Did you read the part in my post, the part that you didn't bold, how a sacrifice to appease the wrath of a god, though the community theoretically benefits, is still a sacrifice to a god?
You're splitting hairs and playing semantic games but, at the end of the day, you've got a god being a sacrifice to convince himself to forgive us. Seems like he could dispense with the whole bleeding-on-a-cross thing if he'd already made the decision to forgive.
You're splitting hairs and playing semantic games but, at the end of the day, you've got a god being a sacrifice to convince himself to forgive us. Seems like he could dispense with the whole bleeding-on-a-cross thing if he'd already made the decision to forgive.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
