Sentences with phrase «passages read as»

Both in Exodus AND Deuteronomy, the passage reads as «Thou shalt not kill»... nowhere do I see «murder».

The text of the decision can be found here, but the key passage reads as follows:

The passage reads as follows: «As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of greatest value, every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of society as great as he can.

Not exact matches

Because if you ever truly read the Bible, there are passages that actually condone slavery, however as a civilized society, most of us with an endearment to our fellow human being decide that slavery is wrong, regardless or religious endorsement of any kind.

Unfortunately too many only hear what the minister spews from the pulpit every week and they go home and read the weeks passages as set out by that minister.

As someone born in the early 50s, that read Lord of the Rings in my teens, I found that the Dark Tower series took LOTR place as a series I could read over and over and each time I find some Christian themes but also beautifully written passages that I simply want to stop and re-read agaiAs someone born in the early 50s, that read Lord of the Rings in my teens, I found that the Dark Tower series took LOTR place as a series I could read over and over and each time I find some Christian themes but also beautifully written passages that I simply want to stop and re-read agaias a series I could read over and over and each time I find some Christian themes but also beautifully written passages that I simply want to stop and re-read again.

As an interesting note, some scribes in the Middle Ages simply changed the passage to read, «as it is written in the prophets..&raquAs an interesting note, some scribes in the Middle Ages simply changed the passage to read, «as it is written in the prophets..&raquas it is written in the prophets..»

I actually love reading RIchard Dawkins, but I also love reading passages from religious text as well.

Whether we read a passage as a metaphor or literal can greatly change the meaning of passage.

He carried her in, sat her before them, read the passage from James, and said, «I invoke you as my elders to carry out your biblical duty to my family.»

But a first - century Middle Eastern would not have read the opening and closing phrases of the passage as the main point.

In addition we read two major christological pronouncements in the passage: «As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world» (v. 5), and «For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind» (v. 39As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world» (v. 5), and «For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind» (v. 39as I am in the world, I am the light of the world» (v. 5), and «For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind» (v. 39).

Yet this passage of Scripture, as with all the others, deserves a more nuanced and respectful reading.

Although the passage on page 88 about the «super-jective nature» reads easily as implying the doctrine in question, I agree that it may not have been intended to do so.

As I read the passages of scripture in the lectionary for today, I found myself identifying most with the author of this psalm.

As such, we talk about a Bible passage that «speaks to us» or about how we «heard God» as we read a passage of ScripturAs such, we talk about a Bible passage that «speaks to us» or about how we «heard God» as we read a passage of Scripturas we read a passage of Scripture.

«I have read about the passage we'll be studying in several commentaries, and some of them see this as I do,» I replied.

Surely it is with this understanding of Jesus» call that we are to read such difficult biblical passages as Colossians 3:22, which bids slaves be obedient to their masters, as though they were obeying Christ himself.

Quite quickly as I began to read Hindu and other scriptures, I found passages that were «inspiring».

There is nothing in that passage that should be read as an approval of slavery.

I started out as a partially indoctrinated Christian and believed the Bible was largely true until the late teens, when I actually read it — all of it — without someone telling me what to think about various cherry - picked passages.

From Heidi: Because Rachel is such a voice for women in the blogosphere, I would love for you to address gender inequality in the church and bring a better reading to the passages that have been used as weapons on women for generations.

This reading, as we have noted, was Italianate, Ultramontane, highly emotional and frequently expressed in passages of purple prose, which, as Wilkinson opines, occasionally topple over into «silliness».

We read Gospel passages and related Old Testament lections except during the season of Easter, when Acts is read as the new Israel continues the history of the old.

Just as St. Paul's letters gave early Christian commentators examples of how to interpret the Old Testament in light of Christ, so the Church Fathers stretch our exegetical imagination by showing how other passages can be read in that way.

The text of the modern day Bible has surely gone through a similar ordeal through the passage of time, as many many many men have had their hands on shaping the text that we read today.

I'd also recommend reading through Romans 5:12 — 8:17 (which, as you know, is all about Adam, sin and Christ as the second Adam) and making a mental checklist of how Paul uses the term death in this passage.

For example, he rightly points out that Jesus says, «You have heard that it was said, «You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy»» (Matthew 5:38), but what he doesn't say is that there is a reason Jesus uses the expression, «that it was said» instead of his usual expression, «have you not read» or «as it is written» when he references scriptural passages.

Well, just as you think I am not reading certain OT texts at face value, I think you are ignoring much of what these NT texts are saying, and not just these passages, but the whole tenor and focus of the ministry of Jesus.

The entire passage reads, «In spite of the many kinds of love, which in Greek are designated as philia (friendship), eros (aspiration toward value), and epithymia (desire), in addition to agape, which is the creation of the Spirit, there is one point of identity in all these qualities of love, which justifies the translation of them all by «love»; and that identity is the «urge toward the reunion of the separated,» which is the inner dynamics of life.

As I was reading through this section of scripture today I felt compelled to look up another opinion of what it meant to compare it to my understanding of the passage.

(The parallel passage, Luke 12:48, should read that the wicked servant is assigned his place with the unfaithful, not with the unbelievers as most translations have it.)

As you can imagine, this causes them to read the passage wrongly and apply it incorrectly.

Now if my reading of Mt. 25:31 - 46 is essentially correct, it should be apparent that the basic, overall thrust of the passage can be defined as a lure toward a feeling of compassion, or love, toward the needy.

Nature has just as much beauty, order, love, and wonder as it does death, blood, suffering, and murder, and Scripture has hundreds of dark and disturbing passages which seems to paint a different picture of God than we read about in the Gospels or in 1 John 4:8.

So this warning passage in Hebrews 10, like the others in this letter, should be read as an invitation and encouragement for the Hebrew Christians to stick with Jesus Christ through thick and thin, come what may.

Many read this passage as a description of the downward spiral into humility and death which Jesus undertook for the sake of humanity, so that this downward spiral eventually resulted in the worst of all possible humiliations, death on a cross (Php 2:5 - 8).

The fact is that * both * religious texts have passages that can be read as justification for abhorrent acts, and so * both * religious traditions have a responsibility to examine and deal with those issues.

It is, moreover, easy to be mistaken, on a superficial reading, about the true meaning of passages which may strike us as congenial.

If you go to the book of revelations, read a couple documents and study a little in some documentary's you will find out that the translation is corrupt, infact they destroyed for other reasons, BUT in Tobias you will still learn that the old testomant does not approve of homosexuality, also in Leviticus, as well as Romans, and 2nd Corinthians, and a bit more passages, use google, it might help.

However, the passage as I read it does not quite say what my critic here takes it to say.

Using Shakespeare instead of the scriptures as the source for their text, but without reading the passage to the end, they said with Hamlet:

«The reading of postliberal theology as antirealist can admittedly appeal to occasional unfortunate passages, but it seems to me a clear misreading of the texts taken as a whole,» he contends.

I interpreted it solely as a divine command... I seized (the book I had been reading], opened it and in silence read the first passage on which my eyes lit: «Not in riots and drunken parties, not in eroticism and indecencies, not in strife and rivalry, but put on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh in its lusts» (Rom.

As J. P. Sanders once said regarding biblical interpretation, «Anytime we read scripture and find ourselves right away on Jesus» side, we have probably misread the passage.»

As soon as I read the passage it's as if the devil went into my mind like hahaha I'm herAs soon as I read the passage it's as if the devil went into my mind like hahaha I'm heras I read the passage it's as if the devil went into my mind like hahaha I'm heras if the devil went into my mind like hahaha I'm here.

By inserting new passages into the text as expansions of the old ones, while leaving much of the earlier writing intact, he invited us to read the earlier expressions in light of the later ones.

Once this is established as important to Paul, this translation should be tried out even in passages that can be read equally well as attributing pistis to Jesus or to his followers.

The passage quoted by Griffin reads as follows: «He did not discriminate the event, as the unit of experience, from the enduring organism as its stabilization into importance, and from the cognitive organism as expressing an increased completeness of individualization» (SMW 155).

Ford came to read this passage as saying that there may be some occasions which are natural events and are not complete, whereas for completion such an occasion requires the addition of the mental (FFP 49).