Sentences with phrase «still mean every word»

A year ago today, I still mean every word.

Not exact matches

There's still no word on if this means Garoppolo has the job for good — Beathard's injury was factored into head coach Kyle Shanahan's reasoning for Jimmy G getting the start — but regardless, Sunday will likely be the most excited Sunday of the season so far for 49ers fans.

«You can talk with someone for years, everyday, and still, it won't mean as much as what you can have when you sit in front of someone, not saying a word, yet you feel that person with your heart, you feel like you have known the person for forever....

(Digit is currently still in its beta stages, which means it's not available to the public yet, and no word yet on when it will be available.)

The word «invest» still meant: «To attempt to help create new economic activity by putting capital toward ** economically productive ** uses that benefit the larger society.»

This is especially true because other countries are not sitting still — in other words, we could actually lose ground as other countries become more competitive, so failing to take up these structural opportunities might still mean an erosion of the status quo.

And by all means please do make another response to me where you still pretend to not be responding to me because you can not live by your own word that you were done responding to me.

God still exists, of course, but from now on the word «exists» shall no longer be interpreted to mean «exists» in the literal sense.

If you still don't get it, I'll still be in the Bible, they just won't call me «Christ», it will probably be the word «savior», which means the same thing.

Catholic is a word that roughly means the Christian Community, that is why many protestants (except the ignornant ones who take it literally) still recite the Apostles Creed w / the word Catholic in it.

For the word «still» means «absent of all movement.»

Just because someone said some magic words over water does not mean it somehow changed the water... it is still just water... a simple chemical compound with amazing characteristics... one of the reasons it was incorporated into your relgion is because it was realized that water is a key to life... not divinity.

It can not be held that language in his case has become automatic; there is no decline in general intelligence, and it is still the case that words are organized through their meaning.

The Word was made flesh... This seemed to me a mysterious statement, part of that world whose meaning, beauty and sometimes pain still lay ahead in the realm of adults.

Worse still — and more to the point of my concern — the translation of the one Word of God into direct social and political terms has meant that the churches neglect the message for which they do have sole responsibility, that which constitutes their specific raison d'etre, and which no other agency in the world is called on or is competent to proclaim: the gospel of Holy Scripture which has the power to make people wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus (2 Timothy 3:15).

Do we mean that he was raised in the minds of his disciples: that as they remembered him and began to put a new and higher value on his words and deeds he seemed to be still so real to them and so uniquely important that they found that they could think of him as though he were still with them?

Our old English «flesh» has become a theological word, but it still means «meat».

Nevertheless, all this is only a «meaning»; the words still remain general and carry no obligation.

Their meanings, more elusive still, unbreathed await articulation, though I have heard in the beginning was the word.

By no means do I profess to be «there» yet, I am still a seeker, but I seek within the context of what God's Word declares, not ehat I hope to find.

Not sure i am convinced because how do you explain the verse an eye for an eye in the old testament there have always been consequences for wrong doing and stiill are for sin.If we believe the word then that word is from God not satan.As far as satan is concerned he uses violence as his tools of trade he works on our fears and is limited to robbing stealing and destroying he does nt have anything else.Violence confirms to us that there is a spiritual battle going on both on the earthly plane and in the heavenlys and the battle is over souls.The verse the kingdon of heaven is expanding and violent people take it by force is referring to that spiritual battle and as satan uses violence to expand his dominion so does God use violence to counter him.So what does he mean by that term for me i think it is saying that the the force of evil that satan uses or violence is overcome by a greater violence or force a more powerful one that being the Love of Christ.Through the cross we see that clearly portrayed and in our lives that very same battle is still happening right now for dominion be clear if we walk in the flkesh satan will have dominion over us but if we walk according to the spirit and abide in Christ we have freedom from our old nature.and satan.He can oppose us but he wont be able to influence us if we are in Christ.

But it still means that I have to get up every day and lay a hold of God, lay a hold of His Word, stir up that gift of faith that's on the inside of me and I've got to fight the fight of faith just like everybody else.

Lest the Deutsche Christen of the Nazi church (or anyone else) mistake what this means, a clear reference to der Führer follows: «We reject the false doctrine [that] the Church could and would have to acknowledge as a source of its proclamation, apart from and besides this one Word of God, still other events, powers, figures, and truths as God's revelation.»

We still could not say that we «just believe the Bible,» because even though we would now know for sure what words were used, there would never be consensus on what those words mean.

It depends on concepts that are still in common use as words, but that have been stripped of any real meaning.

It means that we can no longer presume that even our most sacred words still have meaning or value.

But they have been exposed and unmasked, which is what the Greek term really means (to «strip off») And I am disappointed that the phrase stoicheia tou kosmou is still being translated «elemental spirits,» when the word «spirit» isn't there.

If the Bible is still His breathed in Word, then does that mean He also breathed it into the translators of all 450 English versions of the Bible?

I think the word «vision» is often abused and can often mean «this is where I think the church I lead should go» I think I have been guilty of this at times, whilst still believing that I thought my «vision» was what God was giving me at the time.

Because the word doesn't mean the baby is still - born.

The practices of traditional spirituality — Bible reading, prayer meditation, fellowship around the Word and Sacrament, service of the neighbour — are all still valid provided they have a new orientation and new meanings.

If God promises that He will never again destroy everything that breathes, but then in the future He does so with fire, it seems that either He is playing word games (He only meant that He wouldn't destroy with water, but fire is still an available option), or, just as with the flood, He can not stop the destruction with fire when it comes.

If there is to be «suggestion from without» by means of words in order to evoke «moments of insight,» we are still operating on empirical grounds, for in order for there to be a common expression of such insight there needs to be «first a stage of primary expression into some medium of sense - experience which each individual contributes at first hand.»

We need to invent a new word for people willing to believe the writings of unknown authors, of unknown origin, of an unknown but ancient time, which is badly worded, internally AND externally (with modern science) inconsistent, full of statements with no actual arguments to back them up, with the only decently educated people to back it all up are theologians who twist the meaning of words and commit logical fallacies and still only try to prove that SOMETHING must exist, not that christianity is the truth.

For example, the meaning of the word «dog» is still communicated even if we use the differently sounding words «chien» or «cane».

And when this limit, which is God's honor, is reached by man, there is a twofold temptation, either on the one side to pass the limit, to take up God's cause, to try to avenge God's honor oneself, to use political means in the service of the living God in order to do this, or on the other side to remain within the limit but to continue political action as though it did not exist, in other words, to separate the two kingdoms, to argue that while God's honor is there at the limit of politics, and I can do nothing about it, nevertheless in my own sphere I can still act like a shrewd and effective man, pursuing politics to save what can be saved by human means.

For this reason, Heidegger believed, the words those earliest thinkers used, in their original meanings, were still inseparable from the event of being's self - disclosure; for a time, being really manifested itself — which is also to say, retained its impenetrable mystery — in the names that it evoked from those whom it addressed.

I suspect those who have broken out of (or are still in) these paradigms hear these words and it filters through to mean: you're still not doing it right, you're not doing enough, quit being lazy and do your share.

If I told this to a devout Christian or Muslim, due to the evangelical nature of religion, they would most likely quickly get into an argument on disputing which form of the Word is the true Word (interestingly enough, the Qur» an mentions the Bible as an incomplete version of the scripture, meaning that it is still scripture).

So even using more common words still requires explanation as to how they are used, and exactly what they mean in reference to theology and bible.

Some still find it hard to accept the meaning of the word as it was originally defined and used.

I believe that without knowing TaNaK (the First Covenant) we will all still go in a circle of what certain keys words in the Renewed Covenant (New Testament) mean.

when people get all huffy over my misuse of words or just plain wrong use of them i laugh, because i can bet my life that you still understood my meaning but rather then discuss the issue i brought up chose to insult thru the means of an english teacher — that i care not for... my point was a valid one and it makes me sad that you think yourself so far above me that you won't even bother with the conversation... tisk tisk.

The word solstice comes from an old Latin word meaning stop or to stand still, which is what the moon appears to do on this night.

«We are «old school», a handshake still has meaning for us, our word is everything.»

I mean my soup still turned out great, so maybe since the thing is covered the whole time that's part of its charm, but I'd love to hear from you if you have some words of wisdom on the subject.

While traveling in Turkey, still deciding on the name for the bakery, Ana and Maura would ask the locals what the word «Sofra» meant to them.

than Ozil when both are inform and is Ramsey not a better box to box player than Cazorla when both are inform and do not even deny even if you have your own opinion.Why not put Cazorla in Ozil's position and put Ramsey in the box to box position where he plays best.Can you imagine Giroud on the wings and Mertesacker at right back.I for one still stand by my word that Ramsey is a better box to box player than Cazorla yet peeps will deny.Which position did Ramsey play when he was at his best some seasons ago.To me he is better than him in that role.I remember the man utd match last season yh.Also Cazorla can do anything Ozil can do and do it better including shooting.I mean what is this we are not accepting the realities of the team but we ourselves are forging our favourites into the team.Do this and you will see we will be better.I just do not get it at allllll.Please share your views on my comment on what you think

He is being tutored on patience by noted golf shrink Bob Rotella, but there are signs that he still doesn't quite know the meaning of the word.

Great Reception???, tell you the truth Im not one of those gunners who started supporting the gunners during the invicibles or early Wenger double winning years, quite honestly i wasnt ineterested in football and I liked a certain Crespo and Shevchenko meaning I liked the blue half of London, surprisingly when Mourinho joined I stopped watching football all together, till one glorious Champions League Night, It was my first ever Match there was a certain 20 year old highly rated youngster who scored a wonder goal that day he played with such skill and passion ever since then I started supporting arsenal that was during the barren years.I actually liked Barcelona because of their similarity with the arsenal, so when Fabregas joined Barca I started to watch them a bit more I still loved Arsenal and I was extremely passionate, the other players i adored left in painful manners, while some left which was still painful: i.e Eboue.I always taught cesc would come back and when it was official he was leaving Barca i said Finally almost hosting a party.Well reports started coming out that he is going to join chelsea and i laughed so hard and said he would be the last player on earth to do that, when it became official words cant express how i felt, He was the reason I started watching football he lit up the emirates with exquisite touches through balls to walcott, its a shame I would have preferred he joined bayern, or remained in barca its terrible reading the comments he made recently about the emirates, This was a captain, someone who led, anyways, like ive learnt and Arsenal have learnt, We do nt live in the past Like Liverpool (no pun) WE ARE THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE (Crowley)(Puma) WE ARE ARSENAL.....