Sentences with phrase «in biblical understanding»

Fifth, there is what we might call an internal problem in the biblical understanding of the cross.

Admittedly, there is a rhetorical problem in our contemporary setting when Christians ground their sexual morality exclusively in a biblical understanding of human embodiment.

If this is the serious intention of the Bible reader, many of the common errors in biblical understanding will be avoided.

[4] Reflecting upon this peculiar impasse, Joseph Ratzinger has noted that the crisis in biblical understanding feeds off and fuels a broader predicament in theological hermeneutics.

In the biblical understanding of things, there is nothing mere about any dimension of the human condition.

But he was given no name, which in biblical understanding signified that he still lacked his essential nature.

Not exact matches

But in Sumer, Babylonia, Egypt and the Biblical lands there was a royal understanding that if poor cultivators — the 99 percent — had to pay the debts that they ran up, they would fall into bondage to the 1 percent, and forfeit their land to their creditors.

Of course if you don't believe in the biblical principle of hell you would understand «salvation» in a whole different context.

Nevertheless, the paper is essentially guided by the language of the 1985 Vatican statement in which «Christians are asked to understand the religious ties [of Jews to the land of Israel] that have deep biblical roots.

If you're interested in self - inquiry there are a lot of psychological texts written in recent years when the science was far, far in advance of anything understood about humans back in biblical times.

Having shared the great grace of baptism and having been appropriately catechized into «the mysteries,» evangelical Catholics understand, appreciate, and live the biblical truth of Christian vocation as given by St. Paul: «Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one.

Although biblical values and the good news about Jesus are not in question here, many ministries struggle to embody them in congregation or community in a way people understand and care about.

Missouri Synod theologians had traditionally affirmed the inerrancy of the Bible, and, although such a term can mean many things, in practice it meant certain rather specific things: harmonizing of the various biblical narratives; a somewhat ahistorical reading of the Bible in which there was little room for growth or development of theological understanding; a tendency to hold that God would not have used within the Bible literary forms such as myth, legend, or saga; an unwillingness to reckon with possible creativity on the part of the evangelists who tell the story of Jesus in the Gospels or to consider what it might mean that they write that story from a post-Easter perspective; a general reluctance to consider that the canons of historical exactitude which we take as givens might have been different for the biblical authors.

At the same time, we recognize that, during the past five hundred years, the Holy Spirit, the Supreme Magisterium of God, has been faithfully at work among theologians and exegetes in both Catholic and Evangelical communities, bringing to light and enriching our understanding of important biblical truths in such matters as individual spiritual growth and development, the mission of Christ's Church, Christian worldview thinking, and moral and social issues in today's world.

Knust shows absolutely no awareness of Biblical exegesis, hermeneutics, genre, social and historical context, or even a rudimentary understanding of what's prescriptive or descriptive text in some of the historical Biblical narratives.

Sadly, in this day and age, when someone with proper Biblical understanding tries to educate others about matters of faith, it's called hate mongering, intolerance, bigotry, etc..

But, as with other classical figures Eke Luther and Calvin, Wesley reveals another side which is illustrated in his dealing with problems of chronology, his understanding of the biblical use of non-biblical sources, his judging of much of the Psalms as «unfit for Christian lips,» and so on.

It is all so outdated for the human race... I don't understand why so many people need such strong faith in a biblical text to carry out their lives happily and productively.

This understanding of the atonement relates to biblical nonviolence in several ways.

Steve... But, please clarify... Does it matter (to you) if any specific Biblical event is understood as metaphor or legend, if genuine faith in God is the response.

And, faithful to the same Biblical understanding of the knowledge of God, we read in I John, «no one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us» (4:12), and «If any one says, «I love God,» and hates his brother, he is a liar» (4:20).

«Does it matter (to you) if any specific Biblical event is understood as metaphor or legend, if genuine faith in God is the response?»

The biblical teaching, after all, was not aimed at one or another of the various theories developed in the history of modern science but at the cosmological understandings of origins found among surrounding peoples.

A second lesson that Lindbeck offers evangelicals is a model for understanding how the biblical virtues should manifest themselves in one's vocation, especially in the vocation of theologians and biblical scholars.

With the great Jewish thinker of the early part of this century, Franz Rosenzweig, he believes that Jews need to understand anew that «the Jewish vocation, rooted in the biblical tradition, is to be an instrument for the redemption of all humankind.»

In the biblical history we are to find a revelation of God that can be understood as to give meaning to history in our own timIn the biblical history we are to find a revelation of God that can be understood as to give meaning to history in our own timin our own time.

Nevertheless, the possibility of a coherent quantum theory based on process thought is, in principle, important for the project of recovering a comprehensive vision in which a biblical understanding of God finds an important role.

The real question is, should we, in the name of being «biblical,» hold tight to a first - century worldly understanding of male authority?

Doing a New Testament word study on the Greek word «praus» in order to better understand what Peter means when he instructs women to have a «gentle and quiet spirit» in 1 Peter 3:3 - 4 is biblical exegesis.

• «What is the biblical view and Christian experience of the operation of the Holy Spirit, and is it right and helpful to understand the work of God outside the Church in terms of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit?»

Biblical ideas of atonement root back in this basic soil and stem out from it; and while the development later carried them to branches far distant from the roots, there is no understanding the topmost twig — for example, «as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive» --(I Corinthians 15:22.)

For example, William Wilberforce (who is largely responsible for bringing the abolitionist movement to bear in the English speaking world) fought & successfully changed the British Empire's laws based on his very * conservative * biblical understanding.

Both texts are greatly aided by a proper understanding of how adoption worked in biblical times.

Fourth, the understanding of biblical authority they use to justify this program is one that few Methodists would employ in other areas.

Theological hermeneutics should have a «spiral structure» in which there is ongoing circulation between culture, tradition, and biblical text, each enriching the understanding of the other.

Walter Harrelson's little book, The Ten Commandments and Human Rights (Fortress, 1980), is one of the most important recent attempts to show how the biblical understanding of human obligation under God gave rise to the principles present in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Mention was made earlier of Amos Wilder's comment that all biblical stories might be understood in terms of the «lost - found» motif.

I have repeatedly affirmed that there appeared to be serious tensions between the Biblical understanding of God and that which emerges in Thomist natural theology.

One need not be surprised if in the conflict between the apparent implications of Biblical concepts, understood to be analogical, with metaphysical concepts, understood to be univocal, it is the implications of the Biblical concepts that give way.

In these arguments the move from data consisting of Biblical texts construed in a certain way to conclusions concerning what truly is a tenet in some Biblical theology is warranted by process hermeneutics, strictly understood, i.e., a process theory of understandinIn these arguments the move from data consisting of Biblical texts construed in a certain way to conclusions concerning what truly is a tenet in some Biblical theology is warranted by process hermeneutics, strictly understood, i.e., a process theory of understandinin a certain way to conclusions concerning what truly is a tenet in some Biblical theology is warranted by process hermeneutics, strictly understood, i.e., a process theory of understandinin some Biblical theology is warranted by process hermeneutics, strictly understood, i.e., a process theory of understanding.

But in the biblical traditions, God can not be understood directly.

Therefore it was also natural that the kerygma as we find it in the New Testament should not only be couched in biblical terms but also that these terms require for their proper understanding an awareness of the whole Old Testament witness and record.

Hence, the absence of the Christian understanding of God in preChristian religion indicates that the vision of things as finite existents was virtually absent for common sense as well as for philosophy until the impact of Biblical thought caused it to prevail.

The very arrangement of the biblical books in the Hebrew canon of scripture presupposes this definition of prophetism.1 Between the first division of the Law and the third division of the Writings, the central category of the Prophets embraces not only the books of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve prophets from Hosea to Malachi (all together termed «Latter Prophets») but also the historical writings of Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel and Kings («Former Prophets») In this way the Hebrew Bible formally and appropriately acknowledges that prophetism is more than the prophet and his work, that it is also a way of looking at, understanding, and interpreting historin the Hebrew canon of scripture presupposes this definition of prophetism.1 Between the first division of the Law and the third division of the Writings, the central category of the Prophets embraces not only the books of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve prophets from Hosea to Malachi (all together termed «Latter Prophets») but also the historical writings of Joshua, Judges, and the books of Samuel and Kings («Former Prophets») In this way the Hebrew Bible formally and appropriately acknowledges that prophetism is more than the prophet and his work, that it is also a way of looking at, understanding, and interpreting historIn this way the Hebrew Bible formally and appropriately acknowledges that prophetism is more than the prophet and his work, that it is also a way of looking at, understanding, and interpreting history.

Accepting the biblical understanding of love as central to any human concept of the divine is at the heart of Williams» enterprise, directly challenging the Augustinian formulation as a corruption of this.23 Love is «spirit taking form in history.»

Having, therefore, lived for years with Biblical scholars as my friends and colleagues and in the classroom having dealt with students, trying to gain a coherent and usable understanding of the Bible for practical purposes, I have dared the attempt to put together developments of ideas which the separate Biblical disciplines leave apart.

Where the dialogue between this newer modern consciousness and the biblical witness is sensitively pursued, it can yield the kind of critical insight into our understanding of man which we desperately need in this age of yearning and conflict.

Calvinists believe that their understanding of the biblical text is the only proper understanding, and if people disagree, it is because they don't want to submit to God's revelation of Himself in Scripture.

There is some Biblical truth for what the preacher was saying even though he did not put it across with better understanding and in love (Ephesians 4:15).

To speak specifically on this point, the fact that form and relationship have been restored to the current image of man, both in the new metaphysics and in the sciences of man, enables us to be more understanding in our anthropology of what is being conveyed in such historically biblical notions as the Covenant and the Imago Dei.