Sentences with phrase «biblical texts as»

And it is the Scriptures that I am concerned with — not biblical texts as records of discrete historical times, but rather the Bible as a coherent unit, brought together under the auspices of the Holy Spirit and fitted in God's providence for leading Christians to the contemplation of the Triune God as revealed in the text, the Church, and the world.

What literary critics and biblical scholars share, according to the editors of The Literary Guide, is not so much an interest in the referential qualities of the biblical texts as an interest in their internal relationships, particularly as these relationships are controlled by language.

In this book, basing himself, upon the direct meaning of Biblical texts as construed by him in a literal fashion, he denied the existence of the antipodes, and asserted that the world is a flat parallelogram whose length is double its breadth.

To look for specific biblical texts as the definitive resolution of questions about war, sexuality, personal rights, public policy, etc., and to present these as revealed truths, is highly questionable.

The heroes of modern - day evangelicalism, from scholars like N.T. Wright to pastors like Rob Bell, are passionately and unapologetically contextual textualists, working diligently with a host of ancient literary and archaeological sources to make sense of biblical texts as they would have been understood in their day.

It has about as much to do with the Biblical texts as Humpty Dumpty.

This is certainly a problem for those who treat the biblical text as sacred, regard the biblical heroes as models, and suppose that everything said about God is true.

It is, in particular, the second of evangelicalism's two tenets, i. e., Biblical authority, that sets evangelicals off from their fellow Christians.8 Over against those wanting to make tradition co-normative with Scripture; over against those wanting to update Christianity by conforming it to the current philosophical trends; over against those who view Biblical authority selectively and dissent from what they find unreasonable; over against those who would understand Biblical authority primarily in terms of its writers» religious sensitivity or their proximity to the primal originating events of the faith; over against those who would consider Biblical authority subjectively, stressing the effect on the reader, not the quality of the source — over against all these, evangelicals believe the Biblical text as written to be totally authoritative in all that it affirms.

Almost twenty years ago Joseph Ratzinger observed: Modern exegesis, as we have seen, completely relegated God to the incomprehensible, the otherworldly, and the inexpressible in order to be able to treat the biblical text itself as an entirely worldly reality according to natural - scientific methods.

But the normativeness of Scripture should still take seriously the reality of a spectrum of other views among listeners, ranging from the Bible as an imprimatur on the preached word to the biblical text as having little inherent authority (Allen).

The critique of historical criticism's limit the standard one: it is reductionistic, it claims to subordinate the text to scientific methods when in fact it has philosophical presumptions, and it tends to read the biblical text as a set of fragments rather than as a unified whole.

Modern exegesis, as we have seen, completely relegated God to the incomprehensible, the otherworldly, and the inexpressible in order to be able to treat the biblical text itself as an entirely worldly reality according to natural - scientific methods.

But to receive the biblical text as testimony is to «dismantle» this fortress, «and to restore a historical dimension to studies otherwise purely literary.»

Not exact matches

Especially as pastors, it's easy to individually lose sight of our relationship with God b / c everyday at work, we're looking at biblical texts or looking at some lesson, or talking with someone else about God.

Patrick was immersed in the language and thought of Scripture, and Moore provides alongside the text the biblical references, as well as unobtrusive footnotes explaining historical obscurities.

Almost all the stories surrounding Jesus (if he did exist, some scholars say their is no proof of a historical Jesus) were borrowed from earlier myths and used word for word... as well as the rampant literary corruption and forgeries of Biblical Texts... It is also impossible for God to exist in the Christian version or form they created.

They turned from the authority of the church as interpreter of Scripture to the biblical texts themselves.

It was never originally written in Latin, only translated... the first translation by St. Jerome — the Vulgate which was a translation of a group of biblical texts known as the Vetus Latina.

In the Biblical Manuscript P72, dating from 175 - 200AD, and containing the entire text of 1 Peter, 2 Peter, and Jude, in this, we find 2 Peter 1:1 — ``... our God and Savior, Jesus Christ...» proving that the deity of Jesus was NOT a construct of Emperor Constantine (Roman Emperor from 306 - 337) as was proclaimed by Dan Brown in his book «The DaVinci Code,» but rather, this was a central teaching of the disciples from day 1.

She is neither a rescuer of biblical religion from its feminist critics nor only a «post-biblical feminist» who must reject the Bible wholesale as a gynocidal text.

If experience is more important than doctrine, and no doctrine is immune to revision» both of which are conclusions of Olson's postconservatives» how do we know that our fresh readings are not derived as much from our experience as from the biblical text?

the only remaining biblical argument (that the text is culturally bound) requires a NEW hermeneutic — but now you are asking conservatives not simply to «listen to their Bibles» (as MLK could do) but rather to ABANDON them.

As a scholar of the biblical languages, Peterson was frustrated that his parishioners in Maryland couldn't see how revolutionary the text was, during their Bible study classes.

The biblical hermeneutic of Christian Zionism distorts biblical texts by reading them out of their canonical and historical context, making them seem more like such fictional works as the «Left Behind» series than the whole Word of God.

In the complementarian manifesto, the Danvers Statement, egalitarians are accused of «accepting hermeneutical oddities devised to reinterpret apparently plain meanings of biblical texts,» resulting in a «threat to Biblical authority as the clarity of Scripture is jeopardized and the accessibility of its meaning to ordinary people is withdrawn into the restricted realm of technical ingenuitybiblical texts,» resulting in a «threat to Biblical authority as the clarity of Scripture is jeopardized and the accessibility of its meaning to ordinary people is withdrawn into the restricted realm of technical ingenuityBiblical authority as the clarity of Scripture is jeopardized and the accessibility of its meaning to ordinary people is withdrawn into the restricted realm of technical ingenuity.»

What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist reading of the text represents a capitulation to culture but a reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.

The Lectionary loves to take biblical texts that share some things in common and then watch as worlds collide once differences come to light.

My disagreements with the five points of both Calvinism and Arminianism iare not exactly with their theology or understanding of Biblical texts, but with something much more basic than that: their definition of certain biblical words and theological ideas, such as election, grace, salvation, atonement, justification, eternal life, forgiveness of sins, etBiblical texts, but with something much more basic than that: their definition of certain biblical words and theological ideas, such as election, grace, salvation, atonement, justification, eternal life, forgiveness of sins, etbiblical words and theological ideas, such as election, grace, salvation, atonement, justification, eternal life, forgiveness of sins, etc, etc..

Theology in the Reformation tradition has explored other alternatives, as in the «Andover theory» which views biblical texts such as 2 Peter 3:19 «20 and 4:6 and Christ's descent to the dead referenced in the Apostles» Creed as warranting belief in the Hound of Heaven pursuing the last and the least.

As we learned in the discussion on Inerrancy, the process of copying the Greek and Hebrew texts caused errors to creep into the biblical manuscripts over time.

The loss of biblical language in public rhetoric or in public education may have telling effect (Lincoln might be incomprehensible today) Sunday school and other agencies of biblical education, where the texts can be restored and minds can as well be re-stored, are neglected, signaling that citizens are not really serious when they ask for more religion in the schools.

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

As you can see, Christians advocating for the preservation of slavery did not characterize their abolitionist opponents as simply disagreeing with them on the interpretation of the biblical text, but instead tended to accuse them of not taking the Bible seriously at alAs you can see, Christians advocating for the preservation of slavery did not characterize their abolitionist opponents as simply disagreeing with them on the interpretation of the biblical text, but instead tended to accuse them of not taking the Bible seriously at alas simply disagreeing with them on the interpretation of the biblical text, but instead tended to accuse them of not taking the Bible seriously at all.

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.

One answer takes Biblical texts to function as «lures for feeling.»

Even while acknowledging some lat.itude in these early chapters, it appears that science is increasingly able to corroborate what we have held in faith based upon biblical texts, including bases for such matters as an ancient deluge, genetic linking back to one mother and possible on father, and the possibility of extended life - spans prior to the deluge.

«Through personal stories, proven experience and a thorough analysis of the biblical text, Building a Healthy Multi-ethnic Church illustrates both the biblical mandate for the multi-ethnic church as well as the seven core commitments required to bring it about.»

(2) Boomershine sees historical criticism as the biblical method of this era, where the truth of the text is achieved by personal study of the text in silence on your own.

(And rendering only a partial quote is much like biblical proof texting in my opinion) I am kind of a stickler on such details, as a sloppy portrayal of another's words often leads to inaccurate representation of their intent.

One doesn't have to like this, but as far as the biblical text is concerned, that's all you've got.

This second way of construing the force of Biblical texts, viz., as giving descriptions of actualities, seems part of a quite different enterprise than the first construal of the force of Biblical texts (viz., as expressing «propositions» that are «lures for feeling»).

Literalism diverts attention from, as well as flattening out, the symbolic depth and multidimensionality of the biblical texts.

As a Protestant, I could see the exegetical basis for the former, with the dogma developing as the result of debates over biblical textAs a Protestant, I could see the exegetical basis for the former, with the dogma developing as the result of debates over biblical textas the result of debates over biblical texts.

I believe it is the responsibility of all those who disagree with Richard Dawkins» rather superficial and juvenile conclusions about the biblical text, to create space for a deeper discussion around the way in which we work with it and, as a consequence, who we understand God to be.

Increasingly, he suggests as a biblical scholar, historical criticism is having diminishing value for eliciting lived truth from biblical texts.

It recognizes that there is a twofold relevance to be presented, to the text as well as to the context, but it insists that the relevance to the modem context will collapse as soon as the relevance to the biblical text is lost.

My problems with this book are the same problems I have with nearly all books about biblical criticism: I believe the presuppositions of most of those who engage in biblical criticism are inherently flawed, and as a result, short - circuit the creative thinking that is necessary to discover solutions to the so - called problems in the biblical text.

My first point registers the conviction that the primary hermeneutical principle arises from the decision how to approach the biblical text, whether to view it as I do as God's written Word or to see it in a reduced mode such as is common today.

While we are on this subject, how is it that those who take a high view of the Scriptures are known to produce less by way of creative biblical interpretation than those who either bracket the question or treat the text as a human document?

It has many sources, from redaction critics who started looking at each Gospel as a whole to literary scholars like Northrop Frye and Frank Kermode who have called renewed attention to the narrative shape of biblical texts.