(August 2, 2014 at 7:12 am)Welsh cake Wrote: No, you don't. Clearly, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.We're having the discussion because you don't understand the meaning, or rather, insist on one narrow meaning.
A parent who takes on a second job to put a child through college can rightly be said to be making a sacrifice for the child. All that they're giving up is some free time.
Quote:What do you mean so what? The fact that your argument is falling apart should concern you at this moment in time.As I explained, I mean that, since all analogies have shortcomings, reasonable people aren't overly concerned when a shortcoming in their analogy is presented. In this case, yes, the analogy of a sacrificial animal is not 100% equivalent to Jesus. So what? No analogy is perfect, and his suffering for us falls within the broader meaning of sacrifice.
Quote:We're not talking about the heroism of the act. We're talking about whether or not its a sacrifice.And as noted, the loss can be as simple as leisure time and still correctly be called a sacrifice.
When there's a sacrifice - something is lost in order to protect or save something else.
Quote:Christ lost nothing of consequence in the scriptures, he's not gone, HE GAINED EVERYTHING. Do you not understand this?HE SUFFERED ON THE CROSS FOR OTHERS. Do you not understand this?
