Why Didn't God Save His Son?

[modeller]

I was asked this question by a theist who was looking for some theological answer. He was rather put out when I said ' He couldn't because he didn't want to be accused of nepotism .'

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - what are you saying???

That they MADE It UP????

Wowser!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Peter Pedant]

modeller - why did a theist ask you for chrissakes ? He should know the answer.

This is a bit like hearing in a black cab- eer I had a theist in the back once and he asked me if there was a God. AndI said: ere blimey Gov, if you dont know, I am sure I dont....

[Peter Pedant]

Hmm the NT Gk for Sh+t happens is

scaton geneto

I'll have to see if it occurs in John (the most theological of the Gospels) or if there is any evidence that it was there once but got written out in the recensions

[jomifl]

/The false gods of today that do not exist in actuality will likewise pass away in time./
So, something that hasn't existed will disappear, stunning logic I can see how the JWs befuddled you so easily...:-)

[naomi24]

Andy, oh no! What have I done?! Sorry… I know it’s a shock …. here, sit down…. have a glass of water ….

Jom, Haaa! Very good. ;o)

[netibiza]

I have always wondered this, but he had to make a sacrifice to save us all, but for all we know, he made it painless.

[naomi24]

He had to make a sacrifice to save us all from himself - and he didn't make it painless - allegedly. Suffering, surely, was all part of the plan?

[chrisgel]

Goodlife - //They have vanished with time because such existed in the imagination only. //
I think you'll find Ra gave your god a run for his money (over 1500 years I think)
Not bad for a god that existed in the imagination only.
Oh wait!!!

[modeller]

naomi // All of this was written long after the event - by people who weren't there. // That is true for much of the bible . However it was written by Mark, Matthew and John.

[chrisgel]

Modeller - //However it was written by Mark, Matthew and John. //
Er. No it wasn't. The authors are unknown. The names were put to the gospels, I imagine to make them more personal and relevant to the times, at a much later date. The names could have ended up as anything.
Perhaps Naomi will elaborate on this as I don't know the precise details.

[modeller]

peter //why did a theist ask you for chrissakes ? He should know the answer. // I think he was trying to catch me out with some theological mumbo jumbo.

[modeller]

chrisgel That's true but in view of the fact it diminishes Jesus why would it have been written at all.

[chrisgel]

Ah! Point taken.

[naomi24]

modeller //in view of the fact it diminishes Jesus why would it have been written at all.//

It’s confusing - but as far as Christians are concerned, it doesn’t diminish Jesus. Don’t forget there are three faces (the Trinity) to this one entity, God – and Jesus (the Son) was God in human form. In short, as a human being, God (Jesus) was exposed to sin and temptation, his weaknesses were human, he suffered human pain and anguish, his fears were human - and in calling out to God (the Father), Jesus was expressing his human frailty – thereby ‘proving’ to Christians that God (Jesus) was human - or so the story goes. I’m not sure I’ve explained that well enough, but I hope so.

Incidentally, much of the New Testament was very clearly written with the intention of confirming fulfillment of some of the prophecies of the Old Testament. If you look you will find it was foretold that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem; you’ll even find mention of the donkey that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on – and the words ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ are taken directly from Psalm 22.

‘Proving’ the fulfillment of prophecy is a simple matter when the proof is written – and frequently edited - years after the event. It’s too late in the day to tell you what I think of the ‘Trinity’ theory, but suffice to say all this pathos and suffering certainly tugs at the heartstrings. There was a method in the madness. ;o)

Night all. x

[pixie373]

Night, naomi.
So did God sacrifice his son, or resurrect him? I'm confused...

[beso]

atlanta //The labouring mother is in agony and dread for many days, and they both eventually die. This happens every day.//

The Bible tells us this is God's punishment to all women because the first woman disobeyed His command to not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The punishment also includes giving her desire for a man who will rule over her.

Genesis 3:16

[pixie373]

So women are still being punished for Eve? What was the purpose of Jesus dying for "our sins" then?

[naomi24]

Modeller, Chris is right. Paul, who never met Jesus, and never heard him speak, was a prolific contributor to the New Testament, but the authors of the four gospels are unknown. The names are irrelevant.

Pixie, //So did God sacrifice his son, or resurrect him?//

Both, or more correctly (if you believe it) he sacrificed himself and then resurrected himself.

//So women are still being punished for Eve? What was the purpose of Jesus dying for "our sins" then?//

Good question. Even those women who have asked forgiveness of their sins still suffer in childbirth…… so I’ll pass on that one.

Actually, the more I write, the more it strikes me just how nonsensical the whole thing is.

[modeller]

pixie God demands continuous sacrifices because it's his way of making you fear him . He demanded Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac to ensure Abbraham was sufficiently frightened of him that he would kill his son if so God wished. It was only at the last moment God said OK you've convinced me you are terrified enough , you can kill that unfortunate ram instead.
Genesis 22:10-13. Leviticus 5:17-19 guarantees a steady supply of sacrifices even from unintentional sins. 6:26-29 ensures all male members of a priest's family have plenty of meat.

[Octavius]

modeller, have you heard of Tantalus, and of course Pelops?

We can certainly draw some parallels in historical literal analysis.