Sentences with phrase «by biblical traditions»

But that basis is very narrow, and even it is strongly influenced by biblical traditions in ways seldom recognized by many natural - law theorists.

For the great majority of Americans, moral discourse — beliefs about right and wrong, good and evil — is shaped and carried by the biblical tradition.

And Western culture has been so influenced by the biblical tradition that «humanitarianism» in any form may owe a greater debt to Christianity than it recognizes.

In general, this is a concern much more of process theologians, that is, of Christians influenced by Whitehead, than of the followers of Whitehead in other fields, such as philosophy, who may not be shaped by the biblical tradition.

But the signers overlook an important difference between evangelical empathy evoked by the biblical tradition and the assertion of a specific territorial claim based on religious Scriptures.

Not exact matches

Revisiting late medieval biblical interpretation, we may consider the delicacy of the hermeneutic circle formed by Scripture and tradition, appreciating the fragility of a synthesis that refuses to impose on ancient consensus a linear, hierarchical path to truth.

This discussion is complex, nuanced by all kind of factors like biblical interpretation, church tradition and local contexts.

Those that systematize biblical teaching are usually influenced both by the ways this has been done in the tradition and by what seems credible today.

Much of the information that has come down to us by tradition about the authorship, place and date of biblical writings, about differences of text and translation, and the like, is the outcome of intelligent critical discussion which took place between the first century and the fourth.

Religion News Service: Obama extols a biblical vision of equality for all in second inaugural A presidential inauguration is by tradition the grandest ritual of America's civil religion, but President Obama took the oath of office on Monday (Jan. 21) in a ceremony that was explicit in joining theology to the nation's destiny and setting out a biblical vision of equality that includes race, gender, class, and, most controversially, sexual orientation.

We are somewhat led astray by the tendency, even in the biblical tradition, to conceive the creation before sin as idyllic bliss.

H. A. Wolfson writes that scholastic philosophy, or the coming together of the Biblical tradition and Greek philosophy, was founded by Philo and destroyed by Spinoza.

In Rhetoric and Biblical Interpretation they recommend that the definition of rhetoric be broadened to its fullest range in the classical tradition, namely as «the means by which a text establishes and manages it relationship to its audience in order to achieve a particular effect.»

McCoy suggests that Whitehead, too, may have been shaped by biblical ways of thinking: «Indeed, it is highly probable that the process philosophies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries emerged from contexts influenced by the covenantal or federal tradition and thus are in part intellectual progeny of covenantal theology and ethics» (CCE 360).

Whether commenting on the liturgy or arguing a point of morality, Howard stresses the biblical foundation, interpreted and expanded by tradition.

Luther, by rejecting Dionysius, very appropriately, left spirituality free to return to its more authentic sources in the Jewish biblical tradition.

Biblical understanding, in the tradition of Calvin, teaches that the will of man can not choose God without God first choosing the man, and neither once chosen by God can the man ultimately refuse our savior.

For all the new European inhabitants of America the Christian and biblical tradition provided images and symbols with which to interpret the enormous hopes and fears aroused in them by their new situation, as I have already suggested in using the terms «paradise» and «wilderness.»

Women are speaking with a new voice, a courageous voice which challenges many traditional assumptions — the most important is the challenge to the notion that women are required, by tradition and by the biblical heritage, to submit to all forms of inhuman treatment.

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.

Thus, rather than place the insights of contemporary society in dialogue with Scripture and tradition in a way that maintains Biblical authority, she has compromised the sole authority of Scripture by qualifying it from feminist perspectives.

Such a theological and ecclesiological position has a long cultural heritage in Christian tradition, but it must not imperialize Biblical interpretation by becoming the sole authoritative stance from which the Biblical witness is read.

Articulated by editor Jim Wallis in his book Agenda for Biblical People, as well as by editorials and articles by the staff, the Sojourners position reflects a Christian radicalism steeped in the Anabaptist tradition - one committed to rigorous discipleship, corporate life - style, and societal critique.

Jonathan Edwards is interesting for contemporary theologians because he developed a balance of brilliant intellectual honesty, fidelity to the biblical traditions, and an openness to new insight brought by personal experience.

Certainly Catholic Christianity has had the ability to engage the issue with seriousness, with respect for the integrity of science, and with fidelity to the biblical narrative and Tradition of the Church, as evidenced by the efforts of Pope Pius XII (Humani Generis, 1950) and Pope John Paul II [Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 22, 1996).

Coupled with some of the tools of biblical criticism (such as the criteria of Embarrassment, Double Discontinuity and Multiple Attestation), he seeks to demonstrate the case for the origin of the Johannine tradition in the words and actions of the historical Jesus, as passed on by eyewitness accounts and possibly by John the son of Zebedee himself.

Discussions with British evangelicals after the appearance of the SCM edition last summer convinced me that the British evangelical scene is more uniform and more defined by the Inter-Varsity experience and its tradition of biblical exegesis.

In the broad development of the biblical wisdom tradition, the pattern of wisdom, thus early made indigenous, continued by and large to shape and control its continuing expression.

Reference was made to Tradition, especially to the Decree of the Biblical Commission in 1909 which laid down that a special creation (peculiaris creatio) of the first man was to be held to be the literal historical sense intended by the second chapter of Genesis.

It is quite otherwise, however, with Elijah, the ninth century prophet, who, according to the Biblical tradition, had been carried up to heaven in a whirlwind riding in a chariot of fire, drawn by horses of fire.13 Elijah had made such an impression on the men of his own generation as a man of vitality and divine power that he continued to be a living legend.

As such, it is at least a partially alien criterion by which to appreciate biblical traditions, since their understanding of divine power is rather different, a subject we shall turn to in the next chapter.

While using a conceptuality largely framed by process philosophy, it addresses for the most part the historically contingent elements within the Christian tradition: the biblical witness to Israel and to Jesus, his role as the Christ, the meaning of his death and resurrection, and the implications of the Christian proclamation of the Trinity.

This can be seen in the shift in accent in Biblical interpretation prompted by the work of Karl Barth following World War I. Prior to his initiation of a new approach, the Bible was being approached primarily as a body of content from the Judeo - Christian tradition.

But try as I might, I just can't believe that the Five Books of Moses were written by J, E, P and D — the four main authors whose oral traditions, biblical scholars say, were cobbled together to make the Torah.

This habit (to use O'Connor's phrase) is present in the biblical tradition and has been lifted into systematic theological method by the United Methodist Church itself.

When and how this takes place is not as clearly worked out when both the philosophical and biblical traditions are put side by side,

These studies, extracting the differentiation of the parts, and astounded nevertheless by the historical fact that there has been discernible unity transcending them in the mind and life of the church, have thrust into the foreground a fresh interest in the unity of the biblical tradition, and in the doctrine of the church.

This new apologetic task is not unlike other apologetic tasks undertaken by Christianity in other periods, especially at the time the biblical tradition encountered the Greco - Roman world in the first centuries of the Christian era, from Paul to Augustine, and at the time of the transition from the Middle Ages to the dawn of modernity, including the great reformations of Europe and the Americas.

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.

«New Feminism» avoids the problem by taking the metaphysical language of the tradition — supposing it to be a clear exposition of the biblical complementarity of Christ and the Church — and giving the terms new meanings.

Religious leaders, I think, face alternatives not easily reconciled: to try to form communities in which biblical imagery and ideas provide an alternative vision to our cultural ones, or to engage in a process of mutual critique, edification, correction and revision of frameworks that are informed both by our religious traditions and by the sciences and culture.

At any rate it should by now be obvious that this norm is both formal and material, and that it is central to the Biblical witness to the reality of» God as well as to the uses of tradition in the Bible.

Obviously, our formal understanding of these four circles that make up our situation will already have been shaped to a great extent by a history and tradition influenced by the classic texts and events associated with the biblical revelation.

Those of us who dismiss the conservative tradition as being represented by Billy Graham or by the stance of Christianity Today ten or 5 years ago might, for example, take a look at Richard Mouw's Political Evangelism, which is typical of a new breed of theological writing from a very conservative, though hardly fundamentalist, biblical perspective, or God in Public, by William Coats, Episcopal chaplain at the University of Wisconsin.

Since Catholics believe in tradition as a channel of revelation, they do not expect everything to be demonstrable from biblical evidence alone, nor by means of neutral historical research.

It is not by chance that more than one sage in the biblical tradition was not Jewish.

While insisting that he was not tempted by biblical literalism, Karl Barth began his dogmatics by describing the liberal tradition of Friedrich Schleiermacher and Adolf von Harnack as «the plain destruction of Protestant theology and the Protestant church.»

7 H. S. Nyberg, Studien zum Hoseabuche (1935), p. 8; as quoted by Eduard Nielsen, Oral Tradition (Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1954)(No. 11 in the series Studies in Biblical Theology), p. 39.

Each of these has biblical precedents and each has been advocated by some of the leading thinkers in the tradition.

I wrote my dissertation on Karl Barth and biblical narrative, and I was very much influenced by Hans Frei and the Yale tradition of understanding scripture in terms of narrative.