Sentences with phrase «upon himself our sins as»

Yet if the record in the Synoptic Gospels is to be trusted, he did not, like Paul, look upon sin as an enveloping state of evil resulting from Adam's fall and corrupting man's whole being.

What I've been under the impression about God and why he hates sin is mainly due to the fact that he can not look upon sin as a pure and holy being therefore, as sinners, we are completely separated from God.

Not exact matches

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard); then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority.

God came down as a man to take upon Himself our sins to make us right with God, the Father.

As John the Baptist said upon seeing Jesus: «Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world!»

I think it is so sad that we as American's can not display the cross symbol that Jesus died upon to save us all for our sins.

This means they can do all those things that were banned under the Mosaic law because Jesus washes their sins away, except now they make up new sins that don't get wahsed away as easy like being born gay and acting upon it.

Takeaway for me is that the pain / suffering / rejection we experience in this life does not equal rejection by God — even if it does serve as a chastisement / correction for sin / failure in our lives — it reveals God's love and personal concern for our development, reminding us of our mortality and need to rely upon him... In short, the wounds / scars we receive are God's way of branding / choosing us as his own...

My salvation is not of works but purely of Grace as bestowed upon me through the knowledge that my sins are forgiven through the perfect work of Christ.

But do really believe that Paul believed that the «judgement of God» were the natural things that come upon us as a result of sin.

This is the kind of love we are talking about — not that we once upon a time loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a sacrifice to clear away our sins and the damage they've done to our relationship with God.

12Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, FOR THAT ALL SINNED:

I would say say that the «judgment» of God on sin in Romans 2:3 is the natural consequences that come upon us in life as a result of sin.

First, when Jesus «became sin» and died upon the cross, I tend to get the visual of Jesus acting as a spiritual sponge....

God answered this vital question by sending His Son, Jesus, as the fulfillment of the most violent religious writings, to show us that He had nothing to do with the violence, but was instead dying along with us in the midst of the violence, taking our sin and suffering upon Himself, bearing our guilt and shame in His own being, all for the sake of those He loved.

Telling people they are sinning for being LGBT or for having an abortion or using birth control or trying to impose your specific set of beliefs upon others in the public square is not a good thing and certainly doesn't show that you have a clue as to the meaning of the word respect.

But I think there is some risk that it might be misconstrued so as to obscure certain truths which I believe to be fundamental: that the Passion is the moment at which that complete oneness with the Father which is the unique and all - pervading characteristic of the life of Jesus is paradoxically manifested; that it is at that moment, above all, that Jesus discloses to us God himself in action; that the judgement passed on Jesus and the testing brought to bear upon him are a judgement and a testing exercised (of course, within the permissive will of God) by evil men, or, to use mythological language, by the devil; and that the judgement of God pronounced at Calvary is that which Christ's accepting love passes upon those men, and upon ourselves as sharers in their sinfulness, by showing up their sin in all its hatefulness.

The answer is, he was recognized, even by the demons, who had supernatural insight, and by his disciples, through faith; and yet the disciples were forbidden to declare it, and the demons were silenced; and if the Jews as a whole did not recognize him, it was because their eyes too were «holden,» and because they were already bringing upon themselves a judgment for their sins.

As I understand it, Christ both took our punishment (legal requirement) and absorbed the full force of sin upon Himself (Christus Victor).

I am so sorry I can not believe,» and then appeals to us for pity because he can not believe, but when the Holy Spirit touches a man's heart, he no longer looks upon unbelief as a mark of intellectual superiority; he does not look upon it as a mere misfortune; he sees it as the most daring, decisive and damning of all sins and is overwhelmed with a sense of his awful guilt in that he had not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.

When God looks violent in the Old Testament, it is not because He is violent, but because He is taking the sins of the world upon Himself, just as Jesus did on the cross.

When I read you say this as your possible resolution: «When God looks violent in the Old Testament, it is not because He is violent, but because He is taking the sins of the world upon Himself, just as Jesus did on the cross.»

This is the superbia, or pride, which the medieval church looked upon as the worst of the seven deadly sins, and which exponents of the neo-orthodox school, notably Reinhold Niebuhr in America, continually remind us is the root of sin.

When Ezra cries, «Thou our God hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve,» (Daniel 9:16) or a prayer in the Book of Nehemiah says, «Thou art just in all that is come upon us; for thou hast dealt truly, but we have done wickedly,» (Nehemiah 9:33) or Daniel exhausts tautology in confessing, «We have sinned, and have dealt perversely, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled,» (Daniel 9:5) we see the self - accusation which resulted from the acceptance of national misfortune not as an evidence of Yahweh's weakness in protecting his people but as proof of his inflexible righteousness.

The Christian approach would ideally include the desire to uncover and probe the goodness, beauty and divine purpose of creation, as well as an emphasis upon the pre-eminence of love among men and the dire effects of sin on creation in general (see Romans 8.22) and on men in particular.

Too often we focus upon the depth of our repentance rather than the depth of Gods love in rescuing us all, I read recently that repentance is not as much about saying sorry and turning from sin as it is recognizing what it cost God to save us and that he was the one who took the initiative and not us.

«Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, when he was about to offer himself once on the altar of the Cross to God the Father, making intercession by means of his death, so that he might gain there an eternal redemption, since his priesthood was not to be extinguished by death, at the last Supper, «on the night that he was handed over», left to his beloved Spouse the Church a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, by which the bloody sacrifice achieved once upon the Cross might be represented and its memory endure until the end of the age, and its saving power be applied to the remission of those sins which are daily committed by us.»

In as much as Alpha even mentions our human nature the emphasis is the protestant one upon the image of God being «almost eradicated by sin».

The average unbeliever does not look upon unbelief as a sin»

is simply too ingrained, too much a part of what sin is all about, for us not to feel vexed when reminders come of the opposite reality, which it is precisely the office of religion to provide: «Accordingly, it has always been the office of Religion to protest against the sophistry of Satan, and to preserve the memory of those truths which the unbelieving heart corrupts: both the freedom and the responsibility of man, the sovereignty of the Creator, the supremacy of the law of conscience as His representative within us, and the irrelevancy of external circumstances in the judgment which is ultimately to be made upon our conduct and character.»

«Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:»... The clock in your cells was set to only divide X amount of times.

In the Old Testament, when God looks like He is behaving in ways that do not match the nature and character of God as revealed in Jesus Christ, this is not because God is being deceptive, but because God is taking the sins of His people upon Himself just as Jesus did on the cross.

> Yes, as Christians it is incumbent upon us to forgive sins.

Though innocent of all violence attributed to Him, God allowed the violence committed by others to be laid upon His head so that He might take the blame and thereby rescue and deliver mankind from most of the self - destructive consequences of their sin, and reveal Himself to mankind as a loving Father who takes our sin upon Himself for our deliverance from the consequences of sin and for the sake of our relationship with Him.

As far as Jesus sacrifice goes, I think N.T. Wright hits it on the head in «The Day the Revolution Began» in that in bringing about the «Law», Sin was brought out into the open, and Jesus drew that sin upon himself in order to put it to death in his flesh, and deal with it once and for alAs far as Jesus sacrifice goes, I think N.T. Wright hits it on the head in «The Day the Revolution Began» in that in bringing about the «Law», Sin was brought out into the open, and Jesus drew that sin upon himself in order to put it to death in his flesh, and deal with it once and for alas Jesus sacrifice goes, I think N.T. Wright hits it on the head in «The Day the Revolution Began» in that in bringing about the «Law», Sin was brought out into the open, and Jesus drew that sin upon himself in order to put it to death in his flesh, and deal with it once and for aSin was brought out into the open, and Jesus drew that sin upon himself in order to put it to death in his flesh, and deal with it once and for asin upon himself in order to put it to death in his flesh, and deal with it once and for all.

It is asked by Jesus as He suffers on the cross, and faces the sin of the world being poured out upon Him.

The pain and anguish we feel every day, the suffering of being separated from God that has so numbed our souls, the despair and fear that drives us to live as we do, was felt for the very first time by Jesus on the cross when sin came upon Him.

By the way by no means does this mean that I am particularly against Islam, I am also against Judaism, Christianity, and any unproven dark age manifestation of a all knowing, creator, If there was a god he sure does «nt need help enforcing his edicts and morals, remember that if there is a god then as many religions state, people will be judged upon there beliefs and sins after death and spend eternity in heaven or hell, so why is it so important for people to butt in and start trying to control each other and force people to believe in something that many think is absurd and insane.

My sins seemed to be laid open; so that I thought that every one I saw knew them, and sometimes I was almost ready to acknowledge many things, which I thought they knew: yea sometimes it seemed to me as if every one was pointing me out as the most guilty wretch upon earth.

On the whole, the Latin races have leaned more towards the former way of looking upon evil, as made up of ills and sins in the plural, removable in detail; while the Germanic races have tended rather to think of Sin in the singular, and with a capital S, as of something ineradicably ingrained in our natural subjectivity, and never to be removed by any superficial piecemeal operations.

It also allows for a Holy God to maintain His standards as He took upon Himself the sins on mankind.

It may well be said that the [acceptance of man] in - spite - of [his sin] character of the Christian faith, by means of prophetic criticism and the «will to transform» based upon divine justice, functions as a militant element in the realm of human society and history, whereas the just - because - of [human sin and selfishness acceptance] nature of Buddhist realization,... functions as a stabilizing element running beneath all social and historical levels.

I am merely keeping a steady hold upon the Christian dogma that sin is a position — not, however, as though it could be comprehended, but as a paradox which must be believed.

The scripture of old claimed that a man would come to suffer and die and take the sins of the world upon himself he would be bruised beaten and crucified and then He would come a second time as a conquering messiah.

And in the next place, describing what properly is defiance, it teaches that a man does wrong although he understands what is right, or forbears to do right although he understands what is right; in short, the Christian doctrine of sin is pure impertinence against man, accusation upon accusation; it is the charge which the Deity as prosecutor takes the liberty of lodging against man.

(Acts 3:17) But this ignorance was in part at least the result of a mysterious blindness that had come upon them as a judgment for their sins, their initial unresponsiveness mounting eventually to active hatred and a «blind» fury of malice by which they attributed everything he said or did to the inspiration of Beelzebul, the chief of devils.

He died a criminal's death because He went there willingly, as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, to take our sins upon Himself and bear them into death.

Luther's insight that * sin * is not «man turned down toward the earth rather than up toward heaven» as the Catholic scholasticss taught; but was «man curved in upon himself» was an insight that has been confirmed by contemporary psychology in its teaching on narcissistic egoism.

i thought i was getting my first plan ticket to» the bad place» as what my sunday school teachers would say — but i was taught that God has a Pure heart and doesn't bestow hatred upon his children and forgives us for all our sins!

The same sins that God frowned upon 2000 yrs ago are the same sins we as humans commit today.