Sentences with phrase «views of other christian»

Make sure your date has a healthy view of other Christians.

Students could compare this practical response to the views of other Christians who see redemption as a spiritual salvation from the power of sin.

Not exact matches

Or is it just that one party is viewed predominantly as the party of white, straight, traditionalist Christians and the other is seen as the party of everyone else?

«While I applaud and agree with many of Glenn Beck's conservative and constitutional views, that does not give me or any other Bible - believing Christian justification to compromise Biblical truth by spiritually joining Beck.»

He frequently cites the work of Frank Furstenburg and Arlie Hochschild, two sociologists of family and gender relations whose views are by no means ideologically conservative, and he avoids value - loaded language, especially when it comes to describing the mainline Protestant churches whose leadership has, by and large, capitulated to the secular - elitist acceptance of extramarital sex, abortion, homosexuality, and other practices that conservative Christians view as inimical to moral life and family health.

I spend years in Apologetics and arrived at rational basis for my Christian faith, defend the faith against objections, and expose the perceived flaws of other world views.

It is what has lead me to my veiw that Atheism as a religion, the passion most Atheist have for their point of view from the start you may not fall in this category but I'm sure you know someone that does.The same applies to Christians that freak out on someone and start forcing their view on others, I see that as wrong also if someone asks or brings the debate to you then by all means debate but why be rude how does it help?

So, though southerneyes44 writes of Christian «appreciation of alternate views», there's a long and brutal history of Christians persecuting adherents of other religions, including the followers of Judaism, from which Christianity arose, during various European pogroms against Jews throughout many centuries, and adherents of other branches of Christianity.

But for many reasons Mormans are thier own religion and not Christian because thier view of the trinity, the holy spirit, and who God was is not consitent with what any other Christian really believes.

Imagine a day where christians respect the rights and views of others and actually leave religion in their churches.

Atheists (not all just as not all christians preach) that try to spread their beliefs to others do so with similar ideas of helping people free themselves from they view as mentally oppressive.

Premier Christianity magazine is bringing you a variety of Christian views in response to the EU referendum (click here for other blogs).

I personally think religion should not be a factor.No one should ask the candidates what their religious views are and they should never mention them.Their religious preferences have absolutely no effect on what type of leader they will be.Unless they are some kind of a religious fanatic.I think it's time for an atheist.There was not a Christian president for over the first 50 years of our nations existence.And, I do not think there has been one since.If you look it up you will find not one of our founding fathers were Christian.Not even Jefferson.I know he wrote the Jefferson bible, but, that's just because he, like the other founding fathers, did not believe Jesus to be of divine decent.So, he kept his philosophy while removing all the mystical and dogmatic concepts.

It is understandable why the New York Times's Editorial Board would conclude that Christians view sinners as inferior — the tragic history of Christianity, even within our own country, offers many examples of Christians who have used sin as an excuse to dehumanize, discriminate, and hate others.

The media hounded Tim Farron for his Christian views; they did not regard it as acceptable for him to hold views other than those of the political elite, or the majority, Similarly, our belief in the personhood of the unborn child and the sanctity of their lives enables us to see abortion as a sin crying to heaven for justice, not merely some privately held opinion; for us it is most definitely not «a woman's choice».

A couple years ago, however, I began to find other Christians (throughout church history) who have not held to the substitutionary atonement view of Christ's death.

She says that it is important that Christian college students welcome the challenge of discussing their faith to others, particularly to people who hold opposing views.

The «prevailing Christian view» until relitively recently, would have been against any notion of the rapture, the equality of women, the emancipation of slaves, and a host of other things that most Christians today look back on with some disgust being attached to their religion's history.

I think it's important that Christian college students welcome the challenge of discussing their faith to others, particularly to people who hold opposing views.

While we may not drown people because of their views on baptism, it is not uncommon for one group of Christians to condemn another group of Christians to everlasting hell because the other group has a different view on baptism.

Hence we must conclude with Professors Branscomb, Lohmeyer, Werner, Bishop Rawlinson, and other recent writers, that Mark's point of view is that which was «in general characteristic of the Gentile - Christian Church of the first century,» but that it was not, «in the narrower and more distinctive sense of the words, a «Pauline» Gospel.»

Does this view of Scripture make it frustrating to «debate» with other Christians, which can often lead to verse slinging?

I speak throughout Canada and internationally to churches, conferences, women's groups, universities, and workshops on topics ranging from spiritual formation, a sacramental view of living, being a Christian feminist, the ways that we can navigate change throughout our faith journey, the embrace of ancient church practices as a charismatic Christian, writing, social justice, and many other topics.

When you hear a Christian advocate personal purity, do you hear a judgment of yourself or others, or do you get angry because you don't want to live that way and then decide that the Christian's spoken point of view is a judgment?

This is in fact a resurgence in other terms and with other objectives in view — of the error always committed by Christians who intervene in the sphere of human actions to justify them and to testify that in the end man has good reason for doing what he does.

Of course this is just another case where you think your church has it right, and all other Christians who don't hold the same view are wrong.

From a Christian point of view this is idolatry, just as the absolutizing of prestige, or status, or any other value is idolatry.

Some Christians might believe this, but it is not explicitly taught in Scripture, and there are many other views on how the «atonement» worked and what the death of Jesus accomplished.

I don't mean to sound the doomsday alarm with no ray of hope, because I know there are many great examples like the Christian Community Development Association, The Amos Project, and many others who are moving past reductionist and stereotypical views of one another to build communities where we see and are seen by one another.

[12] They will do this because the law will give the green light for Churches to be prosecuted by homosexuals who disapprove of Christian views such as that which holds that only couples born of the opposite sex should marry each other.

Many liberal Christians, on the other hand, are essentially deists; it is their view that after having created the world and revealed the divine will in its structure and the laws of nature, God can not be looked to for further intervention.

In this lecture, which like the others in this series is intended as a general exposition of process views rather than a Christian development of them, we shall not make as full use of his teaching as we shall of that in other representatives of the school.

From Origen's hope that salvation will eventually be received by all, to Karl Rahner's assertion that other religions can serve as pointers to Christ, to Clark Pinnock's biblical case for a more optimistic view of salvation, I've found that tucked away in the dusty corners of Christian libraries is a wealth of scholarship on the subject.

The fact that these principles have such great similarity to principles of obligation found in other religions and philosophies has led many theologians to believe that what is unique about Christian principles of obligation is not so much their context as the particular view of the world that follows from the metaphors and stories which surround them and which are found in the Christian drama.

The James O'Kelly Christian Church, which represents an important southern heritage of the United Church of Christ, underscores other nonhierarchical biblical Reformation concerns by viewing the Scriptures as «the only creed, a sufficient rule of faith and practice.»

In my mini-documentary The D Word: A personal view of divorce and the Church, I and three other Christians talk candidly about our experiences of divorce.

If valid, this view rightly gives Christians and others hope that respect for the integrity of creation is less alien to human life, and more attainable, than circumstances have often led us to believe.

As Christians, Birch and Cobb believe that in many respects the Whiteheadian vision of reality is more compatible with biblical points of view than are other visions, Platonic for example, on which Christian in the past have relied.

Insofar as our own culture participates in — indeed, is founded upon — structures of systemic evil, a happy outcome of our difficulties, as opposed to other people's difficulties, ought not be expected in the Christian view.

On the part of the minister there is an empathetic or phenomenological concern for the attitudes of all the other people (and their conditions such as broken arms) to all serious things, including Christian faith but not confined to it, regardless of the existing content of those views and conditions.

So these atheists they're looking at are people likely just recovering from a bad upbringing while the Christians, like many other a christians, are people for whom this isn't just an issue of ontology, but their whole ethics, lifestyle and wChristians, like many other a christians, are people for whom this isn't just an issue of ontology, but their whole ethics, lifestyle and wchristians, are people for whom this isn't just an issue of ontology, but their whole ethics, lifestyle and world view.

These and other similar articles are written by Muslim, Christian, and Jewish contributors reflecting different points of view, supported at times by different bibliographies.

Moreover, since God is infinitely good to all who truly seek him, I do not see how anyone's experience of grace or formation by grace can settle the truth of one confessional position as against another, and I doet want to look as if I think that the quality of my Christian experience or the strength of my Christian convictions should be decisive in persuading others to accept my views.

In view of the onerous restrictions in this predominantly Islamic society, it is not surprising that their enthusiasm sometimes leads them to steal sheep from other Christian pastures instead of preaching to Muslims.

I could fill a large hotel full of the most World's most «learnerd» Jewish, Christian and Islamic theological scholars (to take the, inaptly named, monothistic religions) and they would be unable to agree on anything other than some nauseating throw away line like «we should all rewspect each other's views»».

Just as my Christian faith will look similar and different to other Christians, atheists are not a homogeneous group, but encompass a range of views.

This is partly because I accept the view that even our natural theology is inevitably a Christian natural theology, in the sense suggested by John Cobb, and partly because some of the doctrines that should be placed under the more strictly Christian aspect, such as the problem of evil, are not as strictly limited to Christian theology as are some others, such as christology.

For a long time now the Christian understanding of man has been obscured by theories of his nature built on other dogmas than that of the sovereignty of God and constructed out of observations of his behavior made from other points of view than those of Christian faith.

It is assumed that the soul by its nature is eternal, which was also the view of the third century Christian thinker Origen (c. 185 - c. 254) although in Advaita philosophy from the standpoint of realization the individual soul is not other than the Universal Soul.

What happens when young, Christian students aren't supported in their pro-life views from other Christian organizations, ones that supposedly follow Christ - like teachings of love and compassion and the calling to protect those who can not speak for themselves?