# data[].attributes.headline
Documentary of Prophecies, Thoughts and Teachings from around the world. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Documentary of Prophecies, Thoughts and Teachings from around the world. 

# data[].attributes.body
"If they are not against us, they are for us," stated Yeshua/Jesus about others proclaiming truth and doing miracles. There are many prophets, seers around the world who are saying the same things as Revelation, Esdras, Enoch. The books KJV took out of every Christian bible. The Catholics kept these books in their Bibles. In mainstream religion, these books are known as the "apocrypha" or unaccepted by the modern "experts," from among Jewish and Christian scholars. What is interesting is the prophesies that were taken out, line up with similar warnings from almost every culture around the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Hopi, Enoch, Esdras, Revelation, Yeshua/Jesus, Massawa (Peacemaker of Native Americans), Tibetans,
and many other cultures - all share the same prophecies.
Jump start your thinking with the science behind Matthew 24 (earth shaking, quakes in divers places)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Countdown to Apocalypse: Hopi Blue Star Warns of Mass Extinction (S1, E4) | Full Episode

# data[].attributes.body
"Come out," means . . ?

# data[].attributes.body
This is the Way: love our Father Yah, love His creation.

# data[].attributes.body
Obadiyah 1:1-18
Salvation is not a "get out of consequence" card.

# data[].attributes.body
For 2nd Adam Slideshow

# data[].attributes.body
Not Yet (New Covenant) & End Times

# data[].attributes.body
2nd Adam, Son of Man
slides #13-16

# data[].attributes.body
This is a 32 part Podcast series. These tell the truth of how the Message Yeshua (aka: Jesus) taught, preached was perverted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Testimonial

Hello brother Kingdom Prepper,

I just wanted to send a brief message of thanks to you for this blessed and amazing series. I have listened to and read several episodes and watched the excerpts on Youtube and they have been very enjoyable and very informative.

I am just now coming into the true knowledge of our identity and this series is very helpful and I think it can be helpful not only for Hebrews but Gentiles too (at least get them asking questions).

I truly appreciate the more indepth study of Churchianity and that whole breakdown that is truly needed to help us realize and understand its true history and the strong, deadly grip that it has on us as Hebrews. That's why I rejected this truth so long. But the Most High gently and faithfully kept leading me until I humbly submitted to Him.

As I began to learn some things, I never could put the pieces together when I heard that our ancestors ran into Jerusalem to escape Roman persecution. We were taught that it was white Christians who were persecuted and who had endured the Spanish Inquisition. Anyway, please know that your ministry is a blessing. I can't remember how I found it but I am thankful and grateful to Abba Yah that I have. I had been praying for increased wisdom and knowledge on all of this, and for understanding and discernment in weeding through all of the information out there and the "teachers/morehs."

It has been a blessing to me, and as I share with others, I pray that they are blessed as well. May the Father continue to keep you and richly bless you and this ministry, and may He do so abundantly. Thank you.

-Rochelle H.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
All Churchianity Podcasts - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hello brother Kingdom Prepper, I just wanted to send a brief message of thanks to you for this blessed and amazing series. I have listened to and read several episodes and watched the excerpts on Youtube and they have been very enjoyable and very informative.

# data[].attributes.body
Read, take notes.

# data[].attributes.body
As more Gentiles joined, the true message (gospel) became blurred.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With the rejection of Yeshua by the Judahites on a whole, and the subsequent suppression of the efforts of the emissaries-that being the Messianic movement-Jerusalem's fate was sealed. Many Messianic Judahites had heeded Yeshua's warning when he foretold of the destruction of Jerusalem. Companies of Judahites fled the city well beforehand, but a great many-political rebels for the most part-stayed to resist the Romans and attempt to free Jerusalem from their grip, just as the Maccabees had done against the Seleucid Empire.

Rome dispatched an able general to end the Judahite revolt in Jerusalem. In 67 CE, Vespasian marched into Palestine and effectively put down pockets of resistance throughout Galilee. But in 70 CE, Vespasian was made emperor, thus he returned to Rome to rule. This left his son, Titus, in charge of the ongoing war against the Judahites. In February of 70 CE, Titus began the siege of Jerusalem. The Judahites managed to resist him till May, when he finally broke through the new northern wall. A week later, the Second Wall around the markets was breached, and fighting broke out around the temple itself. Three of the Good News books record the same event, but Luke in particular states that, just prior to Yeshua's death:

[44] It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour, [45] while the sun's light failed. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two.

-Luke 23:44 - 45

The curtain of the temple was torn, from top to bottom, allowing all to see inside the apartments. This was done in fulfillment of a prophecy recorded in the book of Daniel:

[27] And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. . . .

-Daniel 9:27

The curtain of the temple being torn should have brought a decisive end to the custom of sacrifices on earth, as Yeshua, the great sacrifice, had become the substance of that shadow representation. Despite this, however, sacrifices continued to take place in the temple after his death, resurrection, and ascension, and the last such sacrifice was offered on August 6, 70 CE of the Roman Calendar. Even with the systematic bombardment of the temple courts by Titus and his Roman army, the Judahite rebels, comprised of the radical Zealots, still put up a fierce resistance. They somehow believed that Yah was still on their side. One false prophet even predicated that the Most High would intervene at the last hour to save the temple and its valiant defenders. But Yeshua's prophecy would not fail. By August 28, the Romans broke through to the temple's inner courts, where they were met by six thousand Judahite Zealots prepared to die for their cause. Even the priests-the only ones still allowed inside the temple-put up a resistance.

Once raging fires began to consume the temple itself, the fight went out of the Judahites, and those who survived either fled in horror or watched helplessly as their last hopes went literally up in smoke. Following the destruction of their beloved city, persecution and new restrictions on the Judahites forced thousands to leave the now desolate region, many migrating to Egypt, West Africa, and Arabia. Others were carried by General Titus into exile to other lands.

The picture could not look any different for the rest of the inhabitants of the Greco-Roman world at that time and the periods that immediately followed. The Roman Empire successfully maintained an unrivaled political unity in the Mediterranean basin. As long as its citizens adhered to established Roman law and lived happily within the Hellenistic culture that prevailed, all would be fine. It was within this framework that the new Christian movement was allowed to grow and even thrive. Christians were afforded freedom of travel along well-paved roads that were policed by Roman soldiers. But water was the basis for the main mode of transportation, making trade possible. So, by road and sea, therefore, the message of Christianity was able to spread to various parts of the known world through the efforts of, not only Christian missionaries, but also by Christian merchants and traders, and even slaves, who were, at times, the cargo.

When the number of Gentiles joining the Christian movement increased, it became necessary on the part of the leadership to provide a method of training and initiation to ease them into the belief system and ready them for official baptism. This gave birth to what is called, the catechumenate, which involves a person receiving instruction in preparation for baptism or confirmation. It stems from a Greek word that means, "being instructed," hence the modern Catholic term, "catechism."

Catechumenates were conducted in two parts. The first part is called, "the service of the word," where large portions of scripture were read and explained to the new Gentile convert. If the convert was not a baptized member of the church, he or she would be dismissed following this portion of the catechumenate. If he or she was a baptized member, the service would move to part two: "service of the table," or, communion, a corrupted representation of the Passover meal observed by Yeshua and his disciples. This practice of catechumenates was an early staple of the Christian movement and was maintained for the first three centuries of the early church system.

The Romans were initially tolerant of the Christian movement, but persecution and martyrdom of Christians came with the arrival of Nero, and did not abate until the conversion of Constantine. It was Roman custom to have all citizens of Rome worship the sitting Roman Emperor. This custom involved burning a pinch of incense at a Roman altar, offering incense or wine to a statue of the emperor, or simply swearing by the emperor himself. Christians were seen as obstinate by refusing to perform such acts of loyalty by virtue of their religious convictions. Rome first viewed Christianity as a sect within Judahite culture, which it was, initially. But Christians eventually made pains to disassociate themselves entirely from their Hebraic roots and were eventually considered as followers of a distinct religion in the eyes of Rome.

The problem with this distinction is that the Romans had come to accept the Judahites and their bizarre adherence to Torah-coupled with their belief in the one true Creator-as something that did not arise out of a spirit of national rebellion. Forcing them to go against their strong spiritual convictions would result in true rebellion, therefore Judahites were exempt from having to perform rites that demonstrated their allegiance to the emperor. When Christians were seen as a sect within the Judahite culture, the same tolerance was extended to them. But by choosing to disassociate from the Judahites, Rome saw Christians, who were a growing collection of disparate Gentiles from across the realm, as a new religion within the milieu of mystery religions that already existed in the empire. This meant that Christians, like other regular subjects, had to demonstrate their loyalty to the emperor through open worship of him. Note that, despite this early reluctance on the part of Christians to venerate the emperor by these acts, elements of this kind of worship would later worm their way into Christendom through the veneration of supposed saints.

The Christian refusal to openly worship the emperor was part and parcel of the persecution that was unleashed on them during the first two centuries of their new movement. Other factors contributed to the cause of the prolonged persecution as well. Choosing to worship a man who had been condemned by a Roman governor on the charge of being a messianic king was one major demerit; their failure to express political loyalty to Rome on the grounds of their faith, was another.

At this time, governors throughout Rome's territories were the only ones allowed to pronounce the sentence of death on offenders, so the occasional martyrdom was largely restricted to great provincial cities. Christians responded to the early persecution in two ways: by writing what are called apologetics and accounts of martyrdom. The apologies are derived from a Greek word meaning, "defense," while the word martyr derives from another Greek word meaning, a "witness." So the body of writings produced and dispatched were either in defense of their beliefs, or else they recounted the murder of their fellow Christians who died in testimony of their faith. Both pieces of writing were meant to state the Christian case in their plea for tolerance on the part of Roman officials.

From the apologetics we can see the shape that Christian thought and doctrine took in the second century. An early apology titled the Epistle to Diognetus, written by an anonymous author, attempts to argue for the divine origin of Christianity, which it states is superior to the Judahite culture and its ritual worship. Christianity had, at this point, nearly shaken off adherence to the Torah in full. A clearer picture of Christian thought in this era is painted by one of the most well known and influential of all the second century Christian apologists, Justin Martyr. He taught Christian doctrine at a private school in Rome, and was executed in 167 CE when charges were brought against him.

Justin Martyr is one apologist who recognized the importance of the Hebrew Scriptures, but at the same time, he presumptuously expressed the fulfillment of their prophecies in Christianity. He redirected the promises made to a literal people descended from the patriarch Jacob to Christians of his day. His view, which shaped the view of other Christians, was that the Torah comprised a set of laws that was forced on the people of Israel as a punishment, and those laws were only in place until the advent of the Messiah, who, he believed, removed their obligation for all Christians through his perfect life, death, and resurrection. He maintained that Sabbath-keeping and physical circumcision should cease. And Christians, he also argued, were now the true people of Yah. With this we see that, as early as the second century, the foundation for replacement theology was being laid.

Now, Christian persecution, which gave rise to the prolific writing of apologetics and martyrdom, began under the emperor Nero, who came to power in October of 54 CE-with the help of his mother. Early on, he was seen as a reasonable ruler, one who regarded the poor and landless citizens of Rome via favorable laws. But Nero soon succumbed to an insatiable lust for both pleasure and grandeur, which compelled him to fill his courts with people who catered to his wishes. Within a decade, Nero was largely despised by his population, who eventually considered him to be insane.

On the night of June 18, 64 CE, a massive fire blazed through Rome, with Nero mere miles away, holed up in his palace at Antium. We are told that when he heard of the fire, he immediately rushed to Rome to lead the fight against it. His palace gardens and certain public buildings were opened to the homeless and displaced as a means of shelter.

Despite these noble efforts on the part of Nero, there were those who immediately suspected him of ordering the city to be burned. To this day, it is believed that he did this so he could rebuild vast sections of Rome in his honor. The fire, which lasted six days and seven nights, destroyed ten of Rome's fourteen sections, and affected citizens cried out for justice amid the chaos that ensued. Nero attempted to deflect all suspicions against him and rise above the rumors, but his efforts failed. And when all fingers pointed at him, he sought someone else to blame.

There were two known areas that had not burned in the fire, where many non-Messianic and Messianic Judahites and Gentiles resided. The emperor lay blame squarely on the Messianic Judahites and Gentiles, who, by that time, were already known by the Greek term, Christians.

We'll be back with more exciting scriptural history . . . in a moment.
[MUSICAL INTERLUDE]
We now continue with our podcast.

The Roman historian, Tacitus, wrote in his Annals that:

"In spite of every human effort, of the emperor's largesse, and of the sacrifices made to the [deities], nothing sufficed to allay suspicion nor to destroy the opinion that the fire had been ordered. Therefore, in order to destroy this rumor, Nero blamed the Christians, who are hated for their abominations, and punished them with refined cruelty. . . . Thus, first those who confessed [that they were indeed Christians] were arrested, and on the basis of their testimony a great number were condemned, although not so much for the fire itself as for their hatred for humankind."

Tacitus's charge that Christians were "hated for their abominations" speaks to the spiritual stance Messianic believers took in those days, before the doctrinal leaven truly set in. To everyday pagan Romans, social activities were the norm, and these included: the theater, classic literature, sporting events, and even involvement in the Roman army, since Roman soldiers were required to offer sacrifices both to the emperor and to the false deities.

Pagan worship went hand-in-hand with these interests, but first-century Messianic believers insisted on abstaining from such secular and heathen fair for the sake of their strong spiritual convictions. To a pagan like Tacitus, who treasured his Hellenistic culture and Roman society, this was an abomination. As to Tacitus's charge of the Christian hatred of humankind, in his book, Medieval Christianity, Kevin Madigan writes:

"Christians were mistrusted for supposedly meeting secretly, and for being anti-social and taciturn. This caused the Romans to charge them with misanthropy, or hatred of the human race."

Again, quoting from his Annals, Tacitus goes on to say:

"Before killing the Christians, Nero used them to amuse the people. Some were dressed in furs, to be killed by dogs. Others were crucified. Still others were set on fire early in the night, so that they might illumine it. Nero opened his own gardens for these shows, and in the circus he himself became a spectacle, for he mingled with the people dressed as a charioteer, or he rode around in his chariot. All of this aroused the mercy of the people, even against these culprits who deserved an exemplary punishment, for it was clear that they were not being destroyed for the common good, but rather to satisfy the cruelty of one person."

Even a Christian-hating pagan like Tacitus points out that Nero's persecution was unjust. At that time, persecution of Christians seems to have been restricted to Rome, and it stemmed from the accusation of arson. But eventually, Christians were persecuted in Rome simply for their belief, and the abomination of being anti-pagan. Ironically, they were even called atheists by pagans because they worshipped an unseen Creator, rather than the pantheon of stone deities the Romans sacrificed to. Nero's reign ended about four years later, in 68 CE, when he was deposed by a successful rebellion against him that was supported by the Roman senate. After his murder, the persecution of Christians ceased for a time, as the next official emperors, Vespasian and his successor Titus, would have their hands full with a war against Judahites and the destruction of their beloved city and temple.

The idea of the martyr, while a Judahite concept throughout the Messianic Writings, took on quite a new meaning when Christians employed the word during the persecution of the second century. The word, as we pointed out, originates from Greek and means "witness." The emissaries demonstrated various uses of the word in their writings, mostly in the form martureó-word G3140, to bear witness, and marturia -word G3141, to testify. For instance, when Luke uses the term, he refers to one who has borne "witness" to Yeshua's resurrection. John uses the word to denote someone who bears "witness" to Yeshua being the Son of Elohim. By the time we get to the book of Revelation, John uses the word to refer to the blood-witness of those who gave their lives for their testimony.

Second-century Christians adapted the sense of the word martyr and made it specific to those who gave their lives in persecution. Those who bore witness of their faith through confession alone (which qualified one as a martyr according to the word's use by the emissaries) and did not give their lives, were merely "confessors." In this way, martyrdom, being narrowed in scope, became, in the eyes of Christians, a privileged state conferred on one by the Creator alone, so one could not force themselves into martyrdom. Those who were selected for this cherished experience were viewed as heroes of the faith, because their deaths represented a defeat of the devil himself, much in the way the Messiah's death did. The Christian martyr, it was thought, shared in the very sufferings of the Messiah. Martyrs were also thought to be perfect Christians in their suffering and death, and many believed-despite what Scripture says-that they entered heaven and stood in the presence of Yeshua the moment the breath left their bodies.

To some, this might sound like the act of a radical Muslim engaged in a modern-day jihad, where one sacrifices himself (or takes his own life) for his religious cause, thinking that the privilege of a special place in paradise will be enjoyed immediately upon death. That is the Muslim shaheed, the equivalent of the Christian martyrdom. Essentially, the same spirit is behind both lines of ideology. I say this not to disparage the death of true martyrs, but the genuine article has since been abused and cheapened. Interestingly, the Christian martyr was also thought to share in the role of judge, alongside the Messiah, and was thus equally able to forgive the sins of his fellow mortal Christians from heaven. This was the foundation for the false, pagan custom of praying to so-called saints for intercession.

Accounts of Christian persecution and martyrdom in the first century, beginning with Nero, are scarce, but many records are left to us regarding that of the second century. We get a clear picture of the Christian attitude toward martyrdom, as well as the attitude of the Roman authorities toward the new Christian movement. There is an important exchange between a Roman governor and the sitting emperor, Trajan, that gives shape to the policy that set the terms for Christian martyrdom. In the year 111 CE, a man named Pliny the Younger was made governor of Bithynia, a region in northwest Asia Minor, in what is modern-day Turkey.

Pliny appears to have been a just ruler who honored Roman law and upheld Roman traditions. But something began to disturb him. Bithynia was littered with converts to a new religion called Christianity. There were so many people flocking to this new religion in fact that the pagan temples were largely deserted, and the market for animal sacrifices to the deities had dried up. A list of those suspected of being Christians in the region soon reached Pliny, and he began to inquire into the matter, because the new religion was illegal.

Pliny had those accused of being Christians brought before him, and through this he learned both what they believed and practiced. Out of fear, some denied being Christians, while others confessed that they once were but had since abandoned the faith. These souls were simply required to offer a prayer to the deities, burn a pinch of incense before the emperor's image, and curse the Messiah. True Christians, Pliny knew, would never submit to any of these requirements, so those who performed the customs were released with all charges dropped.

For the ones who stubbornly refused to deny their faith, Pliny offered them three chances to recant upon threat of death. When they still refused, they were executed. Pliny, who strove to be a just Roman ruler, as stated, wanted to know if Christians were worthy of death based on their obstinacy alone, or if they were truly guilty of greater crimes. He tortured two female Christian ministers to arrive at an answer, but they merely confirmed all that he already knew about Christians. Still torn, Pliny wanted to know exactly how to proceed in punishing Christians according to defined Roman law, thus, he wrote the emperor.

Trajan wrote back saying that there was currently no general rule regarding the punishment of Christians. They committed no crimes against the state, so the state should not waste time or resources seeking them out. But if they are accused locally and refuse to abandon their beliefs and practices, they should be punished. Those who did recant and openly worshipped the deities would immediately be pardoned. However, proceedings could not develop from the accusations of anonymous persons. Trajan's policy was in place throughout the realm long after his reign. While the authorities agreed that Christians did in fact commit no crimes against the state, the Christian refusal to worship the emperor indicated their rejection of his right to rule, and if the courts did nothing, they would be viewed as powerless in the eyes of the public.

This policy was in place when Polycarp, the beloved bishop of the assembly in Smyrna, was martyred. Polycarp was highly respected in the eyes of his Christian followers, and was seen as one of many successors to the emissaries. Of course, neither he nor his advisor, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, were officially appointed by the emissaries themselves, despite the legends that surrounded the two leaders. Also, Peter, James, John, and the rest of the twelve were never known as bishops. This title was conferred upon them by subsequent Gentile leaders of the Christian movement. The original emissaries, had they lived, would not have recognized what became of the assemblies they established, which were now churches, nor of the Messianic movement they headed, which was now something called Christianity.

By the time of Polycarp's death, even martyrdom had taken on new meaning. But that is the case with Christianity, as well as many religions: they tend to change to suit the times. The martyrdoms witnessed by various crowds helped to elicit sympathy and compassion for persecuted Christians, and in effect, their various murders became somewhat a draw, bringing publicity to the Christian cause, and inspiring many others to join. Often, crowds of thousands sat in the amphitheaters, gazing in awe at the Christians who faced torture and finally death with an incredible degree of courage that was fueled by pure conviction of faith.

Now, while persecutions were ongoing throughout the first two centuries of Christianity's existence, Christians were never killed on a broad scale in this period, as is often portrayed in various media. Persecutions and martyrdoms did widen in scope and scale in the third century and beyond, but not to the exaggerated levels often related in print and film.

Dr. Ryan M. Reeves, an assistant professor of historical theology at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, has this to say about the Roman persecution of Christians in the first two centuries:

"Persecution of Christians is often misunderstood. There are popular misconceptions about how Christians were persecuted, and about the ways in which the Roman world, and the Roman government, treated Christians as a whole. Often, particularly in textbooks, or in popular books on the subject, the first centuries of the church are treated as if the Christians were subject to ethnic cleansing; or to something as heinous as the Nazi treatment of the Jews in World War II.

"In fact, with some diffidence, we want to stress that that is not the case. But we have to understand that, in general, overall, given the breadth and the depth of the Roman government, and the amount of land that it covers, and looking at the church as a whole for several centuries, by and large, as we'll see, persecutions were sporadic, and they were local. In fact, at times, only a handful would be persecuted, not thousands, and thousands of Christians. We don't see Rome attempting to wipe Christians from the face of the earth, at least not in these centuries. When we get to the third-century crisis, and up into Diocletian in the early fourth century, we do see something close to that. It gets significantly worse by that period of time. But from the earliest days, up until the early 200s, Christianity is sporadically persecuted, and it is, by and large ignored, though it is, on the books, oppressed and illegal."

That wraps it up for this episode of Churchianity: Two Thousand Years of Leaven. A production of Kingdom Preppers.org, this episode was written, produced, and hosted by yours truly, Kingdom Prepper. All praise, honor, and glory are due to my boss, Yah Elohim, and to his right hand, Yahushua HaMashiach. You can access the transcript for this episode on our website. Yah willing, our history will continue in the next podcast. Shalom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Persecution and Martyrdom - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Emperor Nero rises to power, and, needing someone to blame for the suffering caused by his excesses, persecution of Christians begins under his reign. This leads to Christian apologetics and martyrdom, as well as a new policy dictating how and when Christians should be punished for their obstinacy.

# data[].attributes.body
Rise of "ek klesia" (called out of assembly)

# data[].attributes.body
The lies begin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Between the years 70 and 312 CE, Christianity spread throughout much of the Roman Empire and a bit beyond. This rapid expansion of the movement was already called by another name: catholic, from the Greek word that meant universal, in the sense that the religion was to reach all. It grew despite Roman persecution and pagan opposition, and the movement was steered by bishops who, holding to the same beliefs and orthodoxy, presided over churches far and wide. It was to them that the Christian masses turned for counsel and guidance; and it was they who formed the episcopal church government that is the ancient basis for the modern worldwide church system.

Ignatius, the respected second-century bishop of Antioch, coined the term "catholic church," referring to the perceived universality of all the local churches in the realm, and beyond, whose unity the leadership fought to maintain. Many of Ignatius's letters addressed a problem that plagued Christianity from its inception: that of variant interpretations of the faith from outsiders. He sought to sure up the core structure of the church as an institution; to give it a unified spiritual identity. And that has been the effort of its leaders ever since; an effort that has failed, given the many denominational strands that have stemmed from the main Papal branch and its various offshoots.

By the end of the second century, Ignatius's designation for the church, catholic, was in wide use, as many embraced his view of spiritual and doctrinal unity. What began as scattered Israelite assemblies in the time of the emissaries, morphed into a Hellenized alternative that appealed to Gentiles far and wide. And, by the third century, Christianity was the favored, and later, the official religion of the Roman Empire. When Constantine became the first Christian emperor, churches could be found in every major town in his realm, and they even stretched as far as Britain, Persia, and Carthage-the great Phoenician commercial empire of the North African coast.

The spread of Christianity was occasioned partly because it appealed to interested Gentiles who responded favorably to the preaching of the Christian message, which seemed to be the antithesis of what was coming out of the stringent, Torah-centered synagogues. The regions to which Christianity expanded also highlight something interesting. During its first three centuries of existence, the Christian religion reached lands inhabited by simple, humble people, among them: slaves, women, traders, and soldiers. People from these walks of life made up the majority of the population.

The hatred many cultured pagans directed against Christians stemmed from prejudice. Those among the cultured and sophisticated saw lower class Christians as barbarians, who were wrapped up in the teachings of primitive Israelites, whose wisdom and knowledge paled in comparison to that of the Greeks and Romans. One outspoken critic of Christianity, a philosopher named Celsus, attempted to deliver a major blow to the religion by stating:

"Far from us, say the Christians, be any man possessed of any culture or wisdom or judgment; their aim is to convince only worthless and contemptible people, idiots, slaves, poor women, and children . . . . These are the only ones whom they manage to turn into believers."

In its early stages, one could say that Celsus had a point. But toward the close of the second century, Christianity's power and appeal would attract some who were thought to be among the keenest intellects of the era. Critics like Celsus gave rise to the apologists, who we touched on in our last podcast. They were the defenders of the Christian faith, warding off pagan attacks, rumors, and railings like those delivered by Celsus, through intellectual, Scripture-centered retorts that were aimed at the educated masses. The apologetics were written to address the flaws in pagan reasoning while correcting the perceived misconceptions surrounding the Christian movement. And it was hoped that these carefully written arguments would lead many to convert to the religion.

Justin Martyr's most well-known disciple, Tatian, wrote an apology titled, Address to the Greeks, in which he goes on the offensive. While the Greeks considered non-Greek speaking souls to be "barbarians," Tatian argued that even the elite Greeks could not agree on what their cultured language should sound like, since there was a different dialect of Greek spoken in each region. And what the Greeks praised, he also argued, they borrowed from other civilizations: stargazing from the Babylonians, geometry from the Egyptians, and writing from the Phoenicians. Even their philosophy he said, and their spiritual culture, was preceded by the writings of the Israelite, Moses, who wrote well before that of Plato or Homer. Thus, the similarities between Greek and Hebrew culture were a result of Greeks learning wisdom from so-called "barbarians"; Hebrew wisdom, he pointed out, that they both misunderstood and twisted.

With so many converts joining the Christian movement, drawn from such a wide variety of backgrounds at that, changes were bound to come. On the one hand, the variety spoke to the "catholic," or universal appeal of the religion, which attracted many, but on the other hand, this vast mix of personalities and classes of people brought with it equally diversified views on the Christian message, as well as widely differing interpretations of Scripture. This resulted in two outcomes that still plague Christianity and even Hebraic movements to this day: schisms and heresies.

A schism is a division among members of a group caused by a disagreement over something, and this can result from differing views on discipline, practice, and even a disdain for the personality, character, or attitude of the leadership or fellow members. In short, schisms can occur due to any number of things within a group, which causes the group to split into two or more factions to satisfy the differing views that led to the schism. This occurred repeatedly in the Christian movement in the second and third centuries, where our current historical narrative resides.

A heresy, on the other hand, is quite another matter, being that it is the problem of what is perceived as false doctrine, or the belief in something that dissents or deviates from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice based on Scripture. Heretics were often those who, on a quest for truth, did not lean on a single system of doctrine, but took parts of various existing systems to form their amalgamated teaching. This caused many heretics to hold opinions of Scripture that drifted far from the core messages taught by the church; core messages that became orthodoxy, or traditionally held beliefs and customs that were accepted as true or correct by the majority.

In some sense, church orthodoxy was developed in response to the threat of heresy, wherein the church defined itself by formulating its beliefs, which had its roots in the Hebrew culture. It is from that culture that Christianity learned the doctrines of creation, the rule of Yah over that creation, the resurrection of the body-which the Pharisees and Yeshua could agree on-and the coming Kingdom of Yah. In packaging these and other beliefs to form its orthodoxy, the church developed a means of sustaining them, in the form of creeds, a cannon of Scripture, and what is called apostolic succession, which relates to the ordination of various bishops they believe literally inherit the spiritual authority from the twelve emissaries who walked with Yeshua. And this unsubstantiated succession has been perpetuated since the second century.

Interestingly, apostolic succession was first claimed by Gnostics, with whom the church came into conflict. In his book, Medieval Christianity, Kevin Madigan writes:

"Among the greatest challengers to the triumph of orthodoxy were the numerous sects historians today classify, cautiously and often reluctantly, under the general rubric of 'Gnosticism.' The word 'Gnosticism' is an umbrella term. It is meant to describe a wide variety of religious and philosophical movements and groups in the ancient Mediterranean world. One early church father in Rome wrote a refutation of no fewer than thirty-three groups he considered Gnostic.

". . . The term 'Gnosticism' derives from the Greek word for knowledge (gnosis). Gnosticism in most of its forms was preoccupied with knowledge regarding the genesis of the world, the origin of evil, the destiny of the elect, and the knowledge or teaching needed to liberate one from the material domain, which it regarded as evil. The knowledge it imparted was to a small group of elect; the recipients of this revealed knowledge were a minority of humanity chosen to receive it and destined to return to their heavenly home once liberated from ignorance of their lofty destiny."

This might all sound far-fetched to the modern listener, but Gnostics truly believed what they touted, and the supposed "revealed knowledge" about the spiritual world held by their leaders, posed a serious threat to the church, since its own bishops, the alleged enlightened apostolic successors, were thought to be the custodians of knowledge from Yah. These lofty delusions often led to heated encounters between orthodox Christians and Gnostics.

Gnostics were also active in Israelite communities. In attempting to understand what Gnostics believed and how they operated, we can examine Marcion of Pontus, who, though labelled a heretical teacher, is among the most accessible of the second-century Gnostics, in that his positions are far less speculative and fanciful than that of the spate of groups and movements within the Gnostic designation. He had much in common with them, but differed from them enough to fall into his own category. But examining his life gives us a window into the mind of the Gnostic. Marcion's teachings challenged the leaders of the orthodox church and forced them to mount a counter offensive in order to protect their new Christian heritage.

We again turn to Kevin Madigan, who writes:

"Born in Sinope, a port city in the province of Pontus on the Black Sea, Marcion was the son of a bishop in that city. A wealthy shipowner and merchant, he traveled to Rome around 140 and joined the Christian community there, to which he donated a large sum of money. Having soon fallen under the influence of a Gnostic teacher named Cerdo, he began to develop his own theological ideas, which he then proceeded to explain to the leaders of the Roman church. Horrified, the leaders returned his money and then, in July 144, excommunicated him. Undaunted and bent on spreading his teachings, Marcion founded his own church. It had a ritual and organization so similar to those of the Roman church that contemporary orthodox Christians felt compelled to warn their flocks not to enter a Marcionite church by accident. One contemporary Christian, Justin Martyr, asserts that Marcion's ideas were so rapidly and widely disseminated that they could be found everywhere in the Roman Empire by the middle of the second century."

Unlike the orthodox, or apostolic church led by bishops, which embraced the Pre-Messianic Writings often referred to as the "Old Testament," Marcion, an anti-Israelite, emphatically rejected them, along with all writings that flowed from the pens of the original emissaries. He only accepted Paul and a butchered version of Luke, wherein he removed all references to Israelite culture. He also believed in an extreme doctrine of grace. He saw Yah as a different being from the deity he served, who was-according to him-the "Father of Christians."

His "creator" was all-loving, so there would be no final judgment of mankind, and no punishment, since this deity would simply forgive everyone. In order to make this all possible, Yeshua, the Son of Yah, could not have been born from Mary, so his book of Luke starts at chapter three, expunging all references to a miraculous birth, genealogies tied to ancient Israelites, and things of that sort. Marcion, in effect, posed a greater threat to the church than any other Gnostic teacher. And by founding his own bishop-led church, which grew in measure to rival the official orthodox church-at least for a few years-Marcion bested the various Gnostic movements of his day.

We'll be back with more exciting scriptural history . . . in a moment.
[MUSICAL INTERLUDE]
We now continue with our podcast.

Debates over the origin of all existence are central to the development of Gnostic movements of the second century. And these movements borrowed elements from Israelites, Christians, and even pagans. A vast number of Gnostic speculations arose from their attempts to discern deeper layers underlying the first few chapters of the book of Genesis. This is not to say that all Gnostic groups believed the same things. No, each Gnostic teacher had a unique way of thinking that shaped their view of reality; rather, Gnostic communities were held together by myths related to origins, and by their shared speculative language, which helped to mold a kind of group identity.

Some of the main components of their various myths are these:

The physical, created world we live in was not made by Yah, but rather by the progeny of an Eve-like entity named Sophia. And being unskilled in creation, this progeny makes a physical, rather than a spiritual world that is evil as soon as it materializes. Because the material world, and all things made of matter, were viewed as evil by Gnostics, they despised the contrary belief held by Israelites and Christians that the physical world Yah created was first seen as "good." Therefore, they refused to attribute the creation of a world of physical matter to a Creator of goodness. They could not conceive of a Creator like Yah being able to allow evil to materialize, despite Yah stating plainly in the Hebraic Scriptures that:

[7] I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity.

-Isaiah 45:7

Other Gnostics, pushing the belief that the world was not made by Yah, taught that it was instead made by his heavenly messengers. And going farther, the Messiah, being born human, and made of fleshly material matter, could not, in their view, come from a spiritual being of perfect goodness. Therefore, Yeshua, they claim, was born of Joseph, just like all other men, but somehow, he became pure in his lifetime. Thus, we see that, the belief that Joseph, the husband of Mary, being the biological father of the Messiah, derives from second-century Gnostic thought.

To help pass these ideas onto the public, Gnostics even penned their own spiritual writings, retelling the life of Yeshua and aspects of Scripture by editing details according to their own doctrines. As a movement, the Gnostics were a formidable match for the Christian church. They claimed to have secret knowledge that was handed down directly from Yeshua, which was hidden, according to them, from the Israelites who established the Messianic culture. But Christians successively beat back the tide of Gnostic teachings and established their own set of orthodox convictions. In response to Gnosticism, and other similar efforts that attempted to distort basic Scriptural principles and concepts, the church focused on the three Cs: creed, canon, and clergy.

The creeds (from the Latin, credo, meaning "I believe") were a written set of basic beliefs that were confessed by converted Christians, particularly during baptism. Following the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE, creeds went from being mere confessions of faith to being tests that determined whether one was worthy of Christian fellowship. One creed directly refuted Gnostic assertions by referring to the Creator mentioned in the Scriptures, the Almighty, who is referred to as the "Maker of heaven and earth." This countered the Gnostic teaching that the earth was created by an inferior being and was inherently evil. The creed also affirmed the belief in the Messiah, born of the Set Apart Spirit and of a virgin mother. It also affirmed his death and burial, signifying his complete humanity, which was contrary to what the Gnostics believed. If any converted Christian could not recite such a creed, they were deemed unworthy of fellowship.

As to the canon, this is derived from a Greek word that indicates a "measuring rod" or "ruler." The Scripture canon, therefore, was a body of spiritual writings that acted as a measuring rod and ruler, or, in other words, a standard that believers were to live by. The church's original canon was taken from the people who introduced them to the Messiah: the Israelites. And the canon of the Israelites was the Torah, Prophets, and Writings. In fact, what was understood as Scripture in the first few centuries, and certainly in Yeshua's time, were the books that comprised those categories.

Yeshua said:

[35] ". . . And the Scripture cannot be broken. . . ."

-John 10:35

And he clarified what many of those books were:

[44] And he said unto them, "These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and in the Psalms concerning Me."

[45] Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures.

-Luke 24:44-45

Even the book of Isaiah highlighted what the Scriptures were.

[20] To the law and to the testimony! If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

-Isaiah 8:20

The law, of course, is the Torah, or first five books of Scripture, which Yeshua called "the Law of Moses." The testimony refers to the Prophets and Writings, such as the Psalms. The word testimony is the Hebrew teudah, word H8584, which means testimony, in the sense of an attestation, or affirming to be genuine or true; and to authenticate as a witness. In other words, these are the books that testify of Yeshua, and of them he rightly said:

[39] "Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me."

-John 5:39

Thus, the Scriptures are, in essence, comprised of the books that testify of Yeshua, ranging from Genesis to Malachi, which are the very ones he often quoted from. The Pre-Messianic books, according to Isaiah 8:20, are the true standard against which all other writings are to be measured, and if those other writings stand the test and speak according to Torah and Teudah, then there is light in them. Thus, these Pre-Messianic books were accepted as canon by the Christian church; a canon of Israelite Scriptures they considered their own. And for a time, only the four traditional Good News books-Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John-were considered canon from the Messianic era. To the early church, the Pre-Messianic Scriptures of the Israelites were believed to be the authoritative word of Yah, and they, along with the Good News books, a spattering of letters penned by Yeshua's emissaries, and a few other associated writings, were the basis for defining their Christian message.

The third aspect of the church's efforts to establish orthodoxy in the face of challengers was establishing a defined clergy and imbuing that clergy with authority. This was especially true following the rise of Montanism. Late in the second century, the church experienced a major change: enthusiasm was waning among its members and, while many were still entering the church, the laity felt there was a lack of spiritual prophecy. The church was becoming more secular as well, allowing for philosophical and even heathen discussions to be had. This paved the way for the entrance of Montanus in Asia Minor, somewhere between 156 and 172 CE. He called for a higher standard of worship, where the church would again be separate from the world.

What's more, Montanus, along with his two prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla, went forth prophesying in the name of the Set Apart Spirit, proclaiming the impending second coming of the Messiah. What was even stranger, however, was that Montanus and his prophetesses raved in a state of ecstatic trance, as though they had no control of their being. This was quite unlike anything referenced in Scripture that related to the behavior of ancient prophets. While the method was perhaps meant to appear that they were deep in the Spirit, it looked more like demon possession. Despite this, they soon gathered others to themselves and a new movement called Montanism emerged. The church moved to intervene, but the damage had already been done and disorder resulted.

The problem wasn't so much that Montanus had called for a spiritual renewal in worship, it was his insistence that any rejection of the new prophecies would be seen as blasphemy of the Set Apart Spirit. The debate over the relevance of these prophecies created schisms, eventually causing many churches to split. Heretically, Montanus then claimed that a new age of the Spirit had begun, displacing the previous ages, which meant that the ten commandments and all the Pre-Messianic Scriptures were now obsolete. Revelations from Yah would only come through the Spirit of prophecy, and he was its main avenue.

Of this, Kevin Madigan writes:

"It is quite clear that the Montanists were not doctrinally deviant in the way, say, that contemporary Gnostic groups were. What made them dangerous, in the eyes of many leaders in the Asian (and by 177 the Roman) churches was the very claim of experiencing new revelation outside the emerging channels of early normative Christianity. A series of synods was held in Asia Minor-the first in Christian history-and the result was that the Montanists (again according to Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 5.16.16) were excommunicated. Then, in 177, the Montanists were excommunicated by the bishop of Rome. [. . .] The issue was whether there could be prophecy or new revelation after the age of the apostles, and if so, could women be vehicles of it? Ultimately, bishops felt that prophets were too great a threat to their own precariously established authority; [. . .] In addition, the controversy stimulated the development of a new, important structure in the history of normative Christianity: the synod or council. This was to become the preferred way to settle disputes regarding belief and discipline for two millennia in the history of Christianity."

During this particular period of the Christian church, many yearned for spiritual renewal. Belief in the power of the Set Apart Spirit was strong, and Christians were familiar with the passages that told of how one could obtain the Spirit's indwelling, such as the example in Acts 2:38, where Peter admonishes his hearers to repent and be immersed in the name of Yeshua, for the forgiveness of sins, that they might receive the gift of the Set Apart Spirit. Christians were also apprehensive about committing sins against the Set Apart Spirit following their immersion. With the ecstatic ravings of Montanus, who accused the church of those very sins-even citing blasphemy-Christians were deeply troubled.

By leaning heavily on its clergy, and imbuing that clergy with authority, the church was able to position itself as a significant institution through forceful rejection of Montanism. Led by its bishops, the church was able to face heresy on a unified front, in the form of synods or councils, and give clear utterance to its orthodoxy. The final power bestowed on the bishops by the church hierarchy was the ability to forgive sins. Thus, with this act of true blasphemy, the episcopacy, or church government led by bishops, was complete. Catholic Christianity was now fully formed. And like the leavened bread it was, all it had to do was grow.

That wraps it up for this episode of Churchianity: Two Thousand Years of Leaven. A production of Kingdom Preppers.org, this episode was written, produced, and hosted by yours truly, Kingdom Prepper. All praise, honor, and glory are due to my boss, Yah Elohim, and to his right hand, Yahushua HaMashiach. You can access the transcript for this episode on our website. Yah willing, our history will continue in the next podcast. Shalom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While the ancient catholic church tries to achieve universal appeal, the rival Gnostics challenge its authority. This conflict presses the church to complete its establishment of orthodoxy, which it struggles to maintain in the form of creeds, Scripture cannon, and apostolic succession. This allows

# data[].attributes.body
Wolves as leaders, lies become truth Acts 20:29

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the most valuable assets to the early church was the collective contributions of a succession of men who came to be known as the church fathers. They were respected and lauded for their efforts in penning a vast body of letters and other writings that were dispatched to various congregations. We made mention of one notable figure among them: Ignatius of Antioch. He could be viewed as a pioneer of the ancient catholic church-the name originated with him after all. In our previous podcast, we examined the rise of the bishops, who led the church into a new era, where the clergy began to exhibit greater authority while defining church orthodoxy amidst the threat of heresy.

Ignatius had a hand in the formation of the order of bishops as well, and was therefore integral to their inevitable rise. During the time of the emissaries, there was no such thing as bishops among those who walked with Yeshua. Taken from the Greek episkopos, the word bishop literally means, "overseer," for that is his role. This word origin also explains the term episcopal, which denotes the involvement of bishops. While the emissaries were unchallenged leaders of the assemblies following the resurrection and ascension of Yeshua, they were seen as elders. Chief among the emissaries, by designation of Yeshua's words in Matthew 16:19, was Peter the Rock, and concerning himself he said:

[1] "The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder. . . ."

-1 Peter 5:1

Even though Peter could have taken a lofty title and commanded greater respect, he viewed himself as an elder, equal to his fellow servants who were seen as shepherds of the flock. Some among the emissaries were given the dual role of prophet, yet they were all teachers, since they were taught directly at the feet of Yeshua. All these experiences and attributes afforded the emissaries unquestioned authority, unlike the leaders of what became the ancient catholic church.

While many were granted leadership positions in the churches that succeeded the Israelite assemblies, those leaders shared authority and were also known as elders, or presbyters (which is the Greek word for elders). Another group of leaders was known as deacons. Though the responsibilities of those in leadership varied from church to church, in a general sense, it was the duty of the elders, or presbyters to teach new converts and lead worship services, while deacons were required to assist with everything-though they could not preside over communion ceremonies.

It was Ignatius who-while head of the church in Antioch-wrote a series of letters early in the second century, calling for a single bishop in each church, with a body of presbyters and a company of deacons to lend support. After a period of time, this became the adopted order for all the churches. When we reach the late second century, bishops stood as unchallenged leaders in all matters of the church, much like the emissaries did concerning the Messianic assemblies.

These were among Ignatius's contributions as a so-called church father. But, through their various writings, Ignatius and the other early church fathers dealt only with specific issues that arose in the churches. In addressing these problems, their letters offered discipline and sought to enforce church guidelines, or else they provided answers to burning questions like those surrounding the forgiveness of sins. Other letters dealt with the ongoing issue of persecution. But in none of these letters is Christianity addressed in a broad sense, where one can see the scope of its overall doctrine.

The entrance of Marcion and the Gnostics changed all of that. Those who were labeled heretics created new doctrinal systems that forced the church to respond with what was perceived as sound doctrine as part of its effort to express to the world its broad and grounded orthodoxy. The speculations of the Gnostics were vast and far-reaching, thus the response from the church had to be equally vast, as well as cogent. This resulted in the many writings that flowed from the pens of the church fathers who took ancient catholic doctrines to the next level, and essentially helped to develop some of the Christian theology we see today. Those writers in question are: Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen.

Of all their various written material, the ones that survive are also important for another reason. Regarding this, Kevin Madigan writes:

"[I]t remained the case for very long that our main sources for Gnosticism had been the hostile writings of Christian critics in the second and third centuries, writers such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen. Documents actually written by Gnostics were often destroyed by the orthodox or otherwise perished and disappeared from history."

We begin with Irenaeus, who was born in Asia Minor (modern Turkey) around the year 130. He was a disciple of the bishop and martyr Polycarp, who he greatly admired. Unknown circumstances eventually led Irenaeus to migrate to Lyons in Gaul, which is now southern France. There he became a presbyter, or elder, and, in the year 177, he was dispatched to Rome with a letter for its bishop. The letter addressed a controversy that resulted from Montanism. While Irenaeus was away, persecution broke out in Lyons and Vienne, and the aged bishop of Lyons, Photinus, was killed. When he returned to Lyons, Irenaeus was elected bishop of the church, and he served in that office until his death in 202.

Unlike Christians of his day, Irenaeus did not like to speculate on Scriptural passages, nor attempt to unravel deep mysteries of the text. He was most interested in leading the Christian flock that was given into his care by the church hierarchy, and this was also reflected in his writing. His pen was devoted to refuting the theories of heretics and instructing those who looked to him as a leader. Only two of his writings survive-one, a body of instructions to his aforementioned flock; the other, a refutation against Gnosticism. In both, we are presented with an exposition of his Christian faith as he received it from those who taught him.

Irenaeus argued that apostolic succession validated the church's teachings, and he reasoned that the church in Rome was the one to exemplify, and so all other churches should agree with its apostolic view. In time, representatives from churches throughout the realm, bowing to Irenaeus's arguments, would descend on Rome to convene, all having their apostolic tradition in common. Irenaeus also presented ideas on the eucharist, or communion embodying more, and he stressed the importance of establishing a venerated position for Mary, who was considered the new Eve.

Irenaeus's influence loomed large in the church in the West during the Greek period, and his writings paved the way for others who are regarded as giants of Christian history, such as Augustine. He pushed Irenaeus's ideas on Mary farther by suggesting the possibility that Mary never sinned. Ideas like these seeded the Christian view of Mary long after, reaching full fruition in 1854, when the dogma of Immaculate Conception was promulgated. This decree of the Roman Church holds that Mary was not subjected to sin through grace.

Close to a hundred years later, in 1950, Pope Pius XII declared the dogma of the Assumption of Mary. This Assumption holds that Mary's body did not decompose upon her death, but-through some miracle of the Most High-was instead reunited with her spirit after she departed this world. We can find no support for these dogmas anywhere in the Messianic Writings, nor in all of Scripture, for this idolatry has its origin in the leaders of the ancient catholic church.

Now, while Christians endured persecution under various emperors in the third century, the Christian doctrine came to be expressed in accordance with Hellenistic thought. So appealing did some of the church fathers make the melding of faith and pagan philosophy that one of the Roman emperors eventually accepted the religion, irreversibly altering the course of the Christian movement. Clement of Alexandria is one such church father who merged pagan philosophy with Christian doctrine.

Clement experienced a life far different from that of Irenaeus. It is believed that Clement was born in Athens, a city renowned for its Greek philosophers. While his parents were pagans, Clement was converted at a young age and soon went in search of a teacher who could aid him in acquiring a deeper understanding of the Christian faith. In his quest around the Mediterranean, he was led to the city of Alexandria. Founded by Alexander the Great himself in the fourth century BCE, Alexandria was the second city of the Roman Empire, and home to Hellenism. It is where Greece and what is now called the Middle East converged.

Alexandria was also home to the largest community of Israelites in the Greco-Roman world, many of whom were Hellenistic in heart and mind. And it was there that the Septuagint-the preferred Scripture version of the early church fathers-came into being. There too was Philo, the first-century Israelite philosopher who was among the first to attempt to merge spiritual revelation with pagan philosophy. Christianity was eventually introduced to Alexandria, and a church was founded there that was infused with Gnostic elements early on.

When Clement reached Alexandria, he met with a Christian teacher named Pantaenus, who was considered an able thinker. Pantaenus was a Stoic philosopher who offered a philosophical interpretation of the faith that appealed to Clement, and when Pantaenus died, Clement took his place as the main Christian instructor in Alexandria. Persecution broke out in 202 under Emperor Septimius Severus, but despite this, Clement's school gained considerable importance, and was an effective means of drawing new converts to the Christian faith. Clement, however, had to flee the city. He traveled the Mediterranean yet again, bouncing from Syria to Asia Minor. He spent his later years in Cappadocia, where he died around the year 215.

Clement sought to present pagan philosophy as a practice that could be of use to Christians. Since most of his teaching career was spent in Alexandria, an intellectual hub for philosophers and worldly scholars, the city left its mark on his mental faculty. Unlike Irenaeus, Clement did not seek to shepherd a flock of believers; he was a thinker, beholden to philosophy, and this he dispensed to anyone seeking a deeper truth. He appealed to pagan intellectuals by employing Plato in theological exhortations, and he even argued that Plato's philosophy could support Christian doctrine. The Greeks, he reasoned, were handed philosophy by Yah, just as he had given the covenant Law to the Israelites. Clement would attempt to merge Christian faith and pagan philosophy for his entire life, and others would follow in his footsteps for many centuries.

We'll be back with more exciting scriptural history . . . in a moment.
[MUSICAL INTERLUDE]
We now continue with our podcast.

Tertullian, a church father who was very different from Clement, was born in Carthage around the year 150. Following his conversion to Christianity, at about age 40, he promoted the Christian faith by writing a series of books, thirty-one of which survive in Latin. These books gained him the distinction of being the "father of Latin theology." The books he wrote in Greek are lost. Of note, he is also credited as being the first to use the word "trinity" in its Latin form, though his concept was influenced by elements of Stoic philosophy, particularly his view of the Creator's "substance." He developed the trinitarian concept after becoming a Montanist, a group we discussed in our last podcast.

Tertullian, it is said, was a trained lawyer, as is evident in his writing, which bears the mark of a legal mind. In one treatise, titled, Prescription against the Heretics, he presents a kind of legal case between orthodox Christians and heretics. His attempt is to prove that heretics were not only wrong in their pursuits, but that they had no license to dispute with the church, which he claims, had full possession of the Scriptures. The heretics, according to him, had no right to the Scriptures at all, as they legally belonged to the church, notwithstanding the fact that the church coopted the Scriptures from the Israelites.

To drive his point, Tertullian argued on the basis of apostolic succession, claiming that the churches in Rome, Antioch, and elsewhere, could trace their origins and unbroken lines of succession back to the emissaries. Thus, he parrots the same unsubstantiated claims of his contemporaries and predecessors. Finally, using his supposed legal precedence of Scripture ownership, Tertullian argues that the church alone should be allowed to interpret the Scriptures. This legal argument, as it happens, has often been used against perceived enemies of the church throughout the course of Christian history. It was a main argument used by Catholics against Protestants during the Reformation era.

Tertullian was by no means gentle of speech and beneficent of mind when it came to confronting those believed to be heretics. Ryan M. Reeves, an assistant professor of historical theology, says this of the church father:

"Tertullian is sort of this curmudgeon of the ancient world in the second century. And he has so much to contribute theologically and intellectually to this world, but his tone with just about everybody is simply nasty and bitter. Tertullian takes a more ancient tactic, which was not uncommon in the day, of simply mocking his opponents. This is the same tactic that Celsus uses. And it's actually telling that historians have pointed out that there are not many other patriciate scholars-any of his contemporaries-who actually cite Tertullian as a person of repute that they actually want to model themselves after. He's kind of the bad boy. It actually takes Augustine at a later generation, in a later century, to sort of rehab and to really cite Tertullian as a real sort of powerful person that he considers to be an authoritative voice. But Tertullian takes a more acerbic tone when he's taking on his pagan opponents."

Still, while pagans and perceived heretics were his main rivals, something in Montanism, a known heretical movement at the time, attracted him enough to join, and he adopted their particular theological slant. But this didn't stop Tertullian from being recognized as the founder of Western theology.

That leaves us with Origen, the most prolific of the church fathers prior to Augustine. Origen was born to Christian parents in Alexandria around the year 185. He rose to become Clement's greatest disciple, and his own Christian father, Leonides, was martyred during the same persecution under Septimius Severus that forced Clement to flee Alexandria. The persecution came when Origen was still a young lad, and, prior to his father's martyrdom-while he was still imprisoned-Origen longed to offer himself as a martyr. He was prevented from leaving the house and fulfilling that strong desire when his mother hid his clothes. He instead wrote a letter to his father in prison.

Origen had been well-educated, not only completing literary studies of the Greek world, but also learning the prevalent pagan philosophy of the day, which was beginning to take the shape of Neoplatonism.

Of this philosophy, Professor Timothy B. Shutt, who holds a PhD in medieval literature, says:

"The person who succeeded, at last, in formulating a vision, which made use-In pretty much equal measure-of Plato and Aristotle, and unified their vision into a coherent wider system, was [. . .] Plotinus, who was from Egypt and moved to Rome, and lived in the second century CE. His legacy was called Neoplatonism, and it represented the final philosophical synthesis of antiquity. [. . .] It was taken over [. . .] by Christian theologians-St. Augustine prominent among them-and went on to become the default philosophy of the middle ages in Christian guise."

And in his book, A History of the Middle Ages, 300 to 1500, John M. Riddle writes:

"A Christian from Alexandria, Origen attended lectures given by [. . .] a founder of Neoplatonism. Of all the pagan philosophies, Neoplatonism held the most appeal for Christians: its theory of the divine as a threefold emanation from the absolute-Plato's universal. Origen's theory of emanation, derived from Plato, provided imagery that could help explain how the Father, Son, and [Set Apart] Spirit could be one [Elohim] in three persons. Unlike Origen, Plotinus believed in no established religion; his work is often quoted as the best source of information on Neoplatonism outside Christianity. [. . . A]nd thus Neoplatonism had a great influence on Christian mysticism, as well as on Christian theology in general."

With all his acquired pagan knowledge, Origen supported his family through secular teaching. But when he was still in his teens, the bishop of Alexandria, Demetrius, appointed him to train catechumens-or new Christian converts readying for baptism. He in fact took over leadership of the school, a position vacated by Clement, who fled the city. Even though he was considerably young, at a mere eighteen years of age, and the task was viewed as a major responsibility, Origen-who was already a genius in his own right-excelled, and his fame soon spread. In accordance with this experience-and given his new position-Origen sold his secular books to support himself and was thereafter devoted to the study of Scripture.

So devoted was he in fact that one scholarly achievement credited to him is the Hexapla, a sixfold version of the Pre-Messianic Scriptures in parallel columns that contained line by line comparisons of the text in Hebrew, a Greek transliteration, and four Greek translations. He also attempted to write an extensive collection of commentaries on the Book of John. He wrote thirty-two books on the subject, nine of which survive, though it was never completed. To demonstrate the immense scale he intended to achieve, ten of his books covered the first two chapters of John alone.

After a few years, Origen left the teaching of catechumens to his most trusted disciples and ran a school that taught Christian philosophy to both Christians and pagans who were drawn by his fame. There, he lectured to the delight of his hearers, calling on what he had learned from the great classical pagan philosophers. As he increased his studies, so increased his fame, and he was even privileged to an audience with the mother of the sitting emperor.

A trip to Palestine resulted in the regional bishops inviting Origen to publicly interpret Scripture in the church at Caesarea, though he was not yet an ordained presbyter. This eventually stirred up some trouble in his life, as laymen preaching in the church was frowned upon. First, the bishops of Palestine were criticized, then the bishop who had assigned Origen to instruct catechumens-Demetrius-suddenly turned on him.

While Origen held the position of instructing catechumens-since many of them were women-he took it upon himself to undergo the passage recorded in Matthew 19:12:

[12] ". . . And there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake."

. . . Yes . . . Yes, Origen took that to mean castration, which he inflicted on himself. While this was kept secret for a time, Demetrius now brought the matter before church officials, as it was enough to disqualify members of the church from holding office. Demetrius was such a thorn in Origen's life that he was forced to move to Caesarea in 232, where he took up teaching once more. Despite some of Origen's writings eventually being condemned as heretical, one of his well-known students, Gregory-nicknamed the Wonderworker for his missionary efforts in Asia Minor-would rise to be the bishop of Neocaesarea and later be regarded as a saint.

In the year 251, Emperor Decius persecuted Christians yet again, and this led to Origen being imprisoned and tortured, which likely hastened his death a few years later. Pagan philosophy drove his career and infused his theology, and that philosophy was also imparted to his students. Ryan Reeves tells us that:

"Origen is the most enamored, really, with pagan philosophy. Origen has a real deep reservoir of platonic thinking within him, and we're going to get to that again later when we get into the third and fourth century crises over the trinity and christology. There is an Origen tradition of thinking about, not only these topics of theology, but of the Scriptures and all kinds of different things. But Origen's tactic, you might say, is really to kind of beat the pagans at their own game. He's not simply trying to refute error or cast down misconceptions, though he does do that. Rather, Origen is of the opinion that if we're going to be philosophers let's do it better than the pagans.

"And so, much of his writing-and he wrote a lot besides apologetics works-really is an attempt to show how deeply thoughtful Christians can be in the philosophical arena. Now it's that deep thought that at times gets Origen into trouble; some of his ideas are later condemned, though he himself is not officially condemned by name. And so, Origen has always been sort of this in-between person. He sort of dined with the devil a bit too much, according to some, and he went a little bit too far."

Among some of those condemned ideas are these:

Origen believed that humans were once pure spirit, but, some having fallen, are now either trapped in human bodies, or else have become evil spirits. So, to Origen, humans were once heavenly messengers, and some are now the same demons we battle against. Origen claims to have derived this theory from Scripture, but it is clearly born of the Greek philosophy of his day, which was taught well before his time. So those holding to that doctrine today are dredging up pagan Platonic philosophy.

Origen also believed that Yah, out of pure love, would even save Satan, and return all demons-as well as all of creation for that matter-to their original perfect state. But all spirits will be free, and because of this limitless freedom afforded them, the possibility of perfect beings falling into sin again will always exist, making for a repeated historical saga of fall, intervention, and redemption, which could loop in an eternal cycle.

These are among the broad lengths to which Origen's imagination stretched during his study and speculation of Scriptural matters, though, to his credit, he does not claim that these speculations are to be accepted as doctrine. Nonetheless, they have been accepted as just that by some students of Scripture over the centuries, and they even led to a portion of his writings being condemned in the sixth century and some of his works destroyed. These and other ideas he put forth are rooted in the classic pagan philosophy he and his teacher, Clement, sought to merge with Christian theology. Long after they lived, Christian theologians would labor to continue their original quest.

Over time, other church fathers would rise to prominence in both the east and the west, but they would all be influenced by those who came before them. Eventually, a shift would occur, resulting in a split based on the distinct teachings that emanated from east and west. The Greek provinces of the east would follow Origen and others like him by assimilating and embracing the secular world with its pagan influences. The Latin provinces of the west would follow the rigorist Christian view of Tertullian and others like him, who sought to distance themselves from secular culture. This division between east and west would develop into two individual official catholic churches that would be in direct competition in the centuries to come.

That wraps it up for this episode of Churchianity: Two Thousand Years of Leaven. A production of Kingdom Preppers.org, this episode was written, produced, and hosted by yours truly, Kingdom Prepper. All praise, honor, and glory are due to my boss, Yah Elohim, and to his right hand, Yahushua HaMashiach. You can access the transcript for this episode on our website. Yah willing, our history will continue in the next podcast. Shalom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
None were more instrumental to the development of Christian theology and doctrine than the church fathers; men who, in the early centuries of the movement, rose to prominence via their written expositions of the Christian faith. Modern Christianity exists on the foundation that the church fathers bu

# data[].attributes.body
Wolves: 2 Cor 11:13-15, 2Pet 2:1-3, 3Jn 1:9,10, Rev 2:6,15, 1 Tim 1:20, & 1 John 2:19.

# data[].attributes.body
Politics and persecution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From the years 96 to 251 CE-between the reigns of Domitian and Decius-Christianity had been viewed as a religion separate from Hebraism, Messianic or otherwise. And because of this, together with the fact that it wasn't based on ethnicity, the church had no right to Roman protection. It was therefore subject to sporadic, mostly localized persecutions that were based on Trajan's policy, which was still in effect by the third century. But persecution increased under certain intolerant emperors, such as Marcus Aurelius and Septimius Severus. New policies aimed at Christians were also added by Emperors Septimius Severus and Decius, which had grave consequences for the church.

When Septimius Severus reigned as emperor early in the third century, he managed to end the civil wars that weakened the empire, though ruling the vast domain that now made up his dominion was no easy task. Beyond the borders of the realm, stretching past the Rhine and Danube were the "barbarians," always ready to seize any opportunity to attack the Romans. Inside the realm, other problems persisted, which stemmed from dissident groups with other ideas on policy. And there was always the threat that a legion might split off, name its own emperor, and launch a new civil war.

With a decline in the empire's strength, and faced with such internal problems and external threats, Septimius Severus decided to implement a new policy. He sought harmony among the many religions that had crept into the realm, so he promoted syncretism, which would combine the various beliefs and practices of all religions in the empire. This syncretism, however, would be centered on the worship of Sol Invictus, or "the Unconquered Sun." This meant that everyone was free to worship whatever deity they choose, in whatever manner they choose, so long as they acknowledged that the Sun was ruler over all of them.

Not long after this policy was enforced did two groups immediately resist its adoption: the remaining Israelites and the Christians. Both had steadily gained converts to their particular movements over the years, thus the emperor decided to halt their spread by outlawing new conversions to either, under penalty of death. The result of this targeted policy was a round of new persecutions, this time aimed at new converts and their teachers. The very year that the edict was issued, 202 CE, the church father Irenaeus died-some believe by martyrdom-and Origen's father Leonides was killed in Alexandria. It is also the year that Clement fled from Alexandria to escape the same persecution.

After Septimius Severus, other emperors came and went, and his policy was not generally enforced, thus persecutions on a broad scale abated for a time. The mother of one succeeding emperor, Alexander Severus-who was very tolerant of Christians-even went to hear Origen speak. But by the year 249, Emperor Decius, bent on restoring the ancient glory of Rome, donned the royal purple. His was a very different rule from that of his predecessors. The empire he inherited had abandoned its most ancient traditions, as he saw it, and economic problems plagued the realm. The "barbarians" beyond the borders, meanwhile, were steadily growing bolder as they became a greater threat. Philip Daileader, Associate Professor of History at the College of William and Mary, gives us a unique perspective on Rome's vulnerability to invasion:

"The Roman Empire faced pressure on most of its widely extended borders during the course of the third century. The most serious dangers came from two regions, however. At the far eastern end of the Roman Empire, around Syria and Palestine and Mesopotamia, the Persian Empire was attacking the Roman Empire and trying to recover lands that had once been possessions of the Persian Empire. In Central Europe, along the Rhine/Danube frontier, the Roman Empire also faced pressure-albeit pressure of a somewhat different sort. In Central Europe, Germanic tribes were trying to enter the Roman Empire by crossing the Rhine river and, especially, the Danube river, and trying to settle within the Roman Empire. Unlike the Persians who were looking to make permanent annexations and gain Roman territory, the Germans were not trying to take over anything; they were simply trying to become residents of the Roman empire, but the Romans did not want them there, at least not in the numbers in which the barbarians presented themselves during the third century. And the Roman Empire had a very difficult time trying to deal with the simultaneous threat of Persian and Germanic invasion."

Decius saw all these problems as an outgrowth of national rebellion against the Roman deities, which the citizens of the realm had abandoned. A resurgence of the ancient Roman religion, and unified worship of the deities, would perhaps appease them, and cause the glory of Rome to be restored. Such was the reasoning that led to Decius's particular religious policy, which differed altogether from any that came before it. Decius wasn't interested in punishing a particular religious group for what they believed or practiced; his was an empire-wide campaign to see that everyone in the realm would serve the deities according to the ancient pagan religion. The future of the Roman empire itself, in Decius's view, hinged on the enforcement of his policy. With that, persecutions would take on an entirely new form, with the empire effectively declaring war on the ancient catholic church.

Gone were the sporadic, local persecutions of the old days. Decius intended to persecute subjects in every corner of the realm who refused his order to sacrifice to the deities by burning incense, pouring a libation, or tasting of the sacrificial meat. Those who abided by the policy and performed these rites would receive certificates, or libellum, attesting that they had sacrificed to the deities. With this, Decius's persecutions were unlike those that flowed from the emperors before him. He wasn't out to make martyrs of Christians, he would instead create Christian apostates, by forcing them to accept his religion and abandon their own.

Since there had been a period of abatement of prolonged persecutions prior to Decius's reign, the generation of those who had been martyred gave way to a new generation of Christians unaccustomed to witnessing fellow believers being killed for their faith. This meant that many Christians fell under the pressure of Decius's campaign, obeying the command to sacrifice to pagan deities. Other fearful Christians purchased fake certificates declaring that they had performed the sacrifices, when they had done no such thing.

Beyond that, as part of Decius's policy, which sought to enforce the worship of the pagan deities, rather than exact death as a first order of business, the number of Christians who died as martyrs were few. The task of the Roman authorities was to arrest Christians (who were the most obstinate among the empire's citizens), threaten and torture them, and force them to abandon the Christian movement. Late in life, Origen was imprisoned and suffered this kind of torture, which was the fate of many Christians at the time. As proof of how widespread and systematic was the enforcement of Decius's policy, certificates verifying the performance of sacrifices to the deities have been discovered in some of the most remote parts of the Roman Empire.

Because few martyrdoms resulted from Decius's persecution, rather than consider all who endured it "martyrs," the term "confessor" went into official use and bore new significance as part of the Christian vocabulary to denote those who resisted but lived. Decius's persecution, while brief, lasting only to 251, was still devastating. Gallus, the emperor who succeeded him, set aside his policy and persecutions ceased for another six years, until Valerian took the throne. He was once a companion of Decius and brought on a new round of persecutions before being captured by the Persians and taken prisoner. For the next forty years, Christians would enjoy relative peace. But prior to that time, the restless barbarians were continually amassing strength.

In his book, The Conversion of Europe, Richard Fletcher elaborates on those developments:

"Crippled by instability, civil war, fiscal chaos-and, just to make matters worse, by intermittent outbreaks of bubonic plague-the empire was in no position to defend its frontiers. From 224 onwards the new Persian dynasty of the Sassanids constituted a well-organized and hostile presence to the east, bent upon regaining the Syrian territories which Persian kings of old had ruled. For the Roman empire, the most humiliating moment of this time of troubles occurred in 260 when the Emperor Valerian was captured by the Persians. The Germanic tribes of the Goths, settled at this period on the northern shores of the Black Sea in today's Ukraine, took to the sea to strike deep into Asia Minor. By land, they pressed hard on the Danube frontier, launching raids into the Balkans and Greece. The Emperor Decius was defeated and killed by them in Thrace in the year 251. Along the Rhine frontier new Germanic confederations, those of the Alamans and of the Franks, took shape. In 257 they broke into Gaul to plunder it at will. Some of them even penetrated as far as northeastern Spain, where they sacked the city of Tarraco (Tarragona). Berbers along the Saharan fringes attacked the long, thin, vulnerable littoral of Roman north Africa. In far-flung Britain the construction of coastal defenses witnessed to new enemies from overseas-Saxons from Germany and Scots from Ireland. One of the most telling signs of the times was the building of town walls throughout the western provinces of Gaul, Spain, and Britain, furnishing defenses for settlements which had never needed them before."

Following Decius's reign, the church was faced with a new problem: what to do about those who had "lapsed" in their Christian faith by bowing to the pressures of the persecution. What complicated the decision was that not all Christians had lapsed in the same way. Some immediately offered sacrifices to the Roman deities the minute they were told to, not considering their faith at all. It was agreed that they could not be viewed in the same light as the Christians who purchased fake certificates to prove that they had sacrificed but really had not, or others who weakened momentarily but repented and sought to rejoin the church while the persecution still raged.

Those who were newly minted as "confessors" enjoyed the same privileges as presbyters in the church and were given the authority to forgive sins. This is because they were believed to have received a special portion of the Set Apart Spirit after they refused to give in to their persecutors. So, the confessors were thought to be the ones with the authority to decide on the fate of the lapsed, such as who should be restored to communion status within the church.

You see, communion, or what they refer to as the eucharist (Greek for "thankfulness" or "thanksgiving") was among the most important celebrations to Christians of this era. It meant that you were still a member of the Kingdom of Heaven in the eyes of the church leaders. To be denied the weekly elements of bread and wine meant certain spiritual death and damnation. And that bread and wine, through the supposed miracle of transubstantiation, was believed to literally transform into the body and blood of the Messiah after being blessed.

In North Africa, some confessors stepped forward and claimed the authority to decide on the fate of the lapsed. Thereafter, they began restoring some to communion status by dispensing letters of pardon. Many bishops opposed this action and claimed that only the church hierarchy was vested with the authority to decide on such matters, and they alone could restore the lapsed in a just manner. Others thought that both the confessors and bishops were lax in allowing those who had become apostates such easy reinstatement. This crisis led to schisms of the churches in Carthage and Rome. Decisions on the fate of those who had been immersed but had fallen away, would continue to plague and divide the church. The system of penance grew from crises of the lapsed, and the Protestant Reformation itself was a massive protest against that very system.

To give you an idea of what the system of penance would grow to become in the time of the ancient church, we turn to Richard Fletcher once more, who writes:

"The penitential discipline of the early church as administered by, let us say, Gregory of Pontus was of an exceptional harshness. Its characteristics were as follows. It could be administered only by a bishop, and it could be undergone by the penitent only once in a lifetime. It was public and it was shaming. The penitent sinner formally entered an 'order of penitents' in a ceremony which took place before the entire congregation of his or her Christian community. Penitents were thereafter segregated into a special part of the church building for future services, where they had to listen to the communal intercessions for them of their neighbors. The penitent had to observe lifelong chastity thereafter and was debarred from ever holding any public office: a seventh-century king of Spain who underwent penance had to abdicate. Penance thereby aimed mortal blows at family and civil life. The penitent became in effect a nonperson."

We'll be back with more exciting scriptural history . . . in a moment.
[MUSICAL INTERLUDE]
We now continue with our podcast.

In the year 284, a new emperor would enter the imperial palace and, before the end of his reign, order the most vicious persecution of Christians to date. Roughly thirty emperors sat the throne in the third century, and the Roman senate took the business of electing Caesars more lightly than in times past. Kinship meant hardly anything as well, since being a close relation to a recent Caesar probably meant that you would be assassinated if a rival ascended the throne, which was not unheard of. In one account of life in the time of Diocletian, the book, 20 Centuries of Christianity, by authors Paul Hutchinson and Winfred Garrison, tells us that,

"Chaos and anarchy spread throughout the empire. The slaying of one Caesar was a signal to Roman troops somewhere to acclaim a new ruler. Sometimes the Praetorian Guards stationed in Rome itself made the choice; sometimes it came from the armies on the frontiers. As the third century drew toward its close, most thoughtful Romans were in despair. They saw the empire on a swift slide into ruin and the once proud civilization about to plunge into a barbarian sea."

And into that sea the empire did plunge, and it did see ruin, but not until the fifth century. In fact, Diocletian, despite his ill repute, managed to turn the empire around, and in effect revive it. Turning once more to Professor Philip Daileader, he says that:

"During this period, the Roman Empire was reeling from a series of political and military and economic crises, and indeed became very close to collapse. It probably should have fallen at this point in time. However, a Roman Emperor, by the name of Diocletian, was going to stave off collapse by a few centuries, and despite his intense conservatism, and his love of Roman tradition, Diocletian was going to reshape the Roman Empire and to make it a far more openly autocratic state than it had been previously."

With that, Diocletian altered the basis for imperial rule and reorganized the entire empire in order to strengthen it.

Diocletian was born to slaves in Dalmatia, a Roman province in Illyricum, or what is now the western portion of the Balkan peninsula north of Greece. After setting his mind on the Roman army, he enjoyed a successful military career and rose to become commander of the army before reaching the age of forty. An election held by certain generals and officers proclaimed Diocletian emperor following the murder of the previous emperor. Diocletian quickly, and brutally, dispatched a rival for the throne in the presence of the tribunal of the Senate, and then he made his first order of business securing the Roman borders, setting off a series of battles that drove back the barbarians. He even recaptured territory from distant Britain and Persia, and civil wars were also repressed within the realm.

To militate against any future threats of invasion, Diocletian, switching modes from able general to shrewd statesman, implemented a plan to divide the realm.

"Known for his administrative skill, Diocletian divided the empire bureaucratically into West and East, with an emperor (or Augustus) and vice-emperor (Caesar) for each vast region."

-Kevin Madigan, Medieval Christianity

Prior to this division, a single emperor governed, and succession ordinarily passed from father to son, though that rule had been violated on numerous occasions. Frequent civil wars were produced by power-hungry generals who, with the backing of their armies, fought to secure the throne. Diocletian's plan was to establish a more orderly means of succession to the throne, which would begin with top military commanders, who would be succeeded by the Caesars they choose. By dividing the empire into two bureaucratic halves, with two administrative divisions in each, the idea was that ambitious generals could enjoy supreme rule without launching civil wars to attain it. Also, the realm would be protected by invested leaders enthroned in various quarters.

A man named Galerius was named one of the two Caesars, and he ruled the prefecture of Illyricum. Of the four emperors, Galerius saw the greatest military action along the borders, fending off barbarians and Persians alike. Because several Roman soldiers within the legions were confessed Christians, this created a degree of friction. Many of them refused to obey orders and some tried to leave the army. Other Christians refused to join. Galerius developed a disdain for them and took the matter to Diocletian in an attempt to convince him to expel them all. Diocletian's edict did just that, but some officers refused to lose soldiers within the ranks. They tried to force some Christian soldiers to deny their faith rather than face expulsion, and this resulted in the execution of various Christians in the army stationed at the Danube, which was under Galerius's command.

Following this event, Galerius grew all the more determined to push for a new edict, according to the Christian historian Eusebius. Not only was a new edict issued, but it was followed by three others. With that, Diocletian would declare another veritable, but more decisive war on Christians.

"It was he who launched the fiercest, longest, and most systematic purge of the Christians, traditionally called 'the Great Persecution,' "

. . . Says Kevin Madigan.

"Persuaded that the Christians were the cause of bad omens and also to blame for a deteriorating economy, the emperor issued a series of edicts. . . ."

The first of these edicts ordered that all palace and military officials perform sacrifices to the deities to prove their faithfulness to the empire. Christians were therefore weeded out and removed from high office.

". . . [H]e then decided to 'terminate' the Christian community for its refusal to participate. In November 303, Roman soldiers destroyed and looted a church in Nicomedia . . ."

And they proceeded to burn all the Scriptures they could find.

"Soon an edict was published requiring the destruction of all churches and sacred scriptures. In response, Christians in the East revolted and burned some imperial buildings. Diocletian retaliated by burning almost three hundred Christians in Nicomedia. Another edict was issued: all higher clergy were to be imprisoned, but a third edict allowed them reprieve on the condition that they would sacrifice. A fourth edict raised the stakes by requiring all to sacrifice. The penalty was hard labor or death. This time, thousands, not hundreds, were tortured, mutilated, enslaved, incarcerated, or put to death."

The persecution, which was not that brutal in the beginning, became systematic and cruel in nature. Diocletian, who primarily governed the prefecture of Oriens from its capital, Nicomedia, took his government reforms seriously and decided to step down as Augustus. He convinced Maximian, the Augustus who ruled the prefecture of Italy from its capital, Milan, to step down as well. That allowed the two Caesars, Galerius and Constantius Chlorus, who governed the prefectures of Illyricum and Gaul, respectively, to assume the top two positions in the realm, becoming the new Augusti. Two new Caesars were chosen: a man named Severus was given control of Italy and another named Maximinus Daia controlled Oriens.

Persecutions resumed in the east, with Maximinus Daia resorting to capital punishment to enforce the original edicts. Civil war erupted in the west instead. Maximian, the Augustus who abdicated the throne in Milan, supported his son Maxentius in an overthrow of the new Caesar, Severus, who now ruled the prefecture of Italy. Severus soon committed suicide, and Galerius, who had rushed to aid his Caesar, was forced to retreat to the east as Maxentius secured his rule in Italy. Constantius Chlorus, the ruler of Illyricum, died in the interim. His loyal troops refused to yield to the supremacy of Galerius, so they proclaimed Constantius Chlorus's son, Constantine, their new Augustus. A man named Licinius, who allied himself with Constantine, gained control of the east.

And . . .

"In the end, the persecution failed."

. . . Says Kevin Madigan.

"By the fourth century, many Christians had non-Christian friends or relatives who were disgusted by their torture or death. Western officials were notably reluctant to carry out the harsh decrees mandating death, willing only to comply with the edicts demanding the burning of scriptures. In the East, suffering was more severe. We have the names of about one hundred martyrs who died in Palestine alone; there must have been more. Still, the Roman state could not carry out a mass extermination of Christians, as there was far too much social resistance. In addition, the numbers of Christians had grown to the point where attempted liquidation would have been futile."

When Constantine and Maxentius assumed power, neither kept up the persecutions, which were credited to Galerius, their mutual rival. At last, Galerius himself grew ill and, as the story goes, he issued a final edict on April 30, 311, but one of toleration this time around. Perhaps believing that his illness was in fact some punishment being meted out for his vicious treatment of the Christians, he finally pardons them, and, to the astonishment of not a few, asks them to pray to their deity for him, and "for the public good." Thus ended the most brutal persecution in the time of the ancient church.

The Christians who survived the persecutions were released from their prisons, signs of torture marking them. But all were thankful to be alive. Galerius met his demise five days later. The Roman Empire was now divided between four principals: Licinius, Maximinus Daia, Constantine, and Maxentius. The first three named among these rulers recognized one another as legitimate leaders, but the fourth, Maxentius, was viewed as a usurper. Of the four, Maximinus Daia was the sole ruler to resume the persecution of Christians that Galerius had overturned with his final edict. Nonetheless, the winds of change were already stirring, and Constantine was about to embark on a campaign of war that would end persecutions outright, and alter the political landscape of Europe and the Near East. In the end, he would sit as the sole and supreme ruler of a Christian empire.

That wraps it up for this episode of Churchianity: Two Thousand Years of Leaven. A production of Kingdom Preppers.org, this episode was written, produced, and hosted by yours truly, Kingdom Prepper. All praise, honor, and glory are due to my boss, Yah Elohim, and to his right hand, Yahushua HaMashiach. You can access the transcript for this episode on our website. Yah willing, our history will continue in the next podcast. Shalom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A succession of intolerant emperors inflicts severe punishment on obstinate Christians who refuse to serve the Roman deities, culminating in the harshest of all persecutions of the first four centuries-that under Diocletian. The empire itself, meanwhile, faces near collapse under the weight of econo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Constantine was declared emperor in Britain in 306, and he became the master of Gaul and Spain, but that was not enough. In 312, he assembled his forces in Gaul and started the march south, to wage war with his rival Maxentius for control of Italy and Africa as well. As the legend goes, during this momentous journey, Constantine saw a vision of some sort, of a cross superimposed on the sun with the words, "Conquer in this sign" written in Latin. Encouraged by this, he and his army made their way through the Alps, and then marched for Rome, Maxentius's capital. Constantine ordered his troops to mark their shields with a new sign that was inspired by his supposed vision, though he continued to worship the "Unconquered Sun" long after these events.

Had he stayed within its walls, Maxentius might have held Rome, which was well-defended. Instead, he consulted his augurs-diviners of ancient Rome-who advised him to present battle, and that poor counsel changed the fate of the empire, and indeed the course of Christianity itself. Constantine's attack caught Maxentius by surprise, and he failed to defend his stronghold, which was quickly overrun by Constantine's troops. In her book, The History of the Medieval World, Susan Wise Bauer writes:

"On the morning of October 29, 312, the Roman soldier Constantine walked through the gates of Rome at the front of his army.

"He was forty years old, and for six years he had been struggling to claim the crown of the imperator. Less than twenty-four hours before, he had finally beaten the sitting emperor of Rome, twenty-nine-year-old Maxentius, at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Constantine's men had fought their way forward across the bridge, toward the city of Rome, until the defenders broke and ran. Maxentius drowned, pulled down into the mud of the riverbed by the weight of his armor." [. . .]

"Constantine settled into the imperial palace to take stock of his new empire. Dealing at once with Maxentius's supporters, he ordered immediate but judicious executions: only Maxentius's 'nearest friends' fell victim to the new regime. He dissolved the Praetorian Guard, the standing imperial bodyguard that had supported Maxentius's claim to the throne. [. . .] Then he turned to deal with his co-emperors."

Following the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, Constantine then traveled to Milan to meet with Licinius, to forge a new alliance. Persecution of Christians, they agreed, would cease, and their religious buildings, cemeteries, and other Christian property would be returned to them. This became known as the Edict of Milan, an edict that seconded the one Galerius issued concerning toleration. Licinius married Constantine's half-sister, Constantia, as part of their agreement, and for his part, the sixty-year-old emperor set out to battle Maximinus Daia in 313 for control of the eastern territories. Marching under a Christian banner, Licinius had forty thousand less troops than his enemy, Maximinus, who fought for the Roman deity, Jupiter. Still, Licinius's army conquered Maximinus Daia's forces, and, seeing no way of escape, the defeated emperor swallowed poison.

With Licinius's victory, Constantine decided to legalize Christianity as part of their new compact. Of this, Susan Wise Bauer writes:

"The two men met in Mediolanum (modern Milan) to celebrate Licinius's marriage to Constantia and to issue an empire-wide proclamation that made Christianity legal. . . .

"In fact Christianity had been tolerated in all parts of the empire except the east for some years. But this proclamation, the Edict of Milan, now spread this protection into Maximinus Daia's previous territories. 'No one whatsoever should be denied the opportunity to give his heart to the observance of the Christian religion,' the Edict announced. 'Any one of these who wishes to observe Christian religion may do so freely and openly, without molestation."

And here, Constantine's edict tolerates all religions in the realm:

". . . [We] have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship for the sake of the peace of our times, that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases.' "

This freedom of religion for all would change late in the fourth century, when the leading bishops would convince the emperors that Christianity was the one "true religion," and all others were to be made illegal. Thereafter, Roman Catholicism would dominate the West and Greek Orthodoxy the East, ending freedom of religion and free expression of culture for all.

Constantine had now eliminated two of his three rivals. Licinius was all that remained between him and sole rule of the empire. But Licinius was getting up in age; he would only hold onto power for a little over a decade. In the year 324, Licinius presented Constantine with the perfect opportunity to wage a final war for control of the eastern portion of the realm. Licinius accused the Christians in his territory of spying for Constantine and he expelled them. While the accusations were probably true, Constantine charged Licinius with persecution, which was illegal per the Edict of Milan, and he led his army east to do battle. They squared off twice, with the second encounter leading to Licinius's sound defeat. After surrendering, Constantine spared his life, momentarily, and exiled the former emperor to the city of Thessalonica. Constantine now controlled the entire Roman Empire, and he would do so for the next thirteen years, until his death in 337.

Constantine's path to absolute power did not come haphazardly. On the contrary, he was a meticulous planner, who took on challengers one at a time after prolonged periods of strategizing. Long before he battled Maxentius's forces on the Milvian bridge for control of Italy, Constantine had designs on expanding the empire. With this in mind, he focused on building strong bases of operation in Gaul and Great Britain, and strengthening the borders, particularly positions along the Rhine, which was still vulnerable to barbarian invasion. Though, like many emperors before him, Constantine was given to pomp and excess, and thus lavished himself by building an imposing, richly appointed palace in his capital city, Trier-this while neglecting important public projects. For instance, vineyards in nearby fields flooded due to lack of maintenance of the drainage systems, which disrupted the local economy.

Constantine, like emperors Decius and Diocletian before him, sought to recapture the former glories of the Roman Empire; but unlike them, he did not choose to do so in honor of the pagan deities. Constantine believed that Rome would prosper once more through Christianity. While he could not know it, Scripture prophecy had placed Christianity at the center of world power, which it would achieve in the form of the Papal Empire, and like Nebuchadnezzar and other kings of old, Yah would use Constantine to establish this leavened religion as the dominant force in the earth to bring about other important prophecies that were yet unfulfilled.

Opposition to Constantine's grand vision for a resurgence of Rome's glory came from many Romans, particularly members of the Senate, some of whom belonged to aristocratic families with long ties to the ancient practices. They decried policies that would diminish the importance of the Roman deities and the privileges that came with paganism. Prior to his victory over Licinius, Constantine conflicted with the Roman Senate, which was still an active check on his power. But as absolute master of the empire, he could direct his own course and see it through as he pleased. And what he saw as part of his grand vision for Rome's revival, was a new capital, that was well away from the pagan center of Rome, which was steeped in ancient traditions and those beholden to them.

During Constantine's second battle with Licinius in 324, known as the Battle of Chrysopolis, something promising struck Constantine's eye. Professor Paul Freedman, who teaches medieval history at Yale University, says:

"This event, this Battle of Chrysopolis, showed Constantine the importance of the small fortress city of Byzantium, not far away."

Of course, Byzantium would be renamed in honor of Constantine. And, like the old Rome, this new Rome would feature all the classic pagan elements of the ancient city it was meant to replace, including many statues of pagan deities. These would be removed from their ancient temples and placed in the new city's public baths and squares, and even its famed hippodrome. Professor Freedman goes on to say:

"Constantinople, as this town was called, was planned to be a new Rome. Like Rome it would have a forum, it would have civic spaces, it would have races and sporting events, it would have imperial palaces and gardens, it would have victory columns, triumphal arches, aqueducts; the whole panoply of classical civilization.

"And this relocation of the capital to Constantinople, the relocation of the capital to the east, is significant because it shows us the permanent result of the tetrarchy. Diocletian's experiment was a failure in the sense that the emperors and caesars would not cooperate. And such a scheme was never tried again. But the division of the empire between east and west would be something that would eventually become permanent. Its first traces are with Diocletian; it is also something that continues under Constantine without the addition of the caesars. Constantine ruled over the whole empire. He did not divide it himself, but he facilitated its conceptual and, eventually, real political division by creating a new Rome, a new capital in the former fortress of Byzantium."

In his book, Mysteries of the Middle Ages, Thomas Cahill tells us why this was a lasting economic and political strategy:

"In addition to his lightly worn Christianity, Constantine would be remembered chiefly for his dramatic change of imperial residence. He didn't care much for Rome, too huddled and pluriform for his tastes, so he established a New Rome in the small Greek city of Byzantium on the southwestern shore of the Bosphorus. It was an excellent choice, for the site commanded Europe and Asia on opposite shores, was virtually impregnable, yet stood wide open to trade. Though Western Europe began to fracture into a puzzle of barbarian kingdoms little more than a century after Constantine's death, the Byzantine Empire would remain in the hands of Constantine's successors for ten centuries more-till in 1453 Byzantium, now a golden capital called Constantinople, fell to the Turks, who called it Istanbul."

Upon its founding, Constantinople was not a well-populated city. To draw citizens to the new capital, Constantine resorted to doling out all manner of privileges to those who chose to live there. These came in the form of exemptions from taxes and military service. Some citizens received free agricultural products: oil, wheat, or wine. On the strength of these and other acts, so many people flocked to the new capital that a century later, during the reign of Theodosius II, new city walls had to be erected to accommodate the swollen population.

We'll be back with more exciting scriptural history . . . in a moment.
[MUSICAL INTERLUDE]
We now continue with our podcast.

Before Constantine came to power and bestowed broad freedoms on the church, Christianity was persecuted and outlawed. His intervention, vaulting it to the lofty status it enjoyed from his reign onward, in effect caused the church to re-envision its purpose and alter its overall image. A new age had dawned on the Christian movement, which was now free to develop and spread without imperial impediment. Constantine had made the religion completely legal, and he used legislation to create a new day of rest for Christians, Sunday, that did double duty honoring the Unconquered Sun (see our documentary: Understanding the Sabbath, for an in-depth study of this topic). Nothing seemed to be able to slow the progress of Christianity, as many streamed into the church, which was now favored by a powerful emperor. Of course, this meant that many pagans were drawn to the movement as well, bringing with them pluralistic, and even secular beliefs and practices that would further poison the Christian well.

To Constantine, this was a non-issue. While he could be viewed as a semi-practicing Christian up until his baptism toward the end of his life, his brand of Christianity, and his conversion experience, was not like that of the average convert. In his day, a new person entering the church would endure a lengthy process of education that focused on Christian discipline and doctrinal instruction. This would ensure that the convert both understood and was able to live the new faith he or she adopted. Following this was official baptism. Thereafter, the bishop of the convert's particular church would act as their guide and shepherd in the course of their spiritual journey.

Constantine experienced none of this. After his professed acceptance of Christianity, he never subjected himself to the authority of Christian teachers or bishops. He did have Christians among his entourage-historians, bishops, and ecclesiastical leaders-but they were regarded as employees, in the capacity of tutors of his children, documenters, or otherwise liaisons. They did not dictate Constantine's religious life. He determined that alone and in fact considered himself the "bishop of bishops." Beyond that, Constantine continued to take part in pagan ceremonies, and he held onto the title Pontifex Maximus as head of the Roman religious cult, to which the leading bishops raised no objections.

Of course, Constantine had lavished the church with many gifts, church buildings among them; his policies greatly favored Christians; and he also spoke well of the being they served. More than this, he sat a powerful ruler who had conquered all challengers. But the bishops remained silent not for these reasons, but mainly because Constantine was not yet a baptized member of the church, and so was not viewed as a Christian in the fullest sense. In light of this, the bishops were in no position to direct the life of such a person. In the end, Constantine's actions show that he had a superstitious fear of the Almighty, rather than a healthy reverence for him. And while that superstitious fear prompted him to shower gifts on Christians and treat them favorably, it did not preclude him from serving the other deities, which he did openly, even consulting the oracle of Apollo. He was Supreme Pontiff, or high priest of the Roman religion, after all-which was the prerogative of all Roman emperors.

Since he enjoyed both paganism and Christianity, Constantine was not about to suppress either. The old pagan deities were still favored by the aristocracy and rural citizens, as well as soldiers in the Roman army. The cities of Athens and Alexandria were still important centers for the study of ancient pagan philosophy and wisdom. Roman citizens among these various classes were not ready to abandon their pagan religion for Christianity, nor was Constantine going to force anyone to do so. That would come later, under a new system and other Roman rulers. As much as he did for the church, and though his empire was largely Christian, Constantine did not make Christianity the empire's official religion. This too would come later, during the reign of Emperor Theodosius.

Now, while we use the term "paganism" in reference to the Roman religion and the general worship of other deities, like many ancient terms, the word "pagan" meant something else during late antiquity. In truth, the ancient Roman religion had no name; only the deities were named. By the early fourth century, the Roman religion was pushed mainly to the rural areas of the empire and was predominantly practiced by rural citizens. The word "pagan" has its root in the Latin paganus, which means "country dweller." Thus, "pagan" was thereafter used in a derogatory sense by Christians to describe those who held to the old polytheistic Roman religion, and religions or beliefs akin to this. And so it is used today.

After Constantine, there were few pagans among his successors who tried to restore paganism to the realm, but failed. Christianity would take root, mainly through the many edicts that supported it. Aspects of some of these edicts are still with us to this day, such as church properties being tax exempt, as well as members being able to legally bequeath property to the church. After many centuries, these freedoms would make the church rich in land and other forms of wealth. In his book, Pagans: The End of Traditional Religion and the Rise of Christianity, James J. O'Donnell writes:

"With governmental approval, money and influence began to flow toward Christian communities, especially in the larger cities. The emperor gave gifts, so other dignitaries followed suit. Wealthy men offered support for building fine new buildings and left gifts in their wills. Gifts to the church of productive agricultural property were a kind of endowment, guaranteeing continuing income. Just as an old master painting, once it gets to a museum, is unlikely to move again, so as wealth flowed to the ancient or medieval church, it stayed there, undivided by descendants."

So generous was Constantine toward the Christian movement that he even allowed the bishops use of the imperial posts, which meant that bishops traveling to synods or council meetings would have a supply of fresh horses along their journey, and the entire affair came at the expense of the Roman state. With his conversion, a few changes took place in the church as well. Syncretism set in, and pagan superstition could be seen among the laity. When people faced illnesses, they would rely on ancient magical practices. Others would be buried with both Christian and pagan religious symbols and artifacts. When the decree was passed, ordering the first day of the week to be observed, Christians given over to the old pagan ways simply honored the Unconquered Sun, since the day equally honored this deity. And while incense was mainly used as a sign of respect for the sitting emperor, it became a part of the Christian worship service as well. Ministers who officiated at those services, and who once dressed modestly, now wore extravagant and luxurious garments in keeping with the royal court. They also began to adopt the title "priest," like their pagan counterparts-though the ancient Israelites were among the first to use the title to refer to the Levites who officiated in the temple.

Around the time of Constantine's reign, another major issue arose, that of new Christian movements which proposed theories and doctrines that would divide the church. Perhaps the most divisive of these was Arianism. In his book, A History of the Middle Ages: 300 - 1500, John M. Riddle writes:

"Of all the Christian sects found in the empire and beyond its boundaries, none did more damage to the unity of the church than Arianism. Around 318, Arius, a Christian priest in Alexandria, challenged his bishop by preaching that [Yeshua], having been created by [Yah] the Father at a point in time, could not, as a created being, be co-eternal with [Yah]. Only [Yah] the Father was eternal and immutable, whereas the Son of [Yah] was subject to change, as the [Good News books] described him. Being lesser than [Yah] the Father, the Son of [Yah] could have only indirect knowledge of the Father. Athanasius, a conservative-minded deacon, defended his bishop by arguing that the Son of [Yah], incarnate in [Yeshua], had existed from eternity as a coequal member of the [Elohim]: Father, Son, and [Set Apart] Spirit. . . .

"These were not arcane theological points to Christians of the time. We are told that great numbers within the Christian communities, first in Alexandria, and then in cities in Palestine, Syria, and even Constantinople itself, the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, engaged in vituperative debates that resulted in physical clashes when attempts at persuasion turned to violence. Constantine, who had hoped to strengthen the unity of his empire by recognizing and encouraging Christianity, could not ignore the problem and sent an envoy to Alexandria in a vain attempt to resolve this doctrinal dispute. The envoy reported that more than one person's skull had been fractured in the street fighting over the nature of [Yeshua's] relationship to the Father.

"In 325, Constantine called a Council at Nicaea (near Constantinople), and approximately 300 bishops, out of more than 1,800 in the empire, attended, some at the emperor's expense. The council wrote a creed (from Credo, "I believe," the word with which official creeds in Latin began), known as the Nicene Creed (still widely used in Christian churches), which endorsed the Athanasian position. It proclaimed '[the Messiah] . . . begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father,' rejecting the Arian belief that the Son was of a different substance than the Father. Although this section of the Nicene Constantinopolitan Creed became, and remains, the orthodox position for both eastern and western churches, the threat to the peace and unity of the empire represented by Arianism was not ended. In 381, the creed was revised and incorporated the original version of 325, whose text is lost."

The Arian dispute persisted into the reign of Emperor Theodosius, who ruled four decades after the death of Constantine. He too was forced to deal with its divisiveness. "Arguments about the Arian take on the nature of [Yeshua], as opposed to the Nicene understanding," Susan Wise Bauer writes,

". . . had spread to the lowest levels of society. 'Everywhere throughout the city is full of such things,' complained the bishop Gregory of Nyssa, in a sermon preached at Constantinople, the alleys, the squares, the thoroughfares, the residential quarters; among cloak salesmen, those in charge of the money-changing tables, those who sell us our food. For if you ask about change, they philosophize to you about the Begotten and the Unbegotten. And if you ask about the price of bread, the reply is, 'The Father is greater, and the Son is subject to him.' If you say, 'Is the bath ready?' they declare the Son has his being from the non-existent. I am not sure what this evil should be called-inflammation of the brain or madness or some sort of epidemic disease which contrives the derangement of reasoning."

Despite the controversies that erupted during his reign; regardless of the immense bloodshed of which he was most guilty, which secured his throne; and despite the faithful attachment to his pagan roots, by the year 330, Constantine had managed to fully establish a single empire that would be controlled by one royal family, and be comprised of one church. He had also successfully unified that church temporarily at the Council of Nicaea through imperial sanction. All of this meant that his new Rome would indeed have a lasting impact and enjoy a long legacy. This did not bode well for old Rome, which had lost its status, being isolated as it was, in a region that was far less wealthy that its eastern counterpart centered at the new capital, Constantinople.

But in the centuries to come, Rome would find renewed strength and importance following the collapse of the western Roman Empire. The Roman church would eventually assume primacy over all churches in the western realm, under the direction of powerful popes, beginning with Pope Leo, who would be viewed as the Supreme Head of the western half of Christendom.

That wraps it up for this episode of Churchianity: Two Thousand Years of Leaven. A production of Kingdom Preppers.org, this episode was written, produced, and hosted by yours truly, Kingdom Prepper. All praise, honor, and glory are due to my boss, Yah Elohim, and to his right hand, Yahushua HaMashiach. You can access the transcript for this episode on our website. Yah willing, our history will continue in the next podcast. Shalom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Constantine defeats his rival Maxentius for control of Italy, leaving him with one final rival blocking the way to complete control of the Roman Empire. The battle of Chrysopolis decides the fate of the realm, establishing Constantine as sole ruler. Constantine thereafter cements his place in histor

# data[].attributes.body
Paganism replaces The Way

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Doctrinal disputes created deep divisions in the ancient catholic church, which often led to violence, like the Arianism problem seen at the end of our last podcast. Beginning with Constantine's reign, these disputes forced the intervention of the sitting emperor, and all groups and parties in dispute sought the aid of the Roman government, which they hoped would crush the opposition. Constantine attempted to settle the Arian dispute by summoning an ecclesiastical council over which he presided. This idea would fruition into the sixth-century situation of the Byzantine emperor being seen as both king and priest, caesar and pope.

On the path to this kind of supreme power, the men who succeeded Constantine had to destroy two important elements that threatened the dominance of the church: Arianism and the paganism of the Roman aristocracy. The Arian adherents were too unified and too strong to be crushed by orthodox Christians without the aid of the emperor, so the leading orthodox bishops pleaded with the Roman state to step in on their behalf. Arianism had spread far and wide, and it had gathered such strength and force that Constantine was baptized by an Arian bishop on his deathbed. Even his sons who sat the throne after him sympathized with the Arian movement. By the middle of the fourth century, the opposition against Arianism was halted by powerful rulers who also sympathized with the cause. But two decades later, the emperors who assumed power would begin to favor the side of the orthodox church and reject Arianism.

When Theodosius ruled, he made sweeping changes that would stamp out the Arian problem in much of the realm, but not before great damage was done. Theodosius was an orthodox emperor who condemned the Arian movement and sought to destroy any trace of it from the eastern half of the empire, which was his domain. This was also the half where Arianism thrived. Before he could fully suppress the movement by passing laws forbidding Arians to meet, Arianism spread to the empire's fiercest enemies. In his book, Medieval Christianty, Kevin Madigan writes:

". . . Europe, no longer an empire but an aggregation of smaller kingdoms, now was home to practitioners of Germanic religions, to Catholic Christians, and to baptized Germans who practiced a form of Christianity that was regarded as dangerously heretical by Catholic Christians. . . .

"Born of a Cappadocian Christian family that had been captured by the Goths, Ulfilas was fluent not only in Greek and Latin but in Gothic as well. Consecrated bishop around 340 by Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian who was then bishop of Constantinople, Ulfilas laid the foundation by which the Goths later became Arian Christians and Gothic became a written language based on Greek. Aside from preaching an Arian creed, he translated the New Testament into Gothic. In this way, his Arian style of Christianity passed from the Goths to other Germanic tribes and moved back into the western empire when the German tribes crossed the old frontiers, established kingdoms, and began to settle.

"The western Goths, or Visigoths, terrified of the Huns (who were migrating westward from Central Asia), already occupied the banks of the Danube late in the third century, when Dacia was given to them by the Romans. . . . In a conflict over land and food, they defeated the Romans at Adrianople. Emperor Theodosius I thereafter recognized them as Roman allies and confirmed them in their possessions along the Danube."

Christianity's second great enemy, Roman paganism, saw a slight resurgence when Julian the Apostate, a nephew of Constantine, ascended the throne in 361. After rising to power, Emperor Julian-who was raised a Christian, but secretly embraced paganism-openly expressed his favor of the polytheistic religion and set about reversing the Christian policies put in place by Constantine and his successors. Julian was educated in Neoplatonism and was a great admirer of Greco-Roman culture. He sought to elevate classical paganism to a higher level of sophistication and made it a priority to restore the pagan Roman temples that had been abandoned by the masses who flocked to more alluring mystery religions.

Paganism was dealt a near lethal blow when Julian's efforts were halted during a battle against the Persians.

". . . Julian launched a Persian campaign."

Writes Susan Wise Bauer, in The History of the Medieval World.

"In 363, he marched east with eighty-five thousand men. . . . One June day, during yet another Persian ambush, Julian was struck by a Persian spear that lodged in his lower abdomen. He was carried back to camp, where he slowly bled to death: one of only three Roman emperors to fall in battle against a foreign enemy."

The other two were Valerian and Decius. Following Julian's death, all emperors who rose to power after him, in both the east and the west, were thereafter Christian. But while the emperors who immediately succeeded Julian embraced Christianity, they did little to oppose paganism. It wasn't until the last two decades of the fourth century that the church experienced vindication by gaining the support of emperors who would suppress and eventually crush paganism entirely. Gratian, an emperor of the west who ruled from 375 - 383, separated paganism from the Roman state and excluded the age-old title, Pontifex Maximus from the list of those usually associated with the emperor. No longer was a Roman emperor high priest of the Roman cult.

Gratian also ordered the pagan Altar of Victory removed from the curia, the principal meeting place of the Roman Senate in the Forum Romanum, ending centuries of dearly held tradition within the highest ranks of the state. The removal of the pagan altar led to a debate between a man named Symmachus, leader of the pagan elites, and Bishop Ambrose of Milan. Symmachus argued that all roads led to the Creator, therefore the pagan Roman religion should be left alone. Ambrose argued that Christianity was the one true religion and all others were to be destroyed. Co-Emperor Theodosius, who would later gain control of both the eastern and western halves of the empire, sided with the orthodox bishop and thereafter made the practice of the ancient rites of paganism-both in public and in private-illegal throughout the entire realm.

This new legislation, which devasted the pagan aristocracy, caused a remnant of them to rally around a Roman general who promised to restore paganism if his usurpation succeeded. The general and his army managed to take control of Rome, but Theodosius annihilated them in a final battle in 394. A year later, Theodosius would be dead, but his sons, who succeeded him as emperors in the east and the west, passed additional anti-pagan laws, and many pagan temples and sanctuaries were destroyed. Thus ended the freedom of religion in ancient Rome.

Following the events of 394, Christianity enjoyed greater privileges and saw its catholic clergy placed in equal standing with the realm's most celebrated pagan priests. Toward the end of the fourth century, the privileges extended to the church by the orthodox emperors included the fiscal as well as the judicial variety, since the church was elevated above the common law of the empire, and was thus a state within a state. The church was in effect able to establish its own law which it steered by internal tribunals. This became canon law. Sentences passed on individuals through the realm's imperial tribunals could be bypassed by bishops who chose to exercise the church's right of sanctuary.

The ordinary law courts of the Roman state relinquished judicial control over the church, so its clergy was exempted from its strictures. Through the acts of the late-fourth century Roman emperors-Theodosius in particular-the ancient catholic church, for the first time in history, was fully independent of the Roman state's imperial jurisdiction. This was all necessary in order for the church to fulfill the prophecies that pointed to its unrivaled strength, which it would later amass on its course to achieving full power.

With its newly held status as a state within a state, the church-especially in the western half of the empire-was now in a good position to withstand the prophesied invasion of the barbarians in the fifth century, which devastated the imperial Roman state and reduced the words "Roman emperor" to that of a hollow title, devoid of any power. By the time of Theodosius's reign, the barbarians already had a foothold in the realm, but Theodosius managed to appease and pacify them, keeping them at bay. Theodosius's successors, on the other hand, who lacked his competence, only managed to enrage their Germanic enemies. The result was that:

"[I]n 406 the Rhenish frontiers gave way, and many tribes burst across."

Writes Norman F. Cantor, in his book, The Civilization of the Middle Ages.

"There was officially a western Roman empire until 476, but the last emperors had no influence on the course of events. They had even abandoned Rome for Ravenna in the early fifth century. This left the Eternal City open to the invaders, and the bishop of Rome emerged as the leader, taking the place of the absent emperor.

"As the Roman state disintegrated in the fifth century, the attention of men in the West came more and more to be directed to the only institution that could provide some unity and leadership to religion and education-the bishopric of Rome, the acknowledged leader of the Christian church in the West."

The course of history was undergoing irreversible changes in this period. While Diocletian had divided the realm into east and west, Constantine, upholding this division, enacted policies that freed the church from the grip of the state, ending its persecution and imbuing it with certain freedoms and privileges. Theodosius I, the last of what is considered the great emperors, did more by destroying Christianity's main rivals, and establishing the Christian movement as the state religion. After him, there would be no other single ruler over the entire realm, nor would the administrative aspect of the empire be reunited under one emperor.

In August of 410, Alaric, an Arian leader of the Visigoths, sacked Rome, the former capital of the empire, which sent shockwaves throughout the realm. The barbarians would become a permanent fixture in western civilization. Seeing the precarious nature of this situation, Pope Leo I, the first of the popes to assert any real influence, negotiated with barbarian kings who had invaded Italy. In 452 he requested that the city of Rome be spared by the invading Huns.

In Mysteries of the Middle Ages, Thomas Cahill writes:

"The pope and his brother bishops, all public men in their classical mode, moved quickly and deftly to secure the peace of their increasingly fractured realms (and, in the process, to aggrandize themselves). By the early fifth century, the barbarian hordes were pouring into Italy from the north and east, attracted mightily by settled farmlands and sweet vineyards. By mid-century, one massive influx-the Huns under Attila-looked to march on Rome, now a defenseless former capital. Pope Leo the Great, a bishop of massive dignity, intelligence, and purpose, traveled north to Mantua and met with Attila. The pope used every trick he had-from eloquent words to elegant panoply to a tangible aura of spiritual authority-and so impressed the Hun that he agreed to desist. It was an encounter of mythological proportions and would bolster the reputation of Rome's bishop for centuries to come. The pope could not be withstood, not even by an unbaptized savage."

In 455, Pope Leo again negotiated with the invading Vandals. Here we see the pope replacing the emperor as defender of the realm. It was Pope Leo I, bishop of Rome from 440 - 461, who established the foundation for the supremacy of the papal office, which would begin to reach its height under the eleventh-century popes. The Petrine doctrine, which was formulated by Pope Leo, is based on the words Yeshua spoke to Peter in Matthew 16:15 - 19. Leo's interpretation of this exchange asserts that Yeshua intended for Peter's supposed successors to share in his power, each being given the keys of the Kingdom, as it were. The bishop of Rome, who ruled over a city where Peter is believed to have been a missionary, and was supposedly martyred, was to be the head of the entire church, being invested with absolute authority over matters of faith and morality. The Roman pope was to be seen as Yeshua's vicar, or substitute on earth. Again, this would not begin to be fully realized until late in the eleventh century, as the early popes failed to assert any kind of influence associated with the prestige of the papal office, aside from Leo himself.

We'll be back with more exciting scriptural history . . . in a moment.
[MUSICAL INTERLUDE]
We now continue with our podcast.

To be clear, the Christian independence that was realized in the late fourth and early fifth century was not extended to individuals within the institution. That independence was reserved for the leadership-bishops sitting atop the very apex. Individual conscience was under the direct control of the church hierarchy, which was just as authoritarian as the Roman state itself. The church and the state, at this time, operated in different arenas, and one did not yet absorb the other. Morals and affairs of religion were the business of bishops, not the emperor. But this was mainly true in the west, as the eastern half of the realm, centered in Constantinople, made no such distinction.

It was Ambrose, bishop of Milan, and his colleagues, who gave the church most of its structure after imperial policies were passed in its favor. It was they who developed the church into a political and legal institution complete with bureaucracy, like any sovereign government. The bishops believed that as the emperor had the charge of maintaining order within his vast realm, so too did the church leadership have the charge of maintaining the morality of the Christian body while shaping overall Christian theology. And this could be achieved through force where reasoning alone failed.

Because the church and the state were still separate and distinct in the west, tensions would mount and inevitable clashes of authority were certain. Those clashes were often centered on control of the minds of the people-and it was people who overlapped the jurisdiction of both institutions. This clash of authority could be seen early in the age of church independence, while Theodosius I was still emperor. He had ordered Bishop Ambrose to see that a synagogue was rebuilt, after a horde of angry Christians burned it to the ground. While Theodosius was an orthodox Christian and no sympathizer of those who held to religions outside of his own, he felt this incident fell within his jurisdiction of maintaining order. Bishop Ambrose disagreed, claiming that it was instead a civil matter that was to be handled by the church.

Ambrose easily won that contest, and Christian money, as he had argued, was not used to rebuild a Judahite synagogue. Another incident brought the powers of state and church into further conflict following the murder of imperial officials at the hands of Roman citizens and Theodosius's brutal response. A governor, who had been drinking at a tavern in Pannonia suffered a drunken experience that left a popular charioteer in prison. The charioteer was set to compete the next day, but the governor refused to release him, so his fans rioted and stormed the governor's headquarters. The governor and other officials were killed.

When Theodosius heard of the matter, he immediately retaliated by having all involved in the riot, executed. The result was a massacre of some six to seven thousand citizens of Thessalonica. Theodosius put the matter behind him, but when he attempted to enter a church in Milan, Ambrose, the bishop of that important city, refused him. Theodosius was a baptized Christian, so, despite being emperor, he was subject to church discipline in matters of morality.

Since it was understood that the emperor had overstepped his bounds, Ambrose excommunicated him, barring Theodosius from receiving the cherished sacraments as punishment for his crime. In a bizarre twist, the emperor actually yielded, humbling himself before the church by begging Ambrose to pardon him. The bishop did, and Theodosius was reinstated.

Of this, Susan Wise Bauer writes:

"The Christian historians who recorded this merely say that Theodosius then confessed his sin, did penance, and was restored. But what passes almost as a footnote is the fact that it took Theodosius eight months to do so. Standing on the steps and looking at Ambrose's unyielding face, Theodosius must have realized that his decrees were having an unintended consequence. The single, catholic church held his empire together because it was greater than the state, greater than any national loyalty, greater than any single man. It was greater than the emperor."

Turning once more to Norman F. Cantor, he writes that:

"Ambrose became the dominant force within the Christian church in the crucial decades of the 370s and 380s. Naturally, he brought the attitudes of a Roman official to the church and to society. With his bureaucratic cast of mind, he played a large role in moving the church toward a legalistic style of ecclesiastical life and toward the establishment of canon law as a system based on punishment, duty, office, and obligation. He was deeply concerned with obedience, believing that the role of the bishop was like that of a Roman governor. Bishops had already begun to depart from their early role as pious wise men-the spontaneous leaders of the Christian flock-and Ambrose crystallized the new concept that bishops were authoritarian figures quite separate from ordinary laypeople. A bishop dictates, decrees, and pronounces edicts, and the ordinary Christian is more apt to fear than to love him."

With Ambrose wielding such power and influence at this early stage, we see the beginnings of a state church slowly taking shape. Ambrose only achieved the success he did because a large Christian population supported him; and counted among those Christians were emperors. In this way, Ambrose, having their ear, was able to influence state policy. This is why pagan opposition could be removed by Theodosius, and why Gratian, the young emperor susceptible to Ambrose's control, could be moved to have the pagan altar of Victory withdrawn from the Senate.

Ambrose's influence reached beyond emperors, however. While he presented the theory of the church existing as both a civil and ecclesiastical power, he proved, through his actions, that the church was in fact above the state in many matters, and this would pave the way for the state church that would emerge much later.

That said, the eastern half of the empire was structured quite differently from its western counterpart.

"Following Constantine's example . . ."

Writes John M. Riddle:

". . . the emperors maintained that they were responsible for the church's unity, and, in most cases, that also meant giving approval for appointments to ecclesiastical offices. The emperor appointed the patriarch in Constantinople, generally considered the head of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Patriarch means "rule of the father," similar to the late Latin vernacular word papa, for "father" (in English, "pope"), for the head of the Roman Church. In theory, only one "catholic" or "universal" church existed, but by the late fourth century, the eastern and western churches were separating into the Roman and Eastern Orthodox churches over different theological interpretations and the inability of the emperor in Constantinople to determine the religious status of the pope residing in Rome."

East and west, therefore, became more and more distinct over time, though there was still one Roman empire. In both halves of that empire two separate churches had begun to amass power, being led by a pope-in the case of the western church centered in Rome-or a patriarch-in the case of the eastern church centered in Constantinople. This division speaks to the prophecy found in the book of Daniel, chapter 2 in particular, where Nebuchadnezzar dreams of a statue whose various parts represent succeeding empires that would dominate the known world and control the fate of Yah's chosen people, Israel. Rome, unlike all the other empires before it, would usurp the message of Yah's people, and assume their role in dispensing that message to the world-albeit in a corrupted form. In that chapter, the prophet Daniel told the king:

[31] " 'You, O king, were looking and behold, there was a single great statue; that statue, which was large and of extraordinary splendor, was standing in front of you, and its appearance was awesome. [32] The head of that statue was made of fine gold, its breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of bronze, [33] its legs of iron. . . .' "

-Daniel 2:31 - 33

In verse 38 of Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar was told that he was the head of gold, meaning Babylon was the first kingdom in succession within the prophetic dream. We all have one head on our bodies, signifying that Babylon would be one kingdom with one ruler. But the next kingdom is associated with a chest and arms. Arms signify that the kingdom would have two regions of control, and we learn that the next empire is formed by a combination of Media and Persia.

[28] ". . . your kingdom has been divided and given over to the Medes and Persians."

-Daniel 5:28

We have already shown that the Greek empire was the third succeeding Kingdom in the very first podcast of this series. And while Greece, which is represented at first by the middle or lower torso of the statue-signifying one united empire with one emperor-that kingdom is also pictured as including the thigh region, which indicates a connection to the next kingdom in line. This speaks to the Greco-Roman culture and language adopted by Rome, the statue's "legs of iron." Rome is seen as long legs, signifying not only its impressive span of uninterrupted rule, but also the important eventual, and permanent, division of the empire into east and west, as we see with Rome and Constantinople. This was true of the imperial administration, as well as the later ecclesiastical one, when the Roman and Eastern Orthodox churches emerged as controlling forces within the empire.

Those two churches, however, which comprised one Roman empire, would go from being legs of iron, to feet of iron and clay, meaning that their iron rule would be dampened by outside forces, like the Arab invasion, the rise of independent European states, and the emergence of yet other powerful nations far west, in the new world. Those nations would share the power once wielded solely by the church, signified by the feet of iron and clay in Nebuchadnezzar's statue. The king's dream, and the representation of that great statue, of course reaches down to our time, and many who live now will witness the culmination of Daniel's prophetic interpretation.

That wraps it up for this episode of Churchianity: Two Thousand Years of Leaven. A production of Kingdom Preppers.org, this episode was written, produced, and hosted by yours truly, Kingdom Prepper. All praise, honor, and glory are due to my boss, Yah Elohim, and to his right hand, Yahushua HaMashiach. You can access the transcript for this episode on our website. Yah willing, our history will continue in the next podcast. Shalom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Christian Independence - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Theodosius attempts to stamp out the remnants of the Arian movement from his realm, but not before it spreads to Rome's fiercest enemies. Paganism, on the other hand, is outlawed, and eradicated from the realm, leading to the further rise of the Christian movement. Bishop Ambrose of Milan exercises

# data[].attributes.body
Catholicism is considered the "true christian faith" right up til today.

# data[].attributes.headline
Some great researchers are still blind, and believe in "the church," Though clearly Paul reminded us in Rom 11:11-31 . . ."remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you."

# data[].attributes.subject
Some great researchers are still blind, and believe in "the church," Though clearly Paul reminded us in Rom 11:11-31 . . ."remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Replacing The Jews in Early Christian Theology

"God gave them the Oral Law, that by this they might be distinguished from the other nations. Hence it was not given in writing, or else the other nations [or Ishmaelites] would falsify it - as they did with the written Torah - and say that they are Israel" (Midrash Numbers XVI 10 [on 7.72]). While the midrash from which this statement comes may date from as late as the 12th century, the situation it describes is the second century ad. Most would agree today that the proscription against writing down the oral traditions remained in effect until about the middle of the third century. This midrash seems to look wistfully back to the time before the oral law had been recorded, before the claim that "we are Israel" was commonly heard in debate with Christian opponents.

There is nothing new about replacement theology. It was well developed before the end of the second century. Of course, those who subscribe to the tenets of replacement theology (and there are many, although few would actually answer yes if asked "Are you a replacement theologian?") must say that the teaching goes back to the New Testament itself. The purpose of this paper is to see how the subject was presented in about the first hundred years after the completion of the New Testament.
The Process of Replacement
In a study of early church use of Abraham in its arguments against Judaism, Jeffrey Siker defined four stages or generations in the development of the idea that the Church had replaced the Jews:

Generation One (ad 30-60): Paul argues that the gentiles are included but the Jews are not excluded.

Generation Two (ad 60-90): Matthew, Hebrews and Luke-Acts still argue for the inclusion of gentiles but begin to address the question of Jewish exclusion.

Generation Three (ad 90-120): John, Ignatius, and Barnabas assume gentile inclusion but now argue more strongly for Jewish exclusion.

Generation Four (ad 120-150): Several works, culminating with Justin Martyr, do not even treat gentile inclusion as an issue and assume Jewish exclusion in their arguments.

While the present author cannot fully agree with Siker's conclusions regarding some New Testament writings (particularly the Gospel of John), his observation of the progression from gentile inclusion to Jewish exclusion in such a relatively short time provides a convenient starting point for our overview.
Apostolic Fathers
While the writings usually grouped under this heading are not all earlier than other post-New Testament writings, they reflect an early stage in the development of Christian thought after the New Testament. It is not surprising, then, to find that there is very little in them which claims that God has rejected the Jewish people or replaced them with the Church. The Didache and Polycarp, indeed, contain nothing directly relating to the subject. The Shepherd of Hermas approaches what might be called a theology of precedence when he has a vision of the Church as an old lady who "was created the first of all things, and for her sake the world was established." However, Hermas makes no mention of either Israel or Jews nor indeed of any Old Testament character. With his heavy emphasis on the Church, any inchoate doctrine of replacement would have found a natural place here.
1 Clement
As one reads 1 Clement looking for hints of replacement theology, there is a feeling of innocence and continuity, like the subject has not really come up. Clement refers to "our fathers" (60:4; cf 30:2) and quotes Deuteronomy 3:8-9 ("The Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the allotment of his inheritance.") as if it refers to the Church. But there is no vitriol, no attack, nothing in fact that could not have been written by a rabbinic Jew. God has simply expanded his program: "All the generations from Adam until this day have passed away; but those who were perfected in love by the grace of God have a place among the pious" (50:3).
Ignatius
Writing to the church at Philadelphia in the first decade of the second century, the bishop of Antioch issued this warning: "If anyone interpret Judaism to you, do not listen to him; for it is better to hear Christianity from the circumcised than Judaism from the uncircumcised. But both of them, unless they speak of Jesus Christ, are to me tombstones and sepulchers" ( Phil. 6:1). While this does not speak of a new relationship between Judaism and Christianity, it is interesting to note that Ignatius attacks the Jewish religion while not rejecting the institution of circumcision. However, his position is more clearly refined in his famous statement to the Magnesians (10:2-3): "Put aside the evil leaven, which has grown old and sour, and turn to the new leaven, which is Jesus Christ ... it is monstrous to talk of Jesus Christ and to practice Judaism. For Christianity did not base its faith on Judaism, but Judaism on Christianity."

Ignatius did not expand on this last statement, but it has all the earmarks of what we have called a theology of precedence or pre-existence: the Church has existed since the foundation of the world and is not to be seen as something subsequent to Judaism. This idea is expanded somewhat in the so-called Second Epistle of Clement: "If we do the will of our Father, God, we shall belong to the first church, the spiritual one which was created before the sun and moon ... The Church belongs not to the present, but has existed from the beginning; for she was spiritual, as also was our Jesus, but she was made manifest in the last days that she might save us" (14:1-2). We will discuss this idea further below.

The Epistle to Diognetus is known for its designation of the Christians as a "new race" (1). However, while the writer (4) ridicules Jewish practices such as food laws, Sabbath, circumcision, and the calendar, there is no hint that Judaism or the Jewish people is finished. Indeed, his very reason for writing to Diognetus is to convince him to join the Christians and not the Jews.
Barnabas
Of all of the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, none speaks so directly against Judaism as the epistle which bears the name of Barnabas. Interestingly, scholarly opinion has varied widely when interpreting this letter's relationship to Judaism. R.S. MacLennan argues that Barnabas was not in fact attacking Judaism as such. He posits a group of extremists (around the time of the Quietus revolt, ad 115-117). These, he suggests, were trying to stir up a "messianic frenzy" which Barnabas tries to moderate. Those who are being replaced are these fanatics, who may have included both Jews and Christians. "The Epistle of Barnabas is evangelistic and apologetic - not anti-Jewish. It seeks to clarify and define Christianity as a moderate messianic form of Judaism rather than to degrade Jews."

On the other end of the scale is the declaration of James Parkes that "the whole of the epistle of Barnabas is an exposition of the Church as the true Israel." In support of this claim, Parkes quotes in part from Barnabas 4, which warns the readers against

heaping up your sins and saying that the covenant is both theirs and ours. It is ours: but in this way did they finally lose it when Moses had just received it, for the Scripture says: "And Moses was in the mount fasting forty days and forty nights, and he received the covenant from the Lord, tables of stone written with the finger of the hand of the Lord" (Exod 34:28). But they turned to idols and lost it ... And Moses understood and cast the two tables out of his hands, and their covenant was broken, in order that the covenant of Jesus the Beloved should be sealed in our hearts in hope of his faith. ( Barn. 4:6-8)

Elsewhere Barnabas compares conversion to the Law as "shipwreck" (3:6) and declares that circumcision has been abolished (9:4; cf 13:7). While acknowledging that Jesus loved Israel (5:8), Barnabas states that they were abandoned after seeing signs and wonders (4:14), and Jesus has now prepared for himself "the new people" (5:7) who are now the "heirs of the covenant of the Lord" (6:19; cf 13:1). In this light it is perhaps surprising that he does not make more of the destruction of the Temple. This may be because it was being rebuilt while he was writing (16:3ff). It was safer to spiritualize things, saying that the heart of the Christian is the real Temple (16:6-10).

Barnabas does not quite say that the Church is Israel, a statement which will not be made in writing for another 40 years or so. However, the basic elements of replacement theology are there, stronger than in any prior Christian writings. Rejection of the Law and circumcision greatly weaken MacLennan's claim that Barnabas was keeping it all in the family. As we shall note later, the phenomenon of one Jewish party claiming against others that it is the "real Israel" is not unusual. However, the "real Israel" (meaning continuity) does not claim to abrogate the Law, which distinguishes Israel; that claim can only be made by a "new Israel" with a new Law.
Melito of Sardis
Writing in about ad 160-170, Melito did everything but call the Church "Israel": "... your Sovereign, who formed you, who made you, who honored you, who called you 'Israel'. But you did not turn out to be 'Israel'; you did not 'see God', you did not recognize the Lord." However, he seems to assume Israel''s replacement when he calls "the people" a "model" and a "preliminary sketch" and says that the Law was only a parable whose fulfillment came in the gospel. The reality, he says, is to be found in the Church. "When the church arose and the gospel took precedence, the model was made void, conceding its power to the reality ... the people was made void when the church arose."
Justin Martyr
The definitive formulation of early replacement theology is to be found at great length in the writings of Justin Martyr, especially in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. P. Richardson notes that Justin, writing in about ad 160, is the first Christian writer to make explicit the transference of the title "Israel" to the Church: "For the true spiritual Israel, and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham, ... are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ" ( Dial. 11,5). When Trypho reacts to a long speech by Justin with the surprised question "What then? Are you Israel? and speaks He such things to you?" Justin does not answer directly but rather quotes Isaiah 42:1-4 and adds

As therefore from the one man Jacob, who was surnamed Israel, all your nation has been called Jacob and Israel; so we from Christ, who begat us unto God, like Jacob, and Israel, and Judah, and Joseph, and David, are called and are the true sons of God, and keep the commandments of Christ (123,9).

Justin is significant not only for his pronouncement that the Church is Israel, but also because of the large volume of Old Testament exegesis which he brings is support of this claim. Most of the latter half of Isaiah is quoted in chunks of a chapter or more in the Dialogue, while New Testament quotations are relatively infrequent and short and almost exclusively from the gospels. Skarsaune notes frequent parallels between Justin's sources and Barnabas. It should not be thought that later Church Fathers all base themselves on Justin or will find no new ways of expressing or supporting replacement theology. However, with Justin the plateau has been reached; from now on it will be assumed that the Church has replaced the Jews in God's salvation program.
Some Observations on the Early Development of Replacement Theology
A. The rejection of the Jews is normally connected to their role in the killing of Jesus. If some tried to argue that if his death was ordained by God, then the Jews should not be blamed, the reply was that they should have refused to carry out such a negative deed.

B. In light of Paul's use in Galatians 6:16 of the phrase "the Israel of God," it is especially noteworthy that the claim "the Church is Israel" comes so late. Evidently the early Church writers did not understand it to refer to the Church. Even Justin, in his repeated declaration that the Church is now Israel, does not refer to Galatians 6.16 as proof, nor does he even use Paul"s exact phrase.

C. Richardson has pointed out that the claim to be "Israel" was a common feature in debates between streams of Judaism. After reviewing 1 Maccabees, the Psalms of Solomon, 1 Enoch, the Testimonies of the Twelve Patriarchs, and the Assumption of Moses, he concludes: "In each case where one party's opinion is set over against the rest of Judaism, it tends to claim that it is Israel, though there are many variations in the measure of exclusiveness and of the hope for others'' salvation."

D. One wonders if an external religio-political factor might have led to the later spread of the Church's claim to be Israel. With Roman insistence that its non-Jewish subjects offer sacrifice as a show of loyalty, the believers from among the gentiles were faced with several choices. They could refuse and take whatever consequences were being handed down; they could sacrifice and hope God understood that they did not really mean it; or perhaps in some circumstances they could try to convince the officer that they were Jewish and hence exempt. All of these short-term options would have been seen as undesirable. A long-term solution to the problem would be to convince the authorities that the religio licita status enjoyed by Judaism, with its concomitant exemption from all pagan activities, actually belonged to the Christians.
Conclusion
The New Testament makes no direct claim that the Jewish people have been supplanted by the Church as the new Israel or the new people of God. However, it did not take Christian thought long to arrive at that conclusion. Many factors probably contributed to this conclusion, and only a few of them have been covered in this article. These factors may include Old Testament remnant theology as developed in the New Testament; the normal psychological tendency of a religious movement to claim that it is the "last word," the one which makes all its predecessors obsolete; the socio-ethnic shift in the Church from mostly Jewish to mostly gentile; the hesitancy of both Judaism and Christianity to be identified too closly with the other when dealing with the Roman authorities.

These last two factors point to a reality which is far too often overlooked: the influence which environmental pressures have on the development of doctrine. The success of this distortion is aided by the ease of finding selective support for almost any preconceived idea from a book as large as the Bible. A bias, a concordance, and bad exegesis are the ingredients for proving almost anything you want. Replacement theologians (as well as those of us who think a lot about Jewish evangelism) should be careful not to mix too many non-biblical factors in with theology.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Replacing The Jews in Early Christian Theology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Replacing The Jews in Early Christian Theology by Ray Pritz "God gave them the Oral Law, that by this they might be distinguished from the other nations. Hence it was not given in writing, or else the other nations would falsify it - as they did with the

# data[].attributes.body
Understanding old lies supporting new perspectives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Christians differ over the relationship of the Old Testament to the New Testament. Another way of saying this is that Christians differ over the relationship of the old covenant to the new covenant. Tied with this is the issue of the relationship of Israel to the church.

Many conservative churches in the Western world hold to a strong discontinuity between the old and new covenants, a view that is known as dispensationalism. This would include many Baptist and non-denominational churches.

However, dispensationalism is a fairly modern view, arising in the mid-1800s. Historically, the Christian church held to a stronger continuity between the old and new covenants, or what is known as covenant theology. This is true of the churches coming out of the Reformation, but it is especially true of the Calvinistic branches, the Reformed and Presbyterians. These churches base their practice of infant baptism on the continuity of the covenants and the correspondence of baptism to OT circumcision.

In the past few decades, there has been a significant shift away from 19th-century classical dispensationalism, with many moving closer to covenant theology (in varying degrees). Thus, there is now a broad range of views regarding the relationship of the old covenant to the new and of Israel to the church. These views range from the most discontinuity to the most continuity below:

(1) classical dispensationalism
(2) revised dispensationalism
(3) progressive dispensationalism
(4) new covenant theology
(5) covenant theology

Let's briefly survey each of these views.
(1) Classical Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism was developed in the 1830s by John Nelson Darby, and it was made famous by the Scofield Reference Bible. This theology makes a strong distinction between OT Israel and the NT church. Israel is a "physical and national" people, while the church is a "spiritual" people. Classical dispensationalism sees two different ways of salvation for Israel and the church-Israel was saved by adherence to the old covenant (which includes faith), while the church is saved by grace through faith in Christ.

Classical dispensationalism also holds that the OT promises must be understood as "literally" applying to national Israel. These promises, such as the land promise, do not apply to the church. The church is part of the "parenthesis" of salvation, as the original promises were made to Israel and Israel rejected Christ.

Dispensationalism is most famous for its view of eschatology (end times theology), holding to a pre-tribulational rapture, a seven-year tribulation period, and a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ after His second advent (premillennialism). In other words, Jesus will one day rapture Christians, this will be followed by seven years of tribulation, and then Jesus will return to set up His kingdom on earth for 1,000 years. Then there will be a final judgment.

There are seven dispensations in this scheme (hence the name): (1) Innocence (Eden); (2) Conscience (fall to flood); (3) Human Government (Noah to Babel); (4) Promise (Abraham to Egypt); (5) Law (Moses to John the Baptist); (6) Grace (church age); and (7) Kingdom (millennium).
(2) Revised Dispensationalism
Classical dispensationalism underwent some revisions, including the abandonment of the distinction between the "earthly" and "heavenly" peoples of God. This revised dispensationalism also rejected the belief that the new covenant in Jeremiah 31 was not for the church. Advocates instead hold that the church is the "spiritual" seed of Abraham (Galatians 3:16-29) and that the Abrahamic covenant was fulfilled spiritually in the church. However, they still insist on a "literal" fulfillment of the OT promises to Israel, and they follow dispensational eschatology (pre-tribulational premillennialism). Adherents include John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, and Dwight Pentecost.
(3) Progressive Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism was modified further by men such as Craig Blaising and Darrell Bock. Advocates use the term "progressive" to emphasize the successive arrangements of the dispensations. Progressive dispensationalists do not make as sharp of a distinction between Israel and the church. In other words, the present church age is not a "parenthesis" resulting from Jewish unbelief (as other dispensationalists held). God always planned to save the Gentiles as part of redeemed humanity. However, progressive dispensationalists still see the church as something new, and the promises to Israel in the OT are still available for Jewish Christians (including the land promise).
Summary Characteristics of Dispensationalism
Though there are variations, we can summarize five common tenants of dispensationalism:

1. A strong distinction between Israel and the church.

2. A principle of "literal" interpretation (particularly regarding the land promise).

3. God's relationship to the church differs in some ways from Israel (including the inclusion of children in the covenant).

4. A strong distinction between law and grace.

5. A strong premillennial emphasis in eschatology.

(4) New Covenant Theology
New covenant theology (NCT) is a recent view, which proponents such as John Reisinger and Fred Zaspel claim is a via media between covenant theology and dispensationalism. NCT is closer to CT in that it holds the church is the new Israel in Christ. However, NCT sees a change in covenant membership that is similar to dispensationalism-the new covenant is made only with the elect, in contrast to the Abrahamic covenant made with believers and their children. Thus, NCT rejects infant baptism.

NCT also stresses a change in the law in the NT. Advocates reject the three-fold division of the law (moral, ceremonial, civil) and reject any place of the Mosaic law for the NT church. Instead, the church is to be governed by the "law of Christ" (1 Corinthians 9:21). All advocates of NCT are credo-baptists, but not all Baptists hold to NCT. Some Reformed Baptists prefer to identify with CT while differing with CT on baptism.

There is also the view known as progressive covenantalism, advocated by Stephen Wellum. This has strong similarities with NCT.
(5) Covenant Theology
Covenant theology (CT) is the Reformed position that sees strong continuity between the old and new covenants. CT holds that changes in the new covenant are in the administration of the covenant, not in its essence. Thus, the new covenant is essentially the same as the Abrahamic covenant. The Abrahamic covenant has been renewed through the coming of Christ. As Louis Berkhof said, "The covenant of grace, as it is revealed in the New Testament, is essentially the same as that which governed the relation of Old Testament believers to God" (Systematic Theology, 300).

CT is not "replacement theology" as is sometimes claimed. Gentiles did not replace the Jews. Rather, Gentiles have been grafted into the covenant, while unbelieving Jews have been cut off (Romans 11).

CT holds that the new covenant is still a mixed covenant. The Abrahamic covenant included believers and their children, and there were thus believers and unbelievers in the OT covenant community. The new covenant (as a renewal of the Abrahamic covenant) is still made with believers and their children, and thus CT adheres to the practice of covenantal infant baptism. However, CT makes a distinction between covenant and election, in what is known as the "dual aspect" of the covenant. The elect are those whom God has chosen for salvation before eternity, and they faithfully keep God's covenant. But there are those in God's covenant who will break the covenant through unfaithfulness (apostasy).

Traditionally, covenant theologians held to a three-fold division of the law, with the moral law still binding the NT church. Identifying which OT laws are "moral" can be a difficult task. Yet it is important to note that the NT authors cite the Decalogue (e.g. Ephesians 6:1-4), showing its validity for the church.
Arguments for Covenant Theology
As an advocate of Reformed covenant theology, I cannot close without at least mentioning brief arguments for CT. First, the Greek word translated "church" ( ekklesia) in the NT is used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT) 69 times to translate the Hebrew for "congregation" or "assembly" ( qahal). This use of ekklesia for the OT people of Israel is continued in the NT (Acts 7:38; Heb 2:12).

Second, this continuity of God's people is seen in Romans 11:17-24, where Paul tells us that the Gentiles have been grafted into God's olive tree.

Third, Gentiles and Jews have been made "one" (Ephesians 2:14), are "one new man in place of two" (Ephesians 2:15), and are "fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God" (Ephesians 2:19).

Fourth, the church is made up of those who have faith in Christ, and "it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham" (Galatians 3:7). Those who are in Christ are "Abraham's offspring" (Galatians 3:29), the true Israel (Romans 9:6-8).

Fifth, God says He will make a new covenant with the "house of Israel and the house of Judah" (Jeremiah 31:31). Hebrews 8 then applies this prophecy to the church.

Sixth, there is a problem in saying OT believers are not part of the church. The Bible makes it clear that there is no salvation outside of Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12) and that Christ died for the church (Ephesians 5:25). So to be saved, OT believers must have been part of the church.

The Bible teaches a strong continuity between the old and new covenants and between Israel and the church. While there have been some changes in covenant administration, I do not think these changes warrant the adoption of a form of dispensationalism or new covenant theology. Of course, much more can be said about the intricacies of both dispensationalism and covenant theology. This is only an overview, and specific issues will have to be addressed in the future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Covenant Theology vs. Dispensationalism (And Its Varieties) - Knowing Scripture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Bible teaches a strong continuity between the old and new covenants and between Israel and the church. While there have been some changes in covenant administration, I do not think these changes warrant the adoption of a form of dispensationalism or new covenant theology.

# data[].attributes.body
El Shaddai created RELATIONSHIPS not religions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."

King James Version (KJV)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1 CORINTHIANS 1:10 KJV Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing,...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." King James Version (KJV)

# data[].attributes.body
Translators added and changed the Bible.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Marie Sinclair, Countess of Caithness, in her 1876 book Old Truths in a New Light, states: "It is generally, although erroneously, supposed that the doctrine of the Trinity is of Christian origin. Nearly every nation of antiquity possessed a similar doctrine. [The early Catholic theologian] St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, 'All the ancient nations believed in the Trinity'" (p. 382).

Notice how the following quotes document belief in a divine trinity in many regions and religions of the ancient world.

Sumeria

"The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu's share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods" ( The Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology, 1994, pp. 54-55)

Babylonia

"The ancient Babylonians recognised the doctrine of a trinity, or three persons in one god-as appears from a composite god with three heads forming part of their mythology, and the use of the equilateral triangle, also, as an emblem of such trinity in unity" (Thomas Dennis Rock, The Mystical Woman and the Cities of the Nations, 1867, pp. 22-23).

India

"The Puranas, one of the Hindoo Bibles of more than 3,000 years ago, contain the following passage: 'O ye three Lords! know that I recognize only one God. Inform me, therefore, which of you is the true divinity, that I may address to him alone my adorations.' The three gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva [or Shiva], becoming manifest to him, replied, 'Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears such is only the semblance. The single being appears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation, and destruction, but he is one.'

"Hence the triangle was adopted by all the ancient nations as a symbol of the Deity . . . Three was considered among all the pagan nations as the chief of the mystical numbers, because, as Aristotle remarks, it contains within itself a beginning, a middle, and an end. Hence we find it designating some of the attributes of almost all the pagan gods" (Sinclair, pp. 382-383).

Greece

"In the Fourth Century B.C. Aristotle wrote: 'All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; for, as the Pythagoreans say, everything and all things are bounded by threes, for the end, the middle and the beginning have this number in everything, and these compose the number of the Trinity'" (Arthur Weigall, Paganism in Our Christianity, 1928, pp. 197-198).

Egypt

"The Hymn to Amun decreed that 'No god came into being before him (Amun)' and that 'All gods are three: Amun, Re and Ptah, and there is no second to them. Hidden is his name as Amon, he is Re in face, and his body is Ptah.' . . . This is a statement of trinity, the three chief gods of Egypt subsumed into one of them, Amon. Clearly, the concept of organic unity within plurality got an extraordinary boost with this formulation. Theologically, in a crude form it came strikingly close to the later Christian form of plural Trinitarian monotheism" (Simson Najovits, Egypt, Trunk of the Tree, Vol. 2, 2004, pp. 83-84).

Other areas

Many other areas had their own divine trinities. In Greece they were Zeus, Poseidon and Adonis. The Phoenicians worshipped Ulomus, Ulosuros and Eliun. Rome worshipped Jupiter, Neptune and Pluto. In Germanic nations they were called Wodan, Thor and Fricco. Regarding the Celts, one source states, "The ancient heathen deities of the pagan Irish[,] Criosan, Biosena, and Seeva, or Sheeva, are doubtless the Creeshna [Krishna], Veeshnu [Vishnu], [or the all-inclusive] Brahma, and Seeva [Shiva], of the Hindoos" (Thomas Maurice, The History of Hindostan, Vol. 2, 1798, p. 171).

"The origin of the conception is entirely pagan"

Egyptologist Arthur Weigall, while himself a Trinitarian, summed up the influence of ancient beliefs on the adoption of the Trinity doctrine by the Catholic Church in the following excerpt from his previously cited book:

"It must not be forgotten that Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon [the Trinity], and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord; and the origin of the conception is entirely pagan . . .

"The ancient Egyptians, whose influence on early religious thought was profound, usually arranged their gods or goddesses in trinities: there was the trinity of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, the trinity of Amen, Mut, and Khonsu, the trinity of Khnum, Satis, and Anukis, and so forth . . .

"The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognized the mysterious and undefined existence of the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One . . .

"The application of this old pagan conception of a Trinity to Christian theology was made possible by the recognition of the Holy Spirit as the required third 'Person,' co-equal with the other 'Persons' . . .

"The idea of the Spirit being co-equal with God was not generally recognised until the second half of the Fourth Century A.D. . . . In the year 381 the Council of Constantinople added to the earlier Nicene Creed a description of the Holy Spirit as 'the Lord, and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and Son together is worshipped and glorified.' . . .

"Thus, the Athanasian creed, which is a later composition but reflects the general conceptions of Athanasius [the 4th-century Trinitarian whose view eventually became official doctrine] and his school, formulated the conception of a co-equal Trinity wherein the Holy Spirit was the third 'Person'; and so it was made a dogma of the faith, and belief in the Three in One and One in Three became a paramount doctrine of Christianity, though not without terrible riots and bloodshed . . .

"Today a Christian thinker . . . has no wish to be precise about it, more especially since the definition is obviously pagan in origin and was not adopted by the Church until nearly three hundred years after Christ" (pp. 197-203).

James Bonwick summarized the story well on page 396 of his 1878 work Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought: "It is an undoubted fact that more or less all over the world the deities are in triads. This rule applies to eastern and western hemispheres, to north and south.

"Further, it is observed that, in some mystical way, the triad of three persons is one. The first is as the second or third, the second as first or third, the third as first or second; in fact, they are each other, one and the same individual being. The definition of Athanasius, who lived in Egypt, applies to the trinities of all heathen religions."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Ancient Trinitarian Gods Influenced Adoption of the Trinity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marie Sinclair, Countess of Caithness, in her 1876 book Old Truths in a New Light, states: "It is generally, although erroneously, supposed that the doctrine of the Trinity is of Christian origin. Nearly every nation of antiquity possessed a similar doctrine. [The early Catholic theologian] St.

# data[].attributes.body
Hebrews - like Abraham

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The traditional holidays with their annual rituals are coming: Halloween costumes, Christmas decorations, Easter bunnies. Where did those traditions and practices come from? Celebrated as Christian holidays, shouldn't these occasions be faithful to what the Bible says?

Halloween

Jack-o-lanterns have been around for centuries as part of an ancient Celtic celebration at the start of the winter season. The Druids (a sort of pagan priesthood) believed that at this time of year the barriers between our world and the supernatural weakened and broke down. Expecting the souls of the dead to roam the land, they built large bonfires to frighten them off and slaughtered animals-or even people-to appease the evil spirits. The jack-o-lantern represents a poor soul caught between the two worlds, and some believe it served as a warning meant to ward off bad spirits. Incidentally, pumpkins are not common in Europe, so the original jack-o-lanterns were carved from turnips ( The Encyclopedia of Religion, 1987, p. 176, "Halloween").

Why is much of modern Christian ritual and belief based on pagan practice rather than the Bible? Isn't it enough that people honor God however they want?

Carved vegetables, talismans against evil spirits, human sacrifice-these are not in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Halloween is still looked to by some as All Hallows' Eve-the night before the Catholic All Saints' Day, a supposedly holy occasion. Yet with all its ties to the occult and dark forces, Halloween is anything but holy. And it's now shunned by many professing Christians. They see no value in celebrating a holiday that clearly originated from polytheism (the worship of multiple gods) and animism (belief in spiritual forces in inanimate objects). Such religions have been broadly referred to as pagan in Western societies since the time of the late Roman Empire.

If most of the beliefs and practices associated with Halloween originated in paganism, does the pagan influence end there?

Christmas

The Druids in ancient France and Britain staged a 12-day festival at the time of the winter solstice. They believed it was the high point of an annual battle between an ice giant, representing death, and the sun god, representing life. They built large bonfires to cheer on and assist their champion, the sun. The Druids and other pagan leaders knew, as we do today, that the days always get longer as the calendar progresses through winter toward spring regardless of their seasonal rituals-but still they persisted in them (L.W. Cowie and John Selwyn Gummer, The Christian Calendar, 1974, p. 22). Unfortunately, so does much of Christianity today.

What is today thought to be a celebration of the birth of Christ began as the pagan midwinter festival. One unbiblical tradition of this holiday is the use of greenery. Decorating with green plants in late December through the beginning of January was one of the ways Druids "honored and encouraged" the sun god at the time of the winter solstice. Families commonly cut down an evergreen tree to bring into their home, where they decorated and displayed it in a prominent place. In the Middle Ages, this ritual of paganism persisted and was eventually adapted and given a Christian label, as Roman Catholic missionaries worked to convince people to worship the Son of God rather than the sun god. In due course, German immigrants brought the practice of decorating evergreen trees to America, where it has flourished. As you may have already guessed, the "Twelve Days of Christmas" of the famous carol owe their origin to the pagan festival too (ibid.). (For more on the pagan origins of this holiday, see "Is Christmas Phony?".)

Easter

Even Easter, which many assume was instituted to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus, is steeped in connections to paganism. The name "Easter" ultimately derives from the name of an ancient Chaldean goddess Astarte, who was known as the "Queen of Heaven." Her Babylonian name was "Ishtar." Since most languages pronounce "I" as ee, it's not hard to see how eesh-tar and its linguistic variants could eventually become Easter (see Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1985, New Testament Section, p. 192, "Easter").

As the goddess of love and fertility, Ishtar's symbols were-you guessed it-eggs and rabbits! Rabbits can bear several litters of young each year and thus were highly fertile animals familiar to these ancient people. Worshipping Ishtar during an annual spring festival was intended to ask her blessing of fertility on the crops being planted at that time of year. Decorating eggs as a means of worship seems harmless until you consider that the people also practiced ritual sex acts, often with temple prostitutes, to honor the goddess ( Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, p. 509, "Gods, Pagan"). That doesn't sound very Christian, yet most Christians continue to associate eggs and bunnies with what they think is the most solemn holiday of the year.

Traditional Christian doctrines

Unfortunately, some of the most basic things believed by most professing Christians derive from ancient paganism rather than from the Bible. The idea that people have immortal souls was first taught in ancient Egypt and Babylon. The Greeks likewise taught that at death the soul would separate from the physical body ( Jewish Encyclopedia, 1941, Vol. 6, pp. 564, 566, "Immortality of the Soul"). That idea was merged into Christianity from Greek philosophy. It did not come from inspired Scripture.

The ancient Egyptians developed the concept of going to heaven. In their mythology, the god Osiris was killed but then raised back to life, whereupon he went to a distant heavenly realm. The Egyptians concluded that if he could do this, then human beings could follow ( Lewis Browne, This Believing World, pp. 83-84). This heavenly reward was a central teaching of several ancient mystery religions-but not the religion of the Hebrews or early Christians.

Even some Christian teachings about Jesus have origins in paganism rather than the Biblical record. Babylonian mythology regarding Ishtar claimed that she had a son named Tammuz. He died each year, but then would be reborn again in the spring. The Babylonian veneration of both the mother and child influenced later versions of Christianity that deified Jesus' mother Mary as much as Jesus Himself (Sir James Frazer, The Golden Bough, 1993, p. 326). This stands in contrast to Scripture, which honors Mary, but reveres no ordinary human being-only Christ.

The Chaldean symbol for Tammuz was the letter tau, which appears as a san-serif "t" and is commonly considered a cross ( Babylonian Mystery Religion, p. 51; Vine's, "Cross, Crucify"). While the Bible does indeed teach that Jesus was crucified, there is no record of the shape of the crucifix. At that time, Romans used various forms of upright stakes, some with crossbeams and some without. The Bible gives no indication that the early Church ever used the cross as a religious symbol, but several pagan religions had been doing so for centuries before Christ was born.

How to worship God

Why is much of modern Christian ritual and belief based on ancient pagan practice rather than the Bible? Isn't it enough that people honor God however they want? Human logic might say that one can do anything to show personal religious faith as long as the intent is to worship God. However, God has a much different view.

When He gave the ancient Hebrews instructions about how to worship Him, God also told them very specifically not to borrow or copy the practices of pagan cultures around them. He said, "Do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I will also do likewise.' You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way" ( Deuteronomy 12:30-31). The point of faithfulness is that God defines how He should be worshipped, not man: "Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it" ( Deuteronomy 12:32).

Jesus offered a challenge for us all: "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him" (John 4:23). We live in a world historically deceived about the truth-especially religious truth. But when you do learn the truth, take Christ's challenge: believe it and follow it. God is seeking you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The traditional holidays with their annual rituals are coming: Halloween costumes, Christmas decorations, Easter bunnies. Where did those traditions and practices come from? Celebrated as Christian holidays, shouldn't these occasions be faithful to what the Bible says? Jack-o-lanterns have been around for centuries as part of an ancient Celtic celebration at the start of the winter season.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Temples and robes, crosses and chants, form an important part of Christian worship, yet their origins are far from Christian.

Paganism§ has a wider influence on our lives than we might think

"What delusions will not arise, as soon as man seeks for supposed origins?".

§ By 'pagan', we are taking the widest definition of anything that is not monotheistic.

We also look at, but not necessarily share the view of, the 19 th-century writer Thomas Inman, who is adamant that "Christianity certainly requires to be purged of its heathenisms". In Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, Inman says that just as symbols had a particular meaning and place in ancient religions, some of the same symbols have a particular meaning and place in today's Christianity.

This is not to say that the meanings are the same.

The Church

Many of today's customs used in the Church can be traced back to the 4 th century, when Constantine permitted the process of converting the official religion of the Roman Empire from Paganism to Christianity.

Note the word ' converting'. Changing the sign on the door is a lot easier, quicker and cheaper than changing the whole building. Christianity was modelled on many customs that were familiar and acceptable to Jews and Pagans at that time, when religion and belief were intertwined with superstition.

This contrasts with today's norm - at least in economically advanced countries - where people now have greater access to education and science, and base their religious belief on reasoning rather than superstition. (See also Isn't religion simply glorified superstition?)

But don't misunderstand the use of the word ' converting'; the birth of Christianity was not merely a recycle job. There's little doubt that Early Christians adopted well-known customs to develop their religion and doctrine. To suggest otherwise is to say that the seeds sown by God for earlier faiths was a mistake.

By definition, God does not make mistakes.

Christianity

Even the word 'Christian' was coined by Pagans.

The first followers of Christ borrowed Jewish terms to describe themselves, such as 'believers' and 'disciples' (but in Hebrew, of course). Two of the early missionaries, Paul and Barnabas, went to work spreading the Gospel in the Pagan metropolis of Antioch, where the locals derisively called them 'Christians'.

Paul and Barnabas certainly wouldn't have disputed that they were indeed Christians and would have been quite pleased that the Romans made it the official name.

Religious symbols

Over-emphasizing the relevance and importance of religious symbols can lead to conflict.

Consider the tensions raised in France during 2004/5, following the banning conspicuous religious symbols that didn't blend into secular state schools.The 'headscarf issue' resulted in just a handful of school expulsions but more damagingly generated ill-feeling, divided the country and achieved nothing positive.

This was exacerbated in July 2010 by the French government Assembly overwhelmingly approving a bill banning burqas and niqabs in any public place. Syria also bans the niqab at universities and headscarves are banned at Turkish universities. Several other European and Middle Eastern countries have considered introducing laws that make walking around naked a less punishable offence than walking around fully clothed.

"Where there are few species, like at the South Pole, the ecosystem is fragile. The greater the number of species; the stronger the ecosystem. And the same applies to culture: Monoculture is fragile. If cultural diversityis lost, the human species will become extinct."
Jacques Cousteau (1910-1997)

Setting the law is, of course, the right of governments, and as with many laws, people get upset when they feel restrictions offend their particular cultural traditions. But far from being an example of a 'Clash of Civilizations', this could be more accurately described as an ignorance of civilizations,where too much emphasis has been placed on religious symbols, to the point that they are used as excuses for prejudicial, negative (or positive) discrimination.

And if we look into the origin of many symbols, we see they often have a shaky basis for being considered religious at all. The veil, mentioned above, is just one example.

The Origin of the Symbols

In his 1878 Essay on the Development of the Christian Doctrine John H. Newman wrote:

"The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holy days and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the east, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison,are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church."

It is interesting to note that John Newman was a Catholic prelate - this was not yet more Catholic-bashing by a Protestant.

Perhaps many customs and symbols came into Christianity via Judaism, rather than directly from Paganism. Nevertheless, let's consider what John Newman meant by 'origin':

Holiness

The word 'holy' may have been derived from the Old English hālig, which means 'wholeness', or the Old High German hulis, meaning 'holly', which was considered a sacred plant to Pagans.
(more.....)
Blessings

From the sprinkling of blood on the altar.
(more.....)
Calendars

The names of our Days, Months and Seasons come from the heavens

Our way of measuring time (see hours, minutes and seconds) is based on an early Babylonian system, and our modern calendar is based on Pagan practices, astrology and mythology.

But whether we consider ourselves religious or not, we do not think of the calendar as a religious thing; it's merely a means to measure time, using things called days and months.

If someone believes a particular date ( Easter, for example) has some mystical power, it is the value that person has placed on it. The same goes for the Bible, the cross, and all the other items adopted by Christians that have a Pagan origin.
(more.....)
Fish symbol

Sometimes called the 'Jesus Fish' because of its link to the ancient Greek Ichthys. Currently vogue, the fish symbol is not as widely recognised as a Christian symbol. It means nothing to most people and largely known only 'in-house'.

The fish is an ancient symbol used by other religions, such as Buddhism and Paganism. Our fish symbol page shows how Christians have hooked onto this symbol.
(more.....)
Pagan crosses

The cross is a remarkable shape. Usually just two intersecting lines, the symbol is used in mathematics, shows where people should stop at international border checkpoints, and stops (some) people parking their cars at the roadside. It's a kiss at the bottom of a love letter and it's a vote for a politician. A death cross in financial terms means a situation where long-term and short-term averages converge. The cross is used extensively in black magic and in innumerable religions.

The Cross - an Emblem of Christianity explains how this simple symbol has evolved from its Pagan roots. We explain how it has caused as much grief as it has comforted. A torture instrument, a threat to entire civilizations, and yet used as jewellery and sometimes worshipped. It has associations with illegal psychedelic drugs, BSE and bird flu, Prince Harry, hatred and despair, love, valour and heroism, World War I, World War II, the Crusades, the invasion of Iraq (again), mythology, Satan, and salvation.
(more.....)
Pagan clothing

Photo courtesy of
Alpha Choir Robe Sales

Vestments and fancy garb do not make the wearer a priest.

They have always been little more than symbols of status; a tradition passed down through civilization, and added to along the way.

Look at the ecclesiastical finery sported by high churches - those that emphasize formality and resist modernisation.

Some feel such distinction in the church is inappropriatebut the tradition continues.
(more.....)
Church buildings and Pagan temples

The Early Church was not wealthy, and neither were Christians. The disciples were fishermen, artisans and of the peasant class; not wealthy princes. Even if they wanted to build churches of their own design, there was no money for such a luxury. Therefore existing buildings were adapted.

When it was possible to build a new church, the design was usually in the form of an oblong, a cross or an ellipse (resembling the body of a fish or the hull of a boat). It was hardly ever circular, since that was the shape favoured by heathen religions. Nevertheless, the need for a special place for worship was recognised and the design, with some differences, was the osmosis of Pagan structures.

Those same basic layouts, well-intentioned though spiritually baseless, remain today.
(more.....)
Icon worship - idolatry and iconolatry

(This section is about icons created by man; not Christ, the icon of the invisible God Col. 1:15.)

Even today, there are Crusading 'Christians' who kill people, sincerely believing they are doing God's work whilst ignoring a basic Commandment "Thou shalt not kill".Consequently it is not surprising that most Christians ignore another: "Thou shalt not make to thee any graven image".(Jewish and Islamic laws about murder and idolatry are almost identical to Christian laws.)

This prohibition of idolatry is usually interpreted with some flexibility. Eastern Orthodox churches display icons; Roman Catholic churches contain statues; the pope hired Michelangelo; Protestant churches hang drawings; and almost all churches have one or more crosses.

Since pre-Christian times we have wanted to see God. But we cannot physically see into a different dimension, so we erect effigies of what we think God looks like. Or rather, we erect effigies of what we want God to look like, and that entices us to worship the effigies as idols.

An idol can be something coveted, like a statue, a cross, a Bible, a stained-glass window. It can be a deep green, ecological perspective of the earth; not far removed from Nature Worship.

"Our spiritual peril is the new idolatry - the worship of the God of Bigness and the God of Speed." (Mcilyar H. Lichliter)

Consider the millions of pilgrims, who for decades have touched the spiritual grotto at Our Lady of Lourdes in southern France. And since many have physically and spiritually benefitted from the visit, it's hardly surprising that people revere the place.

However, there is a grave danger that we push God to the side by placing undue attention and importance on idols.

If idols have any supernatural power at all, it must be the power to trick us into believing that we are not really worshipping them. The most popular idol does exactly that: The "Idollar". Without being aware, we sacrifice our time and energy, our family and friends, to the Idollar. Eventually we might discover that the money god doesn't love us or even like us, but usually we are oblivious to Idollartry [ sic] and carry on worshipping it.
(more.....)
Candles

We've included candles on this page, but they don't in themselves have much of a Pagan origin, other than as a representation of light, goodness, spiritual healing, etc.

Candles are not mentioned often the Bible, since they didn't really match the lighting power of (olive) oil lamps in the Middle East until the 5 th century.

Oil lamps were in use before Christianity, not only to replace darkness with light, but also to repel dark spirits. Only a superstition, yet quite natural and understandable behaviour. As children we prefer the light on at night to keep the bogeyman away.
(more.....)
Bells and bell ringing

A bell makes a sound - you probably knew that already. But they also do things that are much more important.

For example, the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia, USA, symbolises the nation's 18 th century independence from Britain, the 19 th century abolition of slavery, and the mid-20 th century Cold War icon of God Bless America.

Such religious symbolism began in Paganism and has since been amplified by the Church.
(more.....)
Incense

Originally used to repel bad smells, the aroma from burning resin was used to dispel bad spirits.

Does this have any place in Christian worship?
(more.....)
Tonsure

A monk with tonsure.
Balderdash (n.) a rapidly receding hairline.

The shaved head, in various styles, sported by monks and clerics of certain religious orders for hundreds of years has a simple origin.
(more.....)
Vow of Silence

St. Seraphim of Sarov is reputed to have said "Silence is the Cross on which we must crucify our ego" (but in Russian, of course), something that might have been easy when he was a solitary hermit, but soon he became extremely popular and many pilgrims visited him for guidance. He undoubtedly echoed the words widely attributed to St. Francis of Assisi; "Preach the gospel, and if necessary, use words."

Trappist Monks, famous for their contemplative silence, follow the Scripturesso that the voice of the world might be shut out and the voice of God might be heard.

But none of these Christian monks invented the idea.

Pythagoreans from around 530 B.C. took the practice of silence seriously; breaking the vow of silence carried the death penalty. And the priestess-guardians of the sacred Roman fire, the Vestal Virgins, lived in silence for years at a time.

Vidar, son of Odinwas the Norse god of silence and there was a minor Roman goddess of silence called Muta, from which we get the word 'mute'.

Chants

Songs in the form of chants, poems, and later as hymns, cantatas, anthems, oratorios or motets, are useful mnemonic methods.

Singing makes us feel hearty and that's why we sing; whether it's a chant or any other form. Singing helps us feel young and energetic, even if we're not very proficient. Singing helps relieve tension. Singing is therapeutic. Communal singing turns an audience into participants.

Chanting has never been restricted to Christianity - Pagans used it as part of their worship too. Like the word Glory, chants are not even restricted to religion. They are used by squads of jogging soldiers, team-sports players in training, supporters at a match, cheerleaders, political convention crowds, children singing the Alphabet song and reciting nursery rhymes (not unlike political convention crowds).

One particular type of Christian hymn is called a carol, which is sung at Christmas time; another custom with Pagan roots:
(more.....)
Christmas

Christmas is one of the biggest events on the Christian calendar, yet the customs we associate with the event are steeped in Paganism.
(more.....)
Prayer posture and words

A prayer is a collection of words spoken aloud or silently, to our god.

Man has prayed to the nature gods for millennia; it was certainly not a new invention for Christianity.

And it was natural, like all the things listed above, for Christians to adopt this form of communication with their God.
(more.....)
Amen

Amen (in Hebrew)

Even Amen, the very last word in the Bible,most probably has Pagan roots. Yet Christians, Jews and Muslims end their prayers, Scripture readings, and hymns by saying "Amen" as an expression of concurrence.

¶ We started this page by saying that Paganism has had a wide influence on Christianity and have given examples of rites and regalia that support this assertion. And this raises the question: "So what?" Christians should be cautious about condemning practices as Pagan, just because of their probable origins.

Isn't it possible that God inspired such rituals and designs through ancient religious practices as part of His plan to prefigure; to prepare humans for the great sacrifice of Jesus?

The previously-mentioned work Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism is just one of many books that can distract our attention from more important things; you know, the things that Jesus taught, such as loving our neighbour and praising God.

God is pleased to see love and goodness, no matter what rites or symbols we feel most comfortable and effective in using to attain those goals.

Chamberlain, Houston Stewart (1911: 293). Foundations of the XIXth Century. London: John Lane.

Muslim girls are permitted to wear the headscarf in private schools; even Catholic schools, such as Saint Mauront Catholic School in Marseille, where 80% of students are Muslim; at Lycée Jean-Paul II Catholic school; and several others.

"Clash of Civilizations?" (Samuel P. Huntington: 1993), "Civilizations Never Clash. Ignorance Does Clash" (Prof. Eiji Hattori: 2004)

Kyrie Eleison: "Lord have mercy"

Muslims similarly understand the Qur'an to forbid images of Muhammad, and yet there are many such examples in public institutions in Istanbul, Vienna, and other places.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Temples and robes, crosses and chants, form an important part of Christian worship, yet their origins are far from Christian. "What delusions will not arise, as soon as man seeks for supposed origins?". § By 'pagan', we are taking the widest definition of anything that is not monotheistic.

# data[].attributes.body
From spoken to written, men pick and choose the "truth" they want.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In his teaching, Jesus often quoted the Jewish Scriptures; after his death, his followers turned to them for clues to the meaning of his life and message. Biblical scholar Mark Hamilton discusses the history of these ancient texts and their significance for early Christians and their Jewish contemporaries.

Mark Hamilton is currently writing a PhD dissertation at Harvard University called 'The Body Royal: Kingship and Masculinity in Ancient Israel.' His article "The Past as Destiny" will appear in the October issue of the Harvard Theological Review

The Origins of the Hebrew Bible and Its Components

The sacred books that make up the anthology modern scholars call the Hebrew Bible - and Christians call the Old Testament - developed over roughly a millennium; the oldest texts appear to come from the eleventh or tenth centuries BCE. War songs such as Exodus 15 and Judges 5 are very archaic Hebrew and celebrate Israelite victories from the time preceding the Israelite monarchy under David and Solomon. However, most of the other biblical texts are somewhat later. And they are edited works, collections of various sources intricately and artistically woven together.

The five books of Pentateuch (Genesis-Deuteronomy), for example, traditionally are ascribed to Moses. But by the eighteenth century, many European scholars noticed problems with that assumption. Not only does Deuteronomy end with an account of Moses' death (a tough assignment for any writer to describe his or her own demise), but the entire Pentateuch shows anomalies of style that are hard to explain if only one author is involved.

By the nineteenth century, most scholars agreed that the Pentateuch consisted of four sources woven together. This notion of four sources came to be known as the Documentary Hypothesis, and, in various forms, it has been the prevailing theory for the past two hundred years. Israel thus created four independent strains of literature about its own origins, all drawing on oral tradition in varying degrees, and each developed over time. They were combined together to form our Pentateuch sometime in the sixth century BCE.

By this time, many of the other biblical books were coming together. Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings form what scholars call a "Deuteronomistic History" (because the work's theology is heavily influenced by Deuteronomy), a history of the Israelite states over a five-hundred-year period. This work contains much of historical value, but it also operates on the basis of a historical and theological theory: i.e., that God has given Israel its land, that Israel periodically sins, suffers punishment, repents, and then is rescued from foreign invasion. This cycle of sin and redemption shapes the work's way of writing history and gives it a powerful religious dimension, so that even when the sources behind the biblical books are "secular" accounts in which God is far in the background, the theology of the overall work places history in the service of theology. The last edition of the Deuteronomistic History, the one in our Bible, comes from the sixth century BCE, the time of the Babylonian Exile. In this context, it offers an explanation for Israel's poor condition and implicitly a reason to hope for the future.

Another section of the Hebrew Bible consists of the prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the twelve "minor," i.e., brief, prophets). Here again, it's important to understand how these developed. In the book of Isaiah, from which Jesus quotes, the original Isaiah of Jerusalem lived in the eighth century BCE in Jerusalem, and much of Isa 6-10 clearly reflects the political and social events of his time. Another part of the book, however, comes from a prophet who lived two hundred years later: Isaiah 40-55, famous in the New Testament (early Christians thought the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 was Jesus) and prominent in Handel's Messiah, speaks of the Persian king Cyrus the Great (d. 530 BCE), and so the text must come from that time. Other parts of the book of Isaiah are even later, and the entire book was carefully edited together, perhaps by the fifth or fourth century BCE. The extraordinary poetry of the book offers the reader hope in a God who controls historical events and seeks to return his people Israel to their own land.

In addition to the prophets, the Hebrew Bible contains what Jews often call the "Writings," or the Hagiographa, hymns and philosophical discourses, love poems and charming tales. These include Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes (or Qoheleth), Song of Songs, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles. These books were the last completed and the last to be received as Scripture, although parts of them may be very ancient indeed. The books of Psalms, for instance, contains many hymns from Israelite temple worship from the monarchic period, i.e., before the Babylonian Exile in the sixth century BCE; songs such as Psalm 29 may be borrowed from the Canaanites, while Psalm 104 closely resembles Egyptian hymns. In its current form, the 150 psalms fall into five "books," modeled on the five books of the Pentateuch.

Proverbs also has many old parts, including one apparently translated from the second-millennium BCE Egyptian text the "Instructions of Amenemope" (Proverbs 22). The remaining books in this part of the Bible are somewhat later: the latest is probably Daniel, which comes from the mid-second century.
From Many Books to the One Book
How did these various pieces come to be regarded as Scripture by Jewish and, later, Christian communities? There were no committees that sat down to decree what was or was not a holy book. To some degree, the process of Scripture-making, or canonization as it is often called (from the Greek word kanon, a "measuring rod"), involved a process, no longer completely understood, by which the Jewish community decided which works reflected most clearly its vision of God. The antiquity, real or imagined, of many of the books was clearly a factor, and this is why Psalms was eventually attributed to David, and Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes (along with, by some people, Wisdom of Solomon in the Apocrypha) to Solomon. However, mere age was not enough. There had to be some way in which the Jewish community could identify its own religious experiences in the sacred books.

This occurred, at least in part, through an elaborate process of biblical interpretation. Simply reading a text involves interpretation. Interpretative choices are made even in picking up today's newspaper; one must know the literary conventions that distinguish a news report, for example, from an op-ed piece. The challenge becomes much more intense when one reads highly artistic texts from a different time and place, such as the Bible.

The earliest examples of interpretation we have appear in the Bible itself. Zechariah reinterprets Ezekiel, Jeremiah often refers to Hosea and Micah, and Chronicles substantially rewrites Kings. These reinterpretations are in themselves evidence that the older books were already becoming authoritative, canonical, even as the younger ones were still being written.

But some of the oldest extensive reinterpretations of our Bible come from the third or second centuries BCE. For example, the book of Jubilees is a rewriting of Genesis, now arranged in 50-year periods ending in a year of jubilee, or a time for forgiveness of debts. A related work is the Genesis Apocryphon, also a rewriting of Genesis. Ezekiel the Tragedian wrote a play in Greek based on the life of Moses. And the Essenes, the sect that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls, composed commentaries ( peshers) on various biblical books: fragments of those on Habakkuk, Hosea, and Psalms survive. From the first century BCE or so, come additional psalms attributed to David and the Letter of Aristeas (about the miraculous translating of the Bible into Greek), among others. And during the life of Jesus himself, Philo of Alexandria wrote extensive allegorical commentaries on the Pentateuch, all with a view toward making the Bible respectable to philosophers influenced by Plato.

Despite their great variety of outlook and interests, all of these works shared certain common views. They all believed the author of the Bible was God, that it was therefore a perfect book, that it had strong moral agendas and that it was abidingly relevant. Interpretation had to show how it was relevant to changing situations. They also thought the Bible to be cryptic, a puzzle requiring piecing together. The mental gymnastics required to make the old texts ever new is one of the great contributions of this era to the history of Judaism and Christianity, and therefore Western civilization itself.
An example of interpretation: Genesis 11
Genesis 11 is the story of how humans soon after the Flood built a city centered around a tower "with its top in the heavens." The purpose of the Tower of Babel was to allow its builders to "make a name" for themselves. God, in a pique of anger, alters the builders' languages so that they cannot understand each other. In its original form, the story is an explanation of why not everyone speaks Hebrew, as well as a comment on the huge temple-towers ( ziggurats) of Mesopotamian cities.

For later interpreters, however, this story cried out for explanation. Why was God afraid of these people? How high was the tower? Who led the construction, and did anyone voice objections? What did the builders expect to do when they reached the heavens? What moral lessons should one learn from the story?

To answer these questions and others, Jubilees 10 says that the builders worked for 43 years (50 years of the Jubilee period minus the mystical number seven) and built a structure one and a half miles high! Their purpose was to enter into heaven itself. Pseudo-Philo's Biblical Antiquities (first century CE) adds a story about Abraham, a model of courage, refusing to cooperate with the builders and so being thrown into a fiery furnace, much like the three young men in Daniel 3. God sends an earthquake to destroy the furnace, and then he changes both the builders' languages and their appearance, so that no one can recognize even his or her own brother. Other traditions think that the builders of the tower were either giants (Pseudo-Eupolemus), or were humans led by the mighty hunter and city-builder Nimrod mentioned in Genesis 10 (Josephus). Each interpreter imaginatively builds on some chance word or phrase in the biblical text to try to answer reasonable questions about it. Meanwhile, the first-century philosopher and biblical interpreter writes an entire book on this chapter, which he interprets as an allegory about human morality: the builders represent greed and venality.
The Book and the Once and Coming Messiah
Like their Jewish predecessors and Jewish contemporaries, early Christians believed that the Hebrew Bible was God's book, and therefore a book that should cast light on current events and moral conundrums. For Christians, of course, the most important issue was the true import of Jesus and the story of his life, death, and resurrection. Since they believed him to be the messiah ("anointed one"), God's savior and the harbinger of a new and perfect age, they sought to find mention of him in the Hebrew Bible itself. This is why so much of the story of Jesus in the gospels quotes the Bible.

This move was not without precedent. The Dead Sea community also believed that the prophets had predicted their movement and their leader, the Teacher of Righteousness, as well as the political events of their time. They go so far as to claim that the prophets did not know what they were saying, but God, the true author of the text, used them to speak of the (to them) distant future.

Christians, however, had a different set of questions than the Dead Sea sect, and so they found different texts to cite. Any texts that refer to a time of a future deliverance, or the coming of a future king, were fair game. So the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 becomes the suffering Jesus of the gospels. And Luke's quotation from Isaiah 61 becomes a reference to Jesus's ministry of healing and reconciliation. Yet in every case, as far as we can tell, the Christian reading comes after the fact. That is, they first believed in Jesus and then tried to find his life in Scripture. They then could shape their telling of stories about his life to fit the scriptures. This process may seem very circular, but given their assumptions -- namely, that Jesus is central to God's plan, that God spoke through prophets who might not understand their own words, and that the Bible was a cryptic puzzle needing solving -- this belief in prophecy and fulfillment is not incomprehensible. So Luke can have Jesus say, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your presence!" Jesus saw himself as the deliverer that the prophets had foreseen long before. When his followers drew the same conclusion, they could then retain the ancient Scriptures, transforming them into something new, a Christian Bible.
Bible Etymology
The English word "Bible" is from the Greek phrase ta biblia, "the books," an expression Hellenistic Jews used to describe their sacred books several centuries before the time of Jesus. Christians adopted the phrase "Old Testament" to refer to these sacred books they shared with Jews.

Jews called the same books Miqra, "Scripture," or the Tanakh, an acronym for the three divisions of the Hebrew Bible: T orah ("instructions" or less accurately "the law"), N eviim ("prophets"), and K ethuvim ("writings," including Psalms, Proverbs, and several other books). Modern scholars often use the term "Hebrew Bible" to avoid the confessional terms Old Testament and Tanakh.

As for the New Testament, its current twenty-seven book form derives from the fourth century CE, even though the constituent parts come from the first century. Christians did not agree on the exact extent of the New Testament for several centuries.
For Further Reading
Brueggemann, Walter. Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997).

Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. (2 vols.; Garden City: Doubleday, 1985).

Kugel, James. The Bible as It Was. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997).

Idem. In Potiphar's House: The Interpretive Life of Biblical Texts. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990).

Leiman, Sid. The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture. (Hamden, CT: Archon, 1976).

Levenson, Jon. Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible. (San Francisco: HarperSan Francisco, 1985).

Noth, Martin. A History of Pentateuchal Traditions. (1948; trans. by Bernhard Anderson; Atlanta: Scholars, 1981).

Vermes, Geza, ed. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English. (3d ed.; New York: Penguin, 1987).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From Hebrew Bible To Christian Bible | From Jesus To Christ - The First Christians | FRONTLINE | PBS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In his teaching, Jesus often quoted the Jewish Scriptures; after his death, his followers turned to them for clues to the meaning of his life and message. Biblical scholar Mark Hamilton discusses the history of these ancient texts and their significance for early Christians and their Jewish contemporaries.

# data[].attributes.body
Fulfilling the curse Deut 28 - 31

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The image is not only inaccurate - it's harmful

On June 22, 2020, Shaun King tweeted, "Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down. They are a form of white supremacy."

Responding to the national call for the removal of confederate flags, statues, monuments, and memorials, Shaun King pressed things even further by demanding the removal of white Jesus.

The internet exploded as Christians throughout the United States proceeded to debate whether Jesus was a symbol of white supremacy. Arguments swirled around Jesus' true ethnicity and the traditional white European depictions of him, ultimately leading to a call for these lily-white images to be eradicated.

Black Christians chimed in supporting that these images-from statues to paintings to stained glass windows-are not historical but are in fact tools of white supremacist intimidation and indoctrination. Such conversations raise several questions: What is the history of white Jesus? Why are white Christians so uncomfortable imagining Jesus outside of whiteness? And, in light of the progressive temperature of our moment in history, should art in the form of church architecture and paintings be changed?

Lacking a detailed description of Jesus' physical appearance, many have used art to imagine the form of their savior. David Morgan, professor of religious studies and art history, in his book The Forge of Vision: A Visual History of Modern Christianity,stated, "Portraits of Jesus had become part of European visual piety" as early as the 13th and 14th centuries. During this time, portraits of Jesus tended to resemble the friends and family of the painters. Over time, artists merely reinterpreted paintings of earlier centuries, which led to paintings bearing typically similar characteristics. Morgan writes:

...a long face, large eyes, somber expression, shoulder-length hair parted in the center, short, slightly forked beard, and a broad uncovered forehead - have congealed into an abiding formula for representing the face of Jesus.

A Christ bearing these characteristics along with similar imaginings of his mother Mary and his apostles reached their height in the early 19th century.

Co-signing this visual history, Edward Blum, author of The Color of Christ, pressed this argument even further:

The white American Jesus first rose to power and prominence in the early 19th century. This was an era of the expansion of slavery and the often fraudulent and violent grabbing of Native American lands. It was also a moment of nation building and defining. Whiteness became a crucial symbol of national identity and citizenship.

While Morgan explained how these visual imaginings of Christ affected the personal and seemingly individual religious piety of white Europeans, Blum suggested these images also rested at the center of white Euro-American national and racial identity and subsequently sanctioned their various social and political crimes against humanity. Blum writes:

By wrapping itself with the alleged form of Jesus, whiteness gave itself a holy face. But he was a shape-shifting totem of white supremacy. The differing and evolving physical renderings of white Jesus figures not only bore witness to the flexibility of racial constructions but also helped create the perception that whiteness was sacred and everlasting. With Jesus as white, Americans could feel that sacred whiteness stretched back in time thousands of years and forward in sacred space to heaven and the second coming.

This imagining of Jesus as a white Euro-American with blond hair, blue eyes, and a soft, meek face reached its peak with the Warner Sallman painting entitled Head of Christ. Identified by some as the " best-known American artwork of the 20th century," Sallman's painting, completed in 1941, went on to be reprinted and mass-produced around the United States.

This image could be found in U.S. homes, schools, churches, and even films. In fact, Blum suggests the portrait was so iconic that a U.S. minister wanted "every Christian to carry a small print of Sallman's Christ in their wallets." This caused the "reproductions of this Head of Christ [to multiply] at an epic rate." In fact, the Washington Post recently ran a quote from an interview with Anthea Butler, associate professor of religious studies and Africana studies at the University of Pennsylvania, in which she relayed how Sallman's Jesus was so pervasive that it was "the Jesus you saw in all the Black Baptist churches."

In other words, this image of Christ was not just accepted and championed by white America, but even Black Americans received and upheld the image. The image of this particular savior so permeated all U.S. culture that despite any critic's suggestion of its historical inaccuracy, this portrait went on to become, in the words of Blum, "the literal face of Jesus to millions."

Understanding this image's social and political influence is critical because many argue that American art is merely a reprinted expression of European art. Blum believes this notion is a myth because it "ignores how the United States became one of the greatest producers of images of Jesus, universalist notions of freedom, and particular privileges of whiteness all at the same time."

In other words, white America created and mass-produced a white Jesus that served not as a symbol of the biblical Christ but instead as a symbol of American freedoms, white privileges, and invariably the inhumanity and inherent subservience of non-whites. Quite frankly, their imagined and composed white Jesus was intentionally created to serve as a symbol of white supremacy.

In other words, white America created the son of God in their own image.

The truth inherent to this visualization of Jesus is that it did not depict a suffering servant, it did not express the demeanor of a religious radical, and it avoided any affiliation to Jesus' experience with oppression. Instead, it expressed a meek, mild-mannered savior, passive and peaceful. It reflected the prevailing ideology of endurance in the face of inhumane treatment, all while holding the face of the very perpetrators of that violence. Butler says it like this: "[Jesus] looked like the people who were beating you up in the streets or setting dogs on you."

The image of a white, Euro-American Jesus cannot be separated from its inherent historical connection to white supremacy and white Euro-American expressions of violence. This is why every time Indigenous and Black American survivors see the proliferation and mass production of white Jesus, they see the maintained power and permeance of racism and white supremacy.

With this in mind, it is critical for white readers to understand that the current demand for the removal of white Jesus is not an attempt at rejecting Christianity. Black people are not denouncing the Eastern religion rooted in the Holy Bible. Black people are not even requesting the removal of historical symbols of European Christian piety or reflections of religious expression. Black people are requesting the removal of a symbol not of Christianity or the biblical Christ, but of whiteness, white authority, and white supremacy. They are advocating for the removal of a divine visualization that sanctioned genocide and chattel slavery. They are seeking repentance and rebuke for the sanctioned violence and human rights crimes inflicted on Indigenous and Black bodies under the validating gaze of a blue-eyed Jesus.

This is a controversial and emotional ask for white Americans, because while white Jesus is a symbol of violence and domestic terrorism for Black Americans, for white Americans, it is a symbol of great religious reverence. Morgan writes:

They see their salvation, they see their comfort, they see the face that launched 2,000 years of faith. They see the man they have always known and loved, because they see the face of the soul that spoke the wisdom that they believe, the person who felt and experienced the moral genius that has guided their lives.

To eliminate white Jesus for white Americans is to eliminate not their violent, political, and social expressions but to eliminate their spiritual imaginings and thus their religious experience and expression.

But, if your spiritual imaging and religious experience and expression can only exist with imagery that negates my humanity and promotes my social and physical destruction, is it a visualization your Christianity would even permit you to hold onto? Would Jesus seek to protect a visual expression of Himself that invokes your individual experience of comfort and joy with Him, knowing that this same expression produced an experience of fear, terror, and trauma in another?

Consider the removal of white Jesus from the perspective of this moment in history. On September 15, 1963, just before 11 a.m. on a bright Sunday morning, Black worshippers in the midst of prayer, fellowship, and spiritual practice were brought to their knees in utter fear and shock. Seeking to find safety from falling debris underneath the pews, members of the 16th Street Baptist Church soon learned that a bomb had exploded under the steps of the church. Five little girls had no clue what was happening. They came to their home church in Birmingham, Alabama, in their prettiest dresses, laughing and talking with one another about the new school year, and excited that today was Youth Day. Their joy was immediately interrupted as the girls were in the basement nearest the explosion. Four girls were killed instantly: 14-year-olds Addie Mae Collins, Cynthia Wesley, and Carole Robertson, and 11-year-old Denise McNair. Addie's sister Sarah survived, but was permanently blinded.

Photo: Алена Кожемякина/Adobe Stock

As the dust from the bomb settled and congregants and law enforcement proceeded to examine the damage, everyone noticed the impact done to a particular stained glass window. The senseless attack that claimed the lives of these young girls also produced great damage to the building. Entire windows were smashed out and piles of brick lay everywhere. Interestingly enough, the stained glass window with a rendering of a white Jesus remained intact. The only aspect of the art impacted by the bomb was the face of Jesus, which was completely removed. Some pieces of the debris had managed to deface the white Jesus in the window, while the remainder of the window maintained its hold.

Commenting on the peculiar image, James Baldwin declared:

The absence of the face is something of an achievement since we have been victimized so long by an alabaster Christ... If Christ has no face [then we must give] him a new face. Give him a new consciousness. And make the whole ideal, the whole hope, of Christian love a reality.

As we find ourselves, 57 years removed from this horrific moment of domestic terrorism, reflecting on the permanence of white Jesus and a call for his removal, I implore us to consider the remains of the 16th Street Baptist Church. Maybe God Himself was seeking to deface this unholy graven image decades ago. And maybe this time we should listen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On June 22, 2020, Shaun King tweeted, "Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down. They are a form of white supremacy." Responding to the national call for the removal of confederate flags, statues, monuments, and memorials, Shaun King pressed things even further by demanding the removal of white Jesus.

# data[].attributes.headline
If Father God said, DON'T - why do we do it?

# data[].attributes.subject
If Father God said, DON'T - why do we do it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Bible Reasons | Bible Verses About Various Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Second Commandment is thou shalt not make any graven image . It is idolatry to worship false gods or the true God by statues or pictures. First, no one knows how Jesus looks like so how can you make an image of him? Right away you see when Catholics bow down and pray to images of Mary it is idolatry. God is not wood, stone, or metal and he will not be worshipped as if he was a man-made item.

God is extremely serious when it comes to idols. There will be a day when many people who claim to be Christian will be caught lacking and will be thrown into hell for their blatant idolatry against God. Do not be that person who tries to twist Scripture and find any way possible to do something that is not supposed to be done. Nobody wants to listen to the truth anymore, but always remember God will not be mocked .

1. Exodus 20:4-6 "You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image of anything in the heavens or on the earth or in the sea. You must not bow down to them or worship them, for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God who will not tolerate your affection for any other gods. I lay the sins of the parents upon their children; the entire family is affected-even children in the third and fourth generations of those who reject me. But I lavish unfailing love for a thousand generations on those who love me and obey my commands.

2. Deuteronomy 4:23-24 Be careful not to forget the covenant of the LORD your God that he made with you; do not make for yourselves an idol in the form of anything the LORD your God has forbidden. For the LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God.

3. Exodus 34:14 Do not worship any other god , for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

4. Colossians 3:5 Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry.

5. Deuteronomy 4:16-18 so that you do not act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the sky, the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water below the earth.

6. Leviticus 26:1 " Do not make idols or set up carved images, or sacred pillars, or sculptured stones in your land so you may worship them. I am the LORD your God.

7. Psalm 97:7 All who worship images are put to shame, those who boast in idols- worship him, all you gods!

8. John 4:23-24 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth."

9. Isaiah 42:8 "I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to anyone else, nor share my praise with carved idols.

10. Revelation 19:10 Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said, "No, don't worship me. I am a servant of God, just like you and your brothers and sisters who testify about their faith in Jesus. Worship only God. For the essence of prophecy is to give a clear witness for Jesus."

11. Isaiah 44:8-11 Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one." All who make idols are nothing, and the things they treasure are worthless. Those who would speak up for them are blind; they are ignorant, to their own shame. Who shapes a god and casts an idol, which can profit nothing? People who do that will be put to shame; such craftsmen are only human beings. Let them all come together and take their stand; they will be brought down to terror and shame.

12. Habakkuk 2:18 "Of what value is an idol carved by a craftsman? Or an image that teaches lies? For the one who makes it trusts in his own creation; he makes idols that cannot speak.

13. Jeremiah 10:14-15 Every man is stupid and without knowledge; every goldsmith is put to shame by his idols, for his images are false, and there is no breath in them. They are worthless, a work of delusion; at the time of their punishment they shall perish.

14. Leviticus 19:4 Do not put your trust in idols or make metal images of gods for yourselves. I am the LORD your God.

15. Ephesians 5:5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person--such a person is an idolater-has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

16. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

17. 1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons,

18. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.

19. Judges 17:4 Yet he restored the money unto his mother; and his mother took two hundred shekels of silver, and gave them to the founder, who made thereof a graven image and a molten image: and they were in the house of Micah.

20. Nahum 1:14 And this is what the LORD says concerning the Assyrians in Nineveh: "You will have no more children to carry on your name. I will destroy all the idols in the temples of your gods. I am preparing a grave for you because you are despicable!"

21. Judges 18:30 And the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
21 Important Bible Verses About Graven Images (Shocking Read)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bible verses about graven images The Second Commandment is thou shalt not make any graven image. It is idolatry to worship false gods or the true God by statues or pictures. First, no one knows how Jesus looks like so how can you make an image of him?

# data[].attributes.headline
Why these books were all removed from the KJV

# data[].attributes.subject
Why these books were all removed from the KJV

# data[].attributes.body
Truth about the Bible

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1 MACCABEES 3:48 KJV And laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
1 Maccabees 3:48 KJV: And laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images.

# data[].attributes.body
The times we live in are in here -

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
5 "Now concerning the signs: lo, the days are coming when those who inhabit the earth shall be seized with great terror, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land shall be barren of faith. 2 Unrighteousness shall be increased beyond what you yourself see, and beyond what you heard of formerly. 3 And the land that you now see ruling shall be a trackless waste, and people shall see it desolate.

and the sun shall suddenly begin to shine at night,
and the moon during the day.

5 Blood shall drip from wood, and the stone shall utter its voice;
the peoples shall be troubled,
and the stars shall fall.

6 And one shall reign whom those who inhabit the earth do not expect, and the birds shall fly away together; 7 and the Dead Sea shall cast up fish; and one whom the many do not know shall make his voice heard by night, and all shall hear his voice. 8 There shall be chaos also in many places, fire shall often break out, the wild animals shall roam beyond their haunts, and menstruous women shall bring forth monsters. 9 Salt waters shall be found in the sweet, and all friends shall conquer one another; then shall reason hide itself, and wisdom shall withdraw into its chamber, 10 and it shall be sought by many but shall not be found, and unrighteousness and unrestraint shall increase on earth. 11 One country shall ask its neighbor, 'Has righteousness, or anyone who does right, passed through you?' And it will answer, 'No.' 12 At that time people shall hope but not obtain; they shall labor, but their ways shall not prosper. 13 These are the signs that I am permitted to tell you, and if you pray again, and weep as you do now, and fast for seven days, you shall hear yet greater things than these."

Conclusion of the Vision

14 Then I woke up, and my body shuddered violently, and my soul was so troubled that it fainted. 15 But the angel who had come and talked with me held me and strengthened me and set me on my feet.

16 Now on the second night Phaltiel, a chief of the people, came to me and said, "Where have you been? And why is your face sad? 17 Or do you not know that Israel has been entrusted to you in the land of their exile? 18 Rise therefore and eat some bread, and do not forsake us, like a shepherd who leaves the flock in the power of savage wolves."

19 Then I said to him, "Go away from me and do not come near me for seven days; then you may come to me."

He heard what I said and left me. 20 So I fasted seven days, mourning and weeping, as the angel Uriel had commanded me.

Ezra's Second Prayer of Complaint

21 After seven days the thoughts of my heart were very grievous to me again. 22 Then my soul recovered the spirit of understanding, and I began once more to speak words in the presence of the Most High. 23 I said, "O sovereign Lord, from every forest of the earth and from all its trees you have chosen one vine, 25 and from all the depths of the sea you have filled for yourself one river, and from all the cities that have been built you have consecrated Zion for yourself, 26 and from all the birds that have been created you have named for yourself one dove, and from all the flocks that have been made you have provided for yourself one sheep, 27 and from all the multitude of peoples you have gotten for yourself one people; and to this people, whom you have loved, you have given the law that is approved by all. 29 And those who opposed your promises have trampled on those who believed your covenants. 30 If you really hate your people, they should be punished at your own hands."

Response to Ezra's Complaints

31 When I had spoken these words, the angel who had come to me on a previous night was sent to me. 32 He said to me, "Listen to me, and I will instruct you; pay attention to me, and I will tell you more."

33 Then I said, "Speak, my lord." And he said to me, "Are you greatly disturbed in mind over Israel? Or do you love him more than his Maker does?"

34 I said, "No, my lord, but because of my grief I have spoken; for every hour I suffer agonies of heart, while I strive to understand the way of the Most High and to search out some part of his judgment."

35 He said to me, "You cannot." And I said, "Why not, my lord? Why then was I born? Or why did not my mother's womb become my grave, so that I would not see the travail of Jacob and the exhaustion of the people of Israel?"

36 He said to me, "Count up for me those who have not yet come, and gather for me the scattered raindrops, and make the withered flowers bloom again for me;

38 I said, "O sovereign Lord, who is able to know these things except him whose dwelling is not with mortals? 39 As for me, I am without wisdom, and how can I speak concerning the things that you have asked me?"

40 He said to me, "Just as you cannot do one of the things that were mentioned, so you cannot discover my judgment, or the goal of the love that I have promised to my people."

Why Successive Generations Have Been Created

41 I said, "Yet, O Lord, you have charge of those who are alive at the end, but what will those do who lived before me, or we, ourselves, or those who come after us?"

43 Then I answered and said, "Could you not have created at one time those who have been and those who are and those who will be, so that you might show your judgment the sooner?"

44 He replied to me and said, "The creation cannot move faster than the Creator, nor can the world hold at one time those who have been created in it."

45 I said, "How have you said to your servant that you will certainly give life at one time to your creation? If therefore all creatures will live at one time and the creation will sustain them, it might even now be able to support all of them present at one time."

47 I said, "Of course it cannot, but only each in its own time."

48 He said to me, "Even so I have given the womb of the earth to those who from time to time are sown in it. 49 For as an infant does not bring forth, and a woman who has become old does not bring forth any longer, so I have made the same rule for the world that I created."

When and How Will the End Come?

50 Then I inquired and said, "Since you have now given me the opportunity, let me speak before you. Is our mother, of whom you have told me, still young? Or is she now approaching old age?"

51 He replied to me, "Ask a woman who bears children, and she will tell you. 52 Say to her, 'Why are those whom you have borne recently not like those whom you bore before, but smaller in stature?' 53 And she herself will answer you, 'Those born in the strength of youth are different from those born during the time of old age, when the womb is failing.' 54 Therefore you also should consider that you and your contemporaries are smaller in stature than those who were before you, 55 and those who come after you will be smaller than you, as born of a creation that already is aging and passing the strength of youth."

56 I said, "I implore you, O Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, show your servant through whom you will visit your creation."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Esdras 5 - New Revised Standard Version

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Signs of the End - "Now concerning the signs: lo, the days are coming when those who inhabit the earth shall be seized with great terror, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land shall be barren of faith. Unrighteousness shall be increased beyond what you yourself see, and beyond what you heard of formerly.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Disclaimer: The Scripture verses have been restored to reflect the true sacred name of Yahuah and Yahusha, but because this article was written by one who was not versed in the sacred names it is therefore replete with the replacement terms of the Lord, God, and Jesus Christ.

"e Americans [and much of the world] take Santa Claus, presents, holly, evergreen trees, carol singing, and all the other pleasant Christmas customs very much for granted. How intriguing it is to trace them to their origins. Many of our cherished traditions are buried deep in the pagan past. In fact, when Christmas was first officially established, the date coincided with ancient celebrations of the sun's rebirth at the winter solstice. The [Roman Catholic] church saw no reason to destroy the old customs, and so they were adopted to fit our celebration of the birth of Christ." W ¹

Prepare yourself, because it may come as quite a shock to discover the true meaning and origin of the Christmas celebration. For decades we Christians [both Catholic and Protestant] have trimmed our trees, decorated our houses with lights and garlands, exchanged gifts and propagated the tale of a white-whiskered fat man in a red suit being pulled across the sky by reindeer! But have we ever stopped to wonder about the significance of these Christmas customs? Where do they come from? And what could they possibly have to do with the birth of Christ? By uncovering the truth about Christmas origins and customs, we may realize that it is not the innocent Christ-glorifying celebration that it seems on the surface. Instead, we may discover sinister implications in many Christmas practices, and origins heavily steeped in ancient pagan idolatry. Once you know the shocking truth about Christmas, as the facts are presented in this pamphlet, you may well wonder whether Christians should celebrate it at all! As a matter of fact, for all of the reasons given here, many sincere Christians have forsaken this holiday altogether. "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32). Here then, is the shocking truth:

1. Christ, the Messiah was not born on December 25th.

Although Christians everywhere observe this day as the birth date of the Messiah, we know that He was definitely not born on December 25th, or at any time during the winter season. At least two factors make this quite evident. Note what the Bible records concerning the time of Jesus' birth:

a) "And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night" (Luke 2:8). As these shepherds were watching their sheep by night in the open fields, the angel came to them with the message of the birth of Christ. It has well been established that the shepherds of Judea did not themselves abide, nor did they keep their flocks in these open fields any later than about the end of October, due to the piercing nature of the winter wind, rain and cold. ² "The shepherds always bring their flocks in from the mountain slopes and fields not later than the fifteenth of October." ³ Obviously, the birth of Christ could not have occurred as late in the winter season as December 25th.

b) The Bible records that at the time of the Messiah's birth, Caesar Augustus had decreed that "all the world should be taxed . . . And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city" (Luke 2:1, 3). It was because of this tax that Joseph traveled to Bethlehem, "To be taxed with Mary, his espoused wife, being with child" (vs. 5). While in Bethlehem, unable to secure a room in which to lodge, Mary delivered her child in a stable behind an inn. Indeed this could not have occurred in the winter since travel at that time of year was very difficult. Caesar would not have ordered such a taxation then since it would have been virtually impossible for everyone to comply. Travel was so bitterly hard and hazardous during the deep winter season that Jesus himself told the people to pray that their flight at the end of this age would not be in winter, "But pray ye that your flight be not in winter . . ." (Matthew 24:20). In fact, history records that these taxations always took place at the end of harvest, which was sometime in September or October, a much more logical time for taxation and travel. ⁴ Obviously, Christ could not have been born on December 25th. His birth date was probably some time in the fall of the year, but no exact day can be determined. Even the Roman Catholics are compelled to admit, "The date of Christ's birth is not known." ⁵

Dear reader, isn't it amazing that no one knows the date of the most important birth in the history of humankind? We know the birth dates of many famous, ancient men, from the Caesars to the Pharaohs, and in fact, "... in Egypt, birthday celebrations can be documented back to the 13th century BC." ⁶ But there is not one single reference in all 66 books of the Bible, and not one mention in early church literature pinpointing the date of Christ's birth. Obviously, God did not want us to know the date Christ was born! We must remember that the Son of God preexisted from eternity with the Father. Perhaps for us to affix a "date of birth" to Christ, who always existed, is to detract from His divinity. One thing is sure; if God wanted the church to celebrate the birth of His Son, He would have told us to do so! Reasonable minds can only conclude that the reason the Bible is silent on the subject, is because it was never God's intention for Christ's birthday to be celebrated!

However, we do celebrate Christ's death! It is through His death and atoning sacrifice that we are reconciled to God and have forgiveness of sin. ⁷ Every time we partake of the communion of the bread and cup, we are celebrating the death that purchased our redemption (1 Corinthians 11:23-28).

2. Christmas is not a Bible doctrine.

One author asked: "... What was Christmas? Had Christ or His apostles made it a holy-day?" Is there any passage anywhere in the Bible encouraging us to celebrate Christ's birth? Emphatically NO! This author continues, and answers himself: Christmas ". . . was a survival of the old pagan Saturnalia." ⁸

Another writes: "If our blessed Lord had wanted us to celebrate His birthday. He would have told us when to celebrate it, and how to celebrate it. But Christ never told anyone to celebrate His birthday. Furthermore, we know from the Bible and from church history that the apostles and the early church never celebrated Christ's birthday. The Bible is God's complete and final revelation to man, and it tells us everything we need to know for our spiritual lives (II Timothy 3:16). We don't have to go outside the Bible for anything. God's word tells us how we're to worship, how we're to give money for the support of the Lord's work, how to evangelize the lost, how to observe the Lord's supper, and everything else pertaining to the Christian life. But not once in the Bible does God tell us to celebrate Christmas! We're told to remember the Lord's death, but nowhere are we told to celebrate His birth. God's people are supposed to be Bible people. We're supposed to live by the teaching of God's holy Word. So the very fact that Christmas is never mentioned in the Bible is sufficient reason for us not to have anything to do with it." ⁹

3. December 25th does have profound religious significance

Although we have clearly demonstrated that December 25th was not Christ's birthday, that day does have profound religious significance. In fact, long before Christ was born, December 25th was the most widely recognized and celebrated holiday of ancient times among the idolatrous nations. This day was universally recognized and celebrated as the birthday of the sun god, Mithra, who also was known by other names in different parts of the world. The birthday of other sun gods such as Osiris, Horus, Hercules, Bacchus, Adonis, Jupiter, Tammuz, Saturn, etc., was celebrated on December 25th also. Christmas originated with pagan sun worship! As one writer says: "Instead of this being the time of our Savior's birth, it was the very day and season on which the pagans, for centuries have celebrated the birth of their sun god!" ¹⁰ It was the celebration of the winter solstice! It was a time for merriment, revelry, and drunkenness (the very same way many celebrate it still today). Most of our current Christmas customs, such as decorated evergreen trees, lights, holly and mistletoe, exchanging presents, parties, and revelry, all were essential elements of this pagan winter solstice.

History records just how firmly entrenched these heathen celebrations had become in society, and when the Roman Catholic Church could not persuade the public to give up these idolatrous practices, they adopted them! The Catholic Church adopted every pagan aspect of this abominable custom, including the date, and simply renamed it. Now instead of representing the birth of Tammuz or Saturn (or any of the sun-gods), it was supposed to celebrate the birth of Christ. They mixed Christianity with paganism! "It was in the fifth century that the Roman Catholic Church commanded that the birth of Christ be observed forever on December 25th, the day of the old Roman feast of the birth of Sol-one of the names of the sun-god." ¹¹ No honest investigator could deny these plain facts. When you celebrate Christmas, you are actually participating in an ancient sun-worship ritual. It is nothing less than sacrilegious idolatry!

Britannica has this to say about Christmas: "Its observance as the birthday of the Savior is attended with secular customs often drawn from pagan sources; indeed, both Christmas and Epiphany, which falls 12 days later on January 6th, are transformed pagan celebrations of the winter solstice, and so closely linked that their origins cannot be discussed separately. December 25th in Rome . . . was the date of a pagan festival . . . the birthday of the unconquered sun (god)." ¹² (Italics mine.)

Nothing could be plainer. December 25th is the celebration of pagan sun deities, not the birthday of Christ! The Bible says, "Put away the strange gods that are among you, and be clean . . ." Genesis 35:2. Christians should have nothing to do with it.

4. The Christmas celebration is an abominable mingling of truth with falsehood

It mingles right with wrong and pollutes the purity and truth of Christianity with the abominable practices of heathenism. How dare we pollute the holy name of Jesus with the vile customs of sun-worship? How dare we mix the purely pagan elements of Christmas, such as the Christmas tree, boughs, wreaths, holly, mistletoe, Santa Claus, exchanging of presents, etc., with the true worship of Christ as commanded in the Bible? Do you honestly think God looks with favor upon such a mixture?

"Thus saith Yahuah Alahim; are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? For when ye offer your gifts . . . ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, shall I be inquired of by you? . . . Pollute ye My sacred Name no more with your gifts, and with your idols." Ezekiel 20:30, 31, 39

"For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Messiah with Belial? Or what part hath he that believes with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of Yahuah with idols?" II Corinthians 6:14-16

It is an abomination to God, to take a thoroughly idolatrous holiday, and with all of its attending practices and customs, simply change the name and call it "Christian." There is nothing Christian about Christmas! It is 100 percent pagan. One author has well noted: "Christmas looks out at us from the shadow of the groves of the Druids who knew not Christ, and it is dear to those who now renounce the name of Christian. The Christmas log is but the Saxon Yule-log burning on the English hearth, and the blazing holiday temples of Saturn shine again in the illuminated Christian churches. It is the pagan mistletoe under which the Christian youth kisses the Christian maid. It is the holly of the old Roman Saturnalia, which decorates Brace Bridge Hall on Christmas eve. The huge smoking bacon or beef, the flowing oceans of ale, are but survivals of the tremendous eating and drinking of the Scandinavian Valhalla. The Christian and ante-Christian feeling blend in the happy season, and the Christian observance mingles at every point with the pagan rites. It is not easy to say where the paganism ends, and Christianity begins." ¹³

How clear it is for all who have eyes to see! Blatant, outright paganism has been incorporated into the church of Jesus Christ through the Christmas celebration. What an unholy amalgamation to mix the name of the holy Son of God, with the depraved deities of the ancient heathen nations! Originally, the church would have nothing to do with vile winter solstice celebrations. But the Roman Catholic church, under Constantine, began, "the adoption under Christian forms not only of pagan rites and ceremonies but also of pagan festivals. In order to reconcile heathen converts to the new faith, these relics of paganism, like antique columns transferred from ancient temples to adorn Christian churches, were freely incorporated into the Christian ceremonial. Thus it was that Christmas was transferred to the 25th of December, the time of the Roman Saturnalia, and became invested with much of the paraphernalia of the heathen festival." ¹⁴ In Rome, the Saturnalia was the vilest, immoral feast that ever disgraced that pagan city. It was a season of license, drunkenness, and debauchery. The spirit of revelry prevailed, and the entire city wantonly indulged in the filthiest sorts of immorality imaginable.

Dear reader, isn't it plainly obvious to you, that though its name has been changed, the same spirit of merriment is present in our modem Christmas celebrations? There is no doubting the fact that Christmas is the most drunken, immoral time of the whole year. Any liquor salesman would tell you that more alcoholic beverages are bought, sold, given, and consumed at Christmas than at any other time of the year. That fact alone assures me that Christmas is not of God! If it were, it would be a time of holiness and repentance, of drawing closer to God and turning from sin. It would be a time when true spirituality and godliness abounded, but instead, just the opposite is true. The public celebrates it just as the ancient Saturnalia was celebrated, with drunkenness and office parties, with revelry and lewdness, with blasphemy and indulgence in every sort of sin imaginable. This is the true spirit behind Christmas.

One writer commented, "It is a time when the world is turned over to drunkenness, revelry, debauchery, shame, and misrule. It is a time of exchanging gifts, singing religious songs called Christmas carols, and at the time, the whole world is one madhouse, religious and otherwise. The non-religious world will cover up their ungodliness and wickedness with Christmas carols, which will be played and sung in every saloon, every sporting house, every gambling hall, and every brothel over the world. The religious world will give vent to the wickedness of their hearts in these days of debauchery under the guise that they are celebrating the birthday of Christ. Thousands of church members will get drunk at Christmas when they would not get drunk at any other time. Churches will turn their buildings over to Christmas pageants, Christmas programs, Christmas trees, and exchanging of gifts, with hilarity and frivolity, in the spirit of a festival. All of these in their different spheres will believe they are doing God's will. Christmas Day will be a day of feasting and drinking, drunkenness and dancing, and frivolity, as very seldom witnessed at other times of the year. Is this the way to celebrate the birthday of Christ? I certainly wouldn't want you to celebrate my birthday like that. Then how sacrilegious it is to celebrate the birthday of the Lord Jesus Christ in such a manner." ¹⁵

5. All of the elements and symbols commonly associated with Christmas have pagan roots and idolatrous significance.

Haven't you ever been curious about what Santa Claus, exchanging gifts, trees, ornaments, lights, holly, etc., has to do with the birth of Christ? Actually, they have nothing at all to do with His birth, and nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity! But they do have a lot to do with the idolatrous pagan feast of the Saturnalia. For instance:

The Christmas tree, holly, ivy, and mistletoe greenery were widely considered as symbols of immortality and fertility among the ancient pagan nations since these evergreens never lost their leaves or turned brown (symbolizing death) through the winter season as did the other trees. Therefore, a certain reverence was attached to them by the superstitious pagans.

Says one author, "Our primitive forefathers brought in green branches at the winter solstice, and used them in magical rites to ensure the return of vegetation. Roman houses were decorated with laurel and bay. And for many centuries now, Christian homes and churches have burst into greenery at Christmas time. It is true that the early church forbade the custom, as savoring of paganism, but it was too deeply rooted for such prohibitions to have permanent effect. Holly, ivy, and mistletoe are the favorite decorations now, as they were in earlier times. To our ancestors, they were strong life symbols, not only because they are evergreens, but also because, unlike most plants, they bear fruit in winter. By tradition, holly is masculine and ivy feminine, thus both are needed if all in the house are to share in the blessings they imply (i.e., fertility). Mistletoe, the Golden Bough of classical legend, was held sacred by the Celtic Druids and by the Norsemen. It was once called the plant of peace, under which enemies were reconciled in ancient Scandinavia. It brought good luck and fertility. It protected the house that contained it from witchcraft and was an antidote to poison. Yet, unlike holly and ivy, it never quite lost its heathen character . . ." ¹⁶

Another one states why kissing is associated with mistletoe is somewhat obscure. But because of mistletoe's role as a fertility symbol, it stands to reason that the kissing associated with it carries sexual rather than merely platonic implications. The practice is believed to have originated with the Celtic Midsummer Eve ceremony when the mistletoe was gathered. During that festival, the men would kiss each other as a display of their homosexuality. The custom was later broadened to include both men and women. Some historians believe that kissing under the mistletoe is reminiscent of the temple prostitution and sexual license that was most prolific during the Roman Saturnalia." ¹⁷ Thus we can see that the use of this greenery at Christmas perpetuates the ancient religious rites and superstitions that God so vehemently condemns.

Make no mistake, the current custom of cutting down a perfectly good, healthy tree, propping it up in our homes, and decorating it with tinsel and globes certainly does not spring from any Christian tradition! It was an idolatrous practice of the ancient pagans, that has been passed down through the centuries. Why should the church of the Lord Jesus Christ perpetuate a custom that is anti-Christ in nature?

One writer stated, "millions of young trees are annually sacrificed to satisfy America's Christmas god, Tammuz, son of Nimrod (who became Baal) and his wife Semiramis (Ishtar or Easter). In this illustration from an ancient Nineveh relief artifact copy from circa 2000 B.C., Nimrod/Baal is pictured holding a deer in the right hand and an evergreen tree in his left.

During the weeks of Christmas festivities, one is met everywhere with these dead evergreen trees arrayed in their glitter and tinsel, reminding us of the lifeless pagan gods of old. But behold! As the fervor of festivity dies down, out goes the stripped and bedraggled remains of the Christmas god into the junk pile! Yet thousands of untaught people will gladly go hungry and willingly deprive their families of necessary things in order to buy and decorate this same Christmas tree. The first decorating of an evergreen tree was done by pagans in honor of their god Adonis (Tammuz), who, after being slain, was brought to life by the serpent Aesculapius. The representation of this slain god was a dead stump of a tree. Around this stump coiled the snake Aesculapius, a symbol of restoring life. And lo, from the roots of the fallen tree, comes forth another and different tree - an evergreen tree symbolic to pagans of a god who cannot die! In Egypt, this god was worshiped in a palm tree as Baal-Tamar. The fir tree was worshiped in Rome as the same newborn god as Baal-Berith, who was restored to life by the same serpent, and a feast was held in honor of him on December 25th called the 'Birthday of the unconquered Sun'." ¹⁸

In numerous Bible passages, the "green" tree is associated with false worship and idolatry. ¹⁹ Since most trees are green at one time or another, these passages most certainly refer to a tree that is especially noted for being green - the evergreen. With that in mind, consider what God says in Jeremiah 10:1-5, and compare it to the present custom of decorating a tree at Christmas time:

"Hear ye the word which Yahuah speaks unto you, O house of Israel: Thus saith Yahuah, learn not the way of the heathen . . . For the customs of the people are vain: for one cuts a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the ax. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with hammers, that it moves not. They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must be borne because they cannot go."

Although some commentaries have suggested that the trees mentioned in this passage were carved into the shapes of varying pagan deities, we must acknowledge that in fact, the verses say nothing about the tree being shaped or carved at all-only that it was cut down out of the forest by a workman with an ax, and then decorated with silver and gold, just like the modem Christmas tree. In commenting on this passage, one writer well noted: "Now, of course, the people in the days of Jeremiah, as the context goes on to show, were actually making an idol out of the tree. We do not mean to infer that people who today place Christmas trees in their homes and churches are WORSHIPING the tree. What we are saying is that today's use of the tree is plainly a carryover from paganism . . ." ²⁰ Though you may insist that you do not worship the Christmas tree, you cannot deny that the whole concept is pagan!

Then too, we must mention the "dark presence" many have felt when in a dimly lit room with a Christmas tree. Not merely the overactive imaginations of "spooky" individuals, bringing these forbidden objects into your home does indeed invite in another presence also-the spirits associated with the rites and rituals of the ancient pagan fertility groves, in which the evergreens played an integral part. Commenting on this very thing, one researcher said, "The phenomenon of evergreen inside a house has a presence far beyond its festive meaning. Innocent enough in a modem room, or in any room fully lit for the occasions, it may have quite another effect in a house not brightly lit; holly in clumps at picture level-above you, in fact-can frown darkly, gather shadows, appear to contain some sort of suspended life. Similarly, the presence of even a medium-sized Christmas tree, unlit, stands like a personage. Such impressions are not consciously welcomed, but they are part of the same thing, and of a strangeness to the house with all its new reflections of tinseled glitter, its mirrors freshly alive. Nowadays, few people may notice this in the crowded time before Christmas, but it can still be felt in the quieter evenings that follow. It is a powerful time, full of ancient apprehensions. Alongside the brightness, there rides a darkness of old instincts." ²¹

Discerning Christians have long realized that many objects, especially those associated with occultism or idolatry, actually attract demon spirits like magnets, attract iron. Be forewarned, Christmas presents may not be the only presence around your tree! When will Christians obey God's command to, "Learn not the way of the heathen ... for the customs of the people are vain."

The Exchanging of Gifts

For many people, buying and exchanging gifts is the most essential part of Christmas. Many go heavily into debt to buy presents they can't afford to give to people they don't even like! Most assume that the Christmas tradition of exchanging gifts is a reenactment of the Magi bringing gifts to Jesus, but such is not the case. There is indisputable evidence that exchanging gifts at this time of the year was an important part of the Roman Saturnalia celebration. Said one author, "The tradition of gift-giving during the holiday season began even before there was a Christmas. Ancient Romans exchanged gifts during the winter festival of Saturnalia." ²²

Tertullian also mentions that the practice of exchanging gifts at this season was a part of the pagan Roman Saturnalia. When this mid-winter festival was adopted into the Roman church, this custom was also approved. As usual, however, apostate leaders tried to find some point of similarity between the pagan and Christian religion - to make the merger seem less obvious. In this case, reference was made to the fact that the wise men when they came to see the Christ-child presented to him gifts. Some suppose that this is where the custom of exchanging gifts at Christmas time came. But not so. The wise men did not exchange gifts among themselves. They presented their gifts to Jesus, who was born king of the Jews. (It was an Eastern custom to offer gifts when coming into the presence of a king). But these gifts were not birthday gifts. ²³

How do we know that these were not birthday gifts? Because the Magi (wise men) did not come to visit Jesus until He was nearly two years old! (Matthew 2:16) The shepherds came from the fields to visit Jesus at His birth, but it was almost two years later before the Magi arrived. Even if we believed that the Magi brought "Christmas presents" to Jesus, how does that justify our buying gifts for each other? Shouldn't we instead give some sort of a sacrificial gift or offering to the church, Christ's body? (I Corinthians 12.27) Wouldn't that be much more consistent? After all, it is supposed to be His birthday, isn't it? What would you think if the whole world celebrated your birthday, but no one brought presents to you? What then must Christ think? Everyone comes together in the spirit of the celebration and gives gifts at Christmas to everyone but Him. And it's supposed to be His birthday they're celebrating! Sadly, people often buy so many gifts (for people who don't really need them), that they have nothing left to give to the Lord!

One writer, in reference to this pagan custom, said, "The exchange of gifts and greetings at or near Christmas time began long before Christianity. In the beginning, these presents are said to have been simple boughs of greenery brought from the groves of the goddess Strenia. There were many were charms as well as gifts." ²⁴

Did you know that the early Christians refused to exchange gifts at this time of the year? They knew where the custom came from! It was thoroughly pagan. "Because gift-giving was such an essential part of the pagan celebrations, the early church frowned upon it as sternly as upon other and more questionable New Year customs. In the first centuries, Christians did not give each other presents in the Christmas season." ²⁵ Christians in the United States did not practice this heathen custom of exchanging gifts at Christmas until the 19th century, ²⁶ when the merchants revived it in order to enrich their own coffers. It's a merchant's holiday! As much as 50 percent of some merchants' business is transacted at this time of year, so you know why they love Christmas.

What a joyous liberation the people of God experience when they forsake this pagan ritual. I didn't realize what a burden I carried until God delivered me from the whole heathen practice. Did you know that the only place in the entire Bible where the exchanging of gifts is mentioned is in Revelation 11:10: "And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another . . ." Although this sounds like Christmas, the context plainly shows it to be a wicked celebration of the death of God's servants. Then (as now), it will be an anti-Christian celebration. Can you see anything "Christian" in this commercial, materialistic, drunken festival? Dear reader, why don't you give up this carry-over-from-paganism custom? Christ isn't glorified in it. If anything, He is utterly forgotten by it!

Some would have us to believe that America's jolly Santa Claus was once Saint Nicholas, a kindly old saint who generously gave gifts to the needy. The facts of history, however, prove otherwise. Actually, there is no valid evidence that any "St. Nick" ever existed (in spite of Roman Catholic tradition). But the customs and traditions from which Santa Claus evolved, trace him back to Odin or Saturn - the sun-god himself! Santa has been called by many names in different countries down through the centuries, but the customs that surround him have remained steadfastly the same. He has always been "an old, old, very old white-bearded gentleman, and this is as it should be for his age is immense. Once he was Odin, but when Christianity drove away the old gods, he remained, and appeared again as St. Nicholas." He is always someone mysterious and shadowy, outside the run of ordinary human experience. His home is far away in Heaven or at the North Pole or in some remote country from which he comes on horseback, or in a sleigh drawn by reindeer. He may come secretly by night, or openly in the winter daylight, accompanied by a train of masked demons and strange animal forms. Often he is associated with fire, entering the house by the chimney, or leaving gifts by the hearth" (remember, he's a sun-god), and "like the ancient gods from whom he is descended, he can read the heart and knows the hidden thoughts and actions of those he visits." ²⁷

Undeniably, Santa Claus is a "god" of some sort, for he has attributes of deity. He can visit every house on earth in one night (omnipresence); he knows everything about every child's behavior (omniscience); he rewards the good and punishes the bad, just like God! Even Christian parents have suggested to their own children that Santa is god, by saying things like, "You'd better be good because Santa is watching you," or "Let's go and tell Santa what you want for Christmas," etc. What an abomination this is in God's sight, for Christian parents to teach their children to reverence Santa instead of Him! God said, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me" (Exodus 20:3). As one author asked, concerning a "divinity" attached to Santa Claus, "Can it be that we are back again with Odin, the ancient gift-bringer, still going invisibly about at yuletide, as in past centuries, through the lands where he was once supreme?" ²⁸ Make no mistake, this Santa Claus is nothing less than the pagan god once worshipped as Odin or Saturn!

"They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods. They have moved Me to jealousy with that which is not Alahim (); they have provoked Me to anger with their vanities." Deuteronomy 32:16, 21

Shockingly, the first "Santa" can be traced all the way back to a Carthaginian deity (Moloch), a huge bronze idol whose fat swollen belly was an oven, and whose arms were extended making a "lap" or an "altar," to which parents brought their children, and laid them on that lap to be roasted alive! As an act of devotion to their false god, they sacrificed their own children. In the ancient custom, the children themselves were the presents the parents gave to "Santa." That gives a whole new significance to the act of bringing your children to Santa, and sitting them on his lap, doesn't it? Did you realize that in so doing, you were re-enacting an actual scenario of ancient child sacrifice? How dare we bring our children to this false god and encourage them to supplicate him for gifts and blessings? God will hold us accountable! We must forsake this idolatrous Santa (Satan) worship immediately.

"Make no mention of the name of other gods [i.e., Santa Claus?], neither let it be heard out of your mouth." Exodus 23:13

6. The early Bible Followers consistently refused to celebrate Christmas!

The Roman Saturnalia, with all of its festivities, merriment, garlands, lights, trees, exchanging of gifts, revelry, drunkenness, orgiastic sex, etc., was so thoroughly pagan and anti-Christ in nature, the true followers of Christ considered the whole celebration an abomination. It is well known and well documented that the early church did not celebrate Christmas at all. "Within the Christian Church no such festival as Christmas was ever heard of till the third century, and that not till the fourth century was far advanced did it gain much observance." ²⁹ As previously noted, the Roman Catholic Church adopted every aspect of the Saturnalia and renamed it-supposedly sanctifying it and giving it a "Christian" significance. But it's still a pagan festival though it wears a Christian name!

Whenever Bible believers longed for authentic spirituality and returned to the Bible as their source for all practice and belief, one of the first things they did was to forsake the unscriptural Christmas celebration. In England in 1644, parliament banned Christmas, calling it "the Profane Man's Ranting Day." The Puritans disapproved of the Catholic implication of "Christ's Mass" and the worldliness associated with the holiday. ³⁰

Even here in America, it was once AGAINST THE LAW to celebrate Christmas, and anyone caught doing so was fined. "In 1659, Massachusetts passed a law fining anyone caught celebrating Christmas. Throughout New England, Christmas was suppressed." ³¹

Although the Catholic Christian influence was hard to suppress for long, and those laws were repealed some 20 years later, public schools remained open in Boston on December 25th until 1870. "In the United States traditional Christmas customs were at first suppressed (as in England under the Common-wealth), because of the Puritan objection to them as pagan in origin, but since the middle of the 19th century the celebrations have become increasingly popular and commercialized." ³²

Today few Americans know that Christmas was once outlawed in their country. Of course, we are not suggesting that laws be passed banning Christmas; only that sincere followers honestly decide whether they should participate in such an unscriptural pagan festivity.

Dear reader, if Christmas was really of God, the world would hate it! But the same sinners who hate Christ love Christmas. The biggest thieves, drunkards, liars, adulterers, and hypocrites love Christmas. They love the parties, the festivities, the carols, the feasting, and the merriment, but they hate everything that is truly spiritual. That should tell us it's wrong. For whatever the world loves, God is sure to hate!

"Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of Yahuah." James 4:4.

". . . As the One who called you is set-apart, so you also should become set-apart in all behavior, because it has been written, "be set-apart, for I am set-apart." 1 Peter 1:15-16

How tragic it is that the Christian church today continues to hold this unholy alliance with the world in the celebration of Christmas. They put up the same forbidden trees in their homes Jeremiah 10:1-5)', cover it with globes (symbols of the sun-remember the Saturnalia is sun worship), they hang lights and garlands all around house and hearth (pagan symbols of fire and fertility), they lie to their children about Santa Claus (read Revelation 21:8 and see where liars go), and engage in virtually every other aspect of this renamed pagan festival, just like the world! Then they weakly encourage their congregations to "put Christ back into Christmas". Christ never was in Christmas, nor will He ever be! He never was a part of this fleshly, sensual, wicked festival. Even the very name "Christ-mass" smacks of the heretical rites that claim to offer up Christ as a sacrifice again and again, in a heathen "mass" (cf. Hebrews 9:26, 28).

Do not think that this pagan holiday has been sanctified simply because it has been renamed. It's no less an abomination today than it was thousands of years ago. The Bible asks: "Can the leopard change its spots?" (Jeremiah 13:23) Of course not! You might stop calling it a leopard and start calling it a "puppy" or a "kitten," or you could paint it white and call it a dog, but you haven't changed its nature one iota! It's still a leopard, and still a dangerous, devouring beast. And so it is with Christmas. Underneath the sanitized "Christian" veneer, it is still the Roman Saturnalia! They've changed its name but not its nature. Jesus said, "a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit," and "a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit" (Matthew 7:17-18). Take an honest look this holiday season, and see the "fruit" this festival produces. This is certainly not the fruit of repentance. You don't see godliness everywhere you look, but ungodliness. Licentious behavior, wantonness, revelry, drunkenness, materialism, greed, covetousness, fornication, and merriment, all supposedly in celebration of the holy Son of God. How God must grieve over the brazen sin of polluting His holy name with this abominable filth.

Some Bible believers readily acknowledge the pagan origins of Christmas, but offer all sorts of worldly compromising excuses and participate in it anyway. All the while declaring, "that's not what it means to me." Some think it to be an excellent time to witness to sinners about Christ. While it is never wrong to witness, it is always wrong to sin! And you don't have to compromise with the world in order to witness to the world. In fact, in order for our witness to be effective, just the opposite must be true. We must be different from the world. We must be a light set on a hill, a holy, peculiar people (cf. Matthew 5:13-16; I Peter 2:9). The Eternal Father says to His followers in our generation to come out from spiritual Babylon; come out from all that is false in religion.

"Come out of her My people, that you be not partakers of her sins." Revelation 18:4

Yahuah once said, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because you have rejected knowledge, I will also reject you, that you shall be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the Torah [Law] of your Alahim (God), I will also forget your children. Hosea 4:6

As II Corinthians 6:17-18 says, we must "come out from among them and be separate, and touch not the unclean thing!" There can be no agreement between the temple of God and idols, no fellowship between truth and lies, no mixture of paganism with Christianity.

"For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Messiah with Belial?" II Corinthians 6:14-15

Shall we follow the world and join with those who blaspheme and cast Yahuah out in drunkenness and revelry in the celebration of the birthday of our Lord Jesus? Never! The Scriptures say, "Thou shall not follow a multitude to do evil." Exodus 23:2

7. But won't we deprive the children if we don't celebrate Christmas?

Deprive them of what? The truth? If you really want to deprive them, continue to celebrate the world's holidays, continue to celebrate the ancient Roman Saturnalia; set up the forbidden idolatrous tree, continue to lie to your children about Santa Claus, and you will deprive them and yourself of truth, light, and their eternal reward. If you read Revelation 21:8 earlier, you know where liars go. Now read Galatians 5:20-21, and I Corinthians 6:9-10 and see where idolaters go. Bible believers, we are responsible for bringing up our children in the nurture and admonition of Yahuah (Ephesians 6:4), not in the ways of the world. We are responsible for teaching them the truth, and for walking in the truth ourselves in preparation for His second coming with confident expectation!

"But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in Ruach (spirit) and in truth: for the Father seeks such to worship Him. Yahuah is Ruach: and they that worship Him must worship Him in Ruach and in truth." (John 4:23-24)

Yahuah (the Eternal Father) is seeking those who will forsake the false ways, who will lay aside the traditions of men, who will worship Him in the beauty of holiness, and will not compromise the truth!

"Yahusha [the Messiah] said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life . . ." John 14:6

"Howbeit when He, the Ruach of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth." John 16:13

"Sanctify them through your truth; your word is truth. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." John 17:17, 19

"He shall judge the world with righteousness and the people with His truth." Psalm 96:13

Yahuah loves truth. He is concerned about the truth. He longs for those who will believe the truth and worship Him in truth! But friend, there isn't a shred of truth in Christmas. Everything about this holiday is false, corrupt, idolatrous, pagan, and a counterfeit of what is authentic and true. It is one BIG LIE! So what will you do? What will you follow? What will you believe?

"You cannot drink the cup of the Yahuah, and the cup of devils: you cannot be partakers of the Yahuah's table, and of the table of devils." 1 Corinthians 10:21

"Choose you this day whom you will serve...but as for me and my house, we will serve Yahuah." Joshua 24:15

"For you were sometimes darkness, but now are you light in Yahuah: walk as children of light: for the fruit of the Ruach (Spirit) is in all goodness and righteousness and truth; proving what is acceptable to Yahuah. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." Ephesians 5:8-11

Together, the Jews, Romans, and Greeks, for different reasons, over the last 1,700 years have managed to change the true set-apart Hebrew name of the Eternal Father "Yahuah Alahim" (H#3068 יהוה Yahuah) (H#430 אלהים Alahim) to what is now translated in English generic terms as "the Lord God," or over 7,000 times within the pages of Scripture. As if this was not enough, the Greeks, and Romans, changed the name of the Messiah, Yahusha haMashiach, 981 times in Scripture that morphed multiple times arriving in English after A.D. 1632 with the current name "Jesus Christ" spelled with a "J", which had never existed previously in Hebrew.

The New Testament Scriptures were originally written in Hebrew. Then, essentially 300 years following the events of our Messiah on this earth, Constantine, Emperor of Rome, in creating a new religion for his empire called his new deity "Iesvs Christ," and his followers "Christians." The true name of our Messiah was replaced throughout the pages of the Brit Hadasha (NT). For neither of these names existed prior to A.D. 325. This was accomplished to cause all the world to worship the counterfeit Roman deity and a watered-down version of the supremely divine duo. How was this accomplished? This has been done by way of a calculated attack on the translations of Scripture as we know them in English as well as all the other languages, causing our Messiah's name to appear today, to be "Jesus Christ." The real problem here is that historically, names retain their vocalized sound when one goes to another country. Only the spelling or even writing styles will be different, but nearly always able to produce the same vocalized name. So when it comes to Scripture, why were the sacred names entirely removed from our translated versions?

These LIES borne on the wings of heathen traditions have served well to hide YAHUAH Alahim's magnificent set-apart name and how it relates prophetically to His promised one true Son, YAHUSHA our Messiah. For "there is no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

YAHUSHA haMashiach (the Messiah) came in His Father's name, YAHUAH, with only one Hebrew letter difference. Thus, His very name "Yahusha" (יהושׁה) bears witness to the prophecies that He was indeed the promised LAMB of Yahuah to save His people from their sins. The "sha" (שׁה)"(literally means "saves by way of the Lamb." Add to this the "Yahu" portion of His name and you have, "YAHUAH saves by way of the Lamb."

Our Messiah was to fulfill all the Torah Law including requirements of the ancient Hebrew astro-luni-solar calendar as set forth in His sacred appointed Feast Days, the Creator's only recognized Kadosh days (holidays) of the Torah. As it turns out, the real purpose of our Messiah is baked-in to only the name YAHUSHA. He alone was the LAMB who bore the sins of the world at the appointed Feast of Pasch (Passover). It is these truths that define YAHUSHA as the true Messiah, for through Him alone, the Eternal Father's compassionate love was to be manifest as the GREATEST GIFT EVER GIVEN. For more on this most provocative subject refer to the following article: I AM YAHUAH

[Note: This 8th point has been added to Dr. Russell Tardo's article by TheCreatorsCalendar.com, as he was not aware of this point.]

9. The final nail in the coffin of this long-standing Christmas tradition is found in the true birthday of the Messiah who died for the sins of humanity.

The actual birthday of the Yahusha haMashiach (the Messiah) has been found! Remarkably it was there all along. For it was carried on the wings of the Scriptural astro-luni-solar time-measuring model beaconed by the trinity of the sun, moon, and stars, and not the modern Roman Gregorian solar calendar, accepted by all the world. The Creator's Calendar model is identified by years that commence in spring, months that start with each full moon as the true New Moon, and weeks and days that are counted and demarcated by lunar phases from one New Moon to another (Isaiah 66:23). Each smaller unit of time consistently fits into the larger unit.

In order to find and celebrate His birthday, one must trace the Scriptural clues that wind their way through the remarkable preordained time-measuring model based upon this trinity of LIGHTS, which stand out in bold opposition to the popular modern solar time-measuring model accepted by the world today. Also, it is this three-part orchestration of LIGHTS that shamelessly defies all allusions to the renewed popularization of a flat earth theory.

A link to the full article is posted below that explains the AMAZING EVIDENCE of "Our Messiah's Prophetic Birthday." So, for now, I will leave you with the time of year. His birth occurred between late summer and early fall. To find out the exact day, click on the link below.

Refer to the article, "OUR MESSIAH'S TRUE PROPHETIC BIRTHDAY."

This article began with Dr. Russell Tardo, declaring that no one knows the birthday of the Messiah. I believe he was correct at the time of his writing as the Creator's original Calendar remained unknown until its rather recent restoration. To know and honor our Messiah's actual birthday necessitates knowing and keeping the unpopular astro-luni-solar calendar of Scripture. Like all periods of human life, it is far easier to go with the flow of human-made witty time-measuring inventions than stand-up for truth, or for the ONE WHO PAID IT ALL FOR YOU AND ME.

Folks, Yahuah, the Most High Father desires for us to know the true Birthday of His only begotten Son so we may discern the true Messiah from the impostors. The mere fact that He has taken great care to provide a detailed account of His Son's birthday leaves each of us without excuse.

[Note: This 9th point has been added to Dr. Russell Tardo's article by TheCreatorsCalendar.com, as he was not aware of this last point.]

May the Eternal Father help us to be His set-apart people!

By Dr. Russell K. Tardo

[Note: Images have been added and the term "The Lord" has been replaced by the Hebrew name " Yahuah" in all the Scriptural passages as edited by T heCreatorsCalendar.com.

1. Christina Hole, cover sheet, Christmas and Its Customs.

2. Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons, p. 91.

3. Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion, p. 160

4. The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1965 Ed., Vol.2, p. 656.

5. Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, p. 259.

6. The Bible, Rom. 3:24-25; 5:1,9; Col. 1:22; Heb. 9:14-15,26,28; 10:10,19-20.

7. George W. Curtis, Christmas, p. 9.

8. Charles Haff, The Message of the Christian Jew, newsletter, Nov./Dec. 1977.

9. Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion, p. 163.

10. Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 6, p. 623.

11. Encyclopedia Britannica, 1968 Ed., Vol. 5, pp. 704,705.

12. George W. Curtis, Christmas, p. 5.

13. 0. M. Spencer, Christmas Throughout Christendom, p. 19.

14. L. R. Shelton, Christmas, A Demon Holiday, pp. 3,4.

15. Christina Hole, Christmas and Its Customs, pp. 21,22.

16. Albert James Dager, "The Origins of Christmas Tradition," Media Spotlight, p. 2.

17. R. F. Becker, The Truth About Christmas, pp. 19,20.

18. The Bible, Deut. 12:2, I Kl. 14:23; II Kl. 16:4; 17:10; Ezekiel 6:13.

19. Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion, pp. 165,166.

20. William Sansom, A Book of Christmas, pp. 45,46.

21. Lasley F. Gober, The Christmas Lovers' Handbook, p. 64

22. Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion, p. 164.

23. Christina Hole, Christmas and Its Customs, p. 35

24. Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons, p. 93.

25. "Lagnlappe," The Times-Picayune, Dec. 19, 1982.

26. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 5, p. 705.

FAITHFUL WORD PUBLICATIONS

Post Office Box 496, Arabi, Louisiana 70032

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The SHOCKING Truth About Christmas - The Creators Calendar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Disclaimer: The Scripture verses have been restored to reflect the true sacred name of Yahuah and Yahusha, but because this article was written by one who was not versed in the sacred names it is therefore replete with the replacement terms of the Lord, God, and Jesus Christ.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If there is one thing that drives me absolutely bananas, it's people spreading misinformation via social media under the guise of "educating". I've seen this happen in several ways - through infographics that twist data in ways that support a conclusion that is ultimately false, or else through "meaningful" quotes falsely attributed to various celebrities, or by cobbling together a few actual facts with statements that are patently untrue to create something that seems plausible on the surface but is, in fact, full of crap.

Yesterday, the official Facebook page of ( noted misogynist and eugenics enthusiast) Richard Dawkins' Foundation for Reason and Science shared the following image to their 637,000 fans:

Naturally, their fans lapped this shit up; after all, this is the kind of thing they absolutely live for. Religious people! Being hypocritical! And crazy! And wrong! The 2,000+ comments were chock-full of smug remarks about how naïve and stupid Christians were, accompanied by pats on the back for all the atheists who smart enough to see through all the religious bullshit and understand how the evil church had slyly appropriated all kinds of pagan traditions.

And you know what? That's fine, I guess. I'm all for questioning religion and examining the sociological, historical and anthropological reasons that help explain the hows and whys of our lives today. I'm actually super fascinated by that kind of stuff, even if I do think that there's a way to discuss it without making yourself sound smarter and more enlightened than the people around you.

But you guys? The image above is rife with misinformation. RIFE, I say.

Let's start from the top:
This is Ishtar ...
Okay, great. So far things are fairly accurate. The relief pictured here, known as the Burney Relief (also called the Queen of the Night relief) is widely considered to be an Ancient Babylonian representation of Ishtar (although some scholars believe that the woman depicted might be Lilitu or Ereshkigal). This relief is currently housed in the British Museum in London, but originates from southern Iraq and is nearly 4,000 years old.
... pronounced Easter.
Actually, in modern English we pronounce it the way it looks. A case could be made for pronouncing it Eesh-tar, but I have yet to come across a credible source that gives the original pronunciation as Easter.
Easter is originally the celebration of Ishtar, the Assyrian and Babylonian goddess of fertility and sex.
Ishtar was the goddess of love, war and sex. These days, thanks to Herodotus, she is especially associated with sacred prostitution* (also known as temple prostitution), which, in the religions of the Ancient Near East, allegedly took on the form of every woman having to, at some point in her life, go to the temple of Ishtar and have sex with the first stranger who offered her money. Once a woman entered the temple of Ishtar for the purpose of sacred prostitution, she was not allowed to leave until she'd done the deed. I can't imagine that sacred prostitution sex was ever very good sex, but hey, what do I know? Probably some people were pretty into it - I mean, if you can imagine it, someone's made porn about it, right?

Anyway, the point I am trying to make here is that, yes, Ishtar was associated with fertility and sex. However, her symbols were the lion, the gate and the eight-pointed star; I can't find any evidence of eggs or rabbits symbolically belonging to her. And Easter has nothing to do with her.

Most scholars believe that Easter gets its name from Eostre or Ostara**, a Germanic pagan goddess. English and German are two of the very few languages that use some variation of the word Easter (or, in German, Ostern) as a name for this holiday. Most other European languages use one form or another of the Latin name for Easter, Pascha, which is derived from the Hebrew Pesach, meaning Passover. In French it's Pâques, in Italian it's Pasqua, in Dutch it's Pasen, in Danish it's Paaske, in Bulgarian it's Paskha, and so on and so forth.

In the Christian Bible, Jesus returned to Jerusalem from his forty days in the desert just before Passover. In fact, in the Gospel according to John, Jesus was killed on the day before the first night of Passover, at the time when lambs were traditionally slaughtered for the Passover feast (because Jesus was the Lamb of God, etc. - SYMBOLISM, Y'ALL). There are a few differing accounts of when Jesus actually died, but most Christian texts, philosophers and scholars agree that it was around the time of Passover. Easter is still celebrated the week after Passover, which is why it's a different day each year, because the Jewish calendar is lunar rather than solar.
Her symbols (like the egg and the bunny) were and still are fertility and sex symbols (or did you actually think eggs and bunnies had anything to do with the resurrection?).
Actually, according to Jacob Grimm's Deutsche Mythologie, which he wrote after journeying across Germany and recording its oral mythological traditions, the idea of resurrection was part and parcel of celebrating the goddess Ostara:

" Ostara, Eástre seems therefore to have been the divinity of the radiant dawn, of upspringing light, a spectacle that brings joy and blessing, whose meaning could be easily adapted by the resurrection-day of the christian's God. Bonfires were lighted at Easter and according to popular belief of long standing, the moment the sun rises on Easter Sunday morning, he gives three joyful leaps, he dances for joy ... Water drawn on the Easter morning is, like that at Christmas, holy and healing ... here also heathen notions seems to have grafted themselves on great christian festivals. Maidens clothed in white, who at Easter, at the season of returning spring, show themselves in clefts of the rock and on mountains, are suggestive of the ancient goddess."

Spring is a sort of resurrection after all, with the land coming back to life after lying dead and bare during the winter months. To say that ancient peoples thought otherwise is foolish, naïve and downright uninformed. Many, many pagan celebrations centre around the return of light and the rebirth of the land; these ideas are not new themes in the slightest.

And yes, rabbits and eggs are fertility symbols, and they are, in fact, associated with Eostre.
After Constantine decided to Christianize the Empire, Easter was changed to represent Jesus.
Hey! Guess what language Constantine, the Roman Emperor, spoke? Not English, that's for sure! In fact, when he was alive, English didn't even exist yet. He would have spoken Latin or Ancient Greek, so would likely have referred to Easter as Pascha or Πάσχα.
But at its roots Easter (which is pronounced Ishtar) was all about celebrating fertility and sex.
Look. Here's the thing. Our Western Easter traditions incorporate a lot of elements from a bunch of different religious backgrounds. You can't really say that it's just about resurrection, or just about spring, or just about fertility and sex. You can't pick one thread out of a tapestry and say, "Hey, now this particular strand is what this tapestry's really about." It doesn't work that way; very few things in life do.

The fact is that the Ancient Romans were smart when it came to conquering. In their pagan days, they would absorb gods and goddesses from every religion they encountered into their own pantheon; when the Roman Empire became Christian, the Roman Catholic Church continued to do the same thing, in a manner of speaking.

And do you know why that worked so well? Because adaptability is a really, really good trait to have in terms of survival of the fittest (something I wish the present-day Catholic Church would remember). Scratch the surface of just about any Christian holiday, and you'll find pagan elements, if not a downright pagan theme, underneath.

Know what else? Most Christians know this. Or, at least, most of the Christians that I'm friends with (which is, admittedly, a fairly small sampling). They know that Jesus wasn't really born on December 25th, and they know that there were never any actual snakes in Ireland, and they know that rabbits and eggs are fertility symbols. But they don't care, because they realize that religions evolve and change and that that's actually a good thing, not a bad thing. The fact that many Christian saints are just re-imagined pagan gods and goddesses doesn't alter their faith one iota; because faith isn't about reason or sense, it's about belief.

Look, go ahead and debate religion. Go ahead and tell Christians why what they believe is wrong. That's totally fine and, in fact, I encourage it. A little debate and critical thinking are good for everyone. But do it intelligently. Get to know the Bible, so you actually know what you're disagreeing with when you form an argument. Brush up on your theology so that you can explain why it's so wrong. And have some compassion, for Christ's sake - be polite and respectful when you enter into a debate, even when the person you're debating with loses their cool. You want to prove that you're better, more enlightened than Christians? Great, do it by remaining rational and level-headed in the face of someone who's willing to stoop to personal attacks. To behave otherwise is to be just as bad as the people you're debating.

Anyway, I hope you guys have a fantastic long weekend, no matter how you spend it. If your holiday involves chocolate, then I hope you enjoy that. If not, just enjoy the extra day or two off work and the (hopefully) warm weather. No matter what you believe in, I think that we can all agree that the end of winter and the rebirth of spring is worth celebrating.

And also? Richard Dawkins? You need to fact-check yourself before you fact-wreck yourself. Spreading this kind of misinformation to your foundation's 637,000 fans is just plain irresponsible, especially coming from someone like you. Get with the program, buddy.
ETA: The post now seems to be removed from The Richard Dawkins' Foundation for Science and Reason's FB page. Thanks Richard! ETA Part Deux: Oh. It looks like it was deleted from their timeline but not the photo album. Welp.
*It should be noted that the only actual historical evidence that we have of sacred prostitution comes from Herodotus (I've included an excerpt from Herodotus' Histories below) and no one is really sure how accurate it is. Herodotus is known for making shit up, like giant ants for example. But it makes for an amazing story and people still make the association between Ishtar and sacred prostitution, so I decided to mention it here.
The foulest Babylonian custom is that which compels every woman of the land to sit in the temple of Aphrodite and have intercourse with some stranger once in her life. Many women who are rich and proud and disdain to mingle with the rest, drive to the temple in covered carriages drawn by teams, and stand there with a great retinue of attendants. But most sit down in the sacred plot of Aphrodite, with crowns of cord on their heads; there is a great multitude of women coming and going; passages marked by line run every way through the crowd, by which the men pass and make their choice. Once a woman has taken her place there, she does not go away to her home before some stranger has cast money into her lap, and had intercourse with her outside the temple; but while he casts the money, he must say, "I invite you in the name of Mylitta" (that is the Assyrian name for Aphrodite). It does not matter what sum the money is; the woman will never refuse, for that would be a sin, the money being by this act made sacred. So she follows the first man who casts it and rejects no one. After their intercourse, having discharged her sacred duty to the goddess, she goes away to her home; and thereafter there is no bribe however great that will get her. So then the women that are fair and tall are soon free to depart, but the uncomely have long to wait because they cannot fulfil the law; for some of them remain for three years, or four. There is a custom like this in some parts of Cyprus.
That crack about ugly women was totally unnecessary, Herodotus. I am just saying.

**The first written reference we have for Eostre dates back to the 7th century AD and can be found in Venerable Bede's Temporum Ratione, in a passage explaining that April was often referred to as Eostremonth:
"Eosturmonath" has a name which is now translated "Paschal month", and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honor feasts were celebrated in that month.
Jacob Grimm said that he found further evidence of Eostre and her associations with Easter, eggs and rabbits when researching his Deutsches Mythologie, although he was unable to discover any written records about her.

Tags: atheism, christianty, Easter, fertility, I like to rant, ishtar, noted misogynist and eugenics enthusiast richard dawkins, pagan, religion, sex, writing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Easter Is Not Named After Ishtar, And Other Truths I Have To Tell You

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If there is one thing that drives me absolutely bananas, it's people spreading misinformation via social media under the guise of "educating". I've seen this happen in several ways - through infographics that twist data in ways that support a conclusion that is ultimately false, or else through "meaningful" quotes falsely attributed to various celebrities,...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BibleTruth.cc

"Doctrines of Demons" Series

The Truth About Easter

By David M Rogers

www.BibleTruth.cc
Lent
2nd Edition: April 2011

Table of Contents
Good Friday Good Friday Customs Friday and the Fish God Dagon The Pope and His Fish Hat! Hot Cross Buns
The Christian Practice of Fasting and Self-Denial

The Ancient Practice of the 40 Day Fasting and Weeping

The Adoption of the Fish Symbol by Christianity

Easter

What or Who is Easter?

Nimrod and Semiramis and Tammuz

The Easter Egg

Does the Bible Mention Ishtar / Easter?

The Rude Reality of the Easter Season

What's Wrong With Honoring Christ During the Easter Season?

I remember the fun we had at Easter when I was a kid. Nearly every year we would buy a dyeing kit from the grocery store and color hard-boiled Easter eggs many different shades and colors on the Saturday evening before Easter. Waking up on Easter morning and finding a large basket for each one of us kids, though not quite equal to the thrills of Christmas morning, was nevertheless exciting. Each basket would contain colored, artificial "grass," usually green, and many colored eggs, which mom insisted we eat within the first day or so lest they should go bad. And lots of jelly beans. And small chocolate bunnies and candies. And the prize item - a large, sometimes solid sometimes hollow, chocolate Easter bunny.

We would also get dressed up special that day for church. The girls had brand new spring dresses and big bonnets. And I (as a small boy) dressed up in a suit and a hat. My dad would always want to take a picture of everyone dressed up and holding their Easter baskets full of the goodies. So we would line up on the front porch steps and pose with our best smile.

Sunday services that day were special, too. The church would usually be packed with all the regulars and the folks who, out of some sense of obligation, would show up only on Christmas and Easter. I guess they figured that it would be better to go at least a couple times a year than not at all. God would have to look at that act of righteousness with some sort of favor, they must be thinking! After all, it was the celebration of the resurrection of Christ. Or so we thought....

What we were doing was in line with a tradition which the Christian church had been doing for over 1600 years. Now that kind of long history is hard to argue with. We had supposed, in some moment of reflection, that even the apostles of Jesus had celebrated Easter, just like we were doing. Well, a little bit of research, coupled with a sobering realization that traditions are not always from our Creator, had proved us wrong in our assumptions. And somewhat shocking and disturbing are the results of our investigation of the roots of Easter.

Come to find out that the celebration of Easter is not biblical after all! The Torah, Elohim's instructions to his covenant people, does not teach the celebration of Easter. Jesus never taught his disciples to celebrate Easter. Nor did Paul or any of the other prophets, apostles or disciples in the Bible. The celebration of Easter is not in the Bible because it is not from our Maker!

Lent

In the interest of providing some history and background to the popularly observed season of Lent and to impart some perspective about what the Bible has to say about the Lenten season, I offer this summary and analysis. Many of the customs, practices and traditions of the Christian Church, which are believed to be based on the New Testament and the story of Jesus, are actually ancient customs which pre-date Christianity. The forty day fast and abstinence called Lent is one such tradition.

On the liturgical calendar, Lent is the period of time between Ash Wednesday and Easter. The term Lent is a shortened form of Lenten, which derives from the Old English term lencten, which means spring. This word is from the Old English root word lang which means long (Online Etymology Dictionary, www.etymonline.com). And you can probably guess that we also get our word lengthen from that term. Presumable, Lent refers to the spring because it is the season when the days begin to lengthen.

Lent is celebrated worldwide by Roman Catholic Christians. But it is also popular among some Protestant Christians, including Episcopals, Lutherans, Methodists, some Presbyterians and Anglicans.

The Christian Practice of Fasting and Self-Denial

Lent purports to be a continuation of the custom of fasting as Jesus fasted. We are told in Matthew's gospel that following his baptism, Jesus went out into the wilderness and fasted for forty days and nights. It is alleged that Lent is the season when Christians do as their Master did and fast. Often this fasting takes the form of giving up some favorite food, or meat, or promising to stop bad habits for these forty days prior to Easter.

The Lenten season begins after Mardi Gras, which means "Fat Tuesday." The party of Mardi Gras is just an excuse to indulge in excesses and debauchery (getting "fat") before the fast. This festival is most famous in Rio de Janeiro, but is held elsewhere around the world including New Orleans. Mardi Gras is the last chance for these religious zealots to indulge themselves in all manner of sinful behaviors before they have to deny themselves of some earthly pleasure. Then, on "Ash Wednesday," Christians have an ashen mark placed on their foreheads to symbolize the beginning of the sacred fast.

Lent officially became a "Christian" celebration at the edict of the Council of Laodicea in A.D. 360. Nevertheless, even the well-known Catholic Saint Abbot John Cassianus, monk of Marseilles, in the fifth century contrasted the primitive Church with the Church in his day, "It ought to be known that the observance of the forty days had no existence, so long as the perfection of that primitive Church remained inviolate."

If Lent didn't exist during the early years of the Messianic community (the Christian Church), then where did it come from?

The Ancient Practice of the 40 Day Fasting and Weeping

Alexander Hislop, in his classic work, The Two Babylons, in the section entitled, Easter, explains the origin of the Lenten fast:

The forty days' abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess. Such a Lent of forty days, "in the spring of the year," is still observed by the Yezidis or Pagan Devil-worshippers of Koordistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the Babylonians. Such a Lent of forty days was held in spring by the Pagan Mexicans, for thus we read in Humboldt, where he gives account of Mexican observances: "Three days after the vernal equinox...began a solemn fast of
forty days in honour of the sun." Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt, as may be seen on consulting Wilkinson's Egyptians. This Egyptian Lent of forty days, we are informed by Landseer, in his Sabean Researches, was held expressly in commemoration of Adonis or Osiris, the great mediatorial god.
Thus, the testimony of many historians is that Lent was a borrowed festival from Babylon. It is a part of the ancient sun god worship which has found its way into nearly every culture of the world throughout time. Since the early church had no such custom (as Cassianus told us), the Council of Laodicea must have affirmed for the church a celebration which was observed in antiquity by the pagan sun god worshippers.

But there is more. Hislop finds more evidence of the pagan roots of Easter and Lent:

At the same time, the rape of Proserpine seems to have been commemorated, and in a similar manner; for Julius Firmicus informs us that, for "forty nights" the "wailing for Proserpine" continued; and from Arnobius we learn that the fast which the Pagans observed, called "Castus" or the "sacred" fast, was, by the Christians in his time, believed to have been primarily in imitation of the long fast of Ceres, when for many days she determinedly refused to eat on account of her "excess of sorrow," that is, on account of the loss of her daughter Proserpine, when carried away by Pluto, the god of hell. As the stories of Bacchus, or Adonis and Proserpine, though originally distinct, were made to join on and fit in to one another, so that Bacchus was called Liber, and his wife Ariadne, Libera (which was one of the names of Proserpine), it is highly probable that the forty days' fast of Lent was made in later times to have reference to both.

Wikipedia explains who Proserpine is:

The full story of the rape of Proserpina is told at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proserpina.

Tradition also shows that all the observances from other cultures and peoples throughout ancient times were mere copies or modifications of the original story of Nimrod, his wife Semiramis and their son Tammuz. The story is told that the wife of Nimrod, the King of Babylon, after the death of her husband, claimed she had been supernaturally impregnated by the Sun god and gave birth to Tammuz. When Tammuz was forty years old, he went hunting and was killed by a wild boar. His mother and her family mourned for 40 days, at the end of which Tammuz was brought back from the dead. So, Lent is evidently the time when Tammuz is remembered and mourned during the "Fast of Tammuz." The Wycliffe Bible Commentary states, "Mourning for the god was followed by a celebration of resurrection."

Hislop goes on to link the Lenten season with Tammuz of biblical fame:

Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing, and which, in many countries, was considerably later than the Christian festival, being observed in Palestine and Assyria in June, therefore called the "month of Tammuz"; in Egypt, about the middle of May, and in Britain, some time in April. To conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated, and, by a complicated but skilful adjustment of the calendar, it was found no difficult matter, in general, to get Paganism and Christianity--now far sunk in idolatry--in this as in so many other things, to shake hands.

All these stories derive from a common original story of the Babylonian sun god saga. So a pagan connection between Tammuz and Lent is apparent.

The prophets of Scripture allude to the practice of weeping for Tammuz at the temple site. Elohim described the abominations that were going on by the priests and in the temple of those who worshiped Tammuz. The prophet Ezekiel was brought, in vision, into the temple of Yahuwah and was shown what abominable things were happening there:

Again, he said, "You will see them doing things that are even more detestable." Then he brought me to the entrance to the north gate of the house of Yahuwah, and I saw women sitting there, mourning for Tammuz. (Ezekiel 8:13,14).

The whole modern day season of Lent is the carry over of the 40 days of weeping for Tammuz. And Yahuwah hates this. Yahuwah hates all that is associated with the Easter season, especially when we try to pass it off as legitimate worship of the Master Yahusha.

Good Friday

Another element of the Easter season is "Good Friday." This is believed by Christians to be the day that Christ died on the cross and was buried. Theologians do a lot of interpretive gymnastics to arrive at a Friday death of Messiah, followed by a Sunday morning resurrection. This flatly contradicts what the Messiah himself said about the length of time he would be in the grave. He specifically and repeatedly instructed his disciples that he would be in the tomb for three days and three nights.

The major problem with insisting that Messiah died on Good Friday is that the math just doesn't add up. Jesus said that he would be in the grave for three days and three nights:

He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Yonah. For as Yonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:39-40)

There is clearly only one day and two nights between Friday at sunset when Messiah was placed in the tomb and Sunday morning, when the women found the tomb empty. This is obviously a huge problem for those who hold this view.

But even giving the benefit of the doubt, it still may be feasible to count three days as: day one - the final few minutes of Friday before sundown; day two - Saturday; day three - the first few minutes of the daytime portion of Sunday. But there just simply aren't three nights between Friday evening and Sunday morning. So, unless you ignore what the Master taught, you MUST conclude that he did not die on the tree on Friday. (See a detailed study of this prophesy and its fulfillment in our companion article, The Sign of Jonah: 3 Days and 3 Nights).

So Friday was not, in fact, the day Messiah died. But it fits in really nicely with the activities which were traditionally practiced by the pagans on Friday. Thus, it's convenient for Christians to force fit the death of Messiah into a "Friday" frame, because Friday and Sunday were significant days when the pagans practiced the worship of their god-idols. And these practices were amalgamated into the worship of the early Church.

Good Friday Customs

The Catholic Church has some very interesting customs for Good Friday, which don't jive with what the Bible teaches believers. First, there is the "re-enactments" of the suffering and death of Christ. And many believers undergo a "crucifixion" on Good Friday so as to imitate their Lord.

On Good Friday, at Rome and Madrid, and other chief seats of Roman idolatry, multitudes flock together to witness the performances of the saintly whippers, who lash themselves till the blood gushes in streams from every part of their body. They pretend to do this in honour of Christ, on the festival set apart professedly to commemorate His death, just as the worshippers of Osiris did the same on the festival when they lamented for his loss. But can any man of the least Christian enlightenment believe that the exalted Saviour can look on such rites as doing honour to Him, which pour contempt on His all-perfect atonement, and represent His most "precious blood" as needing to have its virtue
supplemented by that of blood drawn from the backs of wretched and misguided sinners? Such offerings were altogether fit for the worship of Moloch; but they are the very opposite of being fit for the service of Christ. ( The Two Babylons, p.144)
The Torah clearly teaches believers NOT to do these kinds of things to their own bodies:

You are the sons of YHWH your Elohim; you shall not cut yourselves nor make baldness between your eyes on behalf of the dead (Devarim [Deuteronomy] 14:1)

There. The Bible tells us not to cut ourselves on behalf of the dead. So this means that we should not cut ourselves to re-enact the suffering and death of Messiah on the tree.

These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence. (Colossians 2:22-23)

Now, the flagellations which form an important part of the penances that take place at Rome on the evening of Good Friday, formed an equally important part in the rites of that fire-god, from which, as we have seen, the Papacy has borrowed so much. These flagellations, then, of "Passion Week," taken in connection with the other ceremonies of that period, bear their additional testimony to the real character of that god whose death and resurrection Rome then celebrates. Wonderful it is to consider that, in the very high place of what is called Catholic Christendom, the essential rites at this day are seen to be the very rites of the old Chaldean fire-worshippers. (The Two Babylons, p.145-6)

Cutting the flesh of the body as a remembrance for the dead is strictly and explicitly forbidden. This is not the way to honor Messiah who was whipped and poured out his blood for us.

If the Bible isn't the source of this kind of activity, then where did this custom come from? Hislop describes the source of these Good Friday flagellations:

And Paul concurs:

So it turns out that the crucifixion re-enactments are nothing more that the adoption of biblical forbidden, pagan worship practices!

Friday and the Fish God Dagon

For the pagans, Friday was the day of honoring and worshipping the fish god Dagon. Dagon, a Semitic deity was originally a fertility god. He was worshipped by the Amorites, and was probably the supreme deity of the Philistine pantheon. Scripture speaks of Dagon, the fish god (pictured to the right):

The rulers of the Philistines gathered to offer a great sacrifice to Dagon their elohim and to celebrate. They said, "Our elohim has handed Samson, our enemy, over to us." (Shoftim [Judges] 16:23)

And again,

The Philistines took the ark of Elohim and brought it to the temple of Dagon, where they positioned it beside Dagon. When the residents of Ashdod got up early the next day, Dagon was lying on the ground before the ark of Yahuwah. So they took Dagon and set him back in his place. But when they got up early the next day, Dagon was again lying on the ground before the ark of Yahuwah. The head of Dagon and his two hands were sheared off and were lying at the threshold. Only Dagon's body was left intact. For this reason to this very day neither Dagon's priests nor anyone else who enters Dagon's temple step on Dagon's threshold in Ashdod. (1 Shemuel 5:2-5)

Another take from this passage is that we shouldn't engage in the silly superstitions about stepping on a crack. This would be pandering to the worship and respect of Dagon, which is a clear violation of the commandment not to worship any other elohim except Yahuwah.

Though the fish god is condemned by Scripture, Christians still have a certain fascination with the fish. Friday is a day on which Catholics traditionally eat fish during the Lenten season. Michael Rood describes the source of the fish eating attraction in Christian circles:

In later years "Good Friday," the day that the Philistines sacrificed to Dagon, the Philistine fish god, also became an integral part of the Easter pageantry (if you are over 40 years of age, you will recall eating fish on Friday in the public school system in America). This entire menagerie of satanic festivities is the pinnacle of the abominations that God had pronounced to the Children of Israel before they entered the Promised Land. (John Michael Rood, The Mystery of Iniquity, Chapter 8)

It seems that eating fish on Friday is out of respect for the ancient fish god.

During the time of the Messiah and afterward, Friday was well known in pagan circles to be a celebration of Dagon. And so, as the Scriptural practices of appointed times were being abandoned and the pagan sun-god and other deity worship began to get folded into the worship of the early church, the blending of Dagon\fish-god worship as a legitimate practice of these Christians became established.

The Pope and His Fish Hat!

Note again the picture above of Dagon, the fish god. He is covered by a fish as with a garment, with the fishes head as his hat with its mouth open and pointing upward. When we take a look at the Pope, the Head of the Roman Catholic Church, we see the same hat! Is it merely a coincidence that the Pope's mitre (hat) looks exactly like the head covering of Dagon?

Note the picture to the right comparing the Pope's hat with Dagon. It's the same fish! The Pope seems to be Dagon the fish god. Something's terribly wrong here.

Hot Cross Buns

Do you not see what they are doing in the towns of Yehudah and in the streets of Yerushalayim? The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven. They pour out drink offerings to other gods to provoke me to anger. (Jeremiah 7:17-18)

The Jews had become so corrupted in the worship of foreign deities that everyone was doing their part - the children, the fathers and the women - they were all participating in the worship of Ishtar.

The cakes of Jeremiah 7:18 are the buns of Good Friday fame, as Hislop explains:

Another custom of Good Friday is the eating of the hot cross buns. That seems innocent enough, until you find our where this custom comes from. Again, Hislop explains:

The hot cross buns of Good Friday, and the dyed eggs of Pasch or Easter Sunday, figured in the Chaldean rites just as they do now. The "buns," known too by that identical name, were used in the worship of the queen of heaven, the goddess Easter, as early as the days of Cecrops, the founder of Athens-- that is, 1500 years before the Christian era. "One species of sacred bread," says Bryant, "which used to be offered to the gods, was of great antiquity, and called Boun." Diogenes Laertius, speaking of this offering being made by Empedocles, describes the chief ingredients of which it was composed, saying, "He offered one of the sacred cakes called Boun, which was made of fine flour and honey." ( The Two Babylons, p. 105)

Jeremiah the prophet wrote about the abominations he saw in the temple of Yahuwah. He was shown a vision of the women of Israel partaking in the pagan rite of making these hot cross buns for Ishtar (Easter):

It is from the very word here used by the prophet that the word "bun" seems to be derived. The Hebrew word, with the points, was pronounced Khavan, which in Greek became sometimes Kapan-os (PHOTIUS, Lexicon Syttoge); and, at other times, Khabon (NEANDER, in KITTO'S Biblical Cyclopoedia). The first shows how Khvan, pronounced as one syllable, would pass into the Latin panis, "bread," and the second how, in like manner, Khvon would become Bon or Bun. It is not to be overlooked that our common English word Loa has passed through a similar process of formation. In Anglo-Saxon it was Hlaf. The hot cross buns are not now offered, but eaten, on the festival of Astarte; but this leaves no doubt as to whence they have been derived. (Ibid., p. 105)

So, what's wrong with eating hot cross buns near the Easter holiday? Nothing - if you don't mind a little pagan mixed into your faith and if you don't mind the condemnation from the prophets of Yahuwah that comes with it.

The Adoption of the Fish Symbol by Christianity

Concerning this fascination Christians have with the fish - the Christian Church had adopted the symbol of the fish as their own. We all know how the third century Christians took the symbol of the fish and used it as a representation of faith in Christ. The justification goes something like this: The Greek word for fish, ivcqu,j (pronounced ick-thus), allegedly represents Christ because the letters which spell it also are the beginning letters of these words: the iota begins the Greek name of the Christ, Iaysous; the chi is the first letter in the Greek Christos (Xristos or "Christ"); the theta begins the word "theos" or "God"; the upsilon begins the word hwee-os ("son"); and the sigma represents "sotayr" or Savior. Thus, the reasoning goes, ickthus ("fish") represents " Iaysous Xristos theos huee-os sotayr" - or "Jesus Christ God('s) son, (and) Savior."

Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use in this country. That name, as found by Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar. ( Ibid., p. 101)

Of course, this is pure nonsense. The fish symbol really has nothing to do with the Messiah of Scripture. But in order to make palatable the practices of fish god Dagon worship in "Christian" circles, the word "fish" had to be given a Christian meaning! And thus was born the adoption of the very pagan fish symbol and fish god into the worship practices of those who follow the Savior of the world. Maybe its time to lose these abominable customs.

Easter

It's not hard to find information about the customs of Easter. It turns out that Easter is an old pagan worship day which Yahuwah hates. Our modern day version of Easter is just a remake of some very ancient pagan traditions and practices. If the Christian would really think about the source of "Easter," he would most assuredly abhor it.

What or Who is Easter?

This brings us to the million dollar question: Who or what is Easter? Where did we get this word from? And where did the customs of Easter come from? I yield again to the renowned scholar of ancient customs - Alexander Hislop, who gets right to the point:

Pictured to the right is Astarte, the goddess of love, usually depicted as a well endowed, bare-breasted woman. It is no secret about Ishtar or Astarte. You can find information and pictures of this idol goddess all over the internet. You can find Easter all around you. You find her in the Statue of Liberty, also known as Lady Liberty, in New York harbor. Her is donned by the seven rays of the sun and a plaque below her dedicates her to Mother Earth, or Ishtar. And you, therefore, also find her on some of our coins and stamps. And in churches!

Yet, in spite of the wealth of information available about the identity of Easter / Astarte / Ishtar, Christians don't care where this Easter came from with all its customs and practices. They prefer to hide their faces from the facts about Easter, like an ostrich hiding her head in the sand when danger comes near. They love Easter and embrace it regardless of the evidence that it is an abomination.

The entire Babylonian religious system, which is the theme of Hislop's book, The Two Babylons, is that of the false religious systems in all countries and cultures throughout all human history, which had its origin in the story of Nimrod. The Book of Revelation speaks a great deal about the ultimate collapse of Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth. The harlot of Babylon is Semiramis, also known as Venus, aka Beltis, aka Ishtar, aka Ashteroth, aka Easter. As she was the mother of harlots, those harlots are all who follow after her pernicious system of worship.

Nimrod and Semiramis and Tammuz

Easter comes from the story of Nimrod of biblical fame. History books describe Ninus (called Nimrod in the Bible) as a mighty warrior, city builder and ruler of the ancient world after the flood. Nimrod founded the city of Nineveh, the capitol of Assyria. His father was Belus or Bel, also called Ba'al. The Bible says Cush was his father. Evidently, Cush was Belus, aka Bel, aka Ba'al. Ninus was first identified in the Recognitions with the biblical Nimrod, who, the author says, taught the Persians to worship fire.

The Jewish historian, Josephus, further describes Nimrod:

The Easter egg has a pagan origin as well. Hislop elaborates...

From Egypt these sacred eggs can be distinctly traced to the banks of the Euphrates. The classic poets are full of the fable of the mystic egg of the Babylonians; and thus its tale is told by Hyginus, the Egyptian, the learned keeper of the Palatine library at Rome, in the time of Augustus, who was skilled in all the wisdom of his native country: "An egg of wondrous size is said to have fallen from heaven into the river Euphrates. The fishes rolled it to the bank, where the doves having settled upon it, and hatched it, out came Venus, who afterwards was called the Syrian Goddess"--that is, Astarte. Hence the egg became one of the symbols of Astarte or Easter; and accordingly, in Cyprus, one of the chosen seats of the worship of Venus, or Astarte, the egg of wondrous size was represented on a grand scale. (The Two Babylons, p.107 ff)

Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it were through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to reach. And that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers.

There are numerous legends and traditions about Nimrod in various cultures and languages. The general consensus is that he was a giant of a man who was the first world ruler.

As legend goes, Ninus took Semiramis, the wife of one of his commanders, and married her. They are several accounts of this marriage. One says they had a son who was more wicked than Ninus. Another says that Ninus died and Semiramis afterward became pregnant, which she attributed to the rays of the sun, as though Ninus had become the sun god and thus had impregnated her. That son was Tammuz spoken of in the Bible. Tammuz, son of the mighty hunter, died at the age of 40 while hunting. He was gored by a wild bore. This was the basis for a tradition which was begun in his honor to fast for 40 days - a day for each year of his life - for Tammuz.

This is only one way the story has been told. As the years moved on, the story of Ninus became legendary in many cultures and in many languages. The myths and legends were sometimes a little different, and other details were added and twisted, so that now, there are many stories told about Ninus. One thing is for sure; the Babylonian system condemned throughout the Bible and whose end is prophesied in Revelation is based on Nimrod's rebellion against the Creator and the subsequent false worship practices his life spawned. Lent, Good Friday and Easter are all part of that ignoble and wretched system.

The Easter Egg

This large egg was supposed to represent the ark in which Noah and his family was saved. The egg, therefore, it a fertility symbol, as the whole world was repopulated from the one(s) who emerged from it. Therefore, Venus / Astarte is the goddess - again, depicted as a bare-breasted woman of desire - who represents fertility and childbearing.

Does the Bible Mention Ishtar / Easter?

He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molech the detestable god of the Ammonites. So Shlomoh did evil in the eyes of Yahuwah; he did not follow Yahuwah completely, as David his father had done. (1 Kings 11:5-6)

Because of his idolatry, Israel was split into two nations after his death as explained later:

I will do this (split the nation) because they have forsaken me and worshiped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Molech the god of the Ammonites, and have not walked in my ways, nor done what is right in my eyes, nor kept my statutes and laws as David, Shlomoh's father, did. (1 Kings 11:33)

Later, King Yosiah (Josiah) destroyed these places which Shlomoh had built:

The king also desecrated the high places that were east of Yerushalayim on the south of the Hill of Corruption-- the ones Shlomoh king of Yisrael had built for Ashtoreth the vile goddess of the Sidonians, for Chemosh the vile god of Moab, and for Molech the detestable god of the people of Ammon. Yosiah smashed the set apart stones and cut down the Asherah poles and covered the sites with human bones. (2 Kings 23:13-14)

Clearly, the worship of Ashtoreth / Astarte / Easter is an abomination before Yahuwah. The righteous ones utterly forsake this kind of worship practice and destroy all remnants of it. Those in rebellion against Yahuwah embrace worship of Ashtoreth / Astarte / Easter.

An interesting side note to the 2 Kings passage: The infamous "Asherah poles" are the statues of Ashtoreth, the "vile goddess of the Sidonians." Much is said in Scripture condemning the use of Asherah poles. Yet, Christianity has adopted these statues of Ashtoreth, which they have renamed "Mary." You see, all the statues and images and "poles" depicting Mary, the mother of Jesus, are really not Mary. They are "Asherim," or "Asherah poles" which are idols of Ashteroth, the "vile goddess of the Sidonians."

As we have seen, the word Easter is derived from the ancient name Ishtar, a pagan goddess and an abomination to our Creator. She is also known as Ashtarte in historical literature and as Ashtoreth in the Scriptures. The prophets speak a very clear word of condemnation regarding the worship of Ishtar:

Shemuel said to all the house of Yisrael, "If you are really turning to Yahuwah with all your hearts, remove from among you the foreign elohim and the images of Ashtoreth. Give your hearts to Yahuwah and serve only him. Then he will deliver you from the hand of the Philistines." So the people of Yisrael removed the Baals and images of Ashtoreth. They served only Yahuwah. (1 Shemuel 7:3,4)

These "images" are referring to the idols and statues of Ishtar, the fertility goddess of the Philistines, who is depicted with large, bare breasts. The record of Shemuel refers to her again later:

Then they cried out to Yahuwah saying, 'We have sinned, for we have forsaken Yahuwah and have served the Baals and the images of Ashtoreth. Now deliver us from the hand of our enemies so that we may serve you.' (1 Shemuel 12:10)

There can be no doubt that the images, statues and idols of this offensive goddess of fertility is an offense to Yahuwah. Israel, in their rebellion against their Creator, worshipped this woman Easter. What makes the modern day Christian think that the festival honoring Easter (Ashtoreth) now brings a smile to Yahuwah's face? The last time I looked, Elohim wants us to have nothing to do with the customs and practices of the pagans in worshipping their gods. He does not want us to worship him by using pagan days, dates, customs and practices. And this includes the festival which is in honor of Ashtoreth (Easter).

Scripture tells us that Shlomoh (Solomon) also followed Ashteroth:

The Rude Reality of the Easter Season

Easter is filled with detestable practices, including the slaughter of innocent babies, which our Father in heaven hates. John Michael Rood very rudely and colorfully tells us what's wrong with the whole Easter season in his cut-to-the-chase, in-your-face summation of that springtime festival:

The Saternalia originated as the birth date of Tammuz, the bastard son of Semiramis, the widow of Nimrod of biblical evil fame. After Shem cut Nimrod in pieces, Babylonian legend insists that he ascended into the heavens and became the sun god himself. The rays of the sun implanted the seed into his widow and presto! The son of the sun god was miraculously conceived, as was the adoration of the mother and child evident in every culture on the earth. On the winter solstice Tammuz was born; as were most of the traditions surrounding "the child-mass" season. Tammuz, the reincarnation of the sun god - Nimrod, was killed in a hunting accident when he was gored to death by a wild boar in his 40th year. Those who worshipped the son of "the sun god" then set aside 40 days of weeping for Tammuz. They celebrated "Lent" one day for each year of his incarnation - in which they would deny a worldly pleasure for his pleasure in the afterworld (see Ezekiel 8).

After many years, his mother Semiramis died. The gods looked favorably on "the mother of god" and sent her back to earth as the spring fertility goddess - always depicted as an exaggeratedly endowed bare breasted queen of sexual desire. Semiramis, the queen of heaven, was "born again" as the goddess Easter (Ashtarte) as she emerged from a giant egg that landed in the Euphrates river at sunrise on the "sun" day after the vernal equinox. To proclaim her divine authority, she changed a bird into an egg laying rabbit. As the cult developed, the priests of Easter would impregnate young virgins on the altar of the goddess of fertility at sunrise on Easter Sunday. A year later the priests of Easter would sacrifice those three-month-old babies on the altar at the front of the Sanctuary and dye Easter eggs in the blood of the sacrificed infants.

The forty days of Lent - or weeping for Tammuz, starts the Easter fertility season. The festivities culminate on Easter Sunday, when the priests of Easter slaughtered the "wild boar that killed Tammuz" and the entire congregation would eat the "ham" on Easter Sunday. (John Michael Rood, The Mystery of Iniquity, Chapter 8)

When you really boil it down to its origins, the entire Easter season is nothing more than disgusting, abominable paganism at its worst. Yahuwah has told us that worship of this kind is completely unacceptable with Him. Yet, all of Christianity is caught up in the celebration of the resurrection of the son on Easter day. Little do most Christians know that the son, whose resurrection is celebrated on Easter, is actually the repulsive sun god Tammuz of biblical fame, not the Messiah of Scripture.

What's Wrong With Honoring Christ During the Easter Season?

The Easter season has become the traditional time when Christians worldwide remember and celebrate the death, burial and resurrection of the Savior of the world. For these Christians, Easter has replaced the biblical appointed times which are prophetic pictures of the death, burial and resurrection of Messiah. Pesach (Passover) is the appointed day which the Almighty has stamped on his calendar as that day when the Lamb would be sacrificed and its blood shed for the redemption of his people. Messiah clearly fulfilled this prophetic picture with his death on the tree at the appointed time of Passover.

The prophetic calendar as described in Leviticus 23 also tells us that the first day of the same week of Unleavened Bread was the time for the first fruits offering to be waved before the Father in heaven. Messiah fulfilled this ceremony by becoming the first fruits of the resurrection of the dead on that first day of the week.

But Christians have replaced these biblical appointed times of the Messiah with ceremonies adopted from the pagan practices of worshipping the sun god. Instead of guarding and observing the appointed times which Yahuwah has established as the acts of redemption which Messiah would fulfill, Christians prefer to try to worship God after the manner of the pagans!

Worship of the true Elohim must never be done in the same way that unbelievers worship their gods. The instructions given in Scripture are crystal clear about this:

Destroy completely all the places on the high mountains and on the hills and under every spreading tree where the nations you are dispossessing worship their gods. Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and burn their Asherah poles in the fire; cut down the idols of their gods and wipe out their names from those places.You must not worship Yahuwah your Elohim in their way (Deuteronomy 12:1-4, mine).

You must not worship Yahuwah your Elohim in their way, because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things Yahuwah hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods. See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it (Deuteronomy 12:31,32).

Yahuwah has made it simple to understand that he does not accept worship done the way that unbelievers worship their gods. He does not want his worshipers to add to or take away from his own prescribed way of worship. He must be worshiped in the way that he has revealed in his word.

Nevertheless, the practice of Christians who think they are honoring Christ is to observe the pagan day of honoring the fish god Dagan, which is Friday. And they tell you that Christ has changed the meaning of that day although there is not a shred of evidence in the Bible that he did. And Christians fast for forty days because they say they are doing it like their Master Jesus did. Yet, what they are doing is actually at the time and in the manner that the pagans wept for forty days for the pagan sun god Tammuz.

Then Christians celebrate Easter Sunday as the time of the resurrection, with Easter Eggs, sunrise services and eating ham for dinner. All of these disgusting customs are borrowed from the pagan worship of the sun god. And Christians ignore the clear instruction of Scripture that the pig carcass is not to be touched or eaten, because it is an abomination to do so.

Let's leave all these pagan ritualistic practices, customs and traditions behind us. Let's worship our Creator the way He instructs us to worship Him. Say "goodbye" to the Easter bunny, colored Easter eggs, so-called good Friday, fascination with "the fish," eating of the ham that slew Tammuz and all other such nonsense. Let's worship the true and living Elohim by keeping His holidays, which are listed in Leviticus 23.

END

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Easter, Ishtar, Ashtarte, and other Evil Traditions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BibleTruth.cc "Doctrines of Demons" Series The Truth About Easter By David M Rogers www.BibleTruth.cc Lent 2nd Edition: April 2011 Table of Contents Good Friday Good Friday Customs Friday and the Fish God Dagon The Pope and His Fish Hat!

# data[].attributes.body
Yah's Chosen, Beloved People

# data[].attributes.body
Episode 1

# data[].attributes.body
Historical documents are aware of our Identity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hidden Hebrews - King David (Spain) - part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hidden Hebrews - King David (Revelation) - part 2

# data[].attributes.body
Tricked to reject Truth of Torah!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hidden Hebrews 4 - part 2 (supplemental material)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hidden Hebrews 4 - The Christian Slave - part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Black Hebrew Inquisition - King John - part 1 of 3

# data[].attributes.body
Kidnapped!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Black Hebrew Inquisition - Kidnapped!! - part 2 of 3

# data[].attributes.body
Part 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Black Hebrew Inquisition - Baby Snatchers - part 3 of 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"We also skipped over who the "Nephilim" were, who Melchizedek was in the bible and what the "Father's" name is in the Old Testament/New Testament. Bible Class teachers would also have nothing to say about Genesis 1:26 when it says "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:" The word "us" and "our" meant more than one person. "

"The Europeans commonly took ancient treasures, historical archaeological finds and religious materials into their custody never to be seen by the people they were taken from. "

More quotes...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We also skipped over who the "Nephilim" were, who Melchizedek was in the bible and what the "Father's" name is in the Old Testament/New Testament. Bible Class teachers would also have nothing to say about Genesis 1:26 when it says "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:" The word "us" and "our" meant more than one person.

# data[].attributes.body
The 1666 edition was the first edition of the KJV that did not include these extra books.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For Anne's friend.

The King James Version of the Bible is a great translation and has helped countless thousands of people to find and know God, to receive his gift of salvation, and to effectively serve him and his people. The Bible was beautifully written by some of the best scholars of the day and its reputation as fine literature is deserved.

Some Christians today maintain that the KJV is the superior English translation. Some Christians and churches are so enamoured with the KJV that they refuse to use, or give credit to, any other translation. The stance of these Christians has been referred to as King-James-Onlyism.

The KJV is an excellent English Bible and if you can easily understand it there is no real reason to change to another translation. However, one of the biggest shortcomings for most people is its dated language.

The Language of the King James Bible

The KJV uses many archaic words: words such as jangling, subtil, privily, and holpen, etc. And it uses archaic expressions and phrases that are unfamiliar to modern readers. For instance, how many people readily understand "Charity vaunteth not itself"? Or these verses in Job?:

" He runneth upon him, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses of his bucklers: Because he covereth his face with his fatness, and maketh collops of fat on his flanks" (Job 15:26-27 KJV).

Earlier editions of the KJV also used spelling that is outdated, which can be confusing for some readers (e.g., sunne for "sun"). Furthermore, the edition of the KJV that is still commonly used contains several words that have changed in meaning over time. Words such as flowers, suffer, vile, quit, conversation, draught (as in "draught house"), and bowels convey different meanings to modern readers than was intended by both the KJV translators and the original authors of the biblical texts. (See Lev. 15:24KJV; Matt. 19:14KJV; 1 Cor. 16:13KJV; Phil. 3:20-21KJV; 2 Kings 10:27: Song 5:4 KJV; etc.)

The fact that the KJV uses the word "unicorn" nine times (see here and here) and "satyr" twice (Isa. 13:21KJV; Isa. 34:14KJV) is also problematic, as unicorns and satyrs are regarded as mythological creatures rather than the real animals-wild oxen and goats-that are mentioned in the Hebrew Bible and in many contemporary translations. (Note that the New King James Bible, commissioned in 1975, has replaced archaic and outdated words while retaining the basic text and style of the KJV, and it doesn't contain the words "unicorn" or "satyr".)

Apart from its dated language, there are a few other shortcomings that KJV-only people seem unaware of. Moreover, many accept incorrect statements that are frequently made about the KJV. The following paragraphs contain seven pieces of information that some KJV-only people may not be aware of.

(1) The KJV was not the first English translation of the Bible.

A few King-James-Only Christians believe that the King James Bible was the first English translation of the Scriptures. This belief is incorrect. John Wycliffe's Bible was translated from Latin into English and hand-copied in the 1400s. In 1526, almost 100 years before the KJV was first published, William Tyndale's English translation of the Greek New Testament was printed. A decade or so later, full English Bibles began to be printed. First came the Coverdale Bible (1535-1537) which used Tyndale's NT, as did the Matthew Bible (1537). Then came Richard Taverner's Bible (1539), closely followed by the Great Bible (1539-1541). The Geneva Bible (1556-1560) was published by and for Calvinist Puritans. The Bishops' Bible (1568) was based on the Great Bible and edited by Church of England bishops, partly, in response to the Geneva Bible. The Douay Rheims Bible (1582-1609) was translated from the Latin Vulgate, rather than Hebrew and Greek, for the Roman Catholic Church.[1]

Much of the KJV, which was first published in 1611, borrows heavily from earlier English translations, especially Tyndale's New Testament and the Bishop's Bible.

(2) The KJV was not the first authorised English translation of the Bible

The KJV was not the first approved or first authorised English translation. The 1537 edition of the Coverdale Bible was officially approved by Henry VIII and bears the royal license on the title page, and the Great Bible (1539) was authorised by Henry VIII. Thomas Cromwell, Vicar General and Henry's secretary, issued an injunction that a copy of the Great Bible "be set up in every parish church. It was consequently the first (and only) English Bible formally authorized for public use."[2]

(3) The KJV has been through several editions.

Some King-James-Only Christians believe that the King James Bible perfectly preserved the Scriptures for all time. If this is the case there would have been no need for further edits. The current edition of the KJV is different from the original 1611 translation and several other early editions. "The KJV Bible we use today is actually based primarily on the major revision completed in 1769, 158 years after the first edition."[3]

Interestingly, the 1611 version, and all other editions of the KJV that were published for the next fifty years, contained the Apocrypha. Protestant Christians do not regard the apocryphal books as uniquely inspired and authoritative. The 1666 edition was the first edition of the KJV that did not include these extra books. (Article six of the Thirty-Nine Articles, ratified in 1562 before the KJV was first published, explains the Church of England's position on the canonical and apocryphal books of the Bible.)

(4) King James authorised the new translation for political reasons.

King James believed that a single, authorised version was a political and social necessity. He hoped this book would hold together the warring factions of the Church of England and the Puritans that threatened to tear apart both church and country. Most of the translators were clergymen belonging to the Church of England, but at least some had Puritan sympathies.[4]

King James issued over a dozen rules that the translators had to follow. He disliked the Geneva Bible, the Bible used by the Puritans, because he believed that some of the comments in the margin notes were seditious and did not show enough respect for kings.[5] James' new translation was to have no commentary in the margins.

King James favoured the hierarchical structure of the Church of England and wanted the new translation to use words that supported a bishop-led hierarchy. In keeping with his preferred views on church government, he specified, "The old ecclesiastical words [are] to be kept; as the word church [is] not to be translated congregation." (I personally believe "congregation" is a better translation of the Greek word ekklēsia in some verses.) King James also ruled that only his new Bible could be read in England's churches. The political motives of King James had a direct influence on the translation of the KJV. (The translation rules of King James can be found here and here.)

(5) The translators of the KJV 1611 were relatively unfamiliar with Koine Greek.

Koine ("common") Greek is the original language of the New Testament, but the KJV translators of the New Testament, who were accomplished scholars of Classical Greek, were relatively unfamiliar with Koine Greek. Koine Greek was not well-understood. Some people suggested it was a "Judaic" or "Hebraic" Greek. Some even believed it was a unique, Spirit-inspired dialect.[6] It was not until the 1800s and early 1900s, when tens of thousands of papyrus documents were discovered, many written in Koine, that we began to understand the language more fully.[7] Unlike the translators of the KJV, modern translators of the New Testament are scholars of Koine Greek. There are also some issues with the KJV translation of the Hebrew into English in the Old Testament.[8]

(6) The KJV translation of the NT is based on relatively recent Greek manuscripts.

As well as relying on previous English translations, the 1611 edition of the KJV relied on critically edited Greek texts that were "for the most part based on about half a dozen very late manuscripts" (none earlier than the 12th century AD)."[9] These Greek texts included five printed editions of the Greek New Testament by Erasmus,[10] as well as Robert Estienne's (a.k.a. 'Stephanus') edition (1550) and Theodore Beza's edition (1598). Michael Holmes writes more about the Greek texts behind English Bibles here.

Unfortunately, one of the manuscripts Estienne and Beza used for their Greek editions contained a few "corrections" that downplayed the importance of women in the church.[11]

(7) The Textus Receptus, or Received Text, is basically Erasmus' Greek Text.

Many KJV advocates claim that the New Testament in the King James Bible was translated from a Greek text known as the Textus Receptus (TR) and that the TR is especially accurate and inspired. The term Textus Receptus was first coined in 1633, after the KJV was first published, and it basically refers to Erasmus' critical text. The current version of the TR was produced in 1894 by Scrivener who preferred the Byzantine, or Majority, Text. (The Byzantine-Majority Text is similar but not identical to the Textus Receptus.)[12]

Most modern translations of the New Testament are based on critical Greek texts that take into account a larger collection of texts than was available to Erasmus when he was creating his critical texts. A few of these previously unavailable manuscripts date from as early as the third century, which makes them much closer to the date that the New Testament books and letters were written by the biblical authors.

Criticisms of Recent Bible Translations

One of the criticisms levelled at some modern English translations is that the New Testament was translated from the Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament. However, more recent translations, such as the 2011 edition of the New International Version (NIV), are based on the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland/United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament. This is a critical text that takes into consideration all known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, as well as New Testament quotations from early church fathers and from ancient lectionaries.[13] Any criticism of the Westcott and Hort text, or the men themselves-and much of the criticism has been misleading and outright slander-has no relevance whatsoever to the latest edition of the New International Version and other recent translations.

Another criticism of newer translations is that some words and phrases, and even a few passages, that are included in the KJV, are absent in newer translations. These are not omissions. Rather, these words and phrases are additions in the Textus Receptus and in the KJV. These additions are absent in some of the more ancient Greek manuscripts. Most modern translations still acknowledge the traditional additions in some way: in margin notes, in footnotes, or they are printed in a different font, etc. (More about the additional verses in the KJV here. See also the video below.)

Conclusion

The King James Version is an excellent translation, but many of the recent English translations are better. I mostly read the New Testament in Greek, but the English Bibles I use most often are the Christian Standard Bible (CSB), the Common English Bible (CEB), the New International Version (NIV 2011), the New American Standard Bible (NASB), the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), and the King James Version (KJV). Most of the other, better-known English translations are fine too.

It is most important that we read a Bible that we can understand. The New Testament was originally written in common, everyday Greek-a language that almost everyone in the Roman Empire (the world of the New Testament) could easily understand. We need modern English translations of the Bible that modern audiences can easily understand.

Footnotes

[1] There is more information about these English Bibles in Frederic G. Kenyon's essay here and on Wikipedia.

[2] Frederic G. Kenyon, "English Bibles", Dictionary of the Bible, James Hastings (ed.) (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909) ( Source)

[3] Jack P. Lewis, The English Bible From KJV to NIV: A History and Evaluation (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 39.

[4] This paragraph uses information from N.T. Wright, The Monarchs and the Message: Reflections on Bible Translation from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century, presented at SBL in 2011 ( Source)

[5] "For example, a note in the margin beside Exodus 1 [in the Geneva Bible] said the Hebrew midwives in the time of baby Moses were right to disobey the Egyptian king's order to kill newborn baby boys. And a note beside 2 Chronicles 15 criticized King Asa for not executing his idol-worshipping mother." Stephen M. Miller and Robert V. Huber, The Bible: A History (Oxford: Lion Hudson, 2003), 178.

[6] New Testament Greek scholar Bill Mounce writes, "For a long time Koine Greek confused many scholars. It was significantly different from Classical Greek. Some hypothesized that it was a combination of Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. Others attempted to explain it as a "Holy Ghost language", meaning that God created a special language just for the Bible. But studies of Greek papyri found in Egypt over the past one hundred years have shown that this language was the language of the everyday people . . ." Mounce, The Basics of Biblical Greek (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993, 2003), 1. See also George Milligan's "General Introduction" in The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament linked to in the next footnote.

[7] Before the discoveries of numerous ancient documents in Egypt and elsewhere, there were very few Koine Greek writings available besides the New Testament and Septuagint. But now we have numerous letters, business receipts, census statements, novels, and other writings written in Koine. Today, we can compare the language of the New Testament with these other writings to see how words were used in and around the first century. Furthermore, among the discoveries were ancient manuscripts of biblical texts that were older than those used to create Erasmus Greek text that became the Textus Receptus.
George Milligan has written about the value of these papyri in his "General Introduction" to the dictionary he produced with J.H. Moulton. James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-literary Sources (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1929), vii-xx. This can be read here.

[8] Hebrew scholar Robert Alter notes,

... the seventeenth-century translators, for all their learning, had a rather imperfect grasp of biblical Hebrew. At times they get confused about the syntax, and they repeatedly miss the nuance, or even the actual meaning, of Hebrew words. Usually this is a matter of being slightly off or somewhat misleading, as when, following the Vulgate, they transpose concrete Hebrew terms into theologically fraught ones-"soul" for nefesh, which actually means "essential self," "being," or "salvation" for yeshuՙah, which means "rescue," "getting out of a tight fix." Sometimes, alas, there are real howlers. In the mysterious covenant between God and Abram in Genesis 15, the 1611 version reads "an horror of great darkness fell upon him," because they have taken an adjective ḥasheikhah to be the noun it formally resembles. The Hebrew actually says "a great dark horror fell upon him," with no suggestion that Abram our forefather was afraid of the dark. Still more egregiously, in Job 3:8 we encounter cursers of the day "who are ready to raise up their mourning." The Hebrew in fact says "raise up Leviathan." The King James translators misread the mythological beast lewayatan as the rabbinic word for "funeral," lewayah, not distinguishing between biblical and rabbinic Hebrew, and overlooking the fact that the word as they incorrectly construed it would have an inappropriate feminine possessive suffix.
Alter, The Art of Bible Translation (Princeton and Oxford: New York: Princeton University Press, 2019), 7-8. ( Google Books)

[9] Daniel Wallace, The Conspiracy Behind New Bible Translations at Bible.org.

[10] Erasmus was a Roman Catholic priest. He dedicated the first edition of his Greek New Testament to the Pope. I include this bit of information for those who wrongly claim that some newer English translations are influenced by Roman Catholicism. (See also endnote 13.)

[11] Robert Estienne, also known as Stephanas, based his text of the New Testament on the works of Erasmus, but he also used a Western text-type manuscript known as the Codex Bezae or Codex D. (This book is also known as Codex Cantabrigiensis as Beza later presented it to the University of Cambridge.) An anti-woman bias is apparent in this Codex.

"Several scholars have observed the apparent anti-feminist tendencies of the writer of the Codex Bezae. The reviser represents the western tradition dating back to the second century, and clearly reveals the trend of thought among his contemporaries by rephrasing the received text of Acts 17:12 to read: 'and many of the Greeks and men and women of high standing believed.' The smoother reading serves to lessen any importance given women in Luke's account of the conversion at Berea, and proves to be a typical alteration of Bezae in Acts."
Lesly Massey, Women and the New Testament: An Analysis of Scripture in the Light of New Testament Era Culture (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 1989), 46-47.

Most Greek manuscripts and modern English translations have "honourable women" before "men" in Acts 17:12. Furthermore, Codex Bezae leaves out "a woman named Damaris" entirely in Acts 17:34, see here, but this omission, at least, did not affect the KJV. Stephanas and the KJV include Damaris. (Damaris was an elite Athenian woman who was converted to Christianity through Paul's ministry.)

Acts 18:26 is another text that was altered by a scribe with "anti-feminist tendencies." In Codex Bezae, Aquila's name is first and Priscilla's second. Stephanus adopted this reading in his Greek edition, and the KJV also has Aquila's name first. More reliable Greek manuscripts have Priscilla's name first in Acts 18:26.

Furthermore, in Acts 1:14, there is the addition of "and children" in Codex Bezae "so that women are no longer an independent group but are simply the wives of the apostles." Ben Witherington, "Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the 'Western' Text in Acts" Journal of Biblical Literature 103 (1984): 82-83, 82. Thankfully, the KJV translators rejected this addition.

Eldon Jay Epp, a noted text critic, has observed that the book of Acts in Codex Bezae is about 8% longer than in other ancient Greek manuscripts, and has observed both an anti-woman and an anti-Judaic (anti-Jewish) bias in the variants within the text.
See E.J. Epp, The Theological Tendency of Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis in Acts (SNTSMS 3: Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1966). And his newer work, "Anti-Judaic Tendencies in the D-Text of Acts: Forty Years of Conversation" in The Book of Acts as Church History: Text, Textual Traditions and Ancient Interpretations, ed. Tobias Nicklas and Michael Till (BZNW 120; Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 2003), 111-146.

[12] Daniel Wallace explains the difference between the Textus Receptus and the Majority Text here. Wallace also notes that there is no evidence for the existence of a Byzantine-Majority text-type before the end of the fourth century.

[13] The 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text was edited by eminent scholars Barbara Aland (Protestant), Kurt Aland (Protestant), Ioannes Karavidopoulos (Greek Orthodox), Carlo Martini (Roman Catholic), and Bruce Metzger (Protestant). [Update: There is now a 28th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament.]

Images

Page decorations are copied from the 1611 King James Bible. (Source: Wikimedia)

You can support my work for as little as $3 a month.
Become a Patron!

Further Reading

What are English Translations of the Bible Based on? by Michael W. Holmes on the Bible Odyssey website.
Bill Mounce explains how 1 John 5:7b-8a (the Johannine Comma) was added to the biblical text later, here.

Related Articles

Which Bible translation is best?
The Authority and Authenticity of New Testament Scripture
Gender Bias in the NLT
The ESV Bible's Men-Only Club
Manhood and Masculinity in the ESV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 things you may not know about the King James Bible | Marg Mowczko

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For Anne's friend. The King James Version of the Bible is a great translation and has helped countless thousands of people to find and know God, to receive his gift of salvation, and to effectively serve him and his people.

# data[].attributes.body
Bible Gateway has these books online because they know they are truth for these days!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
5 "Now concerning the signs: lo, the days are coming when those who inhabit the earth shall be seized with great terror, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land shall be barren of faith. 2 Unrighteousness shall be increased beyond what you yourself see, and beyond what you heard of formerly. 3 And the land that you now see ruling shall be a trackless waste, and people shall see it desolate.

and the sun shall suddenly begin to shine at night,
and the moon during the day.

5 Blood shall drip from wood, and the stone shall utter its voice;
the peoples shall be troubled,
and the stars shall fall.

6 And one shall reign whom those who inhabit the earth do not expect, and the birds shall fly away together; 7 and the Dead Sea shall cast up fish; and one whom the many do not know shall make his voice heard by night, and all shall hear his voice. 8 There shall be chaos also in many places, fire shall often break out, the wild animals shall roam beyond their haunts, and menstruous women shall bring forth monsters. 9 Salt waters shall be found in the sweet, and all friends shall conquer one another; then shall reason hide itself, and wisdom shall withdraw into its chamber, 10 and it shall be sought by many but shall not be found, and unrighteousness and unrestraint shall increase on earth. 11 One country shall ask its neighbor, 'Has righteousness, or anyone who does right, passed through you?' And it will answer, 'No.' 12 At that time people shall hope but not obtain; they shall labor, but their ways shall not prosper. 13 These are the signs that I am permitted to tell you, and if you pray again, and weep as you do now, and fast for seven days, you shall hear yet greater things than these."

Conclusion of the Vision

14 Then I woke up, and my body shuddered violently, and my soul was so troubled that it fainted. 15 But the angel who had come and talked with me held me and strengthened me and set me on my feet.

16 Now on the second night Phaltiel, a chief of the people, came to me and said, "Where have you been? And why is your face sad? 17 Or do you not know that Israel has been entrusted to you in the land of their exile? 18 Rise therefore and eat some bread, and do not forsake us, like a shepherd who leaves the flock in the power of savage wolves."

19 Then I said to him, "Go away from me and do not come near me for seven days; then you may come to me."

He heard what I said and left me. 20 So I fasted seven days, mourning and weeping, as the angel Uriel had commanded me.

Ezra's Second Prayer of Complaint

21 After seven days the thoughts of my heart were very grievous to me again. 22 Then my soul recovered the spirit of understanding, and I began once more to speak words in the presence of the Most High. 23 I said, "O sovereign Lord, from every forest of the earth and from all its trees you have chosen one vine, 25 and from all the depths of the sea you have filled for yourself one river, and from all the cities that have been built you have consecrated Zion for yourself, 26 and from all the birds that have been created you have named for yourself one dove, and from all the flocks that have been made you have provided for yourself one sheep, 27 and from all the multitude of peoples you have gotten for yourself one people; and to this people, whom you have loved, you have given the law that is approved by all. 29 And those who opposed your promises have trampled on those who believed your covenants. 30 If you really hate your people, they should be punished at your own hands."

Response to Ezra's Complaints

31 When I had spoken these words, the angel who had come to me on a previous night was sent to me. 32 He said to me, "Listen to me, and I will instruct you; pay attention to me, and I will tell you more."

33 Then I said, "Speak, my lord." And he said to me, "Are you greatly disturbed in mind over Israel? Or do you love him more than his Maker does?"

34 I said, "No, my lord, but because of my grief I have spoken; for every hour I suffer agonies of heart, while I strive to understand the way of the Most High and to search out some part of his judgment."

35 He said to me, "You cannot." And I said, "Why not, my lord? Why then was I born? Or why did not my mother's womb become my grave, so that I would not see the travail of Jacob and the exhaustion of the people of Israel?"

36 He said to me, "Count up for me those who have not yet come, and gather for me the scattered raindrops, and make the withered flowers bloom again for me;

38 I said, "O sovereign Lord, who is able to know these things except him whose dwelling is not with mortals? 39 As for me, I am without wisdom, and how can I speak concerning the things that you have asked me?"

40 He said to me, "Just as you cannot do one of the things that were mentioned, so you cannot discover my judgment, or the goal of the love that I have promised to my people."

Why Successive Generations Have Been Created

41 I said, "Yet, O Lord, you have charge of those who are alive at the end, but what will those do who lived before me, or we, ourselves, or those who come after us?"

43 Then I answered and said, "Could you not have created at one time those who have been and those who are and those who will be, so that you might show your judgment the sooner?"

44 He replied to me and said, "The creation cannot move faster than the Creator, nor can the world hold at one time those who have been created in it."

45 I said, "How have you said to your servant that you will certainly give life at one time to your creation? If therefore all creatures will live at one time and the creation will sustain them, it might even now be able to support all of them present at one time."

47 I said, "Of course it cannot, but only each in its own time."

48 He said to me, "Even so I have given the womb of the earth to those who from time to time are sown in it. 49 For as an infant does not bring forth, and a woman who has become old does not bring forth any longer, so I have made the same rule for the world that I created."

When and How Will the End Come?

50 Then I inquired and said, "Since you have now given me the opportunity, let me speak before you. Is our mother, of whom you have told me, still young? Or is she now approaching old age?"

51 He replied to me, "Ask a woman who bears children, and she will tell you. 52 Say to her, 'Why are those whom you have borne recently not like those whom you bore before, but smaller in stature?' 53 And she herself will answer you, 'Those born in the strength of youth are different from those born during the time of old age, when the womb is failing.' 54 Therefore you also should consider that you and your contemporaries are smaller in stature than those who were before you, 55 and those who come after you will be smaller than you, as born of a creation that already is aging and passing the strength of youth."

56 I said, "I implore you, O Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, show your servant through whom you will visit your creation."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Esdras 5 - New Revised Standard Version

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Signs of the End - "Now concerning the signs: lo, the days are coming when those who inhabit the earth shall be seized with great terror, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land shall be barren of faith. Unrighteousness shall be increased beyond what you yourself see, and beyond what you heard of formerly.

# data[].attributes.body
Antichrist system of false religion exposed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hebrews to Negroes 2 Volume 3: Wake Up Black America a book by Ronald Dalton Jr

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As years pass by, the “Antichrist Beast System” is slowly “emerging” upon us and around us. But are the true followers of Christ seeing the signs? Sadly, the answer is no. The Bible clearly explains the signs that are to appear on Earth before the Second Coming of the Messiah (Yahusha HaMashiach). I…

# data[].attributes.body
The beginning of the end

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Fall of Jerusalem - A Black History Story

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While this channel is open to all for edification, it is dedicated to the True Hebrew Israelites, the chosen people of Yah. It is to be seen as a spiritual source to identify who they are in history as verified by Scripture, and to understand what the covenant is, as well as the curses and blessings associated with the covenant, and how they will affect them as a nation and as individuals.

# data[].attributes.headline
All Churchianity Podcasts & Transcripts: 2000 Years of Leaven (lies/sin)

# data[].attributes.subject
All Churchianity Podcasts & Transcripts: 2000 Years of Leaven (lies/sin)

# data[].attributes.body
The false religion never practiced by Jesus the Christ has trapped the world for over 2000 years!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Covering the history of the past two thousand years of the corrupt church system. To download free full episodes, go here: https://kingdompreppers.org/all-ch...

# data[].attributes.body
2 Esdras 15

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
15 Look here, speak in my people's ears the words of the prophecy that I place in your mouth, says the Lord. 2 See to it that they are written down on paper, because they are reliable and true. 3 Don't be afraid of conspiracies against you, and don't be confused by what unbelievers say, 4 because every unbeliever will die in his unbelief.

5 Look, I am bringing disasters over the whole earth-the sword, hunger, death, and destruction, says the Lord, 6 because wickedness has covered the whole earth, and their deeds are complete. 7 Therefore, says the Lord, 8 I will no longer be silent about their wicked deeds, which they do in their godlessness, nor will I tolerate any longer the things they do wickedly. Look, innocent and righteous blood calls out to me, and the souls of the just cry out constantly. 9 I will surely avenge them, says the Lord, and I will receive all their innocent blood to myself.

10 Look, my people are led like sheep to slaughter. I will no longer permit them to live in the land of Egypt,

12 Let Egypt howl from its very foundations because of the plague of beating and punishment inflicted by the Lord. 13 Let the farmers who work the ground howl, because they won't have enough seed, and their trees will be devastated by blight, hail, and terrible storms. 14 How terrible it will be for the world and those who live in it! 15 The sword and distress draw near, and nation will rise against nation to fight with spears in their hands.

16 Human beings won't be able to trust each other. As they grow strong against each other, they will pay no respect to their king or to the powerful chief of their great men. 17 Someone will want to go into the city and won't be able. 19 People will have no mercy on their neighbors. They will cause their neighbors trouble by breaking into their houses with swords, to pillage their property, because they are hungry for bread and in great distress.

22 My strong hand won't spare sinners, nor will my sword stop fighting against those who spill innocent blood on earth. 23 God's anger has gone forth like fire to devour the earth's foundations and sinners like kindled straw. 24 How terrible it will be for those who sin and don't keep my laws, says the Lord. 25 I won't spare them. Go away, faithless children! Don't defile my sanctuary!

26 God knows all who sin against him. Therefore, he will hand them over to death and slaughter. 27 Even now disasters have swept over the world, and you will have to endure them. God won't deliver you because you sinned against him.

28 Look! A terrible sight is appearing from the east! 29 The nations of the serpents of Arabia will go out with many chariots. From the day they begin their journey, their hissing will echo over the earth so that all who hear them fear and tremble. 31 After this, the serpents will remember their origin and become strong. They will turn, united in great strength, to pursue them. 33 From the Assyrians' land an enemy will attack them in an ambush and will kill one of them. Their army will fall into fear and terror and their kings into indecision.

34 Look! Angry storm clouds from the east and from the north to the south-their appearance is very terrible. 35 They will collide with each other and unleash a mighty tempest on the earth, their own tempest. Blood will flow as high as the belly of a horse, 36 a man's thigh, and a camel's hock because of their swords. Great fear and terror will be on earth. 37 Those who see that wrath will be horrified and seized by fear.

38 After this, the mighty clouds will be moved from the south and the north, and another portion from the west. 39 But the winds from the east will prevail and will stop them, together with the cloud it had stirred up in wrath. The tempest that was to cause destruction will be driven violently from the east to the west. 40 Great, angry storm clouds will be raised up so that they may destroy the whole earth and its inhabitants, and they will unleash over every high and lofty place a terrible tempest- 41 fire and hail, flying swords, and much water-so that all the fields and all the streams will be filled with the great quantity of those waters. 42 They will destroy cities, walls, mountains and hills, trees in the forests, grass in the meadows, and their grain. 43 They will proceed steadily to Babylon to destroy it. 44 They will come to it, surround it, and pour out their tempest and all their wrath over it. Dust and smoke will go up to heaven, and all around will mourn it. 45 Those who survive will serve those who destroyed it.

46 You, Asia-you who share in Babylon's splendor and the glory of the mask it wears- 47 how terrible it will be for you, wretched one, because you have become like Babylon. You dressed up your daughters for sexual immorality, to please and take pride in your lovers, who have always lusted for you. 48 You have imitated that repulsive one in all her works and devices. Therefore, God says, 49 I will send disasters upon you-widowhood, poverty, hunger, sword, and disease-to desolate your houses, to bring you to devastation and death. 50 Your glorious strength will dry up like a flower when the heat that is sent against you rises. 51 Plagues will leave you weak and impoverished, wounded by whips, so that you can't receive your powerful lovers. 52 Would I have been so jealous of you, says the Lord, 53 if you hadn't constantly killed my chosen ones, rejoicing, clapping your hands, and talking about their deaths when you were drunk? 54 Make yourself beautiful! 55 The fee due a prostitute is in your lap. Because of this, you will get what's coming to you. 56 As you will do to my chosen ones, says the Lord, so God will do to you and will give you over to disasters. 57 Your children will die of hunger, and you will fall by the sword. Your cities will be laid waste, and all your people will fall by the sword in the open field. 58 Those who are in the mountains will perish by hunger. They will be so hungry for bread and so thirsty for water that they will eat their own flesh and drink their own blood. 59 Already made miserable by the earlier disasters, you will come to suffer even more troubles. 60 As they return from Babylon, passersby will strike the repulsive city and will destroy her. They will destroy another portion of your glory and your land as they return from Babylon. 61 You will be mown down by them like hay, and they will come upon you like fire. 62 They will devour you and your cities, your land, and your mountains. They will burn all your forests and fruit-bearing trees with fire. 63 They will take your children captive, plunder your wealth, and put an end to your beautiful face.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Esdras 15 - Common English Bible

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Christian addition - Look here, speak in my people's ears the words of the prophecy that I place in your mouth, says the Lord. See to it that they are written down on paper, because they are reliable and true.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul quoted Esdras 1 Tim

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
5 "But about the signs: Look, the days will come when those who live on earth will be seized with great terror. The way of truth will be hidden, and the land will be barren and devoid of faith. 2 Injustice will be multiplied beyond what you yourself see and beyond what you have heard of formerly. 5 Blood will drip from wood, and stones will speak out. Peoples will be troubled, and natural courses will be changed. 6 A person no one on earth expected will come to power, and birds will migrate together. 7 The sea of Sodom will cast up fish; it will utter sounds in a voice that many don't know, but all will hear its voice. 8 Chasms will open up in many places, and fire will be shot forth frequently. Wild beasts will roam beyond their territory, and women will give birth to monsters. 9 Salt waters will be found in sources of freshwater. Friends everywhere will begin to fight each other. Reason will be hidden, and intelligence will go into hiding. 10 Many will look for it, but they won't find it, and injustice and lust will be multiplied on earth. 11 One country will ask its neighbor, 'Has justice passed through you, doing what is right?' and the answer will be no. 12 At that time people will hope but not get what they hoped for; they will labor, but they will make no progress. 13 I am permitted to tell you these signs, and if you pray again and continue to weep as you are now doing and fast for seven days, you will again hear greater things than these."

14 I awoke, my body shuddered greatly, and my spirit labored so that it fainted. 15 The angel who came and talked to me held me, comforted me, and set me on my feet.

16 On the second night, Phaltiel a leader of the people came to me and said, "Where were you, and why is your face sad? 17 Don't you realize that Israel has been entrusted to you while it is in exile in this land? 18 Arise then, and take some food so that you may not abandon us like a shepherd who leaves his flock in the power of cruel wolves."

19 I said to him, "Leave me and don't come near me again for seven days. After that, you will come to me." He heard how I spoke and withdrew from me.

Second dialogue

20 I didn't eat food for seven days, wailing and weeping, as the angel Uriel had commanded me. 21 After seven days, my deepest thoughts were again very troubling to me. 22 Then I recovered my wits and I began again to speak words before the Most High:

23 Supreme Lord, you chose one vine from every forest on earth and from all its trees, 25 and from all the ocean's depths you filled for yourself one river, and from all cities that have been built you dedicated for yourself Zion, 26 and from all the created birds you named for yourself one dove, and from all the flocks that have been made you provided for yourself one sheep, 27 from all the peoples that have multiplied you acquired for yourself one people, and to this people that you desired you gave the Law celebrated by all. 29 Those who have denied your promises have trampled those who believed in your covenants! 30 If you really hate your people, they should be punished with your own hands.

31 When I had said these words, the angel who had come to me on the previous night was sent to me. 32 He said to me: "Listen to me, and I will instruct you; pay attention to me, and I will tell you more."

33 I said, "Speak, my Lord."

He said to me, "Are you really more deeply disturbed over Israel, or do you love him more than the one who made him does?"

34 I said: "No, Lord, but I spoke in grief. My heart torments me every hour while I try to make sense of the Most High's ways and investigate his decisions."

35 He said to me, "You can't."

And I said: "Why, Lord? Or else why was I born, and why did my mother's womb not become my tomb so that I might not see the toil of Jacob and the exhaustion of the line of Israel?"

36 He said to me: "Count for me those who haven't yet been born, gather for me the scattered raindrops, make the withered flowers bloom again for me, 37 open for me the closed warehouses and bring forth for me the winds shut up in them, or show me what a voice looks like. Then I will show you what you ask to see."

38 I said: "Supreme Lord, who can know these things except one who doesn't live among human beings? 39 But I'm ignorant. How can I speak of these things that you asked me about?"

41 I said: "Look, Lord, you've made promises concerning these who are alive at the end, but what will those who are before us do, or we, or those who come after us?"

43 I replied, "Couldn't you have created all at once those who have been and those who are and those who will be so that you might show your judgment more quickly?"

44 He replied to me, "The creation can't run ahead of its creator, nor can the world sustain all at one time those who are created in it."

47 I said, "Surely it can't, but only over time."

48 He said to me: "I also have given the earth's womb for those who have been sown on it over time. 49 As an infant doesn't give birth and a woman who has become old doesn't give birth any longer, so I have set in order the world I created."

50 I asked: "Since you have given me opportunity, let me speak before you. Is our mother, of whom you spoke to me, still young? Or is she already approaching old age?"

51 He responded to me: "Ask one who gives birth, and she will tell you. Say to her, 52 'Why are those you have borne now not like those whom you bore before, but are smaller in stature?' 53 She herself will tell you, 'Those who are born in youth's vigor are different from those who are born in the time of old age, when the womb is failing.' 54 Therefore, consider that you yourself are smaller in stature than those who were before you, 55 and those who come after you will be even smaller than you, as born of a creation that is already aging and past the strength of youth."

56 I said: "I ask, Lord, if you look favorably on me, show your servant through whom you will visit your creation."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Esdras 5 - Common English Bible

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"But about the signs: Look, the days will come when those who live on earth will be seized with great terror. The way of truth will be hidden, and the land will be barren and devoid of faith. Injustice will be multiplied beyond what you yourself see and beyond what you have heard of formerly.

# data[].attributes.headline
All scripture . . to be "equipped" and "complete"

# data[].attributes.subject
All scripture . . to be "equipped" and "complete"

# data[].attributes.body
2 Tim 3:16 & 17 -

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
3 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith;

The Man of God and the Word of God

11 persecutions, afflictions, which happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra-what persecutions I endured. And out of 14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, them all the Lord delivered me.

16 All Scripture 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Timothy 3 - New King James Version

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Perilous Times and Perilous Men - But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power.

# data[].attributes.headline
Read all of 2 Esdras 6 through to the end

# data[].attributes.subject
Read all of 2 Esdras 6 through to the end

# data[].attributes.body
To truly understand the condition of the earth, the people in "end times" read Esdras!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
before the world's exits were made,
before the gathered winds blew,

2 before the voices of the thunders sounded,
before the flashes of lightning shone,
before paradise's foundations
were made firm,

before the powers of movement
were established,
3 before beautiful flowers were seen, before the innumerable heavenly armies of angels were assembled,

were lifted up,
before the measures
of the firmament were named,
before Zion's footstool was established, 4 before the heights of the air

were reckoned,
before the imaginations of those
who now sin were alienated,
before those who stored up faith
as a treasure were sealed- 5 before the present years

6 then I planned these things. As they were done by me and not by another, so also the end will come by me and not through another."

7 I answered, "What separates the times? When is the end of the first and the beginning of that which follows?"

8 He said to me: "From Abraham to Abraham, because Jacob and Esau were born from him, but Jacob's hand held Esau's heel from the outset. 9 Esau represents the end of this age, and Jacob represents the beginning of the following.

11 I answered: "Supreme Lord, if only you looked so favorably upon me

13 He answered: "Get up on your feet. You'll hear a loud, echoing voice. 14 Don't be afraid if the place on which you stand is greatly moved 15 while the voice is speaking. Since the word concerns the end, and since the foundations of the earth will understand 16 that the speech is about them, the place will tremble and shake, because it knows that it is destined to be transformed."

17 When I heard, I rose on my feet and listened. There was a voice speaking, and its sound was like the sound of deep waters. 18 It said: "Look! The days are coming when I will begin to come near to visit those who live on earth, 19 when I will begin to examine those who unjustly inflicted harm in their cruelty. When the humiliation of Zion is complete, 20 when the seal is placed on the age that begins to pass away, I will perform these signs: Scrolls will be opened in view of the firmament, and all will see together. 21 Infants a year old will speak with their voices, and pregnant women will give birth to premature babies of three and four months, but they will live and dance. 23 A trumpet will sound with a blast; when all hear it they will suddenly be terrified. 24 In that time friends will make war on friends like enemies, the earth along with those who live on it will be terrified, and the sources of rivers will stand still so that they don't run for three hours. 25 Then everyone who is left after all these things that I have foretold to you will be saved. These will see my deliverance and the end of my age. 26 They will see the people who have been taken up and who haven't tasted death from their birth. The hearts of those who live on earth will be changed and converted to a different spirit, 27 for evil will be erased and grief extinguished. 28 Faith will flourish, and corruption will be overcome. Truth that was without fruit for so long will be displayed."

32 because the Most High has listened to your voice. The mighty one has seen your virtue and perceived the humility you have had from your youth. 33 Because of this he sent me to show you all these things and to say to you: Trust confidently, and don't be afraid. 34 Don't be hasty to think empty thoughts about the former times, lest you be hasty about the last times."

Third dialogue

35 After all this I wept again and abstained from food for another seven days, to complete the three weeks that had been prescribed for me. 36 Then on the eighth night my heart was disturbed within me again, and I began to speak before the Most High. 37 My spirit was greatly agitated, and my soul was troubled.

38 Then I said: "Lord, you spoke from the beginning of creation on the first day, 'Let heaven and earth be made,' and your word accomplished the deed. 40 Then you commanded that a ray of light be brought forth from your treasuries so that your works might be seen.

41 "Then on the second day you created the spirit of the firmament and commanded that it divide and make a division between the waters so that a certain part might recede upward and another part remain below.

42 "On the third day you commanded the waters to be gathered together in a seventh part of the earth, but you made six parts dry and preserved them so that some of these might be sown and cultivated, to be of service before you. 43 Your word went forth, and the work was immediately accomplished. 44 Suddenly, fruit blossomed in great abundance in an infinite variety of flavors, and flowers with matchless color and scents of unspeakable fragrance. These things were done on the third day.

45 "On the fourth day you commanded the sun's splendor to be made, the moon's light, and the arrangement of the stars. 46 You commanded them to serve the human being who was about to be formed.

47 "On the fifth day you commanded the seventh part where the water was gathered to produce animals, birds, and fish. 48 The silent and lifeless water, as it was commanded, brought forth animals so that peoples might recount your wonders. 50 You separated them from each other, for the seventh part where the water was gathered couldn't contain them. 51 You gave Behemoth one part of the land that had been dried on the third day, where there are a thousand mountains so that he might live there. 52 To Leviathan, however, you gave the watery seventh part. You kept them to be eaten by whomever you wish, and whenever you wish.

53 "On the sixth day you commanded the earth that it create before you cattle, beasts, and reptiles, 54 and over these you set Adam, the leader over all the things you had made. From him we all, the people you have chosen, have been brought forth.

56 You have said that the other nations born of Adam are nothing, that they are like spit, and you have compared their abundance to a drop from a pitcher. 57 But look now, Lord! These nations that are valued as nothing rule over us and devour us, 58 while we, your people, whom you have called your oldest offspring, your one and only child, those who are zealous for you, your dearest ones, are handed over to them. 59 If the world was created for our sake, why don't we possess our world as an inheritance? How long will this situation last?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bible Gateway passage: 2 Esdras 6 - Common English Bible

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
He said to me: "In the beginning of the earthly world- before the world's exits were made, before the gathered winds blew, before the voices of the thunders sounded, before the flashes of lightning shone, before paradise's foundations were made firm, before beautiful flowers were seen, before the powers of

# data[].attributes.body
First study (no audio file)

# data[].attributes.body
The man, our Messiah
(Jan 16 2021 audio file)

# data[].attributes.body
(Jan 23 2021 audio file)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Not Yet: Preparing for the  New Covenant

# data[].attributes.body
Complete 1611 KJV online:
1 & 2 Esdras, Judith, Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, and 1 & 2 Maccabees (and more)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2 ESDRAS 9:4 KJV Then shalt thou well understand, that the most High spake of those things from the days that were before...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
2 Esdras 9:4 KJV: Then shalt thou well understand, that the most High spake of those things from the days that were before thee, even from the beginning.

# data[].attributes.body
¹ The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect and righteous, who will be ² living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From-The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament
H.R. Charles Oxford: The Clarendon Press

INTRODUCTION

[Chapter 1]

[Chapter 2]

[Chapter 3]

Observe and see how (in the winter) all the trees seem as though they had withered and shed all their leaves, except fourteen trees, which do not lose their foliage but retain the old foliage from two to three years till the new comes.

[Chapter 4]

And again, observe ye the days of summer how the sun is above the earth over against it. And you seek shade and shelter by reason of the heat of the sun, and the earth also burns with growing heat, and so you cannot tread on the earth, or on a rock by reason of its heat.

[Chapter 5]

[Chapter 6]

[Chapter 7]

And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

[Chapter 8]

[Chapter 9]

[Chapter 10]

Then said the Most High, the Holy and Great One spake, and sent Uriel to the son of Lamech, and said to him: 'Go to Noah and tell him in my name "Hide thyself!" and reveal to him the end that is approaching: that the whole earth will be destroyed, and a deluge is about to come upon the whole earth, and will destroy all that is on it. And now instruct him that he may escape and his seed may be preserved for all the generations of the world.' And again the Lord said to Raphael: 'Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire. And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin.' And to Gabriel said the Lord: 'Proceed against the bastards and the reprobates, and against the children of fornication: and destroy [the children of fornication and] the children of the Watchers from amongst men [and cause them to go forth]: send them one against the other that they may destroy each other in battle: for length of days shall they not have. And no request that they (i.e. their fathers) make of thee shall be granted unto their fathers on their behalf; for they hope to live an eternal life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years.' And the Lord said unto Michael: 'Go, bind Semjaza and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves with them in all their uncleanness. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is for ever and ever is consummated. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: and to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed will from thenceforth be bound together with them to the end of all generations. And destroy all the spirits of the reprobate and the children of the Watchers, because they have wronged mankind. Destroy all wrong from the face of the earth and let every evil work come to an end: and let the plant of righteousness and truth appear: and it shall prove a blessing; the works of righteousness and truth' shall be planted in truth and joy for evermore.

And then shall the whole earth be tilled in righteousness, and shall all be planted with trees and be full of blessing. And all desirable trees shall be planted on it, and they shall plant vines on it: and the vine which they plant thereon shall yield wine in abundance, and as for all the seed which is sown thereon each measure (of it) shall bear a thousand, and each measure of olives shall yield ten presses of oil. And cleanse thou the earth from all oppression, and from all unrighteousness, and from all sin, and from all godlessness: and all the uncleanness that is wrought upon the earth destroy from off the earth. And all the children of men shall become righteous, and all nations shall offer adoration and shall praise Me, and all shall worship Me. And the earth shall be cleansed from all defilement, and from all sin, and from all punishment, and from all torment, and I will never again send (them) upon it from generation to generation and for ever.

[Chapter 11]

And in those days I will open the store chambers of blessing which are in the heaven, so as to send them down upon the earth over the work and labour of the children of men. And truth and peace shall be associated together throughout all the days of the world and throughout all the generations of men.'

[Chapter 12]

Before these things Enoch was hidden, and no one of the children of men knew where he was hidden, and where he abode, and what had become of him. And his activities had to do with the Watchers, and his days were with the holy ones. And I Enoch was blessing the Lord of majesty and the King of the ages, and lo! the Watchers called me -Enoch the scribe- and said to me: 'Enoch, thou scribe of righteousness, go, declare to the Watchers of the heaven who have left the high heaven, the holy eternal place, and have defiled themselves with women, and have done as the children of earth do, and have taken unto themselves wives: "Ye have wrought great destruction on the earth: And ye shall have no peace nor forgiveness of sin: and inasmuch as they delight themselves in their children, The murder of their beloved ones shall they see, and over the destruction of their children shall they lament, and shall make supplication unto eternity, but mercy and peace shall ye not attain."'

[Chapter 13]

[Chapter 14]

[Chapter 15]

[Chapter 16]

From the days of the slaughter and destruction and death of the giants, from the souls of whose flesh the spirits, having gone forth, shall destroy without incurring judgement -thus shall they destroy until the day of the consummation, the great judgement in which the age shall be consummated, over the Watchers and the godless, yea, shall be wholly consummated." And now as to the watchers who have sent thee to intercede for them, who had been aforetime in heaven, (say to them): "You have been in heaven, but all the mysteries had not yet been revealed to you, and you knew worthless ones, and these in the hardness of your hearts you have made known to the women, and through these mysteries women and men work much evil on earth." Say to them therefore: " You have no peace."'

[Chapter 17]

And they took and brought me to a place in which those who were there were like flaming fire, and, when they wished, they appeared as men. And they brought me to the place of darkness, and to a mountain the point of whose summit reached to heaven. And I saw the places of the luminaries and the treasuries of the stars and of the thunder and in the uttermost depths, where were a fiery bow and arrows and their quiver, and a fiery sword and all the lightnings. And they took me to the living waters, and to the fire of the west, which receives every setting of the sun. And I came to a river of fire in which the fire flows like water and discharges itself into the great sea towards the west. I saw the great rivers and came to the great river and to the great darkness, and went to the place where no flesh walks. I saw the mountains of the darkness of winter and the place whence all the waters of the deep flow. I saw the mouths of all the rivers of the earth and the mouth of the deep.

[Chapter 18]

I saw the treasuries of all the winds: I saw how He had furnished with them the whole creation and the firm foundations of the earth. And I saw the corner-stone of the earth: I saw the four winds which bear [the earth and] the firmament of the heaven. And I saw how the winds stretch out the vaults of heaven, and have their station between heaven and earth: these are the pillars of the heaven. I saw the winds of heaven which turn and bring the circumference of the sun and all the stars to their setting. I saw the winds on the earth carrying the clouds: I saw the paths of the angels. I saw at the end of the earth the firmament of the heaven above. And I proceeded and saw a place which burns day and night, where there are seven mountains of magnificent stones, three towards the east, and three towards the south. And as for those towards the east, was of coloured stone, and one of pearl, and one of jacinth, and those towards the south of red stone. But the middle one reached to heaven like the throne of God, of alabaster, and the summit of the throne was of sapphire. And I saw a flaming fire. And beyond these mountains Is a region the end of the great earth: there the heavens were completed. And I saw a deep abyss, with columns of heavenly fire, and among them I saw columns of fire fall, which were beyond measure alike towards the height and towards the depth. And beyond that abyss I saw a place which had no firmament of the heaven above, and no firmly founded earth beneath it: there was no water upon it, and no birds, but it was a waste and horrible place. I saw there seven stars like great burning mountains, and to me, when I inquired regarding them, The angel said: 'This place is the end of heaven and earth: this has become a prison for the stars and the host of heaven. And the stars which roll over the fire are they which have transgressed the commandment of the Lord in the beginning of their rising, because they did not come forth at their appointed times. And He was wroth with them, and bound them till the time when their guilt should be consummated (even) for ten thousand years.'

[Chapter 19]

[Chapter 20]

And these are the names of the holy angels who watch. Uriel, one of the holy angels, who is over the world and over Tartarus. Raphael, one of the holy angels, who is over the spirits of men. Raguel, one of the holy angels who takes vengeance on the world of the luminaries. Michael, one of the holy angels, to wit, he that is set over the best part of mankind and over chaos. Saraqael, one of the holy angels, who is set over the spirits, who sin in the spirit. Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who is over Paradise and the serpents and the Cherubim. Remiel, one of the holy angels, whom God set over those who rise.

[Chapter 21]

And I proceeded to where things were chaotic. And I saw there something horrible: I saw neither a heaven above nor a firmly founded earth, but a place chaotic and horrible. And there I saw seven stars of the heaven bound together in it, like great mountains and burning with fire. Then I said: 'For what sin are they bound, and on what account have they been cast in hither?' Then said Uriel, one of the holy angels, who was with me, and was chief over them, and said: 'Enoch, why dost thou ask, and why art thou eager for the truth? These are of the number of the stars of heaven, which have transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and are bound here till ten thousand years, the time entailed by their sins, are consummated.' And from thence I went to another place, which was still more horrible than the former, and I saw a horrible thing: a great fire there which burnt and blazed, and the place was cleft as far as the abyss, being full of great descending columns of fire: neither its extent or magnitude could I see, nor could I conjecture. Then I said: 'How fearful is the place and how terrible to look upon!' Then Uriel answered me, one of the holy angels who was with me, and said unto me: 'Enoch, why hast thou such fear and affright?' And I answered: 'Because of this fearful place, and because of the spectacle of the pain.' And he said unto me: 'This place is the prison of the angels, and here they will be imprisoned for ever.'

[Chapter 22]

And thence I went to another place, and he mountain [and] of hard rock. And there was in it four hollow places, deep and wide and very smooth. How smooth are the hollow places and deep and dark to look at. Then Raphael answered, one of the holy angels who was with me, and said unto me: 'These hollow places have been created for this very purpose, that the spirits of the souls of the dead should assemble therein, yea that all the souls of the children of men should assemble here. And these places have been made to receive them till the day of their judgement and till their appointed period [till the period appointed], till the great judgement (comes) upon them.' I saw (the spirit of) a dead man making suit, and his voice went forth to heaven and made suit. And I asked Raphael the angel who was with me, and I said unto him: 'This spirit which maketh suit, whose is it, whose voice goeth forth and maketh suit to heaven ?' 7 And he answered me saying: 'This is the spirit which went forth from Abel, whom his brother Cain slew, and he makes his suit against him till his seed is destroyed from the face of the earth, and his seed is annihilated from amongst the seed of men.' The I asked regarding it, and regarding all the hollow places: 'Why is one separated from the other?' And he answered me and said unto me: 'These three have been made that the spirits of the dead might be separated. And such a division has been make (for) the spirits of the righteous, in which there is the bright spring of water. And such has been made for sinners when they die and are buried in the earth and judgement has not been executed on them in their lifetime. Here their spirits shall be set apart in this great pain till the great day of judgement and punishment and torment of those who curse for ever and retribution for their spirits. There He shall bind them for ever. And such a division has been made for the spirits of those who make their suit, who make disclosures concerning their destruction, when they were slain in the days of the sinners. Such has been made for the spirits of men who were not righteous but sinners, who were complete in transgression, and of the transgressors they shall be companions: but their spirits shall not be slain in the day of judgement nor shall they be raised from thence.' The I blessed the Lord of glory and said: 'Blessed be my Lord, the Lord of righteousness, who ruleth for ever.'

[Chapter 23]

From thence I went to another place to the west of the ends of the earth. And I saw a burning fire which ran without resting, and paused not from its course day or night but (ran) regularly. And I asked saying: 'What is this which rests not?' Then Raguel, one of the holy angels who was with me, answered me and said unto me: 'This course of fire which thou hast seen is the fire in the west which persecutes all the luminaries of heaven.'

[Chapter 24]

And from thence I went to another place of the earth, and he showed me a mountain range of fire which burnt day and night. And I went beyond it and saw seven magnificent mountains all differing each from the other, and the stones (thereof) were magnificent and beautiful, magnificent as a whole, of glorious appearance and fair exterior: three towards the east, one founded on the other, and three towards the south, one upon the other, and deep rough ravines, no one of which joined with any other. And the seventh mountain was in the midst of these, and it excelled them in height, resembling the seat of a throne: and fragrant trees encircled the throne. And amongst them was a tree such as I had never yet smelt, neither was any amongst them nor were others like it: it had a fragrance beyond all fragrance, and its leaves and blooms and wood wither not for ever: and its fruit is beautiful, and its fruit n resembles the dates of a palm. Then I said: 'How beautiful is this tree, and fragrant, and its leaves are fair, and its blooms very delightful in appearance.' Then answered Michael, one of the holy and honoured angels who was with me, and was their leader.

[Chapter 25]

And he said unto me: 'Enoch, why dost thou ask me regarding the fragrance of the tree, and why dost thou wish to learn the truth?' Then I answered him saying: 'I wish to know about everything, but especially about this tree.' And he answered saying: 'This high mountain which thou hast seen, whose summit is like the throne of God, is His throne, where the Holy Great One, the Lord of Glory, the Eternal King, will sit, when He shall come down to visit the earth with goodness. And as for this fragrant tree no mortal is permitted to touch it till the great judgement, when He shall take vengeance on all and bring (everything) to its consummation for ever. It shall then be given to the righteous and holy. Its fruit shall be for food to the elect: it shall be transplanted to the holy place, to the temple of the Lord, the Eternal King.

Then blessed I the God of Glory, the Eternal King, who hath prepared such things for the righteous, and hath created them and promised to give to them.

[Chapter 26]

And I went from thence to the middle of the earth, and I saw a blessed place in which there were trees with branches abiding and blooming [of a dismembered tree]. And there I saw a holy mountain, and underneath the mountain to the east there was a stream and it flowed towards the south. And I saw towards the east another mountain higher than this, and between them a deep and narrow ravine: in it also ran a stream underneath the mountain. And to the west thereof there was another mountain, lower than the former and of small elevation, and a ravine deep and dry between them: and another deep and dry ravine was at the extremities of the three mountains. And all the ravines were deep and narrow, (being formed) of hard rock, and trees were not planted upon them. And I marveled at the rocks, and I marveled at the ravine, yea, I marveled very much.

[Chapter 27]

Then said I: 'For what object is this blessed land, which is entirely filled with trees, and this accursed valley between?' Then Uriel, one of the holy angels who was with me, answered and said: 'This accursed valley is for those who are accursed for ever: Here shall all the accursed be gathered together who utter with their lips against the Lord unseemly words and of His glory speak hard things. Here shall they be gathered together, and here shall be their place of judgement. In the last days there shall be upon them the spectacle of righteous judgement in the presence of the righteous for ever: here shall the merciful bless the Lord of glory, the Eternal King. In the days of judgement over the former, they shall bless Him for the mercy in accordance with which He has assigned them (their lot).' Then I blessed the Lord of Glory and set forth His glory and lauded Him gloriously.

[Chapter 28]

[Chapter 29]

And thence I went to another place in the desert, and approached to the east of this mountain range. And there I saw aromatic trees exhaling the fragrance of frankincense and myrrh, and the trees also were similar to the almond tree.

[Chapter 30]

And beyond these, I went afar to the east, and I saw another place, a valley (full) of water. And therein there was a tree, the colour (?) of fragrant trees such as the mastic. And on the sides of those valleys I saw fragrant cinnamon. And beyond these I proceeded to the east.

[Chapter 31]

[Chapter 32]

And after these fragrant odours, as I looked towards the north over the mountains I saw seven mountains full of choice nard and fragrant trees and cinnamon and pepper. And thence I went over the summits of all these mountains, far towards the east of the earth, and passed above the Erythraean sea and went far from it, and passed over the angel Zotiel. And I came to the Garden of Righteousness, I and from afar off trees more numerous than I these trees and great-two trees there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent, and the tree of knowledge, whose holy fruit they eat and know great wisdom. That tree is in height like the fir, and its leaves are like (those of) the Carob tree: and its fruit is like the clusters of the vine, very beautiful: and the fragrance of the tree penetrates afar. Then I said: 'How beautiful is the tree, and how attractive is its look!' Then Raphael the holy angel, who was with me, answered me and said: 'This is the tree of wisdom, of which thy father old (in years) and thy aged mother, who were before thee, have eaten, and they learnt wisdom and their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked and they were driven out of the garden.'

[Chapter 33]

And from thence I went to the ends of the earth and saw there great beasts, and each differed from the other; and (I saw) birds also differing in appearance and beauty and voice, the one differing from the other. And to the east of those beasts I saw the ends of the earth whereon the heaven rests, and the portals of the heaven open. And I saw how the stars of heaven come forth, and I counted the portals out of which they proceed, and wrote down all their outlets, of each individual star by itself, according to their number and their names, their courses and their positions, and their times and their months, as Uriel the holy angel who was with me showed me. He showed all things to me and wrote them down for me: also their names he wrote for me, and their laws and their companies.

[Chapter 34]

[Chapter 35]

And from thence I went towards the west to the ends of the earth, and saw there three portals of the heaven open such as I had seen in the east, the same number of portals, and the same number of outlets.

[Chapter 36]

And from thence I went to the south to the ends of the earth, and saw there three open portals of the heaven: and thence there come dew, rain, and wind. And from thence I went to the east to the ends of the heaven, and saw here the three eastern portals of heaven open and small portals above them. Through each of these small portals pass the stars of heaven and run their course to the west on the path which is shown to them. And as often as I saw I blessed always the Lord of Glory, and I continued to bless the Lord of Glory who has wrought great and glorious wonders, to show the greatness of His work to the angels and to spirits and to men, that they might praise His work and all His creation: that they might see the work of His might and praise the great work of His hands and bless Him for ever.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From-The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament H.R. Charles Oxford: The Clarendon Press INTRODUCTION [Chapter 1] [Chapter 2] [Chapter 3] Observe and see how (in the winter) all the trees seem as though they had withered and shed all their leaves, except fourteen trees, which do not lose their foliage but retain the old foliage from two to three years till the new comes.

# data[].attributes.headline
0:00 - Section 1: Book of the Watchers (Chapters 1-36)44:38 - Section 2: Book of Parables (Chapters 37-71)1:46:18 - Section 3: Book of the Heavenly Luminaries (Chapters 72-82)2:16:07 - Section 4: Book of Dreams and Visions (Chapters 83-90)2:47:52 - Section 4: Epistle of Enoch (Chapters 91-108)

# data[].attributes.subject
0:00 - Section 1: Book of the Watchers (Chapters 1-36)44:38 - Section 2: Book of Parables (Chapters 37-71)1:46:18 - Section 3: Book of the Heavenly Luminaries (Chapters 72-82)2:16:07 - Section 4: Book of Dreams and Visions (Chapters 83-90)2:47:52 - Section 4: Epistle of Enoch (Chapters 91-108)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Book Of Enoch -  R. H.  Charles (Epic Audio Version)

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Keywords: Hebrew Israelites, Black Hebrews, Timbuktu, Babylon, West Africa, Kingdom of Juda, Slave Coast, Khazaria, Khazarian, synagogue of satan, the real hebrews, African americans, negroe, negroeland, Arthur Koestler, Shlomo Sands, Rudolph R Windsor, from babylon to timbuktu, the thirteenth tribe, the invention of the jewish people, caravel, romanus pontifex, deuteronomy 28, leviticus 26, psalm 83, slave trade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A History of the True Hebrews - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A concise look at the history of the chosen people of Yah, the nation of Israel. This documentary traces their journey from the split into two kingdoms in ancient times to the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD and their sojourn in a strange land prior to being scattered among the nations.

# data[].attributes.headline
Our History: Scattered Among the Nations

# data[].attributes.subject
Our History: Scattered Among the Nations

# data[].attributes.body
Part 2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
View Transcript

Given the long list of preceding curses mentioned in Deuteronomy chapter 28, one might ask, "How are these curses still with the people of Israel today if the covenant was done away with? Aren't we under a new covenant?" Well the fact is, the covenant, despite what many believe, is olam, which is Hebrew for of "long duration," or what is generally translated as "everlasting," meaning it is still in force today. For as Yah said to Abraham:

⁷"I will confirm my covenant with you and your descendants after you, from generation to generation. This is the everlasting covenant: I will always be your Elohim and the Elohim of your descendants after you."

-Genesis 17

Moses actually said this much to the people of Israel following the address that included the long list of curses:

⁹"Therefore, obey the terms of this covenant so that you will prosper in everything you do.
¹⁰ All of you - tribal leaders, elders, officers, all the men of Israel - are standing today in the presence of Yah your Elohim.

¹¹ Your little ones and your wives are with you, as well as the foreigners living among you who chop your wood and carry your water.

¹² You are standing here today to enter into the covenant of Yah your Elohim. Yah is making this covenant, including the curses.

¹³ By entering into the covenant today, he will establish you as his people and confirm that he is your Elohim, just as he promised you and as he swore to your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

¹⁴ "But you are not the only ones with whom I am making this covenant with its curses.

¹⁵ I am making this covenant both with you who stand here today in the presence of Yah our Elohim, and also with the future generations who are not standing here today.

-Deuteronomy 29

You see, the covenant did not only involve the children of Israel who were alive at the time of its establishment; it also involved their many descendants, reaching right down to our time. And it is because our ancestors broke this covenant that the curses mentioned in Deuteronomy chapter 28 have persisted to this day. And it is the reason the children of Israel were scattered among the nations. But let's take a closer look at the cause of these curses and our being scattered abroad.

-Psalm 106

Are we not doing this very same thing today! We are not to do as the heathen nations do, as it is written:

³⁰do not fall into the trap of following their customs and worshiping their deities. . . .

-Deuteronomy 12

. . . and in 2 Kings we read:

¹⁵They rejected his decrees and the covenant he had made with their ancestors, and they despised all his warnings. They worshiped worthless idols, so they became worthless themselves. They followed the example of the nations around them, disobeying Yah's command not to imitate them.

-2 Kings 17

Again, we are not to be like the heathen nations. We are to be a peculiar treasure to him. But getting back to Psalm 106:

-Psalm 106

Yah has an "unfailing love" for Israel. He even knows that our exile will result in a remnant among us turning back to him:

⁸"But I will let a few of my people escape destruction, and they will be scattered among the nations of the world.
⁹ Then when they are exiled among the nations, they will remember me. They will recognize how hurt I am by their unfaithful hearts and lustful eyes that long for their idols. Then at last they will hate themselves for all their detestable sins.

-Ezekiel 6

²⁰In that day the remnant left in Israel, the survivors in the house of Jacob, will no longer depend on allies who seek to destroy them. But they will faithfully trust Yah, the Pure One of Israel.
²¹ A remnant will return; yes, the remnant of Jacob will return to the Mighty Elohim.

²² But though the people of Israel are as numerous as the sand of the seashore, only a remnant of them will return. Yah has rightly decided to destroy his people.

²³ Yes, Yah, Yah of Heaven's Armies, has already decided to destroy the entire land.

-Isaiah 10

All this being said, many claim that Yah no longer cares about anyone being actual descendants of Israel nowadays; that if you have an abiding faith in Yeshua and keep his commandments, that is all that is required to be a part of "Israel." Well that would nullify the term "descendant." And there are many genealogies in the Scriptures and Messianic Writings that show how much Yah does consider actual lineage.

Even the 144,000 are comprised of 12,000 from each tribe. If lineage and true descent from Israel does not matter, then why all this talk of a remnant of those people returning? As for gentile lineage, while he cares nothing for the nations:

¹⁵ No, for all the nations of the world are but a drop in the bucket. They are nothing more than dust on the scales. . . .¹⁷The nations of the world are worth nothing to him. In his eyes they count for less than nothing - mere emptiness and froth.

-Isaiah 40

. . . Believing Gentiles, however, are quite another matter. In the book of Psalms we read:

⁴I will count Egypt and Babylon among those who know me - also Philistia and Tyre, and even distant Ethiopia. They have all become citizens of Jerusalem!
⁵ Regarding Jerusalem it will be said, "Everyone enjoys the rights of citizenship there." And the Most High will personally bless this city.

⁶ When Yah registers the nations, he will say, "They have all become citizens of Jerusalem."

-Psalm 87

Yeshua himself adds to this equation. When dealing with a believing Roman Officer, a Gentile, we read this account in the book of Matthew:

-Matthew 8

Yeshua says the Kingdom was prepared for Israel, but that believing Gentiles will experience it. This is crucial to understand. Israel is Israel and the Gentile nations are the Gentile nations; they are not one and the same. But even Gentiles will enjoy and experience the Kingdom, while many Israelites will not.

You see, being a true descendant of Israel does not mean one is automatically granted entrance into the Kingdom. Many Israelites will be cast into outer darkness for the very reasons our ancestors brought this curse on us. That said, being a true descendant of Israel is vastly important, and Yah says that some of us will come to appreciate this heritage:

¹"But now, listen to me, Jacob my servant, Israel my chosen one.
² Yah who made you and helps you says: Do not be afraid, O Jacob, my servant, O dear Israel, my chosen one.

³ For I will pour out water to quench your thirst and to irrigate your parched fields. And I will pour out my Spirit on your descendants, and my blessing on your children.

⁴ They will thrive like watered grass, like willows on a riverbank.

⁵ Some will proudly claim, 'I belong to Yah.' Others will say, 'I am a descendant of Jacob.' Some will write Yah's name on their hands and will name themselves by the name of Israel."

-Isaiah 44

The truth is many of the true children of Israel do not know the value of their lineage. But even if all of them did know the value, only a small remnant will keep Yah's commandments, loving him with all their hearts, minds, souls, and strengths, and their neighbors as themselves, while having all faith in Yeshua.

¹⁴But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult, and only a few ever find it.

-Matthew 7

-Luke 13

Keywords: Last Days, End Times Prophecy, Black Hebrews, End of the Age, Scattered Abroad, Diaspora, New Covenant, Old Covenant, House of Jacob, Children of Israel, House of Judah, Yehudim, Yisrael, Yacob

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scattered Among the Nations Part 2 - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Given the long list of preceding curses mentioned in Deuteronomy chapter 28, one might ask, "How are these curses still with the people of Israel today if the covenant was done away with? Aren't we under a new covenant?"

# data[].attributes.body
Part 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
View Transcript

As stated in the previous video, the original covenant that Yah made with the people of Israel, our ancestors, is still in force today. We are still to keep the laws, regulations, decrees, and instructions our forefathers agreed to. The covenant has not been replaced by the promised new covenant as yet, despite what some claim. For we read:

⁴⁰"But at last my people will confess their sins and the sins of their ancestors for betraying me and being hostile toward me.
⁴¹ When I have turned their hostility back on them and brought them to the land of their enemies, then at last their stubborn hearts will be humbled, and they will pay for their sins.

⁴² Then I will remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land.

⁴³ For the land must be abandoned to enjoy its years of Sabbath rest as it lies deserted. At last the people will pay for their sins, for they have continually rejected my regulations and despised my decrees.

⁴⁴ "But despite all this, I will not utterly reject or despise them while they are in exile in the land of their enemies. I will not cancel my covenant with them by wiping them out, for I am Yah their Elohim.

⁴⁵ For their sakes I will remember my ancient covenant with their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of all the nations, that I might be their Elohim. I am Yah."

⁴⁶ These are the decrees, regulations, and instructions that Yah gave through Moses on Mount Sinai as evidence of the relationship between himself and the Israelites.

-Leviticus 26.

Note that Yah said the covenant can be canceled by Israel, his chosen people, being wiped out. That has not been the case, therefore the original covenant he made with us at Sinai is still in place and in force today. Make no mistake about that. And this covenant, the same that was made on Mount Sinai, is evidence of the relationship between Yah and the people of Israel. Any deviation from the original covenant is not evidence of that relationship. This is clear.

The covenant was to be the sign that said to the world, the children of Israel are the chosen people of Yah. The only evidence we have today of that fact are the curses that rest on us, as we are still scattered among the various nations we were led away captive to as slaves on ships.

And one important thing to understand about the new covenant is that it will not involve a new set of laws, or doing away of laws, as some might think. Instead, the new covenant will just be Yah's way of getting us to keep our end of the bargain; getting us to live up to our promise to keep the laws, regulations, decrees, and instructions he listed at Sinai, and it will take a literal miracle in order for this to happen.

Remember, Yah does not change.

⁶ "I am Yah, and I do not change. That is why you descendants of Jacob are not already destroyed.

-Malachi 3

So neither can his law change.

¹⁸ I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of Elohim's law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.

-Matthew 5

That takes us to the new covenant. What exactly is it anyway?
THE NEW COVENANT
³¹"The day is coming," says Yah, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah.
³² This covenant will not be like the one I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt. They broke that covenant, though I loved them as a husband loves his wife," says Yah.

³³ "But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day," says Yah. "I will put my instructions deep within them, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their Elohim, and they will be my people.

³⁴ And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their relatives, saying, 'You should know Yah.' For everyone, from the least to the greatest, will know me already," says Yah. "And I will forgive their wickedness, and I will never again remember their sins."

-Jeremiah 31

As stated, the old covenant is still in force until the new covenant replaces it, but that time is yet future as you will see. And we are not talking about laws being changed or replaced. Our ability to keep those laws will be the only thing that will change, and, as stated, it will take a literal miracle in order for us to keep our promise to uphold Yah's laws. The book of Ezekiel sheds more light on how this will happen:

²²"Therefore, give the people of Israel this message from the Sovereign Yah: I am bringing you back, but not because you deserve it. I am doing it to protect my pure name, on which you brought shame while you were scattered among the nations.
²³ I will show how pure my great name is - the name on which you brought shame among the nations. And when I reveal my purity through you before their very eyes, says the Sovereign Yah, then the nations will know that I am Yah.

²⁴ For I will gather you up from all the nations and bring you home again to your land.

²⁵ "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean. Your filth will be washed away, and you will no longer worship idols.

²⁶ And I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit in you. I will take out your stony, stubborn heart and give you a tender, responsive heart.

²⁷ And I will put my Spirit in you so that you will follow my decrees and be careful to obey my regulations.

²⁸ "And you will live in Israel, the land I gave your ancestors long ago. You will be my people, and I will be your Elohim.

²⁹ I will cleanse you of your filthy behavior. I will give you good crops of grain, and I will send no more famines on the land.

³⁰ I will give you great harvests from your fruit trees and fields, and never again will the surrounding nations be able to scoff at your land for its famines.

³¹ Then you will remember your past sins and despise yourselves for all the detestable things you did.

³² But remember, says the Sovereign Yah, I am not doing this because you deserve it. O my people of Israel, you should be utterly ashamed of all you have done!

³³ "This is what the Sovereign Yah says: When I cleanse you from your sins, I will repopulate your cities, and the ruins will be rebuilt.

³⁴ The fields that used to lie empty and desolate in plain view of everyone will again be farmed.

³⁵ And when I bring you back, people will say, 'This former wasteland is now like the Garden of Eden! The abandoned and ruined cities now have strong walls and are filled with people!'

³⁶ Then the surrounding nations that survive will know that I, Yah, have rebuilt the ruins and replanted the wasteland. For I, Yah, have spoken, and I will do what I say.

³⁷ "This is what the Sovereign Yah says: I am ready to hear Israel's prayers and to increase their numbers like a flock.

³⁸ They will be as numerous as the sacred flocks that fill Jerusalem's streets at the time of her festivals. The ruined cities will be crowded with people once more, and everyone will know that I am Yah."

-Ezekiel 36

Again, this miraculous event is yet future, and it will take place following the prophesied regathering of Israel.

⁶"I will strengthen Judah and save Israel; I will restore them because of my compassion. It will be as though I had never rejected them, for I am Yah their Elohim, who will hear their cries.
⁷ The people of Israel will become like mighty warriors, and their hearts will be made happy as if by wine. Their children, too, will see it and be glad; their hearts will rejoice in Yah.

⁸ When I whistle to them, they will come running, for I have redeemed them. From the few who are left, they will grow as numerous as they were before.

⁹ Though I have scattered them like seeds among the nations, they will still remember me in distant lands. They and their children will survive and return again to Israel.

¹⁰ I will bring them back from Egypt and gather them from Assyria. I will resettle them in Gilead and Lebanon until there is no more room for them all.

¹¹ They will pass safely through the sea of distress, for the waves of the sea will be held back, and the waters of the Nile will dry up. The pride of Assyria will be crushed, and the rule of Egypt will end.

¹² By my power I will make my people strong, and by my authority they will go wherever they wish. I, Yah, have spoken!"

-Zechariah 10

It is important to note that when Egypt is mentioned in prophecy, it is not literal Egypt being referenced, but what Egypt represented to ancient Israel - that is: slavery.

³So Moses said to the people, "This is a day to remember forever - the day you left Egypt, the place of your slavery."

-Exodus 13

We are still in spiritual Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon today. Egypt, as stated in Exodus 13:3 represents slavery, or bondage. Whereas Assyria represents exile:

¹¹At that time the king of Assyria exiled the Israelites to Assyria and placed them in colonies in Halah, along the banks of the Habor River in Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes.

-2 Kings 18

And Babylon represents captivity.

¹⁵Nebuchadnezzar led King Jehoiachin away as a captive to Babylon, along with the queen mother, his wives and officials, and all Jerusalem's elite.

-2 Kings 24

Prophecies of Israel's regathering abound in Scripture.

As for the timing of the regathering, which will take place just before the new covenant is established, we are told:

¹²"Someday, O Israel, I will gather you; I will gather the remnant who are left. I will bring you together again like sheep in a pen, like a flock in its pasture. Yes, your land will again be filled with noisy crowds!
¹³ Your leader will break out and lead you out of exile, out through the gates of the enemy cities, back to your own land. Your king will lead you; Yah himself will guide you."

-Micah 2

"Our king will lead us," we are told. This is exactly what Yeshua himself stated to the 12 disciples:

³⁰And then at last, the sign that the Son of Man is coming will appear in the heavens, and there will be deep mourning among all the peoples of the earth. And they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
³¹ And he will send out his heavenly messengers with the mighty blast of a trumpet, and they will gather his chosen ones from all over the world - from the farthest ends of the earth and heaven.

-Matthew 24

And again he said:

³¹"But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the heavenly messengers with him, then he will sit upon his glorious throne.
³² All the nations will be gathered in his presence, and he will separate the people as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.

³³ He will place the sheep at his right hand and the goats at his left.

³⁴ "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world.

-Matthew 25

And this he said to coincide with the words of the prophet Ezekiel:

¹¹"For this is what the Sovereign Yah says: I myself will search and find my sheep.
¹² I will be like a shepherd looking for his scattered flock. I will find my sheep and rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on that dark and cloudy day.

¹³ I will bring them back home to their own land of Israel from among the peoples and nations. I will feed them on the mountains of Israel and by the rivers and in all the places where people live.

¹⁴ Yes, I will give them good pastureland on the high hills of Israel. There they will lie down in pleasant places and feed in the lush pastures of the hills.

¹⁵ I myself will tend my sheep and give them a place to lie down in peace, says the Sovereign Yah.

¹⁶ I will search for my lost ones who strayed away, and I will bring them safely home again. I will bandage the injured and strengthen the weak. But I will destroy those who are fat and powerful. I will feed them, yes - feed them justice!

¹⁷ "And as for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign Yah says to his people: I will judge between one animal of the flock and another, separating the sheep from the goats.

-Ezekiel 34

So what does all this prove? Well for one thing, it tells us that Israel has not been regathered as yet, because that will only happen when Yeshua returns. We also know that we are not currently under the new covenant, because that will be established after we have been regathered. We also know how the covenant was broken, which resulted in our being scattered as slaves and the curses being poured out on us as a people.

But where are we now? What is our purpose as a scattered flock? While the answers to these questions won't be given in full in this video, look for many answers in future videos. But I can say this, the healing will only begin if and when we begin to obey Yah. We must not be like our rebellious ancestors. Rather, we are to live up to the following:

¹"In the future, when you experience all these blessings and curses I have listed for you, and when you are living among the nations to which Yah your Elohim has exiled you, take to heart all these instructions.
² If at that time you and your children return to Yah your Elohim, and if you obey with all your heart and all your soul all the commands I have given you today,

³ then Yah your Elohim will restore your fortunes. He will have mercy on you and gather you back from all the nations where he has scattered you.

⁴ Even though you are banished to the ends of the earth, Yah your Elohim will gather you from there and bring you back again.

⁵ Yah your Elohim will return you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will possess that land again. Then he will make you even more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors!

⁶ "Yah your Elohim will change your heart and the hearts of all your descendants, so that you will love him with all your heart and soul and so you may live!

⁷ Yah your Elohim will inflict all these curses on your enemies and on those who hate and persecute you.

⁸ Then you will again obey Yah and keep all his commands that I am giving you today.

⁹ "Yah your Elohim will then make you successful in everything you do. He will give you many children and numerous livestock, and he will cause your fields to produce abundant harvests, for Yah will again delight in being good to you as he was to your ancestors.

¹⁰ Yah your Elohim will delight in you if you obey his voice and keep the commands and decrees written in this Book of Instruction, and if you turn to Yah your Elohim with all your heart and soul.

-Deuteronomy 30
THE END
Keywords: Bring back the captivity of Israel, time of jacob's trouble, last day events, black israel, hebrew israelites, true people of israel, children of israel, tribe of judah, kingdom of Israel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scattered Among the Nations Part 3 - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This final video in the Scattered Among the Nations series focuses on Yah's plan to regather the true people of Israel from the nations they were scattered to as slaves, after they have acknowledged their sins, repented, and have begun to keep his laws in keeping with the original covenant made at M

# data[].attributes.headline
Sprouts to Beets! LKP is an excellent way to share Words of Life with your seedlings!

# data[].attributes.subject
Sprouts to Beets! LKP is an excellent way to share Words of Life with your seedlings!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Little Kingdom Preppers - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Read our collection of stories that features our forefathers and mothers, prophets and prophetesses, judges, kings & queens, and heroes from our past. The people of Israel will come alive once more in these stories from the Scriptures. Children of all ages will enjoy them and learn their history

# data[].attributes.body
Videos for little ones

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This content is intended for children aged 3-6 years, who we consider little Brussel sprouts. However, no matter how old you are, we tailored these videos to be fun for the whole family!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sprouts: There is Always Time to Do Good - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A young Hebrew boy decides to help a family out instead of only thinking about himself.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sprouts: The Satisfied Worm - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The little worm from Jonah chapter 4 stars in this early concept video about satisfying hunger and thirst.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sprouts: A to the B to the C - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An early concept video with an interesting twist on ABCs.

# data[].attributes.body
Little Ones learning Fun

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LKP Treasure Trove Videos - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.body
This is the foundation for the teaching, "serve 2 masters.; elohiym/God & mammon"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Keywords: precious jewels, precious gems, street of gold, city of new jerusalem, the nations, value, commodity, commodities, soft and hard commodities, devil's economy, yah's economy, futures market, stock exchange, nation exchange, currency, currencies, real money, gold, silver, bronze, iron, empires, daniel 2, isaiah 60, revelation 21, precious metals, bank of yah, list of kingdom preparedness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Keywords: precious jewels, precious gems, street of gold, city of new jerusalem, the nations, value, commodity, commodities, soft and hard commodities, devil's economy, yah's economy, futures market, stock exchange, nation exchange, currency, currencies, real money, gold, silver, bronze, iron, empires, daniel 2, isaiah 60, revelation 21, precious metals, bank of yah, list of kingdom preparedness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
View Transcript

In my studies, I have been shown that there are five main spiritual attributes one needs in order to be ready for the Kingdom of Yah. And within these five falls everything else. Other related attributes will automatically bud off these initial five as you apply them to your walk. The number five itself is significant in that it represents Yah's grace. Many things mentioned in Scripture comprised of five allows for a way to realign with Yah, and get back in his favor.

A case in point of five representing grace is the Torah, the "teaching" or "law" contained in the first five books of Scripture that, when adhered to, realigns us with Yah's will and allows his favor to pour down on us. Note that grace is in fact Yah's offering to us. The definition of offering is as follows:

So grace is Yah's offering to us, as it is a gift he grants to us when we turn back to him and serve him with our all. But the Torah spoke of five offerings the people of Israel were to present to Yah, five representing grace, as I've stated. Those five offerings were: the Burnt Offering (Leviticus 1; 8:18 - 21; 16:24), the Sin Offering (Leviticus 4; 16:3 - 22), the Guilt Offering (Leviticus 5:14 - 19; 6:1 - 7; 7:1 - 6), the Grain Offering (Leviticus 2) and the Peace Offering (Leviticus 3; 7:11 - 34). So grace was represented here as well, but in reverse via the offerings given to Yah.

If you study the significance of five further, you'll find many more examples that point to grace, such as the tabernacle in the wilderness, whose Yah-ordained design required five curtains (Exodus 26:3), five bars (Exodus 26:26 - 27), five pillars, and five sockets (Exodus 26:37). The pure anointing oil mentioned in Exodus chapter 30 verses 23 to 25 was also comprised of five ingredients which were given directly by Yah: liquid myrrh, fragrant cinnamon, calamus, cassia, and a hin of olive oil. These were used to anoint the furniture of the tabernacle.

Now, the five attributes found on our Kingdom Preparedness List, which we'll cover in this five-part series, are also part of the grace that leads us back to Yah. Together, they will allow Hebrews and Gentiles to survive any time of trouble or hardship, pass any test or trial, and essentially conquer any situation within which they find themselves.

I will start by saying that to acquire these five attributes one must be grounded and rooted in Scripture and led by the Ruach, or Spirit of Yah. In fact, the first attribute itself is key to this, and that attribute is:

Part 1: Hearing

In the book of Zechariah, we read:

8 Then this message came to Zechariah from Yah: 9 "This is what Yah of Heaven's Armies says: Judge fairly, and show mercy and kindness to one another.

10 Do not oppress widows, orphans, foreigners, or the poor. And do not scheme against one another.

11"Your ancestors refused to listen to this message. They stubbornly turned away and put their fingers in their ears to keep from hearing.

12 "They made their hearts as hard as stone, so they could not hear the instructions or the messages that Yah of Heaven's Armies had sent them by his Spirit through the earlier prophets. That is why Yah of Heaven's Armies was so angry with them.

13 "Since they refused to listen when I called to them, I would not listen when they called to me, says Yah of Heaven's Armies."

-Zechariah 7

Let us examine this passage of Scripture. First we read that a message came to Zechariah from Yah. We learn from chapter 1 verse 1 of the Book of Zechariah that he is in fact a prophet of Yah. And one of the chief characteristics of being a prophet of Yah is the fact that the prophet hears Yah's Word, otherwise "messages" would not come to them.

Prophets were usually men and women who walked with Yah for large portions of their lives, meaning that the attribute of hearing, which is the first attribute we possess of the five, never left them, nor should it leave us. Being without the attribute of hearing, or ceasing to hear Yah's voice, in other words, means doom for any believer. Verse 11 of the preceding passage highlights this very truth.

In that verse we are told that our "ancestors refused to listen to" Yah's message. Instead they plugged their ears and their hearts became stone to the message sent to them by the Spirit of Yah through the prophets. This is just one demonstration that Yah's message is usually delivered through human messengers. This is the only way we can become servants of the Most High. We must first hear his Word being delivered, and that Word is the seed of truth, as represented in Yeshua's parable found in Matthew chapter 13 verses 1 to 8 and 18 to 23.

Search the Torah, the writings and the prophets, the four Good News books, or the epistles of the emissaries and you'll find passages that plainly demonstrate that no person on earth can become a believer or serve Yah without first hearing the Word. And no person on earth can remain a believer or servant of Yah without the attribute of hearing. We must continue to be hearers of Yah, because his voice will continually direct and lead us through life. As verse 13 of Zechariah 7 illustrates, failing to hear Yah-to listen to his voice-is enough to separate us from him.

You'll find that the longer you've been walking with Yah, the more keen his voice becomes. And the clearer we hear his voice, the stronger our spiritual discernment becomes. But this all requires familiarity with the Scriptures, because Yah speaks to us mainly through his written Word. And anything coming to us outside of that book must comply with the book, and agree with it completely, otherwise it is not the voice of Yah.

20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

-Isaiah 8

This shows us that any source attempting to bring light to you must be in line with the law and testimony of Yah, whether that source is a man or woman you're conversing with, a magazine article you're engrossed in, a scripture study video like the one you're viewing now, or even a random thought that pops into your mind, to name a scant few. By being familiar with Yah's Word, his law and his testimony, you'll know whether Yah is speaking to you through these avenues. It also goes back to what Yeshua said:

27 My sheep hear my voice. . . .

-John 10

5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

-John 10

So being familiar with all of Scripture is key to knowing when you are actually hearing Yah, because he will never speak against his own Word. And the truth is, we should be learning Scripture from our youth up. It is something we should be teaching our children and immersing ourselves in daily, so that we may continually hear the voice of Yah.

5 For He established a testimony in Jacob And appointed a law in Israel, Which He commanded our fathers that they should teach them to their children.

-Psalm 78

I'll say again: being without the attribute of hearing, or ceasing to hear Yah's voice, in other words, means doom for any believer. We have two accounts of two separate kings who ruled in righteousness before losing their way. The first is King David, whose story we covered in part seven of our scripture study series The Covenant Law of Yah. Following the events of the story we recounted in that video, Second Samuel chapter 12 tells us that Nathan the prophet was sent by Yah to rebuke David for his actions. Starting at verse 7 of that chapter we read:

7 . . . The Elohim of Israel, says: "I anointed you king of Israel and saved you from the power of Saul.

8 "I gave you your master's house and his wives and the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. And if that had not been enough, I would have given you much, much more.

9 "Why, then, have you despised the word of Yah and done this horrible deed? For you have murdered Uriah the Hittite with the sword of the Ammonites and stolen his wife.

10 "From this time on, your family will live by the sword because you have despised me by taking Uriah's wife to be your own.

11 "This is what Yah says: Because of what you have done, I will cause your own household to rebel against you. I will give your wives to another man before your very eyes, and he will go to bed with them in public view.

12 "You did it secretly, but I will make this happen to you openly in the sight of all Israel."

13 Then David confessed to Nathan, "I have sinned against Yah." Nathan replied, "Yes, but Yah has forgiven you, and you won't die for this sin.

14 "Nevertheless, because you have shown utter contempt for Yah by doing this, your child will die."

-2 Samuel 12

While David lost his way, he was set back on the right path through the message that came from Yah's prophet, Nathan. The Word of Yah was heard by David, in other words, and he was realigned with the will and ways of Yah. This is the attribute of hearing in full effect. That attribute, while being the first that we acquire of the five, should remain with us through our entire walk with Yah, otherwise we will lose our way and separate ourselves from him. This is the case with the second King used in our illustration here.

First Kings chapter 15 begins the account of King Asa. Beginning in verse 9 we are told:

9 Asa began to rule over Judah in the twentieth year of Jeroboam's reign in Israel.

10 He reigned in Jerusalem forty-one years. His grandmother was Maacah, the daughter of Absalom.

11 Asa did what was pleasing in Yah's sight, as his ancestor David had done.

12 He banished the male and female shrine prostitutes from the land and got rid of all the idols his ancestors had made.

13 He even deposed his grandmother Maacah from her position as queen mother because she had made an obscene Asherah pole. He cut down her obscene pole and burned it in the Kidron Valley.

14 Although the pagan shrines were not removed, Asa's heart remained completely faithful to Yah throughout his life.

15 He brought into the Temple of Yah the silver and gold and the various items that he and his father had dedicated.

-1 Kings 15

So far so good, right? Asa sounds like a righteous King up to this point. He was a hearer for most of his reign, but, eventually, he lost the attribute of hearing Yah along the way. But Scripture points out how this happened. Second Chronicles chapter 14 picks up Asa's story. There we are told in verses 5 and 6:

5 . . . So Asa's kingdom enjoyed a period of peace. 6 During those peaceful years, he was able to build up the fortified towns throughout Judah. No one tried to make war against him at this time, for Yah was giving him rest from his enemies.

-2 Chronicles 14

Even after the Ethiopians attacked his kingdom, we are told in verse 11 that Asa cried out to Yah for help. Yah thereafter defeated the Ethiopians in the presence of Asa in answer to his prayer, which is covered in verse 12 of Second Chronicles chapter 14. Then we read in Second Chronicles chapter 15 and verse 19:

19 So there was no more war until the thirty-fifth year of Asa's reign.

-2 Chronicles 15

Asa enjoyed such a long period of peace that a sense of complacency was allowed to settle upon him, and when trouble arose again, he did not do as he did before and lean upon Yah. Second Chronicles chapter 16 verses 1 to 3 reveals that:

1 In the thirty-sixth year of Asa's reign, King Baasha of Israel invaded Judah and fortified Ramah in order to prevent anyone from entering or leaving King Asa's territory in Judah.

2 Asa responded by removing the silver and gold from the treasuries of the Temple of Yah and from the royal palace. He sent it to King Ben-hadad of Aram, who was ruling in Damascus, along with this message:

3 "Let there be a treaty between you and me like the one between your father and my father. See, I am sending you silver and gold. Break your treaty with King Baasha of Israel so that he will leave me alone."

-2 Chronicles 16

The might of King Baasha instilled fear in Asa to the point that he sought the protection of another powerful king of his day, King Ben-hadad of Aram, a heathen ruler who reigned in Damascus. Not only did King Asa make a treaty with this heathen king, but he also sent him the dedicated treasuries of the sacred Temple, which was a major violation of Scripture ( see Second Chronicles 23 verse 6 for just one of many examples).

For committing this abominable act, Yah sent a seer to deliver a message of warning to King Asa in an attempt to set him back on the right path, as was the case with the prophet Nathan and King David. First Samuel 9 verse 9 says this about seers:

9 (Formerly in Israel, when a man went to inquire of Elohim, he used to say, "Come, and let us go to the seer"; for he who is called a prophet now was formerly called a seer.)

-1 Samuel 9

The seer sent to King Asa was Hanani. Let's see if King Asa will use the first of the five spiritual attributes of kingdom preparedness and actually hear the message of Yah. Second Chronicles chapter 16 records the following:

7 At that time Hanani the seer came to King Asa and told him, "Because you have put your trust in the king of Aram instead of in Yah your Elohim, you missed your chance to destroy the army of the king of Aram.

8 "Don't you remember what happened to the Ethiopians and Libyans and their vast army, with all of their chariots and charioteers? At that time you relied on Yah, and he handed them over to you.

9 "The eyes of Yah search the whole earth in order to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him. What a fool you have been! From now on you will be at war."

10 Asa became so angry with Hanani for saying this that he threw him into prison and put him in stocks. At that time Asa also began to oppress some of his people.

-2 Chronicles 16

Unfortunately, Asa did not hear, and verse 10 recounts the low levels to which he descended in turning a deaf ear to the message of Yah. Right up to his death, as the closing verses of chapter 16 tell us, King Asa relied mainly on physicians, mere men, rather than on his Elohim, cementing the complete separation from Yah. This is what losing the first attribute will result in.

So if Yah sends someone your way who is telling you, "Hey, cut this or that out of your life. Or cease from this or that," it is up to you to decide whether or not this is the voice of Yah speaking to you. And if it is the voice of Yah, you must hear and listen intently, then move on to the second of the five attributes on our Kingdom Preparedness List, which we will cover in our next scripture study video in this five-part series. Shalom!

Keywords: grace of Yah, grace, torah, law and testimony, what five means, what 5 means, five represents, hearing the voice of Yah, King David, King Asa, seers, seer, listen, hear, listening to the voice of Yah, checklist, prepare, kingdom preparedness, attributes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
List of Kingdom Preparedness Part 1 - Kingdom Preppers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This five-attribute kingdom preparedness list is the only list true believers need in these last days to prepare for and survive any situation, test or trial, and time of trouble. It will also ready them for the Kingdom of Yah.

# data[].attributes.body
World wide events

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
SOTT Earth Changes Summary - January 2021: Extreme Weather, Planetary Upheaval, Meteor Fireballs

# data[].attributes.headline
Feb 13: Four Faces of Good News (Besorah)

# data[].attributes.subject
Feb 13: Four Faces of Good News (Besorah)

# data[].attributes.body
Think differently as you read. . .

# data[].attributes.body
2nd Adam Audio w/Q & A

# data[].attributes.body
Know the truth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
James or Jacob in the Bible?
Giving Jacob his due
The problem of names surfaced at a recent Bible study at the St. Paul Union Church in Antalya, Turkey. Pastor Dennis Massaro was discussing the three men named "James" in the New Testament: Two were apostles, and the third was the leader of the Jerusalem church and author of the eponymous letter-the Book of James. Participants in the study came from a range of countries, including the Netherlands, Iran, Mexico, Moldova and Cameroon. When I asked what the name of these men was in their languages, they all said "Jacob."

When I was teaching a course on the New Testament General Letters (Hebrews through Jude), I began by introducing the Book of Jacob, also known as the Book of James. Students were perplexed until they learned that Jacob is the proper translation of the Greek name Iakōbos. One student wrote later that knowing this "turned my understanding of the writing upside down." Another observed that "with the name change, the loss of the Jewish lineage occurs."

So how did the Jewish name Ya'akov become so Gentilized as James? Since the 13th century, the form of the Latin name Iacomus began its use in English. In the 14th century, John Wycliffe made the first Bible translation into English and translated Iakobus as James. (However, in both the Old and New Testaments he arbitrarily used the name Jacob for the patriarch). In all future English translations the name stuck, especially after 1611, when King James I sponsored the translation then called the Authorized Version. Since 1797 it has been called the King James Bible.

So what is lost by using James instead of Jacob? First, it has created an awkwardness in academic writing. Scholars providing a transliteration of James indicate Iakōbos, which even lay readers know is not the same. Hershel Shanks has noted that the reason Israeli scholars failed to understand the significance of the eponymous ossuary is that they didn't connect James with Ya'akov.

Second, James's ancestral lineage is lost, as the student noted above. In Matthew's genealogy, we learn that Joseph 's father was named Jacob (Matthew 1:16) and that his family tree included the patriarch Jacob (Matthew 1:2). James was thus named after his grandfather. As Ben Witherington writes, "It is clear that the family of 'James' was proud of its patriarchal heritage." So Jacob was the third Jacob in the family.

In the free eBook Exploring Genesis: The Bible's Ancient Traditions in Context, discover the cultural contexts for many of Israel's earliest traditions. Explore Mesopotamian creation myths, Joseph's relationship with Egyptian temple practices and three different takes on the location of Ur of the Chaldees, the birthplace of Abraham.

Third, James's Jewish cultural background is minimized. Tal Ilan identifies Jacob as the 15th most popular name in Palestine in antiquity, with 18 known persons carrying it. Including both the Eastern and Western Diasporas, Jacob was the third most popular Jewish name, with 74 occurrences.

Fourth, the Jewish literary heritage is muddled. The Book of Jacob (i.e., the Book of James) is addressed to "the twelve tribes in the diaspora" (James 1:1) and full of references and allusions to the Torah and Wisdom Literature of the Jewish Bible (Christians' Old Testament). Scholars consider James the most "Jewish" book in the New Testament. Its genre is considered to be a diaspora letter like Jeremiah 29:1-23 and the apocryphal works The Epistle of Jeremiah, 2 Maccabees 1:1-2:18, and 2 Apocalypse of Baruch 78-86.

For these reasons, changing English translations of James to Jacob makes a lot of sense. In my lifetime we have adapted to a number of name changes: Bombay to Mumbai, Peking to Beijing, Burma to Myanmar, and Rhodesia to Zimbabwe. These changes were soon incorporated by the media as well as in subsequent editions of geographical and historical books. Making such an onomastic adjustment need not be too difficult in religious circles, either.

But can such a switch be made practically? Biblical scholars and publishers would need to agree that continued use of "James" is linguistically indefensible and culturally misleading. Most difficult to change would be Bible translations, which are very conservative. To start, a footnote could denote that James is really Jacob. And while we're at it, let's rehabilitate Jacob as the name of two of Jesus' disciples/apostles. These connections, now lost only for English readers, were caught by Greek-speaking audiences as well as modern readers of translations in most other languages. Let's give Jacob his due.

Mark Wilson is the director of the Asia Minor Research Center in Antalya, Turkey, and is a popular teacher on BAS Travel/Study tours. Mark received his doctorate in Biblical studies from the University of South Africa (Pretoria), where he serves as a research fellow in Biblical archaeology. He is currently Associate Professor Extraordinary of New Testament at Stellenbosch University. He leads field studies in Turkey and the eastern Mediterranean for university, seminary and church groups. He is the author of Biblical Turkey: A Guide to the Jewish and Christian Sites of Asia Minor and Victory through the Lamb: A Guide to Revelation in Plain Language. He is a frequent lecturer at BAS's Bible Fests.

Notes:

1. Hershel Shanks and Ben Witherington III, The Brother of Jesus: The Dramatic Story & Meaning of the First Archaeological Link to Jesus & His Family (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2003), p. 28.

2. Shanks and Witherington III, Brother of Jesus, p. 97.

3. Ṭal Ilan, Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity. Part IV: The Eastern Diaspora 330 BCE-650 CE (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011).

Related reading in Bible History Daily:

Bible Secrets Revealed, Episode 1: "Lost in Translation" by Robert Cargill

Jacob in the Bible
Who did Jacob wrestle with and how did Jacob become Israel?
Is the "Brother of Jesus" Inscription on the James Ossuary a Forgery? This Bible History Daily feature was originally published on April 27, 2017.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
James or Jacob in the Bible? - Biblical Archaeology Society

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
can such a switch be made practically? Biblical scholars and publishers would need to agree that continued use of "James" is linguistically indefensible and culturally misleading. Most difficult to change would be Bible translations, which are very conservative. To start, a footnote could denote that James is really Jacob.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the study from 10 years ago (Washington St)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why So Many Bible Versions? The UNTOLD Dark History of Bible Translations | Battle of the Bibles

# data[].attributes.body
These are the notes for the video above.

# data[].attributes.body
Prepare to endure, live truth to the End!

# data[].attributes.body
Dangers of vaccines

# data[].attributes.body
In these last days, Yah our Father has spoken to us by His son . . . in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John

# data[].attributes.body
We must know our history to be anchored in truth.

# data[].attributes.body
Hold on!

# data[].attributes.body
Hold on! Be prepared to endure to the end. Fruits, Full Armor

# data[].attributes.body
Prepared & Holding On

# data[].attributes.body
Prepared & Holding On

# data[].attributes.body
Faith comes by hearing . . .

# data[].attributes.body
Pay attention to what you see & hear, it fills your heart tank.