Sentences with phrase «accept its teachings as»

They do not believe that they still are but they still accept the teaching as being from God.

Paul accepted his teachings as valid for him.

Furthermore, they accepted his teachings as ultimately normative for their own lives and for the world.

Not exact matches

Just as jujitsu teaches practitioners to channel an opponent's energy to achieve their goals, running a business during the holidays requires accepting the fact that there will be a certain amount of shifted focus and figuring out how to use it for the good of the company.

But perfect love casts out fear... if he perfectly loved, there would be no reason for him fear that we are destroying America... no fear for us to teach sunday school... and no fear of the future when homosexuals are accepted as equals, even in Alabama (where I live) or in whatever southern state fishon is in.

As a devout Christian, I was always taught that non-Christians would go to hell because they did not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and SaviouAs a devout Christian, I was always taught that non-Christians would go to hell because they did not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviouas their Lord and Saviour.

A number of the major religions have even accepted this as you're not actually worshiping Buddha, just following his examples and teachings as to how to be a better person in life.

I accept the Bible's teaching on creation, and see the evidence as being consistently supportive of that belief.

And, unlike Islam, it accepted that source of its moral teaching precisely because it is God's revelation to his people Israel, and it is as Israel has preserved it in Scripture.

On the juridical level, it was now recognized by many Jewish thinkers that Christianity had explicitly accepted the moral teaching of the Hebrew Bible as normative.

Thus, as one who firmly believes in Judaism's teaching of the ubiquity of moral freedom for all humans, I had to suppress my understandable Jewish reticence and accept this invitation.

Now as a Christian I follow the new testament, and so striving to be Christ like as a Christian I accept everyone for who they are, I love them and do not presume to know the right way for them to live their life, instead I simply open my arms to others and know that all people of all faiths are just fine it doesn't matter to me what you do with your life all that matters is the way that you do it... that was my understanding of christs teachings anyways

Furthermore, if the Christian teachings regarding salvation and necessity of accepting Jesus as your Savior is so critical, why have the vast majority of the worlds religions not contained that doctrine?

Others think that the church should teach monogamy as the preferred form of marriage relationship but should accept those who practice polygamy.

If you believe in Jesus Christ,, accept him as your Savior, and live your life following his teachings, then you've been born again.

This implies that if you aren't not living the teachings of Christ you must not really have accepted him as your personal savior, and hence you will not be saved.

For the faithful in Christ can not accept this view, which holds either that after Adam there existed men on this earth who did not receive their origin by natural generation from him, the first parent of all, or that Adam signifies some kind of multiple first parents; for it is by no means apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with what the sources of revealed truth and the acts of the magisterium of the Church teach about original sin, which proceeds from a sin truly committed by one Adam, and which is transmitted to all by generation, and exists in each one as his own» -LCB- Humani Generis 37).

Rabbi Neuberger asserted that «it's really important that one accepts that... new scientific research has taught us... that the human embryo is not as unique as we thought before... We do have to think differently about the «unique quality of human embryos» in the way that Peter Saunders is saying... The miracle of creation... may have to be explained somewhat differently... Our human brains are given to us by God... to better the life of other human beings... and if this technology can do it..., and I don't believe that anybody is going to research beyond fourteen days, then so be it, lets do it.»

We get that, and we accept that as part of the price of not wanting to close off the teaching work of the Holy Spirit, whom Jesus said would lead us into all truth.

If you accepted it then you would have to change much of what you teach, it would make many who you regard as friends angry with you, and would hurt your reputation.

Second, that what is taught must not conflict with the accepted facts of science, or the pupil is bound to be in trouble as he senses the disparity.

It was agreed in the Samaj that «the Vedas, the Upanishads and other ancient writings were not to be accepted as infallible guides, that reason and conscience were to be the supreme authority and the teachings of the scriptures were to be accepted only insofar as they harmonised with the light within us.»

Rubenstein can teach the Christian that the God who stands aloof from the history of nations is the God who stands aloof from Auschwitz, and that the price of accepting a dehistorized or subjective God (the God who is absolute Subject and only Subject) is the abandonment of the objective world or reality as such to the realm of «flesh.»

Within schools it is accepted that it may be possible to state as a proposition that the Catholic Church teaches such and such a thing but not to insist that it is objectively true [10].

The whole point of Christianity is not to accept and affirm autonomous or self - created identities as ultimately determining of who someone is, but to define what it means to be a person in terms of Christian teaching.

'' Once you remove man's dogmas and get back to the teachings of Jesus Christ» Which is one of man's dogmas... Men wrote the bible.You haven't removed anything, you have accepted one of man's dogmas as if it were truth.

So, if you had the ability to judge God as a good guy before accepting what the Bible has to say about his always being good, then you had morals before the Bible taught you that nobody without a belief that God is the source of morals has any morals.

Leaving aside this quite possible case, we may say that the dialogue between a theologian and the magisterium is an intra-ecclesial one, and the doctrine of this theologian an ecclesial doctrine only if he respects and accepts as binding that teaching which the Church considers inseparable from her faith and proclaims with absolute engagement.

It is obvious that if the Bible is handled as a merely human document, then its claims may be accepted or rejected, its teachings may be in agreement or disagreement with each other, its subject may or may not be found relevant to our belief today.

Any Catholic who rejects Catholic teaching, or who technically accepts it but minimizes it to the point of insignificance, is not a «moderate» Catholic but a dissenter, or one seeking approval from the world (a temptation Our Lord warns against)-- and should be identified as such.

Teaching Creationism as a scientific theory teaches people to reject the value of evidence and accept dogma and tradition.

To discover what was distinctive about Jesus» teaching on church discipline, we have to ask what his hearers would have regarded as new — in other words, what was it that they didn't already know and accept?

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,

A council was the only authority that all Christians — including, by his own admission, Martin Luther — would accept as determining whether Luther's teachings were true or false.

For centuries his theological teaching was accepted as official dogma by most Catholics.

Leon went on to discuss how John the Baptist's heralding did not first go as expected but that it was a good thing because it taught people to accept reality.

No, the Bible teaches that you can kill all you want and, as long as you accept Jesus as your savior, you go straight to heaven.

Somehow, a belief system that teaches people that they are the center of all the universe, created in the image of the most perfect being imaginable, strikes me as a bit more of an ego trip than accepting that we aren't destined to live forever because of our «specialness», but that we live our short lifetimes and die like every other living thing on the planet, our bodies decomposing and ultimately entering the food chain once again, on a tiny speck of a planet in an ordinary, remote backwater of the universe.

Accept these five «cleansers» and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!! Unfortunately if you do, the koran teaches that you should be liquidated as an apostate.

He was aware that there were sophisticated types who could not take his teaching; he accepted this as a part of the conditions under which he had to work.

In my opinion, the central biggest lie that we have accepted hook, line, and sinker, is that Islam teaches, and Muslims believe in the same God as Christians and Jews.

Brunner appeals explicitly to the prologue of John and to certain sayings of Paul, but surely one who is as emphatic as he in rejecting the authority of Scriptural teachings as such does not mean to say that we accept the doctrine of creation because of the presence of these passages in the New Testament.

In one aspect they are addressed to all and sundry, laying down the lines of an absolute ethic determined by the coming of the kingdom of God; but insofar as individuals accept them as such, and commit themselves, the new Israel is being formed, and the ethical teaching of Jesus becomes the new law by which it is to be governed.

In the third paragraph I, upfront, indicated my bias as to what I believe is the Biblical precedence which is that fallen mankind has the inherent - free - will capacity to accept or reject God's call / drawing, commands, instructions, teachings, promises and gifts which biased my interpretation of John 6:25 - 71 — and my interpretation indicates that section of Scripture can be understood (interpreted) to be consistent with the precedence I mentioned.

Some have accepted the teaching of Adam Smith and the economists who have built on his work so far as the economy is concerned and then sought to contain the economy in a larger context.

If Church teaching were to be wholeheartedly accepted by the Church as something that should be promoted with enthusiasm, if Humanae Vitae becomes seen as teaching that will make people's lives holier and happier, several consequences follow for education concerning sex and relationships.

Lutherans accept these books as authoritative because they understand them to be faithful witnesses to the teachings of Scripture.

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 the Church does not accept sola scriptura as a valid argument for teachings and trutAs the Church does not accept sola scriptura as a valid argument for teachings and trutas a valid argument for teachings and truth.

But if someone believes that he can not and should not accept the authority of the Gospel, of Scripture and of the teaching office of the Church he can not consider himself a Catholic, he can not be a partner in the dialogue that takes place within the Church and which presupposes the acceptance of her teaching office in as far as it claims to have authority.