Sentences with phrase «not as a theologian»

I write as the president of a Catholic university, not as a theologian at a Catholic university.

The theologian can not as a theologian enter upon detailed discussions of the interpretation of the modern scientific world view and its relevance for theological assertions, but he can and should show the need for such discussions and their significance for his own work.

Not exact matches

And some of us are troubled by the shallow reasoning that has dominated the political discussions surrounding this move, as though the threadbare idea of equality were enough to settle every question concerning the long - term destiny of mankind and as though the writings of the anthropologists (not to mention the poets, the philosophers, the theologians, the novelists, the sociologists) counted for nothing beside the slogans of Stonewall.

2 untruths spoken by you in one sentence:: You are not dialogging with anyone but Luke because Societyvs has revealed your inadequacies as a theologian.

«I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science.»

As a serious and renowned theologian, he could not afford to falsify written texts.

You are not dialogging with anyone but Luke because Societyvs has revealed your inadequacies as a theologian.

I won't unfriend you because you believe differently than I do, I just don't need more theologians as my friends on Facebook who speak with such confidence when it comes to someone's place in eternity.

Nonetheless, the categories of Michalson's analysis are metaphysical not soteriological, and this obscures the full nature of Kant's great appeal to modern theologians, as well as his baleful influence.

East Eastern Christians see a dichotomy of God and creation Eastern theologians are largely unaffected by modernism Eastern theologians do not agonize over the existence of God Eastern theologians systematize the transcendent, the miraculous, and the mystical into their theology, without a concept of «supernatural» Eastern theologians have coherent and helpful answers for most practical spiritual problems (such as during bereavement) Eastern clergy, monastics, and lay experts have resources for spiritual direction, moral direction, and Eastern clergy, monastics, and lay experts have resources for spiritual direction, moral direction, and bereavement counseling; thus they do not outsource religious problems to secular experts.

As the great theologian and statesman Abraham Kuyper once observed, «In the total expanse of human life there is not a single square inch of which Christ, who alone is sovereign, does not declare, «That is mine!»»

It is not just a «trifle» debate, you do a disservice to everyone when you act as if you have it right and we theologians are arrogant.

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.

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.

Evangelical reform, as Protestant evangelical theologian Timothy George has wisely cautioned, does not come by removing» or ignoring» the landmarks that serve all Christians of all subsequent times and places.

In the end, as theologians like to say, Jesus is not so much a problem to be solved as a mystery to be pondered.

The importance of Hamann's thought, as David Bentley Hart has noted, «would be difficult to exaggerate not only [because of] the immensity of his influence upon all the great European intellectual and cultural movements of his age, but [also for] his continued significance for philosophers and theologians.»

However, as I also said in the review, His Eminence states that he was provoked into writing the book because theologians who talked about divine attributes tended to treat mercy as a marginal attribute of God, because traditionally it was thought that mercy did not pertain to God's essence.

Amy Mandelker has drawn attention to the term «reverse perspective» as used by Russian Orthodox theologians to describe the unusual dimensions of icon paintings, with the gaze of the viewer drawn to the level of earthly events and yet given a peculiar perspective, as from a heavenly seat, so that people and objects do not have their expected everyday appearance.

If a person thinks that nature is wholly corrupt, that there is no natural morality knowable by human reason, that grace completely supplants nature, that the basis of morality is the divine command and not the essences of things as created by God — and some Protestant theologians can plausibly be read as having said such things — then all bets are off.

He does not discuss a single major Protestant or Catholic theologian who has systematically discussed this issue of faith and history — not Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Hans Conzelmann, Gerhard Ebeling, Hans Frei, Friedrich Gogarten, Hans Küng, Schubert Ogden, Karl Rahner, James M. Robinson or Paul Tillich (who, incidentally, is dismissed in a footnote as «too mystical for most Christians, including most Christian intellectuals»).

Theologians are sometimes perceived as dry, dusty eggheads, but that image couldn't be more wrong where Ruth Padilla DeBorst is concerned.

Most classical theologians do not object to the characterization of God as a divine male, but most process theologians, as well as all feminists firmly reject this characterization.

I'd hardly heard of theologians, and I certainly didn't think there were such things as women theologians.

At the Convocation, Pierre asserted that «the pastoral plan of the Holy Father in Evangelii gaudium is what God expects, and as one theologian recently said, «If you don't think Francis is the cure, you don't grasp the disease.

Indigenous African sources have not been considered as primary theological materials by the major African American theologians.

As neo-orthodox theologians, in the era of Reinhold Niebuhr have reminded us, technological advances can not vanquish original sin.

Since it sees the mandate as a relationship between the bishop and the theologian rather than the university, the Bevilacqua proposal also places the responsibility for securing the mandate on the Catholic theologian, not on the university.

As a process theologian, he knows that process theology, if it is to be creditable, must identify oppression «as among the most important, if not the most important of the relevant empirical facts used to illuminate the value problems of personal and social life.&raquAs a process theologian, he knows that process theology, if it is to be creditable, must identify oppression «as among the most important, if not the most important of the relevant empirical facts used to illuminate the value problems of personal and social life.&raquas among the most important, if not the most important of the relevant empirical facts used to illuminate the value problems of personal and social life.»

More than ever, evangelical scholars should not abandon the identity as hopelessly marred by Trumpism, but, in the words of an evangelical theologian who did this well, revision evangelicalism and renew the center.

Since my early days as assistant at my teacher Edmund Schlink's Ecumenical Institute at Heidelberg and afterward during many years of regular ecumenical discussions, especially with Roman Catholic theologians, I became increasingly aware that Christian theology today should not limit itself to some narrowly defined confessional loyalty inherited from the past but should help to build the foundations of a reunited, if to some degree pluralistic, Christian church that should become more and more visible within the foreseeable future.

In all this, university theologians are of course addressing their own personal need — namely, that of maintaining their existence as Christian theologians in a world that can not understand what they are about or why.

This does not mean that when we follow liberation theologians in the turn to praxis, our method will be exactly the same as theirs.

When speaking this way about Scripture, most theologians are about to say that as a result of the Bible being a human book, it should not surprise us to discover that the Bible has errors.

The liberation theologian does not first work out questions of the nature of God and Christ and the church in one context, such as that of the academic community, and then apply these answers to the social situation.

While we may believe in the Holy Spirit as a manifestation of God's presence in the world, we sometimes wonder if the church's early theologians invented this connection as an explanation of the continuity between Jesus and themselves, and if this invention didn't in turn and inadvertently lead to orthodox formulations about the Trinity that belied the Spirit's reality, much as the Kinsey Report misleads readers about the real joy and meaning of sex.

He's usually a lot more nuanced about things... so please don't interpret this as a critique of him as a theologian or pastor, just a discussion around this particular idea that doubt is the result of a guilty conscience.

From my perspective as a process theologian, the theistic account is fuller and more fundamental, but it is not necessary to the advance of scientific research.

Naturally, theologians like Shaull do not consider whether what they call the «humanizing» work of God is the same thing as what revolutions aim at.

Tillich, who died in 1965, possessed a rhetorical genius in addressing Schleiermacher's «cultured despisers of religion,» but, as a serious theologian, his work has not worn well.

Not everyone has avoided this trap; theologians of play seem particularly susceptible to it, as we will observe in Chapter Four.

Although Brown does not uncritically agree with everything said by theologians of liberation, he presents his form of process theology more as a supplementation and conceptual grounding of their insights than as expressing a different understanding of the theological task.

But such a God can not be apathos as classical theologians maintained.

Theologians of color don't benefit from «colorblindness» when their perspectives are discounted as «contextual» while those of white, Western theologians are considered the objectiTheologians of color don't benefit from «colorblindness» when their perspectives are discounted as «contextual» while those of white, Western theologians are considered the objectitheologians are considered the objective default.

Yet Father Peuchmaurd is not as bold as some Protestant theologians, for he points out that revolutionary violence is not a value in itself: «The Christian will carry the call for Reconciliation to the very heart of Revolution.»

From the novelist as well as from the stories in Scripture the theologian should take courage to concentrate on the experience of coming to belief, not on the «beliefs» themselves (the sedimentation of experiences of coming to belief).

Here, cogito and credo are antithetical acts: modern or «objective» knowledge is not religiously neutral, as so many theologians have imagined; rather, it is grounded in a dialectical negation of faith.

More sophisticated theologians have qualified this outrageous notion by saying that God can do nothing which is irrational, such as make square circles, or which is contrary to God's own nature and purpose, which are assumed to be good in some ultimate sense, and therefore that God can not engage in genuinely evil acts.

As per the famous contemporary theologian, Edward Schillebeeckx, God is not omniscient.

I have written this book in the conviction that neither seminaries nor churches, neither theologians nor believers generally, can go on with business as usual — that I can not go on with business as usual.