Sentences with phrase «teaches about responsibility»

The movie teaches about responsibility but in an understandable way.

I get quite concerned when churches and church leaders preach and teach about our responsibility a to kill, bomb, and destroy other people in the name of freedom and justice — or worse yet, in the name of Jesus.

My husband and I are waiting for the arrival of our first child, and I cant wait to teach him about responsibility in this world.

Or, a few weeks ago, Lynn Good, chief executive of Duke Energy, who told Bryant that she had an «ordinary» childhood, highlighted the fact that her parents «taught us about responsibility» and «demonstrated accountability to me through actions.»

This worksheet can help teach them about responsibility and show them that responsibility is an important part of life.

Not exact matches

That's why the 20 percent rule works, because it teaches employees about the weight of responsibility.

Studies show that school gardens have multiple benefits, from teaching students about plant science and agriculture, to instilling a sense of responsibility.

As much as my parents taught me about financial responsibility which sparked my interest in investing and then eventually pursuing financial independence, they haven't always followed their own advice.

The Bible clearly teaches that we, as Christians, have a responsibility to share the good news about Jesus Christ.

The responsibility of bishops is and always has been, as Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis and other bishops have explained in great detail, to protect the integrity of the sacrament, to prevent public scandal that creates confusion about the Church's teaching, and to avoid the danger of people receiving the sacrament, as St. Paul puts it, to their damnation.

It remembered and taught what Jesus had said about God and man, about the kingdom of God, about human moral responsibility, and the like, because it was primarily concerned with something else.

Some high schools have begun teaching family planning by bringing in teen - age mothers to talk about the responsibilities of caring for a baby.

Both of these reasons are at odds with the Church's teaching about marriage and about moral responsibility.

This verse reveals that there is such a thing as false teaching, and we do have a responsibility to warn them and others about their teachings.

I don't think it is the responsibility of a particular religion to teach its members about all of the other religions of the world and I would never expect to learn about Islam in a Lutheran or Catholic church.

Almost every time the New Testament talks about the roles and responsibilities of the spiritual leaders of the church, teaching Scripture is at the top of the list (cf. Acts 20:28; 1 Tim 3:2; 4:6 - 16; 2 Tim 4:1 - 4; Titus 1:3; 2:1; 1 Pet 5:2).

Theologians were disturbed by the suggestion that Christian teaching about God must bear responsibility for the particular forms taken by social and political authority.

The Apostle's Creed presents us with the Trinity (that is not all it presents, but just an example), which gives us the basic idea that the Gospel is about community, which then needs to be expanded through the teaching in the church to explain social justice, kingdom living, responsibility towards earth - care, etc..

All of us who care about peacemaking and alternatives to a nuclear holocaust — those of us who still believe that God loves the world God created and expects us to do all we can to preserve and enhance life on earth — have a responsibility to pay attention not only to what these preachers are saying but also to what our own tradition teaches about «the last things.

They said they have made «a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today,» that their faith is very important in their life today; believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they have confessed their sins and accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior; strongly believe they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; firmly believe that Satan exists; strongly believe that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; strong agree that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; strong assert that the Bible is accurate in all the principles it teaches; and describe God as the all - knowing, all - powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today.

They thought the truth of the Church's teaching about conjugal morality and fertility regulation could be presented in a humane and personalistic way: one that acknowledged both the moral duty to plan one's family and the demands of self - sacrifice in conjugal life; one that affirmed methods of fertility - regulation that respected the body's dignity and its built - in moral «grammar;» one that that recognized the moral equality and equal moral responsibility of men and women, rather than leaving the entire burden of fertility - regulation on the wife.

Regarding schools, teaching about god ain't their responsibility.

Teaching children about is strictly the Parents responsibility.

I mean, according to Scripture, it is the parent's responsibility to raise up their children and teach them about God, but our modern way of doing church relinquishes these things to 45 minutes on Sunday morning and Wednesday night, in a building with a (generally) controlled environment, and to a person we don't really know.

It is the responsibility of the church, and specifically the Pastor - Teachers, to teach and train new Christians about what they are supposed to believe and how they are supposed to behave.

Yes... if taught the biblical ideal about using «measure» on themself (as it is presented)-- and what responsibility truly means (or as the church calls it — repentance).

I don't think it's so much about the levites being paid for their service it's about us doing what's right toward Pastors that must feed and tend to the flock of GOD if GOD has called them.JESUS even said in luke 10:7 that the laborers are worthy of their wages.In luke 8 1 - 4 it's says even JESUS HIMSELF recieved financial support from the women who ministered to him with their possessions.Now most people today would say he should have been ashamed of taking money from those poor women but JESUS accepted their support and they was blessed for sowing onto the LORD»S work.1 Corinthains 9:1 - 15 says dint muzzle the ox while it tread out the grain was GOD talking about oxes no he was talking about those who labor in the ministry.Who goes to war at their own expense.Or who goes to war but pay for their clothes, guns, etc.No one because the goverment if that country provide these things because of the soilders service.Who plants a vineyard and don't eat from it.Who tends a flock and don't drink the milk of it.I think it's just spiritual sense to support a pastor that's teaching you the word, casting out devils, laying hands and healing is manifesting in people lived, going to hospitails, prisons, and house calls to pray for the sick and shut in, going to graduations and funnerals, praying and fasting for himself and the flock.I think a person who think a pastor shouldn't be paid for their service either don't know they need to be paid and need to be taught or they are demonic in their thinking and either hate GOD, PASTORS, AND GOD»S PEOPLE.Why do nt you hear people saying anything against the dope dealers, strip clubs, dope houses, liquor stores, etc.It's only when people give into the LORD»S work that evil minded or misinformed people have a problem with it.No sir we don't have to use the old testament to show that we should support out pastors.You don't use the law, love tells me to support the pastor.Under the new testament LOVE is the greatest of all.Love for GOD and man.If GOD asked for 10 percent under the law to support the levites who didn't have all the responsibilities of Pastor today.Church rent, gas for vans of thd church, insurance fir the church and church vehicles, feeding and clothing the poor, light, gas, and water bill, mantience on the church or vehicles, not to mention the Pastor own house, cars, children, insurance, etc.If would be foolish for one to think that a pastor should take care if his house and GODS HOUSE without people supporting the work of the KINGDOM OF GOD.If we love GOD we are going to support HIS KINGDOM and HIS PASTOR.If under the law GOD asked for 10 percent how much should we give under the LOVE COVENANT?Example I love my wife and if I had 300 dollars I would surley give her more that 10 percent which would be 30 dollars because I love her.The law says you must give LOVE says I chose to give because I love GOD and man.Again we don't have to use the law just love and spiritual sense because hate and a carnal senses will not understand.Now I have given you scriptures please do the same when you respond not your opinion.Please respond right away I await your answer.GOD BLESS.

As Christians, it is our responsibility to bear witness to the truth about marriage as taught by both revelation and reason — by the Holy Scriptures and by the truths inscribed on the human heart.

The pragmatic way that it's taught in the school, with one eye towards responsibility and one eye towards business, and the need to strike a balance between the two, was a real eye - opener for me.The primary reason I believe this is that the amount of international baking I was exposed to while at Escoffier was about as much variety as you could reasonably fit into a PA program.

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

The immediate and huge success of the club created a responsibility to evolve the program to teach and promote the game and skills at international standards, while continuing to help the kids learn real core values about both rugby and life, such a respect, honor, discipline, integrity, teamwork and accountability.

Talk about failing your children in the most important lessons you can teach them in life about love, respect, responsibility and kindness.

It's also a great family bonding experience while teaching your kids about responsibility.

There are many benefits to parents and kids talking about body safety, but when we teach children body - safety rules without screening caregivers, we put the responsibility for safety on children and we rest on a false sense of security.

The toy encourages compassion and care, as well as teaches about taking responsibility for the farm friends.

Mom of 3 and author of «Hard Core Poor» shares some simple tips on how to teach children about money, management and financial responsibility.

Teaching your children about responsibility and tidiness can seriously be a full time job for many of us.

Teaching your children about financial responsibility is one of the most important lifelong lessons you can give — and one... Read More»

Much to our misfortune, there is not a single school (that I am aware of) in the whole of the United States or elsewhere that has taken on the responsibility of teaching young adults about the principles of conscious procreation and parenting.

Hop on over to check out my brutally honest post about the guardian angel who entered my life when I was a pathetically miserable «victim» of my circumstance and taught me a simple, yet infinitely valuable lesson that changed my life — to take responsibility.

It's never too early to teach tots about fiscal responsibility.

If the school contacts you about the tardiness, explain to the administration that you're trying to teach your teen responsibility.

Creating a cell phone contract between you and your tween is an excellent way to teach your child about the responsibilities that come with having a cell phone, as well as the consequences for not seeing those responsibilities through.

It teaches them about deadlines and responsibility.

* Positive Discipline * Positive Discipline for Developing Capable People * Building Self - Esteem through Positive Discipline * Keys to Developing Self - Reliance: A Gift to Our Children * The Significant Seven: Life Skills for Adults and Youth * Positive Discipline: Practical Application * Why Children Misbehave and What to Do About It * Parenting Teenagers: · Empowering Teenagers — and Yourself in the Process * Teaching Parenting the Positive Discipline Way: * Classroom Management: Shared Responsibility through Class Meetings: Eliminating your Role as a disciplinarian (The Kids Can Do It Better Anyway) * Positive Discipline in the Classroom (two - day training on class meetings) * We've Got to Keep Meeting Like This (teacher in - service on class meetings) * School Administrators: Positive Discipline in the Classroom (two - day training with Bill Scott, principal of Birney Elementary School)

This might be a time to teach your teen about some financial responsibility and the difference between want and need.

One of your tasks as the parent is to teach your children about responsibility.

Some parents, Pope said, are resistant to the idea of less homework because they believe homework teaches children about responsibility and time management, even though she says the research does not support that.

In fact, I think them seeing me work the way I do and still make time for them has taught them a lot about responsibility, hard work, and priorities in life.

Teaching your children about financial responsibility is one of the most important lifelong lessons you can give — and one that may not be effectively taught in school.