Sentences with phrase «simply means a way»

I use the Bengkung Belly Binding method - which simply means a way of wrapping and tying the wrap around your hips and abdominals to support your muscles as they heal after birth.

This simply means a way for men to meet older women otherwise known as cougars.

Not exact matches

Natural language simply means consumers and potential customers are now asking questions of the Internet the way they would a person.

Its original meaning was simply a way of describing workplace tools and systems that used web, online, internet or electronic means.

«I guess he simply meant that 30 - year mortgage rates at 4 % are very cheap, and this is a way to borrow cheaply.

Feedback is useless without action, whether that means simply explaining why a process is in place or reviewing the company's systematic problems and brainstorming ways to improve them.

«And that can mean looking way beyond simply making a product that's cheaper or a little bit faster or a little bit prettier.

The term «hack» simply means to think of a different, easier, more efficient way of doing things.

It would simply mean conceding that Europe does not yet have the institutions needed for the currency union to survive, and that the capital, labor, banking and fiscal frictions that remain in place ensure that the flexibility eliminated by currency union will re-emerge in more destructive ways.

The way to identify mean reversion is not simply to ask whether a variable has recently returned to its mean.

What we mean by that is the brand could lose some clients simply by way of negative headlines.

A 2015 study of Internet use distribution found that only about 27 percent of Internet users are 55 or older, meaning our survey likely found its way to primarily younger business owners simply because they were more likely be using sites where the survey appeared.

I specifically stated that yours is simply one of many possible ways for a human to find meaning and purpose.

I mean, you can't have it both ways — but somehow you have Paul paying 0 % homage to the teachings of God from the Tanakh — this is simply not true.

By dominate, I simply meant that they are way more than the men in numbers.

I mean, if Paul somehow managed to continue picking up steam all the way to the convention with front - runner wins how will the RNC simply blow him off?

This is not to undermine your point, but simply to note that not all men or women mean or take it that way.

It simply doesn't matter whether they mean it or not, just get out of harm's way.

Simply I honor the source of the Bible meaning that it is generally where God choses to meet people in terms of revelation but it is not the only place nor the only way that God reveals himself.

In the first way, absence from the future could mean simply reason's lack of knowledge — an either complete or incomplete lack — of a reality that is already finished or fully evolved.

Some people, who don't understand what a human society means, and simply want one that is efficient and scientific, see it the other way round.

Those who think God can not mean well toward us because he «sends» us suffering can prove their point only by showing that there is a way to run the universe, compatible with the existence of other real powers than just the supreme power, which would be more fully in accord with the totality of interests, or by showing that God sends us the suffering while himself remaining simply outside it, in the enjoyment of sheer bliss.

It simply means that God does not condemn all ways but one.

Indeed, to be simply the same in character and knowledge now as I was twenty years ago would mean that I was not the same person who until then had been changing and growing in a normal way.

It is re-casting an indefensible statement in such a way as to change its meaning rather than to simply admit a mistake.

To influence another will mean to recreate or further create oneself in such a way as to influence (but not simply determine) the other's partial self - creation, as the other is made aware of one's own self - creation.

The word has this rich and varied meaning, not because one wants it to have it, or believes that it ought to have it, but simply because on can not talk about the Christian life without using the term «Christ» in this manifold way.

This is a travesty of Christian theology, which is not simply an answer system but is, instead, a way of connecting real life questions with fundamental and ultimate answers — which are by no means achieved or given overnight.

Words of knowledge can stop people in their tracks in a way that more «natural» means simply can't.

Second, epistemologically speaking, Bergson means by «matter» the way in which the intellect approaches all things (whether vital or inert) as if they were simply the sums of their parts — parts that are subject to being disassembled and re-assembled in any order whatsoever to serve the abstract ends of the intellect itself or the purposes of the organism that intellect serves.

Now I agree to stay within these bounds of meaning as long as we are simply trying to understand Bultmann, or to interpret him; but the moment we get beyond these tasks to the larger constructive task of a postliberal theology, I want to take issue with this way of dealing with myth.

Update: By this I simply mean that some couples prefer that one person be more dominant - not necessarily the man, by the way - and I don't think that should be categorically condemned.

His disciples became known as «Oratorians» (which means «men of prayer»), his first meetings were known simply as «the Oratory», and Philip himself was tireless in encouraging his friends to pray, and devising new ways to make this easier for them.

The word kosmos in ancient Greek actually means «order» and not «universe,» and in their mythology the Greeks claimed that the cosmos emerged out of Chaos, which is simply a way of terminating the wonderment in a non «explanation, indeed in a nonsensical non «explanation.

This means that, so far as we know, Jesus never spoke about homosexuality, and we simply have no way of determining what his attitude toward it might have been.

Why believe in real truth - that actually confronts the deep multiplicity of what it means to be human, and actually change your life - when you can believe in your own shallow truth that simply adds to one's self - justification and denial of reality, and remain the way you are?

The modern concept of a state of motion makes it clear what is meant: something which does not really become more but simply alters, and in this sense comes about, but in such a way that what is new in it is always identical with the relinquishing of something of the old.

It simply means to most people the way in which anyone earns his living.

And by the way, understanding a passage does not simply require you to know what YOU think it means, but also requires you to know what OTHERS think it means.

However, in our present consideration, «artistic expression» means simply the careful unfolding of an idea in a way consonant with the content and mood of that idea.

This does not mean you have to agree with what they do, but instead, you simply view the things in their life that you don't agree with the same way you view all the sinful habits and choices you make in your own life.

I can not here investigate why language in our time has become flat, nonallusive, and impoverished, but simply to observe that it has and ask what this means for our churches as they seek to recover ways of worship which shall be more adequate to the object of worship, and more fully reflective of the long history of the people of God in their life of worship.

That's simply not what religion means, certainly there are religions that have practices that attempt to «work their way to God» in some fashion, but that isn't what makes something a religion.

As the Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditions have known for centuries, and many other churches have discovered too, the only way that this extraordinary narrative will yield its meaning is quite simply if we play the events at their original speed — God's speed, not ours — living in and through the events day by day: the grieving farewells, the betrayal and denial, the shuddering fear in the garden, the stretched - out day of torture and forsakenness, and the daybreak of wonder, color and tomb - bursting newborn life.

Jefferson in his many words is todays paul by basically testifying to a lost society by preaching «The heart «that is what God wants not the shell which will rott away.I can stand with this truth until the day I die because I also have had disagreements in my church about this same topic.I dispise religion and encourage salvation which come from having a relationship with Jesus.Many may ask how do i have a relationship with him?by simply asking God through prayer, not what we know as pray but simply given up and telling God he win.That is what being righteous means saying «lord your're right and i will believe and obey that.Last i will like to thank jefferson for this clip, becuase for so long I have been feeling like todays churches in not like the first churches.They are stuck into their four cornered walls preaching to those who already obtain the word and people who already think they are perfect, but what about the weak and the sinners who we are suppose to love, go after, preach to, help and deliver the same way as Christ camed for the sinners so do we also be like him.Jefferson basically telling all us young people and old no matter who have suffered in the world, the church, or no matter what party or the past that there is hope and «God wants that person» not the sin but the person.Jefferson wants us to know that God can become personal with us and we do exist or can exist in the christian world not because we are perfect but because «he is perfect and he saw our broken spirits and rescued us!

This simply means that protecting children becomes a «way of life» for the Christian community, not something to be put back on the shelf once a policy has been adopted.

The article simply reveals the ignorance (and I don't mean that in an unkind way) of some Christians who take verses out of context.

Simply because we eventually go the way of all flesh doesn't mean that our being means nothing to us or anyone else.

Another example of this is the way that some teach that women can not take any kind of leadership in the church on the basis of the Greek word authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12, a word which is found nowhere else in the New Testament and is very rare in Greek as a whole, and which never seems to mean simply «have authority» as some people insist it means.

When I say that we don't have a way to measure the fine - tuning, what I mean is that we simply don't know how many universes there might be..