Sentences with phrase «biblical texts even»

They choose, for whatever reason (spiritual experience, fear, apathy) to not waiver from their interpretation and understanding of biblical texts even in the face of reason and logic.

Not exact matches

It finds a ready home in the biblical text that curiously» even in its most archaic past» chose not to consign all the righteous to the underworld.

This is not at all a fair or even representation of the Biblical text TGM, and I don't think emotive put downs of this sort do much to advance constructive debate on the subject!

Knust shows absolutely no awareness of Biblical exegesis, hermeneutics, genre, social and historical context, or even a rudimentary understanding of what's prescriptive or descriptive text in some of the historical Biblical narratives.

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.

So while I agree that this is an example of how long some of these teachings went, even here they were interactive discussions, and while we can not be certain, the discussion was probably about the interpretation and application of biblical texts.

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.

When Rob Bell released Love Wins, a book that made a compelling biblical case against the exclusivist theology that all non-Christians will be condemned to eternal conscious torment in hell, the Southern Baptist Convention released a resolution that stated: «Being troubled, even deeply troubled, by the implications of the biblical text does not give us a reason to abandon the text or force it into a mold that rests comfortably with us.

As for the area of creation and science, has not reason compelled us to abandon the referential meaning of the biblical texts in Genesis and forced us to treat them in a theological and even mythological way?

We read the Bible «through the Jesus lens» — which looks suspiciously like it means using the parts of the Gospels that we like, with the awkward bits carefully screened out, which enables us to disagree with the biblical texts on God, history, ethics and so on, even when Jesus didn't (Luke 17:27 - 32 is an interesting example).

However, even independently of their bearing on the Church's interpretation of Jesus» life, death, and resurrection, these texts have been held holy for the simple reason that they give authoritative expression to the central themes of promise and hope that constitute the core of biblical faith.

after much thinking the calts called the Denisova the Elves (the children o Danu) and the Neanderthal the Fomorii (children of Danu) we were hums (the children of MIll) in their mythological text making the pretanic religion older and with a biblical story of the creation making them closer to the true religion,... what the mahabharata is an older text what the book of Tets has an even older creation

Even to record such conclusions of biblical scholars may contribute to the wintry chill that reaches many corners of the texts, God simply keeps asking creatures questions that admit of no easy answer.

By providing only fragments from biblical books (in this case part of an oracle from Isaiah, a reassurance from Paul, a parable from Jesus), they leave a suggestive opening, not only to other texts but also to the even more fragmented tissues of our individual lives.

Regrettably, she does little more than provide us with a reminder of a textbook example of eisegesis (reading «into» the biblical text one's own ideology) rather than exegesis (reading «out of» Scripture with attentiveness to historical and literary context, even if it conflicts with one's own personal views).

By contrast, a teaching such as the Immaculate Conception, as with so much Marian dogma, makes claims that not only stand on a highly contestable reading of an extremely narrow scriptural base but also seem to stand in tension with, if not even in contradiction to, significant biblical texts.

But since the New Testament itself contains various kinds of social witness — as its use both for and against slavery and patriarchy, for example, shows — debate can degenerate into mere thrust and parry of proof - texts with no possibility of resolution, or of even honest concession that both sides can claim biblical warrant.

The Word for Word Bible Comic even includes the violence inherent within the biblical text.

But being troubled, even deeply troubled, by the implications of the biblical text does not give us a reason to abandon the text or force it into a mold that rests comfortably with us.

If the biblical text or the Word of God is objective and man the hearer is subjective, then obviously man is secondary, for the Word is the Word even if spoken into an empty room or into the wind.

For those watching such things, keep in mind that most atheists have never read the Bible through even one time, even though they seem to be perfect experts of the biblical texts.

his text of biblical knowledge is only about 200 years old, so not even close to being ancient.

Though most African and Asian churches have a high view of biblical origins and authority, this does not prevent a creative and even radical application of biblical texts to contemporary debates and dilemmas.

Even when we believe the Scriptures are «infallible» or «without error,» it's terribly dangerous to think that our understanding of every biblical text is also without error.

With biblical «conservatives» he shares reverence for the sense of the given text, the «last» text.8 He is not concerned to draw inferences from the text to its underlying history, to the circumstances of writing, to the spiritual state of the authors, or even to the existential encounter between Jesus and his followers.9 Indeed, Ricoeur, in his own way, takes the New Testament for what it claims to be: «testimony «10 to the transforming power of the Resurrection.

Even heroes of the Christian faith have changed their minds about the meaning of various biblical texts.

«No one who pretended to any sort of theology or religious reflection at all wanted to go counter to the «real» applicative meaning of biblical texts, once it had been determined what it was, even if one did not believe them on their own authority,» he remarked.

Clark Pinnock centers the issue even more pointedly as he asks, «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?»

He quotes biblical texts cautiously, even sparingly, with a purposeful restraint and a poet's eye.

Hebrew language and literature, Jewish history, modern Jewish theology and philosophy, even undue absorption in the study of the biblical text — all are proscribed as evidence of defection from Torah - true Judaism.

However, almost everyone agrees that a classification of plants is less «theological» than a discussion of man's true end, even if the plant classification is based more directly on Biblical texts than is the discussion of human destiny.

He would likely modify Jesus» parable of Lazarus and the rich man, concluding with the statement: «If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone's computer sees Maimonides or Billy Graham hidden in the biblical text.»

Mention of tongue tie can be found even in Biblical texts (Mark 7:35 is thought to be in reference to a tongue tie being released), which goes to show they have been a concern for at least a few thousand years.