Sentences with phrase «only end point»

When you drive with only the end point and some fun in mind, that is why your driving record affects life insurance rates.

Not exact matches

Not only did he help us lay out a plan (which allowed us to meet year - end tax obligations), he pointed out several other items on our return where we had been missing out on an opportunity to save.

In order to find the potential turning points that will take an industry in a new direction, leaders must give their employees permission to stop focusing only on what needs to be accomplished by the end of the day or week.

At one point in 2005, criticism from the community that Mozilla managers were being too secretive led Baker to hold a moratorium on all corporate - only meetings for several months; it only ended when managers needed to discuss a human resources question too personal to share with everyone.

Despite a firmer start to trading and a weaker pound, the blue chip FTSE 100 turned lower and ended the session down 0.5 per cent at 7502.69 points, only slightly outperforming a negative European market.

However, this provision runs out at the end of 2016, at which point you'll only be able to deduct expenses that exceed 10 % of your income.

The DJIA ended the day a full 20,66 points lower, at 305,85 points, only two points above the day's low.

Each of the periods below had their own idiosyncrasies, but the only thing we can definitively say is that at some point, they all came to an end.

Dan Loeb's hedge fund firm Third Point LLC has just recently disclosed their Offshore Fund's performance and we see that they were up 3.4 % for the month of April and were up 19.2 % for the year compared to the S&P 500 which was only up 7.1 % for 2010 at the end of the month.

When you read the context and see that Paul was speaking on the subject of those who don't believe in the resurrection, but believed in baptism as Christians, you realize that he was saying that what is the point of baptism if you are only going to end up dead.

I am only pointing out that mistreatment and ridicule for the truth, is just never ending.

In other words, it may be true that «the owl of Minerva flies only at night,» but Kierkegaard suspects that the metaphor hides a profoundly dubious claim: that it is possible to reach a stable end - point of reflection from which Minerva's owl can take off, and to which it can later return.

At one point, for example, Carter describes beautifully the creedal portions of the Catholic belief in the sacraments, only to end by claiming that «the entire purpose of the sacraments was to give an outward sign of belief.»

Most new testament scholars say that the Gospel of Mark originally ended with the story of the women who go to the cemetery, only to encounter a mysterious young man pointing to Jesus» empty tomb and announcing the resurrection.

My point is only that rough approximations to measuring economic welfare strongly suggest that the time for viewing increase in gross product as the appropriate goal for national policy is ended.

We can validly call for the ending of this form of idolatry only as we can point toward the prospects of a less idolatrous society, one that has a better chance of serving God through serving God's creatures.

But from God's own perspective, the end of history is simply the point at which we encounter the reality that was true all along — that God is indeed eternally and self - consistently God but manifests Godself to history only as its forward flow is terminated.

The Christians are very quick to point out that only the doomsdayer group thought the world was coming to an end.

I love Barth not only for his honesty, depth, and focus, but also because he let us watch him develop his theology until the end of his life to the point where many theologians then and to this day consider him a major contributor to the idea of universalism.

Here is the fourth point, which in my opinion is and most beautiful of all... note that in the end the only thing the father has for the older son is the only thing he has for the younger son — pure, unconditional love.

The issues of chief difficulty arise at the point of questions as to whether Jesus expected the Kingdom to come on earth or only in some realm beyond earthly history, and in the latter event, whether he expected earthly history to end very soon by a catastrophic divine intervention when he himself would return in glory to reign over a transfigured world.

But I believe that following Jesus into death is the only way that violence and finger - pointing will ever end.

We have no final end, only ends - in - view, which, when attained, provide us with starting - points to seek further growth.

If there is confusion in the conception of the ministry today, whether only among those who once held to the ideal of the preacher or also among those who have maintained the ideal of the priest, that confusion appears at both points — in inability to define what the most important activity of the ministry is and in uncertainty about the proximate end toward which all its activities are directed.

And I ended up rejecting it, because I think that the emphasis on the law completely misses the point of the law and misrepresents the good news message of Jesus that anyone and everyone can have eternal life simply and only by believing in Jesus for it.

There are four affirmations about Jesus Christ that historically have been stressed in Christian faith: (1) Jesus is truly human, bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, living a human life under the same human conditions any one of us faces — thus Christology, statement of the significance of Jesus, must start «from below,» as many contemporary theologians are insisting; (2) Jesus is that one in whom God energizes in a supreme degree, with a decisive intensity; in traditional language he has been styled «the Incarnate Word of God»; (3) for our sake, to secure human wholeness of life as it moves onward toward fulfillment, Jesus not only lived among us but also was crucified for us — this is the point of talk about atonement wrought in and by him; (4) death was not the end for him, so it is not as if he never existed at all; in some way he triumphed over death, or was given victory over it, so that now and forever he is a reality in the life of God and effective among humankind.

A person might be concerned only for himself and interested in the other only as means to his own ends, or he might actually be concerned about the other to such a point as to be willing to sacrifice his own ends.

From a vantage point within the faith, disestablishing the church can not be justified as an end in itself; it can only be a means, a strategy, a mode of transition to some better end.

well just thinking about these wars in the muslim / mid-east world over religious differences (which may reflect mental states in many ways) in a world where most realize that living in the present moment is best way to happiness and being in the moment in non-strife and awareness through the teachings of masters such as found in the buddhist, taoist, zen, etc., etc., etc. spriritually based practices of religious like thought and teachings, etc. that to ask these scientifically educated populace whom have access to vast amounts of knowledges and understandings on the internet, etc. to believe in past beliefs that perhaps gave basis and inspiration to that which followed — but is not the end all of all times or knowledges — and is thus — non self - sustaining in a belief that does not encompass growth of knowledge and understanding of all truths and being as it is or could be — is to not respect the intelligence and minds and personage of even themselves — not to be disrespected nor disrespectful in any way — only to point out that perhaps too much is asked to put others into the cloak of blind faith and adherance to the past that disregards the realities of the present and the potential of the future... so you try to live in the past — and destroy your present and your future — where is the intelligence in that — and why do people continually fear monger or allow to be fear — mongered into this destructive vision of the future based upon the past?

We would end up with a fractured canon, with bits and pieces taken out of their Scriptural context, with a different body of canon for each theological point of view, and with those portions of Scripture which we find uncomfortable not only ignored but disposed of altogether.

In the end, however, Feezell's moderate view (which leans toward the «conservative view») is not too much different in practical effect from my or Hartshorne's moderate view (which leans toward the «liberal view») in that I am only delivering a carte blanche for abortion in the early stages of pregnancy and pointing out that the fetus in the later stages of pregnancy has a moral status analogous to that of an animal, a status which I think deserves considerable attention on our part.

It extends to all situations in which a judgment or a decision can be made only at the end of a debate or confrontation between adverse opinions and conflicting points of view.

From another quite different point of view, too, the reconciliation which was accomplished by Humani Generis between a moderate theory of evolution and the teaching of faith, can only be regarded as a beginning and not as an end.

I think the only good point made here by Ron Goetz (and it is a very important lesson) is that if you are uninterested in letting the scriptures speak for themselves unto truth, and if you purpose to twist the scriptures to a predetermined end then you absolutely CAN find and justify ANYTHING.

Its main point, which comes only two sentences from the end, is expressed this way: «To those to whom truth has been revealed, who continue in the tradition of the Holy One's followers, the call is not only to offer words of praise, confessing that Jesus is Christ the Lord, but to offer our lives as the instruments of this Lord of peace and justice.»

Thus, doxology is not only to be found at the beginning, but indeed also at the end of theological reflection; doxology forms its starting point and aim.

But as Novak rightly points out, «after this concession (and despite Grotius» disclaimer of any atheism on his part), it is not too difficult to understand how Kant saw theology as having validity only when it is made to serve the ultimate ends of ethics.»

Insulting folks as a means to an end seldom reaches anyone, and even IF your points are valid, introducing them with arrogance and disdain, only causes those you wish to reach to shut down or to search for ways to disprove what you are saying.

The myth of a mystery religion (or the symbol of the comparative - religious school) could only point Out what ought to be; as the «law» of the Hellenistic world it would simply be a new legalism ending like the Jewish law in despair (Rom.

(From the Christian point of view (which in this coincides with the biological viewpoint logically carried to its extreme) the «gathering together» of the Spirit gradually accomplished in the course of the «coiling» of the Universe, occurs in two tempos and by two stages — a by slow «evaporation» (individual deaths); and simultaneously b by incorporation in the collective human organism («the mystic body») whose maturation will only be complete at the end of Time, through the Parousia.)

Beginning and end only have reference points inside of our timeline.

The courage of U.S. Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall, for example: Marshall insisted for two years that the only way to defeat Hitler and his war machine was to land a large force in France, beat the German army, and wrest control of the continent of Europe from the Nazi regime — a point Marshall had to carry against the virtually unanimous opposition of his British counterparts, who, like Winston Churchill, preferred a «periphery» strategy that would peck away at the Third Reich before a quick, end - game invasion administered the coup de grace to a collapsing German empire.

Religion is directly involved in ALL wars big or small, if we're going to point fingers, point them to ourselves for that's the only way we can put an end to this.

Taylor points out — and I can not do full justice to his argument here — that not only was Jesus a threat to Rome and the religious elites who were allied with it, but he ended up being crucified — executed - by the imperial authorities.

Both in The Phenomenon of Man and in The Divine Milieu, Teilhard indicated his conviction that the «end» for which man is intended — and not only man in the racial sense but each man specifically — was a relationship with God, conceived as the Omega - point or the goal and end of the creative process as well as the transcendent origin and initiator of that process.

From the world's point of view it was bad enough when the early church only witnessed to the imminent but future transformation of the structures of the world by a final act of God at the end.

Peirce ends the paragraph by remarking that this «common sense idea of continuity» is not that found in «the calculus and theory of functions,» according to which continuity «is only a collection of independent points.

The consolation addressed to Hezekiah certainly relates to the end of the siege but only as a kind of accessory conclusion, the real point being the renewing of the covenant between the Lord and his people under the rubric of «the remnant.»

Because of this incompleteness God's subjective immediacy does not end, despite God's always having a specific satisfaction, and that is why there is, only in God's case, no perishing, With respect to all these points my argumentation rests on the reversal of poles in God (by which an aim is possible for God which is formally independent of any concrete actual world, while Christian does not use God's reversed polar structure but uses God's everlastingness as his main argument.

We might even grant, if only for the sake of argument, the pro-choicers» point that pro-lifers are not sufficiently attending to other legitimate issues, including those that might prompt a mother to end her pregnancy.