THE APOSTLE JUDE BEFORE THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY A.D. WROTE TO GOD'S PEOPLE TO "EARNESTLY CONTEND FOR THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS,"
BEFORE THE FIRST CENTURY WAS OUT TRUE APOSTOLIC FOUNDED CHRISTIANITY WAS DISAPPEARING, AS FALSE TEACHERS WERE RISING UP. THE APOSTLE JOHN SAID IN HIS EPISTLES THERE WAS ALREADY MANY ANTI-CHRIST IN THE WORLRD. O THEY CLAIMED THEY WERE "WITH" JESUS, ON HIS SIDE; THE FACTS ARE JOHN SAID THEY WERE NOT--- THEY WERE ACTUALLY TEACHING A THEOLOGY THAT WAS AGAINST CHRIST, WHILE TEACHING THEY WITH WITH CHRIST. JESUS IN MATTHEW 24; MARK 13; LUKE 21, SAID MANY, NOT THE FEW WOULD COME SAYING JESUS WAS THE CHRIST BURT WOULD DECEIVE THE MANY NOT THE FEW. JESUS SAID HIS TRUE FOLLOWERS WERE THE SALT OF THE EARCH, THE CITY SET ON A HILL, A LIGHT IN A DARK ROOM. HE ALSO SAID HIS DISCIPLES WOULD BE THE "LITTLE: FLOCK"--- THE GREEK IS A DOUBLE DIMINUTIVE, MEANING IN ENGLISH--- VERY LITTLE FLOCK, OR, LITTLE LITTLE FLOCK; TO THEM ARE PROMISED THE KNGDOM OF GOD.
THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND THE 17 CHAPTER TELLS YOU ABOUT A BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION THAT WILL RISE AT THE VERY END TIME OF THIS AGE--- THE LAST 42 MONTHS PLUS A LITTLE MORE. THE BABYLON HAS MADE THE WORLD DRUNK ON HER SPIRITUAL FORNICATIONS, AND MAS MADE THE WORLD DRUNK ON HER MAN MADE SPIRITUAL PRACTICES AND CUSTOMS, AND MUCH FALSE THEOLOGY, WHILE HOLDING SOME TRUTH OF THE HOLY BIBLEE.BIBLE.
THE FACTS ABOUT CHRIST-MASS
CHRISTMAS - DECEMBER 25 - is the day designated on our calendars as the day of Christ's birth. But is this really the day upon which Christ was born? Are today's customs at this season of the year of Christian origin? Or, is Christmas another result of a mixture between paganism and Christianity? WHEN WAS CHRIST BORN? The word "Christmas" is not found anywhere in the scriptures of course, and as we shall see, December 25 is definitely not the date on which Christ was born. It is evident that our saviour was not born during the middle of winter, for at the time of his birth the shepherds were living out in the fields with their flocks. As the scripture says: "There were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night"(Luke 2:8). As is well known, the shepherds in Palestine do not "abide in the fields" during the winter season. The shepherds always bring their flocks in from the mountain slopes and fields not later than about the fifteenth of October. It is quite evident then that Christ was not actually born in the middle of the winter season. But, on the other hand, do the scriptures tell us what season of the year He was born? Yes, the scriptures indicate that He was born in the FALL of the year. For example, our Lord's public ministry lasted for three and a half years (Dan. 9:27, etc.). His ministry came to an end at the time of the Passover (John 18:39), which was in the Spring of the year. And so three and a half years before this would make the beginning of His ministry the FALL of the year. Now, when Jesus began His ministry, He was about thirty years of age (Luke 3:23). This was the recognized age for a priest before he could become an official minister under the Old Testament (Numbers 4:3). Therefore, since Christ began his ministry at the age of about 30, and since this was in the fall season of the year, then thirty years before this would mark His birth as being in the early FALL, not December 25. While the scriptures do not tell the exact date of the birth of Jesus, there is a way to figure the approximate time of the birth of John the Baptist; and since John was born six months before Jesus. By comparing the two, we can again determine at least the SEASON in which Christ was born, as we shall see below. John's father, Zacharias, was a priest in the temple at Jerusalem. During those times, each priest had a definite period of the year in which to serve in the temple. There were 24 such time divisions or "courses" when each priest would serve during the year. The names of these courses are given in I Chronicles 24:7-19. According to Josephus [Antiquities of the Jews, Vol.7, p.14,7], each of these courses lasted for one week, the first course began serving in the first month, Nisan, in the very early spring (1 Chron. 27:1,2). Each priest in order would then serve his course. After six months, this order of courses would be repeated, so that each priest served a week - twice a year. Then three weeks out of the year all of the priests served together - during the periods of the Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles. With these facts for our foundation, let us notice what course it was that Zacharias served: "There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, OF THE COURSE OF ABIA" - or, in Hebrew, Abijah - "and it came to pass that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course there appeared unto him an angel." The angel revealed that to him and his wife Elizabeth - though they were advanced in years - a son would be born (Luke 1:5-13). But what time of the year was it that Zacharias served the course of Abijah? According to 1 Chronicles 24:10, the course of Abijah was the EIGHTH in order. This would have been lyar 27 to Sivan 5; that is, June 1 to 8. Following his week of service in the temple, Zacharias was obligated to remain another week - for the following week was Pentecost. But as soon as this ministry was accomplished, he returned to his home in the hill country - which was approximately 30 miles south of Jerusalem, and his wife conceived (Luke 1:23-24). This was about the middle of June. By adding nine months then, we arrive at the approximate date of John's birth. According to this, John was born in the early spring of the year. Now, since Jesus was six months younger than John (verses 26,36), we simply add these six months to the time of John's birth in the early spring and come to Mid-September as the approximate time of the birth of Christ. Again, the evidence indicates that our Lord was born in the FALL of the year; not December 25. Still further proof of this conclusion may be seen from the fact that at the time Jesus was born Joseph and ~Mary had gone to Bethlehem to be taxed (Luke 2:1-5). There are no records of this period whatsoever that would indicate the middle of the winter was the time of taxing. On the other hand, there is evidence that taxes were paid in the fall season of the year. This was the logical time for the taxes to be paid - since this was at the end of their harvest. There is also evidence that when Joseph and Mary made this trip it was the time of a great feast at Jerusalem. This is the most logical reason why Mary went with Joseph - to attend the feast (as they also did on later occasions - See Luke 2:41), for there was no law that required a woman's presence at a taxing. We know that the time they went to pay taxes was also the time of one of the great feasts at Jerusalem because of the enormous crowd - so enormous, in fact, "there was no room in the inn at Bethlehem (Luke 2:7). Jerusalem was normally a city of only 120,000 inhabitants, but, according to Josephus, during the feasts sometimes as many as two million Jews would gather there. With such vast throngs of people coming to the feast, not only would Jerusalem be filled, but the surrounding towns also, including Bethlehem, which was only five miles to the south. Mere taxation would not cause a crowd this big to be in Bethlehem, for each person returned to his own city to be taxed. And so, taking all these things into consideration, it seems evident that Joseph and Mary made the journey, not only to pay their taxes, but also to attend a great feast at Jerusalem. This was at the end of the harvest season that they were taxed; and this was also the time of the Feast of Tabernacles. All of this - as well as the evidence already given - would mark the birth of Christ in the fall, not December 25th. HOW DID WE GET CHRISTMASS? Since Christ was not born on December 25, then how did this particular day come to be a part of the church calendar? History has the answer. Instead of this day being the time of our Saviour's birth, it was the very day and season on which the pagans for centuries had celebrated the birth of the Sun-god. A study into this shows how far apostate church leaders went in their effort to merge Christianity and paganism into one apostate religion - even to placing the birth of Christ on a date to harmonize with the pagan birthday celebration of the sun-god. It was in the FIFTH Century that the Roman Catholic Church commanded that the birth of Christ be observed forever on December 25 - the day of the old Roman feast of the birth of Sol (one of the names of the sun-god). [Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 6, p.623] In pagan days, this birth of the sun-god was especially popular among that branch of the "Mysteries" known as Mithraism. Concerning this, we read: "1. The largest pagan relIgious cult which fostered the celebration of December 25 as a holiday throughout the Roman and Creek worlds was the pagan sun worship - Mithraism. This winter festival was called 'the Nativity' - the 'nativity of the SUN.' " [The Golden Bough, p. 4713]. And not only was Mithra, the sun-god of Mithraism, said to be born at this time of the year, but Osiris, Horus, Hercules, Bacchus, Adonis, Jupiter, Tammuz, and other sun-gods were also supposedly born at what is called the "Christmas" season - the winter solstice. [Doane, p. 474; Hislop, p.933]. Says a noted writer: "The winter solstice (was) the time at which all the sun-gods from Osiris to Jupiter and Mithra had celebrated their (birthdays), the celebration being adorned with the pine tree of Adonis, the Holy of Saturn, and the Mistletoe tappers represented the kindling of the newborn sun-god's fire..." [Man and His Gods, p.2013]. Now, the fact that the various sun-gods that were worshipped in different countries were all believed to have been born at the same season (in the old fables), would seem to indicate that they were but different forms (under different names) of the original son of the sun-god, Tammuz, of Babylon, the land from which sun-worship originally spread. In Babylon, the birthday of Tammuz was celebrated at the time of the Winter solstice with great feasts, revelry, and drunkenness; the same way many celebrate it today. The ancient celebration spread and became so much an established custom that "in pagan Rome and Greece, in the days of the Teutonic barbarians, in the remote times of ancient Egyptian civilization, in the infancy of the race East and West and North and South, the period of the winter solstice was ever a period of rejoicing and festivity." [Curiosities of Popular Customs, p.242]. When this mid-winter festival came to Rome, it was known as the Saturnalia (Saturn being but another name of Nimrod or Tammuz as "the hidden god"). This feast was the most vile, immoral feast that ever disgraced pagan Rome. It was a season of license, drunkenness, and debauchery, when all restraints of law were laid aside. And it was from this very feast at Rome that the merry-making of this season passed into the Roman Catholic Church and on down to our present civilization: "It is a matter of common knowledge," says one writer, "that much of our association with the Christmas season - the holidays, the giving of presents and the general feeling of geniality - is but the inheritance from the Roman winter festival of the Saturnalia survivals of paganism." [The Legacy of Rome p.242]. GIFT GIVING AT CHRISTMAS Surely the giving of gifts is taken from the nativity story, some will say. But if we read carefully we shall see that the gifts were given to CHRIST - not exchanged among themselves. So, from where did this custom of people exchanging presents between themselves come from? In the book "Christian Feasts and Customs" by Francis Weiser [p.110-111], we read this: The practice of giving presents was also an old Roman custom, called "strenae." On New Year's Day the people of ancient Rome, exchanged gifts of sweet pastry, lamps, precious stones, and coins of gold or silver, as tokens of their good wishes for a happy year. This custom and even its name (etrennes) have been preserved among the French people to the present day. In most countries, however, the present-giving has become a part of the actual Christmas celebration. In Germany the packages of Christmas gifts were called "Christ bundles." They contained candy, sugar plums, cakes, apples, nuts, dolls, and toys; useful things like clothes, caps, mittens, stockings, shoes and slippers; and things "that belong to teaching, obedience and discipline," such as ABC tables, paper, pencils, books; and the "Christ rod." This rod, attached to the bundle, was a pointed reminder for good behavior. Another form of presenting gifts was the old German custom of the "Christmas ship," in which bundles for the children were stored away. This was adopted in England to some extent, but never attained general popularity, though special carols for the occasion were sung in both countries. GIFTS AND GIFT-BRINGERS A popular Christmas custom in Britain is "boxing" on the feast of Saint Stephen, December 26. It originated because in medieval times the priests would empty the alms boxes in all churches on the day after Christmas and distribute the gifts to the poor of the parish. In imitation of this practice, workers, apprentices, and servants kept their own personal "boxes" made of earthenware, in which they stored savings and donations throughout the year. At Christmas came the last and greatest flow of coins, collected from patrons, customers, and friends. Then, on the day after Christmas, the box was broken and the money counted. This custom was eventually called "boxing" (giving and accepting presents). Each present is a box, and the day of presentation is Boxing Day. Tertullian mentions that the practice of exchanging gifts at this season was a part of the pagan Roman Saturnalia. When this midwinter festival was adopted into the Roman church, this custom was also adopted. 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 present gifts when coming into the presence of a King). But these gifts were not birthday gifts. When the wise men arrived, it was some time after the day on which Jesus was born. By this time he was no longer in a stable, but in a HOUSE (Matt 2:9-11). Obviously, the gifts of the wise men were not Christmas gifts. THE ORIGIN OF SANTA CLAUS Certainly, no one claims that the jolly fat man with a long white beard, known as Santa Claus, is taken from the Bible. Where then did he come from? Francis Weiser says: "After the Reformation, the feast and veneration of Saint Nicholas, the patron of little children, were abolished in many countries. Soon people in those countries forgot the saint who had once been so dear to them. Only here and there a trace of him would linger on; as, for example, in the pageant of the 'Boy Bishop' in England, and in the name Pelznickel (Fur Nicholas), which many people in western Germany gave to their Christmas Man (Pelsnichol - now among the Pennsylvania Dutch). When the Dutch came to America and established the colony of New Amsterdam, their children enjoyed the traditional 'visit of Saint Nicholas' on December 5, for the Dutch had kept this ancient Catholic custom even after the Reformation. Later, when England took over the colony and it became New York, the kindly figure of Sinter Klaas (pronounced like Santa Claus) soon aroused among the English children the desire of having such a heavenly visitor come to their homes, too. The English settlers were glad and willing to comply with the anxious wish of their children. However, the figure of a Catholic saint and bishop was not acceptable in their eyes, especially since many of them were Presbyterians, to whom a bishop was repugnant. In addition, they did not celebrate the feast of saints according to the ancient Catholic calendar. The dilemma was solved by transferring the visit of the mysterious man whom the Dutch called Santa Claus from December 5 to Christmas, and by introducing a radical change in the figure itself. It was not merely a 'disguise' but the ancient saint was completely replaced by an entirely different character. Behind the name Santa Claus actually stands the figure of the pagan Germanic god Thor (after whom Thursday is named). Some details about Thor from ancient German mythology will show the origin of the modern Santa-Claus tale: Thor was the god of the peasants and the common people. He was represented as an elderly man, jovial and friendly, of heavy build, with a long white beard, His element was the fire, his color red. The rumble and roar of thunder were said to be caused by the rolling of his chariot, for he alone among the gods never rode on horseback but drove in a chariot drawn by two white goats (called Cracker and Gnasher). He was fighting the giants of ice and snow, and thus became the Yule-god. He was said to live in the 'Northland' where he had his palace among icebergs. By our pagan forefathers he was considered as the cheerful and friendly god, never harming the humans but, rather, helping and protecting them. The fireplace in every home was especially sacred to him, and he was said to come down through the chimney into his element, the fire." Your Bible says that GOD is the GIFT GIVER - not Santa Claus. "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the father of lights ....." (Jam. 1:17). When we teach our children otherwise, we put another god before them and us. The true and only God says we are not do it: "You shall have NO OTHER gods beside (in place of) me" (Ex.20:3). THE YULE LOG The World Book Encyclopedia says: "The custom of burning the yule (pronounced yool) came from the Norse and Anglo-Saxons. They burned a huge oak log once a year to honor Thor, the god of thunder. After the Norse became Christians, they made the yule log an important part of their word yule to mean Christmas. In Lithuania, the word for Christmas actually means 'log evening'. The yule log became equally important in England. The English considered it good luck to keep an unburned part of the log to light the next year's yule log." THE MISTLETOE Francis Weiser, in his book "Christian Feasts and Customs" has this to say regarding the mistletoe: "THE MISTLETOE. The mistletoe was a sacred plant in the religion of the Druids in Britain. It was believed to have all sorts of miraculous qualities, such as the power of healing diseases, making poisons harmless, giving fertility to humans and animals, protecting from witchcraft, banning evil spirits, bringing good luck and great blessings. In fact, it was considered so sacred that even enemies who happened to meet beneath the mistletoe in the forest would lay down their arms, exchange a friendly greeting, and keep a truce until the following day. >From this old custom grew the practice of suspending mistletoe over a doorway or in a room as a token of good will and peace to all comers. A kiss under the mistletoe was interpreted as a sincere pledge of love and a promise of marriage, and, at the same time, it was an omen of happiness, good fortune, fertility, and long life to the lovers who sealed and made known their engagement by a kiss beneath the sacred plant. After Britain was converted from paganism to Christianity, the bishops did not allow the mistletoe to be used in churches because it had been the main symbol of a pagan religion. Even to this day mistletoe is rarely used as a decoration for altars. There was, however, one exception; e.g. At the Cathedral of York at one period before the Reformation, a large bundle of mistletoe was brought into the sanctuary each year at Christmas and solemnly placed on the altar by a priest. In this rite the plant that the Druids had called 'All-heal' was used as a symbol of Christ, the Divine Healer of nations. The people of England then adopted the mistletoe as a decoration for their homes at Christmas. Its old, pagan religious meaning was soon forgotten, but some of the other meanings and customs have survived: the kiss under the mistletoe; the token of good will and friendship; the omen of happiness and good luck; and the new religious significance." THE HOLLY When the earth turns brown and cold, the holly, with its shiny green leaves and bright red berries, seems to lend itself naturally to Christmas decoration. Its appearance in the homes of old England opened the season of feasting and good cheer. Today, holly is not only hung at doors and windows, on tables and walls, but its green leaves and red berries have become the universal symbol of Christmas, adorning greeting cards, gift tags and labels, gift boxes and wrapping paper at Christmas time. Medieval superstition in England endowed holly with a special power against witchcraft. Unmarried women were told to fasten a sprig of holly to their beds at Christmas to guard them throughout the year from being turned into witches by the Evil One. In Germany, branches of holly that had been used as Christmas decoration in church were brought home and superstitiously kept as charms against lightning. Another superstition claimed that holly brought good luck to men, and that ivy brought it to women. The holly, therefore, is always referred to as "he," while the ivy is the distaff plant. THE IVY In pagan Rome, the ivy was the badge of the wine god Bacchus, and was displayed as a symbol of unrestrained drinking and feasting. For this reason it was later banished from Christian homes. The old tradition in England ruled that ivy should be banned from the inside of homes and should be allowed to grow only on the outside. Accordingly, the use of ivy as a Christmas decoration was opposed by most people in medieval England. On the continent of Europe it was hardly ever used for that purpose. But a symbolism of human weakness clinging to divine strength was frequently ascribed to the ivy; and this prompted some poets in old England to defend ivy as a decoration at Christmas time. CHRISTMAS CARDS People did not exchange Christmas cards until fairly recent times. The first specially-designed Christmas card is believed to have been printed by a London company and placed on sale in 1843. Charles Goodall & Sons of London began printing and selling Christmas cards on a wide scale in 1862. Printed cards soon became as popular as the handwritten personal notes that people had exchanged. Louis Prang, a Boston lithographer, began printing multicolored Christmas cards in 1865, and marketed them in Europe. In 1875, he sold them in the United States. THE CHRISTMAS TREE And, finally, in connection with the customs of the "Christmas" season, we will mention THE CHRISTMAS TREE. An old Babylonish fable went like this: Semiramis, the mother of Tammuz, claimed that overnight an evergreen tree sprang up from a dead tree stump. The dead stump supposedly symbolized her dead husband Nimrod. The new evergreen tree was the symbol that Nimrod had come to life again in the person of Tammuz. This idea spread and developed so that the various nations all have had their legends about "sacred trees." Among the Druids, the oak was sacred; among the Egyptians, it was the palm; and in Rome, it was the fir, which was decorated with red berries during the Saturnalia [Curiosities of Popular Customs, p. 242]. The Scandinavian god Woden or Odin was believed to bestow special gifts at Yuletide to those who honoured him by approaching his sacred FIR TREE [Festivals, Holy Days, and Saints' Days, p. 222]. And even as other rites of the Yuletide season were absorbed into "Christianity" so also is the widespread use of the tree at this season a carryover of an ancient practice. "The Christmas tree .... recapitulates the idea of tree worship gilded nuts and balls symbolizing the sun .... all of the festivities of the (pagan) winter solstice have been absorbed into Christmas day .... the use of holly and mistletoe to the Druidic ceremonies; the Christmas tree to the honours paid to Odin's sacred fir ...." [Ibid, p. 23]. In at least ten Biblical references, the "green" tree is associated with idolatry and false worship [Deut. 12:2; 1 Kings 14; 2 Kings 16:4, 17:10; 2 Chron. 3:6, 13; 17:2; Ez. 6:13]. Now, of course, all trees are green at one time or another. Apparently then, the references to the "green" tree refer to a tree that is especially noted for being green, the evergreen or a tree of that family. Taking all of this into consideration, it is interesting to notice the reading of Jeremiah 10:1-5 and compare it with today's custom of decorating a tree at the Christmas season: "The customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman with the axe. They fasten it with nails and hammers. They deck it with silver and with gold." Jeremiah may not have actually been referring to our modern practice of cutting and decorating the popular "Christmas tree" as such, but it was something of the same nature. It was what the heathen did to a tree within a part of their festival worship towards their false gods. Now, of course the people in the days of Jeremiah, as the context goes on to show, were actually worshipping and idolizing the tree. We do not mean to infer that people who today place Christmas trees in their homes and churches are WORSHIPPING the tree. What we are saying is that today's use of the tree is plainly a carryover from paganism - in a much modified form, of course. But whatever the difference may be between the ancient use of the tree as compared with present-day customs, no one can deny that these things of which we have been speaking are customs of men. And God says: "The customs of the people are vain" - worthless, empty... They add no power to true worship. The Eternal plainly teaches us in this passage from Jeremiah that we are NOT to learn the ways of the heathen in our worship practices towards Him. The Lord is just re-iterating what He gave to Israel a long time before through Moses. It is found in the last verses of Deuteronomy 12. CHRISTMAS ONCE OUTLAWED With the Reformation in the sixteenth century, there naturally came a sharp change in the Christmas celebration for many countries in Europe. The Sacrifice of the Mass - the very soul of the feast - was suppressed. The Holy Eucharist, the liturgy of the Diving Office, the sacramentals and ceremonies all disappeared. So did the colorful and inspiring processions, the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the saints. In England the Puritans condemned even the reduced religious celebration that was held in the Anglican Church after the separation from Rome. They were determined to abolish Christmas altogether, both as a religious and as a popular feast. Pamphlets were published denouncing Christmas as pagan, and its observance was declared to be sinful. In this anti-Christmas campaign these English sects were much encouraged by the example of similar groups in Scotland, where the celebration of the feast was forbidden as early as 1583, and punishment inflicted on all persons observing it. When the Puritans finally came to political power in England, they immediately proceeded to outlaw Christmas. The year 1642 saw the first ordinances issued for-bidding church services and civic festivities on Christmas Day. In 1644, the monthly day of fast and penance was appointed for December 25. The people, however, paid scant attention to these orders, and continued their celebrations. There was thus inaugurated a great campaign of two years duration (1645-1647). Speeches, pamphlets and other publications, sermons and discussions were directed against the celebration of Christmas, calling it "antichrist- Mass, idolatry, abomination," and similar names. Following this barrage of propaganda, Parliament on June 3, 1647 ordained that the Feast of Christmas (and other holidays) should no longer be observed under pain of punishment. On December 24, 1652 an act of Parliament again reminded the public that "no observance shall be had on the five-and-twentieth of December, commonly called Christmas day; nor any solemnity used or exercised in churches in respect thereof." Each year, by order of Parliament, town criers went through the streets a few days before Christmas, reminding their fellow citizens that "Christmas day and all other superstitious festivals" should not be observed, that market should be kept and stores remain open on December 25. During the year 1647 popular riots broke out in various places against the law suppressing Christmas, especially in London, Oxford, Ipswich, Canterbury, and the whole county of Kent. In Oxford there was a "world of skull-breaking;" in Ipswich the festival was celebrated "with some loss of life;" in Canterbury "the mob mauled the mayor, broke all his windows as well as his bones, and put fire to his doorsteps." An ominous note was sounded against the republican Commonwealth at a meeting of ten thousand men from Kent and Canterbury, who passed a solemn resolution saying that "if they could not have their Christmas day, they would have the King back on his throne again." The government, however, stood firm and proceeded to break up Christmas celebrations by force of arms. People were arrested in many instances but were not punished beyond a few hours in jail. Anglican ministers who decorated their churches and held service on Christmas Day were removed from their posts and replaced by men of softer fibre. Slowly and relentlessly, the external observance of Christmas was extinguished. December 25 became a common workday, and business went on as usual. But in spite of these repressive measures many people still celebrated the day with festive meals and merriment in the privacy of their homes. DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE? To use PAGAN practices to worship makes no difference - IF THERE IS NO GOD. But IF THERE IS a God it does make a difference. For God has the right to... tell us HOW to worship Him. It is not for man to decide HOW he will worship God - only whether we will worship Him the WAY God Himself sets. Catholics believe that even though a rite or custom was originally paganistic, if it is applied to Christ, then it is acceptable to God, even though it has no Scriptural basis. But this is mere human reasoning - a reasoning that is completely contrary to the written word of God. Let us notice this carefully. Let us notice how this was the case in the days when the Israelites set up the golden calf (Ex.32). None who read this account would deny that such worship as they engaged in was false, heathenistic, and an abomination in the sight of God. They wanted a god they could see - a sort of supplement to their worship of the invisible and Eternal God. And so they set up the golden calf - a symbol of the son of the sun-god. They sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. They practiced heathenistic rites in which they made themselves naked (verse 25). Whatever these rites may have been, they were no doubt rites that they had learned in the pagan land of Egypt; which, in turn, had received its paganism from Babylon. We have record that in Babylon there were certain heathenistic rites that priests carried out naked. Nevertheless, it is evident that the worship of the golden calf into which the Israelites fell was paganistic to the core. YET - and this is the main thing we wish to point out - they claimed that they were having a "feast to the LORD" - the true God. Here then wax a MIXTURE - an attempt to merge heathenistic rites into their worship and call it a feast to the LORD. Did God approve of this worship? We all know the answer. About three thousand fell by the sword as a result of such apostasy. Now, if God did not accept such worship then, even though they said it was a feast to the LORD, then why should we suppose that He accepts worship today that is likewise a MIXTURE - a mixture between paganism and Christianity? During the forty years of wandering in the wilderness (Amos 5), the children of Israel carried the Tabernacle of God. They were strong believers in the true God, as we all know. However, some of them were not content with this; so they added something. They made unto themselves a Babylonian tabernacle that they carried with them also. As God said: "But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun, your images" (Amos 5:26). This apostasy is also mentioned in the New Testament where these idol gods they carried are called Remphan and Chiun, which are but different names of BAAL (Nimrod) and ASTARTE (the Mother- Goddess). Because of this mixture, God rejected their songs of worship, sacrifices, and offerings. Though these were made to Him - to the true God - yet such worship was not accepted because it was a MIXTURE. To cite another Biblical example of how paganism and the worship of the LORD were mixed together, let us notice the 17th chapter of Second Kings (II Kings 17). In this chapter, we read that the children of Israel fell into false worship. They instituted secret rites; built high places; worshipped the sun, moon and stars; used divination and enchantments; caused their children to pass through the fire; (verses 9-17). As a result, they were driven from their own land. Then the king of Assyria brought men from various nations, including Babylon, to inhabit the land from which the children of Israel had been driven. These nations also practiced heathenistic rituals and God sent lions among them. Seeing that the LORD was against their paganism, they sent for a man of God that had been carried away in the captivity. They wanted him to teach them how to worship and fear the LORD. "Howbeit every nation made gods of their own." And these gods are listed in verses 29-31. They attempted to worship these gods and the LORD also - a MIXTURE. "SO" - in this way - "they feared the LORD, and made unto themselves of the lowest of them priests ..... they feared the LORD, and served their own gods" (verse 32). Such worship was rejected by God. He hates a mixture. Even though these nations claimed to worship the LORD, they served idols also. Today, likewise, Romanism claims to worship the LORD; but it is obviously a system that is a mixture of idol worship. In the days of Zephaniah, another attempt to merge heathen worship with the worship of the true God occurred. Concerning this, our Lord said: "I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place ..... and them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by the LORD, and that swear by Malcham" (Zeph. 1:4,5). Why was God going to destroy them? Were they not worshipping the LORD? Yes, but this worship of the LORD was mixed with Baal worship. God requires a pure worship and rejects a mixture worship. In the 17th and 18th chapters of Judges, we read that a certain man had a "house of gods" - a special chapel in which statues of pagan deities were placed. It had a priest called "father." And the description plainly shows that such worship was idolatrous and false. Yet - and this we mention to show another example of MIXTURE - these people claimed to be seeking the favour of the LORD (17:3, 13). And the young father-priest claimed to speak the word of the LORD (18:6). So here again was a case of an attempt to MIX heathenism with the worship of the true God. Another example of a MIXTURE of paganism into the worship of the LORD is found in Ezekiel 8. Right in the very entrance of God's temple, the people had erected an idol. Inside the temple of God, even the ministers were offering incense to false gods. In this case, these abominations were pictures upon the walls - pictures of creeping things, beasts, idols, etc. This was plainly Babylonish; for such pictures are also found on the Ishtar Gate in Babylon. Also connected with the House of GOD were "women weeping for Tammuz" - the false Babylonian messiah - and men with their "backs toward the temple of the LORD, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east" - worshipping the symbol of the Babylonian sun-god. These people that had mixed such rites into their worship were people who had known the true God, the house of Judah (verse 17). Though their worship was carried on in the House of God, though they prayed to God - the true God - yet God refused their worship (verse 18). God does not bless a mixture. In Ezekiel 23 we read of a time of apostasy when the people who had known God caused, "their sons ..... to pass for them through the fire" and practiced other pagan rites. Concerning this, our Lord said: "Moreover, this they have done unto me: they have defiled my sanctuary ..... For when they had slain their children to their idols, then they came the SAME DAY into my sanctuary to profane it." (verses 38, 39). Jeremiah also wrote of this apostasy. His message was to the people who claimed to be the people of God. These people when they came to the temple of the LORD, came, "to worship the LORD" (Jer. 7:2). But, notice that along with their worship of the LORD, other rites had been mixed in that were of paganistic origin. "Behold," God said, "Ye trust in lying words that cannot profit. Ye ..... burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods ..... and come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name" (verses 8-10). And this same people who came to the house of God, this people who claimed to worship the LORD, not only shipped Baal, but the worship of the pagan Mother; the "Queen of Heaven "was mixed into their religion also: (verse 18). By repeated examples then, we can see from the scriptures that God WILL NOT ACCEPT A WORSHIP THAT IS A MIXTURE. As Samuel preached to the children of Israel when they attempted to worship God and still at the same time hold on to paganism: "If ye do return unto the LORD with all your hearts, then put away the strange gods and Ashtaroth (the pagan Mother worship) from among you, and prepare your hearts unto the LORD, and serve him ONLY: and He will deliver you ....." (I Sam. 7:3). And this is still the unchanging message of our God today. Worship and serve the Lord ONLY, with no mixture of paganism, with no mixture of rites and doctrines whose roots are in heathenism. ....................................... Written 1980 by Keith Hunt |
No comments:
Post a Comment