Sentences with phrase «not human sin»

Ironically, his enemy is not human sin but his own institution.

Territoriality and regionalism are not human sins, but rather assurances — along with local languages and cultures — that humans will remain individuals.

Such pitiless events are not human sins; they are nature's deeds.

Not exact matches

Reality quotes a paradiddle,»... Moreover, an atonement theology that says God sacrifices his own son in place of humans who needed to be punished for their sins...» TThey ddon't bbelieve God iis jjust.

if the first pair would nothave sinned they would still be here and all human kind would know is the ways of almighty God and existing on a paradise earth — wich still is comming.the reason he didn't destroy Satan immediately is because he posed a Question as to almighty Gods right to sovereignty..

muslims DO NOT worship Jesus Christ it would be considered a MAJOR SIN in Islam to worship a physical human enti ty

If humans were able to save themselves, Jesus Christ would have not needed to die for our sins!

In sharp contrast to feeling better, we are forced to confront the reality that sin has infected everyone and everything on this planet and that if anything is true of the human condition, it's that it is not something that should make us «feel better.»

That plus being a human rights abusing, racist jerk who threatens humans with eternal torture for the «sin» of sincerely not believing in him.

What, that god sent himself in human form to earth to live and die, so that he could live again and then rejoin himself in heaven, so that the creations, who apparently have original sin because a talking snake convinced a rib lady to eat an apple thousands of years ago, could choose to believe in Zombie Jesus and if they did they would go to heaven but if they didn't believe in Zombie Jesus they would fry in Hell forever, regardless of how good a life they lived on Earth?

God does not need to become human and kill himself for the sins of man.

It's unique among modern religions in that human sacrifice:» (Jesus) is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.»

Contraception is a sin because it is God's decision whether or not a human is alive at any given point, right?

If Jesus is fully human and also sinless, then * sin * can not be intrinsic to our humanity.

the negation of ideology, the political secularization of the doctrine of original sin, the cautious sentiment tempered by prudence, the product of organic, local human organization observing and reforming its customs, the distaste for a priori principle disassociated from historical experience, the partaking of the mysteries of free will, divine guidance, and human agency by existing in but not of the confusions of modern society, no framework of action, no tenet, no theory, and no article of faith, a distrust of the systems and processes of the idol of self and of the lust for power and status, scorn to all approaches of ideology and meta - narrative.

The Catholic tradition — even the wise Pope Benedict — still seems to put too much stress upon caritas, virtue, justice, and good intentions, and not nearly enough on methods for defeating human sin in all its devious and persistent forms.

It's easy to see individual sins and their aggregate effect alienating people from one another and from God in Sandtown: shooting another human being or stealing to buy drugs are obvious as are landlords who won't deal with lead paint or officers who don't strap prisoners down in the van.

Jesus died so we don't have to pay for those sins because as humans we can't help it.

Humans are not perfect and are sinners that is the whole point of jesus is to forgive our sins because as humans we can't help buHumans are not perfect and are sinners that is the whole point of jesus is to forgive our sins because as humans we can't help buhumans we can't help but sin.

He didn't need Jesus to save humans, all he needed to do was forgive sin.

We can not be expected to remember every sin we have ever committed or be aware of every minor (in human terms) sin that we commit.

Most Western Christians, especially fundamentalists, define what it means to be human by the Original Sin, not the Original Blessing — which is not only unbiblical, but puts the emphasis on the human rather than Divine action.

The non-existent god I don't believe in doesn't save the day, their is no «salvation for the christians», but maybe, in the late afternoon sunlight, while tracking a dust mote through the air, it might be that human invention of «god» was an attempt to take away «sin» so that we could find the beautiful, and ethical, and loving within ourselves and others.

People do not care enough about human suffering to turn from their rebellion against God and from their sins and turn back to God.

«The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands «Acts 17:24 «Then I heard another voice from heaven say: ««Come out of her, my people,» so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;» Revelation 18:4

And as Cheever's confession to Hersey makes clear, the real stress lies more on the human choice between darkness and light than on the sovereignty of God's grace — the divine goodness which must redeem not only our grosser sins but our noblest aspirations as well.

It has been the sins of the Leviathan and Dynasau not only to make all humans as objects of exploitation and oppression, but it is also the sin to make the created things the object of the exploitation, for these sins are to turn the God's created garden into the jungle.

We (humans) are «worthy of death» (not just punishment) from the moment we are born, since we are «flesh,» and therefore «sin.»

Thus Original Sin (and its consequences) is not just the fact of a fall from grace and destination in God, it is also a fact of human biology, a fall from proper union and harmony in the flesh and in the psyche of Man.

He denied he was a universalist, but it was a difficult line for him to hold because he had such a strong view of Christ's death for our sins that he could not find a way to understand how it could not cover all humans.

«If anyone asserts that Adam's sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says, «Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned» (Rom.

'' If any one asserts, that this sin of Adam, which in its origin is one, and being transfused into all by propagation, not by imitation, is in each one as his own, is taken away either by the powers of human nature, or by any other remedy than the merit of the one mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ... let him be anathema.»

This is because human wickedness has real consequences, and therefore our redemption (i.e. how God saves us from our sins) is not just about God «turning a blind eye» to our rejection of him.

Therefore it is not affected by the profound wounding of human nature caused by the sin of Adam which happened at the origins of our species.

Sin is a mystery in the fullest theological meaning of that term, the «mysterium iniquitatis», and we can not expect fully to understand how, so to say, we as humans can stand outside God's will.

On question: if sin was not imputed to people living during the time from Adam to Moses, why did God destroy the entire human race by a flood in Noah's day?

Paul is * not * saying all sinned «in Adam» — i.e. it is * not * sin that is passed from generation to generation (that is, that the taint of sin was added to / imposed upon our human constitution).

but if anyone truley had God in thier heart and had faith in the Lord... simply by folding your hands and asking God to enter your heart... (try it he will be there for you, and you will feel the joy of His love), then they would never do things like this... he obviously was not a person who loved God because No one with God in thier heart would want to do thing s like that... you HATE sin when you truely love God, No ones perfect though, even those who belive in God we all stray from our beliefs, its human nature and the devil takes advantage of this.

(Eph 2), and so the human nature of Christ can not be intrinsically wounded by Adam's sin as ours is.

God loved human beings; God hated sin; everybody is a sinner; God would send all sinners to hell if Jesus hadn't died in our place; believe it or you'll be sorry.

This is because human wickedness has real consequences, and therefore our redemption (i.e. how God saves us from our sins) is not just about God «turning a blind...

i think refusing to see another human as an equal is a sin, refusing to acknowledge that children are small versions of adults and have a lot of insight on things is a sin... but loving another of the same gender isn't a sin, it's love.

The Church also believed that these gods, for all their bluster and ongoing involvement in human affairs, could not answer the deepest human need: deliverance from our enslavement to sin and death, not mere solidarity and fellowship in the midst of that enslavement.

Another way to say it would be to observe that my story testifies to the truth of the position the Christian church has held with almost total unanimity throughout the centuries — namely, that homosexuality was not God's original creative intention for humanity, that it is, on the contrary, a tragic sign of human nature and relationships being fractured by sin, and therefore that homosexual practice goes against God's express will for all human beings, especially those who trust in Christ.»

Both in the secular world and in the church, our characteristic approach to human frailty is not chastisement and dire threats, but understanding; not calling people to repent their sins, but teaching people the gentle arts of self - acceptance; not an ethic of cross-bearing, but an ethic based on the value of self - actualization.

And human marriage is the living out of his plan: a lifelong bond between a man and a woman: the one blessing «not forfeited by Original Sin, or washed away in the flood».

The terrible personal cost is not something demanded by the Father; it is the consequence of what sin has done to human beings in destroying the image and glory of God within our nature.

Having gone to the trouble of impregnating a human and being born god incarnate and dying for mankind's sins, why wouldn't god have ensured there was tons of evidence that this was true?

Thus the Incarnation is placed by Scotus in the context of creation and not of human sin.

While we do not claim that human beings are enslaved by sin, we are aware of the great capacity that humans have for evil as well as for good.