Zone1 Why did Jesus come to earth?

[BreezeWood]

What's the mystery?

what were the 1st century events - when their book tries to say nothing was meant to change yet the main character ended up being murdered -

and why the secrecy their so called prophets when the heavens could communicate in public where what they have to say would be without doubt, ambiguity and verifiable by video and voice recording ...

- the gov't needs to rewrite those religious books so they are at least understandable.

 

[hobelim]

what were the 1st century events

In summary, the first century CE in China was a period of dynastic restoration, significant technological and cultural advancements, and the gradual emergence of social and political challenges that would eventually lead to the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty.

In the first century in the American Southwest, three dominant cultures were emerging: the Hohokam, the Mogollon, and the Ancestral Puebloans (also known as Anasazi).

In the first century CE, Africa was a continent of diverse kingdoms and societies. The Kingdom of Aksum (Axum) in present-day Ethiopia was a major power, involved in extensive trade networks. Meanwhile, the Roman Empire controlled parts of North Africa, with cities like Carthage flourishing as agricultural centers.

In the first century CE, the Caribbean islands were populated by indigenous peoples, primarily the Arawak and Carib.

In the first century CE, India was a land of diverse kingdoms and empires, with the Kushan Empire dominating the north and various regional powers flourishing in the south.. The Kushans, originating from Central Asia, established their rule in the Gandhara region (modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and parts of India). Meanwhile, the south was divided into kingdoms like the Chola, and Pandyan dynasties, who engaged in extensive trade with the Roman Empire and other parts of Asia.

 

[BreezeWood]

In summary, the first century CE in China was a period of dynastic restoration, significant technological and cultural advancements, and the gradual emergence of social and political challenges that would eventually lead to the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty.

In the first century in the American Southwest, three dominant cultures were emerging: the Hohokam, the Mogollon, and the Ancestral Puebloans (also known as Anasazi).

In the first century CE, Africa was a continent of diverse kingdoms and societies. The Kingdom of Aksum (Axum) in present-day Ethiopia was a major power, involved in extensive trade networks. Meanwhile, the Roman Empire controlled parts of North Africa, with cities like Carthage flourishing as agricultural centers.

In the first century CE, the Caribbean islands were populated by indigenous peoples, primarily the Arawak and Carib.

In the first century CE, India was a land of diverse kingdoms and empires, with the Kushan Empire dominating the north and various regional powers flourishing in the south.. The Kushans, originating from Central Asia, established their rule in the Gandhara region (modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and parts of India). Meanwhile, the south was divided into kingdoms like the Chola, and Pandyan dynasties, who engaged in extensive trade with the Roman Empire and other parts of Asia.

- and sadly human rights during those times to this day are the liest of any of those concerns pertaining to cultural self interests. might over right.

than for a few itinerants who do perceive those being persecuted and victimized simply for their own personal beliefs to stand in their way as for everyone to have voice for their own destiny. jesus has never been alone, just misunderstood.

 

[Meriweather]

I have seen that kind of attitude expressed several times, usually by Catholics who like to claim that the Catholic Church has it all figured out and everybody else is wrong.

The Catholic Church is not about claiming "everyone else is wrong". What the Catholic Church has are the answers for why we believe as we do, and why we practice faith as we do. It all comes through scripture and tradition. The Catholic Church did not change what Protestants do. Think about it. It was Protestants who changed what Catholics did which means it is actually Protestants who are claiming Catholics are wrong. Catholics continuing to do things the way they have always been done.... Because Catholics continue doing things the way they have always been done, do you take that as Catholics telling you that what you are doing is wrong? If so, that's on you as those are your changes, not Catholic changes.

Your posts about the Pope are puzzling to Catholics. A change in popes is nothing like a change in Presidents or in an administration. Catholics believe Christ's instructions two thousand years ago work just fine. For Catholics, a new pope is scrutinized for one reason (after how well he reflects Christ): That second reason is, How well does this pope reflect us as Catholics? I would argue that (in my lifetime) the pope who did this best was Pope John Paul II. He reflected Christ; he reflected Catholicism as practiced down through the ages into today. He reflected us who reflect Christ living within us. It's that simple.

 

[crossbody]

Remember, Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. There were more lost sheep from that House than those remaining in Israel at the time of Jesus. Think of the significance of Zebulun and Naphtali, and deportations that happened throughout that region. Jesus was not there simply to gather those who had remained and had descendants who lived where once the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali resided. He gathered Twelve Apostles. There is significance in that as well, as 'apostle' is a missionary who goes forth. Jesus was setting up his Church long before some unbelief among the Jews.

Well that's some interesting information. I disagree with a lot of it, but it sounds good. I will stick with the fact that Jesus announced the rock he would build his church on because he had not yet built it.

I would also stick with the scriptures that Peter was sent to the house of Cornelius followed by Paul being sent to the Gentiles for the building of Jesus' Church. I would not factor in tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali into the building of Jesus' Church as they were under circumcision.

 

[Meriweather]

Well that's some interesting information. I disagree with a lot of it, but it sounds good.

It's all in the Bible. Matthew provides a lot of background information on God's plan throughout the Old Testament, by simply mentioning names that (in genealogies, tribes, sites) that all were Biblical stories of God's plan in and of themselves. I don't find anything in Matthew's historical information on which to disagree. It's like a prologue, pointing back to specific events in the Old Testament.

 

[TNHarley]

No. The Gospels and letters were copied by hand and circulated around the Church communities. Gospels and letters were also memorized and spoken orally to the various communities.

And who put those together to make the bible? Who left out things they didnt like?
I rest my case.

 

[hobelim]

Remember, Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. There were more lost sheep from that House than those remaining in Israel at the time of Jesus.

It is generally believed that the ten "lost tribes" who fled to "the ends of the earth" after the Solomon fiasco, the beast whose number is 666, (the number of a man). 666 is the exact number of gold talents that Solomon received yearly from the temple treasury (25 tons), not including taxes tolls and tributes bled from the laity daily, but apparently, to Jesus, the "lost tribes", the "lost sheep of the house of Israel", were the two tribes that remained perpetuating the corruption of Temple worship. The northern and southern kingdoms. Israel and Judah.

The same exact corruption with sacrifice and all that the Catholic Church based its silly rituals and costumes on. First century Temple worship. Rome has used "the power of death" consequent to defying Divine Law to deceive and subjugate the people of the world ever since 325CE when the Antichrist was first unleashed on "the nations".

A nonexistent trinity that became a supernatural reality defying mangod, an edible human sacrifice. Yum! Yum!

All who perpetuate such rituals and practices have the mark of the beast, 666, on their forehead and right hand.

Now you know.

 

[hobelim]

and sadly human rights during those times to this day are the liest of any of those concerns pertaining to cultural self interests. might over right.

So what? Who is responsible for such conditions if not the people who have failed to comply with the will of God expressed in Genesis 3:14, to openly condemn on earth talking serpents as the lowest of all human life forms.

Electing con men, the least qualified to occupy positions that demand the public trust, to office is just ******* stupid. The people who don't have the stones to stand up to devils are the ones responsible for this madness.

Self determination and all. If you want change, if you want to protect and advance human rights, grow a set.

No one whose balls have been crushed can become a member of the assembly of the Lord.

ITS THE LAW

 

[hobelim]

than for a few itinerants who do perceive those being persecuted and victimized simply for their own personal beliefs to stand in their way as for everyone to have voice for their own destiny. jesus has never been alone, just misunderstood

OK. What then?

 

[hobelim]

the gov't needs to rewrite those religious books so they are at least understandable.

The government? Are you insane?

"And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books."

 

[Meriweather]

And who put those together to make the bible? Who left out things they didnt like?
I rest my case.

What case? It's well know that several theologians and councils over nearly a hundred years discussed and decided upon Canon. Two of the more well-known individuals are Eusebius of Caesarea was a Christian historian who contributed a list, as did Athanasius of Alexandria. But it wasn't until a Synod (under Pope Damascus) and the councils of Hippo and Carthage (more than a decade later) that the Pope approved what is now know as New Testament Canon. (Late fourth century) These councils and individuals followed this criteria:

• Apostolic Origin (Was taught/written by first generation apostles and disciples of Christ)
• Universal Acceptance (Were all in use in major communities in the Mediterranean world in the fourth century)
• Liturgical Use (Were all used by Early Church communities in their weekly worship (Lord's Supper)
• Consistent Message

There are lists and fragments of lists that were all considered. Many of these works are still printed today. I've read many of them--as not making 'Canon' is not a denunciation. My favorite is the Epistle of Barnabas despite the fact some parts of it have been rightly described as tedious. Whoever it was who wrote this Epistle, it is clear he was neither Jew nor Alexandrian. Even before the year 200, it was not regarded as an inspired writing.

Anyway, what case do you have, and which non-canonical books have you read that you believe should have been included?

 

[BreezeWood]

and why the secrecy their so called prophets when the heavens could communicate in public where what they have to say would be without doubt, ambiguity and verifiable by video and voice recording ...

The government? Are you insane?

"And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books."

who wrote that book, book of life - those books ... no one from the middleeast - desert dwellers.

- if there is a bible written for the heavenly religion of antiquity that would be presently best served by the - u s constitution.

 

[BreezeWood]

- and which non-canonical books have you read that you believe should have been included?

you are a joke ... where is the archive of the books included, minutes of the meetings and votes taken over a 100 year time span.

where are the ones written by jesus and by those fed to the lions who died for liberation theology, self determination than those in the 4th century, the crucifiers after the true religion had all but faded away for them to write theirs instead. servitude and denial.

 

[TNHarley]

What case? It's well know that several theologians and councils over nearly a hundred years discussed and decided upon Canon. Two of the more well-known individuals are Eusebius of Caesarea was a Christian historian who contributed a list, as did Athanasius of Alexandria. But it wasn't until a Synod (under Pope Damascus) and the councils of Hippo and Carthage (more than a decade later) that the Pope approved what is now know as New Testament Canon. (Late fourth century) These councils and individuals followed this criteria:

• Apostolic Origin (Was taught/written by first generation apostles and disciples of Christ)
• Universal Acceptance (Were all in use in major communities in the Mediterranean world in the fourth century)
• Liturgical Use (Were all used by Early Church communities in their weekly worship (Lord's Supper)
• Consistent Message

There are lists and fragments of lists that were all considered. Many of these works are still printed today. I've read many of them--as not making 'Canon' is not a denunciation. My favorite is the Epistle of Barnabas despite the fact some parts of it have been rightly described as tedious. Whoever it was who wrote this Epistle, it is clear he was neither Jew nor Alexandrian. Even before the year 200, it was not regarded as an inspired writing.

Anyway, what case do you have, and which non-canonical books have you read that you believe should have been included?

So Rome. LOL
Thanks for proving my point in such good detail

 

[Meriweather]

So Rome

Alexandria and Caesarea are not Rome, but perhaps you mean Roman Empire.

 

[Hawkins]

Too much leverage of human incapability here. In a nutshell, humans are incapable of conveying history. That's why most civilizations on earth didn't leave a trail of what they were 2000 years ago.
Histories are stories (history = his story) gathered by a historian who was authenticated by a human authority (usually a government of an ethnicity where the history written occurred.
That said, you need a reference of human history and compare it with the Bible, instead of fabricating an ideal to judge. (Satan's specialty is to lead humans to an ideal which is never achievable by humans)

Chinese history is canonized, mostly thousand years after the actual occurance. Without the canonical history books, there's no Chinese history. Canonization is a must for that kind of history to convey. There's pattern there to make it the way of convey historical truth legitimate. Canonization is just part of it. Authentication is another part. Scope coverage is yet another part. Canonization is authenticated by the governments in Chinese history as the stories (i.e., history) cover a scope of Chinese (an ethnicity) behavior (events and figures etc.) in the past. A government is the natural authority for such a scope coverage.

The Bible works in a similar way, it fits the pattern of a legitimate way of conveying historical truth by the very capability of humankind (though what flooded this thread is an ideal not achievable by humans). It's already the best way for the recording of God's deeds. There's difference between the crafting of OT and NT though. It's all about the scope of coverage. Jesus came to the Jews first, as Judaism is God's CNN - a mass media prepared for conveying God's truth in a legitimate way. It's very easy to spot that the Jews failed the job as Judaism never gained a scope covering all mankind. Christianity remains the only religion with a legitmate coverage of all mankind, mostly by the explicit command from its deity that the gospel (God's news) must be preached to all nations (with the coverage of all mankind).

It's legitmate in terms human efforts involve, which is a reflection of the maximum level of human capability. The OT Bible was written, kept and conveyed (including its canonization) by the Jews who are (even today) considered to be the most clever group of humans (don't mean to sound racist). Judaism is a reflection of the best effort from this Chosen People.

The NT Bible is a bit different. Since the Jews failed the job and that Judaism till today doesn't have a coverage of all mankind, making it not the legitimate way of conveying God's truth. At the point when the clever Jews failed the job mostly due to the Pharisees failed to keep a close distance to God to perceive His will, the Pharisees were corrupt and they vanished through history, God established the earthly Church as His new CNN (or Fox News when CNN failed the job). God no longer has the clever Jews, but at the same time God the Holy Spirit is said to be poured upon Christians. Humans can't even keep the documents which can be deemed original. However, God (somehow) left the mass of manuscripts that Christians can reconstruct the NT Bible in a way that it's with multiple translations can be deemed legitimate (as authenticated by the intangible Church) as they are theologically identical (they don't need to be contextually identical as it's out of human capability to do so).

At the end, the theological content will be deemed legitimate with maximum level of human effort and capability. It's deemed legitimate as a valid human testimony in the Court of Heaven for a Judgment to be carried out legitimately. What Satan does is to leverage human incapability to lead humans to the ideals which are hardly achievable by humans. So to counter this, whenever you criticize the Bible, please use another human book written 2000 years ago, such as the Chinese canonical history, for a comparison. An ideal is the Tree of Knowledge in Eden, the day you choose to eat of it the same day you shall surely die! That's the warning to humans couple thousand years ago.

 

[TNHarley]

Alexandria and Caesarea are not Rome, but perhaps you mean Roman Empire.

Yes lol

 

[Meriweather]

Yes lol

So...you see no difference between cities, empires, and church.

 

[TNHarley]

So...you see no difference between cities, empires, and church.

omg