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]

Perhaps we differ on definition.

McCulloch,
I find it interesting you argue with the nouns but define with the adjective and the verb? I would say we differ on the words but more importantly, the color of the lens with which we view the words, Justice and Forgiveness.

Don't look for a bias when there is a simpler explanation.
jus‧tice –noun
1. the quality of being just;
for‧give‧ness  –noun
1. act of forgiving;

It seemed a whole lot easier to go directly to the adjective and the verb rather than start with the noun and be redirected to the adjective and the verb anyway. I guess I just went too fast for you. Sorry.

And, yes I know that forgiving is a gerund. But most dictionaries do not define gerunds directly. You must go to the verb from which it was derived.

McCulloch,
I love it, an Ingles lesson from a Canadian, I'm having more fun everyday. LOL. Perhaps I could help you with the French.Although I'm better with Espanol. Back to badminton.
I noticed you didnt respond to my question about innocent suffering.Am I to assume a position of innocent suffering disproving Theism on your part, or not?
Before getting off into a safari on the Justice-Forgiveness Incompatible Perfections issue which could use a thread itself, I would like to address a few misconceptions on the core of the "core belief of Christianity".
Placing the Scripture John 3:16 back into "Context",address's most of the issues.
Johns Gospel chapter 3

[Jester]

Let me take a stab at this one.
And, for the record, these are excellent questions. Unfortunately, I think many Christians avoid them in favor of less important (and less challenging) ones.

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?

I don’t claim to know how many people are going to be saved. I like to think that it will be quite a bit more than the “fire and brimstone” Christians teach. As for the obvious response question: "why isn’t everyone saved, I’d say that some people really do reject God. There are those who would ask to live in Heaven in that they would ask for a paradise, but (even if they believed in God) would not ask for Heaven as it really is: the state of being in a perfect relationship with God. It would be they, not he, that have decided that they will not go to heaven under that definition.

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?

My belief: to make his love appear real to us.
Millions (who knows how many, really) of people over the history of Christianity have been inspired and comforted on a deep level by the lengths Christ was willing to go for humanity. I think that this alone would have been reason enough.
Moreover, humanity has a need to see that a price be paid for wrongdoing. We instinctively feel this debt, and would have had a much harder time dealing with an abstract “God will forgive” than with such a dramatic physical symbol. (To answer the sub-question as to why God didn’t make us to not feel that sense of debt, I think it is obvious that this would lessen remorse for wrongdoing, and cause a great deal more trouble than good).
Also, God is grieved every time we sin. He must endure that pain without “dumping” it back on us. Thus, though the physical sacrifice is a symbol, the idea of God taking the pain we caused and, therefore, deserve is not.
The more I think this through the more legitimate it seems.

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

I suppose my best answer is that “loving the world” means you give people their choice, even if you know it’s wrong. Those who don’t wish to trust God enough to enter into that relationship that is the difinitive characteristic of heaven will get their choice. If we recognize that trust and belief are, in this case, synonomous, this scripture makes sense.

[Cathar1950]

Goose:

In my opinion, I don't see how a person could go through an earnest and deep search for God, drop any presuppositions, ego's, let go of any bittnerness toward God, or whatever and not find Him. So when people tell me they've searched for God but couldn't find Him, I sometimes think they were looking in the wrong place. But that's my opinion.

Is that an opinion or a presumption?
It almost seems self-fulfilling and circular. If you don’t find God then you are not being earnest seems and if you are being earnest you will find God. What kind of sense does that make?

I don't like to think that a person that was sincerely trying to find Him goes to hell.

It wouldn’t seem very fair would it?

Whatever is said by anyone should be weighed and tested against what is said in the Bible.

And why should this be done? Isn’t this really the answer given by those that already believe and redundant?

But we're all a little dysfunctional wouldn't you agree?

Maybe in my family but I can’t speak for everyone. What do you mean by dysfunctional?
Do you have some kind of boundaries here?

Historically when these scriptures were being written there were teachings and cults beginning to emerge that deviated, in some cases only slightly, off of the core doctrine of Christianity. The writers of the time were warning to be cautious of this and cross reference any teaching with known scripture to avoid false teaching. But this still happens today. That was my answer to Confused as she was asking about being mislead.

Historically thee were many variations. Some worked to eliminate others.
Deviation is what Jews and others would claim Christians did while the core doctrine was developing. Being “Mislead” is always what is claimed of others.
I wonder how many people have been “mislead” by someone that was trying to “correct some misunderstandings about Christianity”?

But this has reminded me as to why it's no wonder critics and sceptics get confused about scripture and what Christian's say. They're so busy looking for the gotcha, hidden agenda, or conspiracy that they often miss the whole message and point.

Oh really? Christianity seems to be a solution to an invented problem, the fall and sinful nature of mankind, as a poor allegorical reading of the Garden story by Paul.
I prefer Mercy not sacrifice, but it is just my opinion.