Sentences with phrase «too much truth»

Too much truth, too much honesty is dangerous.

Too much truth in a few short sentences to cope with?

Fuentes told too much truth, and what happens to those who do is exactly her political status at the moment.

It's got too much truth to be stopped by anything.

Daahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, too much truth for you in one day.

It should be noted when Julian Robertson got upset with a Business Week article by Gary Weiss that had too much truth in it, he sued publisher McGraw Hill for $ 1 billion because it was «a nice round number.»

Not exact matches

By not deciding that it's just too much to pay attention to because that's the path to losing truth as the central value in this country,» Comey said.

And the sad truth, the enormous elephant in the room that nobody wants to see, is that the overwhelming majority of you are never going to get there because you spend way too much of your time slacking off.

«Despite all of the crude bulls out there, and boy, we've got way too many of them, the truth is that we've simply got too much supply for crude to mount any kind of sustained rally,» Cramer said.

You know it is too much or that it won't work, and you will have to make a split - second decision — do you tell them the truth or do you let them make the purchase?

But the truth is that I enjoy journalism too much, and couldn't stomach having to regularly crush the dreams of aspiring entrepreneurs.

I'm sure I'd love you too as much as any other person, Shawn, If I ever met you but I have to tell the truth as I understand it.

I've more than once been accused of loving controversy and confrontation which couldn't be further from the truth I just like you love my neighbors too much to do and say nothing or indulge my discomfort and fear!

The truth is, the players behind this book and this movie just love all this stuff too much to use it as a weapon.

When finally confronted with the truth, groupthink becomes fiercely defensive because there's been too much investment of time / energy to risk a demoralizing tale told by a long - gone outsider.

The truth about these lights is that they probably do exist - there's too much evidence, too many sightings over too many years.

I feel it all, too much, and then I feel this yearning to create but it's just not always my time because this is such a short season of my life, constantly on some kind of a balance bar but the truth is, most of my moments are every one else's needs first — and that's okay to me.

I can understand why there is so much confusion among religious followers of the Bible, and that's simply because far too many of you accept it as truth from God himself.

The unbeliever in churches I have frequented too often hear LESS of the truth (I heard the truth of my spiritual condition and was convicted when I went to church as an unbeliever) and too much effort is made NOT to offend.

But the real explanation of our ineffectual preaching lies much deeper: far too many of us, far too much of the time, do not recognize the terrible truth that as preachers we are engaged in nothing other than the task of confronting our listeners with the very Word of God.

In sharpest contrast to Mr. Wieseltier's divorce of truth and justice, at least some friends of freedom begin with the proposition, «We hold these truths to be self - evident...» Are we paying too much attention to Mr. Wieseltier?

Against the modern emphasis on truth's relativity and emotion's primacy, it is tempting to insist upon philosophic objectivity in the Church — the world has too much subjectivity as it is.

is simply too ingrained, too much a part of what sin is all about, for us not to feel vexed when reminders come of the opposite reality, which it is precisely the office of religion to provide: «Accordingly, it has always been the office of Religion to protest against the sophistry of Satan, and to preserve the memory of those truths which the unbelieving heart corrupts: both the freedom and the responsibility of man, the sovereignty of the Creator, the supremacy of the law of conscience as His representative within us, and the irrelevancy of external circumstances in the judgment which is ultimately to be made upon our conduct and character.»

Adherents of the great historic religions are usually too much concerned with the primary historical events rather than with the universal truth discovered through them.

This forum is sadly too short to say too much on each point, but the bottom line is that if you are looking for truth and not just giving lipservice to searching for it... then you will find it.

Elie Wiesel's comment that «all the victims were Jews, and all the perpetrators Christians» is not factually precise in either clause, but the truth is much too close to deny.

jwt, get real, again the response to your latest comment was booted out, it was too much to handle for this site, the misinformed protect their own, from the truth that is, and bs rules.

Only the best versions of truth can drive out error, but contrary errors can keep each other from acquiring too much power.

In fact, they are offended by presumptuous nonfundamentalists who express too much confidence in their own perceptions of truth.

I ask you now not to forget this notion; for although most philosophers seem either to forget it or to disdain it too much ever to mention it, I believe that we shall have to admit it ourselves in the end as containing an element of truth.

well just thinking about these wars in the muslim / mid-east world over religious differences (which may reflect mental states in many ways) in a world where most realize that living in the present moment is best way to happiness and being in the moment in non-strife and awareness through the teachings of masters such as found in the buddhist, taoist, zen, etc., etc., etc. spriritually based practices of religious like thought and teachings, etc. that to ask these scientifically educated populace whom have access to vast amounts of knowledges and understandings on the internet, etc. to believe in past beliefs that perhaps gave basis and inspiration to that which followed — but is not the end all of all times or knowledges — and is thus — non self - sustaining in a belief that does not encompass growth of knowledge and understanding of all truths and being as it is or could be — is to not respect the intelligence and minds and personage of even themselves — not to be disrespected nor disrespectful in any way — only to point out that perhaps too much is asked to put others into the cloak of blind faith and adherance to the past that disregards the realities of the present and the potential of the future... so you try to live in the past — and destroy your present and your future — where is the intelligence in that — and why do people continually fear monger or allow to be fear — mongered into this destructive vision of the future based upon the past?

Yet a proposition regarded simply in terms of its logical subjects admits too much vagueness to have a de facto truth value.

I can not convey truth to a person who has been blinded, as much as I would want too.

The alleged subordination of the gospel to Karl Marx is illustrated, for example, by charging that «false» liberation theology concentrates too much on a few selected biblical texts that are always given a political meaning, leading to an overemphasis on «material» poverty and neglecting other kinds of poverty; that this leads to a «temporal messianism» that confuses the Kingdom of God with a purely «earthly» new society, so that the gospel is collapsed into nothing but political endeavor; that the emphasis on social sin and structural evil leads to an ignoring or forgetting of the reality of personal sin; that everything is reduced to praxis (the interplay of action and reflection) as the only criterion of faith, so that the notion of truth is compromised; and that the emphasis on communidades de base sets a so - called «people's church» against the hierarchy.

Somewhere in those banished graveyards was a metaphysical ground for politics, and buried in them was a truth that too much of modern political theory seems to have forgotten: The living give us crowds.

Jesus used a traditionally accepted form of teaching in a non-traditional way to teach paradigm - shifting and theology - shattering truths which were «too much» for most people to hear, understand, or comprehend.

Because images, in a book or in a sermon, are generally regarded as decorative and hence optional in their bearing upon the principal form and content of the communication, the imaginative preacher may have to endure such comments as «His sermons don't seem theologically weighty» or «It was too interesting to have contained much truth», or perhaps such inverted compliments as «I was much involved in your talk, or whatever it was.

U idiot bigot she brought up jesus in a discussion about santa and said «I mean jesus was a white man too but you know its like we have he was a historical figure I mean thats a verifiable fact...» I watched the whole interview too if u like her so much why did nt u listen to her «just because it makes you uncomfortable doesn't mean you can just change it...» she did say those words so edited or not she proposed a lie as the truth jesus was as white as any middle eastern person is

And the dynamics of this delight will not bear too much scrutiny in terms of the truth of the gospel, the obedience to Christ, and other such properly elevated rubrics.

Both the tellers of the tale and those who love to hear it would have to move too much mental furniture in order to see that the markers of our modern world — the care for truth, the sanctity of the individual, the siding with victims — derive from Christianity, indeed from canonical, orthodox Christianity.

And the overarching truth she uncovered through so much note taking in so many drab and cheerless settings is that white heterosexual males — the oppressive villains of radical secularist orthodoxy — are victims too.

It is time for peace between both sides, between science and faith, there is far too much vitriol from two sides who are are actually care about the truth, and approach it in a different manner.

They have to say it's not the same God otherwise people will start asking why God wants different people to follow different rules, the truth of the matter is Christians don't want to live by rules, they want to live by grace, they don't want anyone to tell them not to eat or drink too much or to do anything anyone else says.

But, if the counselor resists the temptation to put too much pressure on him, he may gradually reveal more of the truth as the relationship grows stronger.

That little book that you do not think too much of, but that has been the source of truth, and guidance for life for countless millions over the course of millenia, says that homosexuality is a sin.

If there is no concept of truth, business agreements become impossible — and indeed the presence of lawyers at every negotiation today are a sign that trustworthiness has been too much undermined.

The Hartshornean candidates for apriori truths rest, it seems to me, on an experiential sense too much refined by his philosophy.

Such a procedure is speculative throughout and in no way proves the truth of the hypotheses, but I find Ogden's final conclusion much too strong when he calls what I have offered «at best a wholly speculative interpretation in no way grounded in the Jesus of history it professes to interpret» (p. 122; italics mine).

Par for the course for the xians in America, They know the answer, and are too afraid to speak truth to power, which is pretty much all Jesus did.

There's too much beauty in the world to lose hope; too many people searching for something more than themselves; too many people who comfort the suffering; too many people who serve the poor; too many people who seek and teach the truth; too much history that witnesses, again and again, to the mercy of God, incarnate in the course of human affairs.