Sentences with phrase «more biblical words»

In other, more biblical words, is there a Word from the Lord today?

Not exact matches

I have to agree with Susan and Sarah although their comments seem to come off as belligerent and perhaps insensitive, given the nature of this article and the congruence of their posts to the word of God they have a much more biblical stance than the chaplain.

Is it possible that the message of comfort for those devastated by the faltering world economy will be nothing more than trite and meaningless words if not accompanied by a biblical response where we, the church, become the Good News, the economic expression of God in flesh?

The word that changed Augustine's life was a biblical command whose message it took no special hermeneutic sensitivity to hear: «Spend no more thought on nature and nature's appetites»» what could be clearer?

I love how some take the words of one supposed «theologian» to another and then tells everyone not to listen to their pastor who has probably had as much experience (if not more) with biblical interpretation than this author.

The biblical hermeneutic of Christian Zionism distorts biblical texts by reading them out of their canonical and historical context, making them seem more like such fictional works as the «Left Behind» series than the whole Word of God.

What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist reading of the text represents a capitulation to culture but a reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.

We had more than 300 people apply to be part of the launch team for A Year of Biblical Womanhood, and because I absolutely hate not including everyone — especially when just about everyone had amazing ideas and meaningful words of encouragement — I've left the selection process to my team at Thomas Nelson.

My disagreements with the five points of both Calvinism and Arminianism iare not exactly with their theology or understanding of Biblical texts, but with something much more basic than that: their definition of certain biblical words and theological ideas, such as election, grace, salvation, atonement, justification, eternal life, forgiveness of sins, etBiblical texts, but with something much more basic than that: their definition of certain biblical words and theological ideas, such as election, grace, salvation, atonement, justification, eternal life, forgiveness of sins, etbiblical words and theological ideas, such as election, grace, salvation, atonement, justification, eternal life, forgiveness of sins, etc, etc..

Richard L. Rubenstein has had a greater and more immediate impact upon the world of Christian theology than has been effected by any recent radical Christian theologian, and doubtless this is true because, in the words of Langdon Gilkey, he presents the sharpest and most devastating challenge to the traditional or Biblical conception of God.

Bootyfunk — The last book I read about Biblical error cited more examples than there are words in the Bible.

In ancient and biblical times, the word is often used regarding things like children who recovered from sickness, a battle which was won, or a successful trading voyage (See my article on the gospel where I document this in more detail).

Wave the mouse over the Hebrew or Greek text, and a little window gives you a complete parsing of the word and more than adequate excerpts from excellent biblical lexicons.

The biblical appeal of the contemporary theologies of liberation has once more given occasion to fulfill the promise of John Robinson that «the Lord has yet much more light and truth to break forth from his holy word.»

The only thing that bugs me about this guy is that there are more people than not who are teetering on the brink of faith in Jesus, and all this guy does is try to knock people away from faith... This is his word against Gods word, I've been reading these articles they've been posting, and nothing he's said has any biblical foundation whatsoever...

In this respect, contemporary «materialism» (if that is the right word here) is much more in accordance with the biblical presentation, in which God does not deny or negate the creation but affirms it, identifies himself with it, and acts within it.

To be more biblical means the greater use of the Bible in sermons as well as in religious education, and instruction as to how to understand the Bible both in its historical setting and as the Word of God speaking to the human spirit in every age.

For theology is more than a scientific assessment of the text; the Biblical texts must also be received as address (they are God's word to us) and made relevant by application (they are God's word to us).

In Chapter 2, Smith delves more deeply into the extent and source of pervasive interpretive pluralism, and in doing so, he tackles what has been a pet peeve of mine for many years — the misuse of the word «biblical.»

Now that the author has seemingly done damage to the integrity of the biblical text to the point that we can apparently know nothing more, or do nothing more, than feel our way around in the dark never being certain of what God's Holy Word says I ask this question:

The revelations are introduced simply by the word Say, more or less the Biblical equivalent of the phrase so frequently found in the prophets, «Thus saith the Lord.»

I see I must choose my words more carefully if they shall be dissected to the ultimate extreme:) The only Biblical translations that I am aware of that add the additional books to their Bibles, are the Catholics.

This is such a truism that one is almost ashamed to pen the words, and yet it remains a fact that, in a great deal of the more conservative biblical scholarship, it does seem to be assumed that the appeal to factual accuracy would he as valid and important a factor in the case of ancient Near Eastern religious texts as it would be in a modern western court of law or in a somewhat literally - minded western congregation.

Because of the Second Vatican Council's endorsement of a biblical approach to revelation, with special emphasis on the «Word of God,» Catholic theology has been implicitly commissioned to mine the resources of modern Protestant theology of revelation which traditionally has been much more explicitly concerned with the theme of God's wWord of God,» Catholic theology has been implicitly commissioned to mine the resources of modern Protestant theology of revelation which traditionally has been much more explicitly concerned with the theme of God's wordword.

In biblical times, the spoken word carried a power and effectiveness that it appears to have lost in more recent periods.

Boldest: Shari Johnson with «My Lesbian Daughter, The Bible, and Sex» «When I hear terms like «God's design» and «Biblical marriage» I have to wonder who decides these things... We keep a death grip on the scriptures that suit us — and the translation of those scriptures becomes more a matter of tradition, opinion and convenience than the Word of God.»

So the attempt to find the fully developed papacy already in the words of the biblical Jesus fails, and all the more so in regard to the historical Jesus.

In light of our conversation about Anne Frank yesterday, I thought I'd re-post this rather lengthy piece from 2008 (back when I thought people liked to read 1,000 - word blog posts) that details some of the biblical support for a more inclusive view of salvation.

Throughout the history of American public education, the practice of integrating the teaching of literacy and social awareness has taken many forms, from the explicit and blatant learning of religious vocabulary words and biblical themes in the primers of the 1850s to the more subtle lessons about the implicit social roles of the two - parent suburban life of Dick and Jane's family in the 1950s.