Sentences with phrase «point questions where»

Many of our tests were for five - point questions where the answer was only one or two points of the entire problem.

Not exact matches

«We've gotten through the point where we're produced all the data and answered all the questions and I think that process will kick off this summer.»

I ran a study at one point where I asked young people, a whole lot of teenagers, a very simple question.

Framing some possible questions and ways to talk about yourself can take some of the stress out of events - just don't overdo it to the point where you're worrying about remembering canned responses.

«In the course of the interview, there comes a point where the interviewer says, «Do you have any questions?»

It sounds simple, but the five Ws (who, what, when, where, why) are a great starting point for questioning your data.

The question then becomes: Will we ever reach a point where this uniqueness rises to the level of being a personality worthy of protection?

As Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress, he's likely wondering how his company got to the point where he must submit to public questioning.

Charles: Right, I think that's a huge demographic question that I haven't seen any really good statistics on because of course most of the boomers are still in their late 50s or 60s, early 70s and they're not yet to the point where the older generation like the boomer parents, the so - called silent generation, which has sold their houses or given them to their offspring, their adult children.

While I certainly don't want to claim that we have finalized our research, we have reached the point where we are confident in putting forth a clear definition and to definitively answer the question, «Is this something I should be paying attention to?»

Honestly that's a side point though, the big question is where did anything come from, not just life specifically.

The answer you'd get to this question would largely depend on the point in history when you asked it and the level of scientific achievement in the culture where you asked it.

In this way of conceiving evangelicalism the issues may be focused on questions of anthropology where the basic starting point is an Augustinian tradition of human inability (the «bondage of the will») leading as a necessary consequence to the classic Reformation articulations of election and predestination.

So to answer your question, I finally got to a point where I couldn't keep rationalizing and making excuses for why the world didn't match all those things I believed as a Christian.

The point of my post is that I was raising a question about your implicit suggestion that his theology lead him to where he is today.

So the Church working through the churches faced the question of revolution and came to the conclusion that there was a point where people might and should rebel against their Government.

Nonetheless, they do have points in common — namely, the points where their boundaries meet.5 Therefore, in terms of one of those common points, our question can be answered as follows: the space - time distance between A and B is O.

This is where Hartshorne could, and in some implicit ways does, drive a wedge in Brightman's view, because Brightman is willing as a point of method to collapse metaphysical questions into epistemological questions.29 Hartshorne is not so willing, and thinks personalism must employ both inductive (empirical) and transcendental argumentation to support its own claims.

For the moments we are weak, we can rely on his strenght; at the points where we seem to be giving up, he, in his fears and questioning, clung to his only thruth: I am the beloved son of God, on me his favour rests.

I consider myself a christian, with religious knowledge and general knowlege, however I do not hold to a set of views dictated by an organized religion, I believe the organized religions are where we have gone wrong, as someone pointed out earlier to most «religious people» to question ones faith or organization is wrong but that is exactly what the bible tells us to do... test ALL things to see what is true.

If the candidates where to respond to these questions with scriptural references, they could point out a few flaws in the questioning while stating their beliefs and thereby come away looking better than before.

Unlike Mark, where the parables mainly pointed to the meaning of the kingdom of God, here the story is told in answer to the question: «Who is the neighbor that I am supposed to love?»

The question here explored, in full awareness of its far - reaching consequences, is whether we have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime.

Ward examines this question in chapter 8, where he points out that in Judaism and Christianity morality is inspired by a vision of a God of supreme goodness, whose nature is meant to be reflected in human society, and whose final goal is «the transfiguration of the cosmos by a fully realised personal unity with God».

His strategy, which he refers to as a «recurrence» to this phase of philosophic thought, is to back up to the point where he is sitting there cheek to jowl with Descartes, and then to start all over again, this time avoiding the hopeless dualism which has kept Descartes, and the whole tradition which constitutes the phase of thought in question, from completing the Copernican Revolution.

At one point, he stated that he is writing from a position of practical concern, which is where all questions of theology should come from:

Most of us have found that place somewhere on the far side of a shadowy valley that stretched from the wreck of our own first naïveté to the point where we finally gave up the need for sure answers to every question.

The God of the Bible requires faith — reasoning everything out in detail to the point where there are no more questions or mysteries would eliminate the need for faith.

Colin William points Out that the direction of ecclesiology in the sixties was a movement away from yesterday's question of where the true church is to be found within the established order of Christendom, to today's question of where the living church must occur as witness to Christ's presence in the secular world.

To get to where I think this is going, the mere fact that at one point «I will say «I don't know» to a question you will pose, such as «where did stars comef from?»

The theologian then finds himself at a point of tension, where he is trying to reconcile the «old» and the «new», i.e. the old heritage and the new questions and knowledge.

We question our identity as God's children and come to a point where our hearts reach out to Him and ask, «am I really yours?»

Yet, one day, science will most likely * IMO * get to the point where they will be able to answer that question.

Even now, we are at the point in history where there are not nearly enough scientists to answer the more and more questions that come up... As Solomon said:

But there comes a point where we start to ask deeper questions, like «where are they getting the guns?»

Believing anything to they point where you have stopped thinking and questioning is wrong.

Many of the questions are similar though, so my wife says that maybe I should create a «FAQ» section to the blog, and that way, after I have answered a question, I can point people to the post where I have already answered it... I think I will follow her wise advice.

Any genuine struggle for justice could only begin at the point where such limits are called into question and where the rights of one are seen also as being valid for the other.

Where Rubio's statement went all to heck is the point where he questions the scientific consensus on the Earth's age, which calls into question everything we have learned in the past 500 years, and the validity of the scientific method itWhere Rubio's statement went all to heck is the point where he questions the scientific consensus on the Earth's age, which calls into question everything we have learned in the past 500 years, and the validity of the scientific method itwhere he questions the scientific consensus on the Earth's age, which calls into question everything we have learned in the past 500 years, and the validity of the scientific method itself.

It is a point, moreover, where civil religion and civility become much the same thing.2 I do not feel comfortable with the student's question of whether I am a Christian because the claims I make in the name of Christianity, while real, are nevertheless importantly limited.

As a physician, has your «God complex» increased your arrogance to the point where you dare question the Creator over matters that are clearly Man's doing, as your own words imply?

Decisions had to be made from time to time as to where or when services of the church would be held; the church needed to be told of the impending visit of an apostle, or of some prophet or teacher from abroad; a question has been raised as to the good faith of one of these visitors, and there must be some discussion of the point and a decision on it; a fellow Christian from another church is on a journey and needs hospitality; a member of the local congregation planning to visit a church abroad needs a letter of introduction to that church, which someone must be authorized to provide; a serious dispute about property rights or some other legal matter has arisen between two of the brothers and the church must name someone to help them settle the issue or must in some other way deal with it; a new local magistrate has begun to prosecute Christians for violating the law against unlicensed assembly, and consideration must be given to ways and means of meeting this crisis; charges have been brought against one of the members by another member, and these must be investigated and perhaps some disciplinary action taken; one of the members has died, and the church is called on for some special action in behalf of his family in the emergency; differences of opinion exist in the church on certain questions of morals or belief (such as marriage and divorce, or the resurrection), differences which local prophets and teachers are apparently unable to compose, and a letter must be written to the apostle — who will write this letter and what exactly will it say?

The questions remain in the backcourt, where Keith Williams and freshman LaBradford Smith are being counted on for the leadership and three - point shooting that were so absent last season.

Now maybe I'm just looking at it from the perspective of someone who is interested in this type of thing, but I can't for the life of me see a position where anyone can hear that the president of Chechnya wants to pay you a bunch of money to fly over and do promotion work, and you don't question that at least to the point where you spend absolute maximum 2 minutes looking him up.

Injuries are part of the day - to - day fears that run through a managers mind; Rafa has allowed the those fears to run rampant on his mind to the point that he's questioning just where the club might have been if Torres was healthy.

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

obviously its hard / impossible to know what is really going on with him still at our dugout but i have had this feeling of sm fishy stuff going on upstairs, almost to a point where i felt sympathetic towards le prof.i couldn't take it anymore, seeing my club detriment this low was unbearable, geting humiliated not once, not twice, not thrice i couldn't help but say enough is enough, this heart ache is way too much, we need fresh ideas fresh evrything.my Question is why would le prof put himself through all this, getting his face tarnished taking the punches for upstairs bosses for adecade or more?

In my mind, there is no question he will sign and be here next season, but the real issue is fans are slowly but steadily turning against Arsene and it might reach a point where nothing will really be good enough, because people have grown tired of Wenger.

Case in point, the literal death penalty's effectiveness in curbing bad behavior has been called into question, to the point where 19 states have banned it outright (https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/study-88-criminologists-do-not-believe-death-penalty-effective-deterrent).

But, I'm at that point where there's that question.