Sentences with phrase «better than any gospel»

A gentle word or a generous tip are better than any gospel tract.

Not exact matches

They move to San Francisco, become gay, and zealously preach the gospel of atheism whether people want to hear them or not... all the while thinking how much different and better than daddy they are.

[101] Sanders points out that the author would regard the gospel as theologically true as revealed spiritually even if its content is not historically accurate [101] and argues that even historically plausible elements in John can hardly be taken as historical evidence, as they may well represent the author's intuition rather than historical recollection.

We feel like the gospel flows better relationally than it does just through a programme.»

Jesus» original disciples likely never thought of him as anything more than a great rabbi, and some might have thought him a good rallying point for a revolt, they could have even whispered that he was anointed by God, but the idea of his being divine only seems to enter into the gospels around the time many Greek educated folks had converted, bringing their own views of what a «son of God» means into the faith.

Hence, in order to understand the meaning of the gospel for a wider community than the first generation, these Fathers are our best source.

Wright criticizes Reformers for failing to stress «the great narrative of God, Israel, Jesus, and the world, coming forward into our own day and looking ahead to the eventual renewal of all things» so that their readings of the gospels «show little awareness of them as anything other than repositories of dominical teaching, concluding with the saving events of Good Friday and Easter but without integrating those events into the Kingdom - proclamation that preceded them.»

D. Martyn Lloyd - Jones (1899 - 1981)[in an excerpt from Romans: The New Man, An Exposition of Chapter 6, Banner of Truth, 1972] said: There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel of salvation than this, that some people might misunderstand it and misinterpret it to mean that it really amounts to this, that because you are saved by grace alone it does not matter at all what you do; you can go on sinning as much as you like because it will redound all the more to the glory of grace.

«There is no better test as to whether a man is really preaching the New Testament gospel of salvation than this, that some people might misunderstand it and misinterpret it to mean that it really amounts to this, that because you are saved by grace alone it does not matter at all what you do;....

A highly valid argument coming from a socialist; but today it is gospel truth for a great many Christians, indeed for the best and most serious Christians — those who think of Christianity as something more than words and kind sentiments.

Let us read the gospel boldly and we shall see that no idea can better convey to our minds the redemptive function of the Word than that of a unification of all flesh in one and the same Spirit.

It is probably best to think of John's gospel as a meditation on the meaning of the life of Jesus rather than primarily a historical record, although at times he seems to preserve an early historical tradition.

The Church should embrace Black Lives Matter because Black Lives Matter is preaching the gospel of life, of hope and of justice better than we are.

So that even though the end result can only happen on a personal level, it is definitely better than nothing and it's not like for those others that getting their own perspective through study plus prayer plus trying out the gospel principles is unavailable because it is it available; quite available.

More than that I think there is so much «wrong» with the system and that Jesus and the Gospel quickly become second among many good things.

In his opinion it is an even better Jesus movie than Pasolini's The Gospel According to St Matthew.

That if that's their calling of the Lord than should be on salary but a moderate salary not a salary that makes them rich but of a modest lifestyle sure if they have a family living in a home that meets their needs and these millionaire status like cars where your above the people Jesus lived a very conservative life for a reason so that he was not a distraction too his assignment of preach the Gospel being a good example and staying away from any appearance of filthy lucre as we see displayed today as he he who preaches the Gospel if they have no other charge from the Lord than they should live of the Gospel

As for the Christian imperative to share the gospel, Vine say it's often «better to be kind than to be right» and that in his experience being honest about our doubts is more authentic to others than cast - iron certainty.

If you have «miracles» on the menu and prophetic utterances (i.e. competing with the psychic hotlines and HDTV), personal growth (read gospel flavoured new age narcissism) and groovy music it gives you an edge over the poor guy next door (read your competition — i.e. the small potatoes pastor who has even less than you) and you will drive a better car and be considered a man of G - d but only if you are successful (i.e. attract crowds) otherwise you are a loser whether you have a shepherd's heart or not.

I was in my cell one night reading the Gospel of John, and I couldn't help but think that Jesus was better than me.

The seventh and last chapter, «The World After Jesus,» eloquently points to ancient and modern individuals and groups who have been faithful to the Spirit of Jesus, including those who have seen better by the gospel light than some who are privileged to carry it.

The Gospel of John, written a good deal later than these, is different in structure, style, and quite largely in content.

Rather than fearing or cheering the arrival of the End of the World, can we all just keep our heads on straight, and keep our heads out of the clouds, and focus instead on living the Gospel by loving and serving others, and making this world better and safer for all of us?

Analogously, the fact that parts of sayings in Thomas can be paralleled in several gospels does not prove that the author used a source earlier than them; it may well indicate simply that he was combining gospel words.

In fact, I'd wager I know the gospels better than you since you are flagrantly violating them.

I doubt if such a presentation of the Christian gospel is other than a palliative for those who are insecure, as well as offering a sort of reassurance to people who have been induced (often by quite dubious techniques) to feel enormously guilty about themselves.

In fact, when they were thinking of its content rather than its form, they spoke of it as «the Good News» (in our translation, «Gospel»).

These two holy apostles would have been better fit as bouncers outside an expensive casino in Vegas owned by a mobster, than preachers of the gospel of love.

However, since the gospel is about way more than just words and ideas, and also contains instructions on how to live life as a member of God's family, it might be best to include some sort of element of «proper living» in the translation of euangelistēs, such as «one who lives the gospel.»

To emphasize this close connection, I have suggested elsewhere that the term «gospelist» might be a better translation than «evangelist,» [3] but since this word us unlikely to receive wide acceptance, maybe the word could be translated as «one who teaches the gospel.»

The gospel insists that human beings are the greatest good, and that everyone's needs are best met when we live in community, caring for each other rather than looking out for Number One.

Demanding strictly scientific precision to guarantee Scripture's trustworthiness, requiring something more objective than the internal, personal witness of the Holy Spirit through the text itself, scholars like Lindsell end up testing the truth of the Bible by an extra-Biblical standard.32 As with Davis, externally derived «good reasons» become the ultimate criterion for judging the gospel.

«Inerrancy,» understood in this way, is «a good deal more flexible than is supposed,» according to Pinnock, «and does not suspend the truth of the gospel upon a single detail, as is so often charged.

Nick Spencer, research director of the Theos think tank and author of The Evolution of the West (SPCK) argues that it is, and that it is a mistake to take the universalist message of the gospel — the good news is for everyone — as invalidation of all identifiers other than being a Christian: «I think that's problematic because it takes the universalist notion of Christianity without also taking the incarnational notion of Christianity which is local and which does have specific identities.

This means that the world in its adulthood «is no really better understood than it understands itself, namely on the basis of the gospel and in the light of Christ.

The gospel for the saint, in many pulpits, has tragically become moral advice rather than God's good news.

If it really has been «done to death,» then I can think of numerous topics that have been done many times more than this topic (at least where I'm at and interact): faith, hope, love, prayer, fellowship, giving, good works, christian unity, salvation, grace, faith healing, being culturally relevant, the gospel, the resurrection, religion vs. relationship, tithing, worship, reverence, christian music, legalism, old vs. new covenant, Paul's conversion, miracles, gifts of the spirit, sign gifts, tongues, nativity, the disciples, crucifixion, materialism, mysticism, new age, atheism, i could probably list about 50 more if I thought about it.

As a result, they stepped down from the Gospel Coalition, the movement's flagship organization, with best wishes for their future ministry but with strong hints that behind the scenes the departure had been less than amicable.

Well, the Sermon on the Mount is probably recorded in more than one gospel (at least a similar sermon, although perhaps preached in a different location).

The date, therefore, at which Paul received the fundamentals of the Gospel can not well be later than some seven years after the death of Jesus Christ.

plus Paul said Jesus said «It is better to give than to receive» but it is not in the gospels.

Or should we say as some have that Paul understood the gospel of grace better than Peter?.

To paraphrase Charles Dickens just a bit, we have a far, far better gospel and a far, far better Savior to offer this world than what they have heard from us at times.

The gospel is of infinitely greater importance than any campaign, and one good summary of the gospel is, «Jesus is Lord.»

most of the people whom Joel reaches know the bible or some parts of it better than you... it is better to preach your own gospel than to judge another man's servant... unless of course that's your job

According to McKnight, contemporary evangelicals have built a «salvation culture,» rather than a «gospel culture» in which the good news is reduced to a message of personal salvation.

There is one gospel, applicable to the whole of life, and to truncate it at any point is to make it into something less than the good news of salvation for which the world waits.

This general point of view has been stated in various ways, but I have not found it better expressed in terms of what it both does and does not imply than in the words of a distinguished New Testament scholar, Frederick Grant, in his book The Gospel of the Kingdom.

If the gospel was nothing more than a set of propositions to believe, or a series of doctrines to defend, then I would agree that creeds and confessions do a good job protecting gospel.

On television this is best done by telling stories — stories which reveal what the gospel means for Christians (rather than for «everyone»).