Sentences with phrase «not teach theology»

Not exact matches

Instead, being exclusive and prideful does hurt others... so I see closed - minded, exclusive theology as sinful, not gay marriage... and I think Scripture, especially the teachings of Christ, is in that same spirit.

In fact, the Tanach is very clear to the Jews that the only covenant they have (and will ever have) is the one pounded out between G - d and the Jews on Mt. Sinai (which, if you read the fine print AND the NT is allowed to be understood / interpreted by designated leaders in the Jewish society; Jesus believed those people to be the Pharisees and told his JEWISH followers to adhere to Pharisee teachings... the Pharisees were the honorable, compassionate end of the theology spectrum in the first century instead of the bad rap they get from a mis - reading of the NT (done generally with no comprehension of Jewish culture or history).

I won't judge this woman on how devout she thinks she is, but I truly think that she needs to understand the teaching behind this theology and how contraceptions actually disrespects a women's body.

In addition: «Not only is feminist theology widely taught in seminaries, but the informal curriculum is also frankly and ideologically feminist.

Pelagianism Augustine accused Pelagius of teaching salvation by works Western Christians are obsessed with not being saved by works Western Christians deemphasize ascetic disciplines and exercises Spirituality becomes a set of mental acts Salvation is rescue from hell, rather than transformation into glory Determinism enters some parts of western theology from Manichaeism through Augustine

As Kerry Egan said, we don't have to use the language of theology to teach and talk about God.

The origin stories teach theology, not cosmology, geology or anthropology.

I just want to testify, for those who are questioning or unsure about Calvinism, that it asserts a false and unlivable theology, teaching that God loves only some, and cruelly punishes the rest, whom he rendered unable to do good for — yep — not doing what he made them incapable of doing.

In other words, they will not teach as Catholic theology what is contrary to the Church's teaching.

I would say to any person commenting on your 10 Ways the Non-Violent Atonement Changes Your Theology blog, to read your book first (its not an expensive purchase) before launching into any detailed discussion or disagreement.It answers many of the potential concerns people have and gets the reader to reflect very strongly on what they have been taught about the atonement and to put on a new set of glasses when reading scripture.

He was active early in the second century CE and is well known for having posited not one but two Gods, one represented in the Old Testament and seen as responsible for the world's creation, the other encountered only in the New Testament in the teaching of Jesus and specifically in the theology of Paul.

It was a difficult challenge: I wanted to rework my understanding of several Scripture passages, but the theology I had been taught about God and Scripture would not allow me to do so.

Permit me to preface my remarks by saying that I do not wish to take a position on the thorny doctrinal question whether we know that some (unknown) persons will be damned, although I take it for granted» as do von Balthasar and Neuhaus» that Catholic theology does not hold or teach that we know all will be saved, a proposition it is unlikely even the optimistic Origen affirmed with certainty, and is surely difficult to square with Jesus» repeated teaching on the «two ways» (e.g., Matthew 7:13 «14), especially his answer to the question whether only a few would be saved.

The pulpit is the place for the declaration of the Word of God and not the place for teaching Christian theology or the principles of Christian morality, although it is obvious that the gospel of Christ has theological implications and involves moral consequences.

It reflects the theology of those who thought of Jesus exclusively in apocalyptic terms, and were prepared not only to go through the tradition and substitute «the Son of Man» for his simple «I,» but also to insert appropriate quotations or paraphrases of their favorite apocalyptic texts in order to give his life its appropriate setting — as they assumed — and his teaching its proper interpretation.

It is not a decision for everyone, but one that is perfect for her, as she prepares for her new life teaching dogmatic theology.

The presentation of theology, that is the way in which the Church's teachings have been integrated with secular sciences, has not kept up with the discoveries of modern science.

This is at odds with the teaching of liberation theology, where you had black theologians like Dr. James Cone who wrote that the gospel is essentially for the oppressed and not the oppressor.

For life within the Catholic Church, the stumbling - block as regards change in the Church's doctrine is not so much the question of defined dogmas as other doctrines of the Church in dogmatic and moral theology which are taught authoritatively but which in principle can not count as defined doctrines of faith or as irreformable dogma.

II 24.6, that this parable was much used by Gnostics, and, both in Thomas and in the Gospel of Truth where a version of it is also to be found, it has become so much a vehicle for expressing gnostic teaching that the versions do not help us to reconstruct the teaching of Jesus (for a good discussion of the meaning and use of this parable in its gnostic setting, see B. Gärtner, Theology of the Gospel According to Thomas, pp. 234 ff.)

«After thirty - five years of studying and teaching the theology and history of the Church,» writes Eamon Duffy, «I find myself living more and more out of resources acquired not in the lecture room or library, nor even at the post-conciliar liturgy, but in the narrow Catholicism of my 1950s childhood, warts and all.»

I fear that many churches and Christians do not realize the horrible, muddled theology we teach to people in our neighborhoods, at our jobs, and even in our families because deep down inside, we do not really care about the people themselves.

Albert Schweitzer identified Paul as the creator of Christian theology, but as A. von Harnack teaches, Paul's theology was not understood by Christendom until the Reformation if even then.

Not all agreed with Calvin's teaching and theology, and many accused Calvin of teaching false doctrine.

I am learning that I can not teach christian theology constructively unless I am aware that, historically, the church has done much to damage women, Jews, people of color and the whole inhabited earth; and unless, as a christian, I am learning how our doctrine, discipline and worship continue to reflect and contribute to this abuse of power.

I was not teaching Nazi theology as the truth.

He does not view it in terms of an ethical community, as does much of 19th - century theology, but in accordance with the exe2etical discoveries of the 20th century, which find the source of this term in the apocalyptic movement and the teachings of Jesus.

I am not influenced by institutionalized theology which teaches cut and paste faith to ministers today so they can create their own definition of Christianity.

For example, if a denomination declared in their doctrinal statement that the Bible teaches that all good Christians must wear pink hats and only those people who wear pink hats can indeed be true followers of Jesus, we would conclude upon reading this statement that we would never be accepted by those folks because we don't agree with this bit of ridiculous theology.

TM's chief guru, the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, claims that the discipline of life renewal that he teaches is not really a religion at all but a psychological self - help program which pays all the dividends of religion without the embarrassing urgency and theology.

Then they would go on to teach some sort of dangerous idea about how a favorite «prophecy» doesn't actually point to Jesus, or how a favorite text doesn't mean what most Christians think, or how the misuse and misunderstanding of a particular point of theology could lead to sin.

One obvious point of division between black theologians and black church people is that black theology is not generally taught in black churches, state and national conventions, regional associations, ministers» conferences or Christian education congresses.

It would exercise some of the same freedom which Paul's and the other NT letters do when they refrain from any nostalgic attempts to play Galilee into their theology by transforming the teaching of Jesus» earthly ministry into a system of theology and ethics [Krister Stendahl: «Biblical Theology, Contemporary,» Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (Abingdon, 1962), theology by transforming the teaching of Jesus» earthly ministry into a system of theology and ethics [Krister Stendahl: «Biblical Theology, Contemporary,» Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (Abingdon, 1962), theology and ethics [Krister Stendahl: «Biblical Theology, Contemporary,» Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (Abingdon, 1962), Theology, Contemporary,» Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (Abingdon, 1962), I, 428].

Ordinarily, when students are asked to write theological reflection papers on ministry experiences, they often fail to address the assignment — seminaries have taught them theology, but not how to reflect theologically.

Gadamer, of how the inspired text, which we question in order to find its meaning and relevance, questions, criticizes, challenges and changes us in the process -» Some who today raise the proper question, whether there are not culturally relative elements in Paul's teaching about role relationships (an the material has to be thought through from this standpoint), seem to proceed improperly in doing so; for in effect they take current secular views about the sexes as fixed points, and work to bring Scripture into line with them - an agenda that at a stroke turns the study of sacred theology into a venture in secular ideology.

Martin Luther presented the theology of Sola scriptura that the bible is the sole source to live and understand what Christianity is all about... but the bible itself does not come with a table of contents to prove that it is correct which is why the bible itself says that the CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of truth... remember that the church existed before even the bible was even put together... To understand the bible you cant just rely on your own interpretation like the protestants often say... The truth is always absolute and hence the teachings of the bible HAS to be absolute which is why the church is said to be ONE in nature (in every sense of the word), HOLY, CATHOLIC (Universal in teaching in every corner of the world) and APOSTOLIC (roots dating back to Jesus himself)... Now figure out what is that one church... The church put together the bible and the holy spirit always protected the church against false teachings and 1600 years later came about the teaching of Sola Scriptura... Protestants... look within and see whats wrong with this teaching.

By contrast, in defending the teaching of theology in the universities, the claim is made that what is taught is somehow common human religious property, and not exclusively Christian.

Daniel Maguire, a former priest who teaches theology at Marquette University, contends that discussions of sexuality («pelvic theology,» as he calls it) would not be necessary in a «healthy» church.

It does not stand at the beginning of the path; rather; the individual can win it only as the fruit of a long, difficult, and tiresome labor, throughout which he believes and hopes as the theology teaches and lives and works as the ethic commands.

But I am hopeful that God will use my detail - oriented and creative - thinking brain in the field of Bible study and theology to help others see that God may not be like what many of us have been taught, and that the Bible may not say what we have always thought.

While the teaching contained in Pope John Paul II's theology of the body is teaching from the authentic magisterium of the Catholic Church, it seems not yet to have been read, absorbed, and responded to adequately.

He wasn't talking about me, of course, but he said that the big problem in the church today is that people read the Bible, they don't like what they read, and so they reject what the Bible clearly teaches because they prefer their own theology over the theology of the Bible.

Indeed, for any belief or teaching not to make a difference is for it not to be genuinely Christian theology.

It is an approach G K Chesterton identified and criticised in his essay «The New Case for Catholic Schools», published in 1950 as part of a collection entitled The Common Man: «If Catholics are to teach Catholicism all the time, they can not merely teach Catholic theology for part of the time.

Of the 1990 apostolic constitution, Ex Corde Ecclesiae, Curran writes: «The document theoretically limits academic freedom by truth and the common good, sees local bishops not as external to the college or university but as participants in the institution, and includes canonical provisions for those who teach theology in Catholic higher education.»

He argued that Jesus» teaching is the presupposition of the theology of the New Testament but is not itself part of that theology.

Even if that someone teaches wrongly — why can't casual conversation over theology be discussed without it having to defame somone?

Some Christians acknowledge the distinction between the Gospel stories and the history behind them and argue that the starting point for Christian theology is not the faith of the New Testament but the teaching and ministry of Jesus.

It is not possible, according to Catholic teaching, to avoid even the mere possibility of a conflict between sacred theology and science by delimiting beforehand and on principle the domain of reality to which the propositions asserted by each refer, in such a way that even the material object of each set of affirmations would be different from the start and as a consequence no contradiction at all would be possible (Denzinger 2109).

«It's not so coincidental that the movement arose in the «60s and «70s,» said Frank D. Macchia, who teaches systematic theology at Vanguard University of Southern California in Costa Mesa.