Sentences with phrase «spoken of doctrine»

Some of the other examples could be more easily interpreted as using the term theology where once the church would have spoken of doctrine.

Not long ago, in a class in systematic theology, I was speaking of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

When the Bible speaks of «the faith» it is speaking of the doctrines and practices which separate followers of Jesus from those who follow something or someone other than Jesus.

Not exact matches

The people do not speak in the language of the law; they do not talk of texts, precedents, doctrine, multi-pronged tests, or the balancing of factors.

God is holy and yes, we walk as sinners speaking of salvation, a doctrine including sin.

The mature, graceful way is to say «I am fully convinced of how the scriptures speak to me on this and if we can agree on the Major Doctrines of Christianity we can still agree to disagree».

So to have someone who can finally speak from experience and explain to me that most of them don't understand their own doctrine, but it's still not an excuse because it's a damaging and false doctrine that the Bible clearly contradicts — is incredibly helpful and healing to my soul.

As he spoke the doctrine of life, he seemed to think it not only familiar but almost trite.

In the light of such fundamental experiences, these doctrines refer to the relationship between the quality of life and the degree to which one participates in the new dimension already spoken of.

The doctrine of Inspiration creates a whole mass of people who think the words themselves are God's Word, and so simply by quoting a verse, they are speaking the words of God, even if they don't have a clue what the words mean.

One way of understanding this language would be to suppose that this is simply a new way of speaking of «doctrines of.»

Unlike the Lutheran - Catholic Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification issued earlier this year, this statement is not the result of an officially sponsored dialogue, but the collaborative work of individuals who speak from and to, but not for, our several communities.

When Muslims speak of Allah, are they always referring to the Qur» anic doctrine or are they speaking from this, more diffuse, background of what has been called general revelation?

He was speaking of that which he saw articulated in the Catholic tradition of Eucharistic worship, as he understood it; yet his words unconsciously echoed a great deal that is most deeply characteristic of Dr. Karl Barth's criticism of what he regards as the very heart and centre of Catholic dogmatics, namely the doctrine of the analogy of being.

So calling it the «Inner Light» speaks to the experience of God, not to doctrines about God, and therefore keeps a proper emphasis.

Professor Hartshorne, who has much more to say on this matter, believes that «the Christian idea of a suffering deity» «symbolized by the Cross, together with the doctrine of the Incarnation» (C. Hartshorne: Philosophers Speak of God, p. 15 [University of Chicago Press, 1953]-RRB- may legitimately be taken as a symbolic indication of the «saving» quality in the process of things which despite the evil that appears yet makes genuine advance a possibility.

When Bell undertook a speaking tour titled The Gods Aren't Angry, he was widely seen as abandoning the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement.

One possibility is that we are simply using this current language to speak of the importance of the church's developing its doctrine of nature more fully and in ways appropriate to our new understanding of the relation between human beings and the natural world.

The biblical justification for the doctrine is sometimes found in Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 1:2 and Isaiah 6:3, but none of these passages speak of a God who is eternally three in one.

And I'm speaking from experience here: I am * profoundly * grateful for the people who confronted me and led me to the doctrines of grace.

The Eastern Church believes in sanctification after death, and perhaps the doctrine of purgatory really asserts nothing more; but can Rome ever say that in speaking of it as «temporal punishment,» which the pope may in whole or part remit, it was in error?

The Doctrine - Index score was strongly related to the tendency to speak out: of the modernists, 93 per cent had taken a stand on a political issue from the pulpit.

(Who speaks any longer of the Christian doctrine of man»?)

We speak of «the doctrine of the atonement,» «the doctrine of Christ,» or «the doctrine of God,» and what we have in mind is the collective testimony from the various biblical authors as to what should be believed about the atonement, about Christ, and about God.

Among white Pentecostals the pressure comes from the charismatics, who are shedding certain classical Pentecostal doctrines, particularly «the baptism of the Holy Spirit» and its being «evidenced» by speaking in tongues.

It is not merely about the balance between pastoralism and doctrine, but about the entitlement of the Church to speak of morality at all.

All of these, but especially the last named, were doctrines of paramount importance during the half century preceding the fall of Japan, at the end of World War II.1 But of that we shall speak at greater length presently.

The Pope is thus speaking specifically of the doctrines of the faith.

In the second place, Whitehead's panexperientialism, combined with his doctrine of eternal objects, shows how we can speak meaningfully of the correspondence between an idea, in the sense of a proposition (the meaning expressed or elicited by a linguistic sentence), and a nexus of actualities.

In recent years I have reclaimed a very old and very important Christian way of speaking about God: the doctrine of the Trinity.

(People could well differ on what this would allow us to say about God, with some opting, for example, for Whitehead's primordial nature of God while rejecting the consequent, with others considering even the primordial nature too speculative and speaking only of «creative interchange» or «creative passage,» and with still others considering the consequent nature of God the most empirically grounded feature of Whitehead's doctrine.)

All of this blue - chip evangelical clout is brought to bear in support of the doctrine of biblical «inerrancy» against a growing party of theological compatriots inclined to speak more of the «authority» of Scripture with regard to «faith and practice.»

The members of the Church who spoke out were acting on that responsibility just as those is the Office of Doctrine are acting on theirs.

We of who does speak and write and read based upon the KING's English have many variants of the Hebrewic doctines yet it is not in our edifying of such doctrines but like you stated above did write, «Christians have a bad habit of not translating the Bible well» is an exact truth!

Near the close of the book, Barr again seems to despair of his subject and calls for works in the «Christian doctrine of the Old Testament,» since «traditional Old Testament theology... has often tried to solve questions which, properly speaking, can not be solved within the horizon of the Hebrew Bible itself and within the boundaries of its resources» (this last is a very valid point).

The real issue concerning a doctrine of inspiration centers on complex matters of interpretation - issues which I have attempted to speak to in the discussion above.

A former student said of his teaching: «He not only thought out the -LSB-...] doctrines upon which he lectured, but he felt their power, and falling tears often evinced his emotion while he spoke of some particular aspect of the truth.

Some Further Reflections on the Origins of the Doctrine of the Trinity,» Coakley writes that «it is the perception of many Christians who pray either contemplatively or charismatically that the dialogue of prayer is strictly speaking not a simple communication between an individual and a distant and undifferentiated divine entity, but rather a movement of divine reflexivity, a sort of answering of God to God in and through one who prays.»

Epistemologically speaking, the ontological principle emerges in the doctrine of «causal efficacy» whereby, Whitehead holds, we actually perceive individual and particular events.

A friend of mine, speaking of the Catholic move to prune excessive Marian doctrine and practice after Vatican II by moving her statue to the side, observed that Protestants moved her out the door altogether.

My own way of speaking of this matter is to insist that the doctrines of redemption and creation must be held together.

At the same time it is instructive to remember that these creeds speak mainly to the doctrines of God and the person of Christ.

She is asked not to speak and pray so she won't have an outburst of false doctrine and disrupt the meeting.

We must re-appropriate the doctrine of original sin in such a way that it speaks to our condition, and lends heuristic power to our personal and corporate forms of addressing evil.

On top of that they tend to take false doctrine and make it into a lifestyle without actually knowing the true meaning of the words they are speaking.

The official teaching of the Church, described by Pius XII as fides catholica (Denzinger 2327), though not, strictly speaking, an actually defined doctrine, holds that the individual spiritual souls are directly created by God.

Thus understood, the doctrine of radical evil can furnish a receptive structure for new figures of alienation besides the speculative illusion or even the desire for consolation — of alienation in the cultural powers, such as the church and the state; it is indeed at the heart of these powers that a falsified expression of the synthesis can take place; when Kant speaks of «servile faith,» of «false cult,» of a «false Church,» he completes at the same time his theory of radical evil.

Those who hold a doctrine of subsequence often (though not always) maintain that the experience of «speaking in tongues» represents the initial physical evidence of «the baptism of the Holy Spirit.»

Thus, if it is true, as has been claimed, that the idea of Christendom and the doctrines of Christian orthodoxy, were not at all what the historical Jesus had in mind when he spoke of the Kingdom of God, we should not be surprised if the continuing stream of cultural influence which he was so instrumental in re-directing should in the future manifest itself in ways very different from the conventional Christianity it later became for a period.

That is why, in the Letter to the Galatians, St. Paul develops above all his doctrine on justification; he speaks of faith that operates through charity.»