Sentences with phrase «teaching of the apostle paul»

It is based on an actual teaching of the apostle Paul and is part of the promise of Salvation from the Judgment that is coming to this world and upon all of you foolish unbelievers.

Then, since this gospel was already being corrupted, there was a reiteration of this gospel in the teaching of the apostle Paul.

Not exact matches

«In my faith community, popular women pastors such as Joyce Meyer were considered unbiblical for preaching from the pulpit in violation of the apostle Paul's restriction in 1 Timothy 2:12 («I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent»),

another gnostic gospel... not even close to the true Gospel found in matthew, mark, luke, and john gospels that line up with Paul, and the other apostles teachings of Jesus, those four gospels have hundreds of manuscrips not like these puny 1 time fragments dated way after apostles

The apostle Paul called women his «co-workers» which could imply a teaching role and women were first to witness the resurrection of Jesus.

What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist reading of the text represents a capitulation to culture but a reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.

The Church has taught, from the time of the Apostles to the time of John Paul II, that the death penalty is lawful.

While it is true that none of the Apostles needed a formal education for their position, we can not say they were not educated by Jesus and others; even Paul not only was educated in the worldly and in religious sense, but he taught «school» every day for two years in Ephesus after being rejected by the synagogue.

The apostle Paul did not teach that «every knee will bow and tongue confess that the Bible is the Word of God,» but that «every knee will bow and tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.»

Origen of Alexandria, the first major interpreter of the Bible in the Church's history, said that «the apostle Paul, «teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth,» taught the Church... how it ought to interpret the books of the Law.»

In writing to Timothy, the apostle Paul exhorts his young student in the value of God's Word: «All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work» (2 Timothy 3:16 - 17).

For this reason the narrative portrait of Paul's relationship with the apostles is not simply meant to show that Paul was not taught by them; it is also meant to model the unity that is only possible in the fear of God and the revelation of Christ in the gospel.

It was impossible for Paul to simply take the practices and teachings of the Apostles and apply the strategy of using Roman transportation and manuscripts.

It is true that both the gospels and the speeches of Peter and Paul in Acts give important testimony as to what the apostles taught about the Christian life and proclaimed about the meaning of Jesus» own life, death, and resurrection; yet both the gospels and Acts were written, not by apostles, but by later disciples, and their evidence on particular points stands in need of confirmation, if possible, from the apostles themselves.

We flatten out the words of God - In - Flesh --(God eating and drinking and walking and teaching and laughing and crying among us)-- and give them equal (or often lesser) value to those of the apostle Paul or Old Testament law.

He believed, however, that they could be reconciled, for while the glorified body of the risen Jesus is normally neither visible nor tangible, it «temporarily reassumes the human outline, and solid frame, and former appearance, and marks of the wounds, for evidential and instructive purposes».13 In the resurrection narratives the Evangelists «describe the re-entrance of the glorified Body of Christ into terrestrial conditions, effected for the purpose of convincing His apostles of His Resurrection, and of giving them instructions and commssions».14 He believed that Paul, being the theologian, was not concerned with these occasional manifestations, but with the essential condition of the risen Christ and that his is therefore the profounder teaching.

The apostle Paul taught that the sword of Caesar is given by God to commend good and punish evil (Rom.

In a sense, they present us with a sort of Christian remix of Greco - Roman morality that attempts to preserve the apostle Paul's earlier teaching that «there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus» (Galatians 3:28).

Pastor, I'm just wondering if you yourself follow ALL the rest of this portion of the Law ie vs 19 or vs 27 regarding cutting the hair at the side of your head, or vs 32 regarding «rising in the presence of elders» or... vs 30 regarding observing the Sabbath — especially after what Our Lord Jesus did in Matt 12 and what He taught in Matt 5 - 7?!? I would suggest that you «do not choke at gnats and swallow camels», and that you prayerfully read what the apostle Paul wrote in 1 Cor 9: 3, 19 - 23 esp vs22 - 23.

Paul is the apostle of the crucifixion, teaching us that our salvation rests on the atonement, that Christ by his death on the cross made restitution for the sins of the whole world.

That pre-eminence can be sensed in the words used by Pius XII on the occasion of the definition of the Assumption of Our Lady «By the authority of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the authority of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul and by our own authority do pronounce, declare and define as a divinely revealed dogma...» It is an awesome power, linking the current successor of St. Peter to the Lord who taught as one having authority, and not as their scribes and Pharisees (Matt.

1 Timothy 4:1 - 3: The apostle Paul fortells a time after the death of the Apostles that some would «fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons, by the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, marked in their conscience as with a branding iron, FORBIDDING TO MARRY, commanding to abstain from foods which God created... etc..

But a body of newer work on the apostle — including, perhaps, as Hurtado notes, Wright's own new books (which I haven't had the chance to finish reading yet)-- reveals that Paul may, after all, look less like a liberal Westerner than the New Perspective has taught us to think and more like a Christ - haunted figure whose radical social practices arose directly from his pioneering, innovative thinking about the identity and achievement of Jesus Christ.

Like Jesus, Paul the apostle quotes the teaching of Genesis that, when a man leaves his parents and cleaves to his wife, he is united with her in one flesh.

Thus Clement regarded the Didache or Teaching of the Apostles as scriptural; both he and Origen viewed the author of I Clement as the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3 and the author of the Shepherd as the Hernias of Romans 16:4.

Paul taught in Ephesians 4: «11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;» Without apostles and prophets we can not come to a «unity of the faith» nor be perfected in Christ.

Eusebius, the church historian, who wrote in the early part of the fourth century, furnishes evidence that some parts of the church accepted still other books, the Acts of Paul, the Teaching of the Apostles, or the Didache, and the Preaching of Peter.

The apostle Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 3:16 - 17, «All Scripture is God - breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.»