delilah5's Blog

« Climate Change and Heat WavesSummer Research »

The Day After Tomorrow: A Scientific Critique

April 26, 2012 by climatesight

The 2004 film The Day After Tomorrow, in which global warming leads to a new ice age, has been vigorously criticized by climate scientists. Why is this? What mistakes in the film led Dr. Andrew Weaver, Canada’s top climate modeller, to claim that “the science-fiction movie The Day After Tomorrow creatively violates every known law of thermodynamics”? What prompted Dr. Gavin Schmidt, NASA climatologist, to say that “The Day After Tomorrow was so appallingly bad, it was that that prompted me to become a more public scientist”? What could an innocent blockbuster movie have done to deserve such harsh criticisms?

 

A New Ice Age?

The Day After Tomorrow opens with a new scientific discovery by paleoclimatologist Jack Hall, played by Dennis Quaid. After a particularly harrowing trip to gather Antarctic ice cores, he discovers evidence of a previously unknown climate shift that occurred ten thousand years ago. Since the film is set in the early 2000s, and ice cores yielding hundreds of thousands of years of climate data have been studied extensively since the 1960s, it seems implausible that such a recent and dramatic global climatic event would have gone previously unnoticed by scientists. However, this misstep is excusable, because a brand new discovery is a vital element of many science fiction films.

 

Jack goes on to describe this ancient climate shift. As the world was coming out of the last glacial period, he explains, melting ice sheets added so much freshwater to the Atlantic Ocean that certain ocean currents shut down. Since thermohaline circulation is a major source of heat for the surfaces of continents, the globe was plunged back into an ice age. Jack’s portrayal of the event is surprisingly accurate: a sudden change in climate did occur around ten thousand years ago, and was most likely caused by the mechanisms he describes. To scientists, it is known as the Younger Dryas.

 

The world’s ascent out of the last ice age was not smooth and gradual; rather, it was punctuated by jumps in temperature coupled with abrupt returns to glacial conditions. The Younger Dryas – named after a species of flower whose pollen was preserved in ice cores during the event – was the last period of sudden cooling before the interglacial fully took over. Ice core data worldwide indicates a relatively rapid drop in global temperatures around eleven thousand years ago. The glacial conditions lasted for approximately a millennium until deglaciation resumed.

 

The leading hypothesis for the cause of the Younger Dryas involves a sudden influx of freshwater from the melting Laurentide Ice Sheet in North America into the Atlantic Ocean. This disruption to North Atlantic circulation likely caused the Gulf Stream, an ocean current that supplies vast amounts of heat to northern Europe, to shut down. Substantial regional cooling allowed the glaciers of Europe to expand. The ice reflected sunlight, which triggered further cooling through the ice-albedo feedback. However, the orbital changes which control glacial cycles eventually overpowered this feedback. Warming resumed, and the current interglacial period began.

 

While Jack Hall’s discussion of the Younger Dryas is broadly accurate, his projections for the future are far-fetched. He asserts that, since the most recent example of large-scale warming triggered glacial conditions, the global warming event currently underway will also cause an ice age. At a United Nations conference, he claims that this outcome is virtually certain and “only a matter of time”. Because it happened in the past, he reasons, it will definitely happen now. Jack seems to forget that every climate event is unique: while looking to the past can be useful to understand today’s climate system, it does not provide a perfect analogue upon which we can base predictions. Differences in continental arrangement, initial energy balance, and global ice cover, to name a few factors, guarantee that no two climate changes will develop identically.

 

Additionally, Jack’s statements regarding the plausibility of an imminent Gulf Stream shutdown due to global warming fly in the face of current scientific understanding. As the world continues to warm, and the Greenland ice sheet continues to melt, the North Atlantic circulation will probably slow down due to the added freshwater. The resulting cooling influence on parts of Europe will probably still be overwhelmed by warming due to greenhouse gases. However, a complete shutdown of the Gulf Stream is extremely unlikely within this century. It’s unclear whether an eventual shutdown is even possible, largely because there is less land ice available to melt than there was during the Younger Dryas. If such an event did occur, it would take centuries and still would not cause an ice age – instead, it would simply cancel out some of the greenhouse warming that had already occurred. Cooling influences simply decrease the global energy balance by a certain amount from its initial value; they do not shift the climate into a predetermined state regardless of where it started.

 

Nevertheless, The Day After Tomorrow goes on to depict a complete shutdown of the Gulf Stream in a matter of days, followed by a sudden descent into a global ice age that is spurred by physically impossible meteorological phenomena.

 

The Storm

Many questions about the Ice Ages remain, but the scientific community is fairly confident that the regular cycles of glacial and interglacial periods that occurred throughout the past three million years were initiated by changes in the Earth’s orbit and amplified by carbon cycle feedbacks. Although these orbital changes have been present since the Earth’s formation, they can only lead to an ice age if sufficient land mass is present at high latitudes, as has been the case in recent times. When a glacial period begins, changes in the spatial and temporal distribution of sunlight favour the growth of glaciers in the Northern Hemisphere. These glaciers reflect sunlight, which alters the energy balance of the planet. The resulting cooling decreases atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, through mechanisms such as absorption by cold ocean waters and expansion of permafrost, which causes more cooling. When this complex web of feedbacks stabilizes, over tens of thousands of years, the average global temperature is several degrees lower and glaciers cover much of the Northern Hemisphere land mass.

 

The ice age in The Day After Tomorrow has a more outlandish origin. Following the Gulf Stream shutdown, a network of massive hurricane-shaped snowstorms, covering entire continents, deposits enough snow to reflect sunlight and create an ice age in a matter of days. As if that weren’t enough, the air at the eye of each storm is cold enough to freeze people instantly, placing the characters in mortal danger. Jack’s friend Terry Rapson, a climatologist from the UK, explains that cold air from the top of the troposphere is descending so quickly in the eye of each storm that it does not warm up as expected. He estimates that the air must be -150°F (approximately -100°C) or colder, since it is instantly freezing the fuel lines in helicopters.

 

There are two main problems with this description of the storm. Firstly, the tropopause (the highest and coldest part of the troposphere) averages -60°C, and nowhere does it reach -100°C. Secondly, the eye of a hurricane – and presumably of the hurricane-shaped snowstorms – has the lowest pressure of anywhere in the storm. This fundamental characteristic indicates that air should be rising in the eye of each snowstorm, not sinking down from the tropopause.

 

Later in the film, NASA scientist Janet Tokada is monitoring the storms using satellite data. She notes that temperature is decreasing within the storm “at a rate of 10 degrees per second”. Whether the measurement is in Fahrenheit or Celsius, this rate of change is implausible. In under a minute (which is likely how long the satellite reading takes) the air would reach absolute zero, a hypothetical temperature at which all motion stops.

 

In conclusion, there are many problems with the storm system as presented in the film, only a few of which have been summarized here. One can rest assured that such a frightening meteorological phenomenon could not happen in the real world.

 

Sea Level Rise

Before the snowstorms begin, extreme weather events – from hurricanes to tornadoes to giant hailstones – ravage the globe. Thrown in with these disasters is rapid sea level rise. While global warming will raise sea levels, the changes are expected to be extremely gradual. Most recent estimates project a rise of 1-2 metres by 2100 and tens of metres in the centuries following. In contrast, The Day After Tomorrow shows the ocean rising by “25 feet in a matter of seconds” along the Atlantic coast of North America. This event is not due to a tsunami, nor the storm surge of a hurricane; it is assumed to be the result of the Greenland ice sheet melting.

 

As the film continues and an ice age begins, the sea level should fall. The reasons for this change are twofold: first, a drop in global temperatures causes ocean water to contract; second, glacier growth over the Northern Hemisphere locks up a great deal of ice that would otherwise be present as liquid water in the ocean. However, when astronauts are viewing the Earth from space near the end of the film, the coastlines of each continent are the same as today. They have not been altered by either the 25-foot rise due to warming or the even larger fall that cooling necessitates. Since no extra water was added to the Earth from space, maintaining sea level in this manner is physically impossible.

 

Climate Modelling

Since the Second World War, ever-increasing computer power has allowed climate scientists to develop mathematical models of the climate system. Since there aren’t multiple Earths on which to perform controlled climatic experiments, the scientific community has settled for virtual planets instead. When calibrated, tested, and used with caution, these global climate models can produce valuable projections of climate change over the next few centuries. Throughout The Day After Tomorrow, Jack and his colleagues rely on such models to predict how the storm system will develop. However, the film’s representation of climate modelling is inaccurate in many respects.

 

Firstly, Jack is attempting to predict the development of the storm over the next few months, which is impossible to model accurately using today’s technology. Weather models, which project initial atmospheric conditions into the future, are only reliable for a week or two: after this time, the chaotic nature of weather causes small rounding errors to completely change the outcome of the prediction. On the other hand, climate models are concerned with average values and boundary conditions over decades, which are not affected by the principles of chaos theory. Put another way, weather modelling is like predicting the outcome of a single dice roll based on how the dice was thrown; climate modelling is like predicting the net outcome of one hundred dice rolls based on how the dice is weighted. Jack’s inquiry, though, falls right between the two: he is predicting the exact behaviour of a weather system over a relatively long time scale. Until computers become vastly more precise and powerful, this exercise is completely unreliable.

 

Furthermore, the characters make seemingly arbitrary distinctions between “forecast models”, “paleoclimate models”, and “grid models”. In the real world, climate models are categorized by complexity, not by purpose. For example, GCMs (General Circulation Models) represent the most processes and typically have the highest resolutions, while EMICs (Earth System Models of Intermediate Complexity) include more approximations and run at lower resolutions. All types of climate models can be used for projections (a preferred term to “forecasts” because the outcomes of global warming are dependent on emissions scenarios), but are only given credence if they can accurately simulate paleoclimatic events such as glacial cycles. All models include a “grid”, which refers to the network of three-dimensional cells used to split the virtual Earth’s surface, atmosphere, and ocean into discrete blocks.

 

Nevertheless, Jack gets to work converting his “paleoclimate model” to a “forecast model” so he can predict the path of the storm. It is likely that this conversion involves building a new high-resolution grid and adding dozens of new climatic processes to the model, a task which would take months to years of work by a large team of scientists. However, Jack appears to have superhuman programming abilities: he writes all the code by himself in 24 hours!

 

When he has finished, he decides to get some rest until the simulation has finished running. In the real world, this would take at least a week, but Jack’s colleagues wake him up after just a few hours. Evidently, their lab has access to computing resources more powerful than anything known to science today. Then, Jack’s colleagues hand him “the results” on a single sheet of paper. Real climate model output comes in the form of terabytes of data tables, which can be converted to digital maps, animations, and time plots using special software. Jack’s model appeared to simply spit out a few numbers, and what these numbers may have referred to is beyond comprehension.

 

If The Day After Tomorrow was set several hundred years in the future, the modelling skill of climate scientists and the computer power available to them might be plausible. Indeed, it would be very exciting to be able to build, run, and analyse models as quickly and with as much accuracy as Jack and his colleagues can. Unfortunately, in the present day, the field of climate modelling works quite differently.

 

Conclusions

The list of serious scientific errors in The Day After Tomorrow is unacceptably long. The film depicts a sudden Gulf Stream shutdown due to global warming, an event that climate scientists say is extremely unlikely, and greatly exaggerates both the severity and the rate of the resulting cooling. When a new ice age begins in a matter of days, it isn’t caused by the well-known mechanisms that triggered glacial periods in the past – rather, massive storms with physically impossible characteristics radically alter atmospheric conditions. The melting Greenland ice sheet causes the oceans to rise at an inconceivable rate, but when the ice age begins, sea level does not fall as the laws of physics dictate it should. Finally, the film depicts the endeavour of science, particularly the field of climate modelling, in a curious and inaccurate manner.

 

It would not have been very difficult or expensive for the film’s writing team to hire a climatologist as a science advisor – in fact, given that the plot revolves around global warming, it seems strange that they did not do so. One can only hope that future blockbuster movies about climate change will be more rigorous with regards to scientific accuracy.

NOW. Having found all of this info, there have been WORSE hurricanes in the past. Dumping snow as well as rain. If you think this is the "end of the world" with this? READ YOUR BIBLE. The Earth is stored up for FIRE. Not water. I can't wait until December 21, 2012. I can't wait until all of you that have no idea what really the end will bring are celebrating your pagan Christmas holiday on December 25. OPEN YOUR EYES.

 a sudden global warming-induced climate shift could not cause the kind of instant wild weather mayhem depicted in the movie. In this respect, The Day After Tomorrow is science Fiction with a capital "F". The laws of meteorology get seriously abused here. Consider the book the movie is based on, The Coming Global Superstorm, by Whitley Streiber and Art Bell. Whitley Streiber is a UFO expert and author of the best-selling 1985 bookCommunion, a non-fiction account of his abduction by extra-terrestrials. Art Bell hosts a nationally syndicated all-night radio show, Coast to Coast AM, which specializes in UFOs and the supernatural. They argue that a sudden climate shift would create such strong atmospheric instability that an incredible "superstorm" must result. Powerful clusters of thunderstorms in the Arctic would penetrate deep into the stratosphere, bringing -150°F upper atmospheric air to the surface, flash freezing any living thing caught outside. The clusters of thunderstorms would merge into a continent-sized "superstorm" that would suck energy from the oceans heated by global warming, generating winds of 100-200 mph, blizzard conditions with hundreds of feet of snow, temperature falls in Canada of 100 degrees in an hour, and incredible thunderstorms with huge hail and tornados. The quick take on this issue is that the short-term calamities that befall earth in The Day After Tomorrowcouldn't happen. It is true that global warming is causing ice to melt in the Arctic, Greenland, and Antarctica, which may eventually disrupt the ocean-current conveyor belt that keeps places like Western Europe warmer than they deserve for their northish latitudes. But such effects would likely happen over decades, not weeksWhen scientists speak about abrupt climate change they mean within five or ten years up to a century. For on-screen drama, events was compressed to a couple of days to weeks and, put simply, Ice Ages do not occur, nor do they retreat, overnight. Climate change has happened a couple of times over the last 13,000 years but, unlike in the movie, never in a few days time.

A complete shut down of the Gulf Stream is possible and is believed to have happened in the geologic past however, it is not expected to occur within the 21st century. It would require a 9°F (5°C) average global temperature increase to create all the conditions necessary for a complete stoppage of this ocean current.

Can Global Warming lead to Global Cooling?

Yes it can, but not over several days as depicted in the movie. Over geologic time Earth has gone through several ice ages followed by inter-glacial warming periods. One possible cause of major periods of glaciation is a change in the tilt of Earth's axis causing a corresponding change in the intensity and location of sun insolation.

Shorter periods of much cooler temperatures have also occurred due to:

• A major volcanic eruption that causes pyroclastics to block and reduce incoming solar radiation resulting in cooler temperatures and a "year without a summer". The ash from the 1816 eruption of Tambora in Indonesia cooled Earth so significantly that New England experienced June snowfalls and, throughout the summer months, crop failures were the norm in New England and also in northern Europe.
• A change in the circulation of ocean currents due to the melting of major Ice Sheets resulting in decreased salinity caused by the addition of large volumes of fresh melt water. The Younger Dryas and the "8200 years before present" events were both drier periods with much colder temperatures. They are believed to have resulted from melting glaciers and the subsequent alteration of the Gulf Stream current.

Scientists are well aware of the delicate balance between 'cloud cover, aerosols, solar radiation and greenhouse gases' and resulting climatic changes. It is absolutely possible that a state of global warming could lead to much colder temperatures for North America and Western Europe, however the timeframe for such an event would not be days or weeks but rather decades and the deep freeze would probably not reach Ice Age proportions.

Two distinct factors that can lead to a state of cooling after a period of global warming are:
A change in Thermohaline Circulation and a change in Cloud Cover and Aerosols.

Oceanic Circulation Patterns - Thermohaline Circulation

As depicted in the movie, a disruption to the pattern of circulation in the Gulf Stream is a possibility that is based on sound scientific concerns. The climates of North America and Europe are influenced by the Gulf Stream, a warm ocean current seen boxed in red on the illustration to the left. An interruption in this pattern of flow, either a decrease in the temperature of the Gulf Stream or a cessation of flow altogether would result in dramatic lowering of average temperatures for both continents. The melting of Arctic sea ice and resulting disturbance of the Gulf Stream ocean current, could bring colder weather to Europe and North America and a rise in temperature for the southern hemisphere.

The unknown factor is how much of this Northern Hemisphere cooling would be offset by simultaneous atmospheric global warming. 

The Gulf Stream acts like a conveyor belt, moving in a circular pattern; a convection current driven by the density difference between warm, tropical salt water versus the colder water found at northern latitudes. An ocean current is like a river flowing through the ocean, at all times maintaining its integrity as one single body of water traveling on a distinct course. 
As the Gulf Stream flows from equatorial regions, along the east coast of North America, two things happen. First, the warm current loses heat to the air, modifying coastal land temperatures. Second, because the Gulf Stream has lost heat, the current is now colder and so the water in current sinks. As the water sinks it flows back towards the tropics close to the ocean bottom. 

Why is the melting of glacial ice such a problem for the Gulf Stream? Fresh water is less dense than salt water therefore, when a large volume of fresh water mixes with a salt water current, it may no longer be dense enough to sink. This would slow down, if not stop, the Gulf Stream from continuing its present course, the end result being that temperatures, normally modified by its path, would drastically change...for the colder.
In the past retreating glaciers dumped enough water into oceans to cause the North Atlantic branch of the Gulf Stream current to stop. This occurred around 8,200 and 12,700 years ago and both times the climate cooled. 
Exactly how much fresh water is necessary to totally shut down the Gulf Stream is uncertain. 

Experts say, "Watch the ice!" Continued melting of glacial ice is the most important telltale sign that Global Warming is taking place.

Cloud Cover and Aerosols

Higher temperatures increase the amount of cloud cover due to an increase in higher evaporation rates of surface water.
Initially, the clouds will assist in trapping heat re-radiating from Earth's surface, adding to the global warming process and the continued rise in temperatures.
However, cloud cover actually works against global warming. Clouds tend to block and reflect back into space any incoming solar radiation, increasing Earth's albedo. After some time, global warming is no longer the main issue; instead global cooling conditions are a threat. How long the cooling will take after the initial warming is uncertain. Some models suggest approximately 50-100 years, but cooling could come much sooner.

Another critical factor in both the formation of thicker, denser clouds and the blocking of sun insolation is aerosols; small particulates such as ash, soot, skin cells, sea salt, sulfates, pollutants and dust. Some of these particulates are natural in origin. Since the industrial revolution however, humans have introduced an excessive amount of pollutants into the air through the burning of fossil fuels. It has been estimated that cloud cover may have increased up to 5% solely based on aerosol emissions contributed by humans. 
Airborne aerosols are condenstion nuclei for cloud formation, causing water vapor to condense into more, but smaller, cloud droplets resulting in the thicker cloud cover seen over the past few decades. Ironically, though there is more cloud cover, there is less rain because the water droplets are too small and lightweight to fall.
In addition, aerosols tend to block and reflect sun energy even when they not part of a cloud formation.

Can Global Warming and Global Cooling
Result in Significant Changes in Weather Patterns?

Yes but once again, not as abruptly, nor to the exaggerated degree as seen in the movie. The next 6 sections deal with specific events in the film, exposing the good and the bad science for each meteorological disaster.

Tornadoes Hit Los Angeles

California has never experienced a tornado higher than an F1 on the F1 to F5 Fujita Scale nor have any fatalities occurred as a result of one. Generally speaking, there is a recent increase in the frequency of tornadoes in the United States. However, it must be pointed out that technology used to detect and record tornadoes has significantly improved along with an increase in more stations capable of analyzing tornadic activity.
Such a technological advance will inevitably detect the smaller, weaker and less damaging tornadoes that decades ago may have gone unrecorded. On the Fujita Scale there has actually been a decline in the more severe tornadoes, those ranking F3 through F5.
The erratic behavior of storms generated in a globally warmed climate cannot at this time be predicted with respect to exactly which locations will bear the brunt of increased violent weather activity. Therefore, references made in the film with respect to tornadoes in Los Angeles neither depart from a possible reality nor are they supported by historical fact or computer-generated models of future weather patterns.
Scientists do admit that more violent weather will occur with rising temperatures. This is due to the fact that an increase in evaporation rates provides the atmosphere with more water vapor, the essential fuel for storm activity.

Massive Storm in New Delhi and a Southward Advancing Ice Age

While it is true that some areas would experience significant drops in temperature due to a change in ocean current circulation, global warming will not necessarily bring about a worldwide Ice Age. Greenhouse gases trap heat and many locations on Earth will experience an increase in temperatures. Also, at this point in time, the Northern Hemisphere is receiving more incoming solar radiation than it did during the last ice Age 20,000 years ago.

Hurricanes and Global Warming

There has been a steady increase in Atlantic hurricane activity since 1995 and according to Kevin Trenberth and Dennis Shea of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), "Global warming accounted for around half of the extra hurricane-fueling warmth in the waters of the tropical North Atlantic in 2005, while natural cycles were only a minor factor".5 Hurricane seasons are forecast to be more active as global temperatures continue to rise. Fueling the 2005 hurricanes were ocean surface water temperatures 1.7° F above the 1901-1970 average with global warming accounting for approximately 0.8° F of this temperature increase.

Super Cell Hurricanes in the Movie

In The Day After Tomorrow several Super Cell Storms present immediate threats to mankind. Bringing freezing, sub-zero temperatures across massive continents, all life in the path of these cyclones will perish immediately. The very formation of these super cells is one of the movie's most significant departures from scientific fact.

• While it is true that global warming can affect the strength, frequency and intensity of hurricanes one fact remains constant and that is that hurricanes form over warm water and lose strength or dissipate over land masses. The fuel that drives a hurricane is the latent heat given off by water vapor as it condenses into rain.
• Also, separate storm systems do not merge into one gigantic super storm, especially true over a continental land mass.
• Heavy rain is typical of a low pressure storm system and not the blizzard conditions seen in the movie.
• Hurricanes tracks may change ranging farther north and south on warmer water temperatures if, in fact, ocean temperatures change but the calm eye of a cyclonic storm happens over ocean water, not land.
• Another significant scientific error can be seen on the radar screens showing these Super Cells. In the Northern Hemisphere, cyclonic storms rotate counter-clockwise due to the Coriolis Effect caused by Earth's rotation. Yet, several times in the film the cyclones are shown moving clockwise.

Sub Zero Freezing Temperatures and Super Cell Storms

As freezing air descends it warms and then rises. However in the movie this law of physics is dismissed by one of the main characters, scientist Jack Hall, when he states that the air in the center of the super cell is "simply descending too quickly". Apparently, this super cell is an area of such extreme low pressure that cold air from the troposphere, (-150°F to -101°C) is rapidly sucked downward towards Earth's surface, instantly freezing everything it comes in contact with. The very concept defies Ideal Gas Laws. 
When molecules of air descend they warm adiabatically due to compression. There are more air molecules concentrated closer to Earth's surface due to gravitational force. More air molecules means more molecular contact and collisions and this generates heat; a kinetic temperature, if you will, in proportion to the increase in kinetic energy.

Manhattan is Flooded by a Gigantic Tsunami

Actually, in the movie, the flooding of Manhattan is caused by a 300 foot "wind-driven storm surge". An actual tsunami that could produce an oncoming wave of the magnitude seen in the film would be caused by an underwater earthquake, a landslide or a direct meteorite impact over the ocean. In reality winds speeds would have to equal two times the speed of sound, or 1200 mph, in order to create a storm surge and wave in proportion to the one that inundated Manhattan.
The force of the onslaught of water against buildings would immediately implode all submerged windows along with sections of wall leaving behind complete devastation with very little left standing, including the Statue of Liberty. After the rush of water receded there would be no survivors left seeking shelter in the library. 
Also interesting is the fact that the huge wave approached Manhattan from the east where the borough of Queens is located. The Atlantic Ocean is located south of Manhattan. The nearest body of open ocean found due east of Manhattan is 120 miles away off the east end of Long Island.

So, enjoy the movie!

SOUL

 

The original-language terms (Heb., ne′phesh [ׁש]; Gr., psy·khe′ [ψυχή]) as used in the scriptures show “soul” to be a person, an animal, or the life that a person or an animal enjoys.

 

The connotations that the English “soul” commonly carries in the minds of most persons are not in agreement with the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words as used by the inspired Bible writers. This fact has steadily gained wider acknowledgment. Back in 1897, in the Journal of Biblical Literature (Vol. XVI, p. 30), Professor C. A. Briggs, as a result of detailed analysis of the use of ne′phesh, observed: “Soul in English usage at the present time conveys usually a very different meaning from נפש [ne′phesh] in Hebrew, and it is easy for the incautious reader to misinterpret.”

 

More recently, when The Jewish Publication Society of America issued a new translation of the Torah, or first five books of the Bible, the editor-in-chief, H. M. Orlinsky of Hebrew Union College, stated that the word “soul” had been virtually eliminated from this translation because, “the Hebrew word in question here is ‘Nefesh.’” He added: “Other translators have interpreted it to mean ‘soul,’ which is completely inaccurate. The Bible does not say we have a soul. ‘Nefesh’ is the person himself, his need for food, the very blood in his veins, his being.”—The New York Times, October 12, 1962.

 

What is the origin of the teaching that the human soul is invisible and immortal?

 

The difficulty lies in the fact that the meanings popularly attached to the English word “soul” stem primarily, not from the Hebrew or Christian Greek scriptures, but from ancient Greek philosophy, actually pagan religious thought. Greek philosopher Plato, for example, quotes Socrates as saying: “The soul, . . . if it departs pure, dragging with it nothing of the body, . . . goes away into that which is like itself, into the invisible, divine, immortal, and wise, and when it arrives there it is happy, freed from error and folly and fear . . . and all the other human ills, and . . . lives in truth through all after time with the gods.”—Phaedo, 80, D, E; 81, A.

 

In direct contrast with the Greek teaching of the psy·khe′ (soul) as being immaterial, intangible, invisible, and immortal, the scriptures show that both psy·khe′ and ne′phesh, as used with reference to earthly creatures, refer to that which is material, tangible, visible, and mortal.

 

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “Nepes [ne′phesh] is a term of far greater extension than our ‘soul,’ signifying life (Ex 21.23; Dt 19.21) and its various vital manifestations: breathing (Gn 35.18; Jb 41.13[21]), blood [Gn 9.4; Dt 12.23; Ps 140(141).8], desire (2 Sm 3.21; Prv 23.2). The soul in the O[ld] T[estament] means not a part of man, but the whole man—man as a living being. Similarly, in the N[ew] T[estament] it signifies human life: the life of an individual, conscious subject (Mt 2.20; 6.25; Lk 12.22-23; 14.26; Jn 10.11, 15, 17; 13.37).”—1967, Vol. XIII, p. 467.

 

The Roman Catholic translation, The New American Bible, in its “Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms” (pp. 27, 28), says: “In the New Testament, to ‘save one’s soul’ (Mk 8:35) does not mean to save some ‘spiritual’ part of man, as opposed to his ‘body’ (in the Platonic sense) but the whole person with emphasis on the fact that the person is living, desiring, loving and willing, etc., in addition to being concrete and physical.”—Edition published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, 1970.

 

Ne′phesh evidently comes from a root meaning “breathe” and in a literal sense ne′phesh could be rendered as “a breather.” Koehler and Baumgartner’s Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden, 1958, p. 627) defines it as: “the breathing substance, making man a[nd] animal living beings Gn 1, 20, the soul (strictly distinct from the greek notion of soul) the seat of which is the blood Gn 9, 4f Lv 17, 11 Dt 12, 23: (249 X) . . . soul = living being, individual, person.”

 

As for the Greek word psy·khe′, Greek-English lexicons give such definitions as “life,” and “the conscious self or personality as centre of emotions, desires, and affections,” “a living being,” and they show that even in non-Biblical Greek works the term was used “of animals.” Of course, such sources, treating as they do primarily of classical Greek writings, include all the meanings that the pagan Greek philosophers gave to the word, including that of “departed spirit,” “the immaterial and immortal soul,” “the spirit of the universe,” and “the immaterial principle of movement and life.” Evidently because some of the pagan philosophers taught that the soul emerged from the body at death, the term psy·khe′ was also applied to the “butterfly or moth,” which creatures go through a metamorphosis, changing from caterpillar to winged creature.—Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, revised by H. Jones, 1968, pp. 2026, 2027; Donnegan’s New Greek and English Lexicon, 1836, p. 1404.

 

The ancient Greek writers applied psy·khe′ in various ways and were not consistent, their personal and religious philosophies influencing their use of the term. Of Plato, to whose philosophy the common ideas about the English “soul” may be attributed (as is generally acknowledged), it is stated: “While he sometimes speaks of one of [the alleged] three parts of the soul, the ‘intelligible,’ as necessarily immortal, while the other two parts are mortal, he also speaks as if there were two souls in one body, one immortal and divine, the other mortal.”—The Evangelical Quarterly, London, 1931, Vol. III, p. 121, “Thoughts on the Tripartite Theory of Human Nature,” by A. McCaig.

 

In view of such inconsistency in non-Biblical writings, it is essential to let the scriptures speak for themselves, showing what the inspired writers meant by their use of the term psy·khe′, as well as by ne′phesh. Ne′phesh occurs 754 times in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew scriptures, while psy·khe′ appears by itself 102 times in the Westcott and Hort text of the Christian Greek scriptures, giving a total of 856 occurrences. (See NW appendix, p. 1573.) This frequency of occurrence makes possible a clear concept of the sense that these terms conveyed to the minds of the inspired Bible writers and the sense their writings should convey to our mind. An examination shows that, while the sense of these terms is broad, with different shades of meaning, among the Bible writers there was no inconsistency, confusion, or disharmony as to man’s nature, as existed among the Grecian philosophers of the so-called Classical Period.

 

Earth’s First Souls. The initial occurrences of ne′phesh are found at Genesis 1:20-23. On the fifth creative “day” God said: “‘Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls [ne′phesh] and let flying creatures fly over the earth . . . ’ And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul [ne′phesh] that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind.” Similarly on the sixth creative “day” ne′phesh is applied to the “domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth” as “living souls.”—Ge 1:24.

 

After man’s creation, God’s instruction to him again used the term ne′phesh with regard to the animal creation, “everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul [literally, in which there is living soul (ne′phesh)].” (Ge 1:30) Other examples of animals being so designated are found at Genesis 2:19; 9:10-16; Leviticus 11:10, 46; 24:18; Numbers 31:28; Ezekiel 47:9. Notably, the Christian Greek scriptures coincide in applying the Greek psy·khe′ to animals, as at Revelation 8:9; 16:3, where it is used of creatures in the sea.

 

Thus, the scriptures clearly show that ne′phesh and psy·khe′ are used to designate the animal creation lower than man. The same terms apply to man.

 

The Human Soul. Precisely the same Hebrew phrase used of the animal creation, namely, ne′phesh chai·yah′ (living soul), is applied to Adam, when, after God formed man out of dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, “the man came to be a living soul.” (Ge 2:7) Man was distinct from the animal creation, but that distinction was not because he was a ne′phesh (soul) and they were not. Rather, the record shows that it was because man alone was created “in God’s image.” (Ge 1:26, 27) He was created with moral qualities like those of God, with power and wisdom far superior to the animals; hence he could have in subjection all the lower forms of creature life. (Ge 1:26, 28) Man’s organism was more complex, as well as more versatile, than that of the animals. (Compare 1Co 15:39.) Likewise, Adam had, but lost, the prospect of eternal life; this is never stated with regard to the creatures lower than man.—Ge 2:15-17; 3:22-24.

 

It is true that the account says that ‘God proceeded to blow into the man’s nostrils the breath [form of nesha·mah′] of life,’ whereas this is not stated in the account of the animal creation. Clearly, however, the account of the creation of man is much more detailed than that of the creation of animals. Moreover, Genesis 7:21-23, in describing the Flood’s destruction of “all flesh” outside the ark, lists the animal creatures along with mankind and says: “Everything in which the breath [form of nesha·mah′] of the force of life was active in its nostrils, namely, all that were on the dry ground, died.” Obviously, the breath of life of the animal creatures also originally came from the Creator, Jehovah God.

 

So, too, the “spirit” (Heb., ru′ach; Gr., pneu′ma), or life-force, of man is not distinct from the life-force in animals, as is shown by Ecclesiastes 3:19-21, which states that “they all have but one spirit [u·ru′ach].”

 

Soul—A Living Creature. As stated, man “came to be a living soul”; hence man was a soul, he did not have a soul as something immaterial, invisible, and intangible residing inside him. The apostle Paul shows that the Christian teaching did not differ from the earlier Hebrew teaching, for he quotes Genesis 2:7 in saying: “It is even so written: ‘The first man Adam became a living soul [psy·khen′ zo′san].’ . . . The first man is out of the earth and made of dust.”—1Co 15:45-47.

 

The Genesis account shows that a living soul results from the combination of the earthly body with the breath of life. The expression “breath of the force of life [literally, breath of the spirit, or active force (ru′ach), of life]” (Ge 7:22) indicates that it is by breathing air (with its oxygen) that the life-force, or “spirit,” in all creatures, man and animals, is sustained. This life-force is found in every cell of the creature’s body, as is discussed under LIFE; SPIRIT.

 

Since the term ne′phesh refers to the creature itself, we should expect to find the normal physical functions or characteristics of fleshly creatures attributed to it. This is exactly the case. Ne′phesh (soul) is spoken of as eating flesh, fat, blood, or similar material things (Le 7:18, 20, 25, 27; 17:10, 12, 15; De 23:24); being hungry for or craving food and drink (De 12:15, 20, 21; Ps 107:9; Pr 19:15; 27:7; Isa 29:8; 32:6; Mic 7:1); being made fat (Pr 11:25); fasting (Ps 35:13); touching unclean things, such as a dead body (Le 5:2; 7:21; 17:15; 22:6; Nu 19:13); being ‘seized as a pledge’ or being ‘kidnapped’ (De 24:6, 7); doing work (Le 23:30); being refreshed by cold water when tired (Pr 25:25); being purchased (Le 22:11; Eze 27:13); being given as a vow offering (Le 27:2); being put in irons (Ps 105:18); being sleepless (Ps 119:28); and struggling for breath (Jer 15:9).

 

It may be noted that in many texts reference is made to “my soul,” “his [or her] soul,” “your soul,” and so forth. This is because ne′phesh and psy·khe′ can mean one’s own self as a soul. The sense of the term can therefore often be expressed in English by use of personal pronouns. Thus Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (p. 627) shows that “my ne′phesh” means “I” (Ge 27:4, 25; Isa 1:14); “your [singular] ne′phesh” means “thou” or “you” (Ge 27:19, 31; Isa 43:4; 51:23); “his ne′phesh” means “he, himself” (Nu 30:2; Isa 53:10); “her ne′phesh” means “she, herself” (Nu 30:5-12), and so forth.

 

The Greek term psy·khe′ is used similarly. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1981, Vol. 4, p. 54) says it may be used as “the equivalent of the personal pronoun, used for emphasis and effect:—1st person, John 10:24 (‘us’); Heb. 10:38; cp. [compare] Gen. 12:13; Num. 23:10; Jud. 16:30; Ps. 120:2 (‘me’); 2nd person, 2 Cor. 12:15; Heb. 13:17,” and so forth.

 

Represents life as a creature. Both ne′phesh and psy·khe′ are also used to mean life—not merely as an abstract force or principle—but life as a creature, human or animal.

 

Thus when Rachel was giving birth to Benjamin, her ne′phesh (“soul,” or life as a creature) went out from her and she died. (Ge 35:16-19) She ceased to be a living creature. Similarly, when the prophet Elijah performed a miracle regarding the dead son of the widow of Zarephath, the child’s ne′phesh (“soul,” or life as a creature) came back into him and “he came to life,” was again a living creature.—1Ki 17:17-23.

 

Because the creature’s life is so inseparably connected with and dependent on blood (shed blood standing for the life of the person or creature [Ge 4:10; 2Ki 9:26; Ps 9:12; Isa 26:21]), the scriptures speak of the ne′phesh (soul) as being “in the blood.” (Ge 9:4; Le 17:11, 14; De 12:23) This is, obviously, not meant literally, inasmuch as the scriptures also speak of the “blood of your souls” (Ge 9:5; compare Jer 2:34) and the many references already considered could not reasonably be applied solely to the blood or its life-supporting qualities.

 

Ne′phesh (soul) is not used with reference to the creation of vegetable life on the third creative “day” (Ge 1:11-13) or thereafter, since vegetation is bloodless.

 

Examples of the use of the Greek psy·khe′ to mean “life as a creature” may be found at Matthew 6:25; 10:39; 16:25, 26; Luke 12:20; John 10:11, 15; 13:37, 38; 15:13; Acts 20:10. Since God’s servants have the hope of a resurrection in the event of death, they have the hope of living again as “souls,” or living creatures. For that reason Jesus could say that “whoever loses his soul [his life as a creature] for the sake of me and the good news will save it. Really, of what benefit is it for a man to gain the whole world and to forfeit his soul? What, really, would a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Mr 8:35-37) Similarly, he stated: “He that is fond of his soul destroys it, but he that hates his soul in this world will safeguard it for everlasting life.” (Joh 12:25) These texts, and others like them, show the correct understanding of Jesus’ words at Matthew 10:28: “Do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” While men can kill the body, they cannot kill the person for all time, inasmuch as he lives in God’s purpose (compare Lu 20:37, 38) and God can and will restore such faithful one to life as a creature by means of a resurrection. For God’s servants, the loss of their “soul,” or life as a creature, is only temporary, not permanent.—Compare Re 12:11.

 

Mortal and destructible. On the other hand, Matthew 10:28 states that God “can destroy both soul [psy·khen′] and body in Gehenna.” This shows that psy·khe′ does not refer to something immortal or indestructible. There is, in fact, not one case in the entire scriptures, Hebrew and Greek, in which the words ne′phesh or psy·khe′ are modified by terms such as immortal, indestructible, imperishable, deathless, or the like. (See IMMORTALITY; INCORRUPTION.) On the other hand, there are scores of texts in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures that speak of the ne′phesh or psy·khe′ (soul) as mortal and subject to death (Ge 19:19, 20; Nu 23:10; Jos 2:13, 14; Jg 5:18; 16:16, 30; 1Ki 20:31, 32; Ps 22:29; Eze 18:4, 20; Mt 2:20; 26:38; Mr 3:4; Heb 10:39; Jas 5:20); as dying, being “cut off” or destroyed (Ge 17:14; Ex 12:15; Le 7:20; 23:29; Jos 10:28-39; Ps 78:50; Eze 13:19; 22:27; Ac 3:23; Re 8:9; 16:3), whether by sword (Jos 10:37; Eze 33:6) or by suffocation (Job 7:15), or being in danger of death due to drowning (Jon 2:5); and also as going down into the pit or into Sheol (Job 33:22; Ps 89:48) or being delivered therefrom (Ps 16:10; 30:3; 49:15; Pr 23:14).

 

Dead soul. The expression ‘deceased or dead soul’ also appears a number of times, meaning simply “a dead person.”—Le 19:28; 21:1, 11; 22:4; Nu 5:2; 6:6; Hag 2:13; compare Nu 19:11, 13.

 

Desire. At times the word ne′phesh is used to express the desire of the individual, one that fills him and then occupies him in achieving its goal. Proverbs 13:2, for example, says of those dealing treacherously that ‘their very soul is violence,’ that is, that they are ‘all out’ for violence, in effect, become violence personified. (Compare Ge 34:3, ftn; Ps 27:12; 35:25; 41:2.) Israel’s false shepherds are called “dogs strong in soul[ful desire],” who have known no satisfaction.—Isa 56:11, 12; compare Pr 23:1-3; Hab 2:5.

 

Serving With One’s Whole Soul. The “soul” basically means the entire person, as has been shown. Yet certain texts exhort us to seek for, love, and serve God with ‘all our heart and all our soul’ (De 4:29; 11:13, 18), while Deuteronomy 6:5 says: “You must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your vital force.” Jesus said it was necessary to serve with one’s whole soul and strength and, additionally, “with your whole mind.” (Mr 12:30; Lu 10:27) The question arises as to why these other things are mentioned with the soul, since it embraces them all. To illustrate the probable meaning: A person might sell himself (his soul) into slavery to another, thereby becoming the possession of his owner and master. Yet he might not serve his master wholeheartedly, with full motivation and desire to please him, and thus he might not use his full strength or his full mental capacity to advance his master’s interests. (Compare Eph 6:5; Col 3:22.) Hence these other facets are evidently mentioned to focus attention on them so that we do not fail to remember and consider them in our service to God, to whom we belong, and to his Son, whose life was the ransom price that bought us. “Whole-souled” service to God involves the entire person, no bodily part, function, capacity, or desire being left out.—Compare Mt 5:28-30; Lu 21:34-36; Eph 6:6-9; Php 3:19; Col 3:23, 24.

 

Soul and Spirit Are Distinct. The “spirit” (Heb., ru′ach; Gr., pneu′ma) should not be confused with the “soul” (Heb., ne′phesh; Gr., psy·khe′), for they refer to different things. Thus, Hebrews 4:12 speaks of the Word of God as ‘piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints and their marrow.’ (Compare also Php 1:27; 1Th 5:23.) As has been shown, the soul (ne′phesh; psy·khe′) is the creature itself. The spirit (ru′ach; pneu′ma) generally refers to the life-force of the living creature or soul, though the original-language terms may also have other meanings.

 

Illustrating further the distinction between the Greek psy·khe′ and pneu′ma is the apostle Paul’s discussion, in his first letter to the Corinthians, of the resurrection of Christians to spirit life. Here he contrasts “that which is physical [psy·khi·kon′, literally, soulical]” with “that which is spiritual [pneu·ma·ti·kon′].” Thus, he shows that Christians until the time of their death have a “soulical” body, even as did the first man Adam; whereas, in their resurrection such anointed Christians receive a spiritual body like that of the glorified Jesus Christ. (1Co 15:42-49) Jude makes a somewhat similar comparison in speaking of “animalistic men [psy·khi·koi′, literally, soulical (men)], not having spirituality [literally, not having spirit (pneu′ma)].”—Jude 19.

 

God as Having Soul. In view of the foregoing, it appears that the scriptures in which God speaks of “my soul” (Le 26:11, 30; Ps 24:4; Isa 42:1) are yet another instance of an anthropomorphic usage, that is, the attributing of physical and human characteristics to God to facilitate understanding, as when God is spoken of as having eyes, hands, and so forth. By speaking of ‘my ne′phesh,’ Jehovah clearly means “myself” or “my person.” “God is a Spirit [Pneu′ma].”—Joh 4:24; see JEHOVAH (Descriptions of his presence).Chapter 4

 

WHAT HAPPENS AT DEATH

 

What is going to happen to you when you die? Will you go to heaven? Or perhaps to another place — such as hell? or purgatory? There have been many articles written about people who have experienced “death” momentarily and have told about the beautiful “life” they had and the glorious things they saw while they were “dead.” Did these people get a glimpse of heaven? Were these people really dead?

 

 

 

Surely God has told us in the Bible what we can expect when we die. Consider some of the many verses that talk about death. Matthew 27:52: “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose.” Acts 13:36: “For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption.” The words “saw corruption” mean that his body decayed after he was laid in his grave. First Corinthians 15:51 tells us that “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” Psalms 13:3 says, “Consider and hear me, O Lord my God: lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death.” First Kings 11:43: “And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.” The expression “slept with his fathers” is used many times in the Bible to indicate that a person had died.

 

 

 

Notice that these verses on death have one thing in common: they speak of death as sleep. Many other verses in the Bible also refer to death as sleep. Could it be that death is like sleep and that when a person dies he does not go anywhere? Even the Lord Jesus referred to death as sleep. In John 11:11-14 He spoke of the death of Lazarus as sleep. Lazarus, whom Jesus knew quite well, was sick. When Mary, Lazarus’ sister, sent word to Jesus and asked Him to come, He delayed his departure for two days. His disciples became worried that Lazarus might die before Jesus arrived. Then Jesus told them that Lazarus was asleep, and the disciples thought that since he was sleeping he would get well, for sleep is beneficial for a sick person. However, they did not realize that Jesus had referred to his death. “These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.”

 

 

 

Do the dead go somewhere when they die? Do they watch what is happening here on the earth after they are dead? Psalms 146:3,4 says, “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” Here we see that in death the body returns to the earth, to the dust from which it came, and the person’s thoughts perish. The dead have no thoughts. Isaiah 38:10,11 says, “I said in the cutting off of my days, I shall go to the gates of the grave: I am deprived of the residue of my years. I said, I shall not see the Lord, even the Lord, in the land of the living: I shall behold man no more with the inhabitants of the world.” Certainly if a person went to heaven when he died, he would see the Lord, but this verse says that the dead do not see the Lord, nor men. The dead, therefore, are not watching people on earth. They are not watching what is taking place on earth or anywhere else, for they are asleep in their graves and their thoughts have all perished.

 

 

 

King David, for example, did not go anywhere when he died except to his grave. Acts 2:29,34 tells us, “Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. For David is not ascended into the heavens.”

 

 

 

Ecclesiastes 9:5,6,10 is an exceptionally clear text concerning death. “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.”

 

 

 

The dead do not know anything. In death there are no thoughts, no knowledge, no wisdom, no emotions, no work nor device, and certainly no consciousness, for without thoughts there can be no consciousness. Death is exactly like a very deep sleep; consequently the Bible frequently refers to death as sleep. When a person dies, he is simply in the grave, where he will remain until the resurrection. He has no thoughts; he is unconscious, exactly as if he were in a very deep sleep.

 

 

 

Just as a person has no knowledge of anything prior to his birth, he will have no knowledge or consciousness of events after he is dead. He simply ceases to exist. His body and mind decay, and he ceases to exist. This might sound like a morbid finality to life; however, death is not the end. The apostle John tells us that everyone who has died, regardless of whether he has been good or bad, will be resurrected. Everyone will be awakened from the sleep of death. John 5:28,29 says: “Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which ALL that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth.” Notice who will hear the Lord’s voice: “ALL that are in the graves.” The dead are not in heaven or in hell; they are in the graves, where they will all remain until they hear the voice of the Lord at the resurrection.

 

 

 

Here, then, is another reason why the Bible speaks of death as sleep. Death as we know it is only temporary. Just as a sleeping person eventually awakes, everyone will be awakened from death at the resurrection.

 

 

 

Death is a very deep sleep. In death there are no thoughts, no knowledge, no wisdom, no emotions, and no consciousness. If you are very tired when you go to bed at night, you fall asleep quickly; you sleep very soundly and awaken the next morning to the sound of the alarm clock or perhaps the light of day. How long did it seem from the moment sleep came until the alarm clock rang? It seemed but a fraction of a second, did it not? Death is exactly the same. From the moment we close our eyes in death until we are resurrected, we will not be conscious of any time passing. Regardless of how long we have been dead, when we open our eyes to behold the Lord in all His glory at the resurrection, it will seem as if only an instant has passed. The dead are not conscious of the passing of time. In fact, if a man died suddenly so that he could not have realized what happened, during the first few moments after his resurrection he will not even realize that he had been dead.

 

 

 

What about the prevalent belief that when a wicked person dies he goes to hell, to everlasting fire, to be punished for his wickedness? As we read in the previous chapter, the Lord Jesus loves us dearly. Would a God whose love for us far exceeds the bounds of human understanding require those that He created to endure the pain of everlasting fire throughout all eternity? Would a God of love require a mother in heaven to witness her son writhing with pain in the fires of hell throughout all eternity? This would certainly not bring happiness to the mother in heaven, where there is to be no sorrow or pain. A God of love would certainly never require such a thing. This fable that people will suffer in an ever-burning hell is an example of the erroneous propaganda which floods this entire world. Satan deceives the world into believing this lie to make mankind think that God has a personality like his own. Satan always tries to make people believe that God is responsible for the evil which he himself has caused.

 

 

 

Consider a few more Bible verses which further emphasize the fact that death is exactly like a deep sleep. Psalms 115:17 says, “The dead praise not the Lord.” If a person who was in the habit of praising the Lord in this life were to go to heaven after he died, there in the presence of God he would surely praise Him. He does not praise the Lord, of course, for he has no consciousness. He is asleep in his grave. Psalms 6:5 says, “For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?” Surely if a person who had been righteous during his life on earth went to heaven when he died, he would remember the Lord as he had on earth; for he would be there with the Lord. After he dies, a person cannot remember the Lord because he is totally unconscious. This verse also implies that the dead do not give thanks to the Lord. Certainly a righteous person would thank God for taking him to heaven. He doesn’t, however, because he is unconscious, asleep in his grave. In Job 17:13, Job says, “If I wait, the grave is mine house: I have made my bed in the darkness.” Job also knew of the resurrection. In Job 19:25-27 he says, “For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another.” Job says here that after he dies and his body decays, he shall, in his flesh, in his body, see God in the latter day at the resurrection. It makes little sense to expect that when a person dies he goes to heaven or to hell and then climbs back into the grave to be resurrected.

 

 

 

Many question the concept of a resurrection from death, even though the Bible describes it, indicates that it has happened before (Moses was resurrected shortly after his death), and shows that the Lord Himself is no longer in the tomb. God put us together once, and He can do it again. In fact, the blueprints and details of our bodies are recorded in the computer banks of heaven so minutely and so accurately that on the resurrection day the thought patterns in our brains will be reconstructed exactly as they were at the moment of death so that our thoughts will continue right where they were when we died. If a righteous person dies in the middle of a prayer to God, he will arise from death finishing that prayer. If a person dies in the process of cursing God, he will arise from death with that same curse on his lips.

 

 

 

There are some verses in the Bible which, on casual reading, would seem to contradict what we have studied so far about death. Let us consider them.

 

 

 

The story of the rich man and Lazarus is found in Luke 16:19-31. “There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou are tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldst send him to my father’s house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”

 

 

 

This story seems to contradict the other verses we have covered, which show death to be exactly like a deep sleep. What is the problem? We have seen that there can be no contradictions in the Bible. What, then, is the meaning of this story?

 

 

 

Jesus used many stories to illustrate various lessons which He wanted the people to understand. These stories are called parables. A parable is a symbolic story which is used as an aid in teaching. Jesus used parables to help us to understand various aspects of life on earth and our relationship with God and to show us the way we should live. The story of the rich man and Lazarus is one of these parables, and in fact most of the King James Bibles have the words, “Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus” printed at the top of the page on which this story is found. At least one ancient manuscript also refers to this story as a parable in the text. This parable is the last of a series of parables which Jesus told on this occasion.

 

 

 

Why did Jesus use this particular parable, which speaks of hell, where people are tormented, and of Abraham’s bosom, where people are happy? The belief was popular in that day, just as it is in our day, that when people died they went either to heaven or to hell, and Jesus used this mistaken belief as a setting for His story, which was designed to induce people to repent and turn away from their evil ways. The people also believed that Abraham had a position of special influence in heaven, much as some today believe Saint Peter guards the gates of heaven. The point of His story was that if they would not hear Moses and the prophets, they would not hear one returning from the dead to warn them to repent. Indeed, Jesus returned from the dead, and many, many people ignore His messages. They do not hear the messages of Moses and the prophets, and they do not hear the messages of Jesus.

 

 

 

We have just read a number of texts in which the prophets describe death as sleep and tell us that in death we have no thoughts or consciousness, that our emotions all perish, and that there is “no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave.” If the people would study and heed what the prophets wrote, they would realize that death is exactly like sleep.

 

 

 

There is another apparent contradiction in the Bible concerning death which must be considered. Luke 23:42,43 describes Jesus’ assurance to the thief on the cross that he would be saved. “And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” These words were spoken on Friday afternoon just before Jesus died. It appears that in this verse Jesus is telling the thief that that day (Friday) he would be with the Lord in paradise; thus, this verse seems to contradict the other verses showing death to be a sleep. However, consider John 20:17, where Jesus, talking with Mary on Sunday morning after His resurrection, said, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: But go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” So, on Sunday morning Jesus made the statement that He had not yet been to paradise, to God the Father. How, then, could He have told the thief on the cross that he would be in paradise on Friday evening with Jesus when He Himself would not be there? Where was Jesus after He died on the cross? He was asleep in the grave, just as the scriptures say, until His resurrection on Sunday morning. Jesus Himself said in Matthew 12:40 that He would remain in the grave until his resurrection: “For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”

 

 

 

Where, then, is the problem? Since Luke 23:43 is the verse that stands in contradiction with the other verses we have considered, there must be some problem with this one. The difficulty can be resolved easily. The original Greek text was written without punctuation. Punctuation was added later by the translators. The problem with this verse is the placement of the comma before the words “To day.” If the comma is placed after the words “To day, the verse says that Jesus on that day promised the thief that he would be with Him in paradise after the resurrection. This verse would then agree with the other verses of scripture concerning death. It should therefore read, “Verily I say unto thee today, that thou shalt be with me in Paradise.” Jesus promised the thief “today” a place in paradise after the resurrection. Remember that the entire Bible must agree with itself; this is one of the methods God has given us so that we might know when we have these difficult verses interpreted correctly. Remember also that the original text had no punctuation and that the problem is with the comma, which was put there by a translator who did not understand.

 

 

 

We have seen that the dead are asleep and go nowhere except the grave; neither have they any thoughts or emotions or knowledge. This is the truth that God tells us in the scriptures. Why, then, do most people believe that the dead do go someplace, either to heaven, hell, or purgatory?

 

 

 

We learned in chapter two that Satan deceives the entire world. The belief that death is another life does not originate from God; it comes from the devil. Satan wants people to believe this lie because then they are much more susceptible to his other deceptions.

 

 

 

Consider, for instance, a hypothetical case. A girl who has been very close to her mother is deeply grieved at her mother’s death. One night just as the girl is about to fall asleep, she sees her mother standing at the foot of her bed. She is overjoyed to know that her mother is not really dead. She listens intently to what her mother has to say about the wonderful life after death.

 

 

 

Another person attends a seance, where a spirit medium, probably with a crystal ball, seemingly contacts the spirit of someone who has died. Perhaps the dead person materializes and talks to the client himself, giving advice and describing the wonderful life after death.

 

 

 

As we have seen, the dead are unconscious and know nothing. Who, then, is masquerading as these dead people? In chapter two we found that Satan is an evil angel and that he has many other evil angels on earth with him helping him to accomplish his purposes and deceptions. In Hebrews 13:2 we saw that angels have the ability to imitate other life forms and that at times they appear as human beings. They can imitate anyone perfectly, and this is what they do when they appear as someone who has died. The girl in our example heard a voice exactly like her mother’s voice, but it was not her mother’s. She saw a form exactly like her mother’s form, but it was not her mother’s. Her mother is dead; and the dead are sound asleep, without thoughts, consciousness, knowledge, emotions, or wisdom. This form was either Satan or one of his angels masquerading as her mother. Since the girl believes that she is seeing and listening to her mother, she will believe what her “mother” tells her. She is wide open for Satan’s lies and deceptions under these conditions. She is told that life after death is wonderful and that she need not worry about anything.

 

 

 

Suppose before her death the girl’s mother habitually lied, stole, and committed adultery and the girl knew about her wickedness. When the “mother” tells her how wonderful life after death is, the girl will believe that lying, stealing, and committing adultery are permissible regardless of what the Bible says about these things. After such an experience it is unlikely that the girl will ever understand the truth. Satan has essentially locked her in error by this deception.

 

 

 

When people see visions of Mary, the mother of Jesus, they are seeing the devil or one of his demons masquerading as Mary. Mary is asleep in her grave awaiting her resurrection, as we have just read from the Bible. Seeing a vision like this can be overwhelmingly deceptive. We must realize that God cannot lie to us. What the Bible says is the truth. Mary is asleep in her grave and cannot appear to anyone.

 

 

 

Similarly, the happenings at a seance are tricks of Satan or his evil angels. A Christian should never visit such a place, not even out of curiosity. The deception that the dead are not really dead is often too overpowering.

 

 

 

Many of the world’s more sensational publications print stories about visits from the dead and about other spiritualistic experiences. These publications do Satan’s work and help to propagate his lies about the state of the dead. When a person supposedly comes back from the dead with a story of a wonderful life hereafter and it is widely publicized, many people believe these stories rather than the Bible. They believe that no matter how they live and no matter what they do, they will experience a wonderful life when they die. After the resurrection, life indeed will be wonderful for the people who follow Christ in the way the Bible specifies, but not for the wicked.

 

 

 

Consider again the very clear description of the state of the dead in Ecclesiastes 9:5,6,10. “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.”

 

 

 

If a man suffers a blow to his head and is knocked out, he knows nothing; for he is unconscious. How ridiculous to believe that if he is hit a little harder and is killed, he knows everything! Our only hope against the deceptions of the devil is complete faith and trust in the Word of God, interpreted so that there are no contradictions anywhere.

 

 

 

Two more concepts which are poorly understood by most are the soul and the spirit. Many believe that at death their soul or spirit goes somewhere and continues to live apart from their body. Genesis 2:7 shows that a soul is a living human being. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” Souls, therefore, are human beings. Ecclesiastes 12:7 describes the process of death. “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.” What is meant by “spirit” in this verse? The word “spirit” is a translation of the Hebrew word ruach, which means “breath.” Ruach is translated “breath” twenty-eight times in the King James version. One of these verses is Genesis 6:17. “And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life [ruach], from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.” The spirit in Ecclesiastes 12:7, then, is the breath of life. When a man loses this, he dies.

 

 

 

By way of analogy, suppose a man constructs a box from several boards and some nails. After the box is built, he pulls out all the nails, puts them in a pile, and places the boards in a stack. What happened to the box? It did not go anywhere; it just ceased to exist. This is exactly what happens to a soul at death; it just ceases to exist. By the hand of God a soul is made from the dust of the ground and the breath of life. At death the breath leaves, the dust goes back to the ground, and the soul simply ceases to exist, exactly as the box ceased to exist. At death the soul does not go anywhere: it is not immortal; it simply ceases to exist.

 

 

 

Consider a few other verses which show that soul means “human being.” Joshua 11:11 is part of a description of a battle. “And they smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them: there was not any left to breathe.” This verse describes people who died in the battle. These souls were not immortal, for they were utterly destroyed. Since they were utterly destroyed, they could certainly not go anywhere.

 

 

 

Acts 27:37 says that there were 276 people on board a particular ship. “And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.” Acts 2:41 tells us that 3,000 people joined the church in one day. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”

 

 

 

Finally Revelation 16:3 tells us, “And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.” We see here that not only human beings are souls, but also all the animals and fish in the sea. Every living entity of the animal kingdom is a soul. Dogs, cats, horses, cows, men, and women are souls, and here on earth none of them is immortal; they are all subject to death.

 

 

 

Consider a few verses which talk about the spirit. You will recall that Ecclesiastes 12:7 showed that a person’s spirit is his breath. James 2:26 says, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” In this case the word “spirit” is translated from the Greek word pneuma, which means breath or wind. We get our English word “pneumatic” from this word. Pneumatic means pertaining to air, or operated by air, as in pneumatic tires (tires with air in them) or pneumatic drill (a drill operated by air pressure). So here again we see that man’s spirit is his breath.

 

 

 

The King James translation of the Bible was the work of a large group of scholars. When a disagreement arose as to how to translate a particular word, the translators would vote on which meaning should be used. They would then put the meaning which the majority wanted in the main text and put the alternate meaning in a margin, which ran down the middle of the page between the two columns of text. This marginal reference is usually printed in the more expensive copies of the King James version.

 

 

 

If you have a King James version with the marginal references, you will notice that by the word “spirit” in James 2:26 there is a small number. Now, look in the margin under chapter two until you see that small number. This is the alternate translation of the word “spirit” and it is “breath.”

 

 

 

Next consider Job 27:3. “All the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils . . . .” The nose (nostrils) is a rather strange place for the spirit to be if the spirit is what most people think it is. Again, the Hebrew word ruach, meaning breath, is used. The marginal reference for the word “spirit” in this verse also shows that the alternate translation is breath: “That is, the breath which God gave him.”

 

 

 

We have seen here that human beings and animals are souls and that their spirit is simply their breath. In death, a person’s soul ceases to exist, for his breath (spirit) leaves him. He quits breathing, and his body goes back to dust. Death is exactly like a very deep sleep.

 

 

 

With few exceptions, every time the word “spirit” is used in the King James version it is the translation of words that mean breath or wind. One of the qualities of breath and wind is intangibility. Thus the Hebrew and Greek words which mean breath or wind are sometimes used also to refer to other things which are of an intangible nature. These words are used, for instance, to refer to the Holy Spirit. In the original languages of the Bible the words for Holy Spirit literally mean “Holy Wind.” Likewise in the original languages the words which refer to unclean spirits literally mean “evil wind.” A few times the word “spirit” refers to a person’s mind.

 

 

 

The only two texts where the word “spirit” is not translated from a word meaning breath or wind are found in the gospels of Matthew and Mark. Both instances refer to the appearance of Jesus to His disciples after His resurrection. The disciples thought they had seen a spirit. In these two cases “spirit” is translated from a word which means apparition or phantom, or ghost.

 

 

 

Next, consider the words “immortal” and “immortality” as they occur in the Bible, and see whether such a thing as an immortal soul is mentioned anywhere. In the King James version, the only occurrence of the word “immortal” is in 1 Timothy 1:17: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.” This is the only time in the entire Bible the word “immortal” appears, and it applies to God, not to man.

 

 

 

Notice in Genesis 2:17 what God said when instructing Adam not to eat the fruit of one particular tree in the Garden of Eden. “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” God told Adam that he would die. Now, notice what Satan told Eve in Genesis 3:4. “And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die.” — a direct contradiction of what God had said. Whom did Adam and Eve believe? As we know, they believed the devil. Whom do men believe today when they claim that when a person dies he is not really dead but is living somewhere else? Isn’t it strange, when God has spoken so plainly, that men still choose to believe the devil’s lies?

 

 

 

Romans 3:23 tells us that we have all broken the law of God. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Romans 6:23 tells us that those who break God’s law earn wages, which is death. “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” With these two texts in mind, notice that Ezekiel 18:4 tells us that “the soul that sinneth, it shall die.” Since we have all sinned, broken God’s law, we are all subject to death. There is no such thing as an immortal soul, for all the souls who have sinned are mortal and are subject to death.

 

 

 

Next, we shall consider each verse in which the word “immortality” is used in the King James version. First Timothy 6:14-16 says, “That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality.” Only God has immortality. God is the only immortal being; He is the only one not subject to death. If only God has immortality, then no other being is immortal. Man has no immortal soul or immortal spirit, for only God is immortal.

 

 

 

Romans 2:6,7 tells us that God “will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life.” We do not have eternal life now, but we are to seek for immortality by well doing. Second Timothy 1:10 tells us that Jesus Christ “hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” Jesus has made it possible for us to gain immortality someday, although we do not have it now.

 

 

 

First Corinthians 15:51-54 tells us when immortality will be granted to some. “Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep [die], but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump [trumpet]: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.”

 

 

 

The last trumpet signifies the return of the Lord Jesus Christ to this earth. It is then that immortality will be granted to the righteous men and women.

 

 

 

We have just looked at every Bible verse which contains the words “immortal” and “immortality.” The term “immortal soul” is not found in the Bible, for there is no such thing at the present time. The immortal soul doctrine is straight from the devil. He has been preaching this lie since the Garden of Eden, and mankind has been believing it ever since.

 

 

 

The word “hell” in the King James Old Testament appears thirty-one times and is ALWAYS translated from the Hebrew word sheowl, which means “the grave.” The word sheowl is translated “grave” thirty times. Hell is simply the grave.

 

 

 

Chapter 5: The Grand Finale <<< Click

 

 

 

Return to Pacific Ins4A “Soul”—A Living Creature, Human or Animal; Life as an Intelligent Person; Other Uses

Heb., נפש (ne′phesh); Gr., ψυχή (psy·khe′); Lat., a′ni·ma

 

In the Hebrew scriptures the Hebrew word ne′phesh occurs 754 times, first in Ge 1:20. The New World Translation consistently renders it “soul” and in each case it proves understandable in the light of its context. The use of this one Hebrew word in many different contexts helps us to ascertain the basic idea inherent in the word as the Bible writers used it, namely, that it is a person, an individual, or a lower creature; or, the life that a person or an animal enjoys as such. This is totally different from what the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans religiously and philosophically called a soul.

 

In the Christian Greek scriptures the Greek word psy·khe′ occurs by itself 102 times, first in Mt 2:20. This includes Eph 6:6 and Col 3:23, where it is in the expression “whole-souled.” Additionally it is used in many compound Greek words such as in Php 2:2, 19; 1Th 5:14. The New World Translation consistently renders psy·khe′ as “soul.” This uniform rendering by the same English word proves very enlightening as to how the inspired writers used psy·khe′ and what properties they ascribed to it.

 

To aid in understanding the uses of “soul,” we have grouped below, under various headings, texts where “soul” occurs.

 

Animals are souls

 

Ge 1:20, 21, 24, 30;  2:19;  9:10, 12, 15, 16; Le 11:10, 46, 46;  24:18; Nu 31:28; Job 41:21; Eze 47:9.

 

A living person or individual is a soul

 

Ge 2:7;  12:5;  14:21;  36:6;  46:15, 18, 22, 25, 26, 26, 27, 27; Ex 1:5, 5;  12:4, 16;  16:16; Le 2:1;  4:2, 27;  5:1, 2, 4, 15, 17;  6:2;  7:18, 20, 21, 25, 27;  17:10, 12, 15;  18:29;  20:6, 6;  22:6, 11;  23:29, 30;  27:2; Nu 5:6;  15:27, 28, 30;  19:18, 22;  31:35, 35, 40, 40, 46;  35:30; De 10:22;  24:6, 7; 1Sa 22:22; 2Sa 14:14; 2Ki 12:4; 1Ch 5:21; Ps 19:7; Pr 11:25, 30;  16:24;  19:2, 15;  25:25;  27:7, 7, 9; Jer 43:6;  52:29; La 3:25; Eze 27:13; Ac 2:41, 43;  7:14;  27:37; Ro 13:1; 1Co 15:45; 1Pe 3:20; 2Pe 2:14.

 

The creature soul is mortal, destructible

 

Ge 12:13;  17:14;  19:19, 20;  37:21; Ex 12:15, 19;  31:14; Le 7:20, 21, 27;  19:8;  22:3;  23:30;  24:17; Nu 9:13;  15:30, 31;  19:13, 20;  23:10;  31:19;  35:11, 15, 30; De 19:6, 11;  22:26;  27:25; Jos 2:13, 14;  10:28, 30, 32, 35, 37, 37, 39;  11:11;  20:3, 9; Jg 5:18;  16:16, 30; 1Ki 19:4;  20:31; Job 7:15;  11:20;  18:4;  33:22;  36:14; Ps 7:2;  22:29;  66:9;  69:1;  78:50;  94:17;  106:15;  124:4; Pr 28:17; Isa 55:3; Jer 2:34;  4:10;  18:20;  38:17;  40:14; Eze 13:19;  17:17;  18:4;  22:25, 27;  33:6; Mt 2:20;  10:28, 28;  26:38; Mr 3:4;  14:34; Lu 6:9;  17:33; Joh 12:25; Ac 3:23; Ro 11:3; Heb 10:39; Jas 5:20; Re 8:9;  12:11;  16:3.

 

Life as an intelligent person

 

Ge 35:18; Ex 4:19;  21:23;  30:12; Jos 9:24; Jg 9:17;  12:3;  18:25; 2Ki 7:7; 2Ch 1:11; Job 2:4;  6:11; Pr 1:18;  7:23;  22:23;  25:13; Mt 6:25;  10:39;  16:25; Lu 12:20; Joh 10:15;  13:38;  15:13; Ac 20:10; Ro 16:4; Php 2:30; 1Th 2:8; Jas 1:21; 1Pe 1:22;  2:11, 25; 1Jo 3:16.

 

Soul delivered from Sheol or Hades (“hell”)

 

Ps 16:10;  30:3;  49:15;  86:13;  89:48; Pr 23:14; Ac 2:27.

 

Dead soul, or corpse

 

Le 19:28;  21:1, 11;  22:4; Nu 5:2;  6:6, 11;  9:6, 7, 10;  19:11, 13; Hag 2:13.

 

Soul distinguished from spirit

 

Php 1:27; 1Th 5:23; Heb 4:12.

 

God has soul

 

1Sa 2:35; Ps 11:5;  24:4; Pr 6:16; Isa 1:14;  42:1; Jer 5:9;  6:8;  12:7;  14:19;  15:1;  32:41;  51:14; La 3:20; Eze 23:18; Am 6:8; Mt 12:18; Heb 10:38.titute’s home page<<< Click

JESUS CHRIST

 

The name and title of the Son of God from the time of his anointing while on earth.

 

The name Jesus (Gr., I·e·sous′) corresponds to the Hebrew name Jeshua (or, in fuller form, Jehoshua), meaning “Jehovah Is Salvation.” The name itself was not unusual, many men being so named in that period. For this reason persons often added further identification, saying, “Jesus the Nazarene.” (Mr 10:47; Ac 2:22) Christ is from the Greek Khri·stos′, the equivalent of the Hebrew Ma·shi′ach (Messiah), and means “Anointed One.” Whereas the expression “anointed one” was properly applied to others before Jesus, such as Moses, Aaron, and David (Heb 11:24-26; Le 4:3; 8:12; 2Sa 22:51), the position, office, or service to which these were anointed only prefigured the superior position, office, and service of Jesus Christ. Jesus is therefore preeminently and uniquely “the Christ, the Son of the living God.”—Mt 16:16; see CHRIST; MESSIAH.

 

Prehuman Existence. The person who became known as Jesus Christ did not begin life here on earth. He himself spoke of his prehuman heavenly life. (Joh 3:13; 6:38, 62; 8:23, 42, 58) John 1:1, 2 gives the heavenly name of the one who became Jesus, saying: “In the beginning the Word [Gr., Lo′gos] was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god [“was divine,” AT; Mo; or “of divine being,” Böhmer; Stage (both German)]. This one was in the beginning with God.” Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from “the beginning” must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as “the firstborn of all creation,” “the beginning of the creation by God.” (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, his firstborn Son.

 

That Jehovah was truly the Father or Life-Giver to this firstborn Son and, hence, that this Son was actually a creature of God is evident from Jesus’ own statements. He pointed to God as the Source of his life, saying, “I live because of the Father.” According to the context, this meant that his life resulted from or was caused by his Father, even as the gaining of life by dying men would result from their faith in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice.—Joh 6:56, 57.

 

If the estimates of modern-day scientists as to the age of the physical universe are anywhere near correct, Jesus’ existence as a spirit creature began thousands of millions of years prior to the creation of the first human. (Compare Mic 5:2.) This firstborn spirit Son was used by his Father in the creation of all other things. (Joh 1:3; Col 1:16, 17) This would include the millions of other spirit sons of Jehovah God’s heavenly family (Da 7:9, 10; Re 5:11), as well as the physical universe and the creatures originally produced within it. Logically, it was to this firstborn Son that Jehovah said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.” (Ge 1:26) All these other created things were not only created “through him” but also “for him,” as God’s Firstborn and the “heir of all things.”—Col 1:16; Heb 1:2.

 

Not a co-Creator. The Son’s share in the creative works, however, did not make him a co-Creator with his Father. The power for creation came from God through his holy spirit, or active force. (Ge 1:2; Ps 33:6) And since Jehovah is the Source of all life, all animate creation, visible and invisible, owes its life to him. (Ps 36:9) Rather than a co-Creator, then, the Son was the agent or instrumentality through whom Jehovah, the Creator, worked. Jesus himself credited God with the creation, as do all the scriptures.—Mt 19:4-6; see CREATION.

 

Wisdom personified. What is recorded concerning the Word in the scriptures fits remarkably the description given at Proverbs 8:22-31. There wisdom is personified, represented as though able to speak and act. (Pr 8:1) Many professed Christian writers of the early centuries of the Common Era understood this section to refer symbolically to God’s Son in his prehuman state. In view of the texts already considered, there can be no denying that that Son was “produced” by Jehovah “as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago,” nor that the Son was “beside [Jehovah] as a master worker” during earth’s creation, as described in these verses of Proverbs. It is true that in Hebrew, which assigns gender to its nouns (as do many other languages), the word for “wisdom” is always in the feminine gender. This would continue to be the case even though wisdom is personified and so would not rule out wisdom’s being used figuratively to represent God’s firstborn Son. The Greek word for “love” in the expression “God is love” (1Jo 4:8) is also in the feminine gender but that does not make God feminine. Solomon, the principal writer of Proverbs (Pr 1:1), applied the title qo·he′leth (congregator) to himself (Ec 1:1) and this word is also in the feminine gender.

 

Wisdom is manifest only by being expressed in some way. God’s own wisdom was expressed in creation (Pr 3:19, 20) but through his Son. (Compare 1Co 8:6.) So, too, God’s wise purpose involving mankind is made manifest through, and summed up in, his Son, Jesus Christ. Thus, the apostle could say that Christ represents “the power of God and the wisdom of God” and that Christ Jesus “has become to us wisdom from God, also righteousness and sanctification and release by ransom.”—1Co 1:24, 30; compare 1Co 2:7, 8; Pr 8:1, 10, 18-21.

 

How he is the “only-begotten Son.” Jesus’ being called the “only-begotten Son” (Joh 1:14; 3:16, 18; 1Jo 4:9) does not mean that the other spirit creatures produced were not God’s sons, for they are called sons as well. (Ge 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:4-7) However, by virtue of his being the sole direct creation of his Father, the firstborn Son was unique, different from all others of God’s sons, all of whom were created or begotten by Jehovah through that firstborn Son. So “the Word” was Jehovah’s “only-begotten Son” in a particular sense, even as Isaac was Abraham’s “only-begotten son” in a particular sense (his father already having another son but not by his wife Sarah).—Heb 11:17; Ge 16:15.

 

Why called “the Word.” The name (or, perhaps, title) “the Word” (Joh 1:1) apparently identifies the function that God’s firstborn Son performed after other intelligent creatures were formed. A similar expression is found at Exodus 4:16, where Jehovah says to Moses concerning his brother Aaron: “And he must speak for you to the people; and it must occur that he will serve as a mouth to you, and you will serve as God to him.” As spokesman for God’s chief representative on earth, Aaron served as “a mouth” for Moses. Likewise with the Word, or Logos, who became Jesus Christ. Jehovah evidently used his Son to convey information and instructions to others of his family of spirit sons, even as he used that Son to deliver his message to humans on earth. Showing that he was God’s Word, or Spokesman, Jesus said to his Jewish listeners: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality.”—Joh 7:16, 17; compare Joh 12:50; 18:37.

 

Doubtless on many occasions during his prehuman existence as the Word, Jesus acted as Jehovah’s Spokesman to persons on earth. While certain texts refer to Jehovah as though directly speaking to humans, other texts make clear that he did so through an angelic representative. (Compare Ex 3:2-4 with Ac 7:30, 35; also Ge 16:7-11, 13; 22:1, 11, 12, 15-18.) Reasonably, in the majority of such cases God spoke through the Word. He likely did so in Eden, for on two of the three occasions where mention is made of God’s speaking there, the record specifically shows someone was with Him, undoubtedly his Son. (Ge 1:26-30; 2:16, 17; 3:8-19, 22) The angel who guided Israel through the wilderness and whose voice the Israelites were strictly to obey because ‘Jehovah’s name was within him,’ may therefore have been God’s Son, the Word.—Ex 23:20-23; compare Jos 5:13-15.

 

This does not mean that the Word is the only angelic representative through whom Jehovah has spoken. The inspired statements at Acts 7:53, Galatians 3:19, and Hebrews 2:2, 3 make clear that the Law covenant was transmitted to Moses by angelic sons of God other than his Firstborn.

 

Jesus continues to bear the name “The Word of God” since his return to heavenly glory.—Re 19:13, 16.

 

Why do some Bible translations refer to Jesus as “God,” while others say he was “a god”?

 

Some translations render John 1:1 as saying: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Literally the Greek text reads: “In beginning was the word, and the word was toward the god, and god was the word.” The translator must supply capitals as needed in the language into which he translates the text. It is clearly proper to capitalize “God” in translating the phrase “the god,” since this must identify the Almighty God with whom the Word was. But the capitalizing of the word “god” in the second case does not have the same justification.

 

The New World Translation renders this text: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” True, there is no indefinite article (corresponding to “a” or “an”) in the original Greek text. But this does not mean one should not be used in translation, for Koine, or common Greek, had no indefinite article. Hence, throughout the Christian Greek scriptures, translators are obliged to use the indefinite article or not according to their understanding of the meaning of the text. All English translations of those scriptures do contain the indefinite article hundreds of times; yet most do not use it at John 1:1. Nevertheless, its use in the rendering of this text has sound basis.

 

First, it should be noted that the text itself shows that the Word was “with God,” hence could not be God, that is, be the Almighty God. (Note also vs 2, which would be unnecessary if vs 1 actually showed the Word to be God.) Additionally, the word for “god” (Gr., the·os′) in its second occurrence in the verse is significantly without the definite article “the” (Gr., ho). Regarding this fact, Ernst Haenchen, in a commentary on the Gospel of John (chapters 1-6), stated: “[the·os′] and [ho the·os′] (‘god, divine’ and ‘the God’) were not the same thing in this period. . . . In fact, for the . . . Evangelist, only the Father was ‘God’ ([ho the·os′]; cf. 17:3); ‘the Son’ was subordinate to him (cf. 14:28). But that is only hinted at in this passage because here the emphasis is on the proximity of the one to the other . . . . It was quite possible in Jewish and Christian monotheism to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God but were not identical with him. Phil 2:6-10 proves that. In that passage Paul depicts just such a divine being, who later became man in Jesus Christ . . . Thus, in both Philippians and John 1:1 it is not a matter of a dialectical relationship between two-in-one, but of a personal union of two entities.”—John 1, translated by R. W. Funk, 1984, pp. 109, 110.

 

After giving as a translation of John 1:1c “and divine (of the category divinity) was the Word,” Haenchen goes on to state: “In this instance, the verb ‘was’ ([en]) simply expresses predication. And the predicate noun must accordingly be more carefully observed: [the·os′] is not the same thing as [ho the·os′] (‘divine’ is not the same thing as ‘God’).” (pp. 110, 111) Elaborating on this point, Philip B. Harner brought out that the grammatical construction in John 1:1 involves an anarthrous predicate, that is, a predicate noun without the definite article “the,” preceding the verb, which construction is primarily qualitative in meaning and indicates that “the logos has the nature of theos.” He further stated: “In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the·os′] cannot be regarded as definite.” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87) Other translators, also recognizing that the Greek term has qualitative force and describes the nature of the Word, therefore render the phrase: “the Word was divine.”—AT; Sd; compare Mo; see NW appendix, p. 1579.

 

The Hebrew scriptures are consistently clear in showing that there is but one Almighty God, the Creator of all things and the Most High, whose name is Jehovah. (Ge 17:1; Isa 45:18; Ps 83:18) For that reason Moses could say to the nation of Israel: “Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. And you must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your vital force.” (De 6:4, 5) The Christian Greek scriptures do not contradict this teaching that had been accepted and believed by God’s servants for thousands of years, but instead they support it. (Mr 12:29; Ro 3:29, 30; 1Co 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 1Ti 2:5) Jesus Christ himself said, “The Father is greater than I am” and referred to the Father as his God, “the only true God.” (Joh 14:28; 17:3; 20:17; Mr 15:34; Re 1:1; 3:12) On numerous occasions Jesus expressed his inferiority and subordination to his Father. (Mt 4:9, 10; 20:23; Lu 22:41, 42; Joh 5:19; 8:42; 13:16) Even after Jesus’ ascension into heaven his apostles continued to present the same picture.—1Co 11:3; 15:20, 24-28; 1Pe 1:3; 1Jo 2:1; 4:9, 10.

 

These facts give solid support to a translation such as “the Word was a god” at John 1:1. The Word’s preeminent position among God’s creatures as the Firstborn, the one through whom God created all things, and as God’s Spokesman, gives real basis for his being called “a god” or mighty one. The Messianic prophecy at Isaiah 9:6 foretold that he would be called “Mighty God,” though not the Almighty God, and that he would be the “Eternal Father” of all those privileged to live as his subjects. The zeal of his own Father, “Jehovah of armies,” would accomplish this. (Isa 9:7) Certainly if God’s Adversary, Satan the Devil, is called a “god” (2Co 4:4) because of his dominance over men and demons (1Jo 5:19; Lu 11:14-18), then with far greater reason and propriety is God’s firstborn Son called “a god,” “the only-begotten god” as the most reliable manuscripts of John 1:18 call him.

 

When charged by opposers with ‘making himself a god,’ Jesus’ reply was: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”’? If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God came, and yet the scripture cannot be nullified, do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, I am God’s Son?” (Joh 10:31-37) Jesus there quoted from Psalm 82, in which human judges, whom God condemned for not executing justice, were called “gods.” (Ps 82:1, 2, 6, 7) Thus, Jesus showed the unreasonableness of charging him with blasphemy for stating that he was, not God, but God’s Son.

 

This charge of blasphemy arose as a result of Jesus’ having said: “I and the Father are one.” (Joh 10:30) That this did not mean that Jesus claimed to be the Father or to be God is evident from his reply, already partly considered. The oneness to which Jesus referred must be understood in harmony with the context of his statement. He was speaking of his works and his care of the “sheep” who would follow him. His works, as well as his words, demonstrated that there was unity, not disunity and disharmony, between him and his Father, a point his reply went on to emphasize. (Joh 10:25, 26, 37, 38; compare Joh 4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 8:16-18.) As regards his “sheep,” he and his Father were likewise at unity in their protecting such sheeplike ones and leading them to everlasting life. (Joh 10:27-29; compare Eze 34:23, 24.) Jesus’ prayer on behalf of the unity of all his disciples, including future ones, shows that the oneness, or union, between Jesus and his Father was not as to identity of person but as to purpose and action. In this way Jesus’ disciples could “all be one,” just as he and his Father are one.—Joh 17:20-23.

 

In harmony with this, Jesus, responding to a question by Thomas, said: “If you men had known me, you would have known my Father also; from this moment on you know him and have seen him,” and, in answer to a question from Philip, Jesus added: “He that has seen me has seen the Father also.” (Joh 14:5-9) Again, Jesus’ following explanation shows that this was so because he faithfully represented his Father, spoke the Father’s words, and did the Father’s works. (Joh 14:10, 11; compare Joh 12:28, 44-49.) It was on this same occasion, the night of his death, that Jesus said to these very disciples: “The Father is greater than I am.”—Joh 14:28.

 

The disciples ‘seeing’ the Father in Jesus can also be understood in the light of other scriptural examples. Jacob, for instance, said to Esau: “I have seen your face as though seeing God’s face in that you received me with pleasure.” He said this because Esau’s reaction had been in harmony with Jacob’s prayer to God. (Ge 33:9-11; 32:9-12) After God’s interrogation of Job out of a windstorm had clarified that man’s understanding, Job said: “In hearsay I have heard about you, but now my own eye does see you.” (Job 38:1; 42:5; see also Jg 13:21, 22.) The ‘eyes of his heart’ had been enlightened. (Compare Eph 1:18.) That Jesus’ statement about seeing the Father was meant to be understood figuratively and not literally is evident from his own statement at John 6:45 as well as from the fact that John, long after Jesus’ death, wrote: “No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him.”—Joh 1:18; 1Jo 4:12.

 

What did Thomas mean when he said to Jesus, “My Lord and my God”?

 

On the occasion of Jesus’ appearance to Thomas and the other apostles, which had removed Thomas’ doubts of Jesus’ resurrection, the now-convinced Thomas exclaimed to Jesus: “My Lord and my God! [literally, “The Lord of me and the God (ho The·os′) of me!”].” (Joh 20:24-29) Some scholars have viewed this expression as an exclamation of astonishment spoken to Jesus but actually directed to God, his Father. However, others claim the original Greek requires that the words be viewed as being directed to Jesus. Even if this is so, the expression “My Lord and my God” would still have to harmonize with the rest of the inspired scriptures. Since the record shows that Jesus had previously sent his disciples the message, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God,” there is no reason for believing that Thomas thought Jesus was the Almighty God. (Joh 20:17) John himself, after recounting Thomas’ encounter with the resurrected Jesus, says of this and similar accounts: “But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name.”—Joh 20:30, 31.

 

So, Thomas may have addressed Jesus as “my God” in the sense of Jesus’ being “a god” though not the Almighty God, not “the only true God,” to whom Thomas had often heard Jesus pray. (Joh 17:1-3) Or he may have addressed Jesus as “my God” in a way similar to expressions made by his forefathers, recorded in the Hebrew scriptures, with which Thomas was familiar. On various occasions when individuals were visited or addressed by an angelic messenger of Jehovah, the individuals, or at times the Bible writer setting out the account, responded to or spoke of that angelic messenger as though he were Jehovah God. (Compare Ge 16:7-11, 13; 18:1-5, 22-33; 32:24-30; Jg 6:11-15; 13:20-22.) This was because the angelic messenger was acting for Jehovah as his representative, speaking in his name, perhaps using the first person singular pronoun, and even saying, “I am the true God.” (Ge 31:11-13; Jg 2:1-5) Thomas may therefore have spoken to Jesus as “my God” in this sense, acknowledging or confessing Jesus as the representative and spokesman of the true God. Whatever the case, it is certain that Thomas’ words do not contradict the clear statement he himself had heard Jesus make, namely, “The Father is greater than I am.”—Joh 14:28.

 

His Birth on Earth. Prior to Jesus’ birth on earth, angels had appeared on this planet in human form, apparently materializing suitable bodies for the occasion, then dematerializing them after completing such assignments. (Ge 19:1-3; Jg 6:20-22; 13:15-20) They thus remained spirit creatures, merely employing a physical body temporarily. This, however, was not the case with the coming of God’s Son to earth to become the man Jesus. John 1:14 says that “the Word became flesh and resided among us.” For that reason he could call himself “the Son of man.” (Joh 1:51; 3:14, 15) Some draw attention to the expression “resided [literally, “tented”] among us” and claim this shows Jesus was, not a true human, but an incarnation. However, the apostle Peter uses a similar expression about himself, and Peter was obviously not an incarnation.—2Pe 1:13, 14.

 

The inspired Record says: “But the birth of Jesus Christ was in this way. During the time his mother Mary was promised in marriage to Joseph, she was found to be pregnant by holy spirit before they were united.” (Mt 1:18) Prior to this, Jehovah’s angelic messenger had informed the virgin girl Mary that she would ‘conceive in her womb’ as the result of God’s holy spirit coming upon her and His power overshadowing her. (Lu 1:30, 31, 34, 35) Since actual conception took place, it appears that Jehovah God caused an ovum, or egg cell, in Mary’s womb to become fertile, accomplishing this by the transferal of the life of his firstborn Son from the spirit realm to earth. (Ga 4:4) Only in this way could the child eventually born have retained identity as the same person who had resided in heaven as the Word, and only in this way could he have been an actual son of Mary and hence a genuine descendant of her forefathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, and King David and legitimate heir of the divine promises made to them. (Ge 22:15-18; 26:24; 28:10-14; 49:10; 2Sa 7:8, 11-16; Lu 3:23-34; see GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.) It is likely, therefore, that the child born resembled its Jewish mother in certain physical characteristics.

 

Mary was a descendant of the sinner Adam, hence herself imperfect and sinful. The question therefore is raised as to how Jesus, Mary’s “firstborn” (Lu 2:7), could be perfect and free from sin in his physical organism. While modern geneticists have learned much about laws of heredity and about dominant and recessive characteristics, they have had no experience in learning the results of uniting perfection with imperfection, as was the case with Jesus’ conception. From the results revealed in the Bible, it would appear that the perfect male life-force (causing the conception) canceled out any imperfection existent in Mary’s ovum, thereby producing a genetic pattern (and embryonic development) that was perfect from its start. Whatever the case, the operation of God’s holy spirit at the time guaranteed the success of God’s purpose. As the angel Gabriel explained to Mary, “power of the Most High” overshadowed her so that what was born was holy, God’s Son. God’s holy spirit formed, as it were, a protective wall so that no imperfection or hurtful force could damage, or blemish, the developing embryo, from conception on.—Lu 1:35.

 

Since it was God’s holy spirit that made the birth possible, Jesus owed his human life to his heavenly Father, not to any man, such as his adoptive father Joseph. (Mt 2:13-15; Lu 3:23) As Hebrews 10:5 states, Jehovah God ‘prepared a body for him,’ and Jesus, from conception onward, was truly “undefiled, separated from the sinners.”—Heb 7:26; compare Joh 8:46; 1Pe 2:21, 22.

 

The Messianic prophecy at Isaiah 52:14, which speaks of “the disfigurement as respects his appearance,” therefore must apply to Jesus the Messiah only in a figurative way. (Compare vs 7 of the same chapter.) Though he was perfect in physical form, the message of truth and righteousness that Jesus Christ boldly proclaimed made him repulsive in the eyes of hypocritical opposers, who claimed to see in him an agent of Beelzebub, a man possessed of a demon, a blasphemous fraud. (Mt 12:24; 27:39-43; Joh 8:48; 15:17-25) In a similar way the message proclaimed by Jesus’ disciples later caused them to be “a sweet odor” of life to receptive persons, but an odor of death to those rejecting their message.—2Co 2:14-16.

 

Time of Birth, Length of Ministry. Jesus evidently was born in the month of Ethanim (September-October) of the year 2 B.C.E., was baptized about the same time of the year in 29 C.E., and died about 3:00 p.m. on Friday, the 14th day of the spring month of Nisan (March-April), 33 C.E. The basis for these dates is as follows:

 

Jesus was born approximately six months after the birth of his relative John (the Baptizer), during the rule of Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus (31 B.C.E.–14 C.E.) and the Syrian governorship of Quirinius (see REGISTRATION for the probable dates of Quirinius’ administration), and toward the close of the reign of Herod the Great over Judea.—Mt 2:1, 13, 20-22; Lu 1:24-31, 36; 2:1, 2, 7.

 

His birth in relation to Herod’s death. While the date of Herod’s death is a debated one, there is considerable evidence pointing to 1 B.C.E. (See HEROD No. 1 [Date of His Death]; CHRONOLOGY [Lunar eclipses].) A number of events intervened between the time of Jesus’ birth and Herod’s death. These included Jesus’ circumcision on the eighth day (Lu 2:21); his being brought to the temple in Jerusalem 40 days after birth (Lu 2:22, 23; Le 12:1-4, 8); the journey of the astrologers “from eastern parts” to Bethlehem (where Jesus was no longer in a manger but in a house—Mt 2:1-11; compare Lu 2:7, 15, 16); Joseph and Mary’s flight to Egypt with the young child (Mt 2:13-15); followed by Herod’s realization that the astrologers had not followed his instructions, and the subsequent slaughter of all boys in Bethlehem and its districts under the age of two years (indicating that Jesus was not then a newborn infant). (Mt 2:16-18) Jesus’ birth taking place in the fall of 2 B.C.E. would allow for the time required by these events intervening between his birth and the death of Herod, likely in 1 B.C.E. There is, however, added reason for placing Jesus’ birth in 2 B.C.E.

 

Relationship to John’s ministry. Further basis for the dates given at the start of this section is found at Luke 3:1-3, which shows that John the Baptizer began his preaching and baptizing in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar.” That 15th year ran from the latter half of 28 C.E. to August or September of 29 C.E. (See TIBERIUS.) At some point in John’s ministry, Jesus went to him and was baptized. When Jesus thereafter commenced his own ministry he was “about thirty years old.” (Lu 3:21-23) At the age of 30, the age at which David became king, Jesus would no longer be subject to human parents.—2Sa 5:4, 5; compare Lu 2:51.

 

According to Numbers 4:1-3, 22, 23, 29, 30, those going into sanctuary service under the Law covenant were “from thirty years old upward.” It is reasonable that John the Baptizer, who was a Levite and son of a priest, began his ministry at the same age, not at the temple, of course, but in the special assignment Jehovah had outlined for him. (Lu 1:1-17, 67, 76-79) The specific mention (twice) of the age difference between John and Jesus and the correlation between the appearances and messages of Jehovah’s angel in announcing the births of the two sons (Lu 1) give ample basis for believing that their ministries followed a similar timetable, that is, the start of John’s ministry (as the forerunner of Jesus) being followed about six months later by the commencement of Jesus’ ministry.

 

On this basis, John’s birth occurred 30 years before he began his ministry in Tiberius’ 15th year, hence somewhere between the latter half of 3 B.C.E. and August or September of 2 B.C.E., with Jesus’ birth following about six months later.

 

Evidence for three-and-a-half-year ministry. Through the remaining chronological evidence an even more definite conclusion can be reached. This evidence deals with the length of Jesus’ ministry and time of death. The prophecy at Daniel 9:24-27 (discussed fully in the article SEVENTY WEEKS) points to the appearance of the Messiah at the start of the 70th “week” of years (Da 9:25) and his sacrificial death in the middle or “at the half” of the final week, thereby ending the validity of the sacrifices and gift offerings under the Law covenant. (Da 9:26, 27; compare Heb 9:9-14; 10:1-10.) This would mean a ministry of three and a half years’ duration (half of a “week” of seven years) for Jesus Christ.

 

For Jesus’ ministry to have lasted three and a half years, ending with his death at Passover time, would require that that period include four Passovers in all. Evidence for these four Passovers is found at John 2:13; 5:1; 6:4; and 13:1. John 5:1 does not specifically mention the Passover, referring only to “a [“the,” according to certain ancient manuscripts] festival of the Jews.” There is, however, good reason to believe this refers to the Passover rather than to any other of the annual festivals.

 

Earlier, at John 4:35, Jesus is mentioned as saying that there were “yet four months before the harvest.” The harvest season, particularly the barley harvest, got under way about Passover time (Nisan 14). Hence Jesus’ statement was made four months before that or about the month of Chislev (November-December). The postexilic Festival of Dedication came during Chislev but it was not one of the great festivals requiring attendance at Jerusalem. (Ex 23:14-17; Le 23:4-44) Celebration was held throughout the land in the many synagogues, according to Jewish tradition. (See FESTIVAL OF DEDICATION.) Later, at John 10:22, Jesus is specifically mentioned as attending one such Festival of Dedication in Jerusalem; however, it appears that he had already been in that area since the earlier Festival of Booths, hence had not gone there especially for that purpose. Different from this, John 5:1 clearly implies that it was the particular “festival of the Jews” that caused Jesus to go from Galilee (Joh 4:54) to Jerusalem.

 

The only other festival between Chislev and Passover time was that of Purim, held in Adar (February-March), about one month before Passover. But the postexilic Feast of Purim was likewise celebrated throughout the land in homes and synagogues. (See PURIM.) So, the Passover seems to be the most likely “festival of the Jews” referred to at John 5:1, Jesus’ attendance at Jerusalem then being in conformity to God’s law to Israel. It is true that John thereafter records only a few events before the next mention of the Passover (Joh 6:4), but a consideration of the chart of the Main Events of Jesus’ Earthly Life will show that John’s coverage of Jesus’ early ministry was very abbreviated, many events already discussed by the other three evangelists being passed over. In fact, the great amount of activity of Jesus as recorded by these other evangelists (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) lends weight to the conclusion that an annual Passover did indeed intervene between those recorded at John 2:13 and 6:4.

 

Time of his death. The death of Jesus Christ took place in the spring, on the Passover Day, Nisan (or Abib) 14, according to the Jewish calendar. (Mt 26:2; Joh 13:1-3; Ex 12:1-6; 13:4) That year the Passover occurred on the sixth day of the week (counted by the Jews as from sundown on Thursday to sundown on Friday). This is evident from John 19:31, which shows that the following day was “a great” sabbath. The day after Passover was always a sabbath, no matter on what day of the week it came. (Le 23:5-7) But when this special Sabbath coincided with the regular Sabbath (the seventh day of the week), it became “a great one.” So Jesus’ death took place on Friday, Nisan 14, by about 3:00 p.m.—Lu 23:44-46.

 

Summary of evidence. Summing up, then, since Jesus’ death took place in the spring month of Nisan, his ministry, which began three and a half years earlier according to Daniel 9:24-27, must have begun in the fall, about the month of Ethanim (September-October). John’s ministry (initiated in Tiberius’ 15th year), then, must have begun in the spring of the year 29 C.E. John’s birth therefore would be placed in the spring of the year 2 B.C.E., Jesus’ birth would come about six months later in the fall of 2 B.C.E., his ministry would start about 30 years later in the fall of 29 C.E., and his death would come in the year 33 C.E. (on Nisan 14 in the spring, as stated).

 

No basis for winter date of birth. The popular date of December 25 as the day of Jesus’ birth therefore has no basis in scripture. As many reference works show, it stems from a pagan holiday. Regarding the origin for the celebration of the day December 25, the Jesuit scholar Urbanus Holzmeister wrote:

 

“Today it is commonly admitted that the occasion for the celebration of the day December 25 was the festival that the pagans were celebrating on this day. Petavius [French Jesuit scholar, 1583-1652] already has rightly observed that on December 25 was celebrated ‘the birthday of the unconquered sun.’

 

“Witnesses for this festival are: (a) The Calendar of Furius Dionysius Filocalus, composed in the year 354 [C.E.], in which it is noted: ‘December 25, the B(irthday) of the unconquered (Sun).’ (b) The calendar of astrologer Antiochus (composed about 200 [C.E.]): ‘Month of December . . . 25 . . . The birthday of the Sun; daylight increases.’ (c) Caesar Julian [Julian the Apostate, emperor 361-363 C.E.] recommended the games that were celebrated at the end of the year in honor of the sun, which was called ‘the unconquered sun.’”—Chronologia vitae Christi (Chronology of the Life of Christ), Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, Rome, 1933, p. 46.

 

Perhaps the most obvious evidence of the incorrectness of the December 25 date is the scriptural fact that shepherds were in the fields tending their flocks on the night of Jesus’ birth. (Lu 2:8, 12) Already by the autumn month of Bul (October-November) the rainy season was starting (De 11:14), and flocks were brought into protected shelters at night. The next month, Chislev (the ninth month of the Jewish calendar, November-December), was a month of cold and rain (Jer 36:22; Ezr 10:9, 13), and Tebeth (December-January) saw the lowest temperatures of the year, with occasional snows in the highlands area. The presence of shepherds in the fields at night therefore harmonizes with the evidence pointing to the early autumn month of Ethanim as the time of Jesus’ birth.—See BUL; CHISLEV.

 

Also weighing against a December date is that it would be most unlikely for the Roman emperor to choose such a wintry, rainy month as the time for his Jewish subjects (often rebellious) to travel “each one to his own city” to be registered.—Lu 2:1-3; compare Mt 24:20; see TEBETH.

 

Early Life. The record of Jesus’ early life is very brief. Born in Bethlehem of Judea, King David’s native city, he was taken to Nazareth in Galilee after the family returned from Egypt—all of this in fulfillment of divine prophecy. (Mt 2:4-6, 14, 15, 19-23; Mic 5:2; Ho 11:1; Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5) Jesus’ adoptive father, Joseph, was a carpenter (Mt 13:55) and evidently of little means. (Compare Lu 2:22-24 with Le 12:8.) Thus Jesus, who on his first day of human life had slept in a stable, evidently spent his childhood in quite humble circumstances. Nazareth was not historically prominent, though near to two principal trade routes. It may have been looked down upon by many Jews.—Compare Joh 1:46; see PICTURES, Vol. 2, p. 539; NAZARETH.

 

Of the first years of Jesus’ life nothing is known except that “the young child continued growing and getting strong, being filled with wisdom, and God’s favor continued upon him.” (Lu 2:40) In course of time the family grew as four sons and some daughters were born to Joseph and Mary. (Mt 13:54-56) So, Mary’s “firstborn” son (Lu 2:7) did not grow up as an only child. This doubtless explains why his parents could begin a return journey from Jerusalem without realizing for a while that Jesus, their oldest child, was missing from the group. This occasion, with Jesus’ visit (as a 12-year-old) to the temple, where he engaged in a discussion with the Jewish teachers that left them amazed, is the only incident of his early life recounted in some detail. (PICTURE, Vol. 2, p. 538) Jesus’ reply to his worried parents when they located him there shows that Jesus knew the miraculous nature of his birth and realized his Messianic future. (Lu 2:41-52) Reasonably, his mother and his adoptive father had passed on to him the information obtained through the angelic visitations as well as through the prophecies of Simeon and Anna, spoken when the first trip was made to Jerusalem 40 days after Jesus’ birth.—Mt 1:20-25; 2:13, 14, 19-21; Lu 1:26-38; 2:8-38.

 

There is nothing to indicate that Jesus had or exercised any miraculous powers during his childhood years, as the fanciful stories recorded in certain apocryphal works, such as the so-called  Gospel of Thomas, pretend. The changing of water to wine at Cana, performed during his ministry, was “the beginning of his signs.” (Joh 2:1-11) Likewise, while among the family in Nazareth, Jesus evidently did not make a showy display of his wisdom and superiority as a perfect human, as is perhaps indicated by the fact that his half brothers did not exercise faith in him during his ministry as a human, as well as by the disbelief most of the population of Nazareth showed toward him.—Joh 7:1-5; Mr 6:1, 4-6.

 

Yet Jesus was evidently well known by the people of Nazareth (Mt 13:54-56; Lu 4:22); his splendid qualities and personality must certainly have been noted, at least by those appreciative of righteousness and goodness. (Compare Mt 3:13, 14.) He regularly attended the synagogue services each Sabbath. He was educated, as is shown by his ability to find and read sections from the Sacred Writings, but he did not attend the rabbinic schools of “higher learning.”—Lu 4:16; Joh 7:14-16.

 

The brevity of the record concerning these early years is because Jesus had not yet been anointed by Jehovah as “the Christ” (Mt 16:16) and had not commenced carrying out the divine assignment awaiting him. His childhood and the growing-up process, like his birth, were necessary, though incidental, means to an end. As Jesus later stated to Roman Governor Pilate: “For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth.”—Joh 18:37.

 

His Baptism. The outpouring of holy spirit at the time of Jesus’ baptism marked the time of his becoming in actual fact the Messiah, or Christ, God’s Anointed One (the use of this title by angels when announcing his birth evidently being in a prophetic sense; Lu 2:9-11, note also vss 25, 26). For six months John had been ‘preparing the way’ for “the saving means of God.” (Lu 3:1-6) Jesus, now “about thirty years old,” was baptized over John’s initial objections, voiced because John till then had been baptizing only repentant sinners. (Mt 3:1, 6, 13-17; Lu 3:21-23) Jesus, however, was sinless; hence his baptism testified instead to his presenting himself to do his Father’s will. (Compare Heb 10:5-9.) After Jesus had ‘come up from the water,’ and while he was praying, “he saw the heavens being parted,” God’s spirit descended upon Jesus in bodily shape like a dove, and Jehovah’s voice was heard from heaven, saying: “You are my Son, the beloved; I have approved you.”—Mt 3:16, 17; Mr 1:9-11; Lu 3:21, 22.

 

God’s spirit poured out upon Jesus doubtless illuminated his mind on many points. His own expressions thereafter, and particularly the intimate prayer to his Father on Passover night, 33 C.E., show that Jesus recalled his prehuman existence and the things he had heard from his Father and the things he had seen his Father do, as well as the glory that he himself had enjoyed in the heavens. (Joh 6:46; 7:28, 29; 8:26, 28, 38; 14:2; 17:5) It may well have been that the memory of these things was restored to him at the time of his baptism and anointing.

 

Jesus’ anointing with holy spirit appointed and commissioned him to carry out his ministry of preaching and teaching (Lu 4:16-21) and also to serve as God’s Prophet. (Ac 3:22-26) But, over and above this, it appointed and commissioned him as Jehovah’s promised King, the heir to David’s throne (Lu 1:32, 33, 69; Heb 1:8, 9) and to an everlasting Kingdom. For that reason he could later tell Pharisees: “The kingdom of God is in your midst.” (Lu 17:20, 21) Similarly, Jesus was anointed to act as God’s High Priest, not as a descendant of Aaron, but after the likeness of King-Priest Melchizedek.—Heb 5:1, 4-10; 7:11-17.

 

Jesus had been God’s Son from the time of his birth, even as the perfect Adam had been the “son of God.” (Lu 3:38; 1:35) The angels had identified Jesus as God’s Son from his birth onward. So, when, after Jesus’ baptism, his Father’s voice was heard saying, “You are my Son, the beloved; I have approved you” (Mr 1:11), it seems reasonable that this declaration accompanying the anointing flow of God’s spirit was more than just an acknowledgment of Jesus’ identity. The evidence is that Jesus was then begotten or brought forth by God as his spiritual Son, “born again,” as it were, with the right to receive life once more as a spirit Son of God in the heavens.—Compare Joh 3:3-6; 6:51; 10:17, 18; see BAPTISM; ONLY-BEGOTTEN.

 

His Vital Place in God’s Purpose. Jehovah God saw fit to make his firstborn Son the central, or key, figure in the outworking of all His purposes (Joh 1:14-18; Col 1:18-20; 2:8, 9), the focal point on which the light of all prophecies would concentrate and from which their light would radiate (1Pe 1:10-12; Re 19:10; Joh 1:3-9), the solution to all the problems that Satan’s rebellion had raised (Heb 2:5-9, 14, 15; 1Jo 3:8), and the foundation upon which God would build all future arrangements for the eternal good of His universal family in heaven and earth. (Eph 1:8-10; 2:20; 1Pe 2:4-8) Because of the vital role he thus plays in God’s purpose, Jesus could say, rightly and without exaggeration: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”—Joh 14:6.

 

The “sacred secret.” God’s purpose as revealed in Jesus Christ remained a “sacred secret [or, mystery] . . . kept in silence for long-lasting times.” (Ro 16:25-27) For over 4,000 years, since the rebellion in Eden, men of faith had awaited the fulfillment of God’s promise of a “seed” to bruise the head of the serpentlike Adversary and thereby to bring relief to mankind. (Ge 3:15) For nearly 2,000 years they had hoped in Jehovah’s covenant with Abraham for a “seed” who would “take possession of the gate of his enemies” and by means of whom all nations of the earth would bless themselves.—Ge 22:15-18.

 

Finally, when “the full limit of the time arrived, God sent forth his Son” and through him revealed the meaning of the “sacred secret,” gave the definitive answer to the issue raised by God’s Adversary (see JEHOVAH [The supreme issue a moral one]), and provided the means for redeeming obedient mankind from sin and death through the ransom sacrifice of his Son. (Ga 4:4; 1Ti 3:16; Joh 14:30; 16:33; Mt 20:28) Thereby Jehovah God cleared away any uncertainty or ambiguity regarding his purposes in the minds of his servants. For that reason the apostle says that “no matter how many the promises of God are, they have become Yes by means of [Jesus Christ].”—2Co 1:19-22.

 

The “sacred secret” did not simply involve an identification of God’s Son as such. Rather it involved the role he was assigned in the framework of God’s foreordained purpose, and the revelation and execution of that purpose through Jesus Christ. This purpose, so long a secret, was “for an administration at the full limit of the appointed times, namely, to gather all things together again in the Christ, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth.”—Eph 1:9, 10.

 

The “sacred secret” bound up in Christ Jesus has as one of its aspects his heading a new heavenly government; its membership is to be formed of persons (Jews and non-Jews) taken from among earth’s population, and its domain is to embrace both heaven and earth. Thus, in the vision at Daniel 7:13, 14, one “like a son of man” (a title later applied frequently to Christ—Mt 12:40; 24:30; Lu 17:26; compare Re 14:14) appears in Jehovah’s heavenly courts and is given “rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him.” The same vision, however, shows that “the holy ones of the Supreme One” are also to share with this “son of man” in his Kingdom, rulership, and grandeur. (Da 7:27) While Jesus was on earth, he selected from among his disciples the first prospective members of his Kingdom government and, after they had ‘stuck with him in his trials,’ covenanted with them for a Kingdom, praying to his Father for their sanctification (or being made “holy ones”) and requesting that “where I am, they also may be with me, in order to behold my glory that you have given me.” (Lu 22:28, 29; Joh 17:5, 17, 24) Because of being thus united with Christ, the Christian congregation also plays a part in the “sacred secret,” as is later expressed by the inspired apostle.—Eph 3:1-11; 5:32; Col 1:26, 27; see SACRED SECRET.

 

“Chief Agent of life.” As an expression of his Father’s undeserved kindness, Christ Jesus laid down his perfect human life in sacrifice. This made possible the union of Christ’s chosen followers with him in his heavenly reign and also made possible the arrangement for earthly subjects of his Kingdom rule. (Mt 6:10; Joh 3:16; Eph 1:7; Heb 2:5; see RANSOM.) He thereby became “the Chief Agent [“Prince,” KJ; JB] of life” for all mankind. (Ac 3:15) The Greek term here used means, basically, “chief leader,” a related word being applied to Moses (Ac 7:27, 35) as “ruler” in Israel.

 

Hence, as the “chief leader” or “pioneer of Life” (Mo), Jesus Christ introduced a new and essential element for gaining eternal life in the sense of being an intermediary or go-between, but he is such in an administrative sense as well. He is God’s High Priest who can effect full cleansing from sin and liberation from sin’s death-dealing effects (Heb 3:1, 2; 4:14; 7:23-25; 8:1-3); he is the appointed Judge into whose hands all judgment is committed, so that he judiciously administers his ransom benefits to individuals among mankind according to their worthiness to live under his kingship (Joh 5:22-27; Ac 10:42, 43); through him the resurrection of the dead also comes. (Joh 5:28, 29; 6:39, 40) Because Jehovah God so ordained to use his Son, “there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved.”—Ac 4:12; compare 1Jo 5:11-13.

 

Since this aspect of Jesus’ authority is also embraced in his “name,” his disciples, as representatives of the Chief Agent of life, by that name could heal persons of their infirmities resulting from inherited sin and they could even raise the dead.—Ac 3:6, 15, 16; 4:7-11; 9:36-41; 20:7-12.

 

The full significance of his “name.” It can be seen that, while Jesus’ death on a torture stake plays a vital part in human salvation, acceptance of this is by no means all that is involved in ‘putting faith in the name of Jesus.’ (Ac 10:43) Following his resurrection, Jesus informed his disciples, “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth,” thereby showing that he heads a government of universal domain. (Mt 28:18) The apostle Paul made clear that Jesus’ Father has “left nothing that is not subject to him [Jesus],” with the evident exception of “the one who subjected all things to him,” that is, Jehovah, the Sovereign God. (1Co 15:27; Heb 1:1-14; 2:8) Jesus Christ’s “name,” therefore, is more excellent than that of God’s angels, in that his name embraces or stands for the vast executive authority that Jehovah has placed in him. (Heb 1:3, 4) Only those who willingly recognize that “name” and bow to it, subjecting themselves to the authority it represents, will gain life eternal. (Ac 4:12; Eph 1:19-23; Php 2:9-11) They must, sincerely and without hypocrisy, line up with the standards Jesus exemplified and, in faith, obey the commands he gave.—Mt 7:21-23; Ro 1:5; 1Jo 3:23.

 

What is the “name” of Jesus on account of which Christians are hated by all nations?

 

Illustrating this other aspect of Jesus’ “name” is his prophetic warning that his followers would be “objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name.” (Mt 24:9; also Mt 10:22; Joh 15:20, 21; Ac 9:15, 16) Clearly, this would be, not because his name represented that of a Ransomer or Redeemer, but because it represented God’s appointed Ruler, the King of kings, to whom all nations should bow in submission or else experience destruction.—Re 19:11-16; compare Ps 2:7-12.

 

So, too, it is certain that when demons gave in to Jesus’ command to get out of persons they possessed, they did so, not on the basis of Jesus’ being a sacrificial Lamb of God, but on account of the authority for which his name stood as the anointed representative of the Kingdom, the one with authority to call for, not merely one legion, but a dozen legions of angels, capable of expelling any demons who might stubbornly resist the order to leave. (Mr 5:1-13; 9:25-29; Mt 12:28, 29; 26:53; compare Da 10:5, 6, 12, 13.) Jesus’ faithful apostles were authorized to use his name to expel demons, both before and after his death. (Lu 9:1; 10:17; Ac 16:16-18) But when the sons of Jewish priest Sceva tried to use Jesus’ name in this way, the wicked spirit challenged their right to appeal to the authority the name represented and caused the possessed man to attack and maul them.—Ac 19:13-17.

 

When Jesus’ followers referred to his “name” they frequently employed the expression “the Lord Jesus” or “our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Ac 8:16; 15:26; 19:5, 13, 17; 1Co 1:2, 10; Eph 5:20; Col 3:17) They recognized him as their Lord not only because he was their divinely appointed Repurchaser and Owner by virtue of his ransom sacrifice (1Co 6:20; 7:22, 23; 1Pe 1:18, 19; Jude 4) but also because of his kingly position and authority. It was in the full regal as well as priestly authority represented by Jesus’ name that his followers preached (Ac 5:29-32, 40-42), baptized disciples (Mt 28:18-20; Ac 2:38; compare 1Co 1:13-15), disfellowshipped immoral persons (1Co 5:4, 5), and exhorted and instructed the Christian congregations they shepherded (1Co 1:10; 2Th 3:6). It follows, then, that those approved for life by Jesus could never put faith in, or render allegiance to, some other “name” as representing God’s authority to rule but must show unbreakable loyalty to the “name” of this divinely commissioned King, the Lord Jesus Christ.—Mt 12:18, 21; Re 2:13; 3:8; see APPROACH TO GOD.

 

‘Bearing Witness to the Truth.’ To Pilate’s question, “Well, then, are you a king?”, Jesus replied: “You yourself are saying that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of the truth listens to my voice.” (Joh 18:37; see LEGAL CASE [Jesus’ Trial].) As the scriptures show, the truth to which he bore witness was not just truth in general. It was the all-important truth of what God’s purposes were and are, truth based on the fundamental fact of God’s sovereign will and His ability to fulfill that will. By his ministry Jesus revealed that truth, contained in “the sacred secret,” as being God’s Kingdom with Jesus Christ, the “son of David,” serving as King-Priest on the throne. This was also the essence of the message proclaimed by angels prior to and at the time of his birth in Bethlehem of Judea, the city of David.—Lu 1:32, 33; 2:10-14; 3:31.

 

The accomplishment of his ministry in bearing witness to the truth required more of Jesus than merely talking, preaching, and teaching. Besides shedding his heavenly glory to be born as a human, he had to fulfill all the things prophesied about him, including the shadows, or patterns, contained in the Law covenant. (Col 2:16, 17; Heb 10:1) To uphold the truth of his Father’s prophetic word and promises, Jesus had to live in such a way as to make that truth become reality, fulfilling it by what he said and did, how he lived, and how he died. Thus, he had to be the truth, in effect, the embodiment of the truth, as he himself said he was.—Joh 14:6.

 

For this reason the apostle John could write that Jesus was “full of undeserved kindness and truth” and that, though “the Law was given through Moses, the undeserved kindness and the truth came to be through Jesus Christ.” (Joh 1:14, 17) By means of his human birth, his presenting himself to God by baptism in water, his three and a half years of public service in behalf of God’s Kingdom, his death in faithfulness to God, his resurrection to heaven—by all these historical events—God’s truth arrived, or “came to be,” that is, came to realization. (Compare Joh 1:18; Col 2:17.) The whole career of Jesus Christ was therefore a ‘bearing witness to the truth,’ to the things to which God had sworn. Jesus was thus no shadow Messiah or Christ. He was the real one promised. He was no shadow King-Priest. He was, in substance and fact, the true one that had been prefigured.—Ro 15:8-12; compare Ps 18:49; 117:1; De 32:43; Isa 11:10.

 

This truth was the truth that would ‘set men free’ if they showed themselves to be “on the side of the truth” by accepting Jesus’ role in God’s purpose. (Joh 8:32-36; 18:37) To ignore God’s purpose concerning his Son, to build hopes on any other foundation, to form conclusions regarding one’s life course on any other basis would be to believe a lie, to be deceived, to follow the leading of the father of lies, God’s Adversary. (Mt 7:24-27; Joh 8:42-47) It would mean ‘to die in one’s sins.’ (Joh 8:23, 24) For this reason Jesus did not hold back from declaring his place in God’s purpose.

 

True, he instructed his disciples, even with sternness, not to broadcast his Messiahship to the public (Mt 16:20; Mr 8:29, 30) and rarely referred to himself directly as the Christ except when in privacy with them. (Mr 9:33, 38, 41; Lu 9:20, 21; Joh 17:3) But he boldly and regularly drew attention to the evidence in the prophecies and in his works that proved he was the Christ. (Mt 22:41-46; Joh 5:31-39, 45-47; 7:25-31) On the occasion of talking to a Samaritan woman at a well, Jesus, “tired out from the journey,” identified himself to her, perhaps to excite curiosity among the townsfolk and draw them out from the town to him, which was the result. (Joh 4:6, 25-30) The mere claim of Messiahship would mean nothing if not accompanied by the evidence, and in the end, faith was required on the part of those seeing and hearing if they were to accept the conclusion to which that evidence unerringly pointed.—Lu 22:66-71; Joh 4:39-42; 10:24-27; 12:34-36.

 

Tested and Perfected. Jehovah God demonstrated supreme confidence in his Son in charging him with the mission of going to earth and serving as the promised Messiah. God’s purpose that there be a “seed” (Ge 3:15), the Messiah, who would serve as the sacrificial Lamb of God, was foreknown to Him “before the founding of the world” (1Pe 1:19, 20), an expression considered under the heading FOREKNOWLEDGE, FOREORDINATION (Foreordination of the Messiah). The Bible record, however, does not state at what point Jehovah designated or informed the specific individual chosen to fill this role, whether at the time of the rebellion in Eden or at some later time. The requirements, particularly that of the ransom sacrifice, ruled out the use of any imperfect human, but not of a perfect spirit son. Out of all his millions of spirit sons, Jehovah selected one to take on the assignment: his Firstborn, the Word.—Compare Heb 1:5, 6.

 

God’s Son willingly accepted the assignment. This is evident from Philippians 2:5-8; he “emptied himself” of his heavenly glory and spirit nature and “took a slave’s form” in submitting to the transferal of his life to the earthly, material, human plane. The assignment before him represented a tremendous responsibility; so very much was involved. By remaining faithful he would prove false Satan’s claim, recorded in the case of Job, that under privation, suffering, and test, God’s servants would deny Him. (Job 1:6-12; 2:2-6) As the firstborn Son, Jesus, of all God’s creatures, could give the most conclusive answer to that charge and the finest evidence in favor of his Father’s side in the larger issue of the rightfulness of Jehovah’s universal sovereignty. Thereby he would prove to be “the Amen . . . , the faithful and true witness.” (Re 3:14) If he failed, he would reproach his Father’s name as none other could.

 

In selecting his only-begotten Son, Jehovah, of course, was not ‘laying his hands hastily upon him,’ with the risk of being ‘a sharer in possible sins,’ for Jesus was no novice likely to get “puffed up with pride and fall into the judgment passed upon the Devil.” (Compare 1Ti 5:22; 3:6.) Jehovah ‘fully knew’ his Son from his intimate association with him during countless ages past (Mt 11:27; compare Ge 22:12; Ne 9:7, 8) and could therefore assign him to fulfill the unerring prophecies of His Word. (Isa 46:10, 11) Thus God was not arbitrarily or automatically guaranteeing “certain success” for his Son simply by placing him in the role of the prophesied Messiah (Isa 55:11), in the manner that the theory of predestinarianism claims.

 

While the Son had never undergone a test like that now before him, he had demonstrated his faithfulness and devotion in other ways. He had already had great responsibility as God’s Spokesman, the Word. Yet he never misused his position and authority, as did God’s earthly spokesman Moses on one occasion. (Nu 20:9-13; De 32:48-51; Jude 9) Being the One through whom all things were made, the Son was a god, “the only-begotten god” (Joh 1:18), hence held a position of glory and preeminence in relation to all others of God’s spirit sons. Yet he did not become haughty. (Contrast Eze 28:14-17.) So, it could not be said that the Son had not already proved his loyalty, humility, and devotion in many respects.

 

To illustrate, consider the test placed upon God’s first human son, Adam. That test did not involve enduring persecution or suffering, but only maintaining obedient respect for God’s will in regard to the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. (Ge 2:16, 17; see TREES.) Satan’s rebellion and temptation were not part of the test as originally given by God but came as an added feature, from a source foreign to God. Nor did the test, when given, call for any human temptation, as resulted to Adam from Eve’s deflection. (Ge 3:6, 12) This being so, Adam’s test could have been effected without any outside temptation or influence toward wrongdoing, the whole matter resting with Adam’s heart—his love for God and his freedom from selfishness. (Pr 4:23) Proving faithful, Adam would have been privileged to take fruit of “the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite” as a tested, approved human son of God (Ge 3:22), all of this without having been subjected to vile influence and temptation, persecution, or suffering.

 

It may also be noted that the spirit son who became Satan by defecting from God’s service did not do so because anyone had persecuted him or tempted him to do wrong. Certainly not God, for ‘He does not try anyone with evil things.’ Yet that spirit son failed to maintain loyalty, allowed himself to be “drawn out and enticed by his own desire,” and sinned, becoming a rebel. (Jas 1:13-15) He failed the test of love.

 

The issue raised by God’s Adversary, however, required that the Son, as the promised Messiah and future King of God’s Kingdom, now undergo a test of integrity under new circumstances. This test and the sufferings it entailed were also necessary for his being “made perfect” for his position as God’s High Priest over mankind. (Heb 5:9, 10) To meet the requirements for full installation as the Chief Agent of salvation, God’s Son was “obliged to become like his ‘brothers’ [those who became his anointed followers] in all respects, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest.” He must endure hardships and sufferings, so that he might be “able to come to the aid of those who are being put to the test,” able to sympathize with their weaknesses as one who had “been tested in all respects like ourselves, but without sin.” Though perfect and sinless, he would still be “able to deal moderately with the ignorant and erring ones.” Only through such a High Priest could imperfect humans “approach with freeness of speech to the throne of undeserved kindness, [to] obtain mercy and find undeserved kindness for help at the right time.”—Heb 2:10-18; 4:15–5:2; compare Lu 9:22.

 

Still a free moral agent. Jesus himself said that all the prophecies concerning the Messiah were certain of realization, “must be fulfilled.” (Lu 24:44-47; Mt 16:21; compare Mt 5:17.) Yet this certainly did not relieve Go

The Two Babylons 

Or

The Papal Worship Proved to be 

the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife

 

by the Late Alexander Hislop

 

 

 

Chapter III 

Section II 

Easter

 

       Then look at Easter. What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian name. It bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use in this country. That name, as found by Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar. The worship of Bel and Astarte was very early introduced into Britain, along with the Druids, "the priests of the groves." Some have imagined that the Druidical worship was first introduced by the Phoenicians, who, centuries before the Christian era, traded to the tin-mines of Cornwall. But the unequivocal traces of that worship are found in regions of the British islands where the Phoenicians never penetrated, and it has everywhere left indelible marks of the strong hold which it must have had on the early British mind. From Bel, the 1st of May is still called Beltane in the Almanac; and we have customs still lingering at this day among us, which prove how exactly the worship of Bel or Moloch (for both titles belonged to the same god) had been observed even in the northern parts of this island. "The late Lady Baird, of Fern Tower, in Perthshire," says a writer in "Notes and Queries," thoroughly versed in British antiquities, "told me, that every year, at Beltane (or the 1st of May), a number of men and women assemble at an ancient Druidical circle of stones on her property near Crieff. They light a fire in the centre, each person puts a bit of oat-cake in a shepherd's bonnet; they all sit down, and draw blindfold a piece from the bonnet. One piece has been previously blackened, and whoever gets that piece has to jump through the fire in the centre of the circle, and pay a forfeit. This is, in fact, a part of the ancient worship of Baal, and the person on whom the lot fell was previously burnt as a sacrifice. Now, the passing through the fire represents that, and the payment of the forfeit redeems the victim." If Baal was thus worshipped in Britain, it will not be difficult to believe that his consort Astarte was also adored by our ancestors, and that from Astarte, whose name in Nineveh was Ishtar, the religious solemnities of April, as now practised, are called by the name of Easter--that month, among our Pagan ancestors, having been called Easter-monath. The festival, of which we read in Church history, under the name of Easter, in the third or fourth centuries, was quite a different festival from that now observed in the Romish Church, and at that time was not known by any such name as Easter. It was called Pasch, or the Passover, and though not of Apostolic institution, * was very early observed by many professing Christians, in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Christ.

 

* Socrates, the ancient ecclesiastical historian, after a lengthened account of the different ways in which Easter was observed in different countries in his time--i.e., the fifth century--sums up in these words: "Thus much already laid down may seem a sufficient treatise to prove that the celebration of the feast of Easter began everywhere more of custom than by any commandment either of Christ or any Apostle." (Hist. Ecclesiast.) Every one knows that the name "Easter," used in our translation of Acts 12:4, refers not to any Christian festival, but to the Jewish Passover. This is one of the few places in our version where the translators show an undue bias.

 

That festival agreed originally with the time of the Jewish Passover, when Christ was crucified, a period which, in the days of Tertullian, at the end of the second century, was believed to have been the 23rd of March. That festival was not idolatrous, and it was preceded by no Lent. "It ought to be known," said Cassianus, the monk of Marseilles, writing in the fifth century, and contrasting the primitive Church with the Church in his day, "that the observance of the forty days had no existence, so long as the perfection of that primitive Church remained inviolate." Whence, then, came this observance? The forty days' abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess. Such a Lent of forty days, "in the spring of the year," is still observed by the Yezidis or Pagan Devil-worshippers of Koordistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the Babylonians. Such a Lent of forty days was held in spring by the Pagan Mexicans, for thus we read in Humboldt, where he gives account of Mexican observances: "Three days after the vernal equinox...began a solemn fast of forty days in honour of the sun." Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt, as may be seen on consulting Wilkinson's Egyptians. This Egyptian Lent of forty days, we are informed by Landseer, in his Sabean Researches, was held expressly in commemoration of Adonis or Osiris, the great mediatorial god. At the same time, the rape of Proserpine seems to have been commemorated, and in a similar manner; for Julius Firmicus informs us that, for "forty nights" the "wailing for Proserpine" continued; and from Arnobius we learn that the fast which the Pagans observed, called "Castus" or the "sacred" fast, was, by the Christians in his time, believed to have been primarily in imitation of the long fast of Ceres, when for many days she determinedly refused to eat on account of her "excess of sorrow," that is, on account of the loss of her daughter Proserpine, when carried away by Pluto, the god of hell. As the stories of Bacchus, or Adonis and Proserpine, though originally distinct, were made to join on and fit in to one another, so that Bacchus was called Liber, and his wife Ariadne, Libera (which was one of the names of Proserpine), it is highly probable that the forty days' fast of Lent was made in later times to have reference to both. Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing, and which, in many countries, was considerably later than the Christian festival, being observed in Palestine and Assyria in June, therefore called the "month of Tammuz"; in Egypt, about the middle of May, and in Britain, some time in April. To conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated, and, by a complicated but skilful adjustment of the calendar, it was found no difficult matter, in general, to get Paganism and Christianity--now far sunk in idolatry--in this as in so many other things, to shake hands. The instrument in accomplishing this amalgamation was the abbot Dionysius the Little, to whom also we owe it, as modern chronologers have demonstrated, that the date of the Christian era, or of the birth of Christ Himself, was moved FOUR YEARS from the true time. Whether this was done through ignorance or design may be matter of question; but there seems to be no doubt of the fact, that the birth of the Lord Jesus was made full four years later than the truth. This change of the calendar in regard to Easter was attended with momentous consequences. It brought into the Church the grossest corruption and the rankest superstition in connection with the abstinence of Lent. Let any one only read the atrocities that were commemorated during the "sacred fast" or Pagan Lent, as described by Arnobius and Clemens Alexandrinus, and surely he must blush for the Christianity of those who, with the full knowledge of all these abominations, "went down to Egypt for help" to stir up the languid devotion of the degenerate Church, and who could find no more excellent way to "revive" it, than by borrowing from so polluted a source; the absurdities and abominations connected with which the early Christian writers had held up to scorn. That Christians should ever think of introducing the Pagan abstinence of Lent was a sign of evil; it showed how low they had sunk, and it was also a cause of evil; it inevitably led to deeper degradation. Originally, even in Rome, Lent, with the preceding revelries of the Carnival, was entirely unknown; and even when fasting before the Christian Pasch was held to be necessary, it was by slow steps that, in this respect, it came to conform with the ritual of Paganism. What may have been the period of fasting in the Roman Church before sitting of the Nicene Council does not very clearly appear, but for a considerable period after that Council, we have distinct evidence that it did not exceed three weeks. *

 

* GIESELER, speaking of the Eastern Church in the second century, in regard to Paschal observances, says: "In it [the Paschal festival in commemoration of the death of Christ] they [the Eastern Christians] eat unleavened bread, probably like the Jews, eight days throughout...There is no trace of a yearly festival of a resurrection among them, for this was kept every Sunday" (Catholic Church). In regard to the Western Church, at a somewhat later period--the age of Constantine--fifteen days seems to have been observed to religious exercises in connection with the Christian Paschal feast, as appears from the following extracts from Bingham, kindly furnished to me by a friend, although the period of fasting is not stated. Bingham (Origin) says: "The solemnities of Pasch [are] the week before and the week after Easter Sunday--one week of the Cross, the other of the resurrection. The ancients speak of the Passion and Resurrection Pasch as a fifteen days' solemnity. Fifteen days was enforced by law by the Empire, and commanded to the universal Church...Scaliger mentions a law of Constantine, ordering two weeks for Easter, and a vacation of all legal processes."

 

The words of Socrates, writing on this very subject, about AD 450, are these: "Those who inhabit the princely city of Rome fast together before Easter three weeks, excepting the Saturday and Lord's-day." But at last, when the worship of Astarte was rising into the ascendant, steps were taken to get the whole Chaldean Lent of six weeks, or forty days, made imperative on all within the Roman empire of the West. The way was prepared for this by a Council held at Aurelia in the time of Hormisdas, Bishop of Rome, about the year 519, which decreed that Lent should be solemnly kept before Easter. It was with the view, no doubt, of carrying out this decree that the calendar was, a few days after, readjusted by Dionysius. This decree could not be carried out all at once. About the end of the sixth century, the first decisive attempt was made to enforce the observance of the new calendar. It was in Britain that the first attempt was made in this way; and here the attempt met with vigorous resistance. The difference, in point of time, betwixt the Christian Pasch, as observed in Britain by the native Christians, and the Pagan Easter enforced by Rome, at the time of its enforcement, was a whole month; * and it was only by violence and bloodshed, at last, that the Festival of the Anglo-Saxon or Chaldean goddess came to supersede that which had been held in honour of Christ.

 

* CUMMIANUS, quoted by Archbishop USSHER, Sylloge Those who have been brought up in the observance of Christmas and Easter, and who yet abhor from their hearts all Papal and Pagan idolatry alike, may perhaps feel as if there were something "untoward" in the revelations given above in regard to the origin of these festivals. But a moment's reflection will suffice entirely to banish such a feeling. They will see, that if the account I have given be true, it is of no use to ignore it. A few of the facts stated in these pages are already known to Infidel and Socinian writers of no mean mark, both in this country and on the Continent, and these are using them in such a way as to undermine the faith of the young and uninformed in regard to the very vitals of the Christian faith. Surely, then, it must be of the last consequence, that the truth should be set forth in its own native light, even though it may somewhat run counter to preconceived opinions, especially when that truth, justly considered, tends so much at once to strengthen the rising youth against the seductions of Popery, and to confirm them in the faith once delivered to the Saints. If a heathen could say, "Socrates I love, and Plato I love, but I love truth more," surely a truly Christian mind will not display less magnanimity. Is there not much, even in the aspect of the times, that ought to prompt the earnest inquiry, if the occasion has not arisen, when efforts, and strenuous efforts, should be made to purge out of the National Establishment in the south those observances, and everything else that has flowed in upon it from Babylon's golden cup? There are men of noble minds in the Church of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, who have felt the power of His blood, and known the comfort of His Spirit. Let them, in their closets, and on their knees, ask the question, at their God and at their own consciences, if they ought not to bestir themselves in right earnest, and labour with all their might till such a consummation be effected. Then, indeed, would England's Church be the grand bulwark of the Reformation--then would her sons speak with her enemies in the gate--then would she appear in the face of all Christendom, "clear as the sun, fair as the moon, and terrible as an army with banners." If, however, nothing effectual shall be done to stay the plague that is spreading in her, the result must be disastrous, not only to herself, but to the whole empire.

 

Such is the history of Easter. The popular observances that still attend the period of its celebration amply confirm the testimony of history as to its Babylonian character. The hot cross buns of Good Friday, and the dyed eggs of Pasch or Easter Sunday, figured in the Chaldean rites just as they do now. The "buns," known too by that identical name, were used in the worship of the queen of heaven, the goddess Easter, as early as the days of Cecrops, the founder of Athens--that is, 1500 years before the Christian era. "One species of sacred bread," says Bryant, "which used to be offered to the gods, was of great antiquity, and called Boun." Diogenes Laertius, speaking of this offering being made by Empedocles, describes the chief ingredients of which it was composed, saying, "He offered one of the sacred cakes called Boun, which was made of fine flour and honey." The prophet Jeremiah takes notice of this kind of offering when he says, "The children gather wood, the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven." *

 

* Jeremiah 7:18. It is from the very word here used by the prophet that the word "bun" seems to be derived. The Hebrew word, with the points, was pronounced Khavan, which in Greek became sometimes Kapan-os (PHOTIUS, Lexicon Syttoge); and, at other times, Khabon (NEANDER, in KITTO'S Biblical Cyclopoedia). The first shows how Khvan, pronounced as one syllable, would pass into the Latin panis, "bread," and the second how, in like manner, Khvon would become Bon or Bun. It is not to be overlooked that our common English word Loa has passed through a similar process of formation. In Anglo-Saxon it was Hlaf.

 

The hot cross buns are not now offered, but eaten, on the festival of Astarte; but this leaves no doubt as to whence they have been derived. The origin of the Pasch eggs is just as clear. The ancient Druids bore an egg, as the sacred emblem of their order. In the Dionysiaca, or mysteries of Bacchus, as celebrated in Athens, one part of the nocturnal ceremony consisted in the consecration of an egg. The Hindoo fables celebrate their mundane egg as of a golden colour. The people of Japan make their sacred egg to have been brazen. In China, at this hour, dyed or painted eggs are used on sacred festivals, even as in this country. In ancient times eggs were used in the religious rites of the Egyptians and the Greeks, and were hung up for mystic purposes in their temples. From Egypt these sacred eggs can be distinctly traced to the banks of the Euphrates. The classic poets are full of the fable of the mystic egg of the Babylonians; and thus its tale is told by Hyginus, the Egyptian, the learned keeper of the Palatine library at Rome, in the time of Augustus, who was skilled in all the wisdom of his native country: "An egg of wondrous size is said to have fallen from heaven into the river Euphrates. The fishes rolled it to the bank, where the doves having settled upon it, and hatched it, out came Venus, who afterwards was called the Syrian Goddess"--that is, Astarte. Hence the egg became one of the symbols of Astarte or Easter; and accordingly, in Cyprus, one of the chosen seats of the worship of Venus, or Astarte, the egg of wondrous size was represented on a grand scale.

 

The occult meaning of this mystic egg of Astarte, in one of its aspects (for it had a twofold significance), had reference to the ark during the time of the flood, in which the whole human race were shut up, as the chick is enclosed in the egg before it is hatched. If any be inclined to ask, how could it ever enter the minds of men to employ such an extraordinary symbol for such a purpose, the answer is, first, The sacred egg of Paganism, as already indicated, is well known as the "mundane egg," that is, the egg in which the world was shut up. Now the world has two distinct meanings--it means either the material earth, or the inhabitants of the earth. The latter meaning of the term is seen in Genesis 11:1, "The whole earth was of one language and of one speech," where the meaning is that the whole people of the world were so. If then the world is seen shut up in an egg, and floating on the waters, it may not be difficult to believe, however the idea of the egg may have come, that the egg thus floating on the wide universal sea might be Noah's family that contained the whole world in its bosom. Then the application of the word egg to the ark comes thus: The Hebrew name for an egg is Baitz, or in the feminine (for there are both genders), Baitza. This, in Chaldee and Phoenician, becomes Baith or Baitha, which in these languages is also the usual way in which the name of a house is pronounced. *

 

* The common word "Beth," "house," in the Bible without the points, is "Baith," as may be seen in the name of Bethel, as given in Genesis 35:1, of the Greek Septuagint, where it is "Baith-el."

 

The egg floating on the waters that contained the world, was the house floating on the waters of the deluge, with the elements of the new world in its bosom. The coming of the egg from heaven evidently refers to the preparation of the ark by express appointment of God; and the same thing seems clearly implied in the Egyptian story of the mundane egg which was said to have come out of the mouth of the great god. The doves resting on the egg need no explanation. This, then, was the meaning of the mystic egg in one aspect. As, however, everything that was good or beneficial to mankind was represented in the Chaldean mysteries, as in some way connected with the Babylonian goddess, so the greatest blessing to the human race, which the ark contained in its bosom, was held to be Astarte, who was the great civiliser and benefactor of the world. Though the deified queen, whom Astarte represented, had no actual existence till some centuries after the flood, yet through the doctrine of metempsychosis, which was firmly established in Babylon, it was easy for her worshippers to be made to believe that, in a previous incarnation, she had lived in the Antediluvian world, and passed in safety through the waters of the flood. Now the Romish Church adopted this mystic egg of Astarte, and consecrated it as a symbol of Christ's resurrection. A form of prayer was even appointed to be used in connection with it, Pope Paul V teaching his superstitious votaries thus to pray at Easter: "Bless, O Lord, we beseech thee, this thy creature of eggs, that it may become a wholesome sustenance unto thy servants, eating it in remembrance of our Lord Jesus Christ, &c" (Scottish Guardian, April, 1844). Besides the mystic egg, there was also another emblem of Easter, the goddess queen of Babylon, and that was the Rimmon or "pomegranate." With the Rimmon or "pomegranate" in her hand, she is frequently represented in ancient medals, and the house of Rimmon, in which the King of Damascus, the Master of Naaman, the Syrian, worshipped, was in all likelihood a temple of Astarte, where that goddess with the Rimmon was publicly adored. The pomegranate is a fruit that is full of seeds; and on that account it has been supposed that it was employed as an emblem of that vessel in which the germs of the new creation were preserved, wherewith the world was to be sown anew with man and with beast, when the desolation of the deluge had passed away. But upon more searching inquiry, it turns out that the Rimmon or "pomegranate" had reference to an entirely different thing. Astarte, or Cybele, was called also Idaia Mater, and the sacred mount in Phrygia, most famed for the celebration of her mysteries, was named Mount Ida--that is, in Chaldee, the sacred language of these mysteries, the Mount of Knowledge. "Idaia Mater," then, signifies "the Mother of Knowledge"--in other words, our Mother Eve, who first coveted the "knowledge of good and evil," and actually purchased it at so dire a price to herself and to all her children. Astarte, as can be abundantly shown, was worshipped not only as an incarnation of the Spirit of God, but also of the mother of mankind. (see note below) When, therefore, the mother of the gods, and the mother of knowledge, was represented with the fruit of the pomegranate in her extended hand, inviting those who ascended the sacred mount to initiation in her mysteries, can there be a doubt what that fruit was intended to signify? Evidently, it must accord with her assumed character; it must be the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge"--the fruit of that very

 

"Tree, whose mortal taste. 

Brought death into the world, and all our woe."

 

The knowledge to which the votaries of the Idaean goddess were admitted, was precisely of the same kind as that which Eve derived from the eating of the forbidden fruit, the practical knowledge of all that was morally evil and base. Yet to Astarte, in this character, men were taught to look at their grand benefactress, as gaining for them knowledge, and blessings connected with that knowledge, which otherwise they might in vain have sought from Him, who is the Father of lights, from whom cometh down every good and perfect gift. Popery inspires the same feeling in regard to the Romish queen of heaven, and leads its devotees to view the sin of Eve in much the same light as that in which Paganism regarded it. In the Canon of the Mass, the most solemn service in the Romish Missal, the following expression occurs, where the sin of our first parent is apostrophised: "Oh blessed fault, which didst procure such a Redeemer!" The idea contained in these words is purely Pagan. They just amount to this: "Thanks be to Eve, to whose sin we are indebted for the glorious Saviour." It is true the idea contained in them is found in the same words in the writings of Augustine; but it is an idea utterly opposed to the spirit of the Gospel, which only makes sin the more exceeding sinful, from the consideration that it needed such a ransom to deliver from its awful curse. Augustine had imbibed many Pagan sentiments, and never got entirely delivered from them.

 

As Rome cherishes the same feelings as Paganism did, so it has adopted also the very same symbols, so far as it has the opportunity. In this country, and most of the countries of Europe, no pomegranates grow; and yet, even here, the superstition of the Rimmon must, as far as possible, be kept up. Instead of the pomegranate, therefore, the orange is employed; and so the Papists of Scotland join oranges with their eggs at Easter; and so also, when Bishop Gillis of Edinburgh went through the vain-glorious ceremony of washing the feet of twelve ragged Irishmen a few years ago at Easter, he concluded by presenting each of them with two eggs and an orange.

 

Now, this use of the orange as the representative of the fruit of Eden's "dread probationary tree," be it observed, is no modern invention; it goes back to the distant times of classic antiquity. The gardens of the Hesperides in the West, are admitted by all who have studied the subject, just to have been the counterpart of the paradise of Eden in the East. The description of the sacred gardens, as situated in the Isles of the Atlantic, over against the coast of Africa, shows that their legendary site exactly agrees with the Cape Verd or Canary Isles, or some of that group; and, of course, that the "golden fruit" on the sacred tree, so jealously guarded, was none other than the orange. Now, let the reader mark well: According to the classic Pagan story, there was no serpent in that garden of delight in the "islands of the blest," to TEMPT mankind to violate their duty to their great benefactor, by eating of the sacred tree which he had reserved as the test of their allegiance. No; on the contrary, it was the Serpent, the symbol of the Devil, the Principle of evil, the Enemy of man, that prohibited them from eating the precious fruit--that strictly watched it--that would not allow it to be touched. Hercules, one form of the Pagan Messiah--not the primitive, but the Grecian Hercules--pitying man's unhappy state, slew or subdued the serpent, the envious being that grudged mankind the use of that which was so necessary to make them at once perfectly happy and wise, and bestowed upon them what otherwise would have been hopelessly beyond their reach. Here, then, God and the devil are exactly made to change places. Jehovah, who prohibited man from eating of the tree of knowledge, is symbolised by the serpent, and held up as an ungenerous and malignant being, while he who emancipated man from Jehovah's yoke, and gave him of the fruit of the forbidden tree--in other words, Satan under the name of Hercules--is celebrated as the good and gracious Deliverer of the human race. What a mystery of iniquity is here! Now all this is wrapped up in the sacred orange of Easter.

 

Note

 

[Back] The Meaning of the Name Astarte

 

That Semiramis, under the name of Astarte, was worshipped not only as an incarnation of the Spirit of God, but as the mother of mankind, we have very clear and satisfactory evidence. There is no doubt that "the Syrian goddess" was Astarte (LAYARD'S Nineveh and its Remains). Now, the Assyrian goddess, or Astarte, is identified with Semiramis by Athenagoras (Legatio), and by Lucian (De Dea Syria). These testimonies in regard to Astarte, or the Syrian goddess, being, in one aspect, Semiramis, are quite decisive. 1. The name Astarte, as applied to her, has reference to her as being Rhea or Cybele, the tower-bearing goddess, the first as Ovid says (Opera), that "made (towers) in cities"; for we find from Layard that in the Syrian temple of Hierapolis, "she [Dea Syria or Astarte] was represented standing on a lion crowned with towers." Now, no name could more exactly picture forth the character of Semiramis, as queen of Babylon, than the name of "Ash-tart," for that just means "The woman that made towers." It is admitted on all hands that the last syllable "tart" comes from the Hebrew verb "Tr." It has been always taken for granted, however, that "Tr" signifies only "to go round." But we have evidence that, in nouns derived from it, it also signifies "to be round," "to surround," or "encompass." In the masculine, we find "Tor" used for "a border or row of jewels round the head" (see PARKHURST and also GESENIUS). And in the feminine, as given in Hesychius (Lexicon), we find the meaning much more decisively brought out. Turis is just the Greek form of Turit, the final t, according to the genius of the Greek language, being converted into s. Ash-turit, then, which is obviously the same as the Hebrew "Ashtoreth," is just "The woman that made the encompassing wall." Considering how commonly the glory of that achievement, as regards Babylon, was given to Semiramis, not only by Ovid, but by Justin, Dionysius, Afer, and others, both the name and mural crown on the head of that goddess were surely very appropriate. In confirmation of this interpretation of the meaning of the name Astarte, I may adduce an epithet applied to the Greek Diana, who at Ephesus bore a turreted crown on her head, and was identified with Semiramis, which is not a little striking. It is contained in the following extract from Livy: "When the news of the battle [near Pydna] reached Amphipolis, the matrons ran together to the temple of Diana, whom they style Tauropolos, to implore her aid." Tauropolos, from Tor, "a tower," or "surrounding fortification," and Pol, "to make," plainly means the "tower-maker," or "maker of surrounding fortifications"; and P53 to her as the goddess of fortifications, they would naturally apply when they dreaded an attack upon their city.

 

Semiramis, being deified as Astarte, came to be raised to the highest honours; and her change into a dove, as has been already shown, was evidently intended, when the distinction of sex had been blasphemously attributed to the Godhead, to identify her, under the name of the Mother of the gods, with that Divine Spirit, without whose agency no one can be born a child of God, and whose emblem, in the symbolical language of scripture, was the Dove, as that of the Messiah was the Lamb. Since the Spirit of God is the source of all wisdom, natural as well as spiritual, arts and inventions and skill of every kind being attributed to Him (Exo 31:3; 35:31), so the Mother of the gods, in whom that Spirit was feigned to be incarnate, was celebrated as the originator of some of the useful arts and sciences (DIODORUS SICULUS). Hence, also, the character attributed to the Grecian Minerva, whose name Athena, as we have seen reason to conclude, is only a synonym for Beltis, the well known name of the Assyrian goddess. Athena, the Minerva of Athens, is universally known as the "goddess of wisdom," the inventress of arts and sciences. 2. The name Astarte signifies also the "Maker of investigations"; and in this respect was applicable to Cybele or Semiramis, as symbolised by the Dove. That this is one of the meanings of the name Astarte may be seen from comparing it with the cognate names Asterie and Astraea (in Greek Astraia), which are formed by taking the last member of the compound word in the masculine, instead of the feminine, Teri, or Tri (the latter being pronounced Trai or Trae), being the same in sense as Tart. Now, Asterie was the wife of Perseus, the Assyrian (HERODOTUS), and who was the founder of Mysteries (BRYANT). As Asterie was further represented as the daughter of Bel, this implies a position similar to that of Semiramis. Astraea, again, was the goddess of justice, who is identified with the heavenly virgin Themis, the name Themis signifying "the perfect one," who gave oracles (OVID, Metam.), and who, having lived on earth before the Flood, forsook it just before that catastrophe came on. Themis and Astraea are sometimes distinguished and sometimes identified; but both have the same character as goddesses of justice. The explanation of the discrepancy obviously is, that the Spirit has sometimes been viewed as incarnate and sometimes not. When incarnate, Astraea is daughter of Themis. What name could more exactly agree with the character of a goddess of justice, than Ash-trai-a, "The maker of investigations," and what name could more appropriately shadow forth one of the characters of that Divine Spirit, who "searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God"? As Astraea, or Themis, was "Fatidica Themis," "Themis the prophetic," this also was another characteristic of the Spirit; for whence can any true oracle, or prophetic inspiration, come, but from the inspiring Spirit of God? Then, lastly, what can more exactly agree with the Divine statement in Genesis in regard to the Spirit of God, than the statement of Ovid, that Astraea was the last of the celestials who remained on earth, and that her forsaking it was the signal for the downpouring of the destroying deluge? The announcement of the coming Flood is in scripture ushered in with these words (Gen 6:3): "And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." All these 120 years, the Spirit was striving; when they came to an end, the Spirit strove no longer, forsook the earth, and left the world to its fate. But though the Spirit of God forsook the earth, it did not forsake the family of righteous Noah. It entered with the patriarch into the ark; and when that patriarch came forth from his long imprisonment, it came forth along with him. Thus the Pagans had an historical foundation for their myth of the dove resting on the symbol of the ark in the Babylonian waters, and the Syrian goddess, or Astarte--the same as Astraea--coming forth from it. Semiramis, then, as Astarte, worshipped as the dove, was regarded as the incarnation of the Spirit of God. 3. As Baal, Lord of Heaven, had his visible emblem, the sun, so she, as Beltis, Queen of Heaven, must have hers also--the moon, which in another sense was Asht-tart-e, "The maker of revolutions"; for there is no doubt that Tart very commonly signifies "going round." But, 4th, the whole system must be dovetailed together. As the mother of the gods was equally the mother of mankind, Semiramis, or Astarte, must also be identified with Eve; and the name Rhea, which, according to the Paschal Chronicle was given to her, sufficiently proves her identification with Eve. As applied to the common mother of the human race, the name Astarte is singularly appropriate; for, as she was Idaia mater, "The mother of knowledge," the question is, "How did she come by that knowledge?" To this the answer can only be: "by the fatal investigations she made." It was a tremendous experiment she made, when, in opposition to the Divine command, and in spite of the threatened penalty, she ventured to "search" into that forbidden knowledge which her Maker in his goodness had kept from her. Thus she took the lead in that unhappy course of which the scripture speaks--"God made man upright, but they have SOUGHT out many inventions" (Eccl7:29). Now Semiramis, deified as the Dove, was Astarte in the most gracious and benignant form. Lucius Ampelius calls her "the goddess benignant and merciful to me" (bringing them) "to a good and happy life." In reference to this benignity of her character, both the titles, Aphrodite and Mylitta, are evidently attributed to her. The first I have elsewhere explained as "The wrath-subduer," and the second is in exact accordance with it. Mylitta, or, as it is in Greek, Mulitta, signifies "The Mediatrix." The Hebrew Melitz, which in Chaldee becomes Melitt, is evidently used in Job 33:23, in the sense of a Mediator; "the messenger, the interpreter" (Melitz), who is "gracious" to a man, and saith, "Deliver from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom," being really "The Messenger, the MEDIATOR." Parkhurst takes the word in this sense, and derives it from "Mltz," "to be sweet." Now, the feminine of Melitz is Melitza, from which comes Melissa, a "bee" (the sweetener, or producer of sweetness), and Melissa, a common name of the priestesses of Cybele, and as we may infer of Cybele, as Astarte, or Queen of Heaven, herself; for, after Porphyry, has stated that "the ancients called the priestesses of Demeter, Melissae," he adds, that they also "called the Moon Melissa." We have evidence, further, that goes far to identify this title as a title of Semiramis. Melissa or Melitta (APPOLODORUS)--for the name is given in both ways--is said to have been the mother of Phoroneus, the first that reigned, in whose days the dispersion of mankind occurred, divisions having come in among them, whereas before, all had been in harmony and spoke one language (Hyginus). There is no other to whom this can be applied but Nimrod; and as Nimrod came to be worshipped as Nin, the son of his own wife, the identification is exact. Melitta, then, the mother of Phoroneus, is the same as Mylitta, the well known name of the Babylonian Venus; and the name, as being the feminine of Melitz, the Mediator, consequently signifies the Mediatrix. Another name also given to the mother of Phoroneus, "the first that reigned," is Archia (LEMPRIERE; SMITH). Now Archia signifies "Spiritual" (from "Rkh," Heb. "Spirit," which in Egyptian also is "Rkh" [BUNSEN]; and in Chaldee, with the prosthetic a prefixed becomes Arkh). * From the same root also evidently comes the epithet Architis, as applied to the Venus that wept for Adonis. Venus Architis is the spiritual Venus. **

 

* The Hebrew Dem, blood, in Chaldee becomes Adem; and, in like manner, Rkh becomes Arkh.

 

** From OUVAROFF we learn that the mother of the third Bacchus was Aura, and Phaethon is said by Orpheus to have been the son of the "wide extended air" (LACTANTIUS). The connection in the sacred language between the wind, the air, and the spirit, sufficiently accounts for these statements, and shows their real meaning.

 

Thus, then, the mother-wife of the first king that reigned was known as Archia and Melitta, in other words, as the woman in whom the "Spirit of God" was incarnate; and thus appeared as the "Dea Benigna," "The Mediatrix" for sinful mortals. The first form of Astarte, as Eve, brought sin into the world; the second form before the Flood, was avenging as the goddess of justice. This form was "Benignant and Merciful." Thus, also, Semiramis, or Astarte, as Venus the goddess of love and beauty, became "The HOPE of the whole world," and men gladly had recourse to the "mediation" of one so tolerant of sin.

 

INDEX

 

 

 

Easter is Not the Worship of God in Spirit and in Truth

 

One of the purposes of this site is to expose Satan's snares, especially those that he is directing towards the saints of God—the called out ones. Satan always marks his work  with evil fruit, the appearance of evil, occult symbolism, occult dates, and a myriad of ways that defy the authority of the Word of God.

 

Jesus warned, 

 

"Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs or thistles?"-Matthew 7:16  

 

The Lord Jesus Christ explained the concept of satanic marking in regard to behavior: the tree is corrupt if it bears corrupt fruit. The context of this verse zeroes in on false prophets—Satan's workers. However, this principle also applies to the fruits of religious practices. God's people must carefully examine the practices the world and the church runs after and prove them to see if they are acceptable unto the Lord.  (See Eph. 5:10)

 

Keeping the principle of "knowing them by their fruits" in mind, let us briefly examine Easter. I do not want to repeat the insights other believers have shared in exposing the origins of Easter. There are some good websites where this information is readily available to those who are willing to prove what is acceptable unto the Lord. 

 

First of all, nowhere in the Holy Bible are followers of the Lord Jesus Christ commanded or exhorted to commemorate our Lord's resurrection in special worship. It is interesting that the world revels in the celebration of the resurrection of the Son of God, even while they know not the one they are supposedly worshiping. Since they are not committing their annual "resurrection worship" to the true Lord Jesus Christ, to whom is their worship directed?  Since they are not worshipping in spirit and in truth, then what kind of worship is it? It is fleshly worship, which is devilish.

 

Devilish worship is any worship, no matter how holy it appears on the surface, that is not carried out in spirit and in truth. This kind of worship is offered by the "children of disobedience" by the spirit that now works in them which is the prince of the power of the air:

 

"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience."-Eph. 2:2

 

Christians also offer devilish worship if they are double-minded in regard to their worship. If believers are not worshipping God in spirit and in truth, then the Bible says they are partaking of the table of devils:

 

"Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils."-1 Cor. 10:21 

 

Only true Christians only have the capacity to worship God in truth. Unbelievers, who are spiritually dead in their tresspasses and sins, do not have the ability to worship in spirit and in truth and cannot partake of the Lord's table. Followers of Jesus Christ have the ability to partake of either the Lord's table or the table of devils. They cannot partake of both at the same time. One is mutually exclusive of the other. If we look at the context of 1 Cor. 10:20-23 we can see what happens in regard to believers partaking of the "table of devils":

 

"But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to the devil, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?"-1 Cor. 10:20, 22 

 

An unbelievers' worship is to the devil by default, even if his worship appears to be directed toward the Lord Jesus Christ. Since he is not born of the Holy Spirit and thus cannot worship God in spirit and in truth, his worship is at the table of devils in the sight of God whether he realizes this or not. This is a fact. It is also a fact that believers can fellowship with devils in their worship if they do not confine their worship of God to biblical standards: in spirit and in truth:

 

 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth"-John. 4:24  

 

If a Christian is worshipping who he presumes to be God, but is not worshipping in spirit and truth, he is unwittingly fellowshipping with devils. The entire tenth chapter of 1 Corinthians is about believers committing idolatry and the consequences for such. Paul likened idolatry to the sin of tempting Christ! He explained that God's people must flee from idolatry:

 

Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. 1 Cor. 10:14

 

God is pleased when his people obey him and flee from idolatry. On the other hand, the religious-but-worldly relatives of the Christian who flees from idolatry will not be pleased. Remember that persecutions for living godly in Christ Jesus will be a faint memory when we hear the words, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant."

 

Easter: A "Christian" Celebration based Upon the Full Moon

 

Is celebrating Easter worshipping God in spirit and in truth? Well, let us look at the day that is chosen to celebrate what was and still is a fertility rite. Easter is not celebrated on a fixed date each year. The reason the date fluctuates is because the date for Easter is based upon the full moon. I learned about this several years ago by consulting my Webster's Universal Unabridged Dictionary. 

 

Easter-[a paschal feast, originally a pagan festival in honor of the Goddess of Spring, Eastre, held in April.]

1. An annual Christian festival in commemoration of the resurrection of Jesus, held on the first Sunday after the date of the full moon that occurs on or after March 21.

2. The Sunday on which Easter is held: often called Easter Sunday.

 

March 21st (or 22nd)  is the Vernal (Spring) Equinox and is also a Satanic high day. The date of this "Christian" celebration is held on the first Sunday after the date of the full moon that occurs on or after March 21! The way the yearly Easter date is calculated definitely marks it as a pagan holiday.

 

Destroy the Works of the Devil Through Prayer

 

Human sacrifices are performed throughout the Easter holidays. These satanic ritual killings begin on "Good Friday" at 12:01 a.m. and continue through Easter Sunday. It is the will of God that we pray and ask him to intervene and rescue from death those who have been prepared for ritual murder at this time. Pray that Satan would be thwarted from receiving the sacrifices that he desires and that lives would be saved to the honor and glory of God.

 

Human sacrifice blasphemes God and intensely glorifies Satan. God's people must not participate in Easter in the manner of a celebration because it is Satan's holiday marked by the full moon and  human sacrifice! Satan's followers covet the cooperation of devils which enable them to carry out Satan's purposes in this world. To acquire this power they must shed and consume human blood in ceremonial killings. Satan requires the execution of these diabolical practices throughout the world.

 

God is calling his called-out ones to prevail in prayer against the gates of hell during this time. Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. As his followers, we must follow him and do the same. We must worship in spirit and in truth during Easter week by interceding for those held in bondage. God has provided a way of escape for people slated for sacrifice in the past and he will continue to provide a way of escape if we will pray. 

 

Some of you might say,

 

"Well, I'm going to go to the church play, will enjoy my Easter feast, and partake of the spiritual aspects of the resurrection celebration anyway. I have nothing to do with what Satan's workers are involved in and I reject the world's secular rituals of egg hunting and chocolate bunnies and marshmallow chicks. My celebration is a Christian one. I'm going to enjoy myself and celebrate Christ's resurrection. There's nothing wrong with that!  My family has always done this; it's a tradition!"

 

Gary and I do understand your feelings because we celebrated Easter for many years before we realized that we were taking man's tradition and trying to put God's Spirit and truth into it. We had to let go of even treasured family holidays in order to put the Lord Jesus Christ first.

 

Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for elevating tradition over God's Word: 

 

"Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Matt. 15:3

 

Those who celebrate Easter transgress the commandments of God because The Bible does not direct believers to celebrate the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ nor does God's word condone paganism in Christian garb. We are commanded to remember Jesus' death via the Lord's Supper, not his resurrection.

 

Let us look at the verse that Christians like to use as an excuse to partake of the table of devils by observing the holidays the world runs after: 

 

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."  Col. 2:16, 17 

 

"Ah hah! See? Nobody may judge a Christian in respect to a holy day!" Perhaps some who name the name of Jesus Christ are not aware that Easter (Ishtar) is not really a holy day unto the Lord Jesus Christ. Rather, it is Satan's holy day. It is probable that many Christians do not know that Easter is a time of human sacrifice. But you and I know, and Jesus said we will be held accountable for what we know: 

 

"But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." Luke 12:48

 

You may protest,

 

"But I have nothing to do with human sacrifice!  It is not my fault that Satanists do such vile things on Easter Sunday! Easter has an entirely different meaning to me. Easter is a holy time in my eyes; I worship the Lord Jesus Christ and honor him only on this day!"

 

Please soberly ponder these words. Do you believe the Lord Jesus Christ is receiving your worship when he has indicated nowhere in the Holy Bible that this kind of worship is acceptable to him? God's ways are not our ways. The Lord Jesus Christ is not pleased with those who call themselves by his name and yet insist on adhering to religious tradition over and above his word. Easter is a pagan holiday that is based on the full moon, the fertility goddess, and human sacrifice. How can one in good conscience associate such things with the worship of God? Jesus is not honored while He watches the worldwide, simultaneous sacrifices of thousands upon thousands of people while his church does nothing to counter these atrocities! 

 

Jesus Christ is calling his true worshippers to bear his burden and intercede to bring about the rescue and escape of men and women, boys, girls, and infants who are being prepared for ritual slayings on Easter and other satanic high days. Jesus Christ came to destroy the works of darkness. May his people co-labor with him and do the same by praying against human sacrifice while the world engages in the Easter celebration.

 

But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship Easter and Christmas 

 

The Truth about their origin and how the symbols came into use. Also the correct timing of our Lord's birth.

  Christmas, our most celebrated holiday, dedicated to remembering our Lord's birth, is and has been so commercialized, that the true meaning, for most of the world that celebrates it, has been obliterated. However, in taking it's true meaning and working with that aspect, you will find that it teaches underlying falsehoods that attempt to cover up the truths that God has preserved and intends for us to know. "Christmas" or "Christ's Mass", originated with the feast of Saturnalia, a pagan winter festival devoted to the hope of an early spring. The evergreen symbolizes the ever renewing life force that was desired to ward off winter. Jeremiah warns us about cutting down evergreens, decking them out with silver and gold, and placing them in our homes. Early Christians tried to stop their practice but when they found it impossible to change them they figured that if they were to stamp Christ on it that might be what is needed to convert these "heathen".

 

   There was however a "Saint Nicholas" that did give gifts to the orphan children of his city. He became symbolic of love and giving and was soon incorporated into this pagan festival. Jesus wasn't born in December. He was born in the fall of the year. The shepherds wouldn't be tending their flocks on the hillsides of the land in December, it would be far too cold. if you go to the Jewish priests records you will find out when John the Baptists father Zacharias was the high priest. Which is when he saw the angel and couldn't speak and Elizabeth became pregnant. Six months later is when Elizabeth came to Mary and found her to be with child also. It is possible that Jesus may have been conceived m December but was born in September, on the Feast of Trumpets, Rosh Hashanah the Jewish new year. God has always used certain "Set Tines" to fulfill his plan for mankind. Satan has introduced other holidays and he has tried to stamp the meaning out of Gods perfect times. The world, even most Christians, think of the Jewish feasts as strictly Jewish. When it is plain that God intended for us to incorporate them into our heritage as followers of Christ. Paul said that the feasts were types and shadows that pointed to Christ. I'm not saying that we should not celebrate Christmas, but we should teach the truth about Christ, and when he was born, then maybe fewer of the young generation will turn off of God, when they realize that Santa Clause and the Easter bunny are only lies. Maybe then they won’t start thinking that God, Jesus and the bible are also lies or fairy tales

 

  Now lets talk about Easter. The name is derived from the feast of Ishtar. Good Friday came from Good Freila. Both are pagan sun god feasts. Nimrod the “great hunter” was wed to Semiramus, also called Freila in another language. When Nimrod died she was found to be with child, and to cover her adulterous affair, she claimed that Nimrod became the sun and a sunbeam impregnated her with a child who was Nimrod incarnate. The Feasts of Ishtar and Good Freila then came into being. People rose early to watch the sunrise Which is why the sunrise services at most churches is teaching a lie. Christ arose in the night, at dusk, not at sunrise and that subject is next. The Easter bunny and the egg are symbols of fertility also attributed to this lying and deceitful woman. Jesus said that as in the parable of Jonah, whereas he was in the belly of the whale for for days and three nights, so the Son of Man was also to be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. Now I’m pretty good with math and I just can’t figure how to get three days and three nights fit into Friday evening to Sunday morning. Even if you were to count all of Friday and all of Sunday, which is absurd if he was in the tomb at sunset and rose at sunrise, you still will only get three days and two nights. Either God is wrong, or our thinking and reasoning about these events are way off base.

 

   While this whole letter is designed as an overview on Easter and Christmas, I’ve just completed a new study on Good Friday to Easter Sunday vs Passover to Feast of Firstfruits. Visit it if you like. It is a more in-depth and updated study and covers only this particular subject. I’ll complete an in-depth study on Christmas later this year. 3/16/2012 PR

 

   First, let me say that no one knows exactly when Christ arose, no one saw the resurrection. The tomb was empty when the women arrived, very early in the morning before the the sun came up. There are many Sabbath’s, not just the Saturday Sabbath. The feasts are High Sabbath’s and are also referred to as Sabbaths. John 19:31 refers to the Sabbath after the crucifixion as a “High Sabbath”. Jesus was our Passover Lamb and as such was crucified and in the tomb just before the Passover Sabbath to become our sacrifice. Passover that year was on a Thursday, Jesus was crucified on Wednesday, he was in the tomb before dusk at which time the Passover started. He was m the tomb for three days and nights, 72 hours, and then rose Saturday evening after it became dark and Sunday began. I’m sure he wasn’t in the tomb any longer than necessary. Sunday is the Lord’s Day and we as Christians are to recognize that “there remaineth a Sabbathing unto us” we have a command to be in a constant sabbathing state of mind. To be continually in that state of mind and not just a one day of week. There was only one Sabbath day, Saturday, we are to live in a “Sabbathing” state of mind at all tines. To do good even on the Sabbath when we were supposed to be at rest are the truths that Jesus taught.

 

   This leads me to another subject. Did Jesus really come out of the tomb? It is vital to the Christian faith that Jesus would rise from the dead. If he be not raised, then our faith is vain. What hope would there be if we had nothing to look forward to, after our death. We might as well live our lives up, stepping on whomever we want to get on top. But if he did rise from the dead then we have eternal life to look forward to and the fear of death is removed for all believers. There are many reasons to believe that he did rise from the tomb but it comes down to two things. Either the disciples were liars and were preaching falsehoods, or they were honest reporters, reporting the facts as they truly experienced them. The main reason to believe that they were honest reporters was that they all died, apart from one another, horrible death’s, save John, and could have stopped their torture by just stating that it was all a lie. You will not find one instance, that any one of them ever changed their story. There weren’t telephones, or TV, no one would have found out, but no one gave in. These men truly believed what they were preaching. For an in depth study on the resurrection, please visit my Resurrection letter.  In it you find the details necessary to help you to increase Gods kingdom, which makes delving into the resurrection more important than ever. We need to teach all truth even at the risk of having to change our current ways of interpreting God’s word. Because falsehood breeds falsehood, but truth breeds truth. God’s Word will not fail. Don’t worry of having to save God, he can take care of himself. We need to worry more about our own faith, and work and learn and increase in the knowledge, and the truth of him. Lets be faithful and may he finding us being so, when he returns.

 

  In Christ, Patrick Robinson

  8/l/1999him in spiritThe Plain Truth About EASTER 

by Herbert W. Armstrong 

  1957, 1973 edition 

  

 

 

The Resurrection was not on Easter Sunday! Easter is not a Christian name, but the title of the idolatrous "queen of heaven." Here's an explanation of the true origin and meaning of Lent, Easter eggs, and sunrise services! 

 

 

 

 

     WHY DO you believe the things you believe, do the things you do?

 

     The chances are you never stopped to ask yourself that question. You have been taught since childhood to accept Easter as the chief of the Christian holidays.

 

     You have supposed it is part of the true Christian religion to observe Lent, "Holy Week," "Good Friday," to buy hot cross buns at the bakery, to have colored Easter eggs, to dress up and go to church Easter Sunday -- perhaps to attend an Easter sunrise service!

 

     Because of the "sheep" instinct in humans, most of us believe a lot of things that are not true. Most of us do a lot of things that are wrong, supposing these things to be right, or even sacred! 

 

                     Ishtar the Pagan Goddess

 

 

     What is the meaning of the name "Easter"? You have been led to suppose the word means "resurrection of Christ." For 1600 years the Western world has been taught that Christ rose from the dead on Sunday morning. But that is merely one of the fables the Apostle Paul warned readers of the New Testament to expect. The resurrection did not occur on Sunday! (For the astonishing proof setting forth the exact time of the resurrection, write for our free booklet "The Resurrection Was Not on Sunday.")

 

     The name "Easter," which is marry the slightly changed English spelling of the name of the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian goddess Ishtar, comes to us from old Teutonic mythology where it is known as Ostern. The Phoenician name of this goddess was Astarte, consort of Baal, the sun god, whose worship is denounced by the Almighty in the Bible as the most abominable of all pagan idolatry.

 

     Look up the word "Easter" in Webster's dictionary. You will find it clearly reveals the pagan origin of the name.

 

     In the large five-volume Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, only six brief lines are given to the name "Easter," because it occurs only once in the Bible -- and that only in the Authorized King James translation. Says Hastings: "Easter, used in Authorized Version as the translation of 'Pascha' in Acts 12:4, 'Intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.' Revised Standard Version has substituted correctly 'the Passover.'" 

 

          Apostles Observed Passover

 

 

     The World Almanac, 1968 edition, page 187, says: "In the second century A.D., Easter Day was, among Christians in Asia Minor [that is, in the Churches at Ephesus, Galatia, etc. -- the so-called "Gentile" churches raised up by the Apostle Paul] the 14th of Nisan, the seventh month of the Jewish [civil] calendar."

 

In other words, the 14th day of the first month of the sacred calendar, and it was not then called by the name of the pagan deity "Easter," but by the Bible name "Passover."

 

     Passover, the Days of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, and the holy days God had ordained forever were all observed by Jesus, and the early apostles, and the converted Gentile Christians (Acts 2:1; 12:3; 18:21; 20:6, 16; I Cor. 5:7-8; 16:8). Passover is a memorial of the crucifixion of Christ (Luke 22:19). Passover, observed by the early true Church, occurred not on Sunday or any fixed day of the week, but on a calendar day of the year. The day of the week varies from year to year.

 

     Easter is one of the pagan days Paul warned Gentile converts they must not return to observing (Gal. 4:9-10).

 

     How, then, did this pagan festival enter into and fasten itself upon a professing Christianity? That is a surprising story -- but first, notice the true origin and nature of Easter. 

 

                          Its Chaldean Origin

 

-------------------- 

PHOTO CAPTION: Steele from Ur. Ishtar (Easter) sunrise services.

-------------------- 

 

 

     Easter, as Alexander Hislop says (The Two Babylons, p. 103), "bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven ...."

 

     The ancient gods of the pagans had many different names. While this goddess was called Astarte by the Phoenicians, it appears on Assyrian monuments found by Layard in excavations at Nineveh as Ishtar (Austen H. Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, Vol. II, p. 629). Both were pronounced "Easter." Likewise, Bel (referred to in the Old Testament), also was called Molech. It was for sacrificing to Molech (I Kings 11:1-11, especially verse 7, where Molech is called an abomination) and other pagan gods that the Eternal condemned Solomon, and rended away the Kingdom of Israel from his son.

 

     In the ancient Chaldean idolatrous sun-worship, as practiced by the Phoenicians, Baal was the sun god; Astarte, his consort or wife. And Astarte is the same as Ishtar, or the English "Easter."

 

     Says Hislop: "The festival, of which we read in Church history, under the name of Easter, in the third or fourth centuries, was quite a different festival from that now observed in the Romish [and Protestant] Church, and at that time was not known by any such name as Easter. It was called Pascha, or the Passover, and ... was very early observed by many professing Christians .... That festival agreed originally with the time of the Jewish Passover, when Christ was crucified .... That festival was not idolatrous, and it was preceded by no Lent" (The Two Babylons, p. 104). 

 

                     Where Did We Get Lent? 

 

 

     "Howbeit you should know," wrote Johannes Cassianus (John Cassian) in the fifth century, "that as long as the primitive church retained its perfection unbroken, this observance of Lent did not exist" (First Conference Abbot Theonas, chapter 30).

 

     Jesus observed no Lent. The apostles and the early true Church of God observed no Lenten season. Then how did this observance originate?

 

     "The forty days' abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshipers of the Babylonian goddess. Such a Lent of forty days, in the spring of the year, is still observed by the Yezidis or pagan Devil-worshippers of Koordistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the Babylonians. Such a Lent of forty days was held in spring by the Pagan Mexicans .... Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt ..." (The Two Babylons, pp. 104, 105). In fact this Egyptian Lent of forty days was observed expressly in honor of Osiris, also known as Adonis in Syria and Tammuz in Babylonia (Sabean Researches, by John Landseer, pp. 111, 112).

 

     Do you realize what has happened? God Almighty commanded His 

people to observe the Passover forever! (Ex. 12:24.) This command was given while the Israelites were still in Egypt, prior to the Old Covenant, or the Law of Moses! It pictured, before the crucifixion, Christ's death for the remission of our sins, as a type looking forward to it. At His last Passover, Jesus changed the emblems used from the blood of a lamb and eating its roasted body to the bread and wine.

 

     Jesus did not abolish Passover -- He merely changed the emblems, or symbols used. All the apostles of Christ and true Christians of the first century true Church observed it on the 14th day of the first month of the sacred calendar. It is now a memorial of Christ's death, reaffirming, year by year on its anniversary, the true Christian's faith in the blood of Christ 

for the remission of his sins, and the broken body of Christ for his physical healing.

 

     But what has happened? Do you realize it? All Western nations have been deceived into dropping the festival God ordained forever to commemorate the death of the true Saviour for our sins, and substituting in its place the pagan festival in commemoration of the counterfeit "savior" and mediator Baal, the sun god, named after the mythical Ishtar, his wife -- actually none other than the ancient Semiramis, who palmed herself off as the wife of the sun god, the idolatrous "queen of heaven."

 

     This is not Christian! It is pagan to the core!

 

     Yet scores of millions are deceived into observing this form of heathen idolatry, under the delusion they are honoring Jesus Christ the Son of the Creator God!

 

     Easter does not honor Christ! And yet, have you not been like a blind sheep, following the other millions in observing this custom? "The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30). 

 

                            Dyed Eggs

                         

 

     But did you know that dyed Easter eggs also figured in the ancient Babylonian mystery rites, just as they do in Easter observance today? Yes, these are pagan, too.

 

     It is recorded in Edward Davies' "The Mythology and Rites of the British Druids," page 210, that the ancient Druids bore an egg as the sacred emblem of their idolatrous order.

 

     Eggs were sacred to many ancient civilizations and formed an integral part of the religious ceremonies in Egypt and in the Orient.

 

     According to James Bonwick: "Eggs were hung up in the Egyptian temples. Bunsen calls attention to the mundane egg, the emblem of generative life, proceeding from the mouth of the great god of Egypt. The mystic egg of Babylon, hatching the Venus Ishtar, fell from heaven to the Euphrates. Dyed eggs were sacred Easter offerings in Egypt, as they are still in China and Europe. Easter, or spring, was the season of birth, terrestrial and celestial" (Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought, pp. 211-212).

 

     Why do people who believe themselves to be Christians dye eggs at Easter? Do they suppose the Bible ordained, or commands, this heathen custom? There is not a word of it in the New Testament. Certainly Christ did not start it, and the apostles and early Christians did none of it!

 

     Then why should you do it today? Why follow heathenism and try to convince yourself you are a Christian? God calls such things abomination! 

 

                     Easter Sunrise Services

                                                     

 

     You think Easter sunrise services are beautiful? Listen! God was showing the Prophet Ezekiel the sins of His people in a vision -- a prophecy for today! "Turn thee yet again," said God, "and thou shalt see greater abominations than these [Ezekiel had just been shown, in vision, idol worship among professing people of God]. And he brought me [in vision] into the inner court of the Eternal's house, and behold ... between the porch and the altar, were about five and twenty men, with ... their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east. Then he said unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? Is it a light thing ... that they commit the abominations which they commit here? ... Therefore will I deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them"! (Ezek. 8:15-18.)

 

     Do you grasp what this most abominable thing is?

 

     It is the identical thing millions are doing every Easter Sunday morning -- the sunrise service -- standing with their faces toward the east, as the sun is rising, in a service of worship which honors the sun god and his mythical idolatrous consort, goddess Easter. Yes, deceived into believing this is Christian, millions practice every Easter the identical form of the ancient 

sun worship of the sun god Baal! Throughout the Bible this is revealed as the most abominable of all idolatry in the sight of the Eternal Creator! 

 

                How Easter Crept Into the Church 

 

     Such is the origin and early history of Easter.

 

     How, then, was this pagan festival injected into professing Christian religion, as a substitute for an ordinance of God?

 

-------------------- 

PHOTO CAPTION: Colorfully dyed Easter eggs have been traced by 

scholars to early Egypt. They were also featured in the ancient 

Babylonian mystery rites. 

-------------------- 

 

     Before revealing briefly the astonishing account of this great deception, two facts must be firmly fixed in mind.

 

     First, Jesus and the apostles foretold, not a universal, widespread popular growth of the true New Testament Church, but a falling away from the truth on the part of the great majority. Prophesying a popular, universal falling away from the faith once delivered, to the Thessalonians Paul stated, "The mystery of iniquity doth already work," only some 20 years after the Church began! He referred to the very "Chaldean Mysteries," of which Easter and Christmas were the two chief festivals!

 

     Second, although Jesus said the gates of hell would never prevail against His church, yet it is prophesied in the New Testament to be the "little flock" never as a great, large, popular universal church (Luke 12:32).

 

     This is the very fact the world does not realize today! 

 

                TWO Churches -- One False, One True

 

 

     In New Testament prophecy two churches are described.

 

     One, the great and powerful and universal church, a part of the world, actually ruling in its politics over many nations, and united with the "Holy Roman Empire," is brought to a concrete focus in Revelation 17.

 

     This church is pictured with great pomp, ritual and display, decked in purple, scarlet and gold -- proud, worldly, boastful. She is pictured as a universal deceiver -- all the Western nations spiritually drunk with her false doctrines, their spiritual perception so blurred by her paganized teachings and practices they are unable to clearly distinguish truth! She boasts she is the true Church, yet she is drunken with the blood of the saints she has caused to be martyred!

 

     But how could she have deceived the whole world, as foretold in God's Word? Surely, the Protestant world isn't deceived!

 

     Oh, but it is! Notice, verse 5, she is a mother church! Her daughters are also churches who have come out of her, in protest, calling themselves Protestant -- but they are fundamentally of her family in pagan doctrines and practices! They, too, make themselves a part of this world, taking active part in its politics -- the very act which made a "harlot" out of their mother!

 

     The entire apostate family -- mother, and more than 400 daughter denominations, all divided against each other and in confusion of doctrines, yet all united in the chief pagan doctrines and festivals -- has a family name! They call themselves "Christian," but God calls them something else -- "Mystery, Babylon the Great"!

 

     "Babylon" means confusion! God always names people and things by calling them what they are! And here are the identical ancient Babylonian Mysteries now wrapped in the false cloak labeled "Christianity" -- but in fact it is the same old "Babylonian Mystery System."

 

     But where, then, was the true Church? 

 

                  TRUE Church Small -- Scattered

 

 

     Did the true Church of God, of which Jesus Christ is the living, directing Head, become perverted -- did it merely apostatize into the system described above?

 

     No! The gates of hell have never prevailed against the true Church of God, and never will! The true Church has never fallen! It has never ceased! 

 

     But the true Church of God is pictured in prophecy as the "little flock"! The New Testament describes this Church as continually persecuted, despised by the large popular churches because it is not OF this world or its politics, but has kept itself unspotted from the world! It has always kept the Commandments of God and the faith of Jesus (Rev. 12:17). It has kept God's Festivals, not the pagan holidays. It has been empowered with the Spirit of God!

 

     That Church never became the great popular church at Rome, as the Protestant world supposes! That Church has always existed, and it exists today!

 

     Then where did it go? Where was it during the Middle Ages? Where is it today? (Write for our free booklet "Where Is God's True Church Today?")  

 

     First, remember this Church was never large, never politically powerful, or a world-known organization of men. It is a spiritual organism, not a political organization. It is composed of all whose hearts and lives have been changed by the Spirit of God, whether visibly together, or individually scattered.

 

     Under the lash of continual persecution and opposition from the organized forces of this world, it is difficult for such a people to remain united and organized together.

 

     Daniel prophesied the true people of God would be scattered (Dan. 12:7). Ezekiel foretold it (Ezek. 34:5-12). Jeremiah, too (Jer. 23:1-2). Jesus foretold it (Matt. 26:31). The apostolic Church was soon scattered by persecution (Acts 8:1). 

 

                    Ignored by Most Histories

 

 

     You don't read much of this true Body of Christ in the secular histories of this world! No, the world little notes, nor long remembers, the activities of this "little flock," hated and despised by the world, driven to the wilderness by persecution, always opposed, usually scattered! But there are enough references to it in authentic histories to show that it has continued through every century to now!

 

     The prophecies bring this Church into concrete focus in the 12th chapter of Revelation. There she is shown spiritually, in the glory and splendor of the Spirit of God, but visibly in the world as a persecuted Commandment keeping Church driven into the wilderness, for 1260 years, through the Middle Ages!

 

     Even in Paul's day, many among those attending at Antioch, at Jerusalem, at Ephesus, at Corinth, and other places, began to apostatize and turn away from the truth. Divisions sprang up. Those individuals, unconverted or turned from God's truth and way of life, were no part of God's true Church, though visibly assembling with those who were. The "mystery of iniquity" was already working inside these visible churches. This apostasy increased! By the year A.D. 125 the majority in most churches, especially those Gentile-born, were continuing in many of their 

old pagan beliefs and practices, though professing to be Christian! Gradually, a smaller and smaller portion of the visible churches going by the name "Christian" remained truly yielded to God and His truth, and led of His Spirit. After Constantine took virtual control of the visible, professing Church in the early fourth century, this visible organization 

became almost wholly pagan, and began excommunicating and 

persecuting all who held to the true Word of God! Finally, it became necessary for real Christians, who, even as a scattered people, alone composed the true Christian Church, to flee from the jurisdiction of Rome in order truly to worship God! Thus, the visible, organized Church which rose to power was the FALSE Church -- the "Great Whore" of Revelation 17. 

 

                    Injected Into the Church 

 

 

     Nothing illustrates this very fact more vividly than the actual history of the injecting of Easter into the Western Church.

 

     Here is the quick, brief history of it, from the Encyclopedia Britannica (11th edition, Vol. VIII, pp. 828-829):

 

     "There is no indication of the observance of the Easter festival in the New Testament, or in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers .... The first Christians [the original true Church] continued to observe the Jewish [that is, God's] festivals, though in a new spirit, as commemorations of events which those festivals had foreshadowed. Thus the Passover, with a new conception added to it, of Christ as the true Paschal Lamb and the first fruits from the dead, continued to be observed.

 

     "Although the observance of Easter was at a very early period in the practice of the Christian Church, a serious difference as to the day for its observance soon arose between the Christians of Jewish and those of Gentile descent, which led to a long and bitter controversy. With the Jewish Christians ... the fast ended ... on the 14th day of the moon at evening ... without regard to the day of the week. The Gentile Christians on the other hand [that is, the beginning of the Roman Church, now substituting pagan for true Christian doctrines] ... identified the first day of the week with the 

resurrection, and kept the preceding Friday as the commemoration of the crucifixion, irrespective of the day of the month.

 

     "Generally speaking, the Western Churches [Catholic] kept Easter on the 1st day of the week, while the Eastern Churches [containing most of those who remained as part of the true Christian Church] followed the Jewish rule. [That is, observing Passover on the 14th of the first sacred month instead of the pagan Easter.]

 

     "Polycarp, the disciple of John the Evangelist, and bishop of Smyrna, visited Rome in 159 [sic] to confer with Anicetus, the bishop of that see, on the subject, and urged the tradition which he had received from the apostles of observing the 14th day. Anicetus, however, declined. About forty years later (197), the question was discussed in a very different spirit between Victor, bishop of Rome, and Polycrates, metropolitan of proconsular Asia [the territory of the Churches at Ephesus, Galatia, Antioch, Philadelphia, and all those mentioned in Revelation 2 and 3 -- the Churches established through the Apostle Paul]. That province was the only portion of Christendom which still adhered to the Jewish usage. Victor demanded that all should adopt the usage prevailing at Rome. This Polycrates firmly refused to agree to, and urged many weighty reasons to the contrary, whereupon Victor proceeded to excommunicate Polycrates and the Christians who continued the Eastern usage [that is, who continued in God's way, as Jesus, Peter, Paul, and all the early true Church had done]. He was, however, restrained [by other bishops] from actually proceeding to enforce the decree of excommunication ... and the Asiatic churches retained their usage unmolested. We find the Jewish [true Christian Passover] usage from time to time reasserting itself after this, but it never prevailed to any large extent.

 

     "A final settlement of the dispute was one among the other reasons which led Constantine to summon the council at Nicaea in 325. At that time the Syrians and Antiochenes were the solitary champions of the observance of the 14th day. The decision of the council was unanimous that Easter was to be kept on Sunday, and on the same Sunday throughout the world, and that 'none hereafter should follow the blindness of the Jews.' [That is, in plain language, the Roman Church now decreed that none should be allowed to follow the ways of Christ -- of the true Christian Church!]

 

     "... The few who afterwards separated themselves from the unity of the church [Roman Church], and continued to keep the 14th day, were named 'Quarto-decimani,' and the dispute itself is known as the 'Quartodeciman controversy.'"

 

     Thus you see how the politically organized church at Rome grew to great size and power by adopting popular pagan practices and how she gradually stamped out the true teachings, doctrines, and practices of Christ and the true Church, so far as any collective practice is concerned. 

 

                  The First Historical Records

 

 

     The early Church of God in New Testament times was taught that Jesus was in the grave three days and three nights -- that He arose at the close of the third day after the crucifixion. The crucifixion occurred upon a Wednesday, April 25, A.D. 31.

 

     The Passover was observed annually, on the eve of Christ's death, on Nisan 14 of God's Sacred Calendar. This New Testament practice was followed in the West universally until shortly after the death of the Apostle John. In the Eastern Roman Empire the true practice continued even longer.

 

     Here is what happened in the East!

 

     During the middle of the second century A.D., new ideas began to be introduced into the professing Christian world. The true Christians who fled to Pella from Jerusalem "continued to use the Jewish cycle [God's method of reckoning the Passover in the Sacred Calendar] till the bishops of Jerusalem who were of the circumcision were succeeded by others who were not of the circumcision [unconverted Gentiles -- and] ... they began to invent other cycles" (Bingham's Antiquities of the Christian Church, p. 

1152).

 

     This same author continues: "We see, at this time [middle of second century] the Jewish calculation [determined by God's Calendar which the Jews had accurately preserved] was generally rejected by the ... church, and yet no certain one agreed upon in its room [stead] ...."

 

     This is how the Passover -- sometimes called Lord's Supper or Eucharist -- was gradually rejected.  

 

     Jesus Christ kept the Passover. So did the Apostle John. And so did some Christians in Scotland even until the 7th century A.D.

 

     This information comes from no less an ecclesiastical authority than the church historian Bede. His Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation would astound many who have assumed that Christ and the early apostles all kept Easter.

 

     He writes that "John, following the customs of the Law, used to begin the Feast of Easter [actually the Passover] on the evening of the fourteenth day of the first month, whether it fell on the Sabbath or on any other day" (III, 25).

 

     The Apostle John was the author of five books of the New Testament and the "disciple whom Jesus loved." Yet he kept the Passover on the 14th day of the first month (Nisan) just as God commanded in the time of Moses. That is the plain statement of this early Catholic theologian!

 

     But where did John's custom come from? From the very example of Jesus Christ! "Nor did our Lord, the Author and Giver of the Gospel, eat the old Passover or institute the Sacrament of the New Testament to be celebrated by the Church in memory of His Passion on ... [any other day], but on the fourteenth" (Equal. History, III, 25).

 

     Bede thus reiterates what the Bible itself plainly tells us- -that Christ partook of the old Passover and then substituted the New Testament symbols of the bread and wine on the 14th of the first month.

 

     The custom of keeping the New Testament Passover, after the example of Christ and John, persisted among isolated groups for centuries. Bede tells us that some faithful were still keeping it in Scotland in the 7th century! (II, 19.) 

 

                 The Lord's Supper on Saturday! 

 

 

     Remember that up to this point the Churches of God universally understood that Jesus rose after three days -- on Saturday evening shortly before sunset.

 

     With the rejection of God's Sacred Calendar by many in the professing Christian world, the many now began to do what seemed right to them. Not only did they begin to miscalculate the annual occurrence of the Passover, but in the East they began to observe the Passover weekly on Saturday, the Sabbath, believe it or not! Here is the proof:

 

     For over 200 years this custom was a universal practice of the Eastern churches. The church historian Socrates wrote in his Ecclesiastical History, book V, chapter 22: "While therefore some in Asia Minor observed the day above-mentioned [he means that some continued to observe the Passover on the 14th of Nisan as the apostles did] others in the East kept this feast on the Sabbath indeed ...." By "sabbath" all early writers meant Saturday!

 

     So universal was the custom of observing the "Lord's Supper" on Saturday that he continued to write: "For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this."

 

     Did you catch the real significance of this quotation?

 

     The Passover was transformed from an annual memorial in memory of the death of Christ into a weekly memorial in honor of His resurrection, which occurred on Saturday. These weekly "passovers" were called the "sacred mysteries." A part of those ancient mysteries was later the festival of Easter.

 

     But Easter did not enter suddenly. It entered slowly, under the pretext of being a Christian custom.

 

     Many faithful were still observing the practices of the original true Church. Others began to hold the "sacred mysteries" every Saturday to honor, as they thought, the resurrection of Jesus Christ. But how were the false teachers going to alter the knowledge that Jesus was three days and three nights in the tomb?

 

              "Good Friday-Easter Sunday" Tradition

 

 

 

     Let's notice! From the "Syriac Didascalia", composed shortly before the time of Constantine, we have a record of what happened in those early days. False teachers began to interpret the three days and three nights in the following clever fashion:

 

     They claimed Jesus suffered on the cross, supposedly on Friday, for about six hours. The daylight hours from nine in the morning to noon they counted as one day. The hours from noon to three o'clock -- when the land was darkened -- they reckoned as the first night. Then the time from three o'clock to sunset was reckoned as the second day. Friday night to Saturday morning became the second night; the daylight of Saturday, the third day; and Saturday night to Sunday morning, the third night.

 

     A very clever argument and it deceived a great many people! Those false ministers twisted the truth that Jesus was in the grave three days and three nights.

 

     For the first time the idea of a Sunday resurrection was injected into the churches. Now observe what happened. 

 

                  Easter Sunday Begins Earlier at Rome 

 

 

     In commenting on those who did not observe the Passover in accordance with the practice of the apostles, Irenaeus, who lived toward the close of the second century, wrote to Bishop Victor of Rome, "We mean Anicetus, and Pius, and Hyginus, and Telesphorus, and Xystus. They neither observed it [the true Passover on the 14th of Nisan] nor did they permit those after them to do so" (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 243).

 

     Who were these men? -- bishops of the church at Rome! Here is the first record, by a Catholic, of the fact that the Roman bishops no longer observed the Passover at the correct God-given time, but on a Sunday!

 

     It was Bishop Xystus (his name is also spelled Sixtus) who was the first recorded individual to prevent the proper observance of the Passover, and to celebrate the sacred mysteries annually on a Sunday. Irenaeus speaks further of him, declaring that his doctrine was in direct "opposition" to the practice of the remainder of the churches. Bishop Sixtus was living at the beginning of the second century, just after the Apostle John died.

 

     Notice, too, that Easter Sunday did not begin with Peter or Paul in the 60's A.D., but with Sixtus in the second century!

 

     Here you have the astounding origin of Easter Sunday in the Western churches. Together with this practice, the "sacred mysteries" were also observed every Sunday! 

 

                         The Romans Divided

 

 

     The introduction of this custom naturally divided the Christians at Rome. The Catholic historian Abbe Duchesne wrote: "There were many Christians of Asia in Rome at that time [remember that the Church of God at Rome was founded by those who came from Asia Minor where Paul preached] and the very early Popes, Xystus and Telesphorus, saw them every year keep their Pasch [the true Passover] the same day as did the Jews. They maintained that was correct. It was allowed to pass ... though the rest of Rome observed a different use" (The Early History of the Church, Vol. I, p. 210).

 

     These are startling facts, but they are true! It is time we knew about them!

 

     Irenaeus wrote even more regarding the observance of Easter at Rome and elsewhere as follows: "But Polycarp also was not only instructed by the apostles, and acquainted with many that had seen Christ, but was also appointed by apostles in Asia, bishop of the Church of Smyrna .... He also was in Rome in the time of Anicetus [bishop of Rome, A.D. 155-166] and caused many to turn away from the ... heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received from the apostles this one and sole truth ..." While at Rome, Polycarp discussed the matter of Easter with the Roman bishop.

 

     Irenaeus continued: "For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe it [the Passover] because he had always observed it with John the disciple of our Lord, and the rest of the apostles, with whom he associated; and neither did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, who said that he was bound to follow the customs of the presbyters before him" (Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, book V, chapter 24, quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 244). 

 

                       Counterfeit Vision

                      

 

     Shortly after Polycarp left, there appeared an amazing letter -- said by many scholars to have been a deliberate forgery. This letter states: "Pope Pius, who lived about 147, had made a decree, That the annual solemnity of the Pasch [Pasch is the Greek word for Passover] should be kept on the Lord's day [Sunday] and in confirmation of this he pretended, that Hermes [Hermas], his brother, who was then an eminent teacher among them, had received instruction from an angel, who commanded that all men should keep the Pasch on the Lord's day" (Joseph Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, pp. 1148-1149).

 

     Of this same hoax, we read in Apostolical Fathers, by James Donaldson, page 324: "One of the letters forged in the name of Pius, where one Hermas [Hermes] is mentioned as the author; and it is stated that in his book a commandment was given through an angel to observe the Passover on a Sunday."

 

     If this letter was a deliberate forgery, it was invented after Polycarp's time in an effort to lend weight to the custom of Anicetus, bishop of Rome, who maintained the Sunday observance of the Eucharist or Passover. If it was not a forgery, then Pius himself was the author of this deceptive letter. (Pius died just prior to the visit of Polycarp to Rome.) 

 

                  Constantine -- the Man of Power

          

 

     Constantine then convoked the first general council of the Christian-professing world. The Council of Nicaea decided, under his authority, that Easter must be celebrated on Sunday and that the Passover must be forbidden!

 

     Without regard to these decisions, many continued faithful. For this reason Constantine issued an edict declaring: "We have directed, accordingly, that you be deprived of all houses in which you are accustomed to hold your assemblies ... public or private" (Life of Constantine, book III). 

 

           Easter Still Observed on Different Sundays

 

 

     Though everyone was now forced to observe Easter or flee the urban areas of the Roman Empire, the churches were still divided over the exact Sunday for Easter. Here is how confusing matters became:

 

     "But notwithstanding any endeavors that could be used then, or afterwards, there remained great differences in the church about it for many ages. For the churches of Great Britain and Ireland did not accord with the Roman church in keeping Easter on the same Sunday, till about the year 800. Nor was the Roman way fully received in France, till it was settled there by the authority of Charles the Great ..." (Bingham's Antiquities of the Christian Church, p. 1151).

 

     These are startling facts -- but they ought to make you wake up to the truth! It is high time we learned exactly what has happened to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to the practices of the New Testament Church of God these past 1900 years! 

 

                  True Christians Kept Passover

                                                        

 

     The New Testament reveals that Jesus, the apostles, and the New Testament Church, both Jewish- and Gentile-born, observed God's Sabbaths, and God's Festivals weekly and annually! Take your Bible and carefully read Acts 2:1; 12:3-4 (remember the word "Easter" here is a mistranslation in the King James Version -- originally inspired "Passover," and so corrected in the Revised Standard Version); Acts 18:21; 20:6, 16; I Corinthians 16:8.

 

     Eusebius, historian of the early centuries of the Church, speaks of the true Christians observing Passover on the 14th of Nisan, first month of the Sacred Calendar.

 

     "A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour's passover ... the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom handed down to them. He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had come down to him:

 

     "'We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord's coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven, and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles ... and, moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined upon the bosom of the Lord ... and Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr; and Thraseas, bishop and martyr from Eumenia ... the bishop and martyr Sagaris ... the blessed Papirius, or Melito ....All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith' " (Ecclesiastical History, book V, chapters XXIII and XXIV).

 

     But as the false, paganized church grew in size and political power, decrees were passed in the fourth century A.D. imposing the death sentence upon Christians found keeping God's Sabbath, or God's Festivals. Finally, in order to keep the true way of God, many Christians (composing the true Church) fled for their lives.

 

     But another large portion of the true Church of God, failing to flee, yet remaining true to God's truth, paid with their lives in martyrdom (Rev. 2:13; 6:9; 13:15; 17:6; 18:24).

 

     They loved obedience to God more than their lives! Do you?

 

     But through all generations, through every century, though persecuted, scattered, unrecognized by the world, many true Christians have kept alive the true Church of God -- the Church composed of those who have the Holy Spirit of God. 

 

                      What God Did Command

 

 

     The "communion," often called the "Lord's Supper," is actually the Passover -- as the ordinance should more properly be called. On observing the Passover, as on every practice, Jude exhorts "that ye should contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the saints."

 

     Now that we know the pagan origin of the Easter celebration, let's clear away the web of error that covers the truth about keeping the Passover, the memorial of Christ's death.

 

     Let's examine the way Jesus o

Easter’s Origins

 

It should not surprise us that Easter, a religious holiday closely associated with Christmas, is also rooted in pagan practices. For, as with Christmas, Easter’s pagan origins are often mentioned in newspapers. For example, this past March 29 the Newark Sunday News carried the heading “Easter Festival Tied to Pagans.” Giving some background to its paganism, the book Easter and Its Customs by Christina Hole observes:

 

“It was in spring, in the season of new life and revival when, from time immemorial, the pagan peoples of Europe and Asia held their Spring Festivals, re-enacting ancient regeneration myths and performing magical and religious ceremonies to make the crops grow and prosper. Vernal Mysteries, like those of Tammuz [Babylonian god condemned in the Bible] and Osiris [Egyptian god] and Adonis [Greek god], flourished in the Mediterranean world when Our Lord lived and moved in it, and farther north and east there were others, less well-known but no less vividly alive. Inevitably, some of their cherished rites and symbols were carried forward into the Easter customs.”—Page 9; compare Ezekiel 8:13, 14.

 

Did you know that those ceremonies often featured obscene fertility rites? As for the rabbit symbol and Easter eggs, a modern authority says: “This is not mere child’s play, but the vestige of a fertility rite, the eggs and the rabbit both symbolizing fertility.” Even The Catholic Encyclopedia says: “The rabbit is a pagan symbol and has always been an emblem of fertility.” Certainly, rabbits and eggs have no connection with thIt becomes apparent, then, that Easter is a pagan name and that the event is associated with a pagan goddess of spring. But let us now go back to the time when Easter got its official start. It was A.D. 325, long after Christ’s resurrection. By now apostasy had set in and there were many false Christians, Christians in name only. The pagan emperor Constantine was one of them. Constantine, who was still chief priest of the Roman pagan religion, assembled a large number of these apostate Christians together at the Council of Nicaea. What was this pagan priest’s motive?

 

He wanted harmony in religion for political reasons. And so, as the book A General History of Rome tells us, “he combined in his own mind the two hostile faiths rather than balanced them against another—a state of feeling rather than of opinion, which is more common, perhaps, than is generally supposed.” Constantine thus blended the two religions, the Roman pagan religion and apostate Christianity. One of the results was that Constantine decreed that “everywhere the Great Feast of Easter” was to be observed.

 

This appealed to the pagans, since they had long been used to worshiping a springtime goddess of fruitfulness. To the Greeks and Romans her name was Astarte. The Babylonians had worshiped her by the name Ishtar and the Phoenicians by the name Ashtoreth.

 

It was natural that the customs and rites pertaining to these springtime goddesses and their worship would surround Easter. Thus archaeologists have uncovered carvings of the fertility goddess Ishtar. They found her holding an egg in her hand and a rabbit at her feet. Thus the book Great Catholic Festivals comments on Easter: “The eating of eggs on this day is said to have come down from pagan usage of the egg as a symbol of fertility.” And The Catholic Encyclopedia says under “Easter”: “The rabbit is a pagan symbol and has always been an emblem of fertility.”

 

Worshipers of the springtime goddess Ashtoreth had a custom of eating cakes in her honor. They called the goddess “queen of heaven.” Of Ashtoreth and her worshipers the Bible says: “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead the dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.” (Jer. 7:18, AS) Jehovah’s anger was kindled against his people whenever they adopted these pagan customs. But those who adopted the pagan Easter festival were not interested in following the Bible. They Christianized the pagan cakes, so they thought, by marking a cross on the top of them, thus the hot cross buns.

 

Even the wearing of new clothes and the Easter parade were part of the pagan rites. European pagans believed that wearing a new bonnet on Easter brought happiness in love. The Easter parade is a late addition to the festival, according to some authorities, who say that it comes from an ancient Chinese spring procession. Rich mandarins donned their finest robes and then displayed them en masse to one and all. “Such things as Easter-eggs, Easter-fires, Easter-games and Easter-laughter,” concludes the book Easter, “all seem to have a heathen origin.”

 

Though Protestants for a long time took no notice of the Catholic Church festival Easter, within the past seventy-five years virtually all Protestant churches have begun to observe Easter. Of the United States, the book The American Book of Days says: “It was during the Civil War that the nonritualistic churches began to observe Easter. So many men were killed and so many homes were made desolate that the churches strove to bring all the consolations of religion to the bereaved. In the Presbyterian churches first, and in the others later.”

 

Knowing what Easter is all about, what does the true Christian do? He knows the Bible rule: “What fellowship does light have with darkness?” And he follows God’s command: “‘Get out from among them, and separate yourselves,’ says Jehovah, ‘and quit touching the unclean thing.’” There is no reason to follow the Easter paraders. Follow Jehovah. Separate yourself from Easter and its unclean pagan practices.—2 Cor. 6:1Easter—What Are Its Origins?

 

BY MANY Easter is considered to be Christendom’s chief religious festival. Early on Easter morning large numbers throughout the world meet together for the Easter sunrise service. Everywhere the churches are filled with worshipers, some even several times, and thousands crowd into the square of St. Peter’s Basilica on that day to hear the pope give his Easter blessing. Great throngs of pilgrims also flow into the old walled city of Jerusalem to make their Easter pilgrimage.

 

But Easter also has another side to it. During the Easter season bakeries display hot cross buns, and candy counters feature butter-cream eggs and chocolate rabbits. There are also Easter music, Easter perfume, Easter jewelry, Easter clothing for men and women and Easter dinners. And not to be overlooked is the Easter parade, in which hundreds of thousands parade on New York City’s Fifth Avenue alone, to be seen or just to see. In the United States the Easter festival may be said to come to an end on Monday with the egg-rolling contest on the presidential White House lawn, which in times past was a decorous affair but of late appears to have deteriorated into a boisterous egg-throwing affair.1

 

The ostensible purpose of Easter is to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. This being so, it may well be asked, What do hot cross buns, eggs, rabbits, new clothes, and so forth, have to do with Easter? Little, except that both for long have been associated with the spring of the year. As An Encyclopedia of Religion, by Ferm, says: “Pagan practices were introduced into the Christian observance of Easter at an early age on account of the fact that the feast coincided with the beginning of spring. . . . At that season of the year, the New Year and the creation of the world were celebrated in ancient times by an exchange of gifts (Easter eggs) and by generous hospitality to friends, to the poor, and so forth.”

 

YES, PAGAN ORIGINS

 

Did you know that the very name “Easter,” is of pagan origin? Says an early eighteenth-century Catholic scholar, a Benedictine monk, in a work that may well be said to have been the forerunner of the modern Bible dictionary:

 

“Easter is a word of Saxon origin; and imports a goddess of the Saxons, or rather, of the East, Estera, in honor of whom sacrifices being annually offered about the passover time of the year (spring), the name became attached by association of ideas to the Christian festival of the resurrection which happened at the time of passover; hence we say Easter-Day or Easter Sunday, but very improperly; as we by no means refer to the festival then kept to the goddess of the ancient Saxons.”2

 

To the same effect testify other authorities, from the eighth-century English historian Bede to the lastest encyclopedias.

 

Concerning the use of hot cross buns at Easter time we are told:

 

“Like the Greeks, the Romans ate bread marked with a cross . . . at public sacrifices, such bread being usually purchased at the doors of the temple and then taken in with them—a custom alluded to by St. Paul in 1 Cor. x. 28. The cross-bread was eaten by pagan Saxons in honour of Easter, their goddess of light. The Mexicans and Peruvians are shown to have had a similar custom. The custom, in fact, was practically universal, and the early Church adroitly adopted the practice, grafting it on to the Eucharist and so giving us the hot crossbun.”3

 

What about the Easter eggs? It is a well-known fact that in the ancient pagan cosmogonies, or theories about the origin of the universe, the egg looms up prominently. One tells of the “Egg of Light,” another of the “World-Egg.” From one or another of these eggs was supposed to have issued the first god, the Maker and Ruler of the World. Eros, the god of “love,” is also said to have issued forth from an egg.4

 

True, some claim that the use of eggs at Easter is due to the fact that at one time eggs were banned during Lent, but this does not explain the featuring of eggs on Easter ever since that ban was lifted and now when eggs can be eaten all during Lent. Neither does it explain why the same prominence is not given to other foods that are still banned during Lent and that may be eaten only beginning with Easter. The eating of ham on Easter does not prove the contrary, for it began to be featured in Easter dinners for an entirely different purpose. Says one authority: “Many American Catholics have a boiled ham for dinner on Easter without being aware of the origin of the custom. It is a survival of the ancient habit among the English of eating a gammon of bacon on that day to show their contempt for the Jewish custom of not eating pork.”5

 

The more pertinent explanation for eating eggs on Easter is that found in The Catholic Encyclopedia: “The custom may have its origin in paganism, for a great many pagan customs, celebrating the return of spring, gravitated to Easter. The egg is the emblem of the germinating life of early spring.”6

 

Concerning the Easter bunny, this same religious authority states: “The Easter Rabbit lays the eggs, for which reason they are hidden in a nest or in the garden. The rabbit is a pagan symbol and has always been an emblem of fertility.”6

 

Even the early Easter sunrise service is not without pagan antecedents. “According to old superstition, the sun rising on Easter morning dances in the heavens; this belief has been traced to old heathen festivals of spring, when the spectators danced in honor to the sun.”7

 

And the same must be said of the impressive ceremony that takes place throughout Christendom on the day before Easter in which new fire is blessed and certain candles and lamps are lit. A detailed description of this ceremony includes the following: “The obtaining and blessing of the new fire is probably a rite of Celtic or even pagan origin, incorporated in the Gallican Church service of the eighth century.”8

 

ITS HISTORY

 

How did all this originate? Certain it is that it does not go back to the beginning of Christianity, for as The Encyclopædia Britannica states:

 

“There is no trace of the celebration of Easter as a Christian festival in the New Testament or in the writings of the apostolic fathers. The sanctity of special times or places was an idea quite alien from the early Christian mind; too profoundly absorbed in the events themselves to think of their external accidents [nonessentials]. ‘The whole of time is a festival unto Christians because of the excellency of the good things which have been given,’ writes Chrysostom. . . . Origen [urges] in the same spirit . . . The ecclesiastical historian Socrates . . . states with perfect truth that neither Christ nor his apostles enjoined the keeping of this or any other festival. ‘The apostles,’ he writes, ‘had no thought of appointing festival days, but of promoting a life of blamelessness and piety;’ and he attributes the introduction of the festival of Easter into the church to the perpetuation of an old usage, ‘just as many other customs have been established.’ This is doubtless the true statement of the case.”9

 

This should not surprise us, for had not both Jesus and his apostles foretold a falling away from the pure worship? This is what Jesus had reference to when in one of his parables he said: “While men [the apostles] were sleeping [in death], his [Christ’s] enemy [Satan] came and oversowed weeds [false Christians] in among the wheat [true Christians], and left.” And the apostle Paul warned: “I know that after my going away . . . from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” The apostle John likewise foretold a falling away, in fact, said that it had already begun in his day.—Matt. 13:25; Acts 20:29, 30; 1 John 2:18, 19.

 

History shows that these prophecies have been fulfilled, and the facts regarding Easter are an illustration of it. Before the end of the second century there was much disputing as to just when Christ’s resurrection should be celebrated, Victor, the bishop of Rome at the time, unsuccessfully attempting to impose his views on the rest of the then professedly Christian world.10 To end this conflict was one of the purposes for which the Council of Nice was called. It ruled that Christ’s resurrection should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the spring equinox, or after March 21.11 It appears that antipathy to the Jews played a part in determining this date.12

 

Concerning this trend in early Christendom Sir James G. Frazer, a historian, revealingly states:

 

“Taken altogether, the coincidences of the Christian and heathen festivals are too close and too numerous to be accidental. They mark the compromise which the Church in the hour of its triumph was compelled to make with its vanquished yet still dangerous rivals. The inflexible Protestantism of the primitive missionaries, with their fiery denunciations of heathendom, had been exchanged for the supple policy, the easy tolerance, the comprehensive charity of shrewd ecclesiastics, who clearly perceived that if Christianity was to conquer the world it could do so only by relaxing the too rigid principles of its Founder, by widening a little the narrow gate which leads to salvation.”13

 

However, let it be noted that nowhere did Jesus command his followers to conquer the world by conversion or by force of arms. His Kingdom gospel was to be preached in all the world for a witness to all nations.—Matt. 24:14.

 

In this connection it will no doubt be news to most Protestants that just as at one time Christmas was forbidden by law in certain Protestant lands because it was held to be a pagan festival, so “with the rise of Puritanism in England and its abhorrence of religious ceremonial the Protestants for a long time took no note of Easter, or of any other of the church festivals. . . . It was during the Civil War [1861-1865] that the non-ritualistic churches [of the United States] began to observe Easter.”5

 

THE scriptURAL POSITION

 

In view of all the foregoing what should be the attitude of those who would please God toward the celebration of Easter together with all its pagan appendages? As already noted, neither Jesus nor any of his apostles established any Christian festival days. Nor was this any mere oversight, as shown by Paul’s rebuke to the Christians at Galatia: “How is it that you are turning back again to the weak and beggarly elementary things and want to slave for them over again? You are scrupulously observing days and months and seasons and years.”—Gal. 4:9-11.

 

Even more strongly condemned in the scriptures is the comingling of paganism with the worship of the one true God: “Flee from idolatry. . . . What, then, am I to say? That what is sacrificed to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? No; but I say that the things which the nations sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers with the demons. You cannot be drinking the cup of Jehovah and the cup of demons; you cannot be partaking of ‘the table of Jehovah’ and the table of demons. Or ‘are we inciting Jehovah to jealousy’? We are not stronger than he is, are we?” Paganism is the product of Satan and his demons, and to mix it with Christianity is an affront to Jehovah God that he will not permit to go unnoticed, for he is “a God exacting exclusive devotion.”—1 Cor. 10:14-22; Ex. 20:5.

 

The adopting of pagan appendages in Christian worship is also ruled out with these words: “What fellowship does light have with darkness? Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what portion does a faithful person have with an unbeliever? And what agreement does God’s temple have with idols?” None whatever. “‘Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves,’ says Jehovah, ‘and quit touching the unclean thing”’; “‘and I will take you in.’” Godless paganism is part of this unclean world, and Christians must keep themselves “without spot from the world.”—2 Cor. 6:14-18; Jas. 1:27.

 

Yes, what a discredit to associate such pagan appendages as hot cross buns, eggs, rabbits or hares, eternal fire and suchlike with the greatest of all miracles, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, from the dead, one of the paramount truths of Christianity! True, children need entertainment—and adults too—but surely there are better forms than those that make a pagan caricature of the great truths of God’s Word!

 

Christians show appreciation for the miracle of Christ’s resurrection, not by celebrating a certain day set aside by some ancient council of men, and doing so with pagan appendages, but by accepting by faith the fact of Jesus’ resurrection and by letting it give them hope for their dead loved ones and for themselves and then letting that hope spur them on to serve Jehovah God with all their heart, mind, soul and strength.—Mark 12:30; 1 Cor. 15:58.

 

REFERENCES

 

 1 New York Times, April 24, 1962.

 

 2 Dictionary of the Bible—Calmet, p. 363.

 

 3 The Encyclopædia Britannica (1959 Edition), Vol. 4, p. 381.

 

 4 Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics—Hastings, Vol. 4, pp. 147, 148.

 

 5 The American Book of Days—Douglas, pp. 200-202.

 

 6 Vol. 5, pp. 225-227.

 

 7 The Encyclopædia Britannica (1959 Edition), Vol. 7, p. 531.

 

 8 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, p. 438.

 

 9 Ninth Edition, Vol. 7, p. 531.

 

10 History of Christianity—The First Three Centuries—Neander, Vol. 1, pp. 523-537.

 

11 The Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 9, p, 507.

 

12 Ecclesiastical History—Socrates (Bohn’s Edition), pp. 37, 38.

 

13 The Golden Bough—Frazer, p. 361.

 

[Footnotes]

 

The Roman Catholic Church in France as distinguished from the church in Italy.4, 17, NW.e resurrection of Christ, do they?

GRAVE

 

A place of interment. Though today the term “grave” is generally understood to apply to an excavation in the earth for use as a place of burial, a common method of burial among the Hebrews and other Oriental peoples was by use of a natural cave or a rock-cut tomb, or vault. The Hebrew word qe′ver is the common word used to designate a burial place, a grave, or a graveyard. (Ge 23:7-9; Jer 8:1; 26:23) The related word qevu·rah′ similarly may refer to an earthen grave or to a tomb excavated in rock.—Ge 35:20; 1Sa 10:2.

 

In Greek the common word for grave is ta′phos (Mt 28:1), and the verb form (tha′pto) means “bury.” (Mt 8:21, 22) The word mne′ma (Lu 23:53) refers to a tomb and the word mne·mei′on (Lu 23:55) refers to a memorial tomb.

 

Since these Hebrew and Greek words refer to an individual burial place or grave site, they are often used in the plural as referring to many such graves. They are, therefore, distinct from the Hebrew she’ohl′ and its Greek equivalent hai′des, which refer to the common grave of mankind, or gravedom, and hence are always used in the singular. For this reason many modern translations have not followed the practice of the King James Version, in which she’ohl′ and hai′des are alternately rendered by the words “hell,” “grave,” and “pit,” but have instead simply transliterated them into English.—See HADES; SHEOL.

 

Nevertheless, since one’s entry into Sheol is represented as taking place through burial in an individual grave or at a burial site, words pertaining to such places of interment are used as parallel though not equivalent terms with Sheol.—Job 17:1, 13-16; 21:13, 32, 33; Ps 88:3-12.

 

At Romans 3:13 the apostle Paul quotes Psalm 5:9, likening the throat of wicked and deceitful men to “an opened grave.” As an opened grave is to be filled with the dead and with corruption, their throat opens for speech that is deadly and corrupt.—Compare Mt 15:18-20.

 

It was a custom to whitewash graves so that persons would not accidentally touch them and become unclean. The tombs near Jerusalem were whitewashed one month before Passover to prevent a person from becoming unclean at this special period of worship by accidentally touching a grave. Jesus used this custom as a basis for an illustration of the scribes and Pharisees as appearing righteous outwardly but inside being “full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”—Mt 23:27, 28.

 

Although the grave is likened to a pit from which man rightly desires to be delivered, Job draws attention to the despair of those suffering persons who, lacking a clear hope or understanding of their Creator’s purposes, seek death and “exult because they find a burial place.” (Job 3:21, 22) Such attitude contrasts sharply with that of men who devoted their lives to their Creator’s service and confidently embraced the promise of a resurrection.—Ps 16:9-11; Ac 24:15; Php 1:21-26; 2Ti 4:6-8; Heb 11:17-19; see BURIAL, BURIAL PLGEHENNA

 

(Ge·hen′na) [Gr. form of the Heb. Geh Hin·nom′, “Valley of Hinnom”].

 

This name appears 12 times in the Christian Greek scriptures, and whereas many translators take the liberty to render it by the word “hell,” a number of modern translations transliterate the word from the Greek ge′en·na.—Mt 5:22, Ro, Mo, ED, NW, BC (Spanish), NC (Spanish), also the footnotes of Da and RS.

 

The deep, narrow Valley of Hinnom, later known by this Greek name, lay to the S and SW of ancient Jerusalem and is the modern-day Wadi er-Rababi (Ge Ben Hinnom). (Jos 15:8; 18:16; Jer 19:2, 6; see HINNOM, VALLEY OF.) Judean Kings Ahaz and Manasseh engaged in idolatrous worship there, which included the making of human sacrifices by fire to Baal. (2Ch 28:1, 3; 33:1, 6; Jer 7:31, 32; 32:35) Later, to prevent such activities there in the future, faithful King Josiah had the place of idolatrous worship polluted, particularly the section called Topheth.—2Ki 23:10.

 

No Symbol of Everlasting Torment. Jesus Christ associated fire with Gehenna (Mt 5:22; 18:9; Mr 9:47, 48), as did the disciple James, the only Biblical writer besides Matthew, Mark, and Luke to use the word. (Jas 3:6) Some commentators endeavor to link such fiery characteristic of Gehenna with the burning of human sacrifices that was carried on prior to Josiah’s reign and, on this basis, hold that Gehenna was used by Jesus as a symbol of everlasting torment. However, since Jehovah God expressed repugnance for such practice, saying that it was “a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart” (Jer 7:31; 32:35), it seems most unlikely that God’s Son, in discussing divine judgment, would make such idolatrous practice the basis for the symbolic meaning of Gehenna. It may be noted that God prophetically decreed that the Valley of Hinnom would serve as a place for mass disposal of dead bodies rather than for the torture of live victims. (Jer 7:32, 33; 19:2, 6, 7, 10, 11) Thus, at Jeremiah 31:40 the reference to “the low plain of the carcasses and of the fatty ashes” is generally accepted as designating the Valley of Hinnom, and a gate known as “the Gate of the Ash-heaps” evidently opened out onto the eastern extremity of the valley at its juncture with the ravine of the Kidron. (Ne 3:13, 14) It seems obvious that such “carcasses” and “fatty ashes” are not related to the human sacrifices made there under Ahaz and Manasseh, since any bodies so offered would doubtless be viewed by the idolaters as “sacred” and would not be left lying in the valley.

 

Therefore, the Biblical evidence concerning Gehenna generally parallels the traditional view presented by rabbinic and other sources. That view is that the Valley of Hinnom was used as a place for the disposal of waste matter from the city of  Jerusalem. (At Mt 5:30 Ph renders ge′en·na as “rubbish heap.”) Concerning “Gehinnom,” the Jewish commentator David Kimhi (1160-1235?), in his comment on Psalm 27:13, gives the following historical information: “And it is a place in the land adjoining Jerusalem, and it is a loathsome place, and they throw there unclean things and carcasses. Also there was a continual fire there to burn the unclean things and the bones of the carcasses. Hence, the judgment of the wicked ones is called parabolically Gehinnom.”

 

Symbolic of Complete Destruction. It is evident that Jesus used Gehenna as representative of utter destruction resulting from adverse judgment by God, hence with no resurrection to life as a soul being possible. (Mt 10:28; Lu 12:4, 5) The scribes and Pharisees as a wicked class were denounced as ‘subjects for Gehenna.’ (Mt 23:13-15, 33) To avoid such destruction, Jesus’ followers were to get rid of anything causing spiritual stumbling, the ‘cutting off of a hand or foot’ and the ‘tearing out of an eye’ figuratively representing their deadening of these body members with reference to sin.—Mt 18:9; Mr 9:43-47; Col 3:5; compare Mt 5:27-30.

 

Jesus also apparently alluded to Isaiah 66:24 in describing Gehenna as a place “where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out.” (Mr 9:47, 48) That the symbolic picture here is not one of torture but, rather, of complete destruction is evident from the fact that the Isaiah text dealt, not with persons who were alive, but with “the carcasses of the men that were transgressing” against God. If, as the available evidence indicates, the Valley of Hinnom was a place for the disposal of garbage and carcasses, fire, perhaps increased in intensity by the addition of sulfur (compare Isa 30:33), would be the only suitable means to eliminate such refuse. Where the fire did not reach, worms, or maggots, would breed, consuming anything not destroyed by the fire. On this basis, Jesus’ words would mean that the destructive effect of God’s adverse judgment would not cease until complete destruction was attained.

 

Figurative Use. The disciple James’ use of the word “Gehenna” shows that an unruly tongue is itself a world of unrighteousness and that one’s whole round of living can be affected by fiery words that defile the speaker’s body. The tongue of such a one, “full of death-dealing poison” and so giving evidence of a bad heart condition, can cause the user to be sentenced by God to go to the symbolic Gehenna.—Jas 3:6, 8; compare Mt 12:37; Ps 5:9; 140:3; Ro 3:13.

 

The Biblical use of Gehenna as a symbol corresponds to that of “the lake of fire” in the book of Revelation.—Re 20:1HADES

 

(Ha′des).

 

This is the common transliteration into English of the corresponding Greek word hai′des. It perhaps means “the unseen place.” In all, the word “Hades” occurs ten times in the earliest manuscripts of the Christian Greek scriptures.—Mt 11:23; 16:18; Lu 10:15; 16:23; Ac 2:27, 31; Re 1:18; 6:8; 20:13, 14.

 

The King James Version translates hai′des as “hell” in these texts, but the Revised Standard Version renders it “Hades,” with the exception of Matthew 16:18, where “powers of death” is used, though the footnote reads “gates of Hades.” “Hades” rather than “hell” is used in many modern translations.

 

The Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew scriptures (from Genesis to Malachi) uses the word “Hades” 73 times, employing it 60 times to translate the Hebrew word she’ohl′, commonly rendered “Sheol.” Luke, the divinely inspired writer of Acts, definitely showed Hades to be the Greek equivalent of Sheol when he translated Peter’s quotation from Psalm 16:10. (Ac 2:27) Inversely, nine modern Hebrew translations of the Christian Greek scriptures use the word “Sheol” to translate Hades at Revelation 20:13, 14; and the Syriac translation uses the related word Shiul.

 

In all but two cases in which the word Hades is used in the Christian Greek scriptures it is related to death, either in the verse itself or in the immediate context; the two other instances are discussed in the following paragraph. Hades does not refer to a single grave (Gr., ta′phos), or to a single tomb (Gr., mne′ma), or to a single memorial tomb (Gr., mne·mei′on), but to the common grave of mankind, where the dead and buried ones are unseen. It thus signifies the same as the corresponding word “Sheol,” and an examination of its use in all its ten occurrences bears out this fact.—See GRAVE; SHEOL.

 

In its first occurrence, at Matthew 11:23, Jesus Christ, in chiding Capernaum for its disbelief, uses Hades to represent the depth of debasement to which Capernaum would come down, in contrast with the height of heaven to which she assumed to exalt herself. A corresponding text is found at Luke 10:15. Note the similar way in which Sheol is used at Job 11:7, 8.

 

Jesus and Congregation Delivered. Concerning the Christian congregation, Jesus said, at Matthew 16:18, that “the gates of Hades [“powers of death,” RS] will not overpower it.” Similarly, King Hezekiah, when on the verge of death, said: “In the midst of my days I will go into the gates of Sheol.” (Isa 38:10) It, therefore, becomes apparent that Jesus’ promise of victory over Hades means that its “gates” will open to release the dead by means of a resurrection, even as was the case with Christ Jesus himself.

 

Since Hades refers to the common grave of mankind, a place rather than a condition, Jesus entered within “the gates of Hades” when buried by Joseph of Arimathea. On Pentecost of 33 C.E., Peter said of Christ: “Neither was he forsaken in Hades nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God resurrected, of which fact we are all witnesses.” (Ac 2:25-27, 29-32; Ps 16:10) Whereas “the gates of Hades” (Mt 16:18) were still holding David within their domain in Peter’s day (Ac 2:29), they had swung open for Christ Jesus when his Father resurrected him out of Hades. Thereafter, through the power of the resurrection given him (Joh 5:21-30), Jesus is the Holder of “the keys of death and of Hades.”—Re 1:17, 18.

 

Manifestly, the Bible Hades is not the imagined place that the ancient non-Christian Greeks described in their mythologies as a “dark, sunless region within the earth,” for there was no resurrection from such mythological underworld.

 

Illustrative Use. At Revelation 6:8 Hades is figuratively pictured as closely following after the rider of the pale horse, personalized Death, to receive the victims of the death-dealing agencies of war, famine, plagues, and wild beasts.

 

The sea (which at times serves as a watery grave for some) is mentioned in addition to Hades (the common earthen grave), for the purpose of stressing the inclusiveness of all such dead ones when Revelation 20:13, 14 says that the sea, death, and Hades are to give up or be emptied of the dead in them. Thereafter, death and Hades (but not the sea) are cast into “the lake of fire,” “the second death.” They thereby figuratively ‘die out’ of existence, and this signifies the end of Hades (Sheol), the common grave of mankind, as well as of death inherited through Adam.

 

The remaining text in which Hades is used is found at Luke 16:22-26 in the account of “the rich man” and “Lazarus.” The language throughout the account is plainly parabolic and cannot be construed literally in view of all the preceding texts. Note, however, that “the rich man” of the parable is spoken of as being “buried” in Hades, giving further evidence that Hades means the common grave of mankind.—See GEHENNA; TARTARUS.4, 15;HELL

 

A word used in the King James Version (as well as in the Catholic Douay Version and most older translations) to translate the Hebrew she’ohl′ and the Greek hai′des. In the King James Version the word “hell” is rendered from she’ohl′ 31 times and from hai′des 10 times. This version is not consistent, however, since she’ohl′ is also translated 31 times “grave” and 3 times “pit.” In the Douay Version she’ohl′ is rendered “hell” 64 times, “pit” once, and “death” once.

 

In 1885, with the publication of the complete English Revised Version, the original word she’ohl′ was in many places transliterated into the English text of the Hebrew scriptures, though, in most occurrences, “grave” and “pit” were used, and “hell” is found some 14 times. This was a point on which the American committee disagreed with the British revisers, and so, when producing the American Standard Version (1901) they transliterated she’ohl′ in all 65 of its appearances. Both versions transliterated hai′des in the Christian Greek scriptures in all ten of its occurrences, though the Greek word Ge′en·na (English, “Gehenna”) is rendered “hell” throughout, as is true of many other modern translations.

 

Concerning this use of “hell” to translate these original words from the Hebrew and Greek, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1981, Vol. 2, p. 187) says: “HADES . . . It corresponds to ‘Sheol’ in the O.T. [Old Testament]. In the A.V. of the O.T. [Old Testament] and N.T. [New Testament], it has been unhappily rendered ‘Hell.’”

 

Collier’s Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 28) says concerning “Hell”: “First it stands for the Hebrew Sheol of the Old Testament and the Greek Hades of the Septuagint and New Testament. Since Sheol in Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word ‘hell,’ as understood today, is not a happy translation.”

 

It is, in fact, because of the way that the word “hell” is understood today that it is such an unsatisfactory translation of these original Bible words. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under “Hell” says: “fr[om] . . . helan to conceal.” The word “hell” thus originally conveyed no thought of heat or torment but simply of a ‘covered over or concealed place.’ In the old English dialect the expression “helling potatoes” meant, not to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar.

 

The meaning given today to the word “hell” is that portrayed in Dante’s Divine Comedy and Milton’s Paradise Lost, which meaning is completely foreign to the original definition of the word. The idea of a “hell” of fiery torment, however, dates back long before Dante or Milton. The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia (1971, Vol. 9, p. 205) under “Hell” says: “Hindus and Buddhists regard hell as a place of spiritual cleansing and final restoration. Islamic tradition considers it as a place of everlasting punishment.” The idea of suffering after death is found among the pagan religious teachings of ancient peoples in Babylon and Egypt. Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs depicted the “nether world . . . as a place full of horrors, . . . presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness.” Although ancient Egyptian religious texts do not teach that the burning of any individual victim would go on forever, they do portray the “Other World” as featuring “pits of fire” for “the damned.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, by Morris Jastrow, Jr., 1898, p. 581; The Book of the Dead, with introduction by E. Wallis Budge, 1960, pp. 135, 144, 149, 151, 153, 161, 200.

 

“Hellfire” has been a basic teaching in Christendom for many centuries. It is understandable why The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81) said: “Much confusion and misunderstanding has been caused through the early translators of the Bible persistently rendering the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word hell. The simple transliteration of these words by the translators of the revised editions of the Bible has not sufficed to appreciably clear up this confusion and misconception.” Nevertheless, such transliteration and consistent rendering does enable the Bible student to make an accurate comparison of the texts in which these original words appear and, with open mind, thereby to arrive at a correct understanding of their true significance.—See GEHENNA; GRAVE; HADES; SHEOL; TARTARUS. see LAKE OF FIRE.ACES.TARTARUS   (Tar′ta·rus).   A prisonlike, abased condition into which God cast disobedient angels in Noah’s day.   This word is found but once in the inspired scriptures, at 2 Peter 2:4. The apostle writes: “God did not hold back from punishing the angels that sinned, but, by throwing them into Tartarus, delivered them to pits of dense darkness to be reserved for judgment.” The expression “throwing them into Tartarus” is from the Greek verb tar·ta·ro′o and so includes within itself the word “Tartarus.”   A parallel text is found at Jude 6: “And the angels that did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place he has reserved with eternal bonds under dense darkness for the judgment of the great day.” Showing when it was that these angels “forsook their own proper dwelling place,” Peter speaks of “the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed.” (1Pe 3:19, 20) This directly links the matter to the account at Genesis 6:1-4 concerning “the sons of the true God” who abandoned their heavenly abode to cohabit with women in pre-Flood times and produced children by them, such offspring being designated as Nephilim.—See NEPHILIM; SON(S) OF GOD.   From these texts it is evident that Tartarus is a condition rather than a particular location, inasmuch as Peter, on the one hand, speaks of these disobedient spirits as being in “pits of dense darkness,” while Paul speaks of them as being in “heavenly places” from which they exercise a rule of darkness as wicked spirit forces. (2Pe 2:4; Eph 6:10-12) The dense darkness similarly is not literally a lack of light but results from their being cut off from illumination by God as renegades and outcasts from his family, with only a dark outlook as to their eternal destiny.   Tartarus is, therefore, not the same as the Hebrew Sheol or the Greek Hades, both of which refer to the common earthly grave of mankind. This is evident from the fact that, while the apostle Peter shows that Jesus Christ preached to these “spirits in prison,” he also shows that Jesus did so, not during the three days while buried in Hades (Sheol), but after his resurrection out of Hades.—1Pe 3:18-20.   Likewise the abased condition represented by Tartarus should not be confused with “the abyss” into which Satan and his demons are eventually to be cast for the thousand years of Christ’s rule. (Re 20:1-3) Apparently the disobedient angels were cast into Tartarus in “Noah’s days” (1Pe 3:20), but some 2,000 years later we find them entreating Jesus “not to order them to go away into the abyss.”—Lu 8:26-31; see ABYSS.   The word “Tartarus” is also used in pre-Christian heathen mythologies. In Homer’s Iliad this mythological Tartarus is represented as an underground prison ‘as far below Hades as earth is below heaven.’ In it were imprisoned the lesser gods, Cronus and the other Titan spirits. As we have seen, the Tartarus of the Bible is not a place but a condition and, therefore, is not the same as this Tartarus of Greek mythology. However, it is worth noting that the mythological Tartarus was presented not as a place for humans but as a place for superhuman creatures. So, in that regard there is a similarity, since the scriptural Tartarus is clearly not for the detention of human souls (compare Mt 11:23) but is only for wicked superhuman spirits who are rebels against God.   The condition of utter debasement represented by Tartarus is a precursor of the abyssing that Satan and his demons are to experience prior to the start of the Thousand Year Reign of Christ. This, in turn, is to be followed after the end of the thousand years by their utter destruction in “the second death.”—Mt 25:41; Re 20:1-3, 7-10, 14.HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS IN THE BIBLE MISTRANSLATED TO MEAN HELL HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS MISTRANSLATED TO MEAN HELL [link to www.godsplanforall.com]    Mistranslations of Sheol, Hades, Tartarus and Gehenna     In Chapter 15, we showed that the concept of ‘eternal punishment in hell' is an unbiblical pagan doctrine embraced and christianised by the Roman Catholic Church in the early centuries of Christianity, and made official when Jerome translated the Bible into Latin in 400 A.D.    Jerome mistranslated and misinterpreted several key Hebrew and Greek words into the Latin Vulgate in support of the already established doctrine of hell of the Roman Catholic Church. The Latin Vulgate, as translated by Jerome, had such an overpowering dominance for over a thousand years that many subsequent Bible versions, especially the King James Version (KJV), have simply carried forward the translation and interpretation errors to varying degrees in support of the doctrine of hell.   The doctrine of everlasting punishment in hell is founded upon a combination of mistranslations and misinterpretations of the following Hebrew and Greek words.   • Mistranslations of the Hebrew word sheol and the Greek words hades, tartarus and gehenna to mean hell.   • Mistranslations of the time-related Hebrew word owlam and the time-related Greek words aion and aionios to mean everlasting when relating to God’s future punishment of unbelievers.   In the next chapter, we shall deal with the mistranslations of owlam, aion and aionios. In this chapter, we deal with sheol, hades, tartarus and gehenna, which have been mistranslated to mean hell.   Hell is such an infinitely extreme and dreadfully fearful doctrine with respect to the fate of unbelievers, who are the vast majority of humanity, that surely God would have inspired clear, unambiguous statements about it in the Bible. Also, one would expect Bible translators, experts in the Hebrew and Greek languages, to be in complete agreement on how many times the word ‘hell’ occurs in the Bible. But the shocking fact is that the opposite is true.   When we examine how often the word ‘hell’ occurs in various versions of the Bible from the Latin Vulgate onwards, we are shocked to see how widely Bible translators differ in their opinion and understanding of the word ‘hell’, as demonstrated by the table below.    Number of times the word ‘Hell’ occurs in the following Bible Versions    (SEE Original Link To Site) [link to www.godsplanforall.com]    Please study this comparison table and note the following shocking facts.   You will note that the Latin Vulgate mentions hell 101 times, which is the highest number of times the word hell occurs when compared to all of the other Bible versions. Actually, the number of times hell occurs in the Latin Vulgate is even greater than 101 times, but for comparison purposes with the Protestant Bibles, we have not included the number of times hell occurs in the additional books of the Apocrypha contained in the Latin Vulgate.    All of the popular Protestant Bible versions like the King James Version (KJV), the American Standard Version (ASV), the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), the New International Version (NIV) and the New King James Version (NKJV) do not agree with the Latin Vulgate nor between themselves as to the number of times the word hell appears in the Bible.   Only in the Latin Vulgate, the KJV and the NKJV does the word hell appear in the Old Testament of the Bible, but even these versions have wide disagreements on the number of times hell occurs in the Old Testament. The Latin Vulgate mentions hell 77 times, whereas the KJV mentions hell 31 times and the NKJV mentions hell only 19 times.   All versions of the Bible except for these three, the Latin Vulgate, the KJV and the NKJV, reject any notion of hell occurring in the original Hebrew Manuscripts of the Old Testament. Also, please especially note from the comparison table above that the translators of the Jewish Publication Society Bible and the Tanakh/The Complete Jewish Bible disagree with the Latin Vulgate, the KJV and the NKJV by making no mention of hell whatsoever in their Bibles. If the Jews, who are experts in their own language Hebrew, do not include hell in their Bibles, then this confirms that the word hell is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word sheol.    There are also several Bible versions that reject any notion of hell occurring in the original Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament of the Bible. Among others, these versions include Young’s Literal Translation and Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible.   These are amazing and shocking facts that should make any Christian stop in his tracks, and start seriously questioning the validity of the doctrine of hell. Surely, the just and loving God of the Bible, who desires and wills all men to be saved, would have inspired clear, unambiguous statements in the Word of God about such an extreme doctrine as hell. This is absolutely not the case at all, as we have demonstrated.   The truth of the matter is that there is not one single word in the original Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts of the Bible that means hell. As discussed in the previous chapter, Hell is a man-invented, pagan, unchristian, heretical belief that was first embraced and christianised by Roman Catholicism and incorporated into the Bible through the Latin Vulgate in the early history of Christianity. The Latin Vulgate reigned supreme for over a thousand years and the doctrine of hell became deeply entrenched into the psyche of the Christian world as if it were a true biblical doctrine. The King James Version (KJV) followed the Latin Vulgate in most of its translation errors and also mistranslated sheol, hades, tartarus and gehenna to mean hell.   The King James Version (KJV) published in 1611 was the only standard version of the Bible for English speaking Protestant Christians for nearly 350 years until the general acceptance of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) published in 1952. Therefore, the KJV has had a major influence on formulating the traditional Christian view of the doctrine of hell in Protestant Christianity.   In the original Hebrew Manuscripts, the Hebrew word sheol occurs 65 times in the Old Testament, and it means the grave (the place of the dead) or the pit, as correctly translated by the KJV in 34 out of the 65 times it occurs in the Old Testament. However, shockingly and without any justification whatsoever, the KJV translates sheol 31 out of the 65 times to mean hell. As we have seen from the comparison table, all translators of the Bible versions except those who translated the Latin Vulgate, the KJV and the NKJV reject the interpretation of the Hebrew word sheol to mean hell.   The Greek word hades occurs 11 times in the original Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament and it is the direct equivalent of the Hebrew word sheol, thus it also means the grave (the place of the dead) or the pit. Once again, the KJV translators have carried forward the errors of the Latin Vulgate by translating hades 10 times to mean hell, and only one time to mean the correct translation of the grave.   The Greek word tartarus occurs only once in the original manuscripts of the New Testament and it means a prison of spiritual darkness, which all fallen angels are confined to until their final judgement in the Lake of Fire, as explained in Chapter 13. Tartarus does not mean a place of eternal torment in hell for fallen angels. Translators of the KJV and some other versions of the Bible have erred once again by copying the mistakes of the Latin Vulgate in mistranslating tartarus to mean hell.   The Greek word gehenna occurs 12 times in the original manuscripts of the New Testament, and for each and every time gehenna occurs, it has been mistranslated to mean hell by the KJV translators, who yet again followed the errors made by Jerome in the Latin Vulgate. In addition, all of the popular versions of the English Bible like the NKJV and the NIV also fell into the same trap of mistranslating gehenna to mean hell. However, Young’s Literal Translation version and several other versions of the Bible have left gehenna untranslated as it appears in the original Greek manuscripts.   Let us be absolutely clear that Jesus Christ did not speak about hell. Jesus Christ spoke about gehenna, not hell. Bible translators have mistranslated and misinterpreted the Greek word gehenna to mean hell, a place of eternal punishment for all unbelievers.   We need to understand the spiritual significance of the Greek word gehenna, and why Jesus Christ used it to refer to God’s refining, yet merciful fiery judgement for all unbelievers when they are cast into the Lake of Fire, on the Great White Throne Judgement Day.   As explained in Chapter 12, the Lake of Fire represents both God’s physical and spiritual cleansing of the earth and its heaven (earth’s atmosphere) in the Lake of Fire Judgement Age. This is all in preparation for the Eternal Kingdom of God of the New Heaven and the New Earth. The literal fire will cleanse the earth physically by melting the elements, and God’s Spiritual Fire will cleanse the earth spiritually by consuming the dross, scum and filth of wickedness and unbelief from the hearts of all resurrected unbelievers and all fallen angels. The physical Lake of Fire will be an age-lasting fire and it will not be quenched until every unbeliever and every fallen angel has been refined and purified, and reconciled to God by God’s Spiritual Fire, which is of course, eternal and unquenchable.   In Chapter 18, Jesus Christ did not Teach Hell, we give further details on the meaning of gehenna and explain how Jesus’ words have been mistranslated and misinterpreted in support of the doctrine of hell.   The most important point we need to emphasise is that hell is an absolute mistranslation of the original Hebrew word sheol, and the Greek words hades, tartarus and gehenna. There is not a single word in any of the original Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts of the Bible that means hell, a place of everlasting punishment for unbelievers. :LordKayleSig4: - "Your best investment is ammo, because it's going to weird quickly." - AC 1196210   - "Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God" - Thomas Jefferson's Personal Seal Sir.Kalin (OP)     User ID: 1295383  United States 04/05/2011 07:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation Re: HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS IN THE BIBLE MISTRANSLATED TO MEAN HELL "There is not a single word in any of the original Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts of the Bible that means hell, a place of everlasting punishment for unbelievers."     This IS actually GOOD NEWS!   There is NO such thing as HELL!       Last Edited by Lord.Kayle on 04/05/2011 07:58 PM :LordKayleSig4: - "Your best investment is ammo, because it's going to weird quickly." - AC 1196210   - "Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God" - Thomas Jefferson's Personal Seal Anonymous Coward User ID: 961432  United States 04/05/2011 08:09 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation Re: HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS IN THE BIBLE MISTRANSLATED TO MEAN HELL Then explain this: 

My favby them. Love this video!