Sentences with phrase «not biblical concepts»

These are not biblical concepts.

Thinking of one person / pastor / teacher to figure out «what to offer» or «what to feed us» isn't a Biblical concept either...

It's these ideas — not the biblical concept of an actual Satan — that serve as motivation for their high - profile civic activities.

Not exact matches

The Bible and the universe Thus it was not the biblical perspective but the Greek view of the cosmos — in which everything revolved around a stationary earth — that was to guide man's concept of the universe for many centuries.

Regarding the author's attempt to apply the concept of Biblical retaliation to the current situation, the author should not place himself in the position where he is known to be a fool by opening his mouth.

I have experience with a «church bully» GROUP... and I have since left that group... but my question is: being corrected and not being prideful IS a biblical concept, but how do we discern when such correction is necessary?

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.

We will discuss this concept of being «dead» in future posts, and especially the biblical texts which are used to support this idea (which is based not on Scripture, but on Greek philosophy and fatalism).

The government should not be enforcing Biblical concepts.

Buber does not regard his concept of history as applying only to Biblical history but merely as most clearly in evidence there.

@ Alias: because you begin by assuming God's an idiot (a self - refuting concept), you don't even hear the complexity of what the biblical God is claiming.

Is this concept biblical, and if so why has the church not always heard it?

Recently, while chatting with an old friend who happens to be a professor of New Testament and biblical Studies at a prominent Christian university, I asked him what he thought of the concept of «Christian Privilege» and whether or not he felt as if it existed in practicality.

Biblical concepts should not be strait jackets for the mind, but wings for it.

The non-religious interpretation of Biblical concepts means that the concepts must be interpreted in such a way as not to make religion a precondition of faith.

And at yet another point, we are told that, although evangelicals can not accept all of what process theists mean when they say that the world is «God's body», there is a «striking parallel» between the process concept of «God's self - embodiment in a redeemed world» and «the biblical image of the church as the «Body of Christ»» (111).

Nature (physis in Greek) in the sense of nonhuman self - existent reality does not occur in the Old or the New Testament; it is a concept alien to the biblical world.

He points out, for example, that while strict Whiteheadian thought does not allow for any «true end (finis) or beginning the biblical witness, on the contrary, is pervaded throughout its length and breadth with the concept of a movement of God's grace toward an end that is both teleos and finis» (111).

I do NOT believe in a everlast torture and do not believe it is a true Biblical conceNOT believe in a everlast torture and do not believe it is a true Biblical concenot believe it is a true Biblical concept.

I almost didn't put this item in the list because I am about as uneasy with the concept of a «biblical worldview» as I am with the concept of «biblical literacy.»

Through what I would consider too many «hermeneutical gymnastics,» Bell makes the point that the concept of «forever» is not really a category the biblical writers used.

This should not be a foreign concept to us, though we probably haven't considered the connection between this biblical reality and modern day practices.

@Jane Doe, First I don't think those are «biblical» concepts, since many actually predate the bible: not stealing or cheating was in the Code of Hammurabi (sp?)

But he clearly doesn't mean by this that the concept of omnipotence he attributes to God is derived solely from biblical statements, for he immediately adds that «unfortunately, Scripture contains no explicit statement concerning God's omnipotence, nor does it discuss the issue in any philosophical way.»

Process thinker Francis G. Baur has suggested that the concept of «thresholds» of change beyond which a phenomenon is new in ways that transcend and fulfill its antecedents, but does not cease thereby to be in process towards other previously unimaginable dimensions of being, might mediate at this point between biblical eschatology and process - relational cosmology.6 After all, the eschaton is the completion of God's will for this cosmic epoch, but it is not implied in scripture that there is no life beyond eschaton.

Though judgment carries negative connotations in our minds, the biblical concept of judgment is not always negative.

Just as those who wrote the Biblical texts had no concept of the science that would prove the earth actually revolves around the sun, so they had no concept of homosexuality (which wasn't defined until the 19th century.)

I don't believe it's a biblical concept.

Tradition and aother biblical writings were given great weight as well, and the bible was not something that was seen as literal or without error... God inspired meant God was the muse or concept that moved people to write about their experiences, as well as a history and a bit of a rule book.

(Moltmann, p. 17) Since experience can not be reduced to concepts, a theology that takes experience as its starting point must be a narrative theology, as is biblical theology, to a large degree.