Sentences with phrase «second statement»

Personally, I've learned that it takes immense amounts of practice to be able to present that 50 - second statement under pressure.

There is scope for extension with the pie charts (e.g. create your own second statement for each pie chart).

As a person first and a trainer second this statement is first on my list whether working with my own dogs or your dogs.

Second statement on the matter?

In short, a 30 - second statement from Kawhi's camp would go a long way to dispelling what will probably be an insufferably long off - season full of wild speculation and concern over how this team will look next season.

The CJR Truth - O - Matic2000 finds Bannon's second statement half - true.

Foeller seconded this statement, noting that she and Hait had wanted to keep Wallspace going.

McCain came out with a second statement on Friday emphasizing his hopes for a bipartisan healthcare plan.

Kelly initially released a statement defending Porter, only to release a second statement nearly a full day after the story broke that expressed shock at photographic evidence of the alleged abuse published in the Daily Mail.

(Several hours after the tweet, Trump made a second statement in which he criticized «the K.K.K., neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.»)

Then he issued a second statement speaking out against domestic abuse in general without specifically condemning Porter himself.

Yet some analysts apparently were shocked that the second statement actually contained information.

However, the company put out a second statement hours later stating it did not intend to make an offer.

When that failed to reassure investors, CEO Sawhney added a second statement: «This development is clearly unacceptable and an appropriate management action will be taken upon completion of the internal investigation.»

Update: Ric McIver released a second statement on evening of Feb. 24, 2016, reversing his initial endorsement of the Calgary - Greenway nomination process.

And I consider your second statement very honest and intellectuality driven.

Whereas the scientistic expert refuses to endorse his second statement, he backs him up on the key point by insisting that no one can know anything about values.

While the first statement might be true, the second statement is not.

Regarding the second statement, he goes on to say that «Scripture indicates to us that «mutual edification» is the purpose of the gathering of the church.»

The Islamic State affiliate initially only claimed responsibility for the attack but a second statement posted on the IS - linked Aamaq news agency said two IS «martyrdom - seeking fighters clad in explosive vests and carrying machine guns and hand grenades attacked the church».

Could it be that the references to the rooster crowing once and then twice could, in fact, be refering to the same instance, the second statement simply being more specific than the first?

There was no second statement concerning another 3 denials.

It means quite the same as the second statement and sounds as modern as the second.

This sentence is a double statement, with a first statement on God and a second statement on the world.

Second statement: The Bible has stories about the divine - human relationship.

I turn now to my second statement in Part 2: We live on the boundary of post-modernity.

The immediate implication of this, which is really my second statement in shorthand form, is that the Bible is thus a human product, namely, the response of two ancient communities to their experience of the Sacred.

This leads me to my second statement.

Take the second statement, and twist it for a religion that has several major and many many minor sects, and you have ISIS and al Qaeda.

Yet the second statement, which indicates that God prehends the world and passes the result of that prehension back into the world, can not refer to a primordial nature that is «untrammeled by reference to any particular course of things.»

In 1997, we were able to issue a second statement, «The Gift of Salvation.»

«Thanks to Communism» The second statement is of particular interest, coming from an extended interview with journalist Jas Gawronski which was published in the Milan newspaper La Stampa and then reprinted in the official Vatican paper, L'Osservatore Romano.

In that second statement, do you see how a positive is stated in a negative way?

The bible is so wrong on so many counts.And ain't nobody going to a place that doesn't exist, so you're right about your second statement, though bigoted.

The second statement uses literary license, obviously science doesn't create airplanes, engineers do.

Unfortunately, this isn't so, because the same people who say there are three - gods - in - one also say that gays can't marry, and that second statement has the force of law.

As End Religion wrote, your second statement is too restrictive.

As for the second statement....

As for the second statement, if there is indeed a Christ who belongs as much to non-Christians as to Christians, there would be no difficulty with the assertion that only through Christ can salvation come.

My second statement has also been intimated at an earlier point.

However, the second statement shows how I came to embrace my belief in the topic at hand.