Good question! VERY good question.

Is 53 says that as the Messiah “He took the stroke of justice for US to WHOM the punishment was DUE”.

In Hebrews 2 we are told that “HE tasted the sufferings of death” for everyone of mankind.

In 1John 2:2 “He is the Atoning SACRIFICE for our sin and NOT for our sins only but for the SINS of the WHOLE World”.

You are right to conclude that what we see Externally in Christ’s sufferings is NOT the “payment made” for sin. It is simply the outward physical form — the nexus/intersect in the Ven diagram in physical form that we can see.

In the book of John we are told that BEFORE being crucified Christ stated that His soul was in supernatural agonay and torture “My soul is sorrowful even unto death” and the supernatural agony was so great that by the time He reached the garden – and while in prayer “He sweat great drops of blood” — on the cross He died “and both water and blood flood” showiing that the pericardium had burst around His heart due to the extreme suffering in paying for the sins of the world.

So “IF” you are asking for the Christian “reason” as to why the sufferings of Christ are in fact that sufferings OWED by all mankind in the lake of Fire for all sins committed in all time — and yet to physical appearances – this is “a bad 2 days” — that is the rationale given.

“God so Loved the World that HE Gave HIS only begotten son that whosoever Believes on Him might not perish but have ever lasting life”.

There is an interesting follow-up reading for this in John 11 where Mary and Martha come to Jesus in tears with the bitter lament “IF you had been here my brother would not have died” — might want to look that one up.

in Christ,

Bob

Words fail to grasp the pain of losing loved ones.

The pain and death on this earth is awful and it doesn’t give me hope of anything better but when I look at Jesus — I get a different picture — the hope (faith) that all this misery will come to an end.

John 16:33 “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”

For me it boils down to hope — hope(faith) that because Jesus died for this world’s sins — I have the great hope of going to heaven.

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life
John 14:”Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2″In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3″If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.

Jesus came so to take my sin so I can become the righteousness of God. I can truly say “In Jesus I am the righteousness of God.”

2 Corinthians 5:21God made him(Jesus) who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him (Jesus) we might become the righteousness of God.

Just a couple words of HOPE in a world of pain.

“By whose “authority” is the Bible an accurate definition of God?”
========================

Well it’s a no-brainer to see it as the authorotative definition for “the Christian God”.

But if you are not talking to a Christian – but to a Hindu — then I think you are going to have to speak in terms the Hindu documents for God.

If you are trying to get to “IS THERE a GOD no matter Christian or Hindu” the answer is pretty obvious from nature – “Yes”.

The architecture and design for encoding, transmitting and decoding DNA has put that question to rest.

But it does not tell us “whose God” – Hindu or Christian.

If you start by asking the question “WHY would God allow….” or “Why would God do such-and-such” to a Christian – then you are going to “fully expect” an answer from “the Christian Text”.

Because (obviously) IF you got an answer “off the top of somebody’s head” in response that flatly contradicted the Christian Bible – the next “obvious question” would be – “Well then why does the Bible say that God…” etc.

=================================
LCM -
“I assume you wrote the post itself but all of your comments are unsubstantiated claims that I would wager to have their origin in the Bible, such as:

“This is why God allows Earth to suffer the consequences of sin – the misuse of freewill on humanity’s part – for a time. He knows it is best.”
====================

The fact that an atheist would not accept the Bible as “his authority” is not too surprising. The fact that an atheist would imagine that a Christian ‘has another source the defines God as well as the bible” IS -

Bob

You are absolutely correct to claim that the Bible IS THE authorotative source for “defining the Christian God” — Christians have no other book for doing that very thing so Christians call it “the WORD of God”.

So no matter if one is atheist or Christian IF the context is to “discuss the Christian God and ask why he would or would not do something” – THEN the source text that defines him is “logic to consult” —

Impossible to escape your logic there. You are absolutely correct.

Also you made a very good point that GIVEN a “free will” construct for the Christian God’s creation according to the Bible – we would expect some of the same limits as we see today in our own justice systems. As the bible speaks about not removing the weeds from the wheat until the harvest “lest you destroy some of the wheat” so our Justice system might give a criminal more lattitude than “he deserves” to preserve our democracy.

Good points all – thanks for sharing that logical presentation.

Bob

I assume you wrote the post itself but all of your comments are unsubstantiated claims that I would wager to have their origin in the Bible, such as:

“This is why God allows Earth to suffer the consequences of sin – the misuse of freewill on humanity’s part – for a time. He knows it is best.”

“What we will not do, because of our moral code, is similar to what God will not do, because of His Code, and because of the alternatives that He can see and we cannot.”

“God believes in our free will so much, He would take on the cumulative suffering of all the world upon Himself … than deny us our Choice.”

Do you claim ownership for those ideas (not just the words), in which case I will make sure to cite you if I repeat them, or are they based on what you have read from the Bible or do you have another previously unmentioned historical source?

I like your Greek Myth analogy. It is far more appropriate than you seem to understand. However it fails miserably to match these circumstances since no one actually believes the Greek gods are real, so we are free to discuss them abstractly as fictional characters from fictional, mythical tales. No conflict. No leaps of faith. No need to provide supporting evidence of their existence. But you are taking a series of stories that are mythical, just like the Greek tales, and you are expecting me to accept them as a description of reality, without any supporting evidence whatsoever. Do you see the difference? Accepted fiction vs. unsubstantiated claims of reality.

Not as Truth – Although I accept it as truth – but as an authoritative source for the definition of the Christian God.

Back to the school analogy:

You would never hear this in a Greek literature class “if your definitions and understanding of Hercules are based exclusively on the Greek Myths, then any attempts to continue this discussion are futile, because in order to accept your arguments, I must do what I am unable to do: accept the Greek myths as truth.”

By the way, are you saying I didn’t give ANY philosophical arguements after I quoted the Scriptures? There is NOTHING in my post but Bible texts? NONE of those words were my own? Did I post that post myself or did a first century scholar do it for me? (Sorry, couldn’t resist :-0 )

I believe I’ve been phrasing most of my questions as if the assumption that God exists is correct. I realize that it is not possible to provide evidence for the existance of God, so I am not expecting you to provide that for me… it was never part of my inquiry. But I was asking you to explain your ideas in generic, philosophical terms. Isn’t it possible to speak of God without refering to the Bible? Do you not consider issues of your faith and explore the ideas behind religion in your head or with others, using your own thoughts and words and not those of the Bible? Are there no other sources that could help you explain your belief system to me?

If not, then our difficulty to communicate may be less in our thoughts on God than in our views on the Bible. Christians are willing to accept it as the “truth” and “the word of God” (though it has always fascinated me how selective you can be about which parts you actually accept into your daily lives and how you manage to ignore the inconvenience of the rest). Knowing something about the history of the Bible, namely who wrote it and who altered it to fit their agendas (fallible man, not God), I can’t do that. So if your definitions and understanding of God are based exclusively on the Bible, then any attempts to continue this discussion are futile, because in order to accept your arguments, I must do what I am unable to do: accept the Bible as truth.

But if you would like to provide evidence as to why I should accept the Bible as truth, we can talk… as long as your evidence isn’t “because God says its the truth”. I’ve never been a fan of circlular logic.

There are two differant discussions that are going on and we need to try to keep them separate.

One is – Does the Christian God exist?

The other discussion has to do with whether the beliefs of Christianity fit together logically **If they were true**

When atheist ask if our God is just, or if the ideas of Omnipresence, Omnibenevolence, and Omnipotence can exist logically in the same being, Christians will not give an answer that tries to prove that God is not just like a purple unicorn.

They will give an answer based on the **theory of God** set forth in our belief system and our Bible. I was trying to explain what the Christian God is like from the Bible and my own understanding – not prove His existance, but explain how such a God, if He exists, can be just. To explain such a God, I have to refer to the definition of what the Christian God is, ie, the Bible.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to explain your beliefs without mentioning what the definition of your beliefs are – which are found in the Bible.

You cannot be upset if you ask us questions about the Christian God, and we respond by discussing – of all things- the unbelievable, far-fetched concept of the Christian God, as described in the book which defines the Christian God.

In school, you might be asked to analyze a character in mythology, even make arguements for or against certain personality aspects of that Character. Hey, people even do that when discussing fictional TV characters.

But it is not logical to tell someone “Your theory about this character makes no sense because he/she is fictional.”

Of course you will point out that I do not believe my God is a myth. Which is true, I don’t. But this is a logically separate debate from the defense or defamation of the “character” of God.