Sentences with phrase «differences of doctrine»

The Western Protestant experience, which included church splits and the formation of new denominations on the basis of national, ethnic and class differences — as well as differences of doctrine, sacramental practice and biblical interpretation — had been exported to the mission fields, where many of these differences seemed to be of even less enduring significance than they were at home.

Nevertheless, some modifications of Whitehead by Hartshorne, even in the area of cosmology, lead to differences of doctrine which seem to be marked advances.

His main interest in «Comparative Doctrine,» as it turned out, was not simply the differences of doctrine among Christians, but their possible resolution, especially those between Lutherans and Roman Catholics.

It is broken by anathemas and refusal of shared communion and rejection of real Christians» ministries just because of differences of doctrine and practice.»

That doesn't mean I think they're right about everything or that our differences of doctrine and practice don't matter.

The mystical tradition, with which I have great sympathy and about which I have written in the companion volume What can we Learn from Hinduism, unites believers beyond the differences of doctrines and ritual and stresses the longing to experience the presence of God.

We have visited this territory already in discussing Whitehead's early interpretation of Bergson's view of the intellect, which turns out to be not a difference of doctrine, but a misunderstanding on Whitehead's part of Bergson's view.

If we compare stoic with Christian ejaculations we see much more than a difference of doctrine; rather is it a difference of emotional mood that parts them.

Not exact matches

A central difference is the way the authors connect sports to the Christian doctrine of creation.

Unlike Christianity in the West, where divisive debates often have focused on theological doctrines, in Islam the most important schools of thought reflect differences in jurisprudence.

@fimilleur from time to time mankind experiences the presence of God, there have been and continue to be events that testify to the presence of Him.The multiple gods you continually point to have an unique difference from the God who first revealed His presence to ancient men i.e. the Hebrews.The particular gods you mention roman etc. are all man made and in many instances men themselves i.e. hercules, but even the ancient greeks realized the limitations of their understanding and included an «unknown» God in their worship structure.many cultures did likewise, having a glimpse of God but not the fullness of understanding that was given to the Jews.Whether or not «we» believe, does not alter the fact that God exists as an unique being, whether or not «we» acknowledge Him «we» will stand before Him.You do not choose to understand, but we are actually standing in His presence right now as He is much bigger than the doctrines and knowledge man ascribes to Him those things you find so questionable are the misconceptions and misrepresentations of God made by men throughout history.

At the Houston convention, the insistence was that these are differences in practice, not in doctrine, thereby allowing the LCMS to be free of doctrinal disputes.

There is a HUGE difference between attempting to legislate religious doctrine and well established, secular laws of the land.

It emphasizes participation in God, employing a Thomist doctrine of analogy as a way of affirming difference as well as participation.

The theological views of Philo, Plotinus, Augustine, St. Thomas, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Schleiermacher, Royce, the Hindu Sankara, present differences that are striking enough, but all of them agree, or fail clearly to deny, that God is a being «absolutely infinite» (Spinoza's phrase) or every way complete and perfect, and there seems little rational place for significant variations of opinion in a doctrine so completely determined as the doctrine of complete perfection.

To me this represents a clear difference of simple opinion, doctrine, or personal conviction.

Nor did the historical doctrine of the incarnation intend to provide a basis for a dissolution of the difference between man and God.

One of the decisive reasons for the separation of the Churches is the difference in the doctrine of man's justification before God through grace.

Such a confrontation is needed to help neo - or post-Pentecostal Christians discern the difference between legitimate empowerment by the Holy Spirit and an individualistic doctrine of salvation.

The differences between liberalism and the new orthodoxy center more in the doctrine of man than at any other point.

We differ on politics, and even a number of doctrines but differences are accepted.

There are many theologies of the sacraments and the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant doctrines show important differences.

In this chapter I will try to do two things: first, examine the difference between faith and doctrine; and second, show why saying a belief is a valid Christian belief is not the same as saying it is «right» in the sense of being consistent with truth.

As far as the former is concerned we find a considerable amount of variableness in the nature, intensity, and color of the unifying, basic religious experience, shades or differences in theoretical (belief, myth, doctrine) and practical (worship, activities) expression.

There is a similarity to and a difference from Kant's doctrine of space and time as forms of intuition; each occasion inherits this network of potential relatedness from its past, actualizes a portion of it as its own «region,» and (if it has any substantial experience in the mode of presentational immediacy) redefines the network and projects it upon the contemporary world.

Since the difference is the work of the «mental pole,» we may say that Whitehead has generalized the modern doctrine that mentality is a unifying, transforming agency.

Having noted basic differences in these positions, we can then look at a number of questions which evangelicals must address if they hope to move beyond the present impasse in their theological understanding of the doctrine of inspiration.

For it is not true, as a superficial view assumes, that the doctrine of the atonement is the qualitative difference between paganism and Christianity.

Test 1: «Differences between the LDS Church and most of traditional Christianity include... a doctrine of «exaltation» which includes the ability of humans to become gods and goddesses in the afterlife.»

But the third source of Tillich's thought, the tradition of German idealist philosophy, gives greater emphasis to impersonal conceptions and is more evident in his systematic discussion of the doctrine of God.33 He does not accept Hegel's vision of participation in the all - inclusive Absolute in which all differences are overcome in harmonious synthesis.

Steele, a Protestant, in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the - only difference between our two Churches in their Opinions of the Certainty of their Doctrine, is, the Romish Church is infallible, and the Church of England is never in the Wrong.

So right doctrine makes a profound difference in the lives of individuals and societies.

If religion is a factor in your voting decision, you need to study the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price to see the difference in Mormon beliefs and mainstream Christian beliefs.

First, however: I have now stated the most serious of my differences with orthodox doctrine.

The remaining differences, however, should not obscure the fact that agreement has been obtained on some of the most hotly debated issues in the doctrine on justification, especially concerning the role of faith and concerning the certitude of salvation as based on God's promise.

As Timothy George wrote in his introduction to «The Gift of Salvation» in the December 1997 issue of Christianity Today: «We rejoice that our Roman Catholic interlocutors have been able to agree with us that the doctrine of justification set forth in this document agrees with what the Reformers meant by justification by faith alone (sola fide)... [But] this still does not resolve all the differences between our two traditions on this crucial matter.»

He defends the «ahistorical nature» of the just war doctrine, but surely for people who seek to go to war justly it makes some difference what kind of society they think is capable of doing so.

For nothing shows better the radical difference between the Greek doctrine of the immortality of the soul and the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection.

Cosmotheandric «trinity» offers, as a concept, both dynamics and coherence: the Cosmotheandric Reality is a differentiated reality which is in movement and holds together the three dimensions of God, Man and World.57 This «trinity» is perichoresis and relation, it is not monism or dualism but difference - in - relation: this aspect is shared by Panikkar and nearly all contemporary elaborations of the doctrine of the Trinity.

Secondly, if Christian leaders use the concepts of the new ethic without explicitly clarifying what distinguishes them from the social doctrine of the Church and from the gospel, as is often the case, the faithful will be at a loss and will tend not to discern the difference.

History had shown this to be very circuitous and because we are His conscious part, we will be the future implementor of His will, and this is reflected in history, This is just one of the basic doctrines of it.I am asian, so the time difference between sometimes affect our lively interactions, sorry for that.until tommorrow, bye.

Her account of Lutheran - Catholic differences closely parallels that of certain German and American Protestants who have opposed the recent Lutheran - Catholic Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.

Only difference is a little bit of doctrine but you read the same «Book of Mormon».

Lastly, it may be helpful to compare my understanding of creativity; both in its similarities and its differences, with the thrust of the classical doctrines of creation.

For if God is indeed acting, in whatever degree, through the rituals and institutions and doctrines of non-Christian faiths, surely the difference between «these» Gods and «their» God must seem suspiciously slight.

Knowing I have a sin nature and that nature is as capable as anyone with that nature to do evil makes us equals - the only difference between me and anyone not a Christian is the bold of Christ - on that principle we meet learn the Word and doctrine and if need be share our pain and temptations and learn to trust God and each other.

And I think now again the preacher speaks of this when he says, «Certainly let us not let the difference in a worship service or doctrine be all that important in our lives.

Yes, I can think of THOUSANDS of differences between this and the crackdown of nuns (and I am pretty sure I will get any «answers» saying that), none of them changes the fact these nuns are wrong (according to Church's doctrine), and it does not make it any difference that they are women.

I think its essential to explain these differences so people can see what they are discussing and this is a pretty basic bit of Christian doctrine!

But I highly doubt a bunch of GOP - centric Mormons (who can't be bothered to resolve the differences between GOP dogma and Christian doctrine) starving themselves for an unworthy cause will bring Romney a single step closer to the White House.