Sentences with phrase «taught me years earlier»

Reading the steps laid out in a book triggered my visual memory of her teaching me those years earlier.

Fortunately, I identified a niche for myself in the field — a novel area of research in translational control — and wrote a proposal jointly with a permanent member of faculty at the University of Sussex, U.K., who had actually taught me years earlier.

Not exact matches

Most were in their early - to - mid 40s and had taught for an average of 14.4 years.

Readers may recall a Medium post earlier this year by venture capitalist Hunter Walk, in which he described how interacting with Amazon's virtual assistant device Echo, which responds in a female voice to sharp commands addressed to the name «Alexa,» was teaching his young daughter bad manners.

And I've been teaching at Columbia for a number of years, I have been doing that 22 years now, but you know that time in the early 2000s, I've been doing it for a bunch years in and we had been making money using the same principles that Buffett uses, you know buying cheap good businesses.

As the federal Conservative Party led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper taught Canadians earlier this year, fixed election date laws are merely a suggestion.

Stanley Druckenmiller gave an excellent talk early last year where he mentioned one of the two key things his mentor taught him:

Christians have the problem of not understanding that everything Jesus preached Buddha had already taught in the East 400 YEARS Earlier.

The evidence indicates that the written sources of our Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are not later than c. AD 60; some of them have even been traced back to notes taken of our Lord's teaching while His words were actually being uttered... We have then in the Synoptic Gospels, the latest of which was complete between 40 - 50 years after the death of Christ, material which took shape at a still earlier time, some of it even before His death, and which, besides being for the most part 1st hand evidence, was transmitted along independent and trustworthy lines.»

The subjects they teach each year are: Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, and Early church history.

And no one has yet come up with a satisfactory substitute for family etiquette training in the earliest years of life to foster the development of the child in such principles of manners as consideration, cooperation, loyalty, respect, and to teach the child such etiquette techniques as settling disputes through face - saving compromise.

Those earlier Christians who believed Scripture teaches a young Earth and human origins only 6000 years ago could not explain Indians in America without unsupported speculation.

Not direct «Paulinism,» then, but the leaven of Paul's teaching influencing the common faith of the earliest church in the West, and hence affecting the tradition as it came to Mark some years later — that is what we may reasonably look for in Mark's Gospel.

Melville was not a systematically educated man: though backward in his early schooling, he taught himself literature by devouring haphazard naval libraries during the four years of his sailing adventure.

We can say such things, for example, as that he was born in Palestine during the reign of Herod the Great; that he was brought up in Nazareth; that he lived the normal life of a Jew of his period and locale; that he was baptized by John, a proclaimer of the early coming of God's judgment; that he spent a year or more in teaching, somewhat in the manner of contemporary rabbis, groups of his fellow countrymen in various parts of Palestine, mostly in Galilee, and in more intimate association with some chosen friends and disciples; that he incurred the hostility of some of his compatriots and the suspicion of the Roman authorities; that he was put to death in Jerusalem by these same authorities during the procuratorship of Pilate.

• Fact # 9: I taught at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary early this year and spent some time with the President, Byron Klaus — who is a Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary graduate and keeps up with (and says good things about) his friend Paige Patterson, whose seminary has taken a position against some practices associated with Pentecostal Christianity.

There is now a movement among young modern Zoroastrians to go back to the earlier purer form of their faith, not unlike movements that have occurred within Hinduism and Christianity under such names as «Back to the Vedas,» or «Back to Christ,» or «Back to the gospels,» in an attempt to throw off the accretions of the years which are felt to have obscured the original teachings of those fajths.

From our earliest years we were taught about the terrible monster «Doubt».

No one questions the words that Plato wrote, no one says «I doubt Plato really said that,» yet Plato was in existance around 400BC doing his teachings, but the earliest copies of Platos writings that we have in our possesion are from 900AD... that's a 1300 year gap as opposed to the New Testaments 25 - 30 year gap... That speaks for something, I believe.

But I came to see that what was important was neither what I had been taught as a child when my brother and sister died at a very early age nor what would provide some immediate comfort to me when (as was bound to happen and of course did happen some years later) my parents also died, leaving me with no close living relations.

With minor though growing disturbances, this outlook of mine had lasted through college, through six years of further study at home and in England during the war and the early «peace,» and then through six years of teaching in college and seminary.

Whereas «human reason and knowledge» was called very important by 96 percent of UU congregational leaders who took part in the multi-denominational Faith Communities Today (FACT) survey released early this year, the Bible was termed only «somewhat important» by 50 percent and had little or no importance to 48 percent as a source for worship and teaching.

She will teach there for 23 years while her own children move on through older Sunday school, on through grade school and high school and college, marriages and divorces and bankruptcies, through all kinds of things — she will be here still, teaching the youngest children «Jesus Loves Me» while their parents attend early service.

However, where Paul definitely was the driving force behind the establishment of early Christian congregations and never waivered in his assertion that Jesus is the Messiah, at the same time he prided himself in waiting 3 years after his conversion to even learn what Jesus taught!

Is it possible and after reading about it i kept on thinking «i will sell to my soul for 20 carats get out shut up i will never ever sell my soul to you oh god please help me and this is continuing for a few days i am afraid that i have sold my sold to the devil have i please help and still i think god's way of allowing others to hate him us much worse even you know and can easily think think about much better punishments like rebirth after being punished for all the sins in life and i am feeling put on the sin of those who committed the unforgiviable sin (the early 0th century priests) imagine them burning in hell fire till now for 2000 years hopelessly screaming to god for help i can't belive the mercy of god are they forgiven even though commiting this sin keans going to hell for entinity thank you and congralutions i think the 7 year tribulation periodvis over in 18th century the great commect shooting and in 19th century the sun became dark for a day and moon was not visible on the earth but now satun has the domination over me those who don't belive in jesus crist i used to belive in him but now after knowing a lot in science it is getting harharder to belive in him even though i know that he exsists and i only belived in him not that he died for me in the cross and also not for eternal life and i still sin as much as i used to before but only a little reduced and i didn't accept satan as my master but what can i do because those who knowingly sin a lot and don't belive in jesus christ has to accept satan as their master because he only teaches us that even though he is evil he gives us complete freedom but thr followers of jesus and god only have freedom because they can sin only with in a limit and no more but recive their reward after their life in heaven but the followers of satun have to go to hell butbi don't want to go to hell and be ruled by the cruel tryant but still why didn't god destroy satun long way before and i think it was also Adam and eve's fault also they could have blamed satan and could have also get their punishment reduced but they didn't and today we are seeing the result

After a year or so I began to teach them about, «GOD's PLAN» for His Church, and I gave the Early Church Pattern to them, as an example.

In the early years of the church, teaching about Jesus was by word of mouth.

However, after less than a year of study of early Christian teachings about the Scriptures from the primary Church Fathers (far less than one to two hours a week of study) I can totally answer the whole issue of God commanding the death of the Caananites, etc..

Most of the sermon on the mount was taught by Buddha 400 years earlier... why doesn't Jesus give proper credit for Buddhas teachings which seemed to be the cornerstone of what Jesus was re-teaching?

I can see where Jesus was a Buddhist, considering the majority that he allegedly taught was taught by the Buddha 400 years earlier, but I do not see how people were christian long before jesus lived.

The cartoon from earlier today was inspired by something I read years ago that I've tried to apply ever since, and that is that I should only speak or teach what I actually believe or know to be true.

World responsibility in education further entails serious attention to the teaching of foreign languages, beginning in the early years of school, when children can quickly and naturally learn another tongue in the same fashion as they learned their native language.

For you see, My solitary early years of growing up was without and Godly reformations nor even any teachings of Christ.

Providers of early years education will be now expected to teach children about fundamental British values in an age - appropriate way, according to the Department for Education.

The cartoon from earlier today was inspired by something I read years ago that I've tried to apply ever since, and that is that I should only speak or teach what I actually believe...

John Paul II, presenting his «Theology of the Body» complemented what had begun many years earlier with a renewed understanding of the spiritual realities of the importance of humanity created male and female, expressed in particular by the theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar, and developed by Joseph Ratzinger (now, and gloriously, Benedict XVI, and still developing and teaching it).

The fact that man has made up thousands of gods... the fact that many of those stories were taken from previous cultures, the fact that 90 % of what Jesus allegedly said was taught by the Buddha 400 years earlier... FAR more evidence of any of the supernatural claims, which is absolutely zero, nothing, not one shred of evidence ever.

Earlier this year, Faggioli had tweeted, somewhat gnomically: «One could teach an entire course on fact that in top US universities the course on Vatican II is taught by recent converts to Catholicism.»

We really know nothing of Jesus» youth and early manhood, though much of what appeared later in his brief public life and in his teaching must have been the result of his experience and thinking during those years.

The late Pope did more than any pope of the last century to defend and reassert beyond any doubt the stable and objective character of Catholic teaching - more even than Pius X with his great encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, since modernist incursions had become very much more powerfully established during the pontificate of the unhappy Pope Paul than they had been in the early years of the century.

He drew the hostility of the Nazis with two early works on race, and in 1938 he fled to America, where he taught for many years, mainly at Louisiana State University.

Many of us will have been taught them from our earliest years and we will return to them in the Holy Year ahead.

In his early years as an educator, García taught landscape gardening, olericulture, and pomology.

When I took my 3 year Ayurvedic training in the early 1990's we were taught not to heat honey.

I spent my early years in Statesboro, Ga., when my father taught at Georgia Southern College.

Johnson settled in to watch Each 1 Teach 1, the same Florida - based collective that produced Ben Simmons a year earlier and D'Angelo Russell one season before that.

After teaching Russian at West Point for three years, he served at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in the early»50s.

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

story for the gods... I taught we are talking about finding our rhythms as early as possible and create a good atmosphere to our team with our support?????? why crying over split milk???? for how many years have u been complaining over wenger out... please go and sack wenger then we will all be happy with you

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.....