Sentences with phrase «did as preacher»

What one did as preacher was continuous with what one did in religious education and pastoral counseling.

He'd have to get a real job yet live a life more dedicated to his faith than he ever did as a preacher.

Not exact matches

So, I don't think Berkshire would work as well if were just terribly shrewd but didn't have a little bit of what the preacher said about my grandfather.

One big problem today is that the world is full of preachers who don't have the guts to tell the truth and just give people their weekly feel good and sent them out into the world just as lost as they ever were.

What you, David, have touched on is the majority approach to trying to get people to believe as the preacher / believer / missionary does.

I'm sure even though CNN doesn't seem to be covering this as far as i can tell on TV the propaganda machine at Fox will be all over it and in the most negative way imaginable complete with «color commentary» by the choir preachers.

And you, David, as a preacher of the gospel of Christ — why do you preach Jesus and the need for salvation to mankind?

And his apostles do not come as propagandists of a secular doctrine of salvation «with sublimity of words or of wisdom» (1 Cor 2:1), but as «ministers of the Word» (Luke 1:2), as his «witnesses to the ends of the earth» (Acts 1:8), as preachers and teachers of the Gentiles in «faith and truth» (cf. 1 Tim 2:7).

As Flannery O'Connor said, whom I did recently read in entire works, the southern preacher prides himself on having learned nothing at all.)

Jesus gave us a clear picture of what that was all about as did others say Peter for example 2 Peter 2:4 - 6: For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved to judgment; 5And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample to those that after should live ungodly;

Oh, by the way, the time after jesus or christ whatever you want to call this preacher that did good for the barbarians who lived 2000 years ago and then abandoned them and left them with what was supposed to be a time of enlightenment and spritual awaking but turned out to be almost as bloodinga time period as the old testament.

I was brutally murdered as the preachers didn't want to hear the truth about their life style.

I think I said doing so was stealing and lying, but in any case I said it was wrong, and also pointless, since the congregation is not going to think less of the preacher because he says, «As John Smith says.»

Certainly it can do nothing for the confidence or the credibility of preachers who still invoke those norms in other areas of sexual behavior such as chastity, adultery, and, not least, homosexuality.

Is that... wait... that old drunk turned preacher... wait it is... and now because of how extreme his conversion was he is... he is... hating on all the others that can not convert to the same degree as he did... he's actually mad they seem to give less than him... he thinks they are ungrateful... let's go get drunk!

All those «prosperity gospel» preachers rely on senile old ladies to keep sending in their pension and Social Security checks every month, but as long as the little old ladies don't escalate to sticking up convenience stores to support their evangelical habits, they'll never come to your attention.

Can you image what the actual poor, simple, wandering preacher he supposedly acts as the vicar for, would do, if he saw all that excess?

The bland assurance that God's will was the same as the political cause espoused by a preacher did not go down with him.

No matter how much they say that the husband should love his wife as Christ loves the church, they (the leading complementarian preachers and scholars) are handing husbands the right to ignore truth when it is his wife who has it and he doesn't — that is, when his wife is right and he is wrong.

But the real explanation of our ineffectual preaching lies much deeper: far too many of us, far too much of the time, do not recognize the terrible truth that as preachers we are engaged in nothing other than the task of confronting our listeners with the very Word of God.

Preaching is frequently done to an invisible congregation because the lights have been turned down; yet the facial expressions and bodily postures and movements of the congregation are communications in response to the preacher, and he needs to see and note them as at least partial guidance for his speaking.

The argument of this sermon was open to criticism on the ground that the preacher seemed to take for granted a highly debatable view of the redemptive value of human suffering; yet he was calling attention to something very important, namely, that if we quote Baxter's words as Professor Lampe has done, we must not forget that the scope of Christ's suffering is limited.

What the preacher has to do is to make sure the congregation experiences the story as fully as possible — by giving the context of the story.

Therefore when we see «hard» rules, such as do not kill, many preachers easily put them aside if someone that we want to kill comes along.

Individual editors, writers, preachers and others spoke up; some groups did, as causes or caucuses.

This Beecher did as no other preacher of his generation.

Fundamental to all barriers is the condition of general ambivalence that all human beings — and specifically, here, preacher and congregation — experience in communication: that is, as human beings, we both want to speak and do not want to, and we both want to hear and are afraid to do so.

Part of the preaching task is to overcome this ambivalence, and it can be done only as both preacher and people accept the ambivalence and help each other with it.

On the one hand, by our historical amnesia we break our continuity with historic Christian faith as did the liberals and, on the other, we accord to some preachers a magisterial authority in interpreting Scripture not unlike Roman Catholics do!

How did the earliest preachers proclaim Christ as the Lord of life — not merely of exotic religion?

Applegate does not argue that Beecher, in the midst of such tumultuous times, was especially innovative as a preacher, politician or theologian.

If I appear ignorant to you perhaps it's because I don't blindly follow the theocratic dogma, or accept the creative translations and cultural contexts that particular preachers try to pass off as the only «true» way to interpret the Bible.

Instead he was basically a normal American giving his ideas on religious belief, although he mixed politics into his speech such as with Obama, many people do this who are not currently holding office, preachers especially.

Those who wrote them, being believers, theologians, and preachers themselves, were seeking to make God and godliness known to their original envisaged audience, and the first question to be asked about each book has to do with what its writer saw it as saying and showing about God himself.

Jeremy Myers, i think you are wrong and David is right, so many out there are preaching you can live any way you want and be right that Grace covers any sin, they really believe that, that is not what the bible says, God was very concerned about sin so much he sent Jesus his son to die on a cross for us, if we accept Jesus as our savor then we are to obey his commandments, not break them, we are to live a righteous and holy life as possible, the bible plainly list a whole list of things if we live in will not to to heaven unless we repent, if we die while in these sins, we will not go to heaven, what is the difference, between someone who said a prayer and someone who did not, and they are living the same way, none, i think, if we are truly saved it should be hard to do these things let alone live and do them everyday, i would be afraid to tell people that it does not matte grace covers their sins, i really think it is the slip ups that we are convicted of by the Holy Spirit and we ask for forgivness, how can anyones heart be right with God and they have sex all the time out of marriage, lie, break every commandment of God, i don't think this is meaning grace covers those sins, until they repent and ask for forgiveness, a lot of people will end up in hell because preachers teach Grace the wrong way,, and those preachers will answer to God for leading these people the wrong way, not saying you are one of them, but be careful, everything we teach or preach must line up with the word of God, God hates sin,

Not every way of communication honors the truth: sometimes the manner in which something gets conveyed subverts reality, as when a preacher says all the right words about God's love but in a tone of voice and with a concluding string of «oughts» (therefore we ought to do this and we ought to do that) that makes you feel guiltier than ever.

The preacher of the Reformation needs institutional empowerment, but ordination plays no such role in his accreditation as do first of all the study and personal appropriation of Scriptures and especially of the gospel, and, secondly, the corresponding discipline of life.

Please read genesis where there is no where it is mentioned that there was another partner with the Lord God... don't you think if what you are saying is correct than it will be mentioned in the OT... or OT and NT are contradicting each other... i could show more from the bible itself... i think most of the follower of it does not pay attention what to follow... they just follow blindly as Catholic church does not allow to have a copy of bible with the worshipper while they are at the church... they just have to be listening to the preacher....

No amount of other reading does me much good as a preacher unless I regularly read the Bible.

But as the preacher and priest organized these traditional functions in special ways so does the pastoral director.

But despite the linguistic problems associated with this designation, it seems that the epithet «preacher,» in the sense of «pastor,» is indeed an appropriate one, at least theologically.36 According to Duncan Macdonald, we have done Qoheleth an injustice by viewing his work as reflecting only a spirit of resignation and despair.

When all of humankind ceases to believe the nonsense that bubbles from the mouths of Sunday preachers and finally seek the goodness of humanity which dwells in each one of us, it will be at that point we will begin to see ourselves as equals in a quest to do better then we have done in 2000 years.

So wrong, there is NO evidence of evolution, but you must have faith that it happened as your preachers have said it does.

Be that as it may, Bulman makes a good case that a theology that leaves the millennium to doomsday preachers is not doing anyone a favor.

Yet there can be no excuse for that preacher's failure to do all that is in his or her power to bring men and women to «ripeness» in Christ, as the old Ordinal phrased it, and thus to be brought into a way of living which is both enabled and enriched.

I don't know her name, but I remember she is equally a great preacher as her dad.

As I listened to the two preachers I was aware of the issues, but only now do I see the connections, the significance and relationship of the themes and the scale of their influence on American society today.

Another preacher preaching what ever goes is ok with Christianity... If your going to preach Christianity based on the Bible, then you might as well forget gay marriages are ok... If you want to twist it around then thats up to you... Paul said, «The Berens were of noble charachter because they didn't believe what they heard, but they took what they heard and confirmed it with the Bible... So its like the Yen or Yang... Its either Gods church or Satans Church... Can't be any other way... Do I hate gays, no... I have some very close friends that I have had for over 30 years that are gay, but I think they will be accountable for their life styles... Thats the thing about Christianity, we are held accountable, its not an everything goes belief... Its rules we have to follow... And rules we will be held accountable... So maybe this preacher needs to start a dfferent faith or religion... One where there are no rules and where its people are not accountable for their actions...

Because images, in a book or in a sermon, are generally regarded as decorative and hence optional in their bearing upon the principal form and content of the communication, the imaginative preacher may have to endure such comments as «His sermons don't seem theologically weighty» or «It was too interesting to have contained much truth», or perhaps such inverted compliments as «I was much involved in your talk, or whatever it was.

But I didn't start praying this way until well after I left the TV preachers behind... in those waning days before I walked away from the «church - as - I - knew - it»....