Sentences with phrase «what other language»

You should be able to figure out the punch line: what his answer was no matter what other language he was asked to translate.

Who knows what other languages were massacred in the process?

Not exact matches

«People tend to mimic each other's body language, which might help them develop intuitions about what other people are feeling — intuitions about whether they'll treat them fairly,» explains DeSteno.

Gravitational waves, on the other hand, are what black holes themselves emit — the «natural language» of their existence.

What usually happened was the other party figured this out and began to unwind the contract or comply only with the letter of the contract, seeking every loophole in the language they could find.

Eight other states have gambling laws with similar language to New York's, so what happens in New York could set a precedent for legality elsewhere.

To get at that you'll need to use the right kind of language, whether it's a guarantee, testimonials or some other tactic, to assure people you have what they need.

If you study body language, you'll learn various elements of communication that might give you an indicator of what's going on with the other person.

The laws, which take effect on May 25, require companies to explain how they plan to use people's personal information in simple, unambiguous language and detail what other entities will gain access to that data.

Apart from this, Jarvis can determine the schedule of your day, teach languages, prepare toasts, set up video conferences, play movies and also inform what are other members of the family doing.

It should be one of our main concerns to know what God intends when the Bible uses this language, so that by God's grace we may experience it and help others do the same.

To use language from their platform, «What sets (The Bloc) apart from the other parties is that they focus on Canada while we focus on Québec.»

Unless it was meant for us as a new system to drop Republican systems for the Royalist systems that are taking place now that Jordan and Morocco both Royelists are planed to join GCC as one with a change to the name of the GCC since the Royalist empire will be extending to countries outer of the Arabian Gulf Countries... What ever it is all we need is freedom of rights, justice, peace, equality and to live in prosperity... Egypt is not in the heart of Egyptions only but as well in the heart of every Arabic nation, Egyptions were our teachers in our schools and Egypt was the university of our Yemeni students... Egypt was the source of islamic educations, Egypt was the face of all arts, books, papers, TV plays and movies to all of Arabian speaking countries... Egypt is our Arabian Icon so please please other nations are becoming larger and stronger in the area on your account as a living icon for the Arabian Unity what ever our faiths or beliefs are we are brothers in blood, culture and language, God Bless to All.AWhat ever it is all we need is freedom of rights, justice, peace, equality and to live in prosperity... Egypt is not in the heart of Egyptions only but as well in the heart of every Arabic nation, Egyptions were our teachers in our schools and Egypt was the university of our Yemeni students... Egypt was the source of islamic educations, Egypt was the face of all arts, books, papers, TV plays and movies to all of Arabian speaking countries... Egypt is our Arabian Icon so please please other nations are becoming larger and stronger in the area on your account as a living icon for the Arabian Unity what ever our faiths or beliefs are we are brothers in blood, culture and language, God Bless to All.Awhat ever our faiths or beliefs are we are brothers in blood, culture and language, God Bless to All.Amen.

Science is confirming what the Bible says - the Big Bang (the creation), the idea of other universes (God is not of this universe), the human genome project («the language of God» according to Francis Collins), quantum mechanics, etc..

do I need any approval before I practice my religion, do I have to prove my religion before I practice, my holy book further describe that you must carry a gun in 21st century because there is too much crime in this world, but it doesn't say much about if I migrate to another country these rules will still apply, Or I should modified them according to my comfort, like talking in English which is not my religious language wearing pants or not, having education or not, standing in line or not, I am so confused what should I do can someone help me, should I go back to country where my religion originated or back in time ask my guru questions about western world confusion, or just decide by myself what suites me, or preach other develop country that you guys are wrong be peaceful.

And for that what was needed was a language other than the language of making.

«You can continue teaching Semitic languages which you enjoy, or you can act on what you know — that we have saved your life over the years, and we can save the lives of others as well if you chose to teach them about us.»

But what we believe about others has nothing to do with the others, only with the language we use about them.

(I apologize to those that dislike metaphors, but I almost can't communicate if I don't get to use them, and as insufficient as they at times are, they are very close to the language of what I believe, because you can't really explain or define someone into believing... you can only live out your beliefs in a way that you share with others, and when given the opportunity shine a light, or point a direction, or walk along with someone for a bit).

I wonder, now that it has been translated into other languages, what changes have been made due to changes in language?

Sometimes the most secular of scholars found that what Frei was doing, with his attention to narrative and his interest in the language that shapes a particular community, made more sense to them than the work of many theologians much more systematically concerned to address other academic disciplines.

When crotchety old grammarians complain about the debasement of language, often they are merely deploring change per se; other times they wax wroth over what seem to most of us relatively insignificant losses in precision, clarity, or beauty.

When I reflect on the infinite pains to which the human mind and heart will go in order to protect itself from the full impact of reality, when I recall the mordant analyses of religious belief which stem from the works of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud and, furthermore, recognize the truth of so much of what these critics of religion have had to say, when I engage in a philosophical critique of the language of theology and am constrained to admit that it is a continual attempt to say what can not properly be said and am thereby led to wonder whether its claim to cognition can possibly be valid — when I ask these questions of myself and others like them (as I can not help asking and, what is more, feel obliged to ask), is not the conclusion forced upon me that my faith is a delusion?

As I point out in Darwin on Trial, molecular biologists even now use the language of intelligent communication (information, libraries, translation) because there is no other way to depict what they are seeing.

For instance, the euphemized vocabulary of death, by which we employ language that conceals from ourselves and others what we are doing and what we are proposing to do.

First of all, responsible liturgical revision can not consist only in the use of more contemporary language or in the avoidance of what are known as «sexist» phrases (which are so dominantly masculine that women often feel excluded from what is going on) or in a return to biblical idiom to replace other (perhaps medieval) terminology.

If, instead of gospel, what is proclaimed in the churches is nothing more than the kinds of «musts» and «shoulds» and «ought to's» that one can hear from many other quarters — along with the ubiquitous language of «rights» — then we can not expect church people to be any more receptive to such exhortations than are their counter parts in society at large.

Speaking from the other side of the fence as a (former) seminary instructor, what you're saying is the exact same thing we hear from * every * student that didn't master one or both languages.

Then imagine what could have had happened to the Torah and or Gospel having passed through three dead languages, one after the other then from a classic language into modern language, in many different copies then into many languages.

@jf well your information about the New Testament is about as accurate as your Old Testament knowledge, The prophecies of the Old testament concerning Christ could not have been written after the fact because we now have the Dead Sea Scrolls, with an almost complete Old Testament dated 100 - 200 years before the birth of Christ, Your interpretation of God at His worst shows a complete lack of understanding as to what was being communicated.We don't know what the original texts of the New Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes»

Studying the Bible, the original languages, the cultural context, what the writer was trying to say to his original audience and how they would have understood it, and other similar considerations may help us develop a better «paper theology».

The way we were taught language in the first few years of life limits our ability to conceptualize what other people think.

What Bultmann means is that the difference between the mythological language of the New Testament and ecclesiastical dogma on the one hand and his own interpretation on the other is that the former presents us with a «miraculous, supernatural event», whereas the right interpretation is one which suggests «an historical event wrought out in time and space».

It is because many of the terms lack meaning that squares with verifiable human experience (must be verifiable to others, as well, for purposes of proof; but inverse this requirement, as I did with language, and you end up with the following: if something can't be evidenced to others, there is a good likelihood that it is not what the individual thinks it is).

This is mostly due to the languages they speak, kind of food they eat, kind of crops that grow there, how is the water availability, what is the kind of weather — hot, cold, etc. and other factors.

So in what sense can we continue to proclaim the special authority of Christian revelation while at the same time fully embracing the implications of our two axioms: on the one hand that our religious language, including our Christological categories, is never adequately representative of God, and on the other that it is always conditioned by historical relativity?

When people wonder what sorts of things they can and should pray about, and what kind of language and words to use when communicating with God, it is often not enough to just tell them that they can have a conversation with God just like with any other person.

But we also saw that this analogy with reference to the princeps discourse, that of prophecy, did not do justice to the specific character of each of the other modes of discourse, above all narrative discourse where what is said or recounted, the generative historical event, came to language through the narration.

By undertaking to learn the languages of others and to communicate in their idioms, missionaries became their own first converts, providing an example of what might be involved when prospective believers saw their idioms had also become the idioms of outsiders.

Obviously, Christians need to pay attention to what the adherents of other religions are saying if it is to be decided whether the language of «saving faith» has its counterparts outside the church.

But it remains as the possibility; what is more, Christian faith declares that God already accepts those who acknowledge their failure and commit themselves utterly to Him — so that they are already, as we might put it in mythological language, «in heaven» or in other words discover themselves to be «blessed».

The Christian educator needs more than this, for he is asked to provide education in Christianity for others, not only to describe what it has been and is, but to use language in such a way that the learner will come to an understanding of the nature of Christianity and hopefully will discern the presence of God in his own life and commit himself to the Christian way.

Would you run down to the whorehouse, etc. (using some other earthy and picturesque and memorable language) and the answer of couse is: No, I wouldn't do that with my freedom... None of which makes him an antinomian, because while the saint does not want to do what's bad and needs no law, the old Adam still does, and he needs the curb, rule and guide.

And that you're reading other people's interpretations of what the original words... written in another language... mean?

The books are written in what are virtually different languages, the one rooted in Faith and the other in Reason.»

First, many scholars and other intellectuals who appreciate Eiseley's writings have little understanding of what religious thought is and prefer to treat such matters by the use of safer language.

Sociologists also deal with such topics as the components of culture, i.e., beliefs, values, language, and norms; cultural dynamics; cultural integration; cultural change; ideal culture, what people profess to follow, and real culture, how people actually behave in relation to these claims; ethnocentrism, the proclivity to see one's culture as the best and consequently all others as inferior; and cultural relativity.

Take away this bigoted language and they stop being what they are and must switch to other Christian themes, like loving their neighbor and caring for the poor.

The white - haired nonna and I, neither speaking the other's language, figured it out and she helped me find what I needed.

Seeing fans arguing about what they want wrong with the club, and seeing the language that they were using against each other was enough to make me abstain from social media for a good 4 hours.