On May 16, 4:09=A0pm, "Spd" <spadejenk...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > And this point is where religion and I have bitter differences, and
> > > where I developed a dislike for their lies. Christ cannot be the
first=
> > > begotten of the dead if in fact Lazarus was raised by Christ.
>> How do you come up with this baloney, Rodney?
> =A0 Baloney it isn't. You should be able to figure it out without a lot
of=
> work,
> =A0 or has christianity "dumbed" you down ?
>
> =A0 Lazarus WAS raised from the dead before the crucifiction, was he not
?=
"Crucifiction"?
> If
> so,
> =A0 then it is logical to assume the he, and NOT christ, is the first
bego=
tten
> of the dead,
"First begotten of the dead"?
> =A0 that is assuming for the sake of argument that ANYONE was raised...
>
> =A0 So, do you have a logical answer for this aside from more insults
and
> trolling,
> =A0 and are you capable of logic ? If so, then deal with the content
I've =
put
> before you
> =A0 and forget your urge to insult.
Deal with what "content", Rodney? So far I've seen no "content" from
you, just plain idiocy.
> =A0 Prove that you have a brain, Kelly...
Already done a million times over, Rodney.
|
