Sentences with phrase «humans without sin»

Create humans without sin, but with free will 2.

Not exact matches

God sacrificed his only son, the only innoce3nt human in history, he sufferd the shame of occupying a human body and then he lived his whole life without sin, and let himself be wrongly accused and executed that our sins may be traded and washed away by the blood of the lamb of God.

Afterward, many conservatives realized they could show compassion in recognizing the human side and could support the antidiscrimination ordinance without compromising their theological position (viz., that the Bible condemns homosexuality as sin from which persons need to be redeemed).

He gives the salvation package — from sin and death and slavery to exaltation in the heavens (Ephesians 2:1 - 3, 6 - 7)-- freely, by His grace, without any human works, effort, or sacrifice involved.

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word became flesh, so yes, my Deity was human and understand our weakness, though He was without sin.

For it was felt that to accept that a human being had been conceived without sin was to deny that all redemption came through Christ.

If he what born without sin, he's not truly human, therefore not the representative man.

Resistance to religion is based on an ineluctable fact of human psychology to which he returns again and again: No one sins without making some excuse to himself for sinning.

Without a doubt, it is the ever present reality of sin, the human condition, and how the bible portrays these concepts that is the most tangible evidence for the Christian God from my perspective.

It need not accept world suffering merely as evidence of the broken human condition, and therefore opt to minister only to the victims of sin without addressing sin's sources.

In the language of The Concept of Anxiety, she only sees the «quantitative determinations» of sinfulness in human history, without seeing the «qualitative leap into sin,» which is human evasion of God in the present moment in time.

At the human level, there is what we style «sin» — willful choice, with its consequences, of that which is self - centered, regardless of other occasions, content to remain stuck in the present without concern for future possibilities — and this is an obstacle which is like an algebraic surd.

For Kierkegaard there is no «solution» to this paradox, other than the greater paradox of the God - man, who, without ever making the leap into sin, became sin for us, i.e., accepted his human solidarity with us, so that in him we might be reconciled with God through the Atonement.

His apparent lack of theological formation leads him, in his chapter on evolutionary psychology, to follow the «many» biblical scholars who «do not believe that humans were [originally] created without sin» (p. 122, a case of the blind leading the blind, perhaps?).

We need to represent God to the world, but in such a way that we are as close to human as possible without crossing into sin.

I think that without a sin nature, Jesus is not less human than we are, but more.

How in this case man can be said to be free is one of the paradoxes which Niebuhr holds defies rational understanding.11 But if we accept the paradox, while we may say there is an ideal possibility that we could assert our human will to power in history without sinning and thus bring in the Kingdom of love, this is no actual possibility.

Otherwise it would be too easy to decide that since no human cause is without sin or deserving of our ultimate loyalty, since none will result in the perfect good, we may as well just sit back and sagely observe from an uninvolved distance the vain and foolish strivings of humanity.

Without the grace of Christ, who makes God's reconciliation a reality despite human sin, the devastation of relationships might get the best of us.

Proposition 19: New Evangelisation and Human Development Today it is not possible to think of the New Evangelisation without the proclamation of full freedom from everything that oppresses the human person, ie sin and its consequeHuman Development Today it is not possible to think of the New Evangelisation without the proclamation of full freedom from everything that oppresses the human person, ie sin and its consequehuman person, ie sin and its consequences.

Second, this idea of salvation depends on the double premise that (a) human beings who are without sin are deserving of heaven; and (b) there are no human beings without sin.

If what you interpret Paul as saying is that before creating all the myriad galaxies and star systems God decided that They would put some humans on the third planet from an insignificant star on a little arm of a middling galaxy and that the first hominids chosen role would be to perform pretty much to spec and do something silly and rebellious (arguably without sufficient information as to consequences for themselves and their off spring, oh, and for serpents) and cause affront to the tripartite godhead warranting separation of Gods grace from all their offspring; then we are left with people being chosen from way back before the Big Bang to do some terrible things like killing babies or betraying Jesus who was chosen on the same non date (time didn't exist before creation) to die in a fairly nasty fashion and thereby appease the righteous wrath of himself and his fellow Trinitarians by paying a penalty as a substitute for all future sins (of believers?)

Some theologians put it more strongly than this and say that we are born with a human nature such that, without the action of God's grace, we are bound to be dominated by the motivations that lead to sinning.

Jesus is concerned with the absolute, pure will of God without compromise in view of the conditions of human life and without concessions to human finitude and sin.

By providing us with One whom we may love and serve without reservation, Christ delivers us from self centeredness, that turning - in upon ourselves which is the root - meaning of human sin.

Jesus Christ, is and it will be forever more the unique object lesson of living, the human being not ever, although we may be Christians we don't leave of to sin, for the very her writing she says Aerquémonos confiadamente at the throne of your handsomeness in order to reach forgiving in order to the perpetual help, in as much as not tenemos one God which not it can feel pity for of we, rather one which fué tempting all over, but without sin, according to the letter at the age of Hebrews, and the apostle John she says, whether various hubiere sin, solicitor tenemos in order to with the parent to Jesus Christ the that's right, not ever not any human being it will be the best object lesson not other than The Christ Jesus, nor Buddah bo Mahoma nor none, we don't follow to humanity rather at a God which fué tempting all over but without sin, not ever we owe put her scope in the humanity not other than in the.

We do not know what human life would be without the distortions produced by sin.

It is Christ Jesus himself, the God - man who both perfected human nature and perfectly exemplified its perfection, «one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.»

He was fully human and fully God, yet without any sin his entire life which is the reason he could be OUR sacrificial lamb.

That argument, which comes after his statement that «the argument would go as follows,» is exactly my argument, namely, that the God of traditional theism could have created human - like beings without libertarian freedom, thereby avoiding all the evil due to human sin.

Nevertheless, if Christ's humanity did not diminish his divine nature as being the Son of God and without sin, it follows that human authorship of the Bible need not diminish its divine nature as being the Word of God and without error.

But one can take full account of the sinfulness of human institutions without concluding that participation in them necessarily implies sin.

[2] This condition has been characterized in many ways, ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a «sin nature», to something as drastic as total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt.

If Jesus of Nazareth is truly / fully human as well as truly / fully Divine and WITHOUT SIN, then * sin * can not be intrinsic to our human nature; but must be an aberratiSIN, then * sin * can not be intrinsic to our human nature; but must be an aberratisin * can not be intrinsic to our human nature; but must be an aberration.

Meanwhile, another sequence in which Talorel has to atone for the sins he has committed as a human is a great opportunity to play on how people are inherently sinful, how we seemingly can't get through an entire day without committing some sort of sin in the eyes of the Church or God, but that gets flown through quickly.

pat - «Similarly many environmental activists believe that man's influence is a form of sin and nature (Gaea) will soon strike back...» You can phrase the position of a fictitious group any way you want of course, without rebuttal, because they don't really exist, though there are people who fit the description — especially if by «many» you mean more than three — but the more accurate reality is most of the human beings you would lump under the rubric «environmentalist» would more accurately be described as believing that short - sighted and greedy human attempts at total control and domination and complete disregard for the healthof the environment have gotten us out of balance with what was an interlocking web of balanced and dynamic systems, and would appear to have unbalanced many of those systems as well, including the still poorly understood cycles of climate; or weather, as we laymen call it.