«Interestingly,
when Scripture talks about itself, it doesn't use the language we often use in our explanations of its value.
When scripture uses the word «knowledge» it is not often positive... it «puffs up».
We have relegated friendship to a position of «just» and «only»
when the Scripture refers to it as a weaving of souls together.
What I find puzzling is the obsession with consensual and faithful gay relationships
when Scripture says much more about divorce and remarriage (every single sex act with a second spouse is ALWAYS adultery unless someone is unfaithful and that the only moral choice is reconciliation with your first spouse or lifetime celibacy — 1 Cor 7:10 - 11), charging interest on a loan, our moral obligation toward the poor and other things most conservative Christians ignore.
--
when scripture refers to mischief, the reference is to intent
When the Scripture says Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness it was not regarding the offering up of his son Isaac.
When the scripture says we will be given new (perfect?)
Why would any Christian believe than the gay lifestyle is ok in gods eyes
when scripture clearly says different.
Just saying that we should keep in mind about how Jesus has been portrayed in images as publicly appealing
when scripture says He was not.
When scripture is used to authorize a lifestyle that is inherently legalistic, it does so at the cost of dividing the believer from Christ (Colossians 2).
It does not make logical sense to defame and slander others with an arsenal of Christian conviction
when Scripture clearly renounces this.
However, it is clear,
when scripture is viewed as scripture, plainly written, in a language that was meant to be understood, in a manner that was clearly written, there are roles for men and roles for women.
When Scripture says that God's ways are not our ways, it doesn't mean that God's ways are illogical or unreasonable.
In Paul's fresh reading of scripture the whole mysterious drama of God's election of Israel — Israel's hardening, the incorporation of gentiles into the people of God, and Israel's ultimate restoration — is displayed as foretold in scripture itself, but this foretelling can be recognized only
when scripture is read through the hermeneutics of trust.
It became that
when scripture was removed from the table and opinions, good intentions, being politically correct and culturally relevant became the source of authority.
When scripture and sacrament meet, people are driven to the intimacy of prayer and the life of discipleship.
So
when scripture condemns homosexuality, it is condemning the action, and if you are not acting on it, you are not homosexual.
Quite the contrary, I am convinced that
when Scripture is studied in its various contexts, eternal security is the clear teaching of the Bible.
When that scripture is understood in the context of the parent - child relationship as taught in the NT, then that scripture makes sense.
When the Scriptures say that ALL HAVE SINNED, that is a true statement.
When scriptures say we will meet in the air... it means, that we will be back in spiritual form on earth when Jesus comes back.
How much do our hearts burn within
us when the scriptures are opened to us?
When the Scriptures are put in historical and cultural context and read using reason, we realize the Bible was not intended to condone slavery in modern society but acknowledge it as a reality of the culture
when the Scriptures were written.
It something else
when the Scriptures initiate the action with God, «Thus says the LORD.»
The basis for the liberty of all is further enforced
when the Scriptures are considered.
The Bible «Gods word», is very simple, you must study the word fully to understand the times and culture they were living in
when these scriptures were written, if the time is taken to study this, there would be no room for falsehood or misunderstanding.
Why should churches allow their perverted behaviors into settings
when scriptures tell us we shouldn't deal with sinners that refuse to stop sinning?
All you are doing Spoc aka Bob is showing how much you don't know about reading comprehension 101 because
when the scriptures are put into historical context, nowhere does it condemn the saved loving long term relationship of a gay couple as we know and understand it today.
Not exact matches
He made a similar suggestion in 2003 during a speech at Georgetown University, pointing to a Bible
scripture that spoke of a «day of great slaughter,
when the towers fall,» adding «there are consequences
when we turn away from our source of our strength.»
Love, love, love, and if and
when [it has happened both ways] one of them asks me a straightforward question, I give them the straightforward
scriptures.
This being said,
when gay and lesbians want to promote their views as normal or that would be permissible for a priest or bishop to be a practising homosexual, I disagree based on the clear statements of
Scripture.
That is exactly what occurs
when people take a
scripture out of context.
When I was a good Baptist,
scripture was the only foundation.
I thought that
when anyone speaks from the pulpit, and speaks truth, even if they be such a Pharisee, they should be obeyed regardless of what they do, for the words they are quoting are true, because they are quoting
scripture.
The
scripture refers to the time
when Jesus will return with his army (the saints of God) to destroy the earth.
Edwards is passionate about IHOP and about an intimate understanding of
Scripture — so much so that her priority remains to lead people into worship there, even
when opportunities to tour continually come beckoning.
When will you believers learn that quoting
scriptures at atheists has absolutely no effect — we have discounted your «books of silliness» and relegated them to the trash bin.
It really enriches the
scripture — evokes the peacefulness of times
when you're very much in the presence of God and in the hand of His promises.
So, by your reasoning, if «People put so much importance on words» (implying that they don't matter and we shouldn't take thought of how we use them) then I ought to be able to sing along with the lyrics from pac's «hit»em up» with my black friends, curse in a kindergarten class as well as a corporate meeting for my boss... what impression would a client have of my boss if I were cussing in a professional meeting or at a charity event... it doesn't add up, it's a cop - out rebuttal... trying to find loopholes or applying «human reasoning» like» ll take a swearing guy who's helpful» doesn't change Jesus or
scripture it's just setting up a what - if scenario and trying to allow that to in some way justify your stance
when again, that doesn't change The Holy Spirit or His heart in those who have been born again... the verses (inspired by His own Spirit) speak for themselves.
The term translated to as with means bed every other time it's used in Leviticus and
when Paul referred to that
scripture when writing the clobber passage in Corinthians he rewrote bed.
Ms. Zacharias shows very little intelligence or insight
when it comes to what the
Scriptures say about God.
They don't give much credence to the «take the log out»
scriptures and besides, they don't drink, smoke, or do drugs (at least not
when someone is looking), so they have their act cleaned up.
However, that
scripture does not state that
when one returns to dust that they will forever remain dust.
When Judas went back and try to give back the 30 silver coins he did so because he felt remorse, now there is a huge difference between remorse and repentance, which I don't have time to explain here, my point is let's not be ignorant of the
Scriptures, we have to dig in real deep so that we can understand what it is trying to tell us.
Even the various forms of theological activity can be redescribed in narrative terms, as
when Newbigin writes of «the congregation as hermeneutic of the gospel»: interpretation of
Scripture for Newbigin is not so much what a particular scholar writes as what a particular community of believers enacts.
When we come together in worship we are walking in line with
Scripture (Hebrews 10:25).
The
scripture dealing with Judas having been better off not being born, simply relates to the shame he will feel in due time
when he is resurrected on earth to find earth's billions acknowledging him as the betrayer of the world's saviour, yikes!!
The great thing is that
when we look at
Scripture, we catch all kinds of glimpses of different ways we should be living, like Jubilee — good heavens, there's a great idea.
When writing to Timothy he said «all
scripture is inspired of God».
You have provided no scriptural support for your assertions (yet you say
scripture is the most important thing), and you can't even respond with anything substantial to
when it is pointed out that the site you linked to is complete crap.