Sentences with phrase «over the centuries so»

Third hand accounts are the best you come up with but are contained in a book that has been revised countless times over the centuries so therefore has no credibility.

What excited audiences was not just the contemporary work but the revelation that for over a century so many painters had relied surreptitiously on photographs as aids to composition, tonality and realism.

Traditional contracting practices have been built up over centuries so Accord is the catalyst for this new wave.

Not exact matches

There are many ironies: Germany, which so frightened Europe for nearly a century, as it had in late Roman times, is now being beseeched virtually to take economic suzerainty over chunks of the continent where the physical German occupiers in bygone days were violently unwelcome.

Gynecologists have been using the speculum for over a century, and so far, it's worked.

These dire predictions are troubling for the American worker but perhaps less so for sales professionals who have become accustomed to hearing warnings about their job security for over a century.

Interestingly enough, it's actually so simple, and so straightforward, that it would have helped almost any investor make quite a bit of money over the past couple of centuries regardless of market conditions provided he or she had a long enough time horizon.

Looking over three centuries of Greek experience, Aristotle found a perpetual triangular sequence of democracy turning into oligarchy, whose members made themselves into a hereditary aristocracy — and then some families sought to take the demos into their own camp by sponsoring democracy, which in turn led to wealthy families replacing it with an oligarchy, and so on.

Doing so year in and year out for over half a century is actual proof that JNJ is a powerhouse.

After all, radio dominated home media for half a century before TV took over for the next 60 years or so.

Since the Protestant Churches have no central authority they can interpret The Bible any way they want, which is why so many erroneous versions were destroyed over the centuries.

So her words are taken at face value with no corroboration whatsoever, and then embellished over the centuries by motive - driven commentators, novelists and artists?

So that means that the collective works of Theologians and Historians over the centuries has been all wrong and walla, here comes this Professor and she has it all right in one book.

I have no idea what AvdBerg practices, but he BELIEVES that his interpretations of scripture are so obviously the true ones that they aren't even interpretations, which makes it all the odder that so many hundreds of millions if not billions of christians over the centuries apparently missed these supposedly transparent truths.

We talk about the gains we've made as a society over the last half a century or so, but we still have a long way to go.

Why did people have to go and declare him God so that now, and for centuries before, we fight over him?

Over the past half century or so, too many parts of the Catholic world have come to think of «reform» as something we conjure up from our own cleverness, as if we must puzzle out what makes the Church «relevant.»

All you've done is stolen and re-presented a warmed over version of Pascal's Wager, a piece of «logic» so bad it was eviscerated as such centuries ago.

Rejoice with me Jesus paid my frightful price — Took me to Him — Into HIS Mystical Body — That we shared in life the same tormented cry; He had walked in His Way the same streets as I — Insane — I was never at a total loss; I KNEW the Blessed Mother choose my Cross In Her maternal love for me and for us all; THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION — Conceived In LOVE such a Holy Cross for me; Through Mary Jesus was someone I could serve — She knew it was the Cross that I deserved And so did I — for over a quarter of a century I stood with Her at Calvary — a wretched sentry With the Communion of Saints, and Blessed Kateri Till Easter came for me -

(It just about managed to do so, only reviving when the Jesuits took it over later in the century, and today's University College Dublin is proud to count Newman as its founder.)

So, for instance, in 17th - century Europe a huge dispute arose over the Hebrew vowel points and accents, which were not originally part of the Old Testament texts but were inserted by the Masorete scribes hundreds of years later.

If I had decided to chime in I would have recommended reading Ian Bradley's fine book Abide With Me: The World of Victorian Hymns (1997), where he details the heated debates in 19th century England over whether to have choirs, and if so, if they should be kept at the rear of the sanctuary in order to «back up» the congregation in its worship rather than being a visual distraction in the front.

So sure the Nazis threatened them, but over the centuries they been threatened by everybody.»

We 21st Century Americans tend to think these are boring and irrelevant, and so we mostly just skip over them and get on to the next verse.

As Anthony Trollope observed over a century ago in Phineas Finn, the fault of a prominent politician was «not arrogance, so much as ignorance that there is, or should be, a difference between public and private life.»

Yes, the atheists are so peaceful, over 100 million deaths in the 20th century alone.

The tribe of Levi is completely untraceable after so many forced exiles of the Jews over the centuries.

So the evolution of the Church's understanding of the gospel over the centuries is not a matter of «paradigm shifts,» or ruptures, or radical breaks and new beginnings; it's a question of what theologians call the development of doctrine.

So, today's doubters need to be pressed hard as to why, if the alternative versions of Jesus (mystic, moral teacher, misguided healer) advanced over the last few centuries can be taken seriously, it never occurred to any sceptic in the ancient world to make these very obvious challenges.

The era that began with the revolutions of the 18th century is not yet over and we still have so much to learn before it can be.

Only recently have we even had the tools to test our guesses (like the big bang), so I imagine our understanding of the world, it's history, our origins, and evolution will radically improve over the next century.

As the state has taken over social welfare from the Church in the past two centuries, so Christians concerned for the poor have increasingly said that we must be political.

The philosopher, George Herbert Mead, was acknowledging this when he wrote in Movements of Nineteenth Century Philosophy that the notion of Order which looms so importantly in modern science and philosophy was taken over from Christian theology.

As a scientist, I have trouble defining a term that has been so carelessly bandied about over the last century and a half.

And what are these dangers the author keeps mentioning but not enumerating and how do they compared to the dangers posed by organized religion and other organized philosophies like fascism and communism, «manifest destiny» and other philosophies that those oh so nobly «organized» people have «blessed» us with over the centuries?

Back in the nineteenth century, the Supreme Court explained that churches have authority over their internal decision - making because «All who unite themselves to such a body do so with an implied consent to this government.»

The various cultic interpretations of the poems remind us that such poetry as this is never created new, but rather always draws from the articulate lover of last spring and the spring before and the spring before that, and so on back not merely over the years, but over the centuries and even the millennia.

What Jesus taught has been so effed up in the retelling over the centuries that no one knows anymore.

Why, over the centuries, have so many heterosexuals waited until the girl was pregnant to marry?

Over a century ago Thoreau sounded this note from a hut beside Walden Pond: «Man's capacities have never been measured; nor are we to judge of what he can do by any precedents, so little has been tried.»

The honeymoon, that is, between the now enfeebled and increasingly remote souls who for over a quarter of a century had carped and sneered at Pope John Paul II (and by the same token at «PanzerCardinal» Joseph Ratzinger) but who had nevertheless hoped against hope for a Pope who would be somehow reborn if not as a fully paid - up liberal, as a Pope at least who would go easy on all that counter-cultural JPII stuff about being «signs of contradiction» and about continuity with the pre-conciliar Church and who had breathlessly found (so they thought) that, lo, it was even so, in the wonders of Deus Caritas Est. «On his election last spring,» carolled The Tablet, «the former CardinalRatzinger was widely assumed to have as his papal agenda the hammering of heretics and a war on secularist relativism, subjects with which he was associated as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.»

We have Greco - Roman wrestling today, but it has evolved a bit over the centuries, and so to understand what Paul was talking about here, we need to learn the rules for wrestling as they were in his day.

@Chad «I have never seen anyone successfully argue that Hitlers actions were anything other than motivated by german nationalism, however, I do think horrendous theology in Christianity over the centuries has contributed a great deal to anti-semitism, so I do think we as Christians have an ownership of a great deal of the holocaust and I wont shy away from that.

This naturally, even unconsciously, influences them, and can lead to the situation where a historian carefully disentangles the original Jesus of history from the Christ of faith of the first - century Church only to reidentify him with the Christ of his own faith and so reinterpret the teaching all over again.

I also note that they rarely are aware that the church's understanding of the terms has changed over the centuries, especially in the last century or so in response to critics of the Bible.

In the sacramental mystery cults, which were so influential in the Mediterranean world of the first century, the term (or its equivalent,» Lady») was regularly used to designate the deity who was believed to preside over the cult.

24 And how indeed could Western Christianity and theism have defended for so many centuries a conception of God so glaringly inconsistent with itself and inimical to the biblical portrayal of God as the heavenly Father who grieves over his estranged children?

So get over your hangups and move into the 21st century.

The fact is that over the centuries we have learned and gained knowledge about how things work so just keep on saying that there is something else that created the whole shabang doesn't really explain anything either.

For it is possible to think that man is the image of God only insofar as man is a spiritual being, as indeed so many Christians have thought over the centuries.