Sentences with phrase «views biblical texts»

Theology in the Reformation tradition has explored other alternatives, as in the «Andover theory» which views biblical texts such as 2 Peter 3:19 «20 and 4:6 and Christ's descent to the dead referenced in the Apostles» Creed as warranting belief in the Hound of Heaven pursuing the last and the least.

Not exact matches

This new version is, in my view, much stronger, appealing both to Biblical texts and SBC precedents.

And all of these others have also based their views on careful exegesis of the biblical text, in its grammatical, cultural, historical contexts.

This is the second post in our series, One In Christ: A Week of Mutuality, dedicated to discussing an egalitarian view of gender — including relevant biblical texts and practical applications.

This series is dedicated to discussing an egalitarian view of gender — including relevant biblical texts and practical applications.

My first point registers the conviction that the primary hermeneutical principle arises from the decision how to approach the biblical text, whether to view it as I do as God's written Word or to see it in a reduced mode such as is common today.

While we are on this subject, how is it that those who take a high view of the Scriptures are known to produce less by way of creative biblical interpretation than those who either bracket the question or treat the text as a human document?

That view will reflect the enigmas and ambiguities of the biblical texts, and it will be a view of the whole world.

When biblical texts are the only sufficient reason for holding ethical and political views, a dubious «divine voluntarism» results.

Levenson's reading of biblical texts suggests a view of creation as «combat» against the onslaughts of chaos.

It is, in particular, the second of evangelicalism's two tenets, i. e., Biblical authority, that sets evangelicals off from their fellow Christians.8 Over against those wanting to make tradition co-normative with Scripture; over against those wanting to update Christianity by conforming it to the current philosophical trends; over against those who view Biblical authority selectively and dissent from what they find unreasonable; over against those who would understand Biblical authority primarily in terms of its writers» religious sensitivity or their proximity to the primal originating events of the faith; over against those who would consider Biblical authority subjectively, stressing the effect on the reader, not the quality of the source — over against all these, evangelicals believe the Biblical text as written to be totally authoritative in all that it affirms.

This is the tenth post in our series, One In Christ: A Week of Mutuality, dedicated to discussing an egalitarian view of gender — including relevant biblical texts and practical applications.

Regrettably, she does little more than provide us with a reminder of a textbook example of eisegesis (reading «into» the biblical text one's own ideology) rather than exegesis (reading «out of» Scripture with attentiveness to historical and literary context, even if it conflicts with one's own personal views).

But my connection with the cartoon was that in our obsession to find this single intent we have completely deskilled and discouraged people to share their views on the Biblical texts, and confined that to pseudo-specialists.

He has a take on angels, Satan, and demons which I have never heard before, and which seems to fit the biblical text in a way that, if true, would cause me to read much of Scripture in a whole different way, and which would cause me to view life, and governments, and cities, and politics, and animals, and plants and pretty much everything in a whole new way also.

But the normativeness of Scripture should still take seriously the reality of a spectrum of other views among listeners, ranging from the Bible as an imprimatur on the preached word to the biblical text as having little inherent authority (Allen).

J.I. Packer probably is a good representation of the historic view: «Reference to a second blessing has to be read into the [biblical] text; it can not be read out of it.»

If this were done, then the inevitable danger which every dogmatician must, confront [and here lies the dignity and greatness of his task] would be more clearly recognized: namely, the danger that he may not remain upon an extension of the biblical line, but rather interpret the biblical texts primarily ex post facto, from the point of view of his «going beyond the New Testament.

He must, for instance, make up his mind about what is «true» in the Biblical text, and what is only «temporary» — i.e. to be interpreted in the light of the world view or the religious environment of the age.

Though most African and Asian churches have a high view of biblical origins and authority, this does not prevent a creative and even radical application of biblical texts to contemporary debates and dilemmas.

This is the fifth post in our series, One In Christ: A Week of Mutuality, dedicated to discussing an egalitarian view of gender — including relevant biblical texts and practical applications.

This is the third post in our series, One In Christ: A Week of Mutuality, dedicated to discussing an egalitarian view of gender — including relevant biblical texts and practical applications.

Proof texts from Proverbs are not sufficient to make a view of private property biblical.

Many times, when people of faith are challenged about their anti-gay views, they cite biblical verses or other religious texts as a safe haven when they are unable to articulate why they hold prejudiced atudes toward LGBT people.

Clark Pinnock centers the issue even more pointedly as he asks, «How is it that those who take a high view of the Scriptures are known to produce less by way of creative biblical interpretation than those who either bracket the question or treat the text as a human document?»

Without casting Enlightenment rationalism as categorically evil, Wright details some of the problematic consequences of Enlightenment assumptions regarding the biblical text: false claims to absolute objectivity, the elevation of «reason» («not as an insistence that exegesis must make sense with an overall view of God and the wider world,» Wright notes, «but as a separate «source» in its own right»), reductive and skeptical readings of scripture that cast Christianity as out - of - date and irrelevant, a human - based eschatology that fosters a «we - know - better - now» attitude toward the text, a reframing of the problem of evil as a mere failure to be rational, the reduction of the act of God in Jesus Christ to a mere moral teacher, etc..

The Bible is a storehouse of proof texts into which the believer may dip when seeking «biblical warrant» for his or her own views on current issues.

I'm not certain where she has studied or what views she has that bias her against the accepted interpretation of biblical scriptures, but she has misinterpreted the creation story and seems to lack the language background in Hebrew and Greek to truly appreciate the original meanings of the biclical texts.

The literal / inerrant view was born out of ignorance — ignorance of the biblical texts in their original language and of their metaphorical context and ignorance / misunderstanding of scientific discoveries and theories.

The literal / inerrant view of the Bible is a fairly recent development in the life of the biblical texts and is strongest in the United States.

This is the fourth post in our series, One In Christ: A Week of Mutuality, dedicated to discussing an egalitarian view of gender — including relevant biblical texts and practical applications.

But the significance and content of all such views will be defined completely in terms of thinking about them in the view of larger facts of Jesus Christ and the gospel — not primarily by gathering and arranging pieces of scriptural text that seem to be relevant to such topics in order to pinpoint the «biblical view» on them.»

This approach tends, then, to set up transactional views as «atonement plus,» and to lend weight to their claims to be more biblical and more authentically Christian, since they deny nothing in the other approaches but include positive readings of the central sacrificial texts and images of the tradition.

This «rebellion», he contends, parallels that of Korah's Rebellion in the OT, and is characterised by a view of Scripture that questions the divine authority of the biblical text, its uniqueness, and its sufficiency.