https://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/14/stunning-findings-on-report-catholic-church-abuse-pa-priests-molested-more-than-1000-children.html House of GOD? Only the beginning. Those who you are taught to TRUST THE MOST…. Expect MANY MANY MANY similar reports to surface from around the world. IT GOES A LOT DEEPER.Connected. The choice to know will be yours. Q
With Easter coming up soon, and therefore the most attended Roman Mass will take place, has anyone wondered where Easter actually comes from? It is distinct from the feasts of the Passover, the Unleavened Bread, and the First Fruits, which have already found their fulfillment, and there are no bunnies or anything of the sort in the Bible. And what is up with the "Holy Saturday" before the Easter Sunday Mass? If these things do not come from the Bible, then where do they actually come from?
This is going to be a two-parter (with the second part written in the comments), but to begin forming an answer, let us go to the official exoteric source of Roman teaching, the Catechism of the (Roman) Catholic Church (CCC):
(CCC) 81-82: Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit. And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching. As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, 'does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.'
So according to Rome, if their doctrine is not found in the Bible and ordained by God, then it must be of the tradition, which is put at an equal and even higher level than that of the Word, that is ordained by the church.
But God says:
But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Matthew 15:9
While the Saducees and the Pharisees had implemented a system of rites and traditions contrary to the teachings of the Bible, the system of Roman Catholicism have too implemented no fewer traditions and ceremonies in the place of the Word.
So we ask again, where do these traditions actually come from?
A Brief Exploration of the Easter Tradition
In 325 AD, Constantine convened the first ecumenical council of Rome. Named as the Council of Nicaea, here is where the date and observance of Easter was determined. 200 years prior, Pope Telesphorus, named after the Telesphorus of Greek mythology who was known as the "bringer of completion", established the celebration of Easter on Sunday. As an aside, Telesphorus (in mythology) was the son of Asclepius, the serpent god of healing that is still worshiped in the medical world of today. The mythology of Asclepius was created as a counterfeit to the representation of Jesus as the healing Serpent of brass (Numbers 21:9). Asclepius was worshiped in Pergamos, "where Satan dwelleth" (Revelation 2:12-13), and was revered as the son of Apollo. Interestingly enough, when Constantine had baptized paganism into Christianity, the statues and icons of Apollo were changed into the images of Jesus. Esoterically, business continued as usual.
Now the Easter festival that Telesphorus introduced was the continuation of the Festival of Ishtar from Babylonian times. Along with introducing symbols such as the Roman fasces, the earliest Romans derived their religious jurisprudence from the ancient Etruscans. The Etruscans, as earnest students of the Chaldeans (the diviners, magicians, astrologers, and "wise men" of ancient Babylon), were practitioners of the ancient Babylonian faith system.
The Festival of Ishtar was introduced as a yearly staple in the traditions of Rome before becoming adapted into the weekly Sunday which is today commonly called "The Lord's Day". When the Council of Nicaea formalized the tradition of Easter, they made the following rule:
In order to prevent the [Ishtar] festival from coinciding either with the Jewish Passover or with the celebrations of the Quartodecimans, special provision was made, should the full moon actually occur on a Sunday, to defer the celebration of Easter until the next Sunday.
Interestingly enough, this happened in 2001 when Pope John Paul II delayed the Feast of Easter from the Sunday of April 8 to the Sunday of April 15. This rule, along with their esoteric belief system, is very much alive today.
Just a short aside on the Roman fasces: it symbolizes the ordering of priestly functions into a single infallible sovereign, even as an autocrat who could require the life and limb of his subjects. If the fasces is entwined with laurel, like the pair on the wall of the United States House of Representatives, it signifies Caesarean military power. But as this is not a dive into the Roman take-over of the United States, let us continue with Easter and the Mass.
Now “Easter”, more aptly named as the Festival of Ishtar, is the largest celebration of the Roman Catholic Mass, even surpassing that of “Christ-Mass”. According to Richard Leonard, a Jesuit priest and worker of Catholic Action as director of the Australian Catholic Film Office, “Easter Sunday is the cornerstone of Christian theology”. Catholic Action, which was strengthened by the Papal encyclical Miranda Prorsus in 1957 and the Papal decree Inter Mirifica in 1963, called for the complete control
of the press, the cinema, radio, television, and others of a like nature [...] [of] journalists, writers, actors, designers, producers, exhibitors, distributors, operators, sellers, critics - all those, in a word, who are involved in the making and transmission of communications in any way whatever.
The control over all forms of communication was declared as the birthright of Rome "in order to steer economic, political, and artistic values in a way that will not conflict with the common good". The doctrines of the "common good" are the same Hellenistic, Gnostic teachings that formed the education of Telesphorus before making their way into the current social structure of Rome. All of present-day Holly-wood, for example, which is named after the Holly wood that is used to make the staves of witches, is the result of Catholic Acton.
Now before the Babylonian lifting up of the host on “(Ishtar) Sunday”, there is a “Holy Saturday” (HS).
Traditionally, the HS is called a day of silence where worshipers are encouraged to wait silently for the resurrection, “as did Mary”. It is taught that on this day, Jesus was “in the realm of the dead freeing Adam, Eve, and all the imprisoned souls of the saints” before taking them to heaven. None of this is found in the Bible. Rather than having the focus be on Jesus, the focus of HS is turned towards the Roman Mary, and the day becomes about “spending time with her, waiting in silence with the expectation of hope of a victorious return”. For this reason, in the traditions of Rome, Mary has been attributed titles such as “Our Lady of Sorrows”. As an interesting aside, while the icons of Apollo were hidden under images of Jesus, the sign over the Pantheon indicating "To [the fertility goddess] Cybele and All the Gods" was re-written "To Mary and All the Saints." The "fertility bunnies" of Easter represent the type of worship that was associated with Cybele and performed in Pagan Rome, but like everything else affiliated with Rome, are only the continuation of the ancient Babylonian worship system.
Distinct from the Biblical Mary, the Roman Mary is the missionary adaptation, or in other words the modern representation, of the Sumerian Inanna (also known in the Babylonian Akkadian as Ishtar). The ancient Sumerian myth titled “Angalta”, meaning “From the Great Sky” and also written in the Akkadian as the “Descent of Ishtar into the Underworld”, is the true representation of the “Holy Saturday”.
In the legend involving profound themes of grief and sorrow, Ishtar descends into the “land of the dead” in order to overthrow its ruler. Having failed, but allowed to return to the “land of the living”, Ishtar is required to deliver another living human in exchange for her freedom. She exchanges Tammuz, and her life is returned. The people then "weep for Tammuz".
Now Tammuz, also involved in fertility worship, originated from the Sumerian “Dumuzid sipad”, or “Dumuzid the Shepherd”. He, as a wicked and evil shepherd whose name means "faithful son", stands as a stark contrast and counterfeit of the one Good Shepherd, being Jesus Christ.
I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. John 10:11
So the “Holy Saturday”, as part of what Rome calls "the cornerstone of Christian theology”, is an esoteric representation and declaration of trading the life of God Himself, Jesus Christ, for the life of Tammuz and his theology as embodied in the system of Roman Catholicism. In the Angalta, as preserved in the Mithraic rites, this is represented as the "Handshake of Alliance" where the initiate shakes hands with his god in a gesture of unity and exchange of love. This exchange of Tammuz for Ishtar is celebrated before the Festival of Ishtar, but the exchange of Jesus for Tammuz is performed as part of the Mass when the host is lifted up.
In the ancient Assyrian religion, with a direct example found in the Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon, this “trade” was called the “Ritual of the Substitute King”. In it, the “shar puni”, the “good man”, would act as the “puhi ameli”, the “substitute and sacrifice”, who received the curse placed on the king and perish in his stead, thus allowing the king to continue living as he did before.
And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Genesis 3:14-15 (KJV)
But both the exchange of Dumuzi and the sacrifice of the Shar Puni are rites and traditions claiming to have lifted this curse on the serpent, being Satan, and instead place it upon Jesus Christ. This is part of the reason why Papal Rome seems to only represent Jesus Christ as some emaciated form on the cross, just as mythology depicts of what happened to Ishtar in the underworld, or as some hapless babe on the knees of the Roman Mary, which is how the Egyptian Horus is commonly represented in relationship to his mother Isis. As the topic of this study is not to introduce the Egyptian aspects of Rome, let us continue with the first official English translation endorsed by Papal Rome and brought to the world through the efforts of the Jesuit Order:
I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. Genesis 3:15 (Douay–Rheims Bible - DRA)
While the KJV references Jesus as the Seed of Salvation, the DRA references “she” and “her”, being the Roman Mary, as the victor in the battle being waged over the minds of man.
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Ephesians 2:15 (KJV)
Making void the law of commandments contained in decrees; that he might make the two in himself into one new man, making peace; Ephesians 2:15 (DRA)
In order to justify the system of Roman Catholicism, the DRA replaces that which was abolished as “ordinances”, in this context being rites and tradition, for “decrees”, in this context being the moral law as contained in the Ten Commandments.
And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: Ephesians 2:16 (KJV)
And might reconcile both to God in one body by the cross, killing the enmities in himself. Ephesians 2:16 (DRA)
And to affirm the ritual of the Mass as being that of the Substitute King, the enmities go from “[being] slain”, a statement of the character of God being vindicated over that of the accusations of Satan, to “killing the enmities in himself”, which means that the cause for enmity becomes the Ten Commandments and the character of God. This makes Jesus Christ and His mindset, in the DRA, the “puhi ameli” for Satan and his mindset.
Let us even affirm this esoteric teaching of the Mass representing the substitution of the law of God, and therefore the substitution of Jesus as its Author, in official Roman doctrine:
Catechism of the (Roman) Catholic Church 2174-2177, 2188, 2189, 2190, 2192: “We all gather on the day of the sun [...] Sunday is expressly distinguished from the sabbath [...] The celebration of Sunday observes the moral commandment inscribed by nature in the human heart [...] The Sunday celebration of the Lord's Day andhis Eucharist is at the heart of the Church's life. [...] In respecting religious liberty and the common good of all, Christians should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church's holy days as legal holidays. [...] ‘Observe the sabbath day, to keep it holy’ (Deut 5:12). ‘The seventh day is a sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord’ (Ex 31:15). The sabbath, which represented the completion of the first creation, has been replaced by Sunday [...] Sunday [...] is to be observed as the foremost holy day of obligation in the universal Church (CIC, can. 1246 § 1). On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass (CIC, can. 1247).”
And in the apostolic letter "Dies Domini" written by Pope JPII (1998):
...the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist are so closely joined together that they form a single act of worship. The Eucharist is the full realization of the worship. [...] [the Moral Law written directly in stone by the finger of God] need[s] to be reinterpreted in the light of the theology and spirituality of Sunday: The Code of Canon Law of 1917 for the first time gathered this tradition into a universal law. The present Code reiterates this, saying that ‘on Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to attend Mass’. This legislation has normally been understood as entailing a grave obligation: this is the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, [...]Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.
This is nothing but the blending in of paganism and Christianity, just as was performed in ancient Babylonian times, and just as was accomplished by Constantine. The highest realization of this syncretism is then performed at the Easter Mass.
The fertility God Ester, an egg laying rabbit. Its Resurrection Day like the Word calls it.
How important and beautiful it is to allow the Word to be the first and last filter of all proposed truth!
Thank you for all this info!!
You are so very welcome! Thank God for guiding us so gently in His Word.
If you have any other questions on the Bible, or are wondering about anything prophetic, archaeological, or historical, please feel free to ask!
I do have another question. Was it at this council in 325 AD that the canon was organized? They decided which letters/epistles/prophecies, etc, would be in the canon? The Ethiopian Bible contains those excluded writings. I'm curious about those excluded writings.
The first complete canon was Athanasius's Paschal Letter of 367. Before then people pretty well knew which books met the criteria of Scripture, which were secondary, and which were just human, but he was the first to give the modern list. This didn't exclude the secondary books, because the secondary books never rose in people's estimation to the primary level of being fully recognized as canonical (inerrant, prophetic, consistent, etc.). The argument that John left a tradition of this canon ca. 100-110 is perfectly believable, but it wasn't taken as final then, nor even when Athanasius first listed it exactly as later approved.
So the primitive Christians had lots of holy writings but they didn't call them Scripture until they'd been approved for a few generations. The other holy writings were respected, and should continue to be today, but never reached this approval. In some churches, some of them reached a secondary canon (of which there are a couple variations), and in other churches they didn't. I think Luther gave very good advice about the Apocrypha, which also applies to the Ethiopian deuterocanon: They are worthy of being read by mature Christians for their teachings and history, but they are not to be regarded as more inspired than any other human works.
To what u/ConfirmAndAffirm says, no, Justin and Tatian should not be tarred with contributing to vicious heresy. Yes, Clement of Alexandria and Origen did much to remove literal reading of the text, and they were very questionable but not ruled as heretics; they couldn't change the base text itself.
The three text types Wilkinson simplifies the case into are now called respectively Byzantine, Caesarean, and Alexandrian. Most scholars are affirming the Byzantine (received text) as the closest to the original but respect the testimony provided by every text type; there was a big 19th-century push away from the Byzantine but computerized analysis is both vindicating the received text and bringing the Nestle-Aland definitive model closer to it again. So we could argue, though it's a bit exaggerated, that Constantine may have made a major move that led to a less accurate text having much sway for centuries, but the differences are too minor to quibble about in almost every case. People argue that the cumulative effect is the problem, and it is a problem, but it's not solved by weakening people's faith in those pockets of Christianity that didn't have the blessings of the "best" texts.
OP proposes that a small number of texts read better in the KJV than in the NIV for this reason. Well, that's been noted, and that's why mature Christians recommend keeping a variety of Bibles so as to recognize all the nuances. But arguments that the KJV is better are often used by the KJV-Only crowd to promote idolatry of an English version when it's only a great tool to spread knowledge of the original inspired documents and not an inspired document in the same way itself.
Thank you for this information. I did order an Ethiopian Bible, just out of curiosity. I do plan on doing a side by side comparison of the texts.
"Our Authorized Bible Vindicated" by B. G. Wilkinson and "Thou Hast Magnified Thy Word Above All Thy Name" by Klein Martin both go into great detail on the history of the Bible translations, but here is a summary of what you may be looking for:
Fundamentally, there are only two different "Bibles": the true one ordained by God, and the counterfeit one ordained by tradition.
By the time of Christ, the Old Testament was in a settled condition. Written from 1500-400 BC, the Old Testament, known as the Masoretic Texts, had been carried down intact to the day of printing (about 1450 A.D.) by the unrivalled methods of the Jews in transmitting perfect Hebrew manuscripts.
The last of the apostles to pass away, around the year 100 AD, was John. In his closing days, he cooperated in the collecting and forming of those writings we call the New Testament. This is when the complete Canon had been compiled, and during his time, there was overwhelming agreement as to what constituted Scripture and what did not. The question of "what is the right Bible translation" was not introduced until the system of Roman Catholicism began to merge Gnosticism with Christianity, just as we read with Easter and the Mass.
Beginning shortly after the death of the apostle John, four names stand out in prominence whose teachings contributed both to the victorious heresy and to the final issuing of manuscripts of a corrupt New Testament. These names are,
The word here for "science" is "gnosis". “Gnosis” means knowledge. Paul condemned, not knowledge in general, but false knowledge. False teachers were placing their own interpretations on Christian truth by reading into it human ideas. This tendency grew and increased until a great system bearing the name of Christianity, known as Gnosticism, and now known as the system of Roman Catholicism, was established.
It got to the point that Origen even stated that “the Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written.” He turned the whole law and Gospel into an allegory. Origen, along with all of his instructors, were all students of Gnosticism just as Telesphorus was.
The type of Bible selected by Constantine has held the dominating influence at all times in the history of the (Roman) Catholic Church. This Bible was different from the Bible of the Waldenses, and, as a result of this difference, the Waldenses, and any others who were the protectors and keepers of the true Bible translation, were the object of hatred and cruel persecution.
To summarize on the founding of the true Bible Canon and the seemingly multiple canons, there were the two main streams of texts: the Antioch-Byzantine Manuscripts with the Masoretic and Received Texts (the true copies), and the Alexandrian texts with Gnostic and Egyptian influences (the counterfeit copies). We will very soon get to the Ethiopian Bible, but first with the following in mind,
let us only compare a few of the translations between the western stream, represented by the NIV, and the eastern stream, represented by the KJV. Then we will find that the Ethiopian "bible" is representative of the western stream of texts.
In the KJV, the word of God is preserved for ever.
In the NIV, safety and protection from the wicked is for ever.
The eastern stream tells us that a true Bible will be preserved, but the western stream, by removing this, sets up the possibility of spurious translations and false doctrines.
In the eastern stream, every single word written in the Bible contains the Word of life.
But in the western stream, there is no answer as to how man shall live. Essentially, it is up to the interpretations of the heart,
just as in the teachings of Gnosticism.
In summary, the western stream rejects Jesus Christ as the God of all things, as the Creator of all things, and as the Redeemer of all things. You can compare Scripture such as Ephesians 3:9,14, Colossians 1:2, and hundreds and hundreds of other verses to show the same. Looking at 1 Timothy 3:16 and 1 John 4:3, the western stream even goes so far as to subtly deny that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh:
Now on the Ethiopian Bible and the "extra" books.
So let us try the spirit of the Ethiopian Bible just as we have been doing,
with the Word being the first and last filter of all proposed wisdom.
Tobias 6:1-8 (Ethiopian bible) speaks of bewitching arts, which is then rebuked as follows:
2 Maccabees 12:43-46 (Ethiopian bible) speaks of praying for the dead, which is then rebuked as follows:
The meaning of vengeance as written in Judith 9:2 (Ethiopian bible) is rebuked as follows:
The writings in the "Book of Heavenly Luminaries" (Ethiopian bible) involve sun, moon, and star worship, which is rebuked as follows:
For any form of sun, moon, and star worship is a form of Satanism practiced under the name of Baal:
The very beginning of book of Enoch (Ethiopian bible) describes "watchers" as procreating angels, which is rebuked as follows:
Each one of these rebukes alone dismisses the entirety of the Ethiopian Bible, for they are not in harmony with the Bible, they are not according to the law and the testimony, as written in Isaiah 8:20. Nevermind considering where all of the Ethiopian Bible apocryphals were found, or when they were all composed, or how they were "added" after the completion of the Canon, if one part of the book is not in harmony in the Bible, then there is no light in it.
Excellent! I know that scripture cross references itself quite a bit. Thus, comparing scripture with scripture is very important. The very mind of God repeated over and over for emphasis, from Genesis to Revelation. I've only been studying for 10 years and each time I study and cross reference, I learn something new. Thank you for all the time you spent answering my questions. I appreciate it immensly.
I received a copy of the Ethiopian Bible a few days ago. I found it to be flat in text. That is, in what little I did read. It had no appeal spiritually. So, I returned it. Another interesting piece of information I stumbled across is that if you look at the copyright dates of all those Ethiopian Bibles on Amazon, you will see that the majority of them are published in 2025. That is some food for thought. Why did those authors wait until 2025?
Thank you for this post. Very informative. I've always taken issue with "Easter" (named after Ishtar). So many Christian "holidays" have been formed around pagan holidays (so I was taught in a Bible college), which occurred in order to "bring in" pagans to Christianity. Christmas and the winter solstice is another example.
A year or so ago I recall that "Easter" occurred before PASSOVER. That completely contradicts the Gospels. I call it "Resurrection Sunday" and only recognize the Sunday after the "high passover" (which I have been taught was the high holy day of Passover, when Yeshua broke the bread and shared the wine and said, "Do this in remembrance of ME." -- Exchanging the traditional Passover lamb for the NEW Passover Lamb of God - Christ.). So our household celebrates Passover - as did Christ - He said he came to fulfill the law, not to change it. The Passover lamb was illustrative of the saving of the Hebrews from the Angel of Death if the lamb's blood was painted over the household doorway(s). When Yeshua proclaimed himself the new Passover Lamb, his blood also saved and saves us from eternal death.
JMO.
Yes, since we're far down the road since the Jewish and Christian calendars diverged, sometimes Passover is keyed to a different moon than Easter. Christians who celebrate Passover will do it shortly before Resurrection Day, beginning the first week after the first full moon of spring. Christians who celebrate Easter will celebrate Good Friday before that. And it's possible to keep both traditions at their traditional times, which I call assembling together all the more as you see the Day approaching!
Yes, I believe the high Passover is the 14th of the moon and the day Yeshua broke the (matzah) bread, just as all Jews did. The best reading of Leviticus 23 IMHO is that Resurrection Day is the first of the week ranging from the 16th to the 22nd of the moon.
I grew up in a covenantal church and then discovered all these Hebrew roots 25-30 years ago. Only recently I've been able to finally explain why the church (Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant) has these other traditions and to put them in a proper place as well. They can be kept one with another. But in many eras people have neglected Rom. 14:5 and have judged each other for keeping of days. In the second century this came up twice and was correctly resolved, first by Anicetus and Polycarp, then by Victor and Irenaeus. Those feasting on the 14th of the moon and those feasting on the 1st of the week permitted each other and didn't argue. From the third century on, people ignored this testimony and started arguing, and they still do. Much could be said about it but let that suffice for now. Happy Passover!
Thank you for taking the time to read and to comment.
You are absolutely right; as persecution failed to snuff out the Light of Jesus, the Pagan system of Rome changed their method of destruction to that of infiltration as they slowly transitioned themselves into Papal Rome. At first, they used the persecution of the small rebellious Jewish population to corral, as a shepherd does his sheep, the converted Hebrews, first called a people of "the Way" (Acts 9:2) before being called Christians by the pagans in Antioch (Acts 11:26), into a system which appeared Christian but was, and still is, verily of Satan.
If you are interested, there are a couple of small, related studies written in this comment. You might enjoy reading them as well!
Notice how the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, being the theology of the Nicolaitanes, began to creep in during the period of the very first church.
Stephen, as part of that first church, was full of the faith of Jesus and the power of the Holy Ghost. He was named first and his actions were the fruit of his love, faith, and obedience towards Jesus. In contrast to Stephen, Nicolas was named last. Being named last typically denotes an inferiority of character in some way, such as in Genesis 5:32 when Ham was listed after Shem despite Shem being younger than Ham. The name "Nicolas", from "nikolaos" meaning "victor of the people", was put in contrast to Stephen, whose name means "crowned (of God)". Nicolas represents the desires of the people, while Stephen represents the will of God.
As a proselyte and new convert from Antioch, the primary capital of the Seleucid Empire of Greece, Nicolas brought along with him the same teachings of Gnosticism and syncretism that Telesphorus was inundated with. Nicolas also brought with him antinomianism, which, in contrast to what you so rightly said, taught that the law was changed, even done away with, for the favouring of creeds and traditions.
By the time we get to the prophetic period of the third church of Pergamos, which takes place between 313-538 AD, we see that not only has the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes found its foothold in Christianity, but so too has it evolved into the doctrine of Balaam. Interestingly enough, the Easter Mass represents the exact things spoken against here, being the eating of things sacrificed unto idols and the committing of fornication (physical and spiritual for both applications).
And you are so right about Christmas! Among the many heathen traditions that it represents, Christmas is also a celebration of the birth-date in Mithra as noted in the follow-up comment (if you were interested in learning a little about that as well).
Lastly, when you mention the "high passover", perhaps what you were taught was the High Sabbath? When the Feast Day happened to occur on the seventh-day Sabbath, the Sabbath was then considered as a High Sabbath. When Jesus had rested in the grave on the Sabbath day, He not only re-affirmed the position of His Sabbath and His law (Matthew 12:8), but He did so on a High Sabbath. And just as you so rightly said, He did so as the Lamb of God.
Bible study is so beautiful!
Have this one more related thing that you may enjoy reading.
The ancient Greeks used white and black stones to vote in trials. Black meant guilty (receive judgment), white meant innocent (receive mercy). The manna was also another re-affirmation of Jesus establishing His law.
Now being given a white stone is on the condition of overcoming through the faith of Jesus that is made evident only through the fruits of His work (James 2:18). With the white stone there is a pronouncement of mercy, even a declaration of complete pardon to the extent that not even one sin is remembered, on behalf of the accused. But that white stone can only be given through faith that the blood of the Lamb has received the black stone on behalf of the accused.
In the time of the Exodus Passover, the household names were written on the lintel, which is the the part above the household doorway that you mentioned. In those times, when a slave was freed, his name would be changed to represent his freedom. In the painting of the blood upon the lintel, a new name was symbolically offered, even a name that could be eternally washed clean with the blood of the Lamb.
Thank you so much - Blessings to you and all your readers!
No, no evidence for Mithra original on Dec 25.
At first I accepted that Dec 25 might be a pagan date, but as I researched I was shocked to discover that Luke 2 is evidence that Simeon connected Jesus's conception with Haggai 2 (to which he refers about 10 ways), where the date of 24 Kislev corresponds to an annunciation, visitation, incarnation, conception, and "nativity" on 25 Dec of 5 BC. This aligns with several other chronological points and agrees with the first Christian mentions of 25 Dec.
No, High Sabbath was the day after Passover, i.e. the 15th when it fell on Sabbath.
I appreciate your studying to be approved, but there is much you're taking from sketchy sources with biases. I've only written a few notes to indicate redirection, much more could be added. I welcome discussion with those who are not closed-minded.
A Brief Exploration of the Tradition of the Mass
The word for “abomination” is “šiqqûṣ”, a masculine noun pertaining to idolatry. While the Second Commandment of the Bible explicitly speaks against idolatry, the Catechism of the Catholic Church completely removes this commandment from the (Roman) Catholic Ten Commandments.
1 Kings 11:7 is a direct example of the meaning of “abomination”. The “šiqqûṣ”, used here just as in Daniel 11:31, explicitly points to Chemosh and Molech worship, also known as Baal and Moloch worship. This specific type of sun worship is the abomination, the idolatry, which is represented by each and every Roman Mass. The gathering "on the day of the sun" is one such part of this sun worship, and it is no small coincidence that the Easter Mass holds a "Sunrise Service" where all of their members face east, towards the rising sun, in worship and in prayer. But for now, let us unpack the nature of the Mass more thoroughly.
Let us briefly identify the counterfeit nature of the Liturgy. The Offertory begins with the preparation of an altar, and ends with the washing of hands. The Courtyard service began with the Altar of Sacrifice, and ended with the Laver of Washing. In the Offertory, a chalice is placed atop the altar in order to hold water and wine. In the Courtyard, the blood of the sacrifice flows under the altar with a mixing of water as it runs its course. In the Offertory the corporal, a white cloth, is placed atop the altar, while in the Courtyard fine white linen surrounds the entirety of the area.
Priesthoods have always been central to systems of worldly worship. The priest, by definition of his title, brings the sacrifice demanded by their rites and rituals. So without the altar, the Mass, let alone the Liturgy of the Eucharist of which it is a part of, can not take place. The altar itself should be of stone and “declared sacred” by a Bishop or an Abbot being “bestowed power” by the central body of the Roman Catholic Church, which is headed by the Bishop of Rome. The covering of the altar should also be “blessed” by a Bishop or “person of authority”. The altar, which is to contain a portion of a corpse canonized by Roman Catholic Tradition, is to have a sepulcher hewn into the stone of the altar. The entire altar should stand upon a platform at least one step high. Atop the altar, in the shape of a dome or a four-sided pyramid, is to be the Tabernacle which houses the Eucharistic Host. In short, the amount of detail given to building and preparing the altar is a counterfeit to the detail with which the Altar of Sacrifice was made.
Atop the altar of the Eucharist is the Tabernacle which houses the Eucharistic Host. This host is made prominent particularly during the second part of the liturgy, the “Eucharistic Prayer”, which is deemed the “central and most solemn part of the Mass”. The priest, in taking upon himself the role of Jesus Christ as the only mediator between heaven and earth, “by the power of the church” leads the congregation in performing eight main works: the Preface, Sanctus, Epiclesis, Consecration, Anamnesis, Oblation, Intercession, and Doxology. During this time, transubstantiation, which in 1215 was declared as official Roman dogma, is invoked by the priest, and the priest then proclaims to have consecrated the bread and wine as the literal Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.
Esoterically, the consecration of the Eucharistic Host represents the spiritual magnification of the system of Roman Catholicism over the heavenly service being conducted by Jesus the High Priest.
Now after the Eucharistic Prayer, the Eucharistic Host and the chalice of water and wine are then “lifted up” for adoration.
In regards to the Eucharistic Host, the origin of the word “host” is the Latin “hostia”, meaning “victim” or “sacrifice”. The word “hostia” is derived from the word “hostus” which denotes “the yield of olives from a single pressing”. Olive oil in particular, which was used to light the seven candlesticks in the Holy Place of which the “Eucharistic Prayer” is a counterfeit of, represents the workings of the Holy Spirit in leading man upwards to Jesus Christ (Exodus 35:14). In presenting their own spiritual hostus, the system of Roman Catholicism is offering the world their own spirit, in the form of an idol to be adored, as an invitation to a system where man lifts up his own soul rather than lives by the faith of Jesus.
Other scholars derive the word “hostia” from the Proto-Indo-European root “*ghes”, meaning “to take, give in exchange”. This word is then connected with “*ghes-r”, meaning “hand”, and the Greek “xenos”, meaning “stranger, foreigner” or “enemy”. The word “xenos” is purposefully ambiguous in that the identity of a stranger could be a potential threat, or a potential blessing. The three words come together to form “*ghs-en-uo-”, another definition of the word “hostia”, which then represents uplifted and adorned spiritual host of Rome. So do they view Jesus as a potential threat, or a potential blessing? In a system which seeks to replace Him, the answer should be clear.
The perpetual performance of the Mass, which is nothing more than the performance of theophagy found in Mithraic worship, represents the works of Satan through the chief priests of the world. Their traditions are an attempt to bury the truth under a mountain of creeds in order to “retain” the “priestly authority” granted to them in an exchange for the murder of the Son of God. This is the esoteric appreciation and representation of any Mass that takes place, especially those that take place on United States soil, never mind the White House.
The word for “in the sanctuary” is “qōḏeš”. This word is used to represent the Holy Place, where the ministry of Christ began in the Heavenly Sanctuary (Hebrews 9:12), and the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary, where the final works of ministration has started (Daniel 8:14) and is being performed until a definite end of time. In the Liturgy of the Eucharist, the second and third parts, coinciding with the works in the Holy and the Most Holy, are primarily focused on the murder of their host. Knowing that there is a daily work being performed by Jesus Christ in heaven, the system of Roman Catholicism thinks to, as a daily tradition, spiritually perpetuate the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. By their actions, the belief is that the murdering of the transubstantiated host is preventing or delaying the work being done in heaven.
You quoted "equal" and then changed it for some reason to "equal and even higher". That's not "according to", of course, so it's a bit of a start on the wrong foot.
I don't have proof Telesphorus first ended a Lenten fast (not then called Easter) on Sunday; nor was Lent churchwide by then; but the period, 2nd century, is accurate. But here's where it spins off the rails:
I see no such story. First, no Christian for 500 years used the name Easter, the season was always a form of Pascha (Pesach, Passover). What Telesphorus celebrated continued Firstfruits (Resurrection Day), which according to Lev. 23:11 was always on Sunday, and which was the day Jesus chose to return. There is no evidence that a "festival of Ishtar" from ancient Babylon was transferred to imperial Babylon, then to the Etruscans, then to the Romans, then to the Christians, with that name; I'd love to hear otherwise. There's also no transference from an annual "Ishtar" to weekly fellowship; rather, as Acts 20:7 ff. makes clear, weekly fellowship continued the Jewish tradition of first-night ("Saturday" night) havdalah candle-lighting, and it was celebrated either at that dusk or at the next dawn. The Christian love-feast was certainly transferred from Jesus's Passover to this weekly fellowship, which has nothing to do with Ishtar. The infiltration of Ishtar elements came much later, as I will show.
You quote Nicea as "In order to prevent the [Ishtar] festival", but there was no Christian word like Ishtar then (only Pascha). The decree that Sunday was not Passover or the 14th precisely agrees with Lev. 23 and is not suspect.
I heard it was Jewish. I tracked down claims that witches used holly and found only almond in Egypt and yew in Ireland; no hard evidence on holly, a tenuous inference in Babylon.
Not per se; he did take captivity captive, meaning he freed many. Interpretation varies. We don't need to object to Holy Saturday on that ground.
This is 100% an iconographic argument, 0% historical. With icons the best that can be said is maybe demons remade something in Christianity that had worked for them before; but it's not something provable and not something we should build a historical argument around.
Mary didn't descend or seek to overthrow; Mary didn't deliver Jesus for her freedom; people don't weep for Jesus; and Jesus came back unlike Tammuz who must remain.
None of that, nor its accompanying ramble, is proven at all. Nor even coherent. Are you trying to say that the bread "becoming" Jesus is instead Tammuz becoming, or becoming Tammuz? No logic found.
Christianity teaches Jesus took our curse, not the serpent's. The other mythoi arise because they copycatted that anticipation from Gen. 3:15, not because they redeem satan.
The DRA does indeed have an incongruous "she" there, but in context that means Eve (through her seed); it wouldn't be a problem to refer it to Mary or to all believers (the church) because his victory is ours, so this quibble is minor. Changing Eph. 2:15 from KJV ordinances to DRA decrees does not mean the Ten Commandments, that's just inferring something to agree with the bias brought to the text, and another quibble with the English without reference to the original. The next quibble, 2:16, is even vaguer, between "having slain" and "killed", and "thereby" ["by the cross"] and "in himself", as if one is pagan and the other Christian. From this minor wording change OP infers "the cause for enmity becomes the Ten Commandments and the character of God. This makes Jesus Christ and His mindset, in the DRA, the 'puhi ameli' for Satan and his mindset." That's called flat-out eisegesis (invention).
Yes, this Catholic "replacement" teaching is misguided. But it doesn't replace God's Law or Christ, because those remain the same. Catholics think they're interpreting God's law just fine, and I might think they're not; but Rom. 14 tells me to let them have their days that they observe in good conscience. I have a nuanced Sabbatical view and after 25 years of objecting to Sunday rest I found a way to regard it as supplemental and a different kind of rest than Sabbath rest, as Moses teaches both, weekly Sabbath rest and special annual first-day rest, and they have different rules.
They hold Mass every day, fren. 100% iconographic, 0% historical.
First, animal sacrifices were always by faith in Messiah, Heb. 11; they never saved in themselves. Second, they continued to be affirmed by Christians in Acts, Colossians, Hebrews, etc., and will recur in the future according to Ezek. 40-48; Paul even paid for animal sacrifices in Acts 21 to prove his ethnicity. Third, Scripture doesn't say animal sacrifice is done; Heb. 7:11 says it never was designed to perfect, unlike Jesus's sacrifice; Matt. 27:51 implies God opened the veil (to grant us access); Heb. 10:14 says Jesus's sacrifice does perfect us. The ancient animal sacrifices remain exactly that, ancient ("palaioo" or paleo). If Mass is a "sacrifice" it's sacrificing Christ in us since the bread becomes our (his) body, which is aptly described as to "fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh" (Col. 1:24).
YES, I'm a cannibal, I eat Jesus's flesh, just as he said; Mithra copycatted this late. No, Nero's Circus (site of Peter's death, later St. Peter's) was not a site for a taurobolium. Yes, I do see evidence of a taurobolium event in a Phrygianum, which was on the peak of Vatican Hill some ways north of Nero's Circus, but no indication of how long it was practiced. No, homage to Mary doesn't magically transfer to Ishtar. No, Mithra wasn't born on Dec 25 until people copycatted that date from its prior use in Christianity. If I build a church on a site where there were formerly pagan sacrifices, that's no proof that I'm a pagan as opposed to a triumphalist Christian.
Competing etymologies for "host" prove nothing.
The rest supplies a "host" of associations that go nowhere. Yes, Catholics aren't perfect (they admit that), and they could clean some things up, but accusing them incorrectly doesn't help this cleanup any. Neglecting what they actually say and attributing uncountable ulterior motives doesn't work. I've been a heresy hunter who rooted out pagan fossils, and I found that some are real and some are just invented by the hunters to drum up business. This batch is mostly the invented side. OP bashes both Catholics and Israelites alike, treating both versions as somehow pagan, ignoring Jesus who affirmed both. No positive answer is given about how rightly to celebrate Jesus dying for our sins as he told us, by eating his flesh and drinking his blood. No positive Christianity is left where we, his bride, his body, are identified with him in his life, death, and resurrection, so that our penalty is paid and his eternal life is shared. All I see is a bunch of misguided Catholic-bashing.
It even fails to explain where Easter came from. We all know that Easter came from Eostre, a spring month noted by Bede in Anglic Northumbria. After that Easter became the prime name (in English and cognate German only) for what everyone else still calls Pascha. Before that it's murky, but Eostre is connected to Eos and thereby to East, Austria, Australia, etc. Therefore its meaning comes from the eastern sunrise. Now the association of Resurrection Day with this name is twofold, by a convergent etymology: one is because Eostre signified rising in Indo-European roots, and another is because appears to be a possibility that the unrelated words for Ishtar in Semitic roots (e.g. Ashtoreth, Astarte) may have overlapped with spring celebration in other places.
But with all these points, TO THE PURE ALL IS PURE. The person who worships Jesus purely and calls it "Easter" isn't sinning. The person who conscientiously doesn't call it that isn't sinning. The sinner is the one sacrificing others to his own conscience demanding they obey.
Just ignore the rabbi, he’s not even semetic. All he is trying to do is upset Christians at this specific time of year. Twisting and distorting facts to fit his agenda, while appearing sincere and scholarly about the Word of God.
I can picture the disgusting grin on his ungodly khazarian face.
Note that all of his arguments were not only Catholic bashing, but as it is the root of all Christian churches, he is attempting to undermine the very foundation of Christianity, attempting to paint it as a false religion.
Are we really supposed to believe he typed all of these walls of texts, quotes and references at random on the morning of Good Friday?
That the most commonly used Bible, The King James Version (KJV) is essentially false. The Catholic Church is essentially false. Hence all Christian churches are false. jews are at the core of everything, “the way” as it calls it.
Lies, subversion and deception. Like they do.
Let’s talk about lies, the reality being that the degenerate, satanic talmud filth these people worship and follow is a recent production of some very warped, degenerate, inbred minds from eastern Europe.
Just ignore him. He is the snake sent to divide and corrupt the incorruptible. The satanic spawn of the synagogue of satan.
Christ is King of Kings.