It examines in detail the arguments of certain religious leaders against homosexuality: the faulty logic, the quotation of scriptures out of their historical context, the convenient interpretation
of biblical quotes, the power of charismatic preachers.
It's currently owned by Lynsi Snyder who, according to the Daily Mail, has two tattoos
of Biblical quotes.
Not exact matches
I hope you realize anything that is
quoted «Spoken by Jesus» is questionable at best as in the academic world (
Biblical scholars) most
of what was written by anonymous scribe 200 - 300 years after the event are consider Pseudepigraphic and if nescessary I can supply historical reference.
The
Biblical quote didn't specify to beware
of the false prophet Joseph Smith.
The convictionâ $» endemic among churchfolkâ $» persists that, if problems
of misapprehension and misrepresentation are overcome and the gospel can be heard in its own integrity, the gospel will be found attractive by people, become popular, and, even, be a success
of some sortâ $ ¦ This idea is both curious and ironical because it is bluntly contradicted in Scripture and in the experience
of the continuing
biblical witness in history from the event
of Pentecost unto the present momentâ $ (William Stringfellow,
quoted in A Keeper
of the Word, p. 348).
Now did I talk
of failed Bible prophecies that u
quote as evidence for the truth
of Biblical God?
At many points Wesley sounds like a son
of the Reformation in his emphasis on the finality
of biblical authority and in his desire to be, in the much
quoted phrase, a homo unius libri (a «man
of one book»).
Here's a
biblical quote where jesus says we should follow the OT: Jesus orders Christians to follow the Law
of Moses in the Old Testament: «Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
They argue that when they
quote Scripture at me, I am silenced by the weight
of Biblical evidence.
Obama went on to frame decisions as disparate as ending tax breaks for the wealthy and defending foreign aid as examples
of biblical principles in action,
quoting Jesus» teaching that «for unto whom much is given, much shall be required» and invoking the «
biblical call to care for the least
of these.»
The fact is, most
of the defenses
of American slavery were written by clergy who
quoted Scripture generously and appealed to a «clear, plain, and common - sense reading»
of biblical passages like Genesis 17:2, Deuteronomy 20:10 - 11, 1 Corinthians 7:21, Ephesians 6:1 - 5, Colossians 3:18 - 25; 4:1, and I Timothy 6:1 - 2.
(And rendering only a partial
quote is much like
biblical proof texting in my opinion) I am kind
of a stickler on such details, as a sloppy portrayal
of another's words often leads to inaccurate representation
of their intent.
The majority
of the «
Biblical Quotes» out
of their mouths are actually from Ben Franklin, Shakespear, Milton, Omar Khayam and other non-
Biblical sources.
Light Shines and Jeff:
Biblical quotes are only relevant to those who accept the supposed authority
of the bible.
In fact, in an extended section justifying violence in the name
of self - defense (plagiarized, like much in the manifesto, from other websites), it
quotes from Exodus, Samuel, Judges, Psalms, Luke, Matthew, Isaiah, Daniel, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians and other
biblical books.
Having
quoted from scripture, likewise there may be some who think
of me as a so - called «believer» or «
biblical Christian».
If I am asked to identify more precisely what
biblical scholarship and Reformation traditions have taught us on this subject, I
quote one
of the eminent theologians
of the first part
of this century, who wrote:
Thoughts
of a responsible gun owner and follower
of Christ: After a quick read
of this acticle, the author's
biblical based
quotes and interpretations seem true.
It is inconceivable to me that Paul can be
quoted by modern male chauvinists as the
biblical authority for excluding women from accepting God's call to serve others in the name
of Christ, when Paul himself encouraged and congratulated inspired women who were prominent — to use his own descriptions — as deacons, apostles, ministers and saints.
I was sick and tired
of the bible thumpers
quoting biblical texts and telling me the bible fact.
book
of Enoch to the well - known
Biblical character, or when it
quotes Jesus» reference to the mustard seed as the smallest
of all seeds.
I'm talking to these Christians posting
biblical texts all over here, they love to
quote the first 4 gospels and pretend their religion is soft and cuddly, when in reality it's just as dangerous as any
of the other religions.
Instead
of addressing the fact that humans are organic beings that are part
of the evolutionary life cycle, members
of organized religion can fall back on
biblical quotes and canonical teachings.
And then instead
of you answering my questions, you come back with a bunch
of other
Biblical quotes which mean nothing as I already explained.
For example, it is the opinion
of not a few
biblical scholars that the love commandments in the Fourth Gospel and the epistles
of John, so often
quoted to stress the universality
of the Christian ethic, were originally understood as applying only within the Christian community, and as in the Old Testament «Love your neighbor» meant «Love your fellow Israelite,» so the corresponding «new commandment» was taken to mean, «Love your fellow Christian.
If you believe in
Biblical literacy and the infallibility
of the Bible's writers, then those passages you
quote and many others in the N.T. are indeed hard to understand, even after two thousand years
of examination and discussion — at least without developing some fantastic theology that goes completely against God and nature.
Dale Vree came back in the New Oxford Review with an article titled «If Everyone Is Saved...,» defending Regis Scanlon and rejecting Neuhaus» exegesis
of the
biblical texts he had
quoted.
The comment in
quotes is by Shawn Kelley from an article entitled «Poststructuralism and / or Afrocentrism,» in Eugene H. Lovering, Jr., ed., Society
of Biblical Literature: 1995 Seminar Papers (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), p. 243.
If I
quote a small
biblical passage, then I get accused
of taking it out
of context.
The difference between the
Biblical and non-
Biblical conceptions
of myth is indeed implicitly recognized by HBK, for it
quotes Alfred Jeremias's definition
of Biblical myth: «Myth in the narrower sense... is one
of the supreme creations
of the human spirit.
It generally refers to taking a number
of individual versus and
quoting them out
of context (either their immediate textual context or the broader
biblical context) to make a point that could not be validly made otherwise.
An appropriate
biblical quote here would be the story
of the adulteress.
It has been said that whenever some older theologians got to a hard place they simply
quoted a few lines
of Wordsworth or Tennyson, thinking that ended the matter; or they made a few
biblical citations as if that were the complete answer; or (at worst), when the attack was most fierce, they used the word «mystery» as a kind
of «escape - hatch».
There were other issues too: The way the accounts
of Israel's monarchy contradicted one another, the way Jesus and Paul
quoted Hebrew Scripture in ways that seemed to stretch the original meaning, the fact that women were considered property in Levitical Law, the way both science and archeology challenged the historicity
of so many
biblical texts, and the fact that it was nearly impossible for me to write a creative retelling
of Resurrection Day because each
of the gospel writers tell the story so differently, sometimes with contradictory details.
In The Art
of Biblical Narrative, Robert Alter suggests a key to characters» inner thoughts and motivations which would be helpful even to the inexperienced reader
of Scripture: first, external details (appearance, clothing, gestures); second, «one character's comments on another»; third, «direct speech by the character»; fourth, «inward speech...
quoted as interior monologue»; and fifth, «statements by the narrator about the attitudes and intentions
of the personages» (pp.116 - 117).
I swear - there are common sense Christians who live by faith and follow ALL HIS COMMANDMENTS and then there are the pick - and - choose, no - understanding, ignorant Christians who can
quote a couple
of Bible verses (turn the other cheek, thou shalt not kill and judge not being the most popular amongst your ilk) who LITERALLY have NO READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS AT ALL and for whom CLEARLY The Lord has not chosen to reveal the most basic
of Biblical tenets.
I don't respond well to threats, so I will respond with one
of my favorite
Biblical quotes: Yea, though I walk through the valley
of the shadow
of death, I will fear no evil, because I am the meanest son
of a bi-tch in the valley.
The Navarre Bible, that wonderful commentary which has done so much to seed the wasteland
of contemporary
Biblical scholarship, refers in connection with the passage I
quoted from Matthew (9:36) to words
of St Margaret Mary Alacoque: «This Divine Heart is a great abyss which holds all good, and he commands that all his poor people should pour their needs into it.
The
biblical quote that follows gives the context
of the
quote.
Why anyone would think Hitler was a person that should be
quoted in any sort
of positive way to support - or - contrast
Biblical teachings for parents and children is beyond me.
But Christians compare and contrast a
Biblical truth (how one brings up a child) with a
quote from an evil man who brainwashed millions in Germany to follow an evil path
of destruction and we are doing something evil.
For example, the Bible is frequently
quoted in support
of opposition to portrayals
of sex and violence in the media but not often to challenge the practice
of western media corporations destroying poorer indigenous cultures by selling cheap western entertainment that under - cuts local programming, even though protection
of the poor is a strong
biblical message.
Spurious
biblical warrant was
quoted for increased military spending and the development
of American nuclear capability.
The
biblical quote of treating the rest (Gentiles) as dogs is very true.
For every
biblical quote thrown around I have others to prove my point in support
of my church but one
of my favorite sayings is «never try and teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.»
but all
of the others who
quote biblical text annoy the sh & * out
of me shut the f up and just state your opinion, we do nt need a lecture!
Also love how she
quotes the book
of philip which was rejected by
Biblical Scholars when gathering the Bible together.
She did
quote some
of the scriptures that required quotations, the rest she stated the part and then paraphrased
biblical scholar about that section
of text.
It may mean printing the text and pointing out specific verses or
quoting them with sufficient frequency that it becomes clear that these verses are present, that the ways in which the passage was remembered — the past interpretations brought to the present hearing — have overlooked these verses, that these are not the creation
of the preacher but are the
biblical text.
There has been so much violence and hatred against gays, with «Christians» (not all,
of course),
quoting biblical censoring — Islam is just as bad.