Is there any sense in the core message of the Gospel?

[McCulloch]

As far as I know, this one passage is central to most, if not all, of the Christian gospel.

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

If God really loved the people of the world so much, why could he not come up with a plan that would have more people saved?

Why is it that God cannot avert his own wrath without sacrificing his only begotten Son? Why could he not just forgive without the sacrifice?

Why is belief necessary? Why couldn't God just forgive?

[Biker]

Biker:

I answered the question ,you don't like the answer.God is going to prove nothing to you, he has nothing to prove to you. Is God insecure,NO.Obviously your issue with unbelief is that God has not come down off His throne and personally " plainly and unambiguously demonstrated His existence" just for you! The problem is HE DID, but you don't like the demonstration!
This is very simple,God has a plan,its written down, its called the bible.You among others can accept it or not.Most don't including you.I do,I believe the bible therefore it is true to me and for me, sadly, it is not for you. I guess we will see how it works out in the end. Just make sure your opinion is right is about all I could offer you,because your mind is made up as is mine. What in your great wisdom, would you have done differently,or do differently,since you don't like the way the nonGod is doing?

You are right God doesn’t prove anything to us. How do you know God isn’t insecure? After all isn’t he is a Jealous God? I don’t think his issue is that obvious or you would have presented it better then a desire to have him come down and personally “plainly and unambiguously demonstrated His existence" just for anyone! The problem is that you think he did and because the reported demonstration is good enough for you it should be good enough for everyone. You say it is the bible, which shows us that the bible is where you place your faith and everything else is secondary. If most including Mack don’t believe your bible and the trust in its ambiguous and varied messages then maybe the problem isn’t with us humans. Maybe the problem is with the humans that so willingly believe what they want to believe from rather questionable sources about ultimate reality. My mind is not made up and I am not going to speak for others but your mind seems closed and I would suspect it is from fear that you are unable to entertain other ideas and doubts. My complaint is not what God is or isn’t doing. I take issue with your claims concerning the bible and your interpretation, which seems largely a projected scheme that makes Jesus a God that died for your sins so you can feel like everything is fixed except what you blame on the unbeliever.

A historical figure named Jesus made claims to other historical figures. This historical figure Jesus demonstrated historical miracles as witnessed by various historical figures.These accounts written down by eyewitnesses record various claims by this historical figure Jesus, volumes of corraborating evidence of which I am not going to futally go into for you,its available readily if you truly desire to honestly investigate. This historical Jesus as I say has made claims:As to His divinity!
As Jehovah,Isa.40:3,with Matt.3:3;Jehovah of glory,Psa.24:7,10, with 1 Cor.2:8;Jas.2:1;Jehovah our righteousness,Jer.23:5,6, with 1 Cor. 1:30; Jehovah above all,Psa.97:9,with John 3:31; Jehovah the first and the last,Isa.44:6, with Rev.1:17; Isa.48:12-16,with Rev. 22:13; Jehovahs fellow and equal,Zech.13:7;with Phil.2:6;Jehovah of Hosts,Isa.6:1-3,with John 12:41;Isa.8:13,14, with 1 Peter. 2:8; Jehovah, Psa. 110:1, with Matt.22:42-45;Jehovah the shepherd,Isa. 40:10,11;with Heb.13:20; Jehovah, for whose glory all things were created, Prov.16:4, with Col. 1:16;Jehovah the messenger of the coveant,Mal. 3:1,with Luke 7:27.
Invoked as Jehovah,Joel 2:32, with 1 Cor.1:2; as the eternal God and creator, Psa. 102:24-27,with Heb.1:8,10-12; the mighty God ,Isa.9:6; the great God and Savior, Hos.1:7,with Tit.2:13;God over all,Rom. 9:5; God the Judge , Eccl.12:14, with 1Cor. 4:5; 2Cor.5:10;2 Tim.4:1; Emmanuel, Isa.7:14, with Matt. 1:23; King of kings and Lord of lords, Dan.10:17, with Rev.1:5;17:14; the Holy one, 1 Sam. 2:2with Acts3:14;The Lord from heaven, 1Cor.15:47; Lord of the sabbath,Gen.2:3,With Matt.12:8; Lord of all, Acts 10:36;Rom.10:11-13; Son of God, Matt. 26:63-67; the only begotten Son of the Father,John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1John4:9. His blood is called the blood of God, Acts 20:28.One wiyh the Father, John 10:30,38; 12:45; 14:7-10;17:10. As sending the Spirit equally with the Father, John 14:16, with John 15:26. As unsearchable equally with the Father, Prov.30:4; Matt. 11:27. As Creator of all things, Isa.. 40:28;John 1:3; Col.1:16; supporter and preserver of all things, Neh. 9:6, with Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3. ACKNOWLEDGED by OLD TESTAMENT saints, Gen.17:1,with Gen.48:15,16; 32:24-30, with Hos. 12:3-5; Judg.6:22-24; 13:21,22; Job 19: 25-27.
Explain to me "ultimate reality?" "My mind is closed", I asked you various questions about claims you make, Im still waiting, perhaps if you answerd me you might enlighten me!What am I blaming on the unbeliever?
Jesus claims to be divine, alot,in many places,obviosly, He is right or He is crazy! I say He is THE Messiah, Savior.I say Jesus is the only way to eternal life,there is no other way. Not in observance of the Law given to Moses, not in muhammed,not in budda,not in living a "good life",not wishing,not in cleverly devised schemes.Just in this peculiar plan spelled out in the bible.If you have a better way let me know, as I asked earlier, how would you do it?

Biker

Hum. None of your sources knew the historical Jesus. And no, the so called 'Old testament' does not acknowledge Jesus as a Messiah..

There is more abundant and accurate manuscript evidence for the New Testament thanfor ANY other book from the ancient world. There are more manuscripts copied with greater accuracy and earlier dating than for any secular classic from antiquity.

Biker

And this means it is true?? No, it does not. All it means is that those people who had copies of it thought it was important.

Except for the letters of Paul, the earliest gospels that discuss Jesus are from 65 (probably 70) or later. Paul admits he did not 'know Jesus' in the flesh, but only had a vison (hallucination??) of him.

The various accounts in the New Testament are contradictory, rip things off from various other religions, but claims it is unique. You take passages ripped out of context from the Old testament, retrofit it to Jesus, and make all sorts of claims. I don't accept those claims, and I have seen the original passages Christian misquote, so I am not convinced by those.

William F. Albright noted authority Biblical archaeologist doesnt agree with you, Quote,"every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and the eighties of the first century A.D.(very probably sometime between A.D. 50 and 75).unquote.

Biker

[Biker]

Your concerns with Jesus Christ not fulfilling Messianic prophesy,stem merely from a timing or sequency issue not wrong Messiah.

He, actually, did nothing. Until all the requirements are fullfilled (and none were), then Jesus is not the messiah.

An unfullifed requrement means the messiah didn't come yet.

The passages that Christians claim point to Jesus are taken out of context, sometimes mistranslated, and other times, are written TO as if it were a prophecy.

I am terminating dialogue with you, you do alot of condescending attacks toward me and offer no proof just ramblings.I wont be responding to your posts.Thanks for nothing Goat!

Biker

[Goat]

And this means it is true?? No, it does not. All it means is that those people who had copies of it thought it was important.

Except for the letters of Paul, the earliest gospels that discuss Jesus are from 65 (probably 70) or later. Paul admits he did not 'know Jesus' in the flesh, but only had a vison (hallucination??) of him.

The various accounts in the New Testament are contradictory, rip things off from various other religions, but claims it is unique. You take passages ripped out of context from the Old testament, retrofit it to Jesus, and make all sorts of claims. I don't accept those claims, and I have seen the original passages Christian misquote, so I am not convinced by those.

William F. Albright noted authority Biblical archaeologist doesnt agree with you, Quote,"every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and the eighties of the first century A.D.(very probably sometime between A.D. 50 and 75).unquote.

Biker

So, you will find some inerrant so called scholar that puts an unrealistic low date due to religious fever. I will not his scholarship and education was in oriental studies, and not the bible.

Most scholars today , (except those whose statement of faith say the bible is without error), put Mark as the earliest of the synoptic gospel, with its early terminous at 65 ce, and probably after 70. The earliest Luke is put at by most Christian biblical scholars is 80 C.E., and there has been some who have made quite valid arguements that Luke got his history from Josephus's Antiquties, which would put it after 93 c.e.

[McCulloch]

I answered the question, you don't like the answer.

Sorry, I missed where you answered the question.

God is going to prove nothing to you, he has nothing to prove to you.

I know that. It is just that the believers in that God do appear to have something to prove.

Is God insecure, NO.

Sorry. Jealous and requiring worship. But not insecure. Right.

Obviously your issue with unbelief is that God has not come down off His throne and personally "plainly and unambiguously demonstrated His existence" just for you! The problem is HE DID, but you don't like the demonstration!

How did he plainly and unambiguously demonstrate His existence? By providing a book which if read literally contradicts what we can determine by scientific means about the age of the earth? By the Incarnation, which has been validated and witnessed by no one except the leaders of a religion attributed to him?

This is very simple, God has a plan,its written down, its called the bible.

I have read it. I have tried to state how I find that the core message that Christians take from the Bible as stated in John 3:16 is, itself, logically flawed and makes no sense. My objection is twofold. Firstly, that if God really loved the people of the world, his plan of salvation for those created in his own image, would have a better than 50% success rate. Secondly, if God the lawmaker and creator really wanted to forgive, then he could simply forgive. There is no logical necessity for a sacrifice.

You among others can accept it or not. Most don't including you. I do,I believe the bible therefore it is true to me and for me, sadly, it is not for you.

OK. The Bible is true for you and not for me. Thereby, you are admitting that truth is subjective.

I guess we will see how it works out in the end.

Probably not. That is the problem with death in reality. You don't get to see how it all ends. C'est la vie.

Just make sure your opinion is right is about all I could offer you, because your mind is made up as is mine.

Why not offer me evidence, logic and reason?

What in your great wisdom, would you have done differently, or do differently, since you don't like the way the nonGod is doing?

I do not pretend to have great wisdom. However, it seems plain to me that if there were a God somewhat like the one described by the Christians and if that God loved those he created in his own image. Then he would find a way to forgive and save from eternal torment, at least the majority of us.

[Cathar1950]

Biker:

What am I blaming on the unbeliever?

Unbelief!

William F. Albright noted authority Biblical archaeologist doesnt agree with you, Quote,"every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the forties and the eighties of the first century A.D.(very probably sometime between A.D. 50 and 75).unquote.

Many scholars and archaeologist disagree with him and Place them between 70 and 150 CE except the believed 7 authentic letters of Paul.

Your concerns with Jesus Christ not fulfilling Messianic prophesy,stem merely from a timing or sequency issue not wrong Messiah.

Maybe you have the wrong Messiah or fail to understand the concept of Messiah and believe in a pagan god you think is a Jewish Rabbi.
It sure would clear up the timing and sequence issues you need to support your lack of a case.

[McCulloch]

A historical figure named Jesus made claims to other historical figures.

Not quite. Historical figures have made claims about a figure named Jesus.

This historical figure Jesus demonstrated historical miracles as witnessed by various historical figures.

Again wrong. Historical figures have made claims with regard to the miraculous activities of Jesus, none which has been validated or verified by other historical accounts.

These accounts written down by eyewitnesses record various claims by this historical figure Jesus, volumes of corraborating evidence of which I am not going to futally go into for you,its available readily if you truly desire to honestly investigate.

There are a number of threads about the corraborating evidence. They all, like Josephus, fall short of the claims you make of them.

Jesus claims to be divine, alot, in many places, obviosly, He is right or He is crazy!

No. His followers and biographers make that claim.

I say He is THE Messiah, Savior. I say Jesus is the only way to eternal life, there is no other way. Not in observance of the Law given to Moses, not in muhammed, not in budda, not in living a "good life", not wishing, not in cleverly devised schemes. Just in this peculiar plan spelled out in the bible. If you have a better way let me know, as I asked earlier, how would you do it?

Psst. There is no way to eternal life. There is no evidence that when life is over, it is not over.

[AB]

[quote="McCulloch"]Again wrong. Historical figures have made claims with regard to the miraculous activities of Jesus, none which has been validated or verified by other historical accounts.
quote]

I love it.. the generic come-back of: other historical accounts(other than the historical account in the bible) is not present.. so therefore it is not valid. Weak.

So, , how many historical accounts are need to validate it in your book?

[Cathar1950]

Again wrong. Historical figures have made claims with regard to the miraculous activities of Jesus, none which has been validated or verified by other historical accounts.
quote]

I love it.. the generic come-back of: other historical accounts(other than the historical account in the bible) is not present.. so therefore it is not valid. Weak.

So, , how many historical accounts are need to validate it in your book?

There are no historical accounts in the bible there is some history but the NT is largely rhetoric and apologetic in nature. They are religious and not historical eyewitness accounts. Letters only tell you about the writer and many of them are at best questionable. Only 7 of Paul’s are believed to his and no other letters are known to be the reported writers. They are questionable to even conservative scholars. They seem to be late traditions of many communities. So there is no “generic come-back” it is just a statement of fact. You keep hearing it because it is true and reasonable. Even if you could some how prove it was something other, what ever that would mean, for one work among the 66 that would only account for one and not be a blanket endorsement for the whole thing.

[Confused]

Your concerns with Jesus Christ not fulfilling Messianic prophesy,stem merely from a timing or sequency issue not wrong Messiah.

He, actually, did nothing. Until all the requirements are fullfilled (and none were), then Jesus is not the messiah.

An unfullifed requrement means the messiah didn't come yet.

The passages that Christians claim point to Jesus are taken out of context, sometimes mistranslated, and other times, are written TO as if it were a prophecy.

I am terminating dialogue with you, you do alot of condescending attacks toward me and offer no proof just ramblings.I wont be responding to your posts.Thanks for nothing Goat!

Biker

Why so much anger and hostility? We are all trying to reach the same goal, knowledge enough to make an informed decision. It isn't a personal attack. Yet, you have already taken it that way. First with Bernee in another thread, now with Goat. You are allowed to disagree, you are even allowed to ignore, but if you opt to just ignore, you lose because you will have lost opportunity to gain knowledge. Don't back down, stand your ground and continue with your quest. You may contain information that some of us don't know, and we would welcome it. But if you quit, we never will.

[AB]

Again wrong. Historical figures have made claims with regard to the miraculous activities of Jesus, none which has been validated or verified by other historical accounts.
quote]

I love it.. the generic come-back of: other historical accounts(other than the historical account in the bible) is not present.. so therefore it is not valid. Weak.

So, , how many historical accounts are need to validate it in your book?

There are no historical accounts in the bible there is some history but the NT is largely rhetoric and apologetic in nature. They are religious and not historical eyewitness accounts. Letters only tell you about the writer and many of them are at best questionable. Only 7 of Paul’s are believed to his and no other letters are known to be the reported writers. They are questionable to even conservative scholars. They seem to be late traditions of many communities. So there is no “generic come-back” it is just a statement of fact. You keep hearing it because it is true and reasonable. Even if you could some how prove it was something other, what ever that would mean, for one work among the 66 that would only account for one and not be a blanket endorsement for the whole thing.

So, given your criteria,, you don't belive their was a Paul that traveled and evangelized. There was no Jesus on the earth. There was no King Herod. There was not Church in Ephesus. John Baptizing in the River never happenend. No Greek influence. And then Roman influence in the area

Sorry, don't buy it.