For every verse there is an equal and opposite verse, so let
's not take things out of context.
Not exact matches
How can we *
not * argue that you're
taking things «
out of context» when, indeed, you are quoting
things out of context????
THE RELIGIONS AGREE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THEM WITH AN OPEN HEART... They don't agree when you
take things out of context and force them
not to.
Unfortunately,
taken out of context one can make the Bible say
things it truly does
not say.
Well, the comment is made that this author shouldn't
take things «
out of context.»
Chan
takes lines
of Bell's writing
out of context and makes
things even worse by attributing some statements to Bell that are
not made in «Love Wins» («but some
of his followers could easily construe these ideas»)
You have actually spoken like most people who do
not understand the bible, i.e.
taken things out of context.
Oh, and I for one have no problem with you using anything I say in your class as long as you don't selectively
take things out of context.
Maybe he shouldn't be
taking things out of context and trying deceive people.
youre the one
not seeing it correctly... yo uarte adding stuff into it and
taking things out of context..
Don't tell anyone, but sometimes I wonder if the best
thing that could happen to this country is for Christ to be
taken out of Christmas — for Advent to be made distinct from all the consumerism
of the holidays and for the name
of Christ to be invoked in the
context of shocking forgiveness, radical hospitality, and logic - defying love.
We can't debate civilly, we can only
take certain
things out of context and point fingers everywhere.
Try
not to
take things out of context.
The church is made up
of humans, therefore faults are inevitable, and yes the fundamental church have
taken some stands that are
not biblical, infact if you read the bible and read the chapters,
not just the verses they claim their beliefs come from, you will realise that alot
of fundamentalists
take the scripture
out of context, telling the churcht hat the bible tells us one
thing when infact it tells us another.
Taking things WAY
out of context there, aren't you Bill?
Can't we wait until Hannan actually says something racist (I mean aside from the whole Enoch Powell
thing) instead
of simply
taking him
out of context?
But when you have a killer body like those ladies have — and again, they're musicians, they're artists, they're
not models — they're gonna
take things out of context.
That's
not evidence, even if the subjects were doing the
things they said they were doing, in the stolen,
taken out of context, heavily redacted emails.
We can go back to Stephen Schneider for that, and then a few dolts will claim his statements were
taken out of context and what he was really saying was that scientists just don't have the time and space to provide caveats, assumptions, if / and / but, etc, even though he clearly advocated resorting to this very
thing.
As for the rest, I'd suggest you ask the denier to some work, and actually point
out where in the article it states that global warming isn't happenning or isn't caused at least in large part by increasing greenhouse gas concentrations, and to be on the safe side (because
things can be
taken out of context), ask him / her to also quote the abstract and the conclusion.