Sentences with phrase «not public reading»

It also means that you will have few or not any public readings, at least, not yet, since those usually go with book signings.

Not exact matches

This success has translated not just into a ravenous reading public, but also a soaring stock market value.

In public hearings, Comey has declined to answer when asked if Trump is under investigation, urging lawmakers not to read anything into that statement.

Again, this is not a political commentary, it's just a simple fact based on reading posts that are shared in a public forum on social media.

And even if you can't reach a resolution, a thoughtful, professional and polite public response can prevent any loss of future customers who might read it.

«What the president is pointing out is that, all the while — and Sarah said this from the podium too, read a statement from Rob Porter — that he is denying these «vile allegations,» but that he doesn't want to further engage in this orchestrated public smear campaign,» she said.

A complaint isn't meant to be for the public to read and comment on.

We don't have to be the public relations platform for that, you can just go read it online.

Whitmarsh declined an interview, but did say his correspondence with the government began after reading in the media that officials said the Public Service Agency could do the review because they said they weren't involved in the firings.

And this «expert panel» had not even taken the time to read into the history of the distrust of these supposed public hearings.

While there's learning to be shared among all sectors, it's time to hear and read more about Canada's top 25 non-profit and public boards, not just the top 25 corporate boards in Canada, as listed recently in Canadian Business Magazine (August 2005).

The problem is that the sender can not just unilaterally decide to encrypt a message; rather, the receiver has to first generate a public - private key pair, then share the public key with the sender so that the email can be encrypted in a way that only the recipient — thanks to their private key — can read it.

Whether you are reading to improve your public speaking approach or have an interest in TED talks I couldn't recommend this enough.

While political and foreign policy wonks will understand that Trump isn't necessarily going to end the deal by sending the issue to Congress, broadly speaking it will be read by the American public and the international community as him trying to deliver on his promise to scrap or improve the pact.

12 rules of goldbuggery [The Big Picture] On Africa's economic prospects [The Economist] Nate Silver: confidence kills predictions [IndexUniverse] Leverage: financial versus operating [MicroFundy] The endgame is forced liquidation [Hussman Funds] P / C insurance industry overview and outlook [Insurance Information Institute] Twitter is becoming the first and quickest source of investment news [Guardian] Shameless plug: if you don't already, follow @MarketFolly on Twitter An economic analysis of cable TV pricing [Colorado.edu] Paying for sports programming [The Sports Economist] Here comes Amazon's (AMZN) Kindle TV set - top box [BusinessWeek] eBay (EBAY) fighting online sales tax [Dealbook] Public speaking: how to shine on the soapbox [Anthony Scaramucci] A quant finance reading list [Quantstart] For aspiring investment managers: Kaplan's Series65 exam prep.

But what does it mean to say public reading is not public speaking?

Public reading is not public spePublic reading is not public spepublic speaking.

I only got the last question wrong because I'm not American and I don't know whether it's legally okay in the States to read from the bible in public schools.

A public reading is an appointment with a text, and often a text that is not unfamiliar to the listeners.

I am not arguing for daily Bible reading and prayer in the public schools.

In the East European countries the television newsreaders read 15 minute - long conference communiqués and Central Committee resolutions which are not even suitable for printing in a newspaper, clearly under the delusion that they might fascinate a public of millions.)

What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist reading of the text represents a capitulation to culture but a reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.

Julie - I was especially encouraged and thought of you while reading a particular passage because it is about the story of a woman who was assaulted and not believed... and then about the way that it was necessary for there to be a public forum where she could claim and own her experience.

Many churches have chosen readings for particular Sundays and do not read the whole Bible in public worship.

Plays are play, as Walter Ong observes, except for the playwright and perhaps some of the paying public.5 Moreover, while most would say that tennis and drama provide at least the occasion for play (even if some tennis players, for example, are not actually «playing»), the list of possible play activities is much broader than we often imagine, including much of life - more, in any case, than just tennis, reading, dancing, etc..

That being said, as a follower of Christ I always try to adhere to my best behavior no matter where I am, alone or in public, and I keep that in the forefront of my mind lest I be judged like the restaurant patrons you have described in this article despite the fact I don't do any of these things (i.e. t shirt, bible, leaving pamphlets in lieu of tip, etc...) Will I become a better tipper after reading this?

We should understand some of the mistakes we have made in replacing an oral prose with book, prose, a public language with a private one not written, to be read aloud.

As long as the Bible is read, some attention to this can not be avoided, since much more of the Bible deals with public events than with the inner condition of individuals.

When Obama invoked Jesus to support same - sex marriage, framed health care as a moral imperative to care for «the least of these,» and once urged people to read their Bible but just not literally, he was invoking another Christian tradition that once dominated American public life so much that it gave the nation its first megachurches, historians say.

Their discomfort with cultural issues is reflected in their protests that matters such as partial - birth abortion, school prayer, or same - sex marriage are not proper items for political debate; they are rather «wedge issues» that conservatives illegitimately bring into the public arena in order to divide the nation (read: in order to cost Democrats votes).

This country was founded on the Christian God and if you dare to read real hisotry books and not those in public schools, you will get quite a shock.

Update (Feb. 1): In his first public comments, Saeed Abedini told the Idaho Statesman that «much of what I have read in Naghmeh's posts and subsequent media reports is not true,» but he plans to work on rebuilding their marriage in private because «personal issues are best dealt with personally.»

I tell you what, why don't you go read the book, then get on a public forum and talk.

But we must also be careful not to read the «no establishment» clause so as to restrict all public expressions of faith and hence dilute the meaning of «free exercise.»

I was especially dismayed by his reading of my assessment of the real contributions of evangelicals and Roman Catholics in U.S. public culture; my point (more an aside, really) was simply that, for various reasons, they can not replace the kind of service to civil society that the mainline provides — not that they do no service at all.

Explaining that many rights are enshrined in law, Nicholls added: «It's not clarified what that actually means and how that works out in practice and whether we are free to worship - to read the scripture in public for example - is that a right that we should have?

@LionlyLamb: You believe that the public school system's education is «outdated,» and yet you continue to read your 2,000 - year - old book of nonsense, which has not been updated since it's inception, and you believe that the Bible should re-enter the school system, because you believe that the 2,000 - year - old book of nonsense is a reliable source of truth and knowledge?

In fact, many people «heard» Luther's pamphlets read by someone else, both because some of the listeners were not literate and because oral reading was still a significant public act.

The divorce papers of Democratic lobbyist super couple Tony and Heather Podesta show that for a certain class of people government is not a public service or a field for settling partisan disagreements so much as an opportunity for self promotion: «As a married couple who both lobbied they strategically cultivated their public image,» one document reads, «and worked to build the «Heather and Tony Podesta» brand for the success of their shared enterprise.»

I haven't read the story behind the young man's book, but I suspect, Vic, that he went through a lot of pain and silencing before he finally made his story public.

Moreover, it is not only professional students that are affected; the general reading or thinking public has also moved into the new phase.

This effort, like that of the NCBCPS, relies heavily on the distinction made by Justice Thomas Clark in the 1963 Supreme Court decision forbidding devotional reading of the Bible in public schools: «Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment.»

Hecker's failure, as I read Shaw, is that he didn't grasp that there were corrosives built into American public culture that would eventually eat away at core Catholic convictions.

Not only was it read in public worship, but it was permissible for people to read it privately.

Hope you don't mind, but I read on your Instagram profile that you were in Portugal recently... Were you doing any kind of public appearance?

I reluctantly agreed, because like most folks, public speaking is not my favorite... continue reading...

When using public transportation, spend your time on something entertaining, like reading, so you don't fall back into snacking.

But NOT on public sites, read by children, unless you are an oaf.

If you've searched through our site before or read this blog consistently, you know that we preach a contrarian approach — but that isn't limited to solely betting against the public.

just reading around and all if not most rags are saying our net spend is # 46 million how can they tell that when they do nt even know what our real budget is if it was # 100 million then we are in profit by quite a bit i do nt really know what they base there assumptions on this is where you could do with swiss ramble to dissect what really was spent from what i could see most of our 5 transfers were covered by out goings and c / l monies earned debuchy - vela deal, chambers - vermalen deal, ospina - cesc and miquel deals sanchez c / l monies and other monies recovered from wages and old installment based deals this is the same with welbeck i would imagine if not then poldolski will be sold in jan to cover this as i think he was going to be sold and this would have covered welbecks transfer more or less also and people do nt always realize that arsenal have money coming in from more than one source to cover transfers not just puma and emirates deals we have property arm of the club which makes money for transfers also outstanding debts we are owed of old transfers we receive each year on song cesc maybe van persie and all other structured deals in installment payments sales we just flogged miquel as an example and all the monies from released wages and youths sold its a bit to complex to just say we have a net spend of xyz when arsenal do nt even make the budget public so they have no starting point from which to go from i bet you we have broke even or even made a slight profit as we are self sustaining it would make sense that we can break even or at least make the net spend under # 10 million each year at least screw then all we are the arsenal we do thing our way