sanchez must come back into the team against Spurs and why not?

the game there has changed before the match i was thinking about a formation but flamini was not available in my formation carzola was not in for the simple reason he put a lot work in the last match i would have picked wallcott rosciky and gabrial having said that when the player sheet came out my first thought was yup the team is balanced the bench constituted walcott and chambarelain (speed) so in essence the plan was ok but it just was a disaster The 22 million dollar question who would one pick to secure a win in Monaco and advance into the quarter finals of the champion league

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

We all bought into it at the time, didn't ask questions, we were told that hard times were upon us but that money would eventually come in and Arsenal could compete with anyone for any player.

We come into the match with a couple of question marks over the availability of both Mesut Ozil and Alex Iwobi, and the pair are believed to undergo tests prior to tonight's match, and I wouldn't expect either to start the match.

Pitching may have been a question mark for the Grizzlies coming into the season, but offense was not.

With all the uncertainty swirling about whether he did or did not incur a penalty by causing his ball to move early into his final round of the U.S. Open, the guy whose mental makeup has been questioned over the years came up huge.

Part of this problem could be considered to be that the most used central midfield pairing, Lucas Leiva and Charlie Adam, aren't particularly dynamic nor inclined to get on the end of crosses (of which Liverpool have had more, per game, than any other team in the league apart from Wolves — more of which, will be discussed later), so this only leaves a certain number of players who will be able to get into the box in the more rigid 4 -4-2 utilised for most of this season. Inspite of this, however, 58 % of Liverpool's goals have come from inside the 18 yard box, the highest in the league so far this season in terms of percentage of goals scored by each individual team, suggesting that this is the best avenue of attack for Liverpool, so the question has to be: why have Liverpool only managed to score 14 times, the 10th lowest amount of goals in the league?

That said, Blackpool are the sort of team which boast a great deal of resilience, so this should be a fixture which either goes one or the other, as stalemate really doesn't come into the equation with the teams in question.

The question is pertinent because Arsenal have functioned somewhat as a team since Elneny has come into the side, a state of affairs that didn't exist in the matches leading up to his inclusion, perfectly encapsulated by the pathetic 3 - 2 loss to Manchester United.

Our plumbing is a little delicate, so I haven't flushed much... that said — I question the idea that it will break down when put in a land fill — no matter what you put into a land fill it won't break down with out some kind of composting process going on — that's why you can find newspapers that look like they came off the presses yesterday in the middle of a 50 year old landfill.

around midnight i began to question my decision to have a home birth, & maria was getting tired... she called in a second midwife for support & my doula arrived from another birth... i was afraid of the power - i hadn't felt it like this in kayenn's birth... i was afraid that i would come apart - even though i had to - i know now that coming apart is a part of the process... someplace in the middle of this birth i realized that i did not know how to do this - i was acting against the birth process - literally & emotionally... i had a mental idea of what it should look, sound, smell, be like... after some hours maria checked me again, i had been at 9 cm for 4 hours... she said to me, «some babies can come through at 9 cm, but yours will not, sokhna... sokhna, you are going to have to fight to bring this baby out... go into the bathroom, get in the shower & work it out... «so i did... i went in the cold bathroom alone & remembered every cold detail of kayenn's birth... i wondered if i could get to the hospital on time to have an emergency c - section & i began to cry... & as i cried i had to go to the bathroom - i sat on the toilet & the rushes came down like nothing i can explain - but they didn't hurt - it was just POWER!

Through the course of sharing these experiences, a trend has emerged that has many parents calling into question what should and should not be considered «normal» when it comes to pregnancy, labor, and delivery.

a trend has emerged that has many parents calling into question what should and should not be considered «normal» when it comes to pregnancy...

«There's never a black and white answer when it comes to questions like how long should parents wait before going into their child's room, or whether or not they should pick baby up,» notes Schaf.

This claim has come under question from all sides in recent days, However he insists it is accurate but suggests he can not go into too much detail about hte source of the claim for security reasons.

The problem is that many of the New Labour politicicians grew up and came into parliament at times when excessive wealth was celebrated and not questioned.