Sentences with phrase «by biblical faith»

In its immensities of time and space, as well as in its love of endless diversity, it sacramentalizes the generosity, extravagance, and unpredictability of the creator known by biblical faith as the God of promise.

If Catholics in the United States are going to be healers of our wounded culture, we're going to have to learn to see the world through lenses ground by biblical faith.

Not exact matches

Biblical by definition excludes the other faiths and widens the debate, such as it is.

You are either intentionally or ignorantly — both then and now, i.e., 13 years later — are depriving those patients whom whom God of love is putting in your path to use your divinity school knowledge and your biblical faith experience to guide the path of that talk towards the absolute truth related to the love of God — i.e. true love which stems from God by giving his only Son for whoever to choose to believe on him to have «everlasting life» by having his / her sins forgiven.

But the task of preserving even our moral floor is complicated by the determination of many that «we» should have free and full access to the remissive power of Christian forgiveness without any of the interdictory authority of biblical faith — even if this means that this power can only be «pried from God's clutches» by corrupting it, on at least some important occasions, into nihlistic nonjudgmentalism.

Liberation theology type B is biblical theology, theology determined by Jesus Christ and the witness of faith to him and his own witness in that faith.

«At the center of biblical faith,» says Walter Brueggemann in a sermon on this passage, «is a command from God that curbs economic transactions by an act of communal sanity that restores everyone to proper place in the economy, because life in the community of faith does not consist of getting more but in sharing well.»

It is because the biblical teaching about the kingdom of God promises joy, contentment, and significance to those who live under the rule and reign of God that the invitation to enter into the kingdom by faith in Jesus Christ has such persuasive power.

By «the more fully biblical view of grace,» Piper is referring, of course, to Covenant Theology / Calvinism as described in the Westminster Confession of Faith.)

But it is by no means easy to see what doctrine of God's being can be more adequate to the biblical faith.

There are, however, implications of biblical faith which may help to inform possible responses to the ethical issues raised by the debate.

The James O'Kelly Christian Church, which represents an important southern heritage of the United Church of Christ, underscores other nonhierarchical biblical Reformation concerns by viewing the Scriptures as «the only creed, a sufficient rule of faith and practice.»

Since the Catholic Church in 451 A.D. had so grossly departed from the Biblical faith, why do you respect, receive and follow the Chalcedonian Creed, as if it were written by the Apostles and included in the New Testament?

The christmas myth as told by western culture, is a jumble of faith, popular culture, earlier festivals, and it is held at a time of year that is clearly not in line with biblical accounts of the birth of Jesus.

This attitude toward the relation between history and myth is developed by Buber in his books of biblical commentary, Königtum Gottes, Moses, and The Prophetic Faith, and it is this which constitutes one of the most significant contributions of these remarkable works.

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.

In conclusion, then, we may say that biblical inspiration is the effect of God's promise on individuals writing within the context of a community of faith brought into existence and sustained by a vision of promise emanating from the Spirit of hope.

Even so, I found Hartshorne's work to be highly suggestive for unfolding the distinctively Christian vision of God, perhaps because his own value assumptions have been significantly conditioned by the impact of biblical faith on Western thinking about God.

At the same time, it opens the way for theologians more decisively guided by the distinctive character of biblical faith and of Christian symbols and images to appropriate the achievements of process thinkers into their own understanding.

As a result, the high valuation placed upon the concrete and the temporal both by Hartshorne and biblical faith calls for a reorientation in fundamental attitudes which men can not easily achieve.

For example, when Berger points out that the puzzles of historical scholarship often lead Biblical theologians to crises of faith he expresses it this way: «I have sometimes asked myself how a gynecologist could manage to have sexual intercourse; by the same token, one could ask how a New Testament scholar could be a Christian.»

These teachers are charged with using a biblical faith as a basis for illuminating today's world, and they are frustrated by the difficulty of interpreting first - century Eastern literature to a twentieth - century technological society.

The alleged subordination of the gospel to Karl Marx is illustrated, for example, by charging that «false» liberation theology concentrates too much on a few selected biblical texts that are always given a political meaning, leading to an overemphasis on «material» poverty and neglecting other kinds of poverty; that this leads to a «temporal messianism» that confuses the Kingdom of God with a purely «earthly» new society, so that the gospel is collapsed into nothing but political endeavor; that the emphasis on social sin and structural evil leads to an ignoring or forgetting of the reality of personal sin; that everything is reduced to praxis (the interplay of action and reflection) as the only criterion of faith, so that the notion of truth is compromised; and that the emphasis on communidades de base sets a so - called «people's church» against the hierarchy.

People were asked to accept «by faith» doctrines for which there was no biblical support.

This clearly contradicts the biblical doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace through faith (Rom.

If our concern is peacemaking — particularly the special urgency given that task by the nuclear threat — then we shall have to come to grips with those portions of the biblical witness in which the community of faith has been forced to deal with the violence and pain of conflict between peoples.

Reinhold Niebuhr wrote in 1939, «The idea of the resurrection of the body is a Biblical symbol in which modern minds find the greatest offence and which has long since been displaced in most modern versions of the Christian faith by the idea of the immortality of the soul.61

The problem for Jonah (and, certainly as understood in the biblical faith, the problem for all men) is the abandonment of the cherished hatreds, the nurtured antipathies, the cultivated distastes, the snide comparisons by which persons and groups and classes and nations maintain their own flattering images, their own sense of superiority and exclusiveness.

Fourthly, the adoption by Faith movement of uniformitarianism and evolutionism as controlling principles in historical geology has led to results that contradict biblical - in particular Genesis - inferences.

In these terms, we intended to affirm nothing less than «justification by grace alone because of Christ alone through faith alone,» which is the biblical Gospel.

As Evangelicals, we saw this teaching as implicit in the doctrine of justification by faith alone and tried to express it in biblical terms.

On the other hand, such activities require the perspective of Biblical faith which seeks the Kingdom of God on earth without falling into the illusion that we are going to bring this Kingdom into being by our own actions or that we can expect to participate in it within our own time.

None of us are so untouched by the biblical stories of God's self - disclosure that our understandings of mystery, nature, history, and self are innocent of the interpretations provided of them by the impact of biblical faith and doctrinal traditions on our culture and language.

With all the Biblical basis what we arrive at is a conclusion that the present day caters to the martyrdom is not for the cause of our contention of faith, but for our action in fulfilling God's Commandment given by our Lord Jesus Christ.

Historical arguments between their faiths have rarely if ever been over what to call Abraham's God or who was invoked by that call, and Islamic salvation history is rooted in the conviction that there is a lasting continuity between the dispensations of Muhammad, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and the biblical and extrabiblical prophets.

Biblical inspiration is the effect of God's promise on individuals writing within the context of a community of faith brought into existence and sustained by a vision of promise emanating from the Spirit of hope.

In the last few centuries of the Age of Faith, armies inspired by biblical injunctions to kill the heretic, (see Deut.

Certainly the love of God and neighbour may be recognized and practised by those who do not profess a biblical faith more adequately than by some who stand inside.

If we can respectfully acknowledge that a majority of todays» generation of believers are taught into the faith by their parents, we reluctantly must conclude that the theology base of * a lot * of these believers is not upon careful reflection and personal choice upon the fervent divulgence of the Scriptures, but rather a hodge - podge compilation of «feel good» thoughts that have no biblical or moral grounding other than vague references.

Biblical faith, on the contrary, is centered in the existence and activity of a deity who is infinite in wisdom, power, and love, but who nevertheless cares personally for each of us, a God whom we can approach in prayer and from whom we can receive help and strength, a God who is always acting within the human scene and is known to us by his acts.

But is salvation by faith alone even biblical?

He does not mention belief in Biblical inerrancy or salvation by faith.

To be brief, I will say that the confession of faith expressed in the biblical documents is directly modulated by the forms of discourse wherein it is expressed.

Or do we reach the true meaning of Biblical language by passing through a process of secularization that stills all human language about God, thereby allowing man to respond passively in faith to the full and final language of God?

I swear - there are common sense Christians who live by faith and follow ALL HIS COMMANDMENTS and then there are the pick - and - choose, no - understanding, ignorant Christians who can quote a couple of Bible verses (turn the other cheek, thou shalt not kill and judge not being the most popular amongst your ilk) who LITERALLY have NO READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS AT ALL and for whom CLEARLY The Lord has not chosen to reveal the most basic of Biblical tenets.

You want to argue the USA should be liable to the universal community — that is one thing ------ but to claim that for the Christian faith is utter nonsense — and sooo not biblical — but worldly by any standard.

Troeltsch, followed by Coakley, makes the security of faith rest, albeit only in part, on what the biblical scholars can reconstruct behind the Gospel picture of Jesus Christ, whereas I take the picture itself, as transmitted in the church, to be the actual medium that evokes faith; and I believe Troeltsch did, too, in his clearer moments.

When a Lutheran and a Catholic each talk of faith, does each define the word by some comprehensive abstract system, or by the complex associations the word has in a great range of shared biblical texts, such as Romans 1 with its talk of faith as that by which we live, I Corinthians 13 with its association of faith with hope and love, and Hebrews 11 with its definition of faith as assurance and conviction?

The work of many Biblical scholars, for example, is shaped much more by the state of their discipline and the sense of what its new methods can learn than by the Christian faith of the scholars.

And that such was the case is proved by the fact that no biblical or theological reasoning, no appeal to the community of the faith, ever induced them to change their position.