>>11010321I'm gonna argue against just the first point because I'm not in a mood to write an essay against seven. Christ's blood washed away men's sins when he died on the cross. His blood (and body) was forfeit for future gain, hence it falls under the definition of sacrifice. The fact that he rose to heaven afterward matters not, because that was the goal in the first place (of the sacrifice) - the message being that should you live like Christ, and sacrifice your blood and your body for a future heaven, then you will naturally achieve heaven. Humans understood this when the first sapien tore off a piece of meat from an animal, put it to his mouth, and hesitated. "Wait," he said, "If I were to forfeit my satiation for just a moment, I could have this later.. and it would be of use not only to me, but to others at a later time." Would you look at that person and say "You fool, how would that be a sacrifice if you're just going to eat it later? That's not a sacrifice", no, you wouldn't - in other words, from your first argument alone, I can tell your thoughts are lesser to an ape from thousands of years ago, and not to understand the simple concept of sacrifice is either a sign of stupidity or lunacy.
