Sentences with phrase «meanings of passages in»

The debate about how seriously to take Whitehead's intuition, even when he has not fully systematized it, is different from the question of identifying the meaning of the passage in which the intuition is expressed.

Not exact matches

Instead, it is the task of the theologian to determine authorial intent, because any given passage, painting, or conversation, although they may be «interpreted» (wrongly) to mean anything the reader may wish, the ACTUAL meaning is found only in the author's intent.

What does this phrase mean, especially in light of the statements in passages like Isaiah 34:11, 45:18, and Jeremiah 4:23 say that God did not create the world without form and void, but that it would return to this state?

The author of the review thinks this book sinks under its own weight, for its author makes no secret of his loathing of the whole homosexual community, quoting every passage in the bible that can even remotely be translated against them, often twisting passages to say what they do not mean.

In another essay he casts a distrustful eye to learned commentaries — in his view, they often obscure the plain meaning of the text as they explore the linguistic and historical context of a passagIn another essay he casts a distrustful eye to learned commentaries — in his view, they often obscure the plain meaning of the text as they explore the linguistic and historical context of a passagin his view, they often obscure the plain meaning of the text as they explore the linguistic and historical context of a passage.

It is a good rule that in trying to understand the Bible one should not have recourse to a figurative or allegorical explanation of any passage (outside those poetical and prophetical compositions which obviously have a symbolic intention) without first settling conclusions with the straightforward meaning, even if it seems offensive; for the offence may set up that tension in the mind through which we often reach the truth.

If two apparently contradictory passages are both true in the higher understanding, this means that at least one of them doesn't mean what it says, which means it is true (in the higher understanding) precisely because it is false (in the literal sense).

(ENTIRE BOOK) Based on passages from the Gospel of Matthew, this book considers what it means to be «called» in a time when Christians have so many competing claims for their time, love, and commitment.

and Ezekiel in one of his most splendid passages deliberately played on the word's double meaning as he pictured the spiritual resuscitation of his dead nation: «Thus saith the Lord Yahweh: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.»

That is, you're using the whole of Scripture and you have passages that are «proofs,» but you also have passages that are more about what it means to be made in the image of God and, also, a woman.

Yet the context of Christian worship in which a passage from another scripture is read may suggest a particular meaning or interpretation for the chosen passage.

Lest any reader should suppose that he finally abandoned his rationalism in his attempt to state the relations of God and the world, Whitehead states immediately preceding this passage that» in each antithesis there is a shift of meaning which converts the opposition into a contrast.»

Literally, hearing it meant that with the passage of time my mother's departure had become to me, in some inexplicable manner, premature.

As enough to leave no possibility of doubting the terrible meaning of this ancient law, it is reproduced in another passage — first, the original, absolute requirement, «All that openeth the womb is mine,» and, appended, the merciful codicil, «All the first - born of thy sons thou shalt redeem.»

It may be, especially as the Greek word pais can mean both «son» and «servant», that the title was a way of interpreting Jesus» ministry in the light of passages in Isaiah which speak of a Suffering Servant, who was called to be a «covenant for the people and a light for the gentiles» (Isa.

The author argues that the meaning of the Bible's passages on homosexuality have been lost in translation.

If the following passage from Process and Reality is at all significant, the answer must be that that is precisely what Whitehead means: «The oneness of the universe, and the oneness of each element in the universe, repeat themselves to the crack of doom in the creative advance from creature to creature, each creature including in itself the whole of history and exemplifying the self - identity of things and their mutual diversities» (347f).

I am an old nanny and yet have struggled with this passage, but I know in my heart that you have shared the simple truth of what Jesus meant.

In some cases» such as the Lucan account of the virgin birth or eyewitness reports about the risen Jesus» Cox mentions the troublesome passages but discourages his readers from grappling with their literal meaning and supernatural elements.

But as we understand Whitehead, the passage from the indeterminacy of the initial phases of concrescence, through the intermediate phases to the final phase, satisfaction, is a process which concretizes or actualizes the occasion itself, and the occasion is not actual until the process is complete.9 If so, the indeterminacy of the earlier phases of concrescence is a radical or absolute indeterminacy inconsistent with the passage of time, for there is nothing as yet actual for which time could pass; thus, concrescence is a process in a metaphorical or figurative sense, and this is why Whitehead associates concrescence with creativity, calling creativity the Category of the Ultimate, meaning that though it is used to explain all else, it is not explicable.

On the basis of an argument that partially parallels my own up to this point, Boers concludes that in this passage «acts that are as such non-Christian, even though performed by Christians — they were not done in the name of Christ — are used to interpret the meaning of the confession of Christ» (6:72).

(In the desert context of these passages, inhospitality to a stranger meant certain death.)

I don't want to take that so literally that we assume God will go around collecting swords and bending them, but this kind of passage does seem to indicate that our creations which we meant for destruction, God will transform somehow in the new city.

Sometimes, as in this case, the passage may mean the exact opposite of what we think it means.

However, it is common knowledge that the MANY Bible passages have twofold meanings AND that The Nation of Israel is used as a idiom for multiple facets... This is clearly seen in ROMANS 9 - 11, where modern dispensationalism has found its roots.

This passage may well include the extensive quotation from Hume on the missing shade of blue, since «the principle of relevant potentials» (86.23), Which Hume's discussion is meant to illustrate, can only refer to «The relevance of an eternal object in its role of lure as a fact inherent in the data» (PR 86.7).

Its effect upon one who takes it seriously is well expressed by Paul, in a passage where he has defined the meaning of the Christian life precisely in terms of the Gospel, as sharing Christ's sufferings, being conformed to His death, and experiencing the power of His resurrection.

It also has a lot of people talking about the meaning of the biblical passage about submission that appears in the fifth chatper of Ephesians.

Usually it will pay the student to look up such passages in their Old Testament context, for they will be found often to throw unexpected light upon the meaning of New Testament ideas.

Although it is evident from Whitehead's language, here and in the several other passages where he refers to prehensions as «vectors,» that this is the analogy he intends, the meaning of «vector» in biology [the carrier of a microorganism) also provides an appropriate analogy.

Attempts have been made to force the meaning of the Greek in the passage, and to explain it as meaning that the Elder preferred the order of the fourth gospel, and was criticising Mark's gospel as not giving events in the right order.

Thus the philologist would ascertain the meaning of a passage of the Indian Atharva - Veda; the historian would assign it to a period in the cultural, political, and religious development of the Hindu; the psychologist would concentrate on its origin and significance as an expression of feeling and thought; and the anthropologist would deal with it from a folkloristic point of view.

Even though that word does not occur in the Bible, it does seem to capture the meaning of the I Thessalonians passage.

At least one clear example of this carelessness about detail is evident above in the passage from The Concept of Nature where Whitehead say's that he means by «the passage of nature» what Bergson means by «time.»

Also, in many instances the words «I» or «you» or «we» were mistranslated, changing the entire meaning of some passages.

Verse 45 is the profound ransom passage, one of the few places in Mark where Jesus interprets the meaning of his own death.

(Note: the Spirit means the «Holy Spirit», which is part of the Holy Trinity) Notice how in this passage it does not say «The Spirit causes...», only that «The Spirit says...».

Of course the true sign that is given all Christians is Christ's death and resurrection, and so we must say that Matthew has in a sense rightly interpreted the full meaning of Jesus» words, but in such a way as to make it harder to get at the original sense of the passagOf course the true sign that is given all Christians is Christ's death and resurrection, and so we must say that Matthew has in a sense rightly interpreted the full meaning of Jesus» words, but in such a way as to make it harder to get at the original sense of the passagof Jesus» words, but in such a way as to make it harder to get at the original sense of the passagof the passage.

Brunner appeals explicitly to the prologue of John and to certain sayings of Paul, but surely one who is as emphatic as he in rejecting the authority of Scriptural teachings as such does not mean to say that we accept the doctrine of creation because of the presence of these passages in the New Testament.

The gospel of John in a number of different passages attributes to Christ claims to be the unique means of salvation.

This is the exact meaning of the well - known passages in Psalms 115 and 135; Jeremiah 10:3 - 4; Isaiah 40:18 - 19; 46:6 - 7; etc..

While the passage of this act by no means solves the religious freedom crisis around the world, it is a step in the right direction.

There are, however, two serious problems to such an approach: First, it is difficult to see how some of these passages could possibly be interpreted in a way that is in keeping with Jesus of Nazareth; and second, even if this could be done, the process would necessarily do damage to the original intent and to the established scriptural meaning of these passages.

«When the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise» (Dr. David L. Cooper)

A study of the context of a passage helps uncover vital clues to the set of meanings in a lesson.

I have had enough of the money changers at the front of the stage passing the pan to line their pockets and tell me what God meant in a passage in the Bible.

-- born in a manger to a virgin (like the confused prophet had foretold in the inspired Septuagint he did not know yet existed in a passage that had nothing to do with the Messiah and in a poor translation of the Hebrew word «young women» into the Greek word for «virgin» which miraculously was what the Holy Spirit meant in the first place).

One word is deeply revealing here, and that is the Pauline word kenosis (Philippians 2:5 - 8), a word which Hegel explicitly employs in many of the most crucial and difficult passages of the Phenomenology, and that calls forth the theological meaning of Aufhebung as a divine and ultimate self - emptying or self - negation.

... Every article of human ingenuity has been employed to blunt the sharp edge of this scripture and to explain away the obvious meaning of these words, but it has been employed in vain, though nothing will ever be able to reconcile this and similar passages to the mind of the natural man (Pink, Sovereignty of God, 52).

«Normally, scholars researching the meaning of a word in a particular passage look to other uses of the same word in other writings from that era.