The
whole point of this question is that there is a dispute about the claim that you are making in your answer and I am looking for concrete evidence one way or the other.
The main
point of the question above is that since both Jesus and God the Father knew that God would raise Jesus from the dead (Matt 12:40), in what sense what Jesus forsaken by God?
I think I have a pretty good understanding of it now but continue to be surprised by how frequently site users focus on verbiage and ignore the
actual point of the question.
However, if you don't listen well in the first place, you might miss the
entire point of the question, and as a result, your answer will fall totally flat.
And that's fine —
the point of these questions is to teach math, not to excite the people solving them.
I simply reached
a point of questioning the morality of such a view within the church.
She was homeschooled and the homeschooling community was proud... until the slut - shaming began and some started to criticize her because she wore a bikini, even to
the point of questioning the genuineness of her Christian faith.
Also, if it is established that there is only «one truth», what would be
the point of questioning anything at all?
I think you are very confused over
the point of the question.
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.
Supporters of religions are especially insidious in that they conveniently use as evidence the very same questionable holy books that are
the point of the question.
Somewhere along the lines we evolved to
the point of questioning our existence.
As an atheist, I question EVERYTHING, even to
the point of questioning myself «questioning», and even my own «beliefs».
They often go to
the point of questioning the salvation of those who don't do these things directly.
@CE: you totally missed
the point of that question.
And as to pointing out that vegan does not equal organic, well the amount of time spent informing me how to just go get organic vanilla when that wasn't
the point of my question at all suggested that it might not be a fact you were fully aware of.
That's
the point of my question.
Though I am not certian what
the point of this question is.
Not exactly
the point of the question, unless you were going with irony.
@nicodemus13 That's
the point of the question.
However, the rest of
the points of your question are not done via Internet.
I think it should be «some inequalities are more unequal than others», but that's
the point of my question — how is that fair?
The point of these questions is to find whether, when push comes to shove, voters side more with the «Right» or «Left» view of the way forward.
Black seemingly missed
the point of the question — whether intentionally or not.
If you aren't confident and instead of seeing it as an opportunity to succeed, see it as an opportunity to blow, then it becomes very easy to get too focused on what you are saying and miss
the point of the question you are actually answering.
I'm pretty sure Kushala was aware of the subscription (I referred to it as well as proxy fees when I said it would cost a lot) but I thought
the point of his question was, can I play Frontier here in the West, on my non-JP Vita?
That's
the point of the question.
I know it isn't
the point of your question, but note that interest payments directly reduce your return (as do property management fees).
I can explain why I think these things, although I think it's not
the point of the question.
They don't contribute to your credit score, you don't have any choice or control in the repayments, you can't forget to pay or have already spent the money, so you can't get reclamations invoked against them, they aren't going to cause you a problem if you're suddenly unemployed, they barely incur interest, and (as is
the point of this question) you don't actually HAVE to pay off the capital.
Whatever the explanation
the point of the question is that Earth had a species seemingly on the verge of being capable of creating a technological civilization yet still didn't manage it for another 100,000 years.
Ds and Fs were given out for answers that were overly ambiguous or that dodged
the point of the question.
Though the liberal media tried to play these tapes down, even to
the point of questioning their authenticity, letters seized in the 2011 raid on his hideout in Pakistan confirmed that Osama Bin Laden was something of a climate change fanatic.
I'm not sure this addresses
the point of the question.
The point of my question was to force lawyers to question everything we do — not take any process or practice as a given.
@feetwet
The point of the question is not to investigate the hows, whys and wherefores of it, I just want to know if there is a country where it is a commonly available mode of using an attorney.
Edit — I've just realised that I slightly missed
the point of your question.
Your point about leading questions being allowed for hostile witnesses makes
the point of this question even less clear to me now.