Sentences with phrase «not teach any model»

Jesus did not teach any model of the church or ministry to be followed by those who believed in Him.

One obvious criticism of a simple two - class prediction is that we are not teaching the model to predict the degree of outperformance a stock might achieve.

Not exact matches

The kingpin of a fictional drug enterprise may not be your typical business role model, but Breaking Bad's Walter White can teach you a thing or two about what it takes to build an empire, including when not to delegate important tasks.

The program doesn't just teach men how to become great entrepreneurs, it also teaches them how to be leaders and role models.

While the class teaches a process to search and validate a business model, it does not offer any hints on how to create a killer startup idea.

The discipline of place teaches that it is more than enough to care skillfully and lovingly for oneâ $ ™ s own little circle, and this is the model for the good life, not the limitless jurisdiction of the ego, granted by a doctrine of choice, that is ever seeking its own fulfillment, pleasure, and satiation.

The theory is not uncontroversial even among Muslims, many of whom believe that teaching anything other than the «substitution» model is tantamount to heresy.

I learned about equality even from Paul, who taught that with the resurrection, something radical had changed — not merely ontologically, but functionally — in the relationships between slaves and masters, Jews and Gentiles, men and women, rendering those whose identity was once rooted in hierarchy and division brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ instead; who put a radical gospel - spin on the Greco - Roman household codes, breaking down the hierarchies so that slaves and masters, wives and husbands were charged with submitting «one to another» with the humility of Jesus as their model; who taught that power was overrated and that service will be rewarded; who surrounded himself with women he called «co-workers.»

While the letters are instructive, they are not formal, face - to - face teachings and so are not models or guidelines for how we should preach today.

Such a model of teaching is patently not perfect, but it does a better job than did the classical paradigm of bridging the gap between the discipline of New Testament studies as it actually exists and the students we actually face.

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.

For this reason the narrative portrait of Paul's relationship with the apostles is not simply meant to show that Paul was not taught by them; it is also meant to model the unity that is only possible in the fear of God and the revelation of Christ in the gospel.

Hardesty and Scanzoni, for example, conclude that the text in Ephesians 5 could not be teaching support for a hierarchical marriage relationship «because the dominant - husband submissive - wife model of marriage was the norm in the societies of that time.

Where this model prevails, it is easy to see why the names of Daly and Altizer would not arise as candidates for teaching.

«If you are an evangelical woman with teaching gifts, there aren't always role models in your local church.

They might not be / evangelical / Christians, but they are Christians by any normal definition of the word — they believe in Jesus Christ, they worship Jesus Christ, they believe that only through Christ can you be saved, they believe you need to try to model your life after Christ's teachings, etc..

«If you can only win or succeed or build or plant or whatever your particular brand is, by lying to get in, lying to stay in, lying to earn the support of your neighbors, lying to gain access to this place or that place, then you model, teach or just outright instill or replicate the kind of modalities that you want the next generations to embody and they don't have a ticket home,» he says.

If one believes the Bible to be inspired or a guide for Christian living but doesn't necessarily believe it is inerrant or the literal word of God, that doesn't have to mean we just throw it all out... it doesn't have to shatter your worldview (i.e. it's either all true or all false — fundamentalists love to think this way and teach others to do the same) Use the Episcopal 3 - legged stool model (Scripture, reason, tradition) or the Wesleyan Quadrilateral (Scripture, tradition, reason, experience).

While the Apostles were truly a less than desirable lot, between the arguments between themselves.The fact that they had Jesus there but never believed Him till He rose from the dead always gave me hope for my salvation knowing I was not a model of holiness that Jesus taught.

Those who claim to be Christian strive to follow the model he gave (one of total non-violence) and his teachings which incude love for neighbor and, more importantly, help other to put their hope — not in man's various pitiful efforts to rule themselves, all which have fallen way too short (since man was not created to rule man)-- but rather in God's Kingdom... the only true panacea to ANY and ALL of today's worldwide problems.

That's what happens when you run a man made religious corporation and not a Godly religion where Jesus teachings are used as a model in a 100 %.

Is this not the real meaning of the model prayer which our Lord has taught us?

I do not care if you are more of a topical teacher, or a book - by - book teacher, I believe that we must move away from the monologue model, and allow interaction from those we are teaching.

In other words, the true model for our Christian religion and teachings was not created by Peter and Paul, it was created by Constantine (and his scribes) who also declared himself the supreme Christian church leader.

The trouble is that not only has this understandable reticence deprived the dialogue of the vigor it needs to survive, but it has also produced another unfortunate consequence: Christians who think of Jesus as a model in other areas of their lives do not look to his example or teaching for direction in the dialogue itself.

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

Just because he's physically past it doesn't mean he can't be a role model and teach others to improve and better themselves as players.

We no longer have role models and we are taught not to share our personal problems with anyone else becuase the way people will view us.

Solving the lack of men in teaching is not about providing male role models — the concept that gets trotted out endlessly by the «Broken Britain» brigade — certainly not, at least, in the sense that Mr Gove implies with his idea of drafting in the military.

Some Waldorf teachers have gone on to argue how Waldorf homeschooling shouldn't really exist, because Steiner was laying out indications for a school setting and how this model is not possible for home for one child, let alone multiple children of different grades being taught at the same time.

And «I said it so I'm stuck with it» is role modeling that teaches your child that you don't know how to correct yourself when you've been unreasonable.

We attend to the physical, emotional and spiritual needs of our kids but let's not forget ALL the other things like instilling magic, role modeling, striving for balance, grinding out daily rituals, keeping up holiday traditions, juggling vacations, teaching finances, and the importance of voting... the list is endless.

There are advantages to potty train girls: you do not have to teach them to pee standing up and most toddlers are potty trained by women (whom they model their behavior after already).

Teaching at the table doesn't mean lecturing; it means modeling a healthy relationship with food.

These are skills to be taught as the child will not learn on their own or may learn from inappropriate role models.

I do think they can be taught in the classroom — I think most of us can think of a teacher in our past who helped us develop one or more of those skills — but I don't think we yet have an ideal model for exactly how to teach them in the classroom.

Teaching your children these «adult» behaviors and modeling them will encourage your children to do them, but keep your expectations in check, especially if your child has not napped or is hungry.

As child nutrition expert Ellyn Satter teaches in her «Division Of Responsibility Of Eating» model, mealtimes do not have to turn into a battle ground, where there is a «winner» and a «loser.»

Expressing hatred towards another team (group) would not seem to be a modeling of behavior most parents would want to teach their children.

In my ideal world, not only would parents model these communication tools for their children, but teachers would be taught these methods in all training programs.

Through responding with sensitivity and positive discipline, where we've modeled to our kids how to resolve conflict, we don't have to do nearly as much policing as some parents as our kids are just behaving the way we've taught them.

But I still wish I had a dad who was not only around but involved; another role model to teach me what my mom did her best to instil - values like hard work, integrity, responsibility and delayed gratification - all the things which give a child the foundation to envision a brighter future for themselves... That's why I try every day to be for Michelle and my girls what my father was not for my mother and me.»

Early - career researchers in neuroscience and other biological fields are not adequately aware of the issue, Button writes in her e-mail: «Research methods and statistical inference are key to the current model of bioscience research but their importance is not reflected in the time dedicated to their teaching in undergraduate courses.»

One problem, the researchers say: breaking the «cycle of ignorance,» in which teaching students lack good role models for teaching evolution because they weren't taught the subject well in high school or college.

As a child, I was taught a religious mental model of how reality works; and then as an adult came to understand that the religious model was so severely flawed it couldn't predict anything.

For 30 minutes the facilitator explained and modeled assertive resistance, teaching the girls how to make it clear that sexual coercion and unwanted advances are not acceptable, such as using a firm voice tone, showing confident body language, and stating their limits (e.g., «I don't want to have sex with you, so stop asking me»).

I'm not placing blame — we all act out of how we were taught and what was modeled for us, and these messages are deep - rooted and all around us — in movies and TV shows, in the lyrics of songs we hear on the radio, in our conversations, sarcasm, and jokes with friends and work colleagues.

Our studio model is to educate our students by teaching yoga, not simply leading sequences, with a priority on individualized attention that facilitates a safe and powerful practice at all levels.

When she's not practicing and teaching yoga, Gabrielle also works as a model and actress.

If you want to teach one - on - one to college or university students who don't have any expendable income yet, you might be of greater service offering your sessions at a lower price point, offering group sessions that are more affordable, or create an online program or subscription model your chosen perfect client can afford, will be happy to pay for and will give them the most possible benefit.