Redemptive used in a sentence

Redemptive in a sentence as an adjective

It is redemptive, and this is why Jesus says love.

That has gotta be worth some redemptive value for past sins, yes?

Some works can have a redemptive quality, no?

Perhaps you would not describe them as "redemptive" truth claims, but that's quibbling over words.

If you don't, then yes, you're not stating a redemptive truth, because you're not stating anything.

There is something admirable and redemptive in that way of being.

Would that be acceptable?I read the article, desperately trying to find something redemptive.

The whole point of promoting the literary over the philosophic is to remove our need for redemptive truth.

To say that, well, it isn't "redemptive" truth because he's allowing different people to have different worldviews, is, once again, quibbling over words.

And this moment, as inevitable as it has sometimes seemed, can still, in the end, prove transformational, if not redemptive for our city.

He claims to have "deconstructed" redemptive truth and put something better in its place; but all he's really done is fasten on to his own particular brand of redemptive truth.

When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies.”“Now there is a final reason I think that Jesus says, ‘Love your enemies.’ It is this: that love has within it a redemptive power.

I always try to find redemptive irony in the fact that those most blinded by misleading ideas are themselves disposed to proclaim that it is actually all others others who suffer that affliction.

His belief in the Good Global Society meets the definition of redemptive truth that I quoted, and he appears to think that is possible; so whether he realizes it or not, he does think a form of redemptive truth, as he defines it, is possible.

It has almost no practical redemptive features as compared to modern Python or Lua, MRI is slow and unusable for memory-intensive applications, the syntax is a jumble of esoteric symbols and inconveniences, and so on.

How likely do you suppose that this historian would be open to new information that shed new light on group X, with some positive and possibly redemptive qualities?I reckon, based on my understanding of human nature, that historian would take a while to come around, if they ever revised their perspective at all.

"But if the point of this is to remove the need for redemptive truth, it doesn't work; the search for redemption through literature still tries to fulfill "the need that religion and philosophy have attempted to satisfy", it just tries to fulfill it without appealing to non-human entities:"For the Socratic idea of self-examination and self-knowledge, the literary intellectual substitutes the idea of enlarging the self by becoming acquainted with still more ways of being human.

For the religious idea that a certain book or tradition might connect you up with a supremely powerful or supremely lovable non-human person, the literary intellectual substitutes the Bloomian thought that the more books you read, the more ways of being human you have considered, the more human you become..."Even at the one point where he does explicitly seem to say there is no redemptive truth..."To give up the idea that there is an intrinsic nature of reality to be discovered either by the priests, or the philosophers, or the scientists, is to disjoin the need for redemption from the search for universal agreement.