Sentences with phrase «only change we have seen»

The only change we have seen is the change that was forced on him.

Not exact matches

MoviePass has also made another, smaller change, saying it will now restrict all subscribers to seeing a movie only a single time.

By the end of his two hours in the store, Cornell had some germs of what only a few months later, as we'll see, are significant changes he is planning.

Those smitten by the sleek products that Jobs introduced in his much - anticipated stage presentations have rarely seen them as anything but revolutionary, and claimed that they repeatedly changed not only the expectations of what modern electronics can deliver, but our lives.

What I think has changed only in recent years — and we still need more — is data to drive to help this become clear for those who need to see it.

JoyRun investor Josh Goldman, a general partner at Norwest Venture Partners, said in a statement, «Food delivery has seen only minor incremental changes to the challenging operational issues, and no previous startup had really changed the unit economics in a sustainable way.

(Only consumers who paid careful attention to the tiny print of the ingredients list on the back of the box might have seen the change.)

Tax reform of this magnitude is the biggest change we've seen in a generation and will require intense focus to understand not only how the changes apply at the federal level, but also to navigate the ripple effect this is likely to have on state taxation as well.

«Deregulation» and other changes have seen these controls abandoned to the point where short term interest rates are now virtually the only monetary policy instrument.

(Jesus not only taught only Jews, he instructed his disciples to go ONLY to Jews, something that did not change until mid-Acts after Peter got told by G - d differently, read Acts 11 = 13 and see that the disciples were ONLY going to Jews until thonly taught only Jews, he instructed his disciples to go ONLY to Jews, something that did not change until mid-Acts after Peter got told by G - d differently, read Acts 11 = 13 and see that the disciples were ONLY going to Jews until thonly Jews, he instructed his disciples to go ONLY to Jews, something that did not change until mid-Acts after Peter got told by G - d differently, read Acts 11 = 13 and see that the disciples were ONLY going to Jews until thONLY to Jews, something that did not change until mid-Acts after Peter got told by G - d differently, read Acts 11 = 13 and see that the disciples were ONLY going to Jews until thONLY going to Jews until then).

Since no one has yet to SEE an atom, the idea of the structure of the atom can only be inferred by experimental evidence — yet I see no Republican trying to stop teaching the structure of the atom in school — oh that's right, its because major corporations and industries rely on this science (pharm, weapons manufacturers etc etc) whereas the theory of evolution is merely think piece of scientists on how life on Earth changes over tiSEE an atom, the idea of the structure of the atom can only be inferred by experimental evidence — yet I see no Republican trying to stop teaching the structure of the atom in school — oh that's right, its because major corporations and industries rely on this science (pharm, weapons manufacturers etc etc) whereas the theory of evolution is merely think piece of scientists on how life on Earth changes over tisee no Republican trying to stop teaching the structure of the atom in school — oh that's right, its because major corporations and industries rely on this science (pharm, weapons manufacturers etc etc) whereas the theory of evolution is merely think piece of scientists on how life on Earth changes over time.

not only is the placebo effect very real, you don't have to have any actual change interventional treatment (in other words, you don't need to add a sham treatment / placebo for the effect to be seen)-- just the increased attention and tracking / support by interested parties can improve clinical status

Impatient as I am to see radical changes made, I have also come to realize that changes are sustainable only if they are made through processes of widespread participation.

This is the only way I've ever seen a bully change.

Irrelevant but personally changing question that I have found - In certain areas of the rain forests in South America there are tribes that have never seen a person from the outside world in thousands of years and have only in the last couple of years been discovered by aeroplane.

Americans are slow to adapt and are defly afraid of change, see how the african american community is stiill only allowed to vote under the voting rights act of 1965 (that's right, it still not a law) Why are they not up in arms,,,,, «yet we have a black president... maybe you can take a page from their book (passive aggression).

I am tired of how people who believe in their own «gods» try to shove religion down other peoples throat, what I mean is if your religion doen not let you support guns then don't support it but also don't try to change it for everyone else who doesn't see it your way, I don't go around asking for you all's religion to remove crosses from public view because I don't believe and to remove the bible from public places (i.e. Hotels, Bookstores, etc.) so it can only be seen in their respective places of workship, Remember WE ALL ARE BORN ATHEIST, YOU ARE NOT BORN WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THERE IS A GOD, YOUR PARENTS HAVE TO TELL YOU THERE IS A GOD, A DEVIL, HEAVEN AND EARTH... THEN IT BEGINGS.

We must research the Greek and Hebrew and even beyond to the Acadian era and see how words have changed and the literary usage of words not only in religious writings but in extra-biblical and literary and common writings that relate to the scripture that we are interpreting.

Five hundred years later, the Church hadn't changed its mind; England's only legal carol throughout the 17th century was «While shepherds watched their flocks», since it was biblically accurate («I saw three ships»?

The only alternative was the radical Humanist alternative which the Church had rejected with emphasis and fear 60 years earlier, and that alternative in even its most modern presentation is still untrue, and even more untrue, and it is the cause of the totally unexpected and devastating fruits of change which we see all around us.

«Of all the things I have seen and heard, there is only one message that can change people's lives and hearts.»

The tensions of holding the word «Both» in my heart has changed my definition of a «right» story — not only for women but for a lot of the tensions we see around us in the world today.

Reality Not much has changed, did you see in the pope's papers that old Ratzinger was back selling indulgencies, an audience wuth himself for only US $ 13,000, what a deal?

Well lets see, Maryland was founded as the only catholic colony so has a solid concentration, but we know demographics have changed since the 1700's.

Jeremy have been asking the holy spirit for his help with this and in regards to the lame man that Jesus healed I do nt believe that sin was the issue for him just like the blind man was it his parents or did he sin the answer was neither but so that God would be glorified.What was the sin that may have been worse for him.The two situations are related of the woman caught in adultery the key words being go and sin no more only two references in the bible and will explain later the lame man we see at first his dependency on everyone else for his needs he cant do it he is in the best position to receive Gods grace but what does he do with it.Does he follow Jesus no we are told he goes to the temple and Jesus finds him now that he has his strength to do things on his own what his response to follow the way of the pharisees that is what is worse than his condition before so he is warned by go and sin no more.We get confused because we see the word sin but the giver of is speaking to him to go another way means death.Getting back to the two situations of the woman caught in adultery and the lame man here we see a picture of our hearts on the one our love for sin and on the other the desire to work out our salvation on our terms they are the two areas we have to submit to God.My experience was the self righteousness was the harder to deal with because it is linked in to our feelings of self worth and self confidence so we have to be broken so we are humble enough to realise that without God we can do nothing our flesh hates that so it is a struggle at first to change our way of thinking.brentnz

The only one who can not is Lucifer because he do not want to, God heart is not made of iron, if there are evil people alive in this world it is only because God want them to repent to, there are most evil people who as a children or teenager was sweet but because of another being became evil, Only God know what it did make them change or their pain but only one things is sure as God he did have the first seat to see all their pain and live, and to my point of view as a Father it is by no means lesser than the pain he did feel for them or them victimes, like a electric chonly one who can not is Lucifer because he do not want to, God heart is not made of iron, if there are evil people alive in this world it is only because God want them to repent to, there are most evil people who as a children or teenager was sweet but because of another being became evil, Only God know what it did make them change or their pain but only one things is sure as God he did have the first seat to see all their pain and live, and to my point of view as a Father it is by no means lesser than the pain he did feel for them or them victimes, like a electric chonly because God want them to repent to, there are most evil people who as a children or teenager was sweet but because of another being became evil, Only God know what it did make them change or their pain but only one things is sure as God he did have the first seat to see all their pain and live, and to my point of view as a Father it is by no means lesser than the pain he did feel for them or them victimes, like a electric chOnly God know what it did make them change or their pain but only one things is sure as God he did have the first seat to see all their pain and live, and to my point of view as a Father it is by no means lesser than the pain he did feel for them or them victimes, like a electric chonly one things is sure as God he did have the first seat to see all their pain and live, and to my point of view as a Father it is by no means lesser than the pain he did feel for them or them victimes, like a electric chair.

When Our Saviour Yeshua Mashiah came it is importnat to note that he didn't try to change the Romans i.e the government at that time as His thing was not against them, he came to help people as individuals and its only when we as people change can we begin to see change in the world and this is why God is a very personal experince and not religious, we need teachers but not the religious types, we need teachers who guide us to God with us and this is what Our Saviour did, we have the freedom to choose but we can only choose if we have what to choose from and being informed helps us to do this

secondly he was not the only one in the church who was a «non believer» many others do not «believe» as well as myself and yet non of us saw a problem with something that was being done out of respect and unison for the majority not for just one person opinion, and last, no one ever said he «had» to pray the only command was to bow your head and stare at the ground counting how many toes you had for all we carried, do what you want if choose not to pray but just bow your head in uniformity not cry about it blow it up and change the way events happen — if you have and complaints or questions please FEEL FREE to contact me [email protected]

As we have seen, physical acting must be fundamentally a relating, and relating can not be understood in terms of mere «impact,» for this can result at most in only change of place — and indeed, as was clear to thinkers like Descartes, Newton, Leibniz and Kant, on the conception of the physical as in itself passive «matter,» even change of place could not occur upon mere impact, there being necessary also an «act» setting the impacted body into motion.

This means that fundamentally the «change» entailed in the «acting» of a physical existent can not be essentially locomotive change; rather locomotive change must be seen as either only one aspect of the change involved in and constituting «acting,» or as only the resultant of the change involved in «acting» — the latter is the view of Leibniz and of Whitehead; I would myself incline to the former alternative.

Amazing Steve... Nice analogy, the only thing I would change in your story is that Ted and Jesus didn't really see the house, but rather they hypothesized the house..

Thats what the «good books says» Now more recent versions of «the word of God» have changed these ridiculous creatures to more reasonable creatures, such as oxen, etc. but only because they knew readers with today's knowledge would see this for the rubbish that it is!

At the end of the day you only have control over self and your actions, never the actions of other and you only have the power to see change in your life with the aid of God's Spirit which will cause you to produce good fruits like love, mercy, goodness kindness....

thus seeing energy is constant in the universe and only changes form then the universe has no beginning and no end; so no god required.

The Herbs — As you can see, the only thing that I have changed with the confit recipe is to add the sage which goes quite well with mushrooms; however, you can use any herbs that you want.

The only thing we changed was that we saw Swanson had a hot and sour broth that we used instead of vegetable broth!

In a light - coloured frying pan or pot (so you can see the colour change), heat the sugar and water over a medium heat - stir only just until the sugar has dissolved then put the spoon down and do NOT stir the mixture until instructed.

I've seen the changing of the guard for not only the Tomb of the Unknown, but also in the Capitol Rotunda as a soldier lie in state.

Only change I would make is seeing how to double the gravy — I personally thought it could have used more and found myself scraping the bottom of the plate for more!

Nothing and what is he leaving behind coqoliin xhaka eleny monreal walcott!!!! So he has had 80 million in wages and thats what he cares about and that also goes for everyone running OUR club that do nt give a monkeys about the title or europe it will only change when totally fail and finish 10 - 12 for a few years and there pockets get hit and i can see it and that will make me hate wenger kronke gazidis and all those stuck up arrogant directors of our beloved club it will be like going back to Don howe managing the club and 17000 on the stands I hope i am wrong but can anyone see it any other way????? Time for change and change now Troy deemy is right no balls I wouldnt want to go into a battle with any of them backing me up White feathers all round

I tend to agree but the only one thing I would say in mitigation is that teams generally do not like rotating defences / GKs — you will only see changes generally because of injury or drastic loss of form.

either way I seriously suspect we will be linked with a large number of players and the only one we will see in an Arsenal shirt come august will be Granit We nger has NOT changed in anyway and has already stated that Giroud will lead the line next season which rules out Lewondowski, Aubamayang, Higauin and any real top signings and IF France win the euro (wich will be no real indication of anything much) Wenger will sing Giroud priases to the heavens and state that we have the top striker in europe.

the same is true about your statement.we all know most of the top teams bar juventus play either4 -3-3 or 4 -2-3-1, which are very similar.We know that Wenger isn't a tactical wizard and hes very cautious, so why would he change formation?the only reason i can see would be to accommodate players who might not get into the team i.e Ramsey on the wing.Which is not a good idea

Corrupted club have accepted this footballing buffoon for last 5 years... And serious fans could see he was past his sell by date back then... as long as their pockets are appropriately greased... What is so shocking is that after this recent string of results most serious clubs would have called time on the man but apparently the ball is still in his court... Empty emirates is only way to change this sad state of a once great club

Two of my good mates are arsenal fans, and for a couple of years now I have been telling them it would require a change in manager to get us challenging, surprisingly after not having seen them for much of the season only last week they were still undecided as to whether we should get rid and one of them is a season ticket holder!

Well, you only have to look at united to see that changing managers and spending millions doesn't guarantee success.

This year, we saw big changes in Wenger's recruitment achievements: not only have Arsenal spent a lot (including 35M on a central defender!

@jonm — I can see where you are coming from with your list and would only make 2 changes.

The reason i would like to see pep here at arsenal because we play the way he knows to manage, with only couple of changes we could have success and to get those couple of top players he is the man not Arsen

The only way the squad would be refreshed would have to follow a change of the manager, Wenger is Wenger (which IS AFC at this point in time), while things are as they are regarding organization and management, what you see is what you get: same ol, same ol...