Sentences with phrase «about the justification of»

In the light of this broader description of evil we should reformulate the theodicy problem so as to ask not only about the justification of disorder in a world created by an allegedly all - good and all - powerful God, but also about a world that seemingly can not exist apart from an intrinsic adventurousness.

Not exact matches

To be sure, valid questions may be raised about whether Enlightenment justifications based on insecurity in the state of nature can truly ground human rights.

And, as the normal way of thinking about moral obligations was to understand them as the commands of God, the first defense or justification of this belief was an attempt to show that this is what God commanded.

C. Which, is NOT the context of «deterrence being a justification for punishment» that @saraswati was talking about.

Without the truths of the death and resurrection of Jesus, there is no gospel, but the gospel is way more than a message about justification and how to get eternal life.

She's inviting apologies, or what most likely would be a set of counter-accusations and justifications, or at least explanatory context that would likely invite scrutiny into her behavior at the time because again divorces are competing clashing stories about pain and betrayal and rage and brokenness.

For better or worse, the elaborate investigation of, for instance, the connections between St. Paul's teaching on justification and the criminal justice system will be totally inaccessible» and, if accessible, implausible» to anyone within hailing distance of policy discussions about crime and punishment.

No doubt there is some justification for their belief that the lessening of knowledge and conviction about these doctrines has left a void that leads to lack of evangelical fervor in the church as a whole.

You are right about the legal requirements, especially since the concept of justification is a legal term, right?

For example, he talks about the heresies of «justification by faith alone» (p. 237), annihilationism, hyper - preterism (p. 242), Openness of God, and Religious Inclusivism (p. 281).

He applied his own theory about justification as establishing a covenant of grace to the marriage union, and argued that «God draws a husband and wife into a covenant relationship with each other.»

thoughts about justification recently, though I am not sure what to make of it.

Perhaps his forgiveness of us might evoke in us, if only for a moment, a willingness to wonder about the pride we take in our modernity, our self - sufficiency, our self - justification.

In a second article about the practical implications of the justification debate, this question was asked:

Every single theological statement is only important and intelligible if it is considered within the whole complex of statements about justification.

I also must leave aside the question why theologians on both sides could not agree, or at least thought they could not agree, about the subject of justification.

Their stories often suggest the appalling extent to which the church tends not simply to ignore sexual, physical, emotional and spiritual violence against women and children as a major crisis, but actually to provide theological justification for this violence in its teachings about male headship, women's subordination, and the sinful character of sexuality.

The theologian, on the other hand, confesses the special character of the perspective he shares and is therefore more likely to be critically reflective about his assumptions and about the kind of justification he can claim for them.

I wanted to share this summary from Christianity Today about the current debate between theologians N.T. Wright and John Piper regarding the nature of justification.

But I'm not sure about just ditching the idea of a vision that the Body has (I'm talking local church)... I mean, although I want sometimes to ditch it, I can't find justification in Scripture.

Or to put it another way again, discussion about God's predestination should not fall under the category of justification, but under the categories of sanctification and glorification.

The test of justification must always be pragmatic» (PR 181).13 The experience of CE and particularly of the «withness of the body,» if accurate, gives us essential real - time information about events in our environment which could well have a vital impact on our well - being.

The Reformation was about authority, tradition, and justification, and the leaders of the Reformation believed and taught that everything we have from God, is Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solus Christus, Sola Scriptura, and Soli Deo Gloria.

What else is religion for but to fill in gaps — in our knowledge of how the world should work, in our justifications for our actions, in our responsibility for things we ought to do something about but don't?

R In 1879, W. K. Clifford had never thought about epistemology and had not acquired the concept of rational justification, so that he didn't believe that he was rationally justified in believing that ship owners ought not to send their ships to sea without checking their seaworthiness.

Adamant about the centrality of justification by faith through grace, we sometimes verge on a perverse kind of theological works - righteousness.

Questions about justification are certainly in order, but for a number of reasons I think these are not the right ones.

Paul never wrote about justification, sanctification, or any of other «big words of the Bible.»

He needs our view on salvation, wrath, and eternal rewards, and our case might be strengthened with his view of justification, while avoiding the mistakes he makes about works following faith... though really, his point about works is that they follow faith in the Holy Spirit... which is different, and which I could probably agree with.

They should at the same time be led to inquire into the justification for rules and instructed in the appropriate ways of bringing about changes in social regulations to make them more just.

This definition does not imply that metaphysics does not deal with reality and only refers to thinking about reality.19 As stated above, in An Essay on Metaphysics, Collingwood does not intend to expound his own metaphysical ideas, but to give a justification of the metaphysical project.

I couldn't connect to the kind of devotional, emotional spirituality so many of my friends seemed to enjoy; and most of the time I'd rather study the details of Paul's arguments about justification than meditate on a Psalm.

Yet another «biblical» «justification» about the current state of affairs where so many churches silently hate on gay sex and call that hate under different names.

Instead of offering an excuse, such as mitigating circumstances, or a justification, such as a wrong serving a higher end, people speak about mistakes being made.

Unless one bleaches the debate of its living doctrinal substance — and the Rav explicitly states that requiring men of faith to bracket their deepest experiences constitutes unacceptable censorship — it inevitably raises questions about atonement, justification, faith and works, and so on.

The council itself said little about justification, but it set a mood that made discussion of this old point of division inevitable.

It provides a one - sentence affirmation about the gospel and speaks of our entire hope of justification and salvation» resting on «God's promise and the saving work in Christ,» as «our ultimate trust.»

We have become way too much eyeball people as Christians assume that those who don't live according to the way they do they are unsaved, we have created this judgemental relationship which hurts peoples fellowship with God, there are no litmus tests for people that believe in Jesus, which is why we are called to not judge others, and people use James 2:14, and 1 John's verse of those who practices righteousness are righteous even though I think it's talking about earthly righteousness toward people that we as Christians should show because there is a lost world out there that needs are help and these doctrines of guilt, condemnation, anger, and judgement aren't helping in fact they are doing the opposite, just like how in James it's justification towards man.

Lots of churches and church leaders want to use Matthew 16:19 and Jesus» statement to Peter about the keys of the kingdom of heaven as justification for judging and condemning others for their beliefs or their behavior.

It is in this light that we must understand all that Paul says about redemption, justification, and the end of the Law.

This idea of external justification has no basis in Scripture which consistently speaks of the «new creation» or «new man» brought about through baptism.

Being a Reformed (Calvinist) theologian of considerable earnestness, McGrath's essay understandably dwells at length on the formula «justification by faith alone,» and related questions about, for instance, the connection between justification and sanctification.

It is asked, «Who today cares about those musty doctrinal disputes of the sixteenth century over questions such as justification?»

Political theories and ideologies are fundamentally justifications of the powers; they are not theories about the sovereignty of the Minjung.

Highlights for me included: 1) Belcher's call in Chapter 3 to find common ground in classic / orthodox Christianity (the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed) which, if applied, would dramatically reduce some of the name - calling and accusations of heresy that have been most unhelpful in the discussion between the emerging and traditional camps, 2) Belcher's fabulous treatment of postmodernism and postfoundationalism in Chapter 4, where he rightly explains that when talking about postmodernism, folks in the emerging church and the traditional church are using the same term to refer to two completely different things, and where he concludes that «a third way rejects classical foundationalism and hard postmodernism,» and 3) Belcher's fair handling of the atonement issue in Chapter 6, in which he clarifies that most emergering church leaders «are not against atonement theories and justification, but want to see it balanced with the message of the kingdom of God.»

At the beginning of Romans — the epistle of justification by faith — Paul introduces himself as an apostle set apart for the gospel and explains the gospel as a message about God's Son, born in the flesh as a descendant of David and raised from the dead by the power of the Spirit.

Our inheritance of Reformation iconoclasm is usually put forward as the traditional reason for our discomfort; and in the mainline churches our commitment to social justice and our resulting decisions about stewardship are cited as contemporary explanation and justification.

Was this author equally appalled about the prayer breakfast earlier this month, when President Obama tried to use biblical phrases like «for unto whom much is given, much shall be required» and «love thy neighbor as thyself» out of context as justification for his tax and economic policies?

There remains a theological problem, in the tendency of popular evangelical discourse to reduce the gospel to regeneration and justification by faith alone, as though conversion were only about entrance to the faith.

The freedom of the Christian to live without worrying about his performance towards his justification and salavation and the freedom of God to be God.