Sentences with phrase «even with scripture»

Not exact matches

It's not that I don't feel like I can, I can... but is that in the vocabulary of the one who I worship, if it's not then why would I as His Son want to take on what is not His, my Father's nature... The versions of the Bible I've read seem to think that words are powerful and speaking them is an action and can even change physics if used properly... Again, the scriptures speak for themselves and circumventing the topical study with christiany cliche come - backs doesn't answer or annul anything that the Word has to say on the matter.

A great many of your points have little to do with actual scripture which has even less to do with the moral scaffolding of 21st century life.

You have provided no scriptural support for your assertions (yet you say scripture is the most important thing), and you can't even respond with anything substantial to when it is pointed out that the site you linked to is complete crap.

I do think that maintaining the normativity of Scripture entails giving it a higher priority than worship, if we are talking about our means of knowing the shape the Christian faith ought to take in the world, even if our primary encounter with Scripture is within the context of worship.

This led Luther eventually to conclude that the Roman Church was irrevocably committed to the claim that the authority of the pope stood even above Holy Scripture and it was in this context that he came, over the next several years, to believe that the papacy was the prophesied Antichrist of the last days, a conviction he then held to his dying day with a literalistic fervor that his modern interpreters have rarely been willing to take as seriously as he did.

Even with these few mentions of scriptures — what do they mean to you?

Own up to the fact that there are difficulties in Scripture, maybe even some errors, but with some careful thought and peaceful discussions, solutions can be found.)

But even identifying these two very consequent decisions does not explain how in Lutheranism, of all places, the authority of Scripture could be so undermined and why in Lutheranism, with its strong theology of God's orders of creation and preservation, anyone could hope to get away with proposing that sexual arrangements be judged on quality not kind.

Even we can debate according to Scriptures and cross reference with the best manuscript available, the Word of God and Rhema Word of God is still being experienced and intepreted differently and uniquely by all of us though it could similar but not the same.

Coupled with the desperate unfamiliarity I have felt whenever I attended Catholic, Anglican or even Lutheran worship, the roots of my reticence gradually imbedded themselves in scripture itself.

Even if giving the benefit of the doubt that he was a Christian, the scriptures say that those who depart from the faith were never really OF the faith to begin with.

In fact, by confusing Tradition with traditionalism and radically opposing the Scriptures to Tradition, much of the Christian wisdom Tradition, beginning with the writings of the early Church Fathers (& Mothers) and continuing even into modern time, the Protestant Reformers have cut much of the Western Church off from the ongoing Revelation of the Christian wisdom Tradition.

The scriptures demonstrate that the chiefest of apostles were quick to repent with error (Acts 23:5 Gal 2:14) even when the rebuke came from the wicked.

It is difficult to be a disciple of Jesus and contemplate Scripture without engaging in the things involved with the science of knowledge of God; even less possible is it to be instructed without being engaged in education.

Even though this is Scripture, in our Christian culture, our desert prayer times are often met with well - meaning encouragement like, «Relationship with God isn't a feeling.»

There are other things that are made much clearer in Scripture and in the teachings of Jesus, so we all have to start with a posture of humility, and a posture of listening, and maybe even a commitment to disagree well.

«Where scripture is sometimes internally at odds with itself, even apparently self - contradictory, we would do better to let stand the tensions and inconsistencies than force them into an artificial harmony» (p. 133).

As a spiritual person I am also (in not even a remote way) rejecting the idea of the afterlife, however I am rejecting most ideas as written in scripture since IMO scripture has very little to do with the true msg of Christ or the true msg Christianity once was about.

In place of a scripture - based argument, even combining the scriptural affirmations with the scenarios propagated by various stripes of unbelievers should paint an unmistakable picture of what happened.

Muhammad is even told to follow the previous guidance and to confirm his message with the previous Scriptures:

This approach to scripture even inspired me to start a Bible study in which we are studying the harmony of the Gospels from the standpoint of how Jesus offered himself in relationship to broken people He came in contact with.

Of course it doesn't actually work this way and believers have to make excuses and exceptions and come up with all sorts of silly nonsense that the Bible doesn't even say, just so that they can twist scripture to fit whatever their worldview is.

Even those with good theological formation struggle with the meaning of Scripture:

Not only Popes but councils have held St. Thomas in singular honour, with the Council of Trent even keeping a copy of the Summao n the altar along with the scriptures and the decrees of the Popes, to consult for enlightenment.

(3) Finally your suggestion that II Peter 2:13,18 & 19 teach that such false teachers may be allowed to eat meals with the believers and even teach in the church is a horrible twisting of scripture!

You ARE having spiritual conversations with people every day, even if you don't talk about Jesus, God, Scripture, or church.

I thought straight away this is a joke as scriptures tell us only the father knows the time of his sons return and hes keeping it to himself he hasnt even told his son yet.Mark 13:32 This a mystery isnt God all knowing and isnt Jesus God it is a mystery.Yet I like that that is the case because it proves that the father is not the son and the son is not the father they are separate yet they are one just like the holy spirit.I have come across denominations that believe the father son and holy spirit are the one person i asked them how they can say that when Jesus was baptized we see 3 separate persons.We have enough information to know that we are in the last days the signs are present and increasing.Ever since Israel became a nation the countdown has begun.The verse the enemy will come like a thief in the night i have heard preached many times and i believe the preachers have got it wrong because they preach it from the view for the church to get there act together or you will miss out.This view is incorrect because if you are a born again believer following him in obedience and relying on the holy spirit you are not walking in darkness but are walking in the light so you will not be caught unaware as those who are sleeping this is a warning for those who are sleeping or walking according to the flesh they are in darkness.Remember the 10 wise virgins the ones who were alert and keep refilling there lamps went in with the bride those who slept were left behind and so it will be when the Lord returns.Now is the time to prepare our hearts and lives to be ready for his return.It is an exciting time to be living and we are to live in the expectation that the Lord could return at any time brentnz

If you compared my writing from ten years ago with the writing I do today, I use different terminology, different approaches to proving my point, different vocabulary, and I even have different theological beliefs, supported by reading passages of Scripture in different ways, all to accomplish different goals in the minds and hearts of those who read.

So harmonious has seemed this association of Scripture with sexism, of faith with culture, that only a few have even questioned it.

I felt betrayed when I looked at scriptures and found they don't even agree with Judaism teaching.

It is God who restrains Him, till HE moves His restraint away to allow him, to fulfill the Scriptures... That's where even so many mainstream Christians go wrong, thinking when God secretly raptures them, the Holy Spirit will leave the Earth with them, and then Antichrist will be able to come....

And no human being could ever come up with a definitive answer — not even an inspired author of Scripture.

Churches often identify themselves with their buildings, even though Scripture does not.

Although he did not exercise it fully and showed through His submission His obedience to the Father as you see in the scriptures, he claimed oneness with God and even stated «Before Abraham was, I AM» which the Jews considered blasphemy as that is how God stated who he was to Moses.

Most Christians I know haven't even read the Bible all the way through, and I can out - quote them with their own scriptures.

Please share with us, the scripture (s) that even mention the word Rapture.

Paul, and whoever actually wrote 2 Timothy, must have been aware of, and even familiar with, other scriptures, such as Hindu and Chinese writings.

One can lay out all the evidence and build (and have built) an airtight case against every single religion on Earth past and present, but still believers will not budge from their point of view, even when presented with the lies and contradictions in the very scriptures they they base their beliefs on.

For one thing if Cod has created our minds as well as the rest of reality, then it makes sense to believe that God may communicate with us in nature as well as in Scripture, even if as «through a glass darkly.»

But it goes with the territory — even the devil quotes scripture.

«Lord Jesus, stay with us, for evening is at hand and the day is past; be our companion in the way, kindle our hearts and awaken hope, that we may know you as you are revealed in scripture and the breaking of bread.

«39 Remove the probability of error as one's starting point and instead substitute a «scientific» (inductive) approach to Scripture, one beginning with the Bible's own teaching concerning its infallibility, and building criticism of it from there, and even these more difficult problems dissipate.

I accept no creeds or confessions other than what Scripture makes clear, even though I may have no disagreement with any of them.

With Scripture's autographs no longer extant, «Inerrancy» has become a shibboleth, to be defended even at the expense of theological discourse which, however, must be pursued if Evangelicals are to move beyond the impasse.

We now have two or three generations of people in and around the churches who are not only unfamiliar with the fundamental teachings of the Christian tradition, but largely ignorant even of the scriptures.

Since the Reformation in the 16th Century, much Christian infighting and misunderstanding has occurred over the Catholic and Orthodox emphasis on Tradition (which usually got confused with small cultural «traditions») versus the new Protestant emphasis on Scripture, even «Scripture alone!»

But whoever wants, on the other hand, really to behold and receive all truth, and would have the truth - world overhang him as an empyrean of stars, complex, multitudinous, striving antagonistically, yet comprehended, height above height, and deep under deep, in a boundless score of harmony; what man soever, content with no small rote of logic and catechism, reaches with true hunger after this, and will offer himself to the many - sided forms of the scripture with a perfectly ingenuous and receptive spirit; he shall find his nature flooded with senses, vastnesses, and powers of truth, such as it is even greatness to feel.

And even apart from the specifics in Scripture about sex in particular, we have a whole ethic for how we treat one another now in the Kingdom of God — with love.

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).

If he is arguing as a systematic theologian, with a sense of both Scripture and tradition, he should have no doubt that the reality and the essential importance of Eucharistic presence is central to Christianity even though each and every Christian might not agree.