Sentences with phrase «christian interpreting scripture»

Further, in presenting his interpretation of Matthew 16 and John 20, he merely illustrates the Protestant dilemma of a lack of common faith and practice resulting from each Christian interpreting Scripture as he will in the absence of a divinely sanctioned interpreter, the Catholic Church.

Because of this, most contemporary western Christians interpret Scripture's covenantal concepts as if they were contractual, and as I show in Benefit of the Doubt, this has fundamentally screwed up our understanding of a number of theological concepts in Scripture.

Not exact matches

Today many christian sects have become cultish by taking liberties how to interpret outdated and misunderstood scriptures.

Thus, Scripture never exists sola; rather, it is understood and interpreted via the collective wisdom of the Christian church in all ages and communions.

Yet, in every age and cultural context Scripture must be interpreted, consensually, by the Christian community.

As I said last week, this general guide for interpreting and applying the Bible makes sense to me.It's not about discounting the historical / grammatical method in favor of forcing a Jesus message into every last page, but simply looking at Scripture through the lens of the gospel of Jesus Christ just as Christians should look at everything through the lens of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Following on the British government's decision in favour of promoting English rather than Oriental or Vernacular education in India, and to seek the help of private agencies in the task, the Missions started Christian colleges for imparting education in Western culture and modern science with the teaching of English literature at the centre of secular courses and spiritually interpreted by the teaching of Christian Scripture.

«We were reading and discussing certain Hebrew scriptures,» he says, «and one of the Jewish participants in our group suddenly broke down and told us how painful it was to hear the way Christians were interpreting «his» texts.

On the one hand, by our historical amnesia we break our continuity with historic Christian faith as did the liberals and, on the other, we accord to some preachers a magisterial authority in interpreting Scripture not unlike Roman Catholics do!

Personal religious experience, the home, other religions, church membership, missions, the Scriptures, doctrine, Christian action, the ecumenical movement, church history, Methodist heritage, evangelism, and Christian education — each of these is considered and thoughtfully interpreted from the Christian viewpoint, book by book.

Remember the Christians at Alexandria interpreted the Scripture allegorically (or figuratively), while the Christians at Antioch interpreted them literally.

Christians ought careful how they interpret and use scripture when discussing spiritual matters with non-Christians.

If Paul accepted anyone who believed that Jesus was the Lord, I would not contradict what Paul says and say they a person was not a Christian, because they do not interpret the Scripture the way I do.

And I doubt many casual Christians (which is the majority of this country) would disagree with how he has interpreted the scripture to take on these issues.

Christian spirituality is based on the teaching of Jesus, as known through the Scriptures, and interpreted by the Christian tradition, generally through the authority of the churches.

Particularly for evangelical Protestants» but for many other Christians too» the Scriptures are not something that we interpret and adjust, conforming the documents with whatever passes for present realities or suits particular sensitivities, either individual or cultural.

Isn't that WHY we have so many Christian - based religions, because they interpret parts or all of the Scripture differently?

Finally, we can learn much about Barth (and, of course, other great Christian thinkers) by watching how he interprets scripture; work at this task is still underdeveloped.

He's entitled to that opinion, of course, but I do wish he would stop accusing Christians who don't interpret Genesis 1 as a literal, scientific text as having a «low view of Scripture» when his piece reveals that his own literalism is as selective as the next guy's.

Centuries ago, it was known that no reading of Scripture could be interpreted in one way... if you're talking about the Christian faith, which is already so one - sided, nowadays...

If you want to talk about schizophrenia, you can bring up the example about all the Christian denominations that claim the Holy Spirit inspires them to interpret Scripture.

The early Christians evidently believed that there were Scripture passages, which, when rightly interpreted, made it clear why a servant of God, of the caliber they had recognized in Jesus of Nazareth, should have ended his life in a criminal's death.

I don't want to rewrite this article in english, but basically, I came to the following conclusions 1 - that Scriptures ought to be used in close interaction with daily reality (not out the blue, in abstraction, or in academic ivory tower) 2 - it ought to be interpreted by what we could call «crucified» christians 3 - and that «crucified» christian should interpret in the context of a «crucified» community / church (because being in a close knit church is a very good way to actually be «crucified» and sanctified, and because I need insight from others in my interpretations.

Thus, Huldah not only interpreted but also authorized the document that would become the core of Jewish and Christian scripture.

In it, Justin makes the case for a hermeneutic of love as well as anyone I've read, and his Christocentric approach to Scripture is one that can benefit all Christians, regardless of how they interpret the passages discussed above and regardless of where they stand on same - sex relationships.

The revelation of God, given in Scripture, is regarded as authoritative only insofar as it provides clarifying images which illuminate experience as it is critically interpreted by reason.Theology within this framework articulates the meaning of the inherited tradition of the Christian community in the light of empirical knowledge supplied by the sciences.

Thus, Huldah not only interpreted, but also authorized, the document that would become the core of Jewish and Christian Scripture.

That scripture never exists in a «pure» form, but always is interpreted and understood within the culture of Christians of different times and places.

Before the New Testament was put together, from the oral traditions about Jesus and the letters and other material known in the primitive Christian community, appeal was made to the Old Testament, that is the Jewish Scriptures, for predictions of and a way for interpreting the significance of Jesus.

The torah seemed like an odd target to me too, as I have found jews to generally interpret their scripture in a way that is conducive to a good life on earth, rather than ranting and raving about the end - times like Christians

Israel, surrounded by Arab nations that interpret Scripture in quite a different fashion from Jews or Christians, would lean on the weakest possible support if its claim to its 1967 border were to rest even partially on Scripture.

1) Do you agree that all Christians pick and choose when it comes to interpreting and applying Scripture, and can you think of some other examples?

In spite of the antipathy of the minority headed by Marcion, the majority of Christians adopted the Jewish Scriptures as their own and interpreted them in the light of what they believed they saw in Jesus.

The bible appears to promote violence in selected passages, but the very fact that Christians analyze scripture with the underlying belief that there is such a thing as an objective truth and morality we don't have the freedom in our doctrine to falsely interpret passages from Leviticus to justify killing while ignoring Christ and the ten commandments.

The majority of mainstream Christians have allowed a vocal minority to take over our government and interpret scripture and Christian values for all Christians.

The verse has to be read within the entire context of scripture, including how Jesus lived and other things he said (notably — he who is without sin cast the first stone) to recognize that that verse is not now, nor has it ever been, interpreted to mean that Christians are under OT law upon Christ's resurrection.

How can christians or any other religious person take their scripture which is supposed to be the divine word of their god, and interpret it as they see fit?

He encourage Biblically centred Christian disciples and communities seeking to know the Scriptures, interpret them well, and communicate them effectively.

He encourage Biblically centred Christian disciples and communities seeking to know the Scriptures, interpret them well, and communicate them effectively.

He encourage Biblically centred Christian disciples and communities seeking to know the Scriptures, interpret them well, and communicate them effectively.

He encourage Biblically centred Christian disciples and communities seeking to know the Scriptures, interpret them well, and communicate them effectively.