| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Truth Hunter" |
| Date: |
09 Jul 2004 03:31:55 AM |
| Object: |
Jesus's three days sacrifice |
Jesus's three days sacrifice
I think that the principal that Jesus came down to earth to live as
man, and to die as man, and to bear the sins of man. but Jesus' mock
sacrifice, a sacrifice is when you give all and don't come back. A
mock sacrifice is when you give a little for a short time and get back
more than you had before.
Let's take a small example.Assume that you are dining with the
President of the U.S. at the White House.Your family and friends are
there,and the entire
white house staff is doing everything to make everything perfect.
While dining there,the President tells you that your country needs you
and that you are being shipped to Iraq to fight and die for your
country, but that you will be revived and brought back to the dinner
table.
Scarey, huh?
Well,imagine your fear as you are tossed out of a plane at 1500
feet,parachute to the ground, and land with your twelve helpers, only
to find that the people you came to help are the ones shooting at you.
Being captured, you are tortured for a day, then killed. BUT, as
promised, a medical team grabs you and brings you back to life. You
are then cleaned up, and returned to the table at the white house,
where the president asks you if you would like another cup of coffee.
If you knew that this is what would happen, would you show up at the
white house for dinner? Jesus knew that this is what would happen.
A sacrifice isn't meaningful if you get back what you gave up and it's
even less meaningful if you get back *more* than what you gave up,or
if
what you gave up wasn't very important to you in the first place.
http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq-tr.html
Bumper Sticker
l=================================================================l
DIVINE INSANITY
God died on the cross to save his own creation from his own wrath!
l=================================================================l
.
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
09 Jul 2004 06:36:13 AM |
|
|
"Truth Hunter" <hunter77099@yahoo.com> wrote
A sacrifice isn't meaningful if you get back what you gave up and it's
even less meaningful if you get back *more* than what you gave up,or
if
what you gave up wasn't very important to you in the first place.
Poppycock.
If a guy hits a sacrifice fly to win the World Series, you'd say the
sacrifice was meaningless?
BAM
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Action User" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
18 Jul 2004 05:17:01 PM |
|
|
(Truth Hunter) wrote in
news:e164e783.0407090031.22764fe7@posting.google.com:
Jesus's three days sacrifice
I understand what you are trying to say, but you overlook some important
factors which will possibly change your opinion.
1) Jesus is the first born of Our Father in heaven. Of all of his sons in
heaven, he sent his FIRST SON to become a human. In other words, the
president would send his FIRST SON, NOT a guest. If you are guest, then you
compare to a prophet.
2) As Jesus said many times, NOT all of Our Lord's plans are revealed to
Him. In other words, if he does not know all of Our Father's plans, neither
do we. In other words, as on any other government mission, you are on a
need-to-know basis. At any time, plans could change.
3) One of the important things Jesus continually impressed is you have to
give to receive. What are you willing to give, to give out, to give in, to
give up, to give down, to give in order to receive what Our Lord knows you
need, what knows you want. Like Jesus, we are to pick up our yoke, but the
load is not all that heavy. In other words, the mission is not that
harrowing.
4) Yes. Jesus was brought back to life, but it was Our Lord who brought him
back, not Jesus himself. Despite all that had happened in the past, he
still had to put his faith in Our Father that He would find favor in Jesus'
work, and restore his life. In other words, you not know, you can only keep
faith that the president will revive you.
5) If you think gaining the treasures of heaven makes Jesus' work on Earth
meaningless, then why did you bother write about it? For me, gaining the
treasures of Heaven means more to me than all of the transitory baubles of
this age, and I pray that Our Lord will bestow His grace on me, and at the
very least let a lowly sinner like me be a rock, or a chip of wood, or a
piece of scrap metal, in His presence, for ever.
6) May the Lord bless you and keep you. May the Lord let His face shine on
you and be gracious to you. May the Lord uncover His face to you and bring
you peace.
.
|
|
|
| User: "LP" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
19 Jul 2004 10:13:06 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 22:17:01 GMT, Action User <actionuser@yahoo.com>
wrote:
hunter77099@yahoo.com (Truth Hunter) wrote in
news:e164e783.0407090031.22764fe7@posting.google.com:
Jesus's three days sacrifice
I understand what you are trying to say, but you overlook some important
factors which will possibly change your opinion.
1) Jesus is the first born of Our Father in heaven. Of all of his sons in
heaven, he sent his FIRST SON to become a human. In other words, the
president would send his FIRST SON, NOT a guest. If you are guest, then you
compare to a prophet.
2) As Jesus said many times, NOT all of Our Lord's plans are revealed to
Him. In other words, if he does not know all of Our Father's plans, neither
do we. In other words, as on any other government mission, you are on a
need-to-know basis. At any time, plans could change.
3) One of the important things Jesus continually impressed is you have to
give to receive. What are you willing to give, to give out, to give in, to
give up, to give down, to give in order to receive what Our Lord knows you
need, what knows you want. Like Jesus, we are to pick up our yoke, but the
load is not all that heavy. In other words, the mission is not that
harrowing.
4) Yes. Jesus was brought back to life, but it was Our Lord who brought him
back, not Jesus himself. Despite all that had happened in the past, he
still had to put his faith in Our Father that He would find favor in Jesus'
work, and restore his life. In other words, you not know, you can only keep
faith that the president will revive you.
5) If you think gaining the treasures of heaven makes Jesus' work on Earth
meaningless, then why did you bother write about it? For me, gaining the
treasures of Heaven means more to me than all of the transitory baubles of
this age, and I pray that Our Lord will bestow His grace on me, and at the
very least let a lowly sinner like me be a rock, or a chip of wood, or a
piece of scrap metal, in His presence, for ever.
6) May the Lord bless you and keep you. May the Lord let His face shine on
you and be gracious to you. May the Lord uncover His face to you and bring
you peace.
The idea of a sacrifice started with the convention that humans, in
order to remain on good terms with the nearby tribes, should not take
things without giving something in exchange. This is know as a trade.
If you can benefit from trading goods to nearby tribes, then just
think of the potential if you could negotiate trades with the spirit
world. When these ancient humans wanted special favors from nature,
spirits, or gods, they did the only thing that made sense to them at
the time. They offered a trade. Now here's a problem. How do you trade
something to an invisible god? Well, one way was to burn it, and let
the smoke rise to the heavens. Even those who wrote the Bible believed
in such things. This was known as an offering. If you gave something
that was dear to you, like your best cow, or a virgin, this was known
as a sacrifice. The point that the gods would have absolutely no use
for burnt cows and virgins wasn't even considered. The fact that it
was a sacrifice was the thing that mattered. The whole concept was
pretty ludicrous by today's thinking, but to ancient nomadic tribes,
it was the best they could think of. As absurd as this practice was,
what is even more bizarre is the preposterous concept that the gods
would reciprocate, turning around and giving something dear to them,
as a sacrifice to humans. The whole concept of Jesus's sacrifice was
derived from this doubly idiotic notion concocted by these ancient
sheep herders.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "AnonMoos" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
09 Jul 2004 03:25:43 PM |
|
|
According to your so-called prophet Muhammad, Jesus didn't die on the
cross at all, but only appeared to do so by means of a Helen-of-Troy
type "eidolon", so why are you worrying about this matter in the first
place?
--
Hamas motto: لا إله لهم
إلا الموت،
«حماس» رسول
الموت (The death-worshipping cult)
Murderers are not martyrs! http://symbolictruth.fateback.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fencingsax" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
15 Jul 2004 09:06:35 PM |
|
|
I thought he was just giving the almighty beat-down smite to the
Fallen Star, the Great Deceiver, etc etc etc.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fencingsax" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
15 Jul 2004 09:06:35 PM |
|
|
I thought he was just giving the beat-down to the Fallen Star, the
Great Deceiver, etc etc etc.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "• R.L.Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
09 Jul 2004 04:26:17 AM |
|
|
In article <e164e783.0407090031.22764fe7@posting.google.com>,
hunter77099@yahoo.com (Truth Hunter) wrote:
Jesus's three days sacrifice
I think that the principal that Jesus came down to earth to live as
man, and to die as man, and to bear the sins of man. but Jesus' mock
sacrifice, a sacrifice is when you give all and don't come back. A
mock sacrifice is when you give a little for a short time and get back
more than you had before.
• Good point. A real sacrifice means a real loss, and it can not, by
definition, be temporary, it must be a permanent loss in order to qualify
as a legit sacrifice.
Let's take a small example.Assume that you are dining with the
President of the U.S. at the White House.Your family and friends are
there,and the entire
white house staff is doing everything to make everything perfect.
While dining there,the President tells you that your country needs you
and that you are being shipped to Iraq to fight and die for your
country, but that you will be revived and brought back to the dinner
table.
Scarey, huh?
• Rumsfeld would be delighted. Who knows, if dead-soldier resurrection
became available, he might even go to Iraq and "defend the U. S. A."
himself to help support the GOP in the November election.
Well,imagine your fear as you are tossed out of a plane at 1500
feet,parachute to the ground, and land with your twelve helpers, only
to find that the people you came to help are the ones shooting at you.
Being captured, you are tortured for a day, then killed. BUT, as
promised, a medical team grabs you and brings you back to life. You
are then cleaned up, and returned to the table at the white house,
where the president asks you if you would like another cup of coffee.
If you knew that this is what would happen, would you show up at the
white house for dinner? Jesus knew that this is what would happen.
A sacrifice isn't meaningful if you get back what you gave up ...
• If you get back what was allegedly "sacrificed", it wasn't a sacrifice.
cheers, T. H.
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
09 Jul 2004 12:15:32 PM |
|
|
On 9 Jul 2004 01:31:55 -0700, (Truth Hunter) wrote:
Jesus's three days sacrifice
I think that the principal that Jesus came down to earth to live as
man, and to die as man, and to bear the sins of man. but Jesus' mock
sacrifice, a sacrifice is when you give all and don't come back.
No, no, th, you're still getting it wrong. God became man in the person of Christ to die
on the cross for redemption from sin and salvation of souls.
If you knew that this is what would happen, would you show up at the
white house for dinner? Jesus knew that this is what would happen.
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully man. Why do you keep forgetting that?
duke
*****
I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear
it now. When he comes, the Holy Spirit will declare
to you the things that are coming. John 16:12-15.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
11 Jul 2004 01:35:57 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
Date written: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 12:15:32 -0500
MsgID:<cgkte0141vrv669o4rch3mj74jgism5k48@4ax.com>
I think that the principal that Jesus came down to earth to live as
man, and to die as man, and to bear the sins of man. but Jesus' mock
sacrifice, a sacrifice is when you give all and don't come back.
No, no, th, you're still getting it wrong. God became man in the person of Christ to die
on the cross for redemption from sin and salvation of souls.
The Bible calls it a "sacrifice" but in reality, Christ actually sacrificed
nothing.
If you knew that this is what would happen, would you show up at the
white house for dinner? Jesus knew that this is what would happen.
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully man. Why do you keep forgetting that?
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully divine before and after his alleged sacrifice,
so what did he sacrifice?
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
11 Jul 2004 04:50:28 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:35:57 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> wrote:
I think that the principal that Jesus came down to earth to live as
man, and to die as man, and to bear the sins of man. but Jesus' mock
sacrifice, a sacrifice is when you give all and don't come back.
No, no, th, you're still getting it wrong. God became man in the person of Christ to die
on the cross for redemption from sin and salvation of souls.
The Bible calls it a "sacrifice" but in reality, Christ actually sacrificed
nothing.
Why, of course he did, for Christ was fully man.
If you knew that this is what would happen, would you show up at the
white house for dinner? Jesus knew that this is what would happen.
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully man. Why do you keep forgetting that?
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully divine before and after his alleged sacrifice,
so what did he sacrifice?
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear point, every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
duke
*****
I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear
it now. When he comes, the Holy Spirit will declare
to you the things that are coming. John 16:12-15.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
11 Jul 2004 09:41:06 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
Date written: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:50:28 -0500
MsgID:<ibd3f0h1c79rpinv2qnp14tt11pere52o1@4ax.com>
I think that the principal that Jesus came down to earth to live as
man, and to die as man, and to bear the sins of man. but Jesus' mock
sacrifice, a sacrifice is when you give all and don't come back.
No, no, th, you're still getting it wrong. God became man in the person of Christ to die
on the cross for redemption from sin and salvation of souls.
The Bible calls it a "sacrifice" but in reality, Christ actually sacrificed
nothing.
Why, of course he did, for Christ was fully man.
If you knew that this is what would happen, would you show up at the
white house for dinner? Jesus knew that this is what would happen.
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully man. Why do you keep forgetting that?
Uh, noooooooo. Christ was fully divine before and after his alleged sacrifice,
so what did he sacrifice?
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear point, every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
Giving up a human shell of a body is not a sacrifice, as we will all do that
someday. Giving up a divine body forever would be a sacrifice.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
12 Jul 2004 08:30:44 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 19:41:06 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> wrote:
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear point, every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
Giving up a human shell of a body is not a sacrifice, as we will all do that
someday. Giving up a divine body forever would be a sacrifice.
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
duke
*****
I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear
it now. When he comes, the Holy Spirit will declare
to you the things that are coming. John 16:12-15.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
13 Jul 2004 12:37:13 AM |
|
|
Reply to article by: duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
Date written: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:30:44 -0500
MsgID:<loe6f0dbm11q7q2btdr5lr3ptqkg6hgmgd@4ax.com>
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear point, every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
Giving up a human shell of a body is not a sacrifice, as we will all do that
someday. Giving up a divine body forever would be a sacrifice.
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "• R.L.Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
13 Jul 2004 06:55:21 AM |
|
|
In article <a5t6f0hlijq0ka6ajf9kjgvo1bqh8bvvkv@4ax.com>,
theeSage@azrmci.net wrote:
Reply to article by: duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
Date written: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:30:44 -0500
MsgID:<loe6f0dbm11q7q2btdr5lr3ptqkg6hgmgd@4ax.com>
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear point,
every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
Giving up a human shell of a body is not a sacrifice, as we will all do that
someday. Giving up a divine body forever would be a sacrifice.
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
• A sacrifice that does not result in permanent loss does not satisfy the
dictionary definition of the word 'sacrifice'. The laugher is that
Christians revere the Sermon on the Mount, yet the speaker thereof said
that his dad did not want sacrifice and that the way to get forgiven is
simply to forgive others.
Cheers
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
13 Jul 2004 06:11:48 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: (• R.L.Measures)
Date written: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 04:55:21 -0700
MsgID:<r-1307040455210001@192.168.1.100>
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear point, every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
Giving up a human shell of a body is not a sacrifice, as we will all do that
someday. Giving up a divine body forever would be a sacrifice.
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
• A sacrifice that does not result in permanent loss does not satisfy the
dictionary definition of the word 'sacrifice'.
A sacrifice also implies that whatever it is that is sacrificed is of great
value. Taking on a human body and then throwing it away in exchange back for a
vastly superior divine body is a mock sacrifice and insults the intelligence of
all humans everywhere.
The laugher is that
Christians revere the Sermon on the Mount, yet the speaker thereof said
that his dad did not want sacrifice and that the way to get forgiven is
simply to forgive others.
....something Christians very rarely practice themselves.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "• R.L.Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
13 Jul 2004 08:25:11 PM |
|
|
In article <8nq8f0t685sj1pf5f4tohd71avc990o23j@4ax.com>,
theeSage@azrmci.net wrote:
Reply to article by: (• R.L.Measures)
Date written: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 04:55:21 -0700
MsgID:<r-1307040455210001@192.168.1.100>
His human life. He felt every nail, every stroke, every spear
point, every step on the
way to Golgotha. He was fully man.
Giving up a human shell of a body is not a sacrifice, as we will all
do that
someday. Giving up a divine body forever would be a sacrifice.
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really
happened.
• A sacrifice that does not result in permanent loss does not satisfy the
dictionary definition of the word 'sacrifice'.
A sacrifice also implies that whatever it is that is sacrificed is of great
value. Taking on a human body and then throwing it away in exchange back for a
vastly superior divine body is a mock sacrifice and insults the
intelligence of
all humans everywhere.
• good point
The laugher is that
Christians revere the Sermon on the Mount, yet the speaker thereof said
that his dad did not want sacrifice and that the way to get forgiven is
simply to forgive others.
...something Christians very rarely practice themselves.
• When the Blessed sacrificial blood of the Saviour washes away all sins,
why the hell forgive anyone?
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
14 Jul 2004 05:01:46 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 04:55:21 -0700, (• R.L.Measures) wrote:
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
• A sacrifice that does not result in permanent loss does not satisfy the
dictionary definition of the word 'sacrifice'. The laugher is that
Christians revere the Sermon on the Mount, yet the speaker thereof said
that his dad did not want sacrifice and that the way to get forgiven is
simply to forgive others.
Pretty much over his head.
duke
*****
I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear
it now. When he comes, the Holy Spirit will declare
to you the things that are coming. John 16:12-15.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "• R.L.Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
14 Jul 2004 05:57:55 AM |
|
|
In article <o21af0l2fop36d3coec7fang3tu9oe2uqo@4ax.com>, duke
<duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 04:55:21 -0700, (• R.L.Measures) wrote:
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really
happened.
• A sacrifice that does not result in permanent loss does not satisfy the
dictionary definition of the word 'sacrifice'. The laugher is that
Christians revere the Sermon on the Mount, yet the speaker thereof said
that his dad did not want sacrifice and that the way to get forgiven is
simply to forgive others.
Pretty much over his head.
• Indeed. Denial of reality is like unto a sugar coated pill.
cheers, Duke
--
€ R.L. Measures, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
14 Jul 2004 04:57:39 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:37:13 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> wrote:
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
The Sage
Well, the irrefutable facts still remains that God became man to die on the cross for the
redemption from sin and the salvation of souls.
So try again.
duke
*****
I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear
it now. When he comes, the Holy Spirit will declare
to you the things that are coming. John 16:12-15.
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
14 Jul 2004 11:03:15 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
Date written: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 04:57:39 -0500
MsgID:<no0af0lv517sdneelnqauju1v280spkcoc@4ax.com>
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
Well, the irrefutable facts still remains that God became man to die on the cross for the
redemption from sin and the salvation of souls.
So try again.
You are changing the subject. Jesus made no sacrifice, therefore his life was a
waste of time.
Make up another excuse.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Henru Rustic" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
14 Jul 2004 06:40:55 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 04:57:39 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> blurted:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:37:13 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> wrote:
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
The Sage
Well, the irrefutable facts still remains that God became man to die on the cross for the
redemption from sin and the salvation of souls.
So try again.
duke
*****
I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear
it now. When he comes, the Holy Spirit will declare
to you the things that are coming. John 16:12-15.
*****
Not to mention that the Cross satisfied the definition of sacrifice -
1 : an act of offering to a deity something precious; especially : the killing
of a victim on an altar
2 : something offered in sacrifice
3 a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else b :
something given up or lost <the sacrifices made by parents>
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
14 Jul 2004 11:45:19 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:40:55 GMT
MsgID:<ds6af0pjfekgbfcm0eqphd8ul8vujusm43@news-server.satx.rr.com>
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
Well, the irrefutable facts still remains that God became man to die on the cross for the
redemption from sin and the salvation of souls.
So try again.
Not to mention that the Cross satisfied the definition of sacrifice -
1 : an act of offering to a deity something precious; especially : the killing
of a victim on an altar
2 : something offered in sacrifice
3 a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost <the sacrifices made by parents>
The question then becomes, which one is it? The Bible tells us when it states,
"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to
give his life a ransom for many" (Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in
definition two above and turning back to the dictionary for the definition of a
sacrifice as a noun instead of as a verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human life
he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and therefore
the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand corrected.
And think about this: If God treats His very own children in such barbaric and
cruel manners such as inhumane sacrifices, how much worse do you expect Him to
treat you, an adopted step-child?
But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice:
for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Mat 9:13)
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henru Rustic" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
15 Jul 2004 02:22:35 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 21:45:19 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> blurted:
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:40:55 GMT
MsgID:<ds6af0pjfekgbfcm0eqphd8ul8vujusm43@news-server.satx.rr.com>
Yet the divine took the body of the man and suffered fully as any man did.
Who cares when the irrefutable fact still remains that it still wasn't a
sacrifice in any way, shape, or form...assuming that it even really happened.
Well, the irrefutable facts still remains that God became man to die on the cross for the
redemption from sin and the salvation of souls.
So try again.
Not to mention that the Cross satisfied the definition of sacrifice -
1 : an act of offering to a deity something precious; especially : the killing
of a victim on an altar
2 : something offered in sacrifice
3 a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost <the sacrifices made by parents>
The question then becomes, which one is it? The Bible tells us when it states,
"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to
give his life a ransom for many" (Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in
definition two above and turning back to the dictionary for the definition of a
sacrifice as a noun instead of as a verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human life
he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and therefore
the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand corrected.
And think about this: If God treats His very own children in such barbaric and
cruel manners such as inhumane sacrifices, how much worse do you expect Him to
treat you, an adopted step-child?
But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice:
for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Mat 9:13)
The Sage
Is it possible for anything to be more dishonest than that post by the Sewage?
Maybe Hanoi John could do a better spin job than that, but I'm not sure.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
15 Jul 2004 06:56:22 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:22:35 GMT
MsgID:<e8mdf0tvf3tf91k4l70i8fa46pq5qrbsih@news-server.satx.rr.com>
Not to mention that the Cross satisfied the definition of sacrifice -
1 : an act of offering to a deity something precious; especially : the killing
of a victim on an altar
2 : something offered in sacrifice
3 a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost <the sacrifices made by parents>
The question then becomes, which one is it? The Bible tells us when it states,
"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to
give his life a ransom for many" (Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in
definition two above and turning back to the dictionary for the definition of a
sacrifice as a noun instead of as a verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human life
he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and therefore
the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand corrected.
And think about this: If God treats His very own children in such barbaric and
cruel manners such as inhumane sacrifices, how much worse do you expect Him to
treat you, an adopted step-child?
But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice:
for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Mat 9:13)
Is it possible for anything to be more dishonest than that post by the Sewage?
Maybe Hanoi John could do a better spin job than that, but I'm not sure.
Your credibility (presuming you even had any) is suspect when the best rebuttal
you can give to an intelligent response is a bunch of third grade name calling.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henru Rustic" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
16 Jul 2004 03:03:51 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:56:22 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> blurted:
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:22:35 GMT
MsgID:<e8mdf0tvf3tf91k4l70i8fa46pq5qrbsih@news-server.satx.rr.com>
Not to mention that the Cross satisfied the definition of sacrifice -
1 : an act of offering to a deity something precious; especially : the killing
of a victim on an altar
2 : something offered in sacrifice
3 a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else
b : something given up or lost <the sacrifices made by parents>
The question then becomes, which one is it? The Bible tells us when it states,
"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to
give his life a ransom for many" (Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in
definition two above and turning back to the dictionary for the definition of a
sacrifice as a noun instead of as a verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human life
he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and therefore
the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand corrected.
And think about this: If God treats His very own children in such barbaric and
cruel manners such as inhumane sacrifices, how much worse do you expect Him to
treat you, an adopted step-child?
But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice:
for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Mat 9:13)
Is it possible for anything to be more dishonest than that post by the Sewage?
Maybe Hanoi John could do a better spin job than that, but I'm not sure.
Your credibility (presuming you even had any) is suspect when the best rebuttal
you can give to an intelligent response is a bunch of third grade name calling.
LOL! Who said that was my best response? Your completely ridiculous response
deserved an insult, nothing more, nothing less. Besides, the Bible teaches me
to answer a fool according to his folly. ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
16 Jul 2004 06:38:41 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:03:51 GMT
MsgID:<fq2ff09nmv84dfbpgf5tmgujo4jp92hvp6@news-server.satx.rr.com>
Is it possible for anything to be more dishonest than that post by the Sewage?
Maybe Hanoi John could do a better spin job than that, but I'm not sure.
Your credibility (presuming you even had any) is suspect when the best rebuttal
you can give to an intelligent response is a bunch of third grade name calling.
LOL! Who said that was my best response? Your completely ridiculous response
deserved an insult, nothing more, nothing less. Besides, the Bible teaches me
to answer a fool according to his folly. ;)
Well now we know where you are going to go when you die for being such a blatent
liar! Here was my actual response...
The Bible tells us when it states, "Even as the Son of man came not to be
ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many"
(Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in definition two above and turning back
to the dictionary for the definition of a sacrifice as a noun instead of as a
verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human
life he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and
therefore the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand
corrected.
Now it you want to prove you aren't a liar or an imbecile, please *DEMONSTRATE*
my alleged "dishonesty" that you pretend I made in that reply. And please don't
"forget" that demonstration doesn't mean just because you say so, show the
dishonesty and then correct it with a dictionary quote and a Bible verse JUST
LIKE I DID.
And think about this: If God treats His very own children in such barbaric and
cruel manners such as inhumane sacrifices, how much worse do you expect Him to
treat you, an adopted step-child?
But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice:
for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance (Mat 9:13)
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henru Rustic" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
16 Jul 2004 07:45:14 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:38:41 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> blurted:
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:03:51 GMT
MsgID:<fq2ff09nmv84dfbpgf5tmgujo4jp92hvp6@news-server.satx.rr.com>
Is it possible for anything to be more dishonest than that post by the Sewage?
Maybe Hanoi John could do a better spin job than that, but I'm not sure.
Your credibility (presuming you even had any) is suspect when the best rebuttal
you can give to an intelligent response is a bunch of third grade name calling.
LOL! Who said that was my best response? Your completely ridiculous response
deserved an insult, nothing more, nothing less. Besides, the Bible teaches me
to answer a fool according to his folly. ;)
Well now we know where you are going to go when you die for being such a blatent
liar! Here was my actual response...
The Bible tells us when it states, "Even as the Son of man came not to be
ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many"
(Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in definition two above and turning back
to the dictionary for the definition of a sacrifice as a noun instead of as a
verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human
life he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and
therefore the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand
corrected.
Now it you want to prove you aren't a liar or an imbecile, please *DEMONSTRATE*
my alleged "dishonesty" that you pretend I made in that reply. And please don't
"forget" that demonstration doesn't mean just because you say so, show the
dishonesty and then correct it with a dictionary quote and a Bible verse JUST
LIKE I DID.
I don't have to. I know you're a liar based on the fact that you reject Jesus.
He IS the truth. If you do not believe that His life and subsequent death on
the Cross was a sacrifice, even though the Bible clearly states that it is a
sacrifice, then you go one step further in your dishonesty by calling God a
liar. Hence, you are a liar, just like the devil.
The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it. :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
17 Jul 2004 08:35:29 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 00:45:14 GMT
MsgID:<3ctgf0pemlfjdpu0dgcjsuf3cosmbhkr76@news-server.satx.rr.com>
The Bible tells us when it states, "Even as the Son of man came not to be
ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many"
(Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in definition two above and turning back
to the dictionary for the definition of a sacrifice as a noun instead of as a
verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human
life he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and
therefore the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand
corrected.
Now it you want to prove you aren't a liar or an imbecile, please *DEMONSTRATE*
my alleged "dishonesty" that you pretend I made in that reply. And please don't
"forget" that demonstration doesn't mean just because you say so, show the
dishonesty and then correct it with a dictionary quote and a Bible verse JUST
LIKE I DID.
I don't have to.
Translation: You can't. You have no reasonable and intelligent counter-argument
because my logic and my facts are irrefutable.
I know you're a liar based on the fact that you reject Jesus.
The definition for liar does not include religious beliefs. Get a dictionary and
see what you've been missing.
He IS the truth. If you do not believe that His life and subsequent death on
the Cross was a sacrifice, even though the Bible clearly states that it is a
sacrifice, then you go one step further in your dishonesty by calling God a
liar. Hence, you are a liar, just like the devil.
The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it. :)
The Bible says Jesus would be in the "belly of the Earth for three days AND
three nights" and "AFTER three days I shall raise up this temple" -- refering to
his body as the "temple". The book of John tells us Jesus died on "the day of
Preparation" and the day of Preparation has always been the Jewish term for the
day before the weekly Sabbath, which was always a Friday. So Jesus went to the
grave on Friday night and rose on Sunday morning. That is only two nights and
two days. That's what we call a "false prophecy" and it is only one of many, but
the point is, just this one false prophecy alone is enough to prove the utter
fallibility of the Bible. And if you can't trust the Bible to get the most
important event in all of the Bible right, how could we reasonably expect the
Bible to get the rest of it right?
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henru! Rustic" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
20 Jul 2004 02:22:41 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 18:35:29 -0700, The_Sage <theeSage@azrmci.net> blurted:
Reply to article by: Henru Rustic <>
Date written: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 00:45:14 GMT
MsgID:<3ctgf0pemlfjdpu0dgcjsuf3cosmbhkr76@news-server.satx.rr.com>
The Bible tells us when it states, "Even as the Son of man came not to be
ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many"
(Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in definition two above and turning back
to the dictionary for the definition of a sacrifice as a noun instead of as a
verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human
life he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and
therefore the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand
corrected.
Now it you want to prove you aren't a liar or an imbecile, please *DEMONSTRATE*
my alleged "dishonesty" that you pretend I made in that reply. And please don't
"forget" that demonstration doesn't mean just because you say so, show the
dishonesty and then correct it with a dictionary quote and a Bible verse JUST
LIKE I DID.
I don't have to.
Translation: You can't.
Definition: I don't have to. :)
You have no reasonable and intelligent counter-argument
because my logic and my facts are irrefutable.
Your argument is not reasonable and logical to begin with. The Bible says
"sacrifice". If it were not so, then that word would not have been used. Case
closed.
I know you're a liar based on the fact that you reject Jesus.
The definition for liar does not include religious beliefs. Get a dictionary >and see what you've been missing.
Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life. Without Him, you can't find the way,
you have no truth, and you are a dead man walking. Those are the facts.
He IS the truth. If you do not believe that His life and subsequent death on
the Cross was a sacrifice, even though the Bible clearly states that it is a
sacrifice, then you go one step further in your dishonesty by calling God a
liar. Hence, you are a liar, just like the devil.
The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it. :)
The Bible says Jesus would be in the "belly of the Earth for three days AND
three nights"
No...
========================================
Matthew 12:39 - But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous
generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but
the sign of the prophet Jonas:
Matthew 12:40 - For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's
belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of
the earth.
========================================
It says that Jonah was in the belly of a whale for three days and three nights.
It says that Jesus would be in the heart of the earth three days and three
nights. If you are going to refer to the Bible, at least quote it. Oh wait!
That might be your modus operandi...to bring up an argument and base it on what
YOU claim the Bible says, not actually what it says. IMAGINE THAT <rolleyes>
and "AFTER three days I shall raise up this temple" -- refering
to his body as the "temple".
No...
========================================
John 2:18 - Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou
unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?
John 2:19 - Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in
three days I will raise it up.
John 2:20 - Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in
building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
========================================
Here, you already start off using deception/ignorance to make your argument.
The Bible does not say "AFTER three days" as you claim. It says, "in three
days". There is a difference. If Jesus was raised AFTER three days as you say,
then that would make His resurrection on the FOURTH day, not the third day like
the Bible says.
The book of John tells us Jesus died on "the day
of Preparation" and the day of Preparation has always been the Jewish term for
the day before the weekly Sabbath, which was always a Friday.
========================================
John 19:14 - And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth
hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!
....
John 19:31 - The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the
bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath
day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that
they might be taken away.
========================================
Once again, your whole argument relies on obscure references to what the Bible
actually says. John doesn't say that Jesus died on "the day of Preparation",
but he does say that Pilate was trying Jesus and "it was the preparation of the
passover".
Without thorough knowledge of Jewish customs and timekeeping, there are two
plausible explanations for this I have seen that Bible scholars have explored.
Your conclusions, however, are not plausible to me:
Case 1) The reference to three days are not three literal 24-hour days, but it
was an idiom based on the Jewish reckoning of days. Jewish authorities said
that a part of a day counts as a whole day. Thus, if Christ died on the day of
preparation for the sabbath day, then he died on Friday before evening. That
counted as one day. He was buried before the evening, and remained in the tomb
the whole sabbath day. This was day two. Then after the sabbath ended on
Saturday evening, Christ rose from the grave early Sunday morning, on the third
day, just like the Scriptures say. Thus, a part of a day can count as one day,
and one day can include day and night.
Case 2) The three days referenced in John are literal 24-hour days, but the
sabbath referred to is an annual sabbath, not a weekly sabbath. In this case,
Christ was tried on a Passover preparation day (Sundown Tuesday through sundown
Wednesday), died on the Passover day, a Wednesday night. The next day Thursday
was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, a high holy day and a
sabbath. Jesus rose again on Saturday night after sundown, which is early
Sunday morning the first day of the week in Jewish timekeeping. Therefore, from
Wednesday night through Saturday night is precisely three 24-hour days.
The Bible states that "it was the preparation of the passover" and "that
sabbath was an high day", not "the day of Preparation" for the weekly sabbath.
The weekly sabbath begins at sundown on Friday, and ends at sundown on
Saturday. However, "an high day" means one of the Jewish holy days, not the
weekly sabbath. For example, the Day of Atonement(Yom Kippur) is considered a
sabbath day in the Bible, regardless of whether it falls on the weekly sabbath.
Also, fyi, the preparation for the passover CAN begin days, even weeks in
advance, not necessarily only one day before the annual sabbath.
========================================
Leviticus 23:1 - And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Leviticus 23:2 - Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them,
{Concerning} the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim {to be} holy
convocations, {even} these {are} my feasts.
Leviticus 23:3 - Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day {is} the
sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work {therein}: it {is}
the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.
Leviticus 23:4 - These {are} the feasts of the LORD, {even} holy convocations,
which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.
========================================
Here, the "sabbath of rest" on the seventh day is called "an holy convocation".
The feasts of the Lord are also called "holy convocations". Some feasts are
clearly called sabbaths, regardless of the day they fall on. Therefore, a "high
day" is an annual sabbath/holy convocation. If it doesn't specifically say that
a high holy day is a sabbath, it says "ye shall do no work therein", which is
the same as a sabbath or rest day.
========================================
Leviticus 23:5 - In the fourteenth {day} of the first month at even {is} the
LORD's passover.
Leviticus 23:6 - And on the fifteenth day of the same month {is} the feast of
unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.
Leviticus 23:7 - In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall
do no servile work therein.
========================================
According to John, Jesus was being judged by Pilate in about the 6th hour on a
day of preparation. This preparation day could have been on a Wednesday. "This
process may begin anywhere from days to weeks before Passover begins, depending
on the size of the household and the amount to be cleaned."
(http://www.his-forever.com/q_70.htm) Got Google?
So Jesus went to
the grave on Friday night and rose on Sunday morning. That is only two nights
and two days.
Not necessarily, as I have already shown.
That's what we call a "false prophecy" and it is only one of
many, but the point is, just this one false prophecy alone is enough to prove
the utter fallibility of the Bible.
Who is "we"? Are you copying and pasting without a reference? How dishonest! It
is not a false prophecy, but your conclusion is a false teaching. Your
reasoning ignores relevant evidence which can change the conclusion.
And if you can't trust the Bible to get the
most important event in all of the Bible right, how could we reasonably expect
the Bible to get the rest of it right?
I can trust the Bible. It is always right. Your faulty reasoning and logical
fallacies, OTOH, cannot be trusted. In addition, I have already proven that you
(or your cult of false doctrine insinuated by your use of "we" and not "I"
there) are "handling the word of God deceitfully". Your "hidden works of
dishonesty" and "craftiness" concerning the Holy Scriptures of Truth, the
Bible, make you unreliable in Biblical studies.
I eagerly await shooting down your next red herring, that is if it is not TOO
absurd. ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "The_Sage" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus's three days sacrifice |
20 Jul 2004 06:55:35 PM |
|
|
Reply to article by: Henru! Rustic <>
Date written: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 07:22:41 GMT
MsgID:<dl4pf0t21blopm35pjbuo5r2rr1idj99tm@news-server.satx.rr.com>
The Bible tells us when it states, "Even as the Son of man came not to be
ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many"
(Mat 20:28). A ransom would only fit in definition two above and turning back
to the dictionary for the definition of a sacrifice as a noun instead of as a
verb above, we read a sacrifice/ransom is...
2 Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to
have a greater value or claim.
Since Jesus' sacrificed or bought or paid a ransom using a worthless human
life he didn't want or need to begin with, it wasn't a real sacrifice and
therefore the Cross failed to meet the definition for a sacrifice. You stand
corrected.
Now it you want to prove you aren't a liar or an imbecile, please *DEMONSTRATE*
my alleged "dishonesty" that you pretend I made in that reply. And please don't
"forget" that demonstration doesn't mean just because you say so, show the
dishonesty and then correct it with a dictionary quote and a Bible verse JUST
LIKE I DID.
I don't have to.
Translation: You can't.
Definition: I don't have to. :)
What a pathetic counterargument. The fact is you can't prove anything I said is
false or untrue. I quoted from a dictionary and the Bible and all you can come
up with in return are lame excuses for not having any facts. It is obvious you
have no facts and it is obvious that I do. Just saying "it ain't so" won't make
it so, no matter how many times you repeat that to yourself or these newsgroups.
Only facts will do and you have none. Absolutely none.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"My friend plans to make a fortune with his invention. It's a
big metal box with a slot on one side and a sign that says
'How gullible are you? To find out, insert $50.'" -- COMEDY
COMES CLEAN, by Bill Jones
=============================================================
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
