Sentences with phrase «biblical passages as»

Surely it is with this understanding of Jesus» call that we are to read such difficult biblical passages as Colossians 3:22, which bids slaves be obedient to their masters, as though they were obeying Christ himself.

Early on in my lectionary study and preaching I learned to take the assigned limits of the biblical passages as suggestive rather than prescriptive.

I prefer to apply lessons learned from a wider range of human experience and condemn those biblical passages as the product of an ignorant, arrogant, bloodthirsty tribe of self - centered nomadic shepherds whose primary characteristics were a raging persecution complex and an unending quest for justification for their major case of the hots for the little girls in the naboring tribes.

I cited a biblical passage as evidence, that the Christian god does indeed desire everyone believe in Him.

Not exact matches

Reflecting on key biblical passages, the Pope began by wondering what it meant to Adam, walking in the garden, to discover that he was alone as an embodied self.

It was a fun scene that incorporated both humor and thrilling moments, but it was also easy to embrace the obvious visual cues that suggest what many biblical passages describe as a war of the spirit.

But as you mentioned with # 2 and # 4, there are biblical passages that offer support for loving, redemptive, discipline and for controlled anger against sin.

25:23), the great 13th - century biblical exegete Moses Nahmanides interprets the passage as saying:

This provocative view is expressed in many biblical passages where God is cited as the direct cause of evil (Ex.

Clinton cited the Scripture Mark 6:30 - 44 - where Jesus instructs his disciples to organize their followers into groups and to feed them with five loaves of bread and two fish - as the central biblical passage of her speech.

He carried her in, sat her before them, read the passage from James, and said, «I invoke you as my elders to carry out your biblical duty to my family.»

Obviously, I'm a big advocate for mutual submission in marriage, as that is what I believe those biblical passages ultimately teach and this is what works best in our marriage, but more important than adopting a single household model — either patriarchal or egalitarian — is adopting the posture of Jesus Christ, who emptied himself of power and took the role of servant.

So the virtues of humility and resignation are rejected as despicable, and every effort is made to show that they have nothing to do with Christianity — in spite of all the biblical passages to the contrary.

Since the mere recitation of Biblical passages does not suffice, these professionals require guidance as to how to move from text to sermon.

Together with the opening line of the Letter to the Hebrews («In ancient times God spoke to man through prophets and in varied ways, but now he speaks through Christ, His Son...»), as well as many other biblical texts, this passage reveals to us a startling truth.

A wise interpreter would set this verse aside as too vague and unclear on this particular issue and seek Biblical truth on this subject in the clear passages throughout the Bible that teach that God does not hold children to account for the sins of their parents!

Might you be the same observer who was proved to be in total ignorance as to Biblical passages just a day ago?

Billions of Christians would reject that piece of Biblical law just as billions of Muslims are able to see the 50 peace - promoting passages of the Qur «an for every 1 violent one as indicative of their religious duties in life being peaceful ones.

Our embodied generations of godliness seemingly does not show very much considerations to our current worldly affairs as was made mentioning of within many of our biblical scriptures passaged ways.

As J. P. Sanders once said regarding biblical interpretation, «Anytime we read scripture and find ourselves right away on Jesus» side, we have probably misread the passage.»

of his entire antiquities, there are two passages that mention Jesus, 1 merely says his brother was James, and people called him christ (which says nothing about works, resurrection, miracles, teachings), and the other is recognized as most likely a forgery, even by biblical scholars.

Those who advocate for «biblical equality» often overlook those passages in which women are clearly regarded by the writers of Scripture as less than equal.]

The catechism, it will be seen, assigns belief in God and trust in God to two different virtues, though as Benedict XVI's Spe salvi points out, in several Biblical passages «the words «faith» and «hope» seem interchangeable»; [10] but is either of them to be counted as a virtue?

What she's saying is that they've deluded themselves into thinking that cherry picking which passages to follow qualifies as living THE «biblical way».

To summarize, to literalize the apocalyptic passages in the New Testament, is to run counter to all we know of astronomy and the world of space; they are tied in with the then - current Jewish eschatology and Persian dualism which saw evil in command of creation; as commonly accepted, they encourage passivity about the evils of the present world; they emphasize only one side of the message of Jesus to the exclusion of essential elements; they are grounded at least in part on a misconstruction of biblical poetry and drama.

@Chad «ok, fair enough, I will amend my earlier statement as such: «While there are several passages that are disputed as having been included in the original text, there is zero evidence that the biblical text has been adapted or changed in any way.

This is partly because it involves such questions as the interpretation of biblical passages that, on their face, condemn homosexuality as a sin.

While I know that my proposal wreaks havoc on many traditional ways of reading some biblical passages, please know that just as with Romans 8:34, I am aware of these texts and simply understand them in a different light — in the light of the love and beauty of the crucified Christ.

For we have already pointed out that the biblical passage is late, and, though we can not date it within a couple of centuries, it is probably not earlier than Plato and may easily be as late as Zeno.

We noted that one of the criticisms directed against Schweitzer was that he formulated his position at the beginning of his studies and then regarded as authentic only the biblical passages which supported it.

«While there are several passages that are disputed as having been included in the original text, there is zero evidence that the biblical text has been adapted or changed in any way.»

Happily, today those who are not blinded by uncriticized religious prejudice (including misuse of certain biblical passages) or conventional ideas of proper sexual behavior (as if morals were a matter of counting noses or following some social pattern without question) are ready to accept the fact of the homosexual orientation, and many religious groups are now prepared to adopt this positive attitude.

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.»

Second, the author / speaker of the biblical passage is as much a receiver of God's Word as its conveyer.

As with preaching, so with Scripture, a biblical passage is as much a communal act as the expression of a single authoAs with preaching, so with Scripture, a biblical passage is as much a communal act as the expression of a single authoas much a communal act as the expression of a single authoas the expression of a single author.

Yet as we look at each of the Five Points in more detail in subsequent posts, we will make room for other Calvinistic voices to be heard as well, and as we look at the biblical passages they use to defend their theology, we will see that Calvinism may not be as reasonable or biblical as it first appears.

What troubles me is this: When discussing how to apply the Bible both personally and in public policy, nine times out of ten, the words of Jesus are trumped by some other biblical passage or are discounted as impractical.

He also faulted churches for coalescing around distinctions of class, race, education, and economic status rather than welcoming outcasts — represented in the biblical passage by «foreigners» and «eunuchs» — on equal terms with ourselves as children of God.

Far too frequently an appeal is made to some biblical passage or series of passages, or to ancient Christian thinkers, as if this would readily settle whatever question is under discussion.

It is the distinction made, mutatis mutandis, in biblical passages such as Romans 6:16 — 23.

There are also many biblical passages which reflect this understanding, particularly when God appears to Moses as a burning bush.

She quoted Scalia as saying that «we are fools for Christ's sake,» and apparently didn't recognize that Scalia was citing a biblical passage (1 Cor.

Whatever the precise date of this passage from Jeremiah's prophecies — and, as is usually the case, biblical scholars disagree — the general historical context is clear: More than a century earlier the northern kingdom of Israel had been almost entirely annihilated by the Assyrians.

As I was looking through some of the biblical passages analyzed in the book, I was surprised by how verses generally deemed culturally specific often appeared in close proximity to verses generally deemed trans - cultural.

Thus far we tend to suppress those biblical passages that expose radically the reality of the power such as Revelation 13.

These passages served as fundamental proof texts to those who were arguing that slavery was God's will and accusing abolitionists of failing to obey biblical mandates.

@stevie 7 The biblical definition of a fool is not the English word stupid.The Bible defines fool as someone who has lied to themselves by saying there is no God.In a paraphrase of the brief, out of context passage you reference, one could say, professing themselves to be wise, they became atheists.Which one could agree is extremely stupid.

Christianity becomes an instrument of mental distress when biblical passages such as this are taken literally: «You have heard that it was said to the men of old, «You shall not kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment.»

Literalistic interpretation of the biblical passage, «You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect» (Matt.

This Biblical passage has always meant a great deal to me, and as I've been delighted to find out via blog comments and emails, it turns out it means a great deal to a lot of other gapingvoid readers, as well.