On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:26:58 +0000, The Doctor wrote:

> In article , Dave Cross 
>  wrote:
>>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:32:47 +0000, The Doctor wrote:
>>
>>> In article , Dave Cross
>>>  wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:10:04 +0000, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article , Dave Cross
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:58:34 +0000, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article , Bad Wilf
>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article , Bad Wilf
>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article , Bad Wilf
>>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So exactly what was the idea of this ultimate sacrifice?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And if he
>>>>>>>>>> came back
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to life again, it was hardly much of a sacrifice!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christ is alive.  Know your tenets.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Stephen's point is that it's easy to sacrifice your life when
>>>>>>>>>>>> you can come back from the dead.
>>>>>>>>>>> Christ is resurrected, something Stephen Wilson does not
>>>>>>>>>>> believe.
>>>>>>>>>> You really don't understand the point do you?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which is?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That Jesus made no sacrifice at all because he returned from the
>>>>>>>>dead.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Excuse me??!!  Jesus was the sacrificial Lamb for Sinner's slain
>>>>>>> and rose from the dead.  IF both are not true then Christianity is
>>>>>>> without basis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now you're getting it :)
>>>>>>
>>>>> You forget Christ rose from the dead.
>>>>
>>>>No, I don't forget it. I know that's what you believe. It's all
>>>>nonsense of course :)
>>>>
>>>>But you still don't seem to have grasped the point that Bad Wilf is
>>>>making. If Jesus dies and isn't resurrected then that's (obviously) a
>>>>pretty big sacrifice. If he dies and comes back to life three days
>>>>later then it's no sacrifice at all.
>>>>
>>>>Have you ever read Philip Jose Farmer's "Riverworld" books? Everyone
>>>>is immortal there. When you die, you are resurrected at a random point
>>>>on the planet. In circumstances like that, death stops being seen as a
>>>>problem and simply becomes another mode of transport.
>>>>
>>>>Do you understand yet?
>>> 
>>> Then find me the Corpse of Christ.
>>
>>And we've come full circle again. Don't you remember the way this
>>discussion always goes? I point out that a) it's almost impossible to
>>find the remains of anyone who died two thousand years ago and b) there
>>are a few places that claim to be the tomb of Jesus. You then usually
>>start babbling nonsense about modern day cemeteries.
>>
>>All of which completely ignores the main thrust of this sub-thread. How
>>can Jesus' death be seen as a sacrifice when he came back to life three
>can Jesus' death be seen as a sacrifice when he came back to life three 
>days later?
> 
> You purpot to logic but cannot have a logical argument or basis.

Coming from you, that's almost a (misspelt, as ever) compliment :)

And, of course, it neatly avoids actually addressing any of my points.

Dave...

In article <uzKbk.234121$M63.141447@newsfe13.ams2>,
Stephen Wilson  wrote:
>
>"The Doctor"  wrote in message 
>news:g4nqtf$3tc$3@gallifrey.nk.ca...
>>>
>>>And, of course, it neatly avoids actually addressing any of my points.
>>>
>>>Dave...
>>
>> Knew you would say that.  Gets your basis correct.
>
>You've still addressed none of the points. And your response makes no sense.
>
>

Make the basis.
-- 
Member - Liberal International	
This is doctor@nl2k.ab.ca	Ici doctor@nl2k.ab.ca
God, Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!  
USA petition for dissolution of your nation!

"The Doctor"  wrote in message 
news:g4o1c6$3tc$27@gallifrey.nk.ca...
> In article <uzKbk.234121$M63.141447@newsfe13.ams2>,
> Stephen Wilson  wrote:
>>
>>"The Doctor"  wrote in message
>>news:g4nqtf$3tc$3@gallifrey.nk.ca...
>>>>
>>>>And, of course, it neatly avoids actually addressing any of my points.
>>>>
>>>>Dave...
>>>
>>> Knew you would say that.  Gets your basis correct.
>>
>>You've still addressed none of the points. And your response makes no 
>>sense.
>>
>>
>
> Make the basis.

Make what basis?