BIBLIA ~ Bible
Focus on the message above, not the messenger, St Thomas Aquinas.
This message has special meaning to those who place faith in the teachings of Christ as revealed in scripture, along with apostolic traditions passed down through His divine institution, His Holy Church. The "evidence" to be considered focuses on subjects that many have expressed various opinions on, or have arrived at certain understandings resulting in many different conclusions. Some of these answers were dispensed in writing, but many include oral tradition. ((2 Thess. 2:14) Let's begin.
*Remember important Notice: Right click on each blue highlighted verse and choose "Open link in new tab" and go directly back to this page.
FACT: The Bible is the most widely read book in history with an estimated 5 Billion copies distributed worldwide. This fact alone demands our attention. No intellectually honest person can or should dismiss the content of this collections of books since so many have been drawn to it for so long for so many reasons. Nations, peoples, and cultures have been built upon and influenced by the principles contained in this amazing work, even among non-Christian countries. "Love your neighbor", "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and even "Love your enemies and pray for those who hate and persecute you", all universal truths for all nations to live by. For those who have lived by them have experienced the vast benefits Christ taught.
This is NOT going to be an A to Z exegesis from Genesis to Apocalypse, NOT a "Bible study". Rather, we'll explore some though provoking topics many have wrestled with through the ages. We'll employ a sort of "scientific method" as we explore the "evidence" and how they fit together before arriving at a conclusion. God is the source of all knowledge and order to the universe. Therefore the greatest "scientist" there is, an example to follow.
Before we dive directly into the Bible itself, let's face it, we live in a time when most people have little interest much less faith in the Bible and for good reason. For centuries, there have been controversies, conflicting understandings, and seeming contradictions cast on the Bible by critics and "believers" alike who have expressed doubt as to its veracity, based on things they can't understand within the Bible itself. This has been compounded by the fact there are now over 4,000 different versions of the Bible in circulation, not to mention that the Bible has been translated into 3,756 languages. These are almost staggering obstacles to the average investigator. What can you trust? It's no wonder there's so many misunderstandings surrounding Biblical teachings. Much of the confusion stems from the fact that many in history didn't want to stick with the original text of the oldest "Bible" in history. "We know better!" was apparently their mantra.
Let's explore some facts surrounding the Bible to determine which version is the oldest and closest to the "original" version. We'll explore a few examples of how several later translations, let's just say, read differently, and more importantly, why the translators came up with different versions?
THE CODEX SINAITICUS:
The oldest copy of scripture we know of in existence; The Codex Sinaiticus. Right click on the pictures below and choose "Open link in new tab" to keep this page open.
THE CODEX SINAITICUS
------------------------
STUDY OF:
ITS HISTORY
ITS DISCOVERY
ITS AUTHENTICITY
FACT;
The "Codex Sinaiticus" is the world’s oldest Bible text in existence from the 4th century A.D., handwritten in koinē Greek, the common "every day" Greek (Ἑλληνιστική Κοινή) language, containing the earliest complete manuscript of the New Testament housed in the British Museum.
There are books written about the Codex Sinaiticus, when and how it was found, the material used in the 3rd-4th centuries, the style the monks used, what was included, what was not included, how it lined with previous manuscripts, such as the Septuagint version of the 2nd century "B.C.", etc.
Reading the Codex Sinaiticus challenges Christians to approach the Bible not just as a fixed, inerrant text, but as a document that reflects the ongoing search for "truth" within the Christian faith. It calls believers to wrestle with questions of textual authenticity, historic context, and theological meaning. The Codex Sinaiticus has become not only a symbol of the past, but also a guide for the future--a reminder that the search for truth in the Bible is a journey that continues to unfold. Searching and finding truth has no boundaries or limits.
Consider this; the world's largest library, the Library of Congress in D.C., holds an estimated 175 million items, including books, manuscripts, etc., making it the largest library in the world, both shelf space and the number of items. No surprise which book stands out as #1 most read; "the Bible". This shouldn't be surprising since it claims to be the very work of God.
Like any book, it's important to grasp and understanding "WHY" the Bible came into existence in the first place, "WHO" is the main character of the book, and "WHAT" we should learn from it.
Let's answer these questions:
1. Why are there over 4,000 translations of the Bible in circulation today?
2. Which translation is most reliable? (John 17:3)
3. Which translation is closest to the original words of inspiration?
4. Which collection of Old Testament books (scrolls) did Jesus use during His life on earth?
KEY FACT OF HISTORY ~ KEY PIECE OF THE PUZZLE: Rome defeated Greece in 146 B.C. The western part of the world at that time was still heavily influenced by Greek culture, philosophy, and "koinē Greek" (common Greek language) for centuries after. This included religion and worship of the people then, even among the Jews. Some today refer to the Old Testament as the Hebrew scriptures because the books of Genesis thru Malachi were originally written in both ancient Hebrew and Aramaic. However, in the third century B.C., most Jews were communicating in Greek, not Hebrew. So, a group of 70+ Jewish rabbis living in Alexandria, Greece, assumed the task of translating the Old Testament from Hebrew into "koinē Greek" so that common everyday Jews could read the Torah and other books of the Old Testament. They called this new translation, "the Septuagint", which means "70+ sum".
ANOTHER KEY PIECE OF THE PUZZLE: Jesus Himself quoted from "the Septuagint". Why? Jesus stated mission was to preach first to the house of Israel, the Jews of His time to offer them the gospel, the good news of God's kingdom. (Matthew 15:24). To reach as many Jews as possible at that time, He spoke "koinē Greek", the language most Jews were most familiar, which is why He quoted the Old Testament from "the Septuagint". So, why rely on any other translation? Read on.
Some refer to the New Testament as the "Greek scriptures", but since both the Old and New Testaments ended up being translated into Greek by the time the last books of the scriptures were written at the end of the first century, there is no point making the distinction. The "Old" refers to the Old Mosaic Law covenant verses the "New" referring to the new covenant of Christ.
Fast forward to the fourth century A.D. Although the Old Testament was completed in the fourth century B.C. with the writing of Malachi the prophet, the last book, the gospels and letters of the apostles were not completed until well into the second century, sometime after the apostle John died on the Isle of Patmos in 100 A.D. His assistant Luke completed John's work, but it wasn't until the fourth century A.D. that the Old and New Testament books were finally put together as one complete collection of canon scripture, thus "Biblia", meaning "all the books".
QUESTION: Which came first, the chicken or the egg, the egg (Bible) or the chicken (who laid the egg), who compiled the books and canonized them?
HISTORY: All the apostles and most of all the early Church bishops (spiritual fathers) were martyred during the first two centuries. Those who lived went into hiding in catacombs or in caves in the mountains outside of Jerusalem after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem killing over a million non-Christian Jews still living there. The Jews who became Christian who heeded Jesus warning to leave Jerusalem before 70 A.D. escaped before Jerusalem was destroyed. They scattered and remained in hiding until Constantine became Emperor in 314 A.D., and freed the Christians from exile. None of the first two centuries historians, such as Josephus, reported of any effort to find and collect these books. Christians had no time or freedom to do so. They had no writings to study by either. All they had were oral traditions they remembered. (2 Thess. 2:14) Only after 314 A.D. were Christians free to go back to Jerusalem and openly worship.
FACT: It was "Emperor Constantine", not Church fathers nor the bishop of Rome who convened the first Church council in Nicaea in 325 A.D. Constantine wasn't even Christian yet.
Only after the Nicaea council ended did the newly elected bishop of Rome, Damasus I, convened a group of bishops together to decide to began collecting the books of the Old and New Testaments together, and to have them translated into the new language of the Roman Empire, "Latin Vulgate", the common Latin of the people, not the classical Latin of the upper class Romans. And just as the "koinē Greek" was the language of common everyday people in Jesus' time, so too was "Latin Vulgate" the new common language of the common everyday people in the Roman Empire. The "Latin Vulgate" was the dialect of most everyday people of the Roman Empire, which reached vast territories, such as modern-day Italy, Greece, Egypt, parts of France, Spain, Turkey, Yugoslavia, and all of North Africa. These areas understood and most spoke "Latin Vulgate". To reach the greatest number of people, the bishops chose to translate both the Old and New Testaments into the "Latin Vulgate" language from the Septuagint Old Testament and from the "koinē Greek" New Testament.
Pope Damasus I chose the historian, scholar, and linguist, Eusebius Hieronymus, later renamed "Jerome" to handle this monumental task to translation all the books into "Latin Vulgate".
Jerome had to travel far and wide to find the original and oldest collection of books from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, from Galilee to Capernaum, where Jesus lived and preached. One of Jerome's first stops was Jerusalem where it is believed he found a copy of the "Septuagint" collection. Jerome discovered that Jesus quoted from the "Septuagint" books, as we can see below:
FACTS:
1). The original 7 deuterocanonical books; Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, First and Second Maccabees and also the Greek additions to Esther and Daniel were all included in the "Septuagint' books used in the first century, by Jesus Himself, and He referred to them.
Here are a few references Jesus quoted from.
Matt. 2:16 – Herod’s decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in
Wisdom. 11:7 – slaying the holy innocents.
Matt. 7:16,20 – Jesus’ statement “you will know them by their fruits” follows
Sirach 27:6 – the fruit discloses the cultivation.
Matt. 9:36 – the people were “like sheep without a shepherd” is same as
Judith 11:19 – sheep without a shepherd.
Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 – Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of
Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.
John 5:18 – Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows
Wisdom 2:16.
Luke 21:24 – Jesus’ usage of “fall by the edge of the sword” follows
Sirach 28:18.
2). All these 7 deuterocanonical books were included in the original Latin Vulgate version.
3). All 46 books, including the 7 deuterocanonical books remained in use by all Christians throughout history, including the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches up to the 16th century. Even the early Protestant Reformers accepted these 7 deuterocanonical books as canon.
This being the case, why did reformers "later" remove these 7 deuterocanonical books of the canon from their translations? Why didn't they continue using the Septuagint version that Jesus used? Who gave all these "reformers" authority to create their own Bible translations since the 16th century just because they didn't want to be involved with the Catholic Church anymore since most of these same Protestants reformers were Catholic priests? If they were not happy with certain positions in the Church at the time, why not work together to come to an understanding before running off to change things on their own and start new "unauthorized" Churches. Were not both ancient Israelites as well as Christians warned "NOT" to add or take away anything from scripture? (Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelation 22:18-19) Who were these reformers and why did they ignore this command of God?
FACTS: History alone tells us that these reformers insisted making changes after the 16th century.
QUESTIONS: Why did these "reformers" feel a need to consult with Jewish leaders in the 16th century who insisted that the Masoretic text of 1008 A.D. translation of the Old Testament in Hebrew was closer to the original Old Testament translation, yet Jesus and the apostles used the "Septuagint" translation in the first century? What influences were at work with these reformers? What purpose did it serve them to remove books or change words? What's in these 7 deuterocanonical book they didn't want their Protestant followers to see? Why insist on a Jewish translation, the Masoretic?
ANSWER: [Matthew 23:31-35]
Jesus warning.
"... you (Jewish leaders) are the sons of them that killed the prophets. Serpents, generation of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of hell? Behold I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them "you will" put to death and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city: Upon you will come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar."
The persecution and harassment of the Jews took many different forms over the centuries. Jesus also warned His disciples, "They hated me, they will hate you too." (John 15:18) This hatred prompted them to not only inflict physical persecution on Christians, but they also delivered up Christians to their political paramours, kings and governmental rulers spreading lies and propaganda about the apostolic Church, trying to undermine and infiltrate the gospel itself by their efforts to change the message. How? The first thing the reformers did was to undermine the authority of the Church that continued to use Jerome's Latin Vulgate based on the Septuagint version. These reformers met with a group of Jewish rabbis in the 16th century and put forth the propaganda that the most authentic Old Testament version was the original Hebrew scripture before the Septuagint. So, the reformers decided to use the Masoretic translation of 1008 A.D., even though the Masoretic version omitted the seven deuterocanonical books including in the version Jesus used. What was in the deuterocanonical books the reformers didn't want their followers to see? (More on this as we move forward)
FACT: A significant leap forward occurred in Church history in the 16th century.
For the first time since 382 A.D., a group of Church bishops in Reims, France took on the milestone task of translating Jerome's original Latin Vulgate into English, at the English College, Douai, what was to become the "Douay–Rheims Bible" began in 1582, final version published in 1610.
QUESTION: Why English? Think about it: The Jews in the 3rd century B.C. translated the Hebrew text of the Old Testament into kione Greek, the Septuagint version, because Greece was the world empire at the time and more people, including Jews spoke Greek at the time. Then in 382 A.D., Jerome translated the entire Old and New Testaments in Latin Vulgate because Rome was the western world empire until the late 5th century, when most people spoke common "Latin".
Without going into full details of the history of what happened after the "Fall of the Roman Empire", replaced by the Byzantine Empire from 476 CE - 1453 CE, on the horizon was the growing shadow of the British Empire, even though the Holy Roman Empire had significant power in central Europe from 800 A.D. up to the 16th century with the election of first emperor, Charlemagne, since Emperor Constantine in 314 A.D., but ultimately England became the next world power. And during England's reign of power, the Americas were discovered as an extension of England, particularly the customs, culture, and thus the English language dominated the world since then until today. Did the bishops in France know this in 1582?
Could it be by "providential design" (God guiding events serving a greater purpose) to translate Jerome's Latin version into English to served a purpose beyond what the 16th century s that those scholars could not possibly have imagined in Reims France by coming up with the "Douay–Rheims Bible". It was for all intent and purpose, the quintessential new version of Jerome's Latin Vulgate in English, and by extension, in turn, the English version of the Old Testament version of the original Septuagint Bible Jesus and the apostles used. So, again, why did these "reformers" feel a need and desire to come up with over 4,000 new translations of their own? What was behind their reasoning?
This may be an example of where the expression comes from, "Devil in the details".
QUESTION:
Many reformers claim that Jesus was not divine, merely a created being of the Father, like the angels. Even though this was declared a heresy by over 300 bishops convened by Emperor Constantine in 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicaea, against Arianism, some today continue to question the divinity of Christ, denying that Jesus is both "fully divine" as well as "fully man". They point to (Colossians 1:15-18) teaching that Jesus was the "first creation".
ANSWER: This is one scripture to analyze, "exegesis".
Colossians 1:14-16
Douay-Rheims version, i.e., English version of Jerome's Latin Vulgate, by extension, the Septuagint version that Jesus and His Apostles used in the first century:
"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn "of every” creature: “For in him" were “all things” created in heaven and on earth."
Reformed (NWT) version: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn "of all creation"; “because by means of him" all “other things were created" in the heavens and on the earth."
Notice the subtle yet glaring contrast from apostolic writings to this reformed 20th century version.
Jesus is the first "begotten"; meaning He has an eternal relationship between the Father. Jesus was fully divine before His incarnation (becoming flesh), remained fully divine after becoming "fully man", and continued "fully divine and fully man", after He died, resurrected, ascended, and reunited with the Father in heaven, and remains "fully divine and fully man" eternally. Jesus, the Son, was not brought into being like created things, but is eternally the Father, sharing in the same divine essence, outside time and space. Otherwise, He, the Son could not have been able to create time and spatial existence, heavens, earth, light and all things outside of God the Father. Though this is unfathomable for humans to fully comprehend and is outside finite human understanding, doesn't mean it's no so.
This is what was taught from the beginning by the Church since Pentecost 33 A.D. by the Holy Ghost (Spirit) and remained until the Protestant "reformers" decided, on their own, to change words and apply their own meanings to scripture. This again is where the 'chicken and the egg" illustration comes into focus. The Church made sure we have the Bible, not these "reformers" who changed Bible translations. And the Church saw to it that there would be teachers, bishops, with authority to guide and teach the truth. (Matt. 16:18), verses these 20th century "reformers" with no authority, other than their own self appointed authority to explain the Bible in their terms. (2 Peter 3:16)
An artist rendering below of the "Holy Trinity", of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (Spirit) depicted by the dove, along with the triumphant Saints, including the apostles, ancient prophets and faithful bishops, the Holy angels, and the Blessed Virgin Mary, is just that. No human has a clue what they looks like in their divine nature. Paintings, icons, statues, and crucifixes are simply man-made creations and representations to remind each other of such things. They are not meant to worship, venerate, or bow before them. Even the nation of ancient Israel used iconography and images in their temple and synagogues as renders as well; cherubs on the ark of the covenant , the menorah, the seven-branched candelabra, a symbol representing Israel being "a light unto the nations", the table of showbread, the altar of incense, and the altar for burnt offerings. These items held deep symbolic and religious significance, representing God's presence, provision, and covenant with the Israelites. If the Protestant reformers and others are offended by these things, it's because they don't understand the deep spiritual significance and the meanings thereof. RAead this entire page for more details.
Holy Communion: The Eucharist, from the Greek word "eucharistia," which means "thanksgiving", is the central sacrament (from the Greek the word "mysterio" (μυστήριο), a spiritual ceremony, such as marriage, baptism, and receiving the bread and wine of Christ. (Luke 22:19)
Some claim that "communion" or the "eucharist" is only bread and wine to "symbolize" His body. let's explore this sacred ceremony and what the earliest translation of scriptures on this central event.
"καὶ λαβὼν ἄρτον εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς λέγων · Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ σῶμά μου τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν διδόμενον · τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν." Greek transliteration.
Transliteration from original Greek: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed [it], and brake [it], and gave [it] to the disciples, and said, “TAKE, EAT; THIS IS MY BODY."
"ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἐν ἐμοὶ μένει κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. καθὼς ἀπέστειλέν με ὁ ζῶν πατὴρ κἀγὼ ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα, καὶ ὁ τρώγων με κἀκεῖνος ζήσει δι' ἐμέ. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς, οὐ καθὼς ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἀπέθανον· ὁ τρώγων τοῦτον τὸν ἄρτον ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. Ταῦτα εἶπεν ἐν συναγωγῇ διδάσκων ἐν Καφαρναούμ."
Transliteration from original Greek: "For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eats me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eats this bread, shall live for ever."
Was Jesus advocating cannibalism? Obviously not. That's ridiculous. So, what did He mean?
Jesus commanded His followers to "eat" His body and "drink" His blood; not literally, by why partaking of His "divine nature" in the eucharist communion, just as the Israelites who wondered in the wilderness for 40 years were commanded to ate "manna" if they wanted to survive without anything else to eat. (Exodus 16:35 ~ Numbers 11:9) Many will claim this is conflating two things. So what other explanation is there without personal interpretation for those who reject what Jesus said?
Likewise, Jesus is received into each Christian like "Manna" from heaven, each time they receive the "host" or "eucharist" into their body in the form of unleavened bread (wafers). In this way, the very body of Christ transforms in our body as we eat the bread, thus the (transubstantiation), constituting the ver presencer of Christ. Even some followers of Jesus, when He said these things, turned away in disbelief. (John 6:67) Jesus turned to His own apostles and asked if they too would turn from Him by saying this. That's when Peter said, "but Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. thou art the Christ, the Son of God. Many Christians today find this too difficult to accept, so they too reject the Church's position on this, turn away and say this is all just "symbolic". The Protestants and reformers reject Christ's presence in the bread, the eucharist communion since the 16th century.
THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST:
John 1:1... "in the beginning was the "word", "logos". (John 1:1,14)
Original Greek: “Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.”
Exact transliteration according to Jerome's Latin into English (Douay Rheims).
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Some 20th century "reformers" version reads John 1:1.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a God."
Notice in Greek above it reads = θεός (theos-God), NOT, ὁ θεός (ho theós - a God).
Subtle, but notice how one article added "a" completely changes the entire meaning. That translation came in
Here's how some explain their translation adding the article "ὁ ~ ho" before theós - a God.
"The phrase “the Word was god” describes the divine or godlike nature that Jesus possessed before he came to earth. He can be described in this way because of his role as God’s Spokesman and his unique position as the firstborn Son of God through whom God created all other things."
An early Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god” in the final part of John 1:1. 'Evidently', those ancient translators realized that John’s words did not mean that Jesus was to be identified as Almighty God. The Word was (ho theós - a God), not Almighty God. (See) Hence John 1:1 'must mean', at most, that the Word was of God." (See)
So, they go from was God, to was a God to was of God. Which is it?
The answer is to use the original Latin Vulgate translated directly from kione Greek. "God".
These changes were designed to refute the central doctrine of the "trinity". Their claim is that the word "trinity" doesn't appears in the Bible. Does the absence of words indicate these concepts and doctrines of the early Church didn't exist long before there was a completed written Bible? Words like "incarnate", "immaculate-conception", and "Armageddon" also do not appear in the original text of kione Greek either.
What's interesting is that ALL the major religions and cultures in history spoke about and believed in and worshipped within the framework of a "Trinity" or "trinities of gods, going back thousands of years, such as ancient China, India, Greece, and, of course, Rome. In Greek mythology, Zeus stands out as King of all their Gods , who had equal powerful Gods in the form of his brothers, Poseidon and Hades. They were assigned rulership over different domains after the overthrow of Cronus, Zeus overseeing the heavens, Poseidon the sea, and Hades the underworld. These other religions believed that God(s) themselves or "sons of Gods" came down to earth as human, impregnated women and gave birth to mighty sons, such as the "Nephilim" (giants) mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. What is myth and what's reality? Or, was the Epic of Gilgamesh to act as a precursor to understanding the divine nature of God, beyond human comprehension? Do we truly understand how God can be three separate persons yet have one divine nature? In short, NO, we can't. We delude ourselves into thinking we fully understand God and His nature, certainly not the "trinity". So, when we mere humans don't understand, it doesn't exist?
Do we truly understand what divine nature is outside time and space in an infinite universe?
For millennia mankind believed the atom was one simple tiny basic structure. Now we've come to know there are "three" (trinity) parts of the basic structure, electrons, protons, neutrons. Hmmm.
The Catholic Church did not invent the concept or the word "trinity", nor did the Israelites even contemplate such a concept, believing in the "oneness of God. The early Church never questioned Jesus is one with His Father, Almighty God, the only begotten Son, first "born" of all creation. There too many references to the plurality of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (Spirit) as divine beings outside of time and space to deny it, unless one just doesn't want to.
From Genesis to Malachi in the Old Testament, every writer of "the Bible" pointed to the coming of the Messiah. If you click on this highlighted link you'll see all the Biblical prophesies to the Messiah. (365 PROPHESIES) While some of these prophesies have been called into question, there's certainly enough indicators what to look for to identify the "Messiah", the "Christ". Who is this "word", "logos"? Hold that thought.
When Jesus was questioned by the high priest Caiaphas while on trial in the Sanhedrin, he asked Jesus to His face, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of God?" Jesus paused and then answered, as He also did in His prehuman divine state to Moses on Mount Sinai, "I AM". Then Caiaphas, in some pompous empty gesture, ripped his outer garment as a symbol to his under priests rejecting Jesus and calling Him a blasphemer. The priests then cried out before everyone there to have Jesus executed. They knew they couldn't do it under Caesar's laws, so they turned Jesus over to Pontius Pilate and the Jewish leaders demanded that Jesus be crucified for implying He was a seditious king of Israel. Earlier Jesus also identified Himself as "I AM" to a group of Israelites working at the temple in Jerusalem one day, saying, "Before Abraham, "I AM". (John 8:58) Also, for saying that, they also called Him a blasphemer and wanted to stone Jesus to death. Many still reject Jesus as the "I AM" who addressed Moses on Sinai, refusing to accept Jesus as God the Son, second person of the divine trinity.
As Peter pointed out, "some things may be hard to understand, which the 'unlearned' and 'unstable' wrest (distort)..." (2 Peter 3:16), and so they reject what His Church has taught for nearly 2000 yrs.
Just as Jesus had enemies, His Church has had enemies throughout history. That said, the Church too had to deal with many heretics as well as unfaithful "bad" Church bishops and priests through the ages. Some became enemies of Christ and the Church. Some of these enemies for centuries tried to hide, block and distort "the truth." But again, Jesus promised He would not allow "the gates of hell to prevail against His Church.~ (Matt.16:17-19)
How do we know these things are true? "This is your life, taking in knowledge of God." (John 17:3)
To gain this knowledge, need the guidance and direction from His Church. The big question remains; what is His Church? How can we identify His Church?
The next page on "the Church" will be forthcoming soon.