Sentences with phrase «rather than no gospel»

They ought to blast the sick behavior of clerics, they ought to blast the fact that they have lost their moral authority, because they are more concerned in advancing a Marxist agenda, rather than the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Do you think that modern evangelicals are salvation - focused rather than gospel - focused?

So we see that rather than the gospels contradicting each other, all of the accounts blended together give a fully picture of what went on that evening.

The true dilemma is with churches who preach the American dream rather than the gospel of Jesus.

I am saying that religion is — or can be — a «preparation for the gospel» rather than the gospel itself.

History has not been kind on attempts to enforce moral change via law rather than the gospel, such as Oliver Cromwell's puritanical society.

Yet this «mainstream» Christianity joke is more into trying sweep sin under the rug and focusing on junk like Chick - fil - a rather than the Gospel and the ONLY way.

Did this bear witness to whiteness rather than the Gospel?

Not exact matches

Read Revelations and look this up * Spirit to be poured out on all flesh (Joel 2:28) * Universal apostasy (2 Thessalonians 2:1 - 4) * The watering down of the gospel, teaching the doctrines of man rather than those of God.

As one person said to me, «If we are serious about sharing the gospel around the world, shouldn't we be glad that we still have missionaries who pray rather than setting up a bureau of prayer inspectors!»

Many follow his teaching rather than what Jesus said in the gospels.

In such a time, appeals to the spiritual greatness of the Russian nation may be an essential witness to the Gospel rather than a capitulation to the powers that be.

I suggest a commentary to the gospels rather than speculation so as not to come across unwise.

And in doing so, they'd gotten stuck inside what Polish philosopher Wojciech Chudy, an intellectual great - grandson of John Paul II, called the post-Kantian «trap of reflection»: thinking - about - thinking - about - thinking, rather than thinking about reality — in this case, the Gospel and its truths.

[101] Sanders points out that the author would regard the gospel as theologically true as revealed spiritually even if its content is not historically accurate [101] and argues that even historically plausible elements in John can hardly be taken as historical evidence, as they may well represent the author's intuition rather than historical recollection.

How come this Reverend talked about the Gospel of Christ rather than telling us how filthy America and the white man is like Reverend Wright always did?»

Rather than viewing conflict as the second greatest evil, conflict is an opportunity to grow and give the world something beautiful, a picture of the gospel, a picture of God.

Its sad that religion is the gospel of many churchs today rather than a real relationship with Christ based on his grace rather than works.Just as cains offering wasnt acceptable to the Lord its the same for churchs today the Lord is not pleased by our efforts he does nt need our efforts they do not build Gods kingdom nor do mans programmes..

Donald Trump had an encounter with the gospel of Jesus Christ and rather than propping him up, it made him uncomfortable... as tends to happen with anyone who is actually paying attention, myself included.

What he preaches is called a «Prosperity Gospel» which basically teaches that God existst to satisfy my desires rather than the other way araound.

It was felt that the gospel reflected Hellenistic ideas rather than a Jewish approach.

Rather than staying becalmed in the sacristy, the sanctuary, and the presbytery, the clergy of his day, he urged, should lead a demanding, Gospel - centered life of proclaiming the Word and celebrating the sacraments, nourishing their people with the tangible realities God had entrusted to human hands as pathways to the Trinity: the Bible and the Eucharist.

It is probably best to think of John's gospel as a meditation on the meaning of the life of Jesus rather than primarily a historical record, although at times he seems to preserve an early historical tradition.

But the value of the book lies in the interpretation of Jesus» teaching as a whole, and this interpretation becomes more rather than less convincing if we ascribe to Jesus himself more of the Gospel content than Professor Bultmann is ready to do.

It seems that, in the midst of black Christian outcry in 2013, the majority of white Christians pressed the snooze button on racial justice, sleepwalking into their churches where an individualistic gospel that doesn't call them to say or do anything about racial injustice is preached, where white culture, rather than Christ, reigns supreme, and where the problems and perspectives of black people are ignored.

Prideful atheists always staring in the mirror at their noses rather than reading the Gospel.

Even if someone named Jesus with some sort of causal connection to the Jesus in the gospels existed, if you just blandly say that Jesus really existed, you sound like you are confirming the largely fictional being of the gospels rather than someone who stands oin some real but in many ways indirect, even tenuous relationship to this fictional character.

On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.

Bonhoeffer maintained that interpreting the Bible in terms of the present age is to make man the measure of the Gospel rather than to learn from the Gospel the true norm for human existence.

Rather than confront these evils, our nation turns to the Prosperity Gospel nonsense in order to rationalize our immorality.

The title «Son of God» in Mark's gospel, rather than deriving from Jesus himself, seems to be used by the evangelist to emphasize the true nature of Jesus.

It will live out the gospel among the people of this world by serving, living, and loving them, rather than just teaching facts.

I believe that while the apostle Paul instructed some women not to teach, he encouraged others to prophesy, teach, and lead, and so we have to look at the epistles in their totality and in their context rather than lifting a few verses out to restrict women from preaching the gospel.

Try following the gospels rather than the old testament for a change.

In both the Gospel of John and 1 John, the usage of sin in connection to death and life seems to always refer to eternal / spiritual death, rather than physical death.

The community remains intact as long as its members seek to please God on the basis of the revealed, circumcision - free gospel rather than seeking to please other humans.

Rather than fearing or cheering the arrival of the End of the World, can we all just keep our heads on straight, and keep our heads out of the clouds, and focus instead on living the Gospel by loving and serving others, and making this world better and safer for all of us?

Rather than getting bogged down in the minutiae of this or that passage, he shows that the achievement of the gospels is to help us understand why discipleship makes sense, why the Jesus whose life they capture in different ways is worthy of following.

A disembodied Word expressed in creedal statements, which were constructed to defend orthodoxy against heresy rather than proclaim the faith, will not communicate the joy and redemptive power of the gospel.

The word about sin is the penultimate rather than the ultimate word of the gospel, which witnesses to the power of God, in both judgment and mercy, to provide by grace the resources we can not provide for ourselves.

I would rather one check out claims for themselves rather than taking whatever some book or someone else says as gospel.

Carey speaks of going «into all the world to preach the gospel to every creature» (i.e., to every human being), rather than «to the whole creation» as intended by the Greek.

In fact, when they were thinking of its content rather than its form, they spoke of it as «the Good News» (in our translation, «Gospel»).

The gospel insists that human beings are the greatest good, and that everyone's needs are best met when we live in community, caring for each other rather than looking out for Number One.

Awareness that there are particular cultural situations rather than a universal culture within which the gospel takes form raises, of course, the obvious question: what is the gospel?

-- let us say an Aryan, a Hindu, a Greek, or a member of the Roman proletariat, something would surely be found to betray this fact in the diversified gospel tradition we possess; or if, say, he had had no connection with John the Baptist, or had not criticized the scribes, or had been stoned to death rather than crucified.

Evelyn Underhill once said very wisely that the gospel is concerned with the divine indicative — «what God has done, is doing, and will do» — rather than with an human imperative, or what we should be doing, although the latter should be an inevitable consequence to the former.

Rather than accepting as authoritative Scripture's total witness, the interpreter uses either his subjective experience with the Christ, or his contemporary sensibility, or the church's traditional understanding of the gospel, or perhaps some combination of these to judge what reasonably the «whole Bible» might be saying.

bit, but I thought we were focusing on what Jesus actually said as a whole via his teaching and parables rather than what he did or what the gospel writers or St. Paul said.

Hundreds of Protestant and Catholic thinkers were polled for ideas on the script, and most endorsed the plan of sticking to one Gospel — Luke — rather than blending Gospel accounts, Eshleman said.