Sentences with phrase «in biblical ways»

One needs to be constantly praying through and be conscience that they are indeed sharing biblical ideas in biblical ways to fit contextual understandings.

I admire David Platt and a few others that are willing to confront greed and giving in a biblical way.

Not exact matches

Under the radar, the «establishment» in university science departments has been finding ways to get rid of professors who have any belief in the creation / Biblical viewpoint.

The «quacks» in biblical interpretation are those who think they can just «feel» their way through what the bible «means» because they were «saved».

These men are not following the Bible's truth in a truthful Biblical way.

The Spirit grows and disciples desires for freedom, equality, justice all happens in personal encounter, through worship, through Biblical encounter (in lots of ways) etc..

It is not biblical, nor is it in any way humane.

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.

These are in no way original ideas or thoughts from Calvin, simply the reiteration of the biblical writers expression of the sovereignty of God.

Scientists may ultimately tell us how and when everything happened in ways not articulated in the biblical text, but science will never be able to tell us why.

Proof that even biblical experts can interpret the bible in many different ways.

Let's keep in mind, there's no way this is from the biblical period.

The summary of the biblical principles for the giving of our finances in a God honoring way is clear.

Last week a controversial book of theology was condemned by well - established critics who cautioned the public that the book did not present Christian doctrine in an accurate, biblical, or traditional way.

The point is that this was the way parents named their children in that time in the Middle East, during Biblical times.

There is a final way that the Church often fails gay people, and that is by watering down the biblical vision for sexual holiness and human fulfilment in a misguided attempt to be more welcoming.

I dream of a movement of biblical Christians who even as they are carted off to jail will express Christlike tenderness to policemen, who even as they are sentenced will explain Jesus» way of love and justice to incredulous judges, who will even dare to risk their own lives in order to release the captives and free the oppressed.

I will in no way attempt to «solve» the sin - no - sin question, however allow me to explain my view on homosexuality extra biblical.

The religious insight of the exodus story works itself into the Biblical tradition in many ways.

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

One has only to compare these lines with the statements of St. Paul regarding the destiny of the Jews to see that the biblical thought has been drastically reduced in a way that is decidedly prejudicial.

Christianity itself has become a principality and holds thousands captive, Before anyone comments on me calling todays Christianity a principality, (a demonic stronghold) let me just make a request that those who do answer are those who live as the followers of the way did in biblical times, that is, meeting every day, considering nothing they owned as their own, laying their lives down for the gospel (and not getting paid to do so) and having signs and wonders accompany them when they speak of the Lord.

She is personally in favour of same - sex marriage but believes that silence is more harmful than teaching the classic biblical interpretation in a sensitive way.

Those that systematize biblical teaching are usually influenced both by the ways this has been done in the tradition and by what seems credible today.

I'm looking to eventually teach theology, but in between my personal studies, an obsessive reading habit, and spending far too much money on coffee, I started a blog called New Ways Forward as an outlet for some of my random thoughts and a way to interact with others who share a passion for theology, Biblical studies, and social justice.

But according to the traditional biblical chronology, the patriarchs were schlepping around Canaan on camels over a millennium earlier, all the way back in 2100 BCE

All three of the biblical passages that instruct wives to submit to their husbands are either directly preceded or followed by instructions for slaves to obey their masters, with phrases like «likewise» and «in the same way» connecting them.

Any study of ancient hsitory and linking it in with all the Old Testament biblical journeys into Egypty, including JC's family pilgrimige, plus coming out of and being exiled back to Mesopotaia, with a little Persian, Greek, Roman, etc. influences along the way should make that clear.

Let's take a quick look at three ways Israel's encounter with Canaan in the Old Testament — the paradigm for biblical holy war — is radically different from our modern conflicts today.

And in a way meditation on biblical material is just that: after all the other «senses» have been exhausted, there is the imaginative approach that will make it possible for the reader to grasp the big meaning of what he is reading.

This is significant not only because it is a biblical text, but because it seems for her to sum up in a decisive way the meaning of her self - discovery.

In conclusion, the same problem of the relation of Mascall's philosophy and Biblical thought should be stated in a distinctively Protestant waIn conclusion, the same problem of the relation of Mascall's philosophy and Biblical thought should be stated in a distinctively Protestant wain a distinctively Protestant way.

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.

Smith reminds readers of the idea of divine accommodation, which suggests that «in the process of divine inspiration, God did not correct every incomplete or mistaken viewpoint of the biblical authors in order to communicate through them with their readers... The point of the inspired scripture was to communicate its central point, not to straighten out every kink and dent in the views of all the people involved in biblical inscripturation and reception along the 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.

It was in this way that fundamentalism, under the guise of evangelicalism, was becoming more dominant in the churches at the very same time as academic theology and biblical scholarship were becoming more radical.

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.

Together with the opening line of the Letter to the Hebrews («In ancient times God spoke to man through prophets and in varied ways, but now he speaks through Christ, His Son...»), as well as many other biblical texts, this passage reveals to us a startling trutIn ancient times God spoke to man through prophets and in varied ways, but now he speaks through Christ, His Son...»), as well as many other biblical texts, this passage reveals to us a startling trutin varied ways, but now he speaks through Christ, His Son...»), as well as many other biblical texts, this passage reveals to us a startling truth.

Last week, we talked about the way in which the word «biblical» gets tossed around so carelessly these days — «biblical» politics, «biblical» courtship, «biblical» economics, «biblical» manhood, «biblical» womanhood — and how any claim to a biblical lifestyle or perspective is inherently selective.

I belong to those who advocate for a golden middle way in most Biblical discussions, also the works vs. faith debate.

What if one day we come to regard biblical teachings about homosexuality the same way we regard teachings about slavery, or dietary laws, or women covering their heads in church?

The deeper, original social dimensions of the biblical view are eclipsed when the last things are interpreted in such a highly individualistic way.

Similarly, one can be illumined in many different ways by tracing the word «peace» in a variety of its manifestations — biblical, economic, sociological and theological — among other senses.

The longest biblical passage on male - male sex is Romans 1:26 - 27: «Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another.»

My goal is to make readers first laugh, and then think, about the ways in which we invoke the phrase «biblical womanhood,» because I believe both the Bible and womanhood are more complex than a list of rules and acceptable roles.

Now this variety of usage in the biblical talk of God (and modern scholarship has shown that the biblical statements can not all be neatly fitted together into a systematic whole, in the way some earlier Christian thinkers assumed that to be possible) makes it clear that the Bible is not wedded to any particular form of words concerning God.

I believe it is the responsibility of all those who disagree with Richard Dawkins» rather superficial and juvenile conclusions about the biblical text, to create space for a deeper discussion around the way in which we work with it and, as a consequence, who we understand God to be.

I have honestly tried never to picture an ancient way of conceiving facts as though it were identical with modern thinking, but always to portray the Biblical writers as using their own mental forms of thought in their own way, however diverse from ours those forms may be.

Along with biblical ways of thinking it affirms a special significance of humankind within the context of creation, recognizing, as Conrad Bonifazi puts it in the context of explicating Teilhard de Chardin, that «in human beings evolution has revealed its profoundest energy and significance» (TNE 311).

Instinctively we know that our best preaching comes about when we have discovered the ways in which the biblical writers sought to change minds, hearts, and lives and then have taken those «available means of persuasion» with us into the pulpit.