Object of our Faith?

[makesends]

prism said:
I could just as well bring up... 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (KJV) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

And besides Romans 3:25 refers to Christ in his passive obedience.

Oh, no! Surely not that!

I.e., @prism , let me interpret Eleanor's sarcasm: Please show your points; for example, how does Romans 3:25 reference to Christ in his passive obedience relate to the question you and she are throwing around for the last many posts. How does your use of 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 relate? Quoting them does not make an argument when only YOU understand how they relate in YOUR thinking.

 

[prism]

prism said:
I could just as well bring up... 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (KJV) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

And besides Romans 3:25 refers to Christ in his passive obedience.

I.e., @prism , let me interpret Eleanor's sarcasm: Please show your points; for example, how does Romans 3:25 reference to Christ in his passive obedience relate to the question you and she are throwing around for the last many posts. How does your use of 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 relate? Quoting them does not make an argument when only YOU understand how they relate in YOUR thinking.

Romans 3:25 (KJV) Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Rom 3:25 speaks to Christ's passive obedience,i.e. His obedience that others did to Hin with permission from the Father, Which is part of the Gospel message.
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (KJV) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

1Cor 15:1-4 relates because it encapsulates the Gospel by declaring the activity of Jesus that saves. (rather than saying to a person, "Believe in Jesus".

Perhaps, now you can ask @Eleanor, what she meant by 'Oh, no! Surely not that!'

 

[makesends]

Romans 3:25 (KJV) Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Rom 3:25 speaks to Christ's passive obedience,i.e. His obedience that others did to Hin with permission from the Father, Which is part of the Gospel message.
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (KJV) Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

1Cor 15:1-4 relates because it encapsulates the Gospel by declaring the activity of Jesus that saves. (rather than saying to a person, "Believe in Jesus".

Ok, thanks. Now that I have moderated ( ) I leave you to rejoin the debate. @Eleanor is better than I am at remembering what was said/ what the argument was, up till the current post. (I wonder if the proverb, that a person getting into someone else's argument is like taking a dog by the ears, has any relevance to moderating a debate. )

Perhaps, now you can ask @Eleanor, what she meant by 'Oh, no! Surely not that!'

Are you suggesting that @Eleanor has a problem with, or is threatened by those verses? I took her sarcasm as good natured tongue-in-cheek.

 

[prism]

Are you suggesting that @Eleanor has a problem with, or is threatened by those verses? I took her sarcasm as good natured tongue-in-cheek.

I have no idea why a (sarcastic?) remark would follow an offered scripture verse. Maybe? I just don't know

 

[makesends]

I have no idea why a (sarcastic?) remark would follow an offered scripture verse. Maybe? I just don't know

We get probably more scripture quoted as though the scriptures quoted prove the thesis of the person quoting them, than we do actual arguments. It gets a little old.

 

[prism]

We get probably more scripture quoted as though the scriptures quoted prove the thesis of the person quoting them, then we do actual arguments. It gets a little old.

I understand, but personally, I'll go for what God has revealed through His Word any day over the edookated and speckoolated theories of man

 

[makesends]

Why bother with a debate forum site, then? Let's just all get our Bibles out and read.

Good thing Paul had scripture to throw at Peter when he was kissing up to the Jews.

 

[makesends]

I understand, but personally, I'll go for what God has revealed through His Word any day over the edookated and speckoolated theories of man

Just so you understand, I think that @Eleanor was not replying sarcastically to the verse, but to being presented with that alone, without any dialog concerning how it applied. Don't act like she is sarcastic about Scripture.

 

[prism]

Why bother with a debate forum site, then? Let's just all get our Bibles out and read.

As we read, we will find out that God has instituted teachers in the Church.

Good thing Paul had scripture to throw at Peter when he was kissing up to the Jews.

Yes that's a good thing.

 

[prism]

Just so you understand, I think that @Eleanor was not replying sarcastically to the verse, but to being presented with that alone, without any dialog concerning how it applied. Don't act like she is sarcastic about Scripture.

Sarcasm? Your words, not mine (Last sentence in post #63).

 

[Eleanor]

Just so you understand, I think that @Eleanor was not replying sarcastically to the verse, but to being presented with that alone, without any dialog concerning how it applied. Don't act like she is sarcastic about Scripture.

Significance of "active" and "passive" nowhere stated in Scripture?

 

[prism]

Significance of "active" and "passive" nowhere stated in Scripture?

Thanks for the clarification. It is indeed a man-made distinction, but In my humble opinion a true distinction.

 

[makesends]

Sarcasm? Your words, not mine (Last sentence in post #63).

Of course it was my word, "sarcasm". I didn't say that you introduced the notion she was sarcastic. What I said was that you shouldn't suppose her sarcasm to be about scripture, but (once again) about your putting the scripture reference, without even quoting it, nevermind explaining how it was relevant or what your point was in referencing it.

 

[prism]

Of course it was my word, "sarcasm". I didn't say that you introduced the notion she was sarcastic. What I said was that you shouldn't suppose her sarcasm to be about scripture, ...

Where did I say her sarcasm was about scripture? That may be something you are assuming.

 

[makesends]

Where did I say her sarcasm was about scripture? That may be something you are assuming.

Lol, that was the whole force of your argument, right from the beginning of this inane conversation.

But I'll drop it happily. From the beginning it has been a tangent.

 

[prism]

Lol, that was the whole force of your argument, right from the beginning of this inane conversation.

But I'll drop it happily. From the beginning it has been a tangent.

I see so she throws out Scripture verses (#57) and gets a free pass without 'explaining how it was relevant or what her point was in referencing it.'
Besides, I'm still waiting for your answer of..."Where did I say her sarcasm was about scripture?"

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
Lol, that was the whole force of your argument, right from the beginning of this inane conversation.
But I'll drop it happily. From the beginning it has been a tangent.

I see so she throws out Scripture verses (#57) and gets a free pass without 'explaining how it was relevant or what her point was in referencing it.'
Besides, I'm still waiting for your answer of..."Where did I say her sarcasm was about scripture?"

Yes, unfortunately, I am a hypocrite and unfair. For example, I usually take it for granted that @Eleanor 's manner of conversation/interchange included past statements explaining her present truncated statements. Likewise, though I could easily have been wrong, I thought her answer was a rather humorous sarcasm concerning your having merely referenced a Bible verse, unquoted and unexplained.

And, I thought I answered your, "Where did I say her sarcasm was about scripture?", in the very post you just now quoted, right at the beginning of it. I'm not going to go back through your many contributions to this inane little jag from the force of the OP, to prove it to you.

And this is the last you'll hear from me on this. If you wish to escalate your complaint, take it up with one of the others on staff, or file a report and I will try to see to it that a more fair and less hypocritical person fields your report.

 

[prism]

If you wish to escalate your complaint, take it up with one of the others on staff, or file a report and I will try to see to it that a more fair and less hypocritical person fields your report.

"We are all hypocrites"- José Emilio Pacheco (whoever he is)

 

[Eleanor]

"We are all hypocrites"- José Emilio Pacheco (whoever he is)

But he's my "hypocrite," that makes it different.

 

[makesends]

But he's my "hypocrite," that makes it different.

And to make it even better, I am your hypocrite on staff now! It's like having your own congressman in your back pocket. If I could only remember what the quid was pro quo.... hmmm