Sentences with phrase «between human sin»

It is a tension between human perversity and divine purpose, between human sin and divine grace.

Not exact matches

And as Cheever's confession to Hersey makes clear, the real stress lies more on the human choice between darkness and light than on the sovereignty of God's grace — the divine goodness which must redeem not only our grosser sins but our noblest aspirations as well.

In becoming a model, it has engendered wide - ranging interpretation of the relationship between God and human beings; if God is seen as father, human beings become children, sin can be seen as rebellious behavior, and redemption can be thought of as restoration to the status of favored offspring.

And human marriage is the living out of his plan: a lifelong bond between a man and a woman: the one blessing «not forfeited by Original Sin, or washed away in the flood».

> His suffering for sin, though He entered of His own will, The statement is true but there is an important angle that is missed as we see the GREAT battle of WILLS between the human Jesus and the Father!

As Beecher put it, sin was a conflict «between the lower element of human nature and the higher.»

There is an infinite, qualitative difference between the Creator and his creatures and only God can re-establish a relationship that has been disrupted by human sin.

Although this is not the place to discuss at greater length the nature of evil, human sin, suffering, death and the relationship between them, they must find mention here for they constitute the chief problems which continually confront man and make him question whether there is any justice or meaning to be found in life.

My supposition is that the individualization of sin is the trivialization of sin, and given the systematic connection between our understanding of sin and our understanding of God as the one who addresses us in our human plight, the trivialization of sin has an inexorable affect upon two areas: the doctrine of God, and the sense of individual and corporate responsibility for social ills.

The meaning of this passage has been a matter of dispute among New Testament experts, although it is quite obvious that if it does nothing more it asserts that the Apostle believed that there was some connection between the fact of death and the reality of human sin.

Niebuhr's inordinate emphasis on the doctrine of sin derives from the anxiety inherent in the paradox created by the conflict between man's freedom and his tendency toward the prideful self - dependency which is a universal human tendency.

Examine the question of freedom from literary, theological and political perspectives with attention to the relationship between freedom and human happiness (informed by understandings of law, sin, and grace) and the relationship between freedom and tradition.

If we humans can differentiate between sins, (manslaughter vs premeditated murder, robbery vs armed robbery, assault vs rape, etc.) then I'm sure G - d is smart enough to do the same and act accordingly when we stand before him in judgement.

But he thinks that the Christian and the philosophical understanding of human life are so close to one another in their conception of sin that he refuses to distinguish between them at this point.

At the beginning of the human race, immediately after the first sin, the Lord God Himself spoke of the enmity between her and the serpent.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that as a result of original sin, an operative evil is to be found in human nature - not least in the sexual attraction between man and woman, also inside marriage.

It's not to do with human nature per se; it's to do with sin: envy, jealousy, possessiveness, quarrelling, a lack of willingness to forgive and forget, infidelity, manipulation, the desire to control and dominate, lack of consideration in matters to do with running a home as well as in the bedroom (sex can be one of the highest expressions of love between a man and a woman; it can also be incredibly selfish); hearts that are consistently closed to new life.

God judges the sin and human being judges the violation of human rights and a clear line should be between the two.

When they encounter the actuality of suffering and injustice, the impurity of even the best motives, and the mutual destructiveness even of a relatively virtuous people, and when they discover also the depths of sin which erupt on a massive scale in human history from time to time, they are overwhelmed by the incongruity between what is and what, at some deep level, they feel should be the case.

But when the Holocaust is interpreted as an act so monstrous that it is separate and distinct from all other human evil; when the victims are understood as a special case among all other victims of oppression; when the men who did this deed are differentiated from all other men as being singularly demonic and non-human — then there is no connection between those criminals and ourselves, no possible continuum between our sin and Nazi sin.

Sin, defined as wrong relationship among human beings and between them and the rest of nature, fosters not just economic and political injustice, not just racism and sexism, but the destruction of the entire created order.

First Things often confronts «social sin» (for example, relationships between human communities that are not in accordance with God's plan and for which responsibility can not necessarily be attributed to an individual).

Radner offers a figural scriptural argument: though Israel was divided because of human sin and divine punishment, «No Jew... is ever asked by God to «choose» between Israel and Judah.»

The Christian recognition of original sin appreciates this gap between the initial aim envisioned by God and the final outcome achieved by man in every human event.

The star - studded, genre - bending drama will explore the clash between artificial consciousness and human sin.