Sentences with phrase «christians arguing from»

A post-Enlightenment public square sounds positively tribal: it would mean Muslims arguing for Shari'a law and Christians arguing from the Bible about sexual ethics.

Not exact matches

Other evangelical activists have gone further, arguing that Beck's faith isn't that different from that of mainstream Christians.

James Mildred from the Christian charity CARE said: «It is a complete myth to argue that the majority of men and women in prostitution are there because of choice.

While the report acknowledges that no single «Christian'tax policy can be pieced together from biblical texts, the report argues that some clear directions do emerge, some of which may be controversial.

Brown argues that a decisive shift in the conception of generosity accompanied the transition from pagan to Christian society.

In disputes with Jews, Christian thinkers in the early centuries argued that the promises of return and restoration (in Isaiah, Ezekiel, and the minor prophets) must be interpreted to refer either to the time of the exile in the sixth century B.G.E, i.e., the time of the return from exile in Babylonia, or to the new gathering of humankind in the church.

Some Christians who were there tried to argue with him from 1 John 1:8, that the one who says they have not sinned is a liar.

As Paul argued in I Corinthians 15, if Jesus of Nazareth has not been raised from the tomb, then Christian faith is useless.

One could argue that this had religious advantages from a Christian point of view, since it emphasized what God is doing here and now in and with us rather than locating God's action in the distant past.

I would argue that a Christian and an Atheist could have equally good lives, both from a moral standpoint and a fulfillment standpoint.

The first comes from Frank Viola, who argues that there are now four major streams within evangelicalism, particularly among Christians in their 20s, 30s, and 40s:

Furthermore, Wesley argued (against Reformed doctrine) that Christians could enjoy entire sanctification in this life: loving God and their neighbors, meekness and lowliness of heart, abstaining from all appearance of evil, and doing all for the glory of God.

But he went much further, arguing that Christian philosophy, like that of Aristotle, should be empirical: it should proceed from what can be grasped by the senses — and not, as the Augustinian tradition held, by what can be grasped purely by the Mind.

Adele and Peter Walker (at Emerging Christian blog) will attempt to put Rollins» words into practice through a cooperative blog series about what it means to argue from weakness.

This latter inclusion is Davies's most radical departure from Christian orthodoxy and reveals most strikingly his debt to Jung, who argued that vice and virtue are mutually interdependent — always in contention, but never entirely to be factored out one from the other.

Quote from another poster: «That's like arguing that no Christian church should be build anywhere near downtown Oklahoma City.

As a process theologian Cobb argues that the appropriation of insights from other religions can be authentically Christian, inasmuch as Christianity is itself an ongoing process capable of creative transformation through openness to other Ways.

Some turn to the East, particularly to Taoism; some to Native American perspectives and other primal traditions; some to emerging feminist visions; still others to neglected themes or traditions within the Western heritage, ranging from materials in Pythagorean philosophy to neglected themes in Plato to Leibniz or Spinoza; and still others to twentieth - century philosophers such as Heidegger or to philosophical movements such as the Deep Ecology movement.9 As one would expect in an age characterized by a split between religion and philosophy, few environmental philosophers turn to sources in the Bible or Christian theology for help, though some — Robin Attfield, for example — argue that Christian history has been wrongly maligned by environmental philosophers, and that it can serve as a better resource than some might expect (WTEE 201 - 230).

I argued that the humanity of the Crucified Jesus as the foretaste and criterion of being truly human, would be a much better and more understandable and acceptable Christian contribution to common inter-religious-ideological search for world community because the movements of renaissance in most religions and rethinking in most secular ideologies were the results of the impact of what we know of the life and death of the historical person of Jesus or of human values from it.

David, yes it comes from the Old testament, but those statements are still valid when some christians still argue that the earth is only 6000 years old, and that dinosaurs never actually existed, that that evolution thing is a fraud.

Since we can not survey history from some universal, purely rational point of view, narrative theologians argue, we have no choice but to operate out of the historical narrative in which we find ourselves — and for the Christian theologian that means the Christian narrative, shaped by the story (ies) of Jesus Christ as found in the Bible.

Just as we may argue that there is a unity of aims, objectives and approach underlying and generating empirical science, however greatly scientific beliefs may change and develop from age to age, so we may argue that there is an analogous unity underlying and generating Christian belief and practice.

So I wish to make it very clear I am going to ask a questions to LEARN not to argue: What does the story of the Isrealites and the manna from heaven mean to you personally, as a «conservative» Christian?

Likewise, Christians can often argue either side of any case and back it up with something from the Bible.

I know John 14:6 is the «go - to» verse in order to argue against this, but the Gospel of John could have easily been wiped from the slate - again, it is because Irenaeus chose to include it that Christians embrace it word for word.

Christian feminists often argue that the exclusively masculine God of tradition is an idolatrous projection of male patriarchs, and that those who refuse to revise tradition are fleeing from the prophetic claims to justice.

Instead of subordinating Christian claims to realist (or other) canons of truth that stand outside Christianity, Marshall proposes, Christian thinkers should argue from an explicitly Christian standpoint.

In the first century, Clement referred to the scriptures as the «true utterances of the Holy Spirit» (1 Clement 1:45); in the second, Athenagoras argued that «God moved the mouths of the prophets as if they were musical instruments» (A Plea For the Christians), and Augustine said that «the authors of holy Scripture were totally free from error» (Letter 82.3).

Whilst this approach was disturbing for many Christians at the time, it again meant that defenders of Christianity, instead of calling for a leap of faith, could start from historical events and argue from them to the divinity of Jesus Christ His divinity was seen as the perfection of his humanity and this fitted with the approach of Schleiermacher, who saw Jesus, whose consciousness was entirely taken up with awareness of God, as «the ideal representative of religion».

Even if Gnosticism in its distinction from Christianity is recognized as finally abortive, the critic might argue that the rise of Christian existence as such presupposes Gnosticism.

Or the secularist may argue that we believe in God because we want to claim Divine sanction for our worldly interests and desires, and points to the allied and German soldiers in World War I singing hymns as they tried to kill each other, and the religious believer shakes his head sadly and admits that many Christians have done this from the beginning.

In the book's first chapter, «Why the Christian Church is not Pacifist,» he argued that «the failure of the Church to espouse pacifism is not apostasy, but is derived from an understanding of the Christian Gospel which refuses simply to equate the Gospel with the «law of love.»

Edinburgh scholar Andrew Walls has argued that the shift of the numerical bulk of Christians from Europe and North America to Asia, Africa, Latin America and other areas outside the Northern Hemisphere has had more than demographic significance.

Instead he argues that we should «courteously present adversaries with detailed readings of their own work, while exposing the heresy announced with respect of Christian teaching; then they correct their teachings while also learning from and adopting some of their ideas.»

If you've ever witnessed two Christians arguing polar opposites from the same scriptures, you might think...

Christians arguing stories from their bible vs. scientific facts is like arguing about Santa's sleigh flying... sure it says it flies in the stories but the facts are that there is no Santa (sorry kids), there is no magic sleigh, and there are no magical reindeer to guide his sleigh tonight.

Markos argues that this Christian humanist vision that God's revelation answers our highest aspirations has suffered since the Puritans portrayed heaven as an escape from earth rather than as the redemption of creation.

17I once argued, relying on William A. Christian's An Interpretation of Whitehead's Metaphysics (New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1959), that God was exempt from subjective perishing on the grounds that perishing was absent from the categoreal scheme.

D. E. Nineham points out that «most commentators accept at any rate the basic facts of the story, arguing that Christians would have been unlikely to invent a tradition in which Jesus receives hurried burial from a pious Jew, and his own followers have no part in the proceedings ’15 and then goes on to add that «scholarly opinion has perhaps been a little inclined to overlook the possible influence of the Old Testament on the story».16

Christian philosophers argue that the best explanation for these facts is that Jesus rose from the dead — unless of course your mind is closed to the idea of the miraculous.

@Chad «I have never seen anyone successfully argue that Hitlers actions were anything other than motivated by german nationalism, however, I do think horrendous theology in Christianity over the centuries has contributed a great deal to anti-semitism, so I do think we as Christians have an ownership of a great deal of the holocaust and I wont shy away from that.

To answer that question, Justin argues that we have to have «a clear, consistent biblical standard for interpreting the text, a principle we can apply to various passages that will help us to determine, fairly and consistently, how to translate them for our culture... Such a standard would need to be able to differentiate God's eternal laws — such as those dealing with murder, theft, and adultery — from the cultural biblical rules Christians are no longer obligated to follow — such as those dealing with dietary restrictions and head coverings.»

It has often been argued that the Christian application of the word to Jesus derives from this pagan practice.

One can not argue from Jesus» resurrection to the immortality of people in general for two reasons: first, because people in general are not Jesus or even much like him — and there is strong presumption that Jesus» nature had everything to do with his resurrection — and second, because Jesus was not immortal, according to the Christian message.

The Christian moralist, it is argued, does not need a secular approach to jurisprudence since he derives his principles exclusively from the final revelation.

The French cardinal, who was appointed to the post in June, almost a year after Pope Benedict XVI's controversial speech in Regensburg, argued that dialogue between Christians and Muslims is «the tool which can help us to escape from the endless spiral of conflict and multiple tensions which mark our societies.»

He also justifiably insists that while research on Jewish Christianity has been summoned to argue that Islam is nothing but a Christian heresy, or that Christianity is nothing but an Islamic heresy (or at least a heretical departure from the teachings of the Muslim prophet Jesus), his work attempts to strike a balance between these two trends.

I have christian friends from other churchs and there women do these things and they do it because that is how they interpret the word.Its optional and not inforced by the church or by there husbands.They do it as an act of worship to the Lord.The point is how you interpret the word that was what i was getting at as we know the word is the inspired word of God to understand it we need the inspiration of the holy spirit otherwise the word is dead and brings no life.In the case of mother etta she was called to preach and God used her as an evengelist in her day her ministry grew she witnessed to thousands she healed the sick and saved the lost you can argue over a point but the proof is there that God uses women just as he uses men in ministry today.

The role of the champion of Christian chastity today, I argue, is to dissociate the Church from the false absolutism of identity based upon erotic tendency, and to rediscover our own anthropological foundation for traditional moral maxims.

Do you remember Christian fundamentalists prior to 1990 arguing that Christmas is pagan and from the devil?