Armstrongites, Anti-Trinitarians, Cultists, anti-holiday Christians and Don Quixote

[sparkman]

Well if you study the traditions of the Babylonians in their sun god and fertility worship, they did worship:
1) The stump of the evergreen tree
2) The evergreen tree itself
3) The idols carved out of the trees

So... yes Jeremiah 10 does apply

Regarding Easter, the KJV wasn't exactly wrong as the Romans did celebrate the fertility festival of Ishtar/Eostre/Easter during that time of year. However, it was very closely timed with Passover, hence the syncretism done to merge them together.

Lent was never mentioned in the bible, and was commemorated by the 40 days of fasting and weeping for the fallen Tammuz, killed by a wild boar (hence Easter ham). Neither does it coincide with the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ did die on Passover (14th Nisan) and rose three days later. This we are pretty sure about.

Regarding the OT feasts, we do not observe them by the letter as we are not required to. However, we are called to understand the prophetic nature of the feasts as they apply to Christ's ministry for His first and second coming. As we know, the spring feasts and summer feast were fulfilled to the day. The Fall feasts have yet to be fulfilled. We understand why God instituted them and how they now apply spiritually in Christ. In essence, a spiritual observance and keeping the feasts in Christ just as we keep the Ritual and Ceremonial Law spiritually and not to the letter.

I am not sure how you determined that the KJV translators used Easter properly in Acts 12:4.

The same Greek word pascha was translated 28 times as Passover, and once as Easter.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/act/12/4/t_conc_1030004

What justified their use of the English word Easter in that one case, but in the other 28 cases they used Passover?

 

[sparkman]

Well if you study the traditions of the Babylonians in their sun god and fertility worship, they did worship:
1) The stump of the evergreen tree
2) The evergreen tree itself
3) The idols carved out of the trees

So... yes Jeremiah 10 does apply

Regarding Easter, the KJV wasn't exactly wrong as the Romans did celebrate the fertility festival of Ishtar/Eostre/Easter during that time of year. However, it was very closely timed with Passover, hence the syncretism done to merge them together.

Lent was never mentioned in the bible, and was commemorated by the 40 days of fasting and weeping for the fallen Tammuz, killed by a wild boar (hence Easter ham). Neither does it coincide with the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ did die on Passover (14th Nisan) and rose three days later. This we are pretty sure about.
.

I'd like to know the source of your information. My guess is that it comes about fifth party from Alexander Hislop's book Two Babylons. His work is well known to employ poor logic to relate Roman Catholicism (and the rest of Christianity) to the Babylonian Mystery Religion.

He tried to draw correllations between Christianity from pagan religions and myths with very minimal information and justification.

Ralph Woodrow wrote a book that simplified Hislop's teachings. He later realized that Hislop was in error and recanted the previous book. He published a book in response to the previous book where he outlines the poor reasoning that was employed. The new book is called The Babylon Connection?

Regardless of what the Babylonians did, you need to connect their observances positively with Christianity. If your source is Hislop's book or someone who used it, I would find the reasoning to be in doubt.

Also, Christians do not worship the tree whatsoever. Jeremiah 10 is talking about worshipping a pagan idol. No one is worshiping a Christmas tree. I'd be careful about accusing other Christians of worshipping tree idols.

 

[sparkman]

By the way, you guys who hate Christmas and Easter so much, you should call your local atheist society and ask them if they need some help with their arguments and protesting at schools. I'm sure they would enjoy having you as volunteers, since you share a common concern

 

[CS1]

By the way, you guys who hate Christmas and Easter so much, you should call your local atheist society and ask them if they need some help with their arguments and protesting at schools. I'm sure they would enjoy having you as volunteers, since you share a common concern

What I find interesting is the early church created these holidays to combat paganism . many are very legistic in the Christmas tree & Easter observances. they do not take into concideration tradtions that are not in the bible but do provide symbolism , and memorial . they are not in the bible but they are not wrong in doing them.

 

[NarrowRoadDisciple]

What I find interesting is the early church created these holidays to combat paganism . many are very legistic in the Christmas tree & Easter observances. they do not take into concideration tradtions that are not in the bible but do provide symbolism , and memorial . they are not in the bible but they are not wrong in doing them.

The early church created by the apostles had no mention of these "holidays." They were added much later on because it was easier to bring people in by adopting their beliefs and traditions.... yet God says never to do it.

 

[Budman]

The early church created by the apostles had no mention of these "holidays." They were added much later on because it was easier to bring people in by adopting their beliefs and traditions.... yet God says never to do it.

Well, wedding rings, grave markers, and toasting people at weddings have pagan origins. Are you okay with those?

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Well, wedding rings, grave markers, and toasting people at weddings have pagan origins. Are you okay with those?

By making more wine at the wedding. Jesus seemed to be OK with people getting toasted at weddings.

ha j/k ...

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Two points: the Mosaic Covenant was given to the Children of Israel only, AND the same language using "forever" was used with regards to physical circumcision, the showbread, and the Levitical priesthood.

Since none of those things are observed now, your reasoning is flawed if you are asserting that they are required today.

In order to be convincing, you would need to get past the MANY verses that say the Old Covenant is no longer in effect. Second, you'd need to get past the fact that we aren't parties to the Mosaic Covenant to begin with...it was made with God and the ancient nation of Israel. Third, you'd need to get past the Scriptures that state that the Sabbath and Holy Days are shadows and the fact that they were grouped with things that no longer apply in Colossians 2:16-17, including food and drink offerings and New Moons. Fourth, the same language of "forever" was used in relation to physical circumcision, the showbread, and the Levitical priesthood.

Then, if you managed to do that, I would ask you if you put your wife or daughters out of the house during their menstrual cycle like the Mosaic Covenant prescribes, and if you throw any sofa or furniture that they sat upon away as unclean.

Then, I would ask you if you wear tassels on the corners of your garments and wear clothing made of unmixed materials like the Mosaic Covenant prescribes.

Then, I would ask you why John called the Feast of Tabernacles "the Jews' Feast of Tabernacles" if they still apply (John 7:2).


You guys will never win this argument with me...I know all the points as I've had to work through them myself

Great points. Exalting and observing any shadow takes away from the glory of Christ. Recognizing them as shadows that were done away with magnifies his glory not only because we focus solely on Christ, but also because it witnesses of GOD's incredible power to foretell things in this way.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Then, I would ask you why John called the Feast of Tabernacles "the Jews' Feast of Tabernacles" if they still apply (John 7:2).

As well, Christ called the law of Moses their law.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Christ came and to "tabernacle" amongst us in flesh. I do not think the case for FOT being the Millennium is strong..

That Day of Atonement thing is a Seventh Day Adventist interpretation. Christ is our sin bearer, not Satan, if that's where you are going with this. He bore our sins outside of the camp.

The two goats were symbolic of two different aspects of Christ's atonement..the blood atonement and carrying the sin away.

I Peter 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

Hebrews 13:12 So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood.

Armstrongites used to teach that Day of Atonement nonsense, and SDAs do the same thing.

They claim that Satan is our sin bearer, which in my opinion is blasphemous. Christ bore our sins.

Armstrongites do it to force the festivals into a sequence so they can claim that the Holy Days haven't been fulfilled yet. I don't see any grounds for it. I don't think Feast of Tabernacles can be related to the Millennium (besides that, there were eight days, not just seven). The Day of Atonement interpretation makes on sense as Satan is not our sin bearer...Christ was.

The FOT was 7 days, not 8 (Leviticus 23:34). The eighth day was a sabbath.

Christ bore our sin penalty, not our actual sin. If Christ was the scapegoat, that would mean he would bear sin forever. Ridiculous. The lake of fire is the repository for sin forever. Sin is taken out of the congregation's midst, not placed on the throne forever. Sin didn't just magically disappear at the cross. It must and will be dealt with.

The scapegoat was banished alive into the wilderness. This is a shadow for when all evil doers will be banished alive into the lake of fire. First the beast and false prophet,

And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs before him, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who had worshiped his image. The two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulphur. Revelation 19:20​

then satan and his horde

And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulphur, where the beast and the false prophet also [are], and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. Revelation 20:10​

then death and Hades

And Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire. Revelation 20:14​

then all of satan's resurrected (alive) children

And if anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. Revelation 20:15​

 

[FreeNChrist]

The early church created by the apostles had no mention of these "holidays." They were added much later on because it was easier to bring people in by adopting their beliefs and traditions.... yet God says never to do it.

I see them as more examples of how God takes what was meant for evil and turns it to good.

 

[sparkman]

This is a prime example of how fairy tales devolve into "truths" with the anti-holiday crowd.

"Weeping for Tammuz" has NOTHING to do with Easter whatsoever. The time that this was observed was in the SUMMER not the SPRING.

This is in the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament:

Weeping for Tammuz "was based on the observable fact that the end of spring brought the end of new life in nature..the obvious conclusion was that Tammuz, the power who had produced all these blessings, had died! So a dramatic lament for the dead god was held annually at the beginning of the HOT DRY SUMMER, in the fourth month of the Mesopotamian calendar (our late June and early July), the month that was named 'Tammuz' after him." This month, in summer, is still called Tammuz in the Jewish calendar.

So, "weeping for Tammuz" has no connection with Easter WHATSOEVER, so it could not relate to a 40 day period BEFORE Easter.

40 is a well-known number used in relation to biblical testing and fasts. It's obvious the number is biblical in origin.

A problem with this sort of thing is that anti-holiday people just keep parroting the same things over and over, and almost all of their supposed "facts" don't comport to reality. Additionally, many of their "facts" rely on the teachings of Alexander Hislop and his book called "The Two Babylons", claiming that Christianity accreted elements of the Babylonian Mystery religion, which was really the worship of Nimrod and Semiramis.

He tries to connect many of the pagan gods and goddesses to Nimrod through unusual reasoning, including Tammuz.

Hislop's reasoning ability was non-existent.

An example of his reasoning might go like this:

Bill is wearing a red shirt.
Jim is wearing a red shirt.

Conclusion:

Bill is Jim.

or

Bill is wearing a red shirt.
Tom is wearing a red shirt and blue jeans.
Scott is wearing blue jeans and wearing a hat.

Conclusion:

Bill is Scott

That's an example of Hislop's "genius".

Yet, his works are one of the main source materials of the anti-holiday people. And they simply keep parroting the same bad reasoning over and over and over again

Herbert Armstrong majored in this sort of thing, and I was naïve enough as a 22 year old to absorb his foolishness. No more

I am guessing that the rest of your remarks with regards to pagan customs could be handled in a similar way but I'm not going to take the time to do it. Usually these assertions are based on poor reasoning that don't go too much beyond:

Jim breathes air.
Pagans breathe air.

Conclusion:

Jim is a pagan.

I really wanted to save this material for Easter

Well if you study the traditions of the Babylonians in their sun god and fertility worship, they did worship:
1) The stump of the evergreen tree
2) The evergreen tree itself
3) The idols carved out of the trees

So... yes Jeremiah 10 does apply

Regarding Easter, the KJV wasn't exactly wrong as the Romans did celebrate the fertility festival of Ishtar/Eostre/Easter during that time of year. However, it was very closely timed with Passover, hence the syncretism done to merge them together.

Lent was never mentioned in the bible, and was commemorated by the 40 days of fasting and weeping for the fallen Tammuz, killed by a wild boar (hence Easter ham). Neither does it coincide with the death and resurrection of Christ. Christ did die on Passover (14th Nisan) and rose three days later. This we are pretty sure about.

Regarding the OT feasts, we do not observe them by the letter as we are not required to. However, we are called to understand the prophetic nature of the feasts as they apply to Christ's ministry for His first and second coming. As we know, the spring feasts and summer feast were fulfilled to the day. The Fall feasts have yet to be fulfilled. We understand why God instituted them and how they now apply spiritually in Christ. In essence, a spiritual observance and keeping the feasts in Christ just as we keep the Ritual and Ceremonial Law spiritually and not to the letter.

 

[KohenMatt]

Show us in the bible where it is commanded to observe the 3 yearly festivals anywhere but Jerusalem.

Leviticus 23 doesn't address where they are to be kept.
Deuteronomy 16 only says where the Lord has placed His name. Jerusalem didn't exist at this point in any significant way. Where has the Lord placed His name today?

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Leviticus 23 doesn't address where they are to be kept.
Deuteronomy 16 only says where the Lord has placed His name. Jerusalem didn't exist at this point in any significant way. Where has the Lord placed His name today?

Can you show me in scripture where the festivals were observed anywhere except Jerusalem (excluding Passover)?

 

[KohenMatt]

Two points: the Mosaic Covenant was given to the Children of Israel only, AND the same language using "forever" was used with regards to physical circumcision, the showbread, and the Levitical priesthood.

Since none of those things are observed now, your reasoning is flawed if you are asserting that they are required today.

And this is where the discussion ends. "Who the covenant was given to, only to Israel, Covenant not in effect," blah blah blah. The covenant was given to God's people. If you want to discount yourself from "God's people" on the basis of semantics, go for it.

And then someone throws in the "if they are required today" bit. Never once have I ever said it is required, and NO ONE has ever shown otherwise. People love making that assertion in order to make their argument against me sound better, but it is a lie and NO ONE can prove otherwise. When challenged to do so, the accuser conveniently ignores the challenge and moves on.

The Law is not required. The "Law and "salvation" shouldn't even be used in the same sentence except for those who do so erroneously. Obedience or disobedience does nothing except to give practical examples on how to live. Then people will say, "I only need to love God and others. I don't need the Law to tell me how to do it. The Spirit shows me." That sounds all nice and good except for the fact that Spirit leads us to love in very specific and intentional ways. I'm constantly looking for ways to love others and bless them. I'm constantly looking for ways to honor God and show Him love.

Then someone will probably say "You're trusting in your own efforts to do so." Bologna. Just because we should let the Holy Spirit lead us doesn't negate the effort to look for ways to bless others. Besides, if the Holy Spirit is a manifestation of God, and God gave the Law, then the Spirit follows it as well.

In order to be convincing, you would need to get past the MANY verses that say the Old Covenant is no longer in effect. Second, you'd need to get past the fact that we aren't parties to the Mosaic Covenant to begin with...it was made with God and the ancient nation of Israel. Third, you'd need to get past the Scriptures that state that the Sabbath and Holy Days are shadows and the fact that they were grouped with things that no longer apply in Colossians 2:16-17, including food and drink offerings and New Moons. Fourth, the same language of "forever" was used in relation to physical circumcision, the showbread, and the Levitical priesthood.

Again, context is key. Who was Paul speaking to in Colossians and Galatians, and why was he saying the things he was saying? But we apparently disagree on the context which means our interpretations of those books won't be resolved.

Then, if you managed to do that, I would ask you if you put your wife or daughters out of the house during their menstrual cycle like the Mosaic Covenant prescribes, and if you throw any sofa or furniture that they sat upon away as unclean.

Apparently, you don't pay much attention to the litany of my previous posts directed to you and others regarding physical application of the Law. When asked about specific Laws, I always say that all of them can be kept physically and/or spiritually. Then people will say, "If you keep some of it then you must keep all of it. And if you break one of them you break all of them and you're under a curse." Because of the work of Jesus, the Law mustn't be kept perfectly for any reason except by those who trust in it for their salvation.

Then, I would ask you if you wear tassels on the corners of your garments and wear clothing made of unmixed materials like the Mosaic Covenant prescribes.

Same reasoning as above, but to humor you I wear the tassels a lot and when the tags are available I try to avoid the mixed ones.

Then, I would ask you why John called the Feast of Tabernacles "the Jews' Feast of Tabernacles" if they still apply (John 7:2).

Then I would say, "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." -Galatians 3:28

You guys will never win this argument with me...I know all the points as I've had to work through them myself

You sure think highly of yourself and your work.

I couldn't really care less if I "win" this argument with you. I couldn't really care less if I "win" any argument with anyone. If you're evaluating whether you've "won" an argument, then your focus in the wrong place. I fully recognize that I won't convince you of certain things and fully recognize that you won't convince me of certain things. There are a handful of other people I understand this with and limit my conversations with.
What I do hope to do is provide reasoning for a proper type of obedience to the Law and provide reasoning against complete or partial dismissal of the Law to others. There are many who I engage with about this in productive ways outside of these public forums. That's all I can ask for; to give people a reason to seek God on the matter themselves.

 

[KohenMatt]

Well, wedding rings, grave markers, and toasting people at weddings have pagan origins. Are you okay with those?

There's a difference between doing things for man and doing things in order to worship God.

 

[KohenMatt]

Can you show me in scripture where the festivals were observed anywhere except Jerusalem (excluding Passover)?

Moot point. Show me where in Scripture people only observed the festivals in Jerusalem.

God didn't give the instruction to celebrate the festivals and then say, "But you can't do it until Jerusalem is founded and then the tabernacle/temple is moved there."

 

[CS1]

The early church created by the apostles had no mention of these "holidays." They were added much later on because it was easier to bring people in by adopting their beliefs and traditions.... yet God says never to do it.

actually the early church was not created by the Apostles that is an incorrect statement the point about holidays , memorials, and observances are throughout the bible. Abraham built wells , Jacob built wells, Isaac built wells. David built memorials, and Jesus celabrated at a wedding Paul ate meat offered to idols and guess what those same things happen today. there are thing that one can do that are not in the bible but yet are still praise worthy. I think some should read matt 23 in the NLT Jesus really speaks to the religous self righteous types. a Christiamas tree doesn't offend God nor does Easter from a Christian observance world view. The agreed yes the message of the Savior Born not at all.

 

[KenAllan]

1 Corinthians 10:31-33
[SUP]31 [/SUP] Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
[SUP]32 [/SUP] Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God,
[SUP]33 [/SUP] just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

Everything we do we are to do it to the glory of God.

If you celebrate Christmas or Easter you are to do it to the Glory of God.

 

[kaylagrl]

actually the early church was not created by the Apostles that is an incorrect statement the point about holidays , memorials, and observances are throughout the bible. Abraham built wells , Jacob built wells, Isaac built wells. David built memorials, and Jesus celabrated at a wedding Paul ate meat offered to idols and guess what those same things happen today. there are thing that one can do that are not in the bible but yet are still praise worthy. I think some should read matt 23 in the NLT Jesus really speaks to the religous self righteous types. a Christiamas tree doesn't offend God nor does Easter from a Christian observance world view. The agreed yes the message of the Savior Born not at all.

I was brought up observing Christmas. But we did not believe in Santa Claus,we knew it was to honor the birth of Christ.The same with Easter,no Easter bunny,it was the death of Christ. I believe if it is celebrated in that fashion there is nothing wrong with it.Whether you celebrate it now or some other day there is no difference.We dont know the exact day.

The other night I went to a church we visit sometimes,we have our own home church.They had the church beautifully decorated. They had a choir that sang Christmas carols and a few that shared small testimonies/preached. It was brought down to an alter call for those who needed to respond to the message. It ended with the song "Let there Be Peace on Earth". And each of us was thinking of what is happening in the world today. The entire crowd was moved by the program.The entire focus was on Christ and His coming and saving a lost world.How this could be against God? How could this be wrong? I agree people can take Christmas in a material direction.But when observed in the way I mentioned it honors Christ. You are free to not observe the holiday but you should not interfere or condemn people who do.