Sentences with phrase «grammatical context»

Even more than grammatical context, the cultural context of Scripture provides keys to properly understanding and applying the Scriptures.

We need to get the complete historical, cultural and grammatical context of the passage in order to understand it.

Study not just the grammatical context, but also the historical and cultural contexts, and when you study the Greek words (as I have done), make sure you study the way the words were used in the time when James wrote James 2.

We were trained to talk about the Greek and Hebrew, and to reference the cultural, historical, and grammatical contexts of whatever passage were were studying, thereby giving us more and better ammunition against those with whom we disagreed.

Little do they know that the writer of this post has degrees in Bible and theology, knows Greek and Hebrew, and has written an entire commentary on 1 Corinthians, looking at the historical, cultural, and grammatical contexts.

Not only does Robert Chisholm explain the biblical text in a way that makes sense and reveals the cultural, historical, and grammatical contexts of Judges and Ruth, he also deals with modern questions that the text address, such as the issues of female leadership, the consequences of spiritual compromise, and the often bewildering actions of God in relation to His people on earth.

Understanding historical and cultural and grammatical contexts is just the tip of the iceberg.

Not exact matches

And all of these others have also based their views on careful exegesis of the biblical text, in its grammatical, cultural, historical contexts.

After this, we will look carefully at numerous texts from Scripture which are often used by Calvinists to defend the doctrine of Unconditional Election, and will suggest alternative explanations for these texts which fit better with their grammatical, cultural, theological, and historical contexts.

When properly understood in it's historical, cultural, grammatical, and contextual contexts, Ephesians 2 is a chapter which does not defend the Calvinistic system of theology, but disproves it at every turn.

I always look deeply into the contexts (historical, cultural, grammatical, critical, etc) of every passage I study, and the context of Luke 17 is pretty clearly pointing in a homosexual direction.

It is an interpretation based on my best attempt to study the grammatical, historical, cultural, and theological contexts of Scripture, but in the end, it is only my understanding of what the text is saying.

Although «existence» is in some contexts a grammatical predicate, I would say Kant is right in thinking it is not a determining predicate that can be used in specifying possible states of affairs, for that would play havoc with the distinction between actualized and unactualized possibilities.

«Then, once it became dominant in the question context, it was selected for in other contexts, the imperative and declarative, probably for reasons of grammatical consistency or cognitive ease.»

These alternative expressions, whose grammatical structure varies, turn out to be used in different communicative contexts.

Dotted lines indicate significantly - increased functional connectivity between seed regions of significant clusters in the experimental context of UNGRAMMATICAL sequences compared to GRAMMATICAL.

Seeing how the grammatical errors made by these particular students are often rooted in the logic of their native languages and how a teacher who understands something about that logic and that culture can sensitively respond in context - specific ways may lead teacher candidates to develop cognitive flexibility as they wonder what other patterns in student writing (and their own) are the result of where they grew up and how they can take that into account when writing feedback.

As such, it must be interpreted according to the modern principle of statutory interpretation: Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act and the intention of Parliament.

Remember: «the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament.»

[63] The well - established modern approach to statutory interpretation requires the words of an Act to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense, harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of the legislature: Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership v. Rex, 2002 SCC 42 at paras. 26.

If we break down this approach into its constituent parts, we see there are five things the Supreme Court has said that courts must consider when interpreting a statute: 1) the grammatical and ordinary meaning of the words, 2) the textual context in which the words appear, 3) the scheme of the Act, 4) the object of the Act, and 5) the intention of Parliament or the provincial legislature.

Under this approach «the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament.»

[64]... the words of a provision are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense, harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament...

Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament.

[2] The court's approach to interpretation is teleological or purposeful, and to interpret a statute, the words of the statute are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the statute, the object of the statute, and the intention of the legislator.

The court stated that it has been long established that there is but one principle or approach to statutory interpretation which is that the words of the statute are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act and the intention of the enacting legislative body.

Justice Khullar relied upon the «modern» approach to statutory interpretation: «the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of [the legislature]»: Elmer Driedger, Construction of Statutes, 2nd ed (Toronto: Butterworths, 1983 at 87)(at para 23).