Sentences with phrase «by going to the cross»

He then demonstrated His love by going to the cross in our place.

Not exact matches

But, given that crossing deserts brings a slow, miserable death to a number of these immigrants (and others will suffocate in the back of cargo trucks or be murdered by smugglers), a few more feet to climb is probably going to deter only a small number of potential immigrants.

That's despite the fact premiers Christy Clark and Alison Redford, in a backgrounder to their recent agreement on the ground rules for building pipelines, warned that oil may end up crossing B.C. by train en route to Asia regardless of whether the Northern Gateway or Trans - Mountain Expansion projects go ahead.

As I've said that the 10 yr bond crossed over 3.0 % means the US$ will be going to be weaker and weaker further and further by the 1st half of 2020 yr:) Also, the commodity price esp WTI will be going up to the level of 70 - 80 $ no later than 1st half of May (at the earliest), or no later than 2nd week of June, and then it will be in the range to the end of Trump Era:)

As TMM mentioned last week there is a regional flavour as to opinion on China so perhaps we just need to get through a complete trading day cycle before we get a true representation of reaction, but TMM are going to stand by their guns as far as China goes and if we are going to start seeing some spurious euro trashing we will play this as a regional cross trade rather than a global play.

Nothing gets corporate America going like a tax - cut proposal.Chief executive officers are keeping their fingers crossed that the skeletal details offered up by President Donald Trump's administration Wednesday will turn into a concrete proposal to slash...

Most business owners sued by patent trolls don't talk about it to anyone other than their lawyer; a typical response is to cross one's fingers and hope the problem goes away.

If a currency or a stock should breach the 81 level, for example, the system predicts that it would go on to reach 121 (in the third quadrant formed by the blue cross and the circle).

It's a concert that IS sponsored by the MWR, is completely voluntary (believe me, if anyone were FORCED to go, heads would roll), and can be easily avoided by traversing the various roads and pathways which cross Fort Bragg and it's surrounding areas, via car, truck, or foot.

-- theif on the cross; not sayting «comfort» them by saying they are going to Hell, but at least present the gospel

But I can go months, even years without saying a cross word to anyone, hurting anyone's feelings, or behaving in any way that could be considered by Christians as «sinful»... well, not sinful as in causing any harm.

While that is not desirable, which is worse: to occasionally fall into sin ourselves, knowing that such sin is covered by the grace of the cross, OR telling the whole world that although we've been rescued from sin and death and the devil, they can just go to hell because all we care about is our own eternal life?

But the Biblical concept of prayer, as practiced by Christ Himself as a model for us, is to seek and obtain God's will, and they pray for God's will to be done (even if that means going to the cross).

We say that rather «The Eucharist went to the Cross», so every Mass is the One same offering of Christ in time and space which was ratified by his perfect obedience unto death on the cross and is offered in heaven as an eternal offering.

In my theology class, I tell my students that a Spirit - empowered Jesus goes to this village, not that one, heals this woman, not that one, allows himself to be interrupted by people along the way, even as he sets his face like flint toward the cross.

Neville i agree with you Jesus has the power to forgive sin past present and future through the cross when he died his death covered past present and future.If those in the old testament were justified by faith and made righteous then they are covered by the blood of Jesus even though he hadn't died for them yet because there hope was in God.Isn't that what the definition of faith is it is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things unseen.The proof is Enoch how could he go to be with God if he was not righteous and only the blood of Jesus is able to do that.

So, for example, if your hear a pastor saying, «You have to take up your cross daily and follow Jesus in order to go to heaven when you die,» you can look in the text he is preaching from (maybe Matthew 16:24 - 26 or Luke 9:23 - 26), and see that Jesus is talking about saving your life (which is NOT the same thing as receiving eternal life) by living in a profitable way here on earth (cf. Luke 9:24 - 25).

The Bible doesn't teach any other way to go to heaven, except the by the way the thief at the cross did.

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.

Jeremy Myers, i think you are wrong and David is right, so many out there are preaching you can live any way you want and be right that Grace covers any sin, they really believe that, that is not what the bible says, God was very concerned about sin so much he sent Jesus his son to die on a cross for us, if we accept Jesus as our savor then we are to obey his commandments, not break them, we are to live a righteous and holy life as possible, the bible plainly list a whole list of things if we live in will not to to heaven unless we repent, if we die while in these sins, we will not go to heaven, what is the difference, between someone who said a prayer and someone who did not, and they are living the same way, none, i think, if we are truly saved it should be hard to do these things let alone live and do them everyday, i would be afraid to tell people that it does not matte grace covers their sins, i really think it is the slip ups that we are convicted of by the Holy Spirit and we ask for forgivness, how can anyones heart be right with God and they have sex all the time out of marriage, lie, break every commandment of God, i don't think this is meaning grace covers those sins, until they repent and ask for forgiveness, a lot of people will end up in hell because preachers teach Grace the wrong way,, and those preachers will answer to God for leading these people the wrong way, not saying you are one of them, but be careful, everything we teach or preach must line up with the word of God, God hates sin,

The story opened in a swank Protestant church where at the conclusion of the service a poor, unemployed, shabby young man got up and told his story of unemployment to the startled parishioners and ended by saying: «You can't all go out hunting up jobs for people like me, but what I am puzzled about when I see so many Christians living in luxury and singing, «Jesus, I my cross have taken, all to leave, and follow Thee,» is what is meant by following Jesus?

We are basically disputing over a piece of toast that has the crude image of Jesus burnt into it but we go it for free on ebay — the cross by no way is perfect and its shape is bound to happen based on the nature of how really tall building collapse and their architecture with many perpendicular angles.

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

As a missionary hardly a day went by when I didn't get the opportunity to chat to someone about the work Jesus did on the cross.

Let me tell you something my friend, please go and meet the reverted American in your next door or the person sits next to you or you cross when you walk... it would be easy for woman as you will see while American with blue eyes wearing hijab... and ask yourself why did they reverted... or ask them and see what they say... if it was spreaded by force then why they do not go back...

Over the next two years, my friendship with Rob was limited by the fact that he couldn't cross the sidewalk without his ankle monitor going off, but I was still glad to hang out on his porch and make small talk.

Because we can't save ourselves, Jesus is going to restore sinners who repent and freely receive Him by giving His life on a cross.

The cross, thought to be worth more than # 80,000, has been donated by Grosvenor to Cambridge University's Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology (MAA), where it will go on display with the other grave goods.

In the desert a war memorial cross erected many years ago torn down by vandals and they have had to go to court to try to put it back up and Obam is still blocking the way.

He could have done this by going down into Judea on the west side of the Jordan and then crossing to Perea, but the narrative as a whole gives the impression that he went down on the east side of the river and crossed back farther south, near Jericho.

We, who deserved to die for all the evil we have done in this world (and usually in the name of God), should have been the ones to go to one of the most painful and excruciating torture techniques invented by man — the Roman cross.

Jesus cast out demons and healed the sick was divine in power by the Spirit and they couldn't kill Him by flogging but on the cross He gave up His life so how was sickness going to touch Him?

Jesus went to the cross by choice and that is where victory was won.

The cross is an invitation to live in a different way, and let go the nature of identity that is formed by Pax Romana (peace for some on the backs of others), Religious judgmentalism, or other patterns.

Our speech acts go out from us and return back to us, and we can only establish our bearings within language contextually, like the sailor must establish the position of his boat at sea by a system of cross bearings.

i long with you david... and i myself stumble in my own awkward efforts toward freedom, and as you said, we know the fact is that it is scary to move into freedom... because it is unknown... but i see so many on this newfound road to freedom get trapped in the liminal space of wish - fullfillment community (which actually rather looks like affinity rather than the hard - won community that comes from communitas)... i'm sure this is going to come off the wrong way, but i'm going to say it anyway: many of the comments seem to be «all about me», and truly that is what religion is... but not freedom, not the mission of Jesus where you die to yourself by taking up your cross daily... not being centered on the «other» rather than yourself...

As we contemplate the work which Christ has laid upon his church, we who are met here on the Mount of Olives, in sight of Calvary, would take up for ourselves and summon those from whom we come, and to whom we return, to take up with us the cross of Christ, and all that for which it stands, and to go forth into the world to live in the fellowship of his sufferings and by the power of his resurrection.

I was put on an exercise program by one of my professors which really helped, and we worked up from cycling on a reclining bike for 2 minutes to going on the cross trainer for 45 minutes over the course of about nine months.

After all the «yucky cross» comments by others I decided to make up my own so I winged it with 2 parts flour, 1 part caster sugar and a little water to make a runny paste then put it in a freezer bag, peirced the corner with a skewer and piped on my crosses - occassionally a little lump blocked the hole I just pinched it out and kept going - they turned out really well.

Described by Johanna of Green Gourmet Giraffe as a cross between a brownie and a jammy dodger, I for one am not going to be able to resist making a batch of these most scrumptious sounding chocolate walnut thumbprint biscuits with blackcurrant jam.

by the time he signs 11 big players, the previous signings are gonna cross their 30 yrs age.

Stradbally village went by, and then we saw two likely spots, a pair of stony little streams that crossed half a mile of bog and sand to the sea.

I knew aubameyang would not be as effective here at arsenal because of our style of play, our football is pathetic, lack of vertical penetration, lack of proper wingers to offer width and one on one dribbling or crosses from the by - line, lack of a proper defensive midfielder, zonal marking on corners instead of man marking, i can go on but we all know our weaknesses.

David Moyes» team was in dire straits after Joe Hart's howler left West Ham down with 11 minutes to play, but Andy Carroll's volley from 15 yards on a cross by Aaron Cresswell had too much pace for Jack Butland and went inside the left post for a vital equaliser that kept the Potters in the drop and ended a frustrating match on an up note for West Ham, who had three goals disallowed during the contest.

Thus i prefer we go the boom boom and try to harm them by crosses.

Soon all will be hailing the assist king, Ozil.Madrid are completing signing of Kovacic so the Benz I guess should be on its way to the Emirates ready to take EPL by storm.Wenger's waiting game in transfer market is soon going to pay off.FINGERZ CROSSED.

Player ratings GK - 5 not much to do looked a bit shaky on crosses Bel - 6 got forward but poor crossing Mon - 7 did ok but impact for the goal Gaby - 7 defended well looked solid Kos - 6 did ok Coq - 6 ok defensively but poor distribution Xhaka - 6 did ok at times but very average player Gibbs - 6 wing back looks to suit his ability but would like more from him Walcott - 5 looked average and positive enough in possession Ozil -4 poor in possession and none existent without the ball, luxury player Sanchez 5 worst game I've seen him have and embarrassed the team by going down after the ball hit him although the Leicester player deserved a ref

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

I would go for same starting 11, actually no, would bring in sanogo to help bully Anderlecht defense line and perhaps get on to one of those crosses which were a quite a few in the last game, i deem him to be physically stronger than welbeck who was left frustrated by the physicality shown by anderlecht defenders and sanogo is better in the air also.

Aubameyang's fantastic cross was finished off impeccably by Lacazette to give the away side a great start the first half, something that should install Arsenal fans with a bit of confidence going forward.