Christian Forums

I was reading the news when the hair in the back of my neck started to tingle. I looked twice to see if I was reading it right. ...November 8, 2024-Putin says 'new world order' is taking shape in speech after Trump win.

The Russian president called NATO out of date, praised President-elect Donald Trump for acting courageously after the assassination attempt and said he hopes U.S.-Russia relations will be restored.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/putin-warns-that-a-new-world-order-is-happening-before-our-eyes/vi-AA1tHwTj?ocid=BingNewsSerp

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?view=detail&q=putin+says+new+world+order&mid=6DFFA01D4695AD48DECC6DFFA01D4695AD48DECC&FORM=VIRE

Putin congratulated Trump on winning the US election and said he was "ready" to talk to the US president-elect, adding: "I was impressed by Trump's behaviour during the assassination attempt.

Putin said Russia and Europe must return to a state of mutual trust. Russia, Putin said, did not consider Western civilisation to be the enemy despite attempts by the United States and its allies to isolate Moscow.

"The former structure of the world is irrevocably disappearing, we can say it has already gone, and a serious, irreconcilable struggle is unfolding for the formation of a new one," Putin said.

Now this has been championed by Catholic Church for some time as one can see..

"...Pope Proposes New Financial Order...
"...Pope Benedict XVI called for a new financial order with �real teeth� as Group of Eight leaders prepare to discuss ways out of the worst recession since World War II. �Profit is useful if it serves as a ...From profits to ethics: pope calls for a new political and financial world order...
"...This must be tackled, he said, by the creation of a global political authority and financial order based not just on the search for ever greater profits, but on ethics and a sense of the common good.The pontiff made the appeal in a 144-page encyclical � a reflection on doctrine that is the highest form of papal writing � three days before he was due to discuss the global downturn with Barack Obama.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/07/pope-new-political-financial-order

"...Pope Benedict today pinned responsibility for the worldwide recession squarely on greed and an amoral fascination with technological progress for its own sake. This must be tackled, he said, by the creation of a global political authority and financial
Georgetown/On Faith: Pope Benedict on Economic Justice - Thomas J. Reesehttp://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfai...l?hpid=talkbox1

"...Pope: encyclical, even globalization in need of a soul..Globalisation, which marks society today, is in need of a reaffirmation of ethical values, as well as �a personal and communal cultural orientation, open to transcendence" that is capable of "correcting its malfunctions." Moreover, in our age, �the State finds itself having to address the limitations to its sovereignty imposed by the new context of international trade and finance�. �This new context has altered the political power of States� (n. 24). But �as we take to heart the lessons of the current economic crisis, it seems more realistic to re-evaluate their role and their powers, which need to be prudently reviewed and remodelled�
http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=15716&size=A


"...Pope Benedict's long awaited encyclical calls for a radical rethinking of economics so that it is guided not simply by profits but by "an ethics which is people-centered."
...days before he is to meet with Pope Benedict XVI on his first trip to Italy, President Obama told FOX News that the Catholic Church's long tradition of social justice has had a "profound influence" on him. Obama told FOX News that he looks forward to reading the encyclical, a "circular letter" titled "Charity in Truth," published by the Vatican.

Pope Francis Calls For 'New World Order' After The Pandemic

Vatican News — Pope Francis insists in a new book things will never be the same in a post-pandemic world, calling instead for the establishment of a "new world order."

In a book-length interview with journalist Domenico Agasso titled God and the World to Come, scheduled for release in Italian on Tuesday, the pontiff reiterates his case for the Great Reset with a shift away from financial speculation, fossil fuels, and military build-up toward a green economy based on inclusiveness.

https://www.stvincenttimes.com/pope-francis-calls-for-new-world-order-after-the-pandemic/

And Putin has picked up the Popes line..

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/04/world/europe/pope-francis-putin.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBIowJ6IOiM

We are seeing the Image of the Beast being formed..

Lets look in Rev 13 to understand..

Revelation 13:1-2 King James Version (KJV)
1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Revelation 13:11-15 King James Version (KJV)
11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

This shows the beast of Revelation and depicts the attempt of an unholy trinity to counteract God's goal for the plan of salvation. Which essentially is the restoration of 'image' of God in human beings as it was at Creation. We see this evil entity try to subvert Gods plan in the last days by creating the image of the beast on Earth. The image of the beast is an end time entity, comprised of a community of people who reflect the character of the dragon, and has religious-economic-political power to impose false worship on Earth. We see the corruption it brings which is the end time Babylon the Great of Revelation 17-18, and the image of the beast is best identified with this entity.

The image of the beast is basically an institution and procedures which will duplicate the form and behavior of the beast power in Revelation 13. It will convince many that its words and purpose are true despite not being in full harmony with Scripture and will persuade the people of the earth, believers and non-believers, to follow the religious-political power which is the beast. The lamblike beast will also begin speaking like a dragon and exercising the power of the beast, showing that it will become as intolerant especially in setting aside of laws and foundational liberties. This results in people receiving the mark of the beast which is by following it in its false practices of worship, which is really worship of the Beast, and corruption of Gods Holy Day of worship. Lets look at the Revelation 14...

Revelation 14:9-12 King James Version (KJV)
9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Worshiping on Sunday is a direct way of worshiping the Beast, but there are other ways which we are seeing and even in the world are picking up is the 'climate change' and the idealogy behind it and even with the 'green sabbath' idea as this new World Order is put together

 

Quote from: Hobie on Fri Nov 08, 2024 - 18:56:07Worshiping on Sunday is a direct way of worshiping the Beast, but there are other ways which we are seeing and even in the world are picking up is the 'climate change' and the idealogy behind it and even with the 'green sabbath' idea as this new World Order is put together

You might of , kind of, sort of, provoked thoughts in my mind of the potential that wouldn't it be great if the New World Order is coming soon and Trump is the reason... because he would be a great head of it.

But BUT "Worshiping on Sunday is a direct way of worshiping the Beast"

The easy way to avoid that is not to worship.....

If Jesus told us to go to our closets and pray then we can go to or closets and worship. Who would know?

Quote from: Rella on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 06:47:03You might of , kind of, sort of, provoked thoughts in my mind of the potential that wouldn't it be great if the New World Order is coming soon and Trump is the reason... because he would be a great head of it.

But BUT "Worshiping on Sunday is a direct way of worshiping the Beast"

The easy way to avoid that is not to worship.....

If Jesus told us to go to our closets and pray then we can go to or closets and worship. Who would know?

Everyone senses there is a power behind all this, they call it the 'deep state' or 'puppet master' etc..., but they all see it. Something is moving the leaders of the world to come together under a 'united world' and you can see it in the Popes words as he calls it the need to come together for the 'Common Good', but the question is under who. God or the power of another...? https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-06/pope-audience-centesimus-annus-foundation-community-solidarity.html

So this is where Gods Word comes in and tells us what will happen at the end and we must read and understand, as its coming together and we must discern and know what is from God, as its getting very hard to see especially in the political arena.

Quote from: Hobie on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 07:33:29Everyone senses there is a power behind all this, they call it the 'deep state' or 'puppet master' etc..., but they all see it. Something is moving the leaders of the world to come together under a 'united world' and you can see it in the Popes words as he calls it the need to come together for the 'Common Good', but the question is under who. God or the power of another...? https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-06/pope-audience-centesimus-annus-foundation-community-solidarity.html

So this is where Gods Word comes in and tells us what will happen at the end and we must read and understand, as its coming together and we must discern and know what is from God, as its getting very hard to see especially in the political arena.

I am not disagreeing with this.

But I am when it says if I pray to our heavenly Father on a Sunday I am worshipping the beast.

The Sunday Worship is the mark of the beast is complete bull crap.  All put together by the the likes of the Kamala Harris of prophets EGW.

It's another "my church is the true church" because of some completely retarded and hardly defensible doctrine that one must twist scripture to arrive at.

Trump WAS endorsed by the leader of the NWO:

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 09:46:40The Sunday Worship is the mark of the beast is complete bull crap.  All put together by the the likes of the Kamala Harris of prophets EGW.

It's another "my church is the true church" because of some completely retarded and hardly defensible doctrine that one must twist scripture to arrive at.

I agree with you but they are no worse then the anti-Trinitarians
who are insistent those that believe are not saved, nor will be...

Or the worst that I have tangled with and almost make Frankie seem like the boy next door are the JW....

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 10:16:09Trump WAS endorsed by the leader of the NWO:

Hollywood Hogan is the entire reason I voted Trump. 

Say your prayers, train, take your vitamins, and vote Trump.

Quote from: Rella on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 07:39:27I am not disagreeing with this.

But I am when it says if I pray to our heavenly Father on a Sunday I am worshipping the beast.

There is no worshipping the beast, until the beast attempts to force its mark upon everyone. No one has ever said that praying to God on a Sunday is worshipping the beast.

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 09:46:40The Sunday Worship is the mark of the beast is complete bull crap.  All put together by the the likes of the Kamala Harris of prophets EGW.

It's another "my church is the true church" because of some completely retarded and hardly defensible doctrine that one must twist scripture to arrive at.

Exactly what scriptures are being twisted out of place, when suggesting the mark of the beast could be forced Sunday worship? Sunday sacredness is definitely all about worshipping God, just on a day He never commanded for such. Scripture declares that the seventh day sabbath is a sign that God is the one who sanctifies his people forever. Why wouldn't forced worship on an alternate day therefore, very possibly represent a sign or mark of the beast. As the Catholic church does also suggest that such is a sign or mark of her authority?

Exo 31:12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. 14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. 16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. 17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. 18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

This is of course not to mention the fact that there have been numerous and continued Sunday laws forced upon all citizens of many nations, throughout the history of "Christianity". Including many established in the last couple of decades around the world. A trend that seems to be on the increase again, with many calls from popes and others to bring Sunday laws back, where they have once been established already.

The Catholic Church considers Sunday sacredness to be a mark of her authority.

https://www.jlfoundation.net/papacy.html

Quotes from article pasted below, from link above.

QuoteOne day a man picked up Peter Geiermann's Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine and read the following on page 50:

Q. Which is the Sabbath day?

A. Saturday is the Sabbath day.
 
Q. Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?

A. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.

The man was dumbfounded and supposed there must be some mistake so he wrote a letter to the then famous James Cardinal Gibbons of Baltimore, and asked if the Catholic church did, indeed, change the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. The Cardinal replied, "Of course, the Catholic church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a MARK of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters."

Notice, also, the following words from The Catholic Record of London, Ontario, Canada, September 1, 1923: "Sunday is our MARK of authority...the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact."
 
Notice this from A Doctrinal Catechism by Stephen Keenan:

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept?

A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her, she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.

The Papacy claims that it changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday and that Sunday or Sunday-keeping is its mark of authority and power. God's mark or sign of power, is Sabbath and Sabbath-keeping and the beast's sign or mark of power, is Sunday and Sunday-keeping.

THE PAPACY ASKS A QUESTION

Here is the famous question which the Papacy has repeatedly asked Protestants. And Protestants have remained strangely silent:
 
"You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! But by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, 'Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day' who shall dare to say, nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day, but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead? This is a most important question which I know not how you can answer. You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet, in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that which He has commanded. The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principle, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered." Library of Christian Doctrine, Burns and Oates, pages 3-4, London.

Quote from: Amo on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 16:56:59Exactly what scriptures are being twisted out of place, when suggesting the mark of the beast could be forced Sunday worship? Sunday sacredness is definitely all about worshipping God, just on a day He never commanded for such. Scripture declares that the seventh day sabbath is a sign that God is the one who sanctifies his people forever. Why wouldn't forced worship on an alternate day therefore, very possibly represent a sign or mark of the beast. As the Catholic church does also suggest that such is a sign or mark of her authority?

Exo 31:12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. 14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. 16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. 17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. 18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

This is of course not to mention the fact that there have been numerous and continued Sunday laws forced upon all citizens of many nations, throughout the history of "Christianity". Including many established in the last couple of decades around the world. A trend that seems to be on the increase again, with many calls from popes and others to bring Sunday laws back, where they have once been established already.

The Catholic Church considers Sunday sacredness to be a mark of her authority.

https://www.jlfoundation.net/papacy.html

Quotes from article pasted below, from link above.
 

Amo,

If you plan on taking the mark of the beast you will have a lot more to worry about then just Sunday worship.

Quote from: Rella on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 17:32:56Amo,

If you plan on taking the mark of the beast you will have a lot more to worry about then just Sunday worship.

That is for sure. Sunday worship is just Sunday worship, and the mark of the beast is just a mark. Those who refuse it will not be able to buy or sell, be cut off from societies, and eventually face a death penalty. Those who choose to worship the beast and receive its mark, will face the seven last plagues by the judgment of God, be destroyed by the brightness of our Lord's coming, and be thrown into the lake of fire after the resurrection of damnation.

Jhn 5:28  Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Rev 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

The difference between the saints and those who worship the beast, is that the saints keep the commandments of God, and apparently those who worship the beast do not. The final issue will obviously be concerning the keeping or not of at least one of God's commandments. Thereby, all choosing who they really worship. I don't think it takes rocket science to figure out which commandment fallen humanity will choose to ignore and replace with their own. The testimony of history has already laid this issue wide open for all who care to see it. This will only become more evident as time continues.

The meaning of Jesus's interaction with the woman at the well in John 4 evades those who point to law keeping as a component of the mark of the beast.  Not to mention the meaning of much of the New Testament.

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Sun Nov 10, 2024 - 07:08:56The meaning of Jesus's interaction with the woman at the well in John 4 evades those who point to law keeping as a component of the mark of the beast.  Not to mention the meaning of much of the New Testament.

So, just exactly how do you think the beast is going to force everyone to worship it, without making a mandate or law requiring everyone to do so? What other law concerning a non scripturally established form of worship, has been, and continues to be a topic of such agitation as Sunday laws? Which have been around as long as there has ever been a united church and state. That is to say, a form of Christianity that firmly believes the state should force everyone to keep Sundays "holy". Go to the following link, and note just some of the agitation concerning this issue around the world since just 2012. Not to mention the agitation right here on these message boards.

https://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/index.php?topic=61496.0

Like it or not, laws are the instruments of governing every society, including heavenly societies according to scripture. God's laws are over and above all others. All who ignore His laws, or place their own over and above His, will not enter into the societies of heaven. Therefore does the last book and chapter of the bible address and declare such.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

The final issue this earth faces will be the exact issue which began all of our problems in the first place. Will humanity obey the commands of God, or not. A simple choice between the commandments of God, or the commandments of humanity inspired by the evil one unto their destruction along with his own.

Quote from: Amo on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 18:13:36That is for sure. Sunday worship is just Sunday worship, and the mark of the beast is just a mark. Those who refuse it will not be able to buy or sell, be cut off from societies, and eventually face a death penalty. Those who choose to worship the beast and receive its mark, will face the seven last plagues by the judgment of God, be destroyed by the brightness of our Lord's coming, and be thrown into the lake of fire after the resurrection of damnation.

Jhn 5:28  Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Rev 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

The difference between the saints and those who worship the beast, is that the saints keep the commandments of God, and apparently those who worship the beast do not. The final issue will obviously be concerning the keeping or not of at least one of God's commandments. Thereby, all choosing who they really worship. I don't think it takes rocket science to figure out which commandment fallen humanity will choose to ignore and replace with their own. The testimony of history has already laid this issue wide open for all who care to see it. This will only become more evident as time continues.

If I have gone for 77 years going to church on Sundays, or Watching my church on Sundays on the laptop, Or others for that matter...
do you not think my fate will be sealed?

Do you realize how many people will face that horrible extinction
and only the Jews and SDA  Seventh Day Baptists, Church of God ( Seventh Day) Hebrew Roots, United Church of God, will escape.

Truth be told. If that is the case... how lucky for all the aborted babies that never will face that.

________________
Gen 2:2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

Funny that so many translations vary with by or on.

If God finished on, then he may have still been working on that day.

If God finished by, then that would indicate some time before.

We do not know. We were not there.

Gen 2:3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Wonderful and wise. Do no work on the 7th day and worship.     

The following rather long but food for thought... Any color changes are mine for emphasis.

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Lords-Day

Encyclopedia of The Bible – The Lord's Day

QuoteThe Lord's Day

LORD's DAY, THE (ἡ κυριακὴ̀ ἡμέρα, the Lord's day, the day belonging to the Lord). The expression is found in the Bible only in Revelation 1:10, where John states that he "was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" when he received a divine commission to write the Book of Revelation. The adjective kyriakos, however, also occurs in 1 Corinthians 11:20 in the expression, "the Lord's supper." As will be shown, "the Lord's day" is used frequently in other early Christian writings to designate Sunday, the first day of the week, observed from the time of the apostles as a day of Christian worship.

Outline

I. The origin of the Christian Sunday

Many people believe that the origin of the Christian Sunday is identical with the origin of the Heb. sabbath, and that the sabbath was changed either by Jesus Himself or by His apostles from the seventh to the first day of the week (Wilbur F. Crafts, The Sabbath for Man, p. 376; R. L. Dabney, The Christian Sabbath, pp. 6-8; J. P. Hutchison, Our Obligations to the Day of Rest and Worship, p. 100). This belief has persisted even though no passage of Scripture can be found that teaches that the Heb. sabbath has been transferred from one day of the week to another.

The origin of the Christian Sunday is not as simple as those who hold this view would have us believe. The change from sabbath to Sunday was gradual. Millgram describes it as follows:

The change from the Sabbath to Sunday was the result of a long historic process which is tied up with the formative years of Christianity. This process coincided with the drift of early Christianity from a messianic movement among the Jews to a religion of the Gentiles. When Christianity was predominantly Jewish, the Sabbath was the official Christian day of rest and worship. When Christianity finally became predominantly Gentile, the Sabbath was abandoned and Sunday became the official day of rest and worship. This change was not sudden. It was a slow process of more than three centuries' duration (A. E. Millgram, Sabbath: The Day of Delight, p. 364).

In this process, which took place when Christianity was emerging from the confinement of Judaism, it was inevitable that Judaism should contribute a great deal to a Christian institution such as Sunday. At this time also Christianity was entering into conflict with paganism, which, esp. in later ages, made its influence felt on the institutions of Christianity. At the same time, as the distinction between Christianity and Judaism, and between Christianity and paganism came to be realized, it was certain that the observance of Sunday would contain some elements of a distinctively Christian character.

A. The contribution of Judaism. Christianity stands in debt to Judaism in at least three regards: (1) Judaism gave to Christianity its sacred Scriptures; (2) Judaism provided in the synagogue service a pattern for Christian worship; and (3) Judaism presented in the Heb. sabbath an example of a weekly day of rest and worship.

1. The Jewish Scriptures. The Jews regarded the writings now known as the OT as an authoritative divine revelation, and the sabbath as a divine institution that rested upon the authority of that revelation. Jesus and the apostles likewise accepted the OT as the Word of God (Matt 5:17-19; John 10:35; Rom 3:31; 4:3; 2 Tim 3:16; Heb 1:1; 2 Pet 1:21). Cotton asks the question, "How could Christianity, which accepted the Old Testament as authoritative, dare to set aside the Sabbath which was established as an institution within the very ten commandments, and set up as a kind of substitute the first day of the week to be observed as a sacred day?" (Paul Cotton, From Sabbath to Sunday, p. 8). The answer to this problem lies in the interpretation the Christians gave to those Scriptures. Paul, for example, following the principles set forth by Jesus and the Heb. prophets, held that it was the spirit and not the letter of the Scriptures that was applicable to the Christian believer (2 Cor 3:6). This interpretation of the OT Scriptures enabled the early Christians to hold them as authoritative, and at the same time to regard the Heb. sabbath as no longer binding on them.

2. The Jewish synagogue. In every place where there was a sizable Jewish community, the synagogue was the center of Jewish worship. Jesus made regular use of the synagogue to teach and preach (Matt 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:21, 39; 6:2; Luke 4:15-27, 44; 13:10; John 18:20). The Apostle Paul made it a practice to begin his ministry in any particular place by preaching in the synagogue (Acts 13:5, 14-47; 14:1; 17:1-3, 10; 18:4-7; 19:8, 9). It was natural, then, that the weekly services in the Jewish synagogue should become a pattern for the Christian assemblies on the Lord's day.

The general arrangement of the synagogue was followed in the Christian meeting places. The sexes were separated and the leader took his place on a raised platform in the center at one end of the building (A. Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Vol. II, pp. 434-439; Paul Cotton, From Sabbath to Sunday, pp. 91, 95). The order of worship, including the reading of the Scriptures, the singing of psalms, the preaching of a sermon, and the offering of prayers, was much the same in the Jewish synagogue and the Christian assembly. The Christian practice of reading the Scriptures consecutively week by week was borrowed from Judaism. Even the Christian postures in prayer were borrowed from the Jews. The close parallels between the features of worship in the Jewish synagogue and the Christian assembly become all the more significant when it is remembered that Sunday was the weekly day for Christian worship just as the sabbath was the weekly day for Jewish worship.

3. The Jewish sabbath. The sabbath held a distinctive place in the life of the Jewish nation. The religious rites of the Jews centered about this one day. The early Christians had been reared in the traditions of Judaism. It was natural that many of these traditions should be retained and incorporated in the life of Christianity. Jews who had been accustomed to observe the sabbath by resting from their ordinary labors and by worshiping in the synagogue would find it very difficult not to maintain the custom of observing a weekly day of rest and worship.

At first, Jewish Christians apparently observed both the seventh and the first day of the week. Later, however, when the Christian Church became more Gentile in character, and when it was realized that Christianity was distinct from Judaism, the great majority of Christians observed only the first day of the week, but they transferred to it many of the features of the earlier institution which had held such an important place in the heritage they had received from Judaism.

The character of the Jewish sabbath was imitated in the Christian Sunday. Like the sabbath, Sunday was regarded as a day of joy and festivity, and fasting was forbidden (P. Cotton, From Sabbath to Sunday, pp. 92, 93). The sabbath began and closed with appropriate celebrations. Similarly, the early Christians met on Sunday early in the morning, and again in the evening to worship and to take food together (cf. esp. the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan, H. Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church, pp. 4, 5).

The sabbath was, to the Jew, a memorial of the creation of the world, a weekly reminder of God's rest after the six days of creation and of the Israelites' deliverance from Egyp. slavery (Gen 2:3; Exod 20:11; Deut 5:15). To the Christian, Sunday was a memorial of Christ's resurrection, a weekly reminder of the work of Christ and of His redemption from the bondage of sin. The most prominent feature of the Heb. sabbath was rest from all kinds of work. Although this feature of the Jewish sacred day was the last to be carried over into the Christian Sunday, as early as the beginning of the 3rd cent. there are indications that Christians abstained from work on the Lord's day (Tertullian, On Prayer, ch. 23, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, p. 689).

The fact that Sunday became a weekly day of rest and worship for the Christians (as opposed to a monthly or yearly observance) can be explained only by the weekly recurrence of the Jewish sabbath. The Christian Sunday, both in its initial and more developed form, owed much to the Jewish sabbath.

B. The influence of paganism. Paganism exerted little influence on early Christianity. Christianity took root not in the soil of paganism, but of Judaism. Judaism and Christianity alike stood in marked contrast to the ethics and ideals of the pagan world. In three respects, however, paganism influenced the origin and development of the Christian Sunday: (1) it gave to the Christian institution the name by which it is most commonly called; (2) it promoted the observance of Sunday by its adoption of the seven-day week; and (3) it prepared for the adoption of Sunday as the official weekly religious day by the prominence accorded to Sunday in the pagan religions.

1. The name "Sunday."This name for the first day of the week originated from the naming of the days of the week by the ancient Babylonians after the sun, moon, and five planets that were then known (R. J. Floody, Scientific Basis of Sabbath and Sunday, p. 3; W. Rordorf, Sunday, pp. 24, 25). Sunday was named in honor of the sun or the god of the sun. Although both Jews and Christians avoided the use of this pagan name in the 1st cent. of the Christian era, Christians began to use the name as early as the 2nd cent. (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch. 67, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 186).

2. The adoption of the seven-day week. Although the Jews had observed a seven-day week for many centuries and there is some evidence that a seven-day planetary week was observed by the Babylonians, there is no conclusive evidence that such a week existed among the Romans until the 1st Christian cent. The Rom. historian, Dio Cassius, writing at the beginning of the 3rd cent., states that (1) the planetary week originated in Egypt; (2) it was of relatively recent date; and (3) it had by his time spread everywhere (Dio Cassius, Roman History, 37:18, 19; Willy Rordorf, Sunday, p. 27; Rordorf also cites evidence from Pompeii). It would have been difficult, if not impossible, for Christians to have observed a weekly day of rest and worship, if the Rom. empire had not adopted the seven-day week.

3. The prominence of Sunday in pagan religions. One of the numerous Oriental religions which became popular in the Rom. empire at the beginning of the Christian era, esp. among the Rom. soldiers, was Mithraism, a religion that was imported from Persia. Mithra was the god of the sun. Consequently, Mithraism regarded Sunday as a sacred day. The veneration of this day by the adherents of this pagan religion no doubt contributed to the selection of Sunday by the Emperor Constantine as the imperial rest day. His edict, issued in the year 321, ordered all judges, city people and craftsmen to rest on "the venerable day of the sun" (H. Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church, p. 26). Although the prominence given to Sunday in Mithraism and in other pagan cults did contribute to the acceptance of that day by the pagans as a national rest day, it did not account for the observance of the first day of the week as a day of worship by the early Christians.

The use of the name "Sunday," the adoption of the seven-day week, and the association of Sunday with pagan religions all helped to make the observance of the Lord's day more acceptable to the pagans, but in no way did paganism produce or modify the essential character of the Christian institution.

C. The distinctive Christian elements

1. Consciousness of a distinction from Judaism. The Christian Sunday, although manifesting a number of features borrowed from the sabbath of Judaism, nevertheless was from the beginning a distinctive Christian institution. The first day of the week was observed because it was the day on which Jesus rose from the dead. The resurrection of Jesus, denied by Judaism, was foundational to the Christian movement. It was inevitable that Christians, even those who were Jews by race, would come to sense an essential difference between Christianity and Judaism. This consciousness of a distinction from Judaism demanded a separate day for worship.

The distinctiveness of Christianity from Judaism may be seen in (1) its universal character; (2) its internal character; and (3) its personal character. While Judaism was the religion of one people, even though other peoples were attracted to it, Christianity quickly became a universal religion transcending all racial bounds. The Heb. prophets spoke of Israel's mission to the world (e.g. Isa 42:6; 54:5), but Judaism was so closely intertwined with the social, economic and political life of the Jewish people that it never became a universal religion. The emphasis on the observance of the law in normative Judaism tended toward an external observance of legal precepts, including those having to do with the sabbath. The teaching of Jesus and of Paul and the other apostles, on the other hand, was that God demanded an internal righteousness effected by the Holy Spirit in one's heart (Matt 5:20; Mark 7:21, 22; Rom 8:4, 9). Again, while there was an emphasis in Judaism on the individual's personal relationship with God, because it was bound up with the national life of the Jewish people and was expressed in an elaborate system of worship, Judaism tended to become depersonalized. Christianity, on the other hand, at least in its early forms, was intensely personal. Christian believers from all races and strata of society formed a new community, based not on racial or national ties, but on personal faith in Jesus Christ. He was the One whom they worshiped as Lord on the day of the week which they came to designate as the Lord's day.

2. The supernatural designation of Sunday. All four gospels indicate that Jesus rose from the dead on the morning of the first day of the week (Matt 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1). The resurrection of Christ on this day was reason enough for the Christians to observe it. Six of the eight appearances of Christ after His resurrection recorded in the gospels took place on Sunday: (1) to Mary Magdalene (John 20:11-18); (2) to the women who had brought spices to anoint His body (Matt 28:7-10); (3) to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-33); (4) to Simon Peter (24:34); (5) to the ten disciples when Thomas was absent (John 20:19-23; cf. Luke 24:36-49); and (6) to the eleven disciples when Thomas was present (John 20:24-29). These appearances of Christ on Sunday were sufficient to designate it as a day of peculiar significance.

If the crucifixion of Christ took place on Friday, as is traditionally held, then Pentecost also occurred on Sunday that year. This Jewish festival received its name from the fact that it took place fifty days after the Passover. The latter was observed annually on the fifteenth of Nisan (A. E. Millgram, Sabbath: The Day of Delight, p. 339). Since the Jews were commanded to count the fifty days "from the morrow after the sabbath...to the morrow after the seventh sabbath" (Lev 23:15, 16), and since the fifteenth day of Nisan, which was the first day of the feast of unleavened bread (23:6), was considered a sabbath, the feast of Pentecost would occur on Sunday only when this special sabbath coincided with the regular weekly sabbath. (The use of the plural form of "sabbaths" in Matt 28:1 seems to support this view.) If Pentecost did occur on Sunday that year, then the outpouring of the Holy Spirit also occurred on the Lord's day (Acts 2:1-4).

These supernatural events, the resurrection of Christ, His appearances to His disciples, and the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, would serve to mark the first day of the week as a special day for the Christian. Jesus, when questioned about His authority, quoted an OT passage: "The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner. This is the Lord's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes" (Ps 118:22, 23; Matt 21:42). Peter, in his address before the Jewish Sanhedrin, quoted part of the same passage and applied it to the resurrection of Christ (Acts 4:11). Athanasius, in the 4th cent., added the succeeding v. and applied it to the resurrection day: "This is the day which the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it" (Ps 118:24; Athanasius, Commentary on Psalm 118, cited in J. A. Hessey, Sunday: Its Origin, History, and Present Obligation, p. 69).

II. The history of the Christian Sunday in the Early Church

A. The Apostolic Period, A.D. 29-100. The NT is the only source of information concerning the observance of Sunday in the apostolic period, and it has little to say about it. This may be because its observance only gradually displaced that of the Jewish sabbath and did not become prevalent until the close of the apostolic period. There are, however, three unmistakable references in the NT to the Christian observance of Sunday (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:1, 2; Rev 1:10).

1. Paul's command to the Corinthian church. The Apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians about a.d. 55 "concerning the contribution for the saints," a collection that he had undertaken to gather from the churches in the four provinces where he had labored, for the relief of the poverty-stricken Christians in Jerusalem, gave them the following command: "As I directed the churches of Galatia, so you also are to do. On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that contributions need not be made when I come" (Acts 24:17; Rom 15:25-28; 1 Cor 16:1, 2; cf. 2 Cor 9:1-5). As early as the 2nd cent., a collection for the poor was a regular part of the worship service on the Lord's day (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch. 67, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol I, p. 186). This custom may have had its origin from Paul's command to the Corinthian church. Even though Paul's words seems to mean that each individual was to lay aside his contribution at home (Gr. παῤ ἐαττῷ) on the first day of the week, it is clear that Paul regarded Sunday as an appropriate day for the laying aside of that which was to be given to the poor. The verb tr. "store up" (Gr. θησαυρίζω, G2564) is derived from a noun meaning "treasure box or chest" (Gr. θησαυρός, G2565), which might refer to the treasury or church box where the collection was to be deposited. If so, the money set aside was brought on that day to the church when it assembled for worship (J. Moffatt, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 271). The same instructions had been given to the churches of Galatia (1 Cor 16:1). While it is not certain that this passage implies that there was an assembly of the church on that day, the passage does indicate that Sunday was viewed as an appropriate day for the performance of religious duties, and therefore regarded in some sense as a sacred day (G. C. Findlay, St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 945).

2. Paul's visit at Troas. Paul's visit at Troas, recorded in Acts 20:5-12, took place about two years after the writing of 1 Corinthians, as the apostle was on his way to Jerusalem, bearing the contributions of the Gentile churches to the poverty-stricken Christians in the Jewish capital. Paul and his companions arrived at Troas after the close of the feast of unleavened bread and remained there for seven days (Acts 20:6). On Sunday evening the church gathered "to break bread" and Paul gave a farewell address to them which lasted until midnight (20:7). After the miraculous resuscitation of Eutychus, Paul broke bread with them and continued to converse with the believers until daybreak (20:8-11).

This passage is significant because it relates what seems to have been a customary weekly assembly of the Christians on the first day of the week, to break bread and to listen to an exposition of the Word of God. Even though Paul was in Troas seven days, this is the only assembly reported. It would seem that Paul remained a full week, even though he was in a hurry to get to Jerusalem, in order to meet with the believers on Sunday. The "breaking of bread" refers to a simple meal that was taken together by members of a local church in token of their fellowship with one another and in memory of Christ's last supper with His disciples (Acts 2:42, 46; 1 Cor 10:16-21; 11:20-34; Jude 12). The meal was followed by the eating of the bread and the drinking of the wine in obedience to the Lord's command and in remembrance of His death (Matt 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19, 20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The assembly at Troas also included a public discourse. It is evident that the protraction of the address until midnight, or to daybreak, was not the usual practice. It is implied, however, that preaching had become a regular part of the Christian worship on the first day of the week.

Some have held that the service described in Acts 20:7-12 was on Saturday, rather than Sunday, evening (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. III, pp. 338, 339). However, since Troas was a Gentile community, it is quite prob. that Sunday evening is meant. This becomes almost certain when the expression used here is compared with its use in John 20:19, where "the first day of the week" cannot possibly refer to Saturday evening, but must refer to Sunday evening. Thus this passage provides a connecting link between the first meeting of Jesus with His disciples on the evening of the resurrection day (John 20:19-23; Luke 24:36-43) and the established custom of the church of the 2nd and 3rd centuries of assembling together for worship on the first day of the week. It is significant that the meeting of Jesus with the disciples on the first Lord's day, the meeting of Paul with the disciples at Troas, and the meeting of the disciples in succeeding generations, each took place on Sunday evening; each was observed by the breaking of bread; and each was characterized by a discourse on the holy Scriptures.

3. John's vision on Patmos. The first vision of the Book of Revelation, written during the latter part of the reign of Nero (c. 66) or of the reign of Domitian (c. 95), was given to John "on the Lord's day" (Rev 1:10). Although some have argued that this is merely an alternative designation for "the day of the Lord," used repeatedly in the OT and NT for the day of judgment (cf. A. Deissmann, Encyclopaedia Biblica, Vol. III, p. 2815; F. J. A. Hort, The Apocalypse of St. John, p. 13), most scholars conclude that it is a reference to Sunday (H. B. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, p. 13; R. H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John, Vol. I, p. 23). This conclusion is established by the frequent use of "the Lord's day" in early non-canonical Christian writings (e.g. Didaché 14:1; Ignatius, Magnesians 9:1; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 7:12; Tertullian, On Idolatry, ch. 14) to refer to Sunday.

It is remarkable that John received this vision of the risen Lord on the day that had become hallowed by the Resurrection of Christ and His appearances to His disciples. As John fell before the "living one," who "died" but was "alive for evermore" (Rev 1:18), he became an example for all those who, in succeeding generations, kept the Lord's day as the day of the week sacred to the memory of that same risen, living Christ.

B. The Ante-Nicene Period, A.D. 100-321

1. From Ignatius to Irenaeus. Ignatius, a disciple of the Apostle John, and the bishop of Antioch, wrote to the Magnesians in the early years of the 2nd cent., describing Christians with a Jewish background as those who "have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death" (Magnesians 9:1-3).

The Didaché, a manual of Christian worship written during the first quarter of the 2nd cent., [b]contains the following instructions regarding worship on the Lord's day: "But every Lord's day do ye gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure" (14:1).[/b]

In the pseudonymous Epistle of Barnabas, written in the early part of the 2nd cent., the author interprets certain OT passages (Gen 2:2, 3; Ps 90:4; Isa 1:13) to mean that God will bring the present world to an end at the conclusion of six days of a thousand years, each by ushering in the seventh day, or thousand years, of rest at Christ's Second Coming, after which God will make a beginning of another world on the eighth day. The writer then concludes: "Wherefore we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day on which Jesus rose again from the dead" (Barnabas 15:9).

Pliny, the Rom. governor of Pontus and Bithynia, wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan around 112, in which he asked for an imperial ruling with regard to the treatment of Christians against whom accusations had been made. He says: "But they declared that the sum of their guilt or error had amounted only to this, that on an appointed day they had been accustomed to meet before daybreak, and to recite a hymn antiphonally to Christ, as to a god, and to bind themselves by an oath, not for the commission of any crime but to abstain from theft, robbery, adultery and breach of faith, and not to deny a deposit when it was claimed" (H. Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church, pp. 4, 5). Although Pliny does not state that the appointed day for the Christians' accustomed meeting was Sunday, his description of its observance is so accurate that it is certain that it was the Lord's day.

Justin Martyr, around the middle of the 2nd cent., describes the order of worship in the Christian assembly "on the day called Sunday." It included the reading of the Scriptures, a sermon, prayers, the celebration of the Lord's Supper, and an offering. Justin then proceeds to give two reasons why Christians assemble for worship on Sunday: (1) because it was the day on which God began His work of creation; and (2) because it was the day on which Jesus Christ rose from the dead (First Apology, ch. 67). In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin explains why Christians do not observe the Jewish sabbath by asserting that true sabbath observance under the new covenant consisting of turning from sin (ch. 19). Later he states that the command to circumcise children on the eighth day "was a type of the true circumcision, by which we are circumcised from deceit and iniquity through Him who rose from the dead on the first day after the Sabbath, our Lord Jesus Christ" (ch. 41).

Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, in a letter to the church of Rome, a.d. 170, writes: "Today we have passed the Lord's holy day, in which we have read your epistle" (Eusebius, Church History, IV, 23:11).

Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, a.d. 178, wrote to the bishop of Rome with regard to the controversial question whether Easter should be celebrated on Sunday. He says: "The mystery of the Lord's resurrection may not be celebrated on any other day than the Lord's day" (Eusebius, Church History, Bk. V, ch. 24).

These testimonies show that throughout the 2nd cent. Sunday was observed as a day of Christian worship in commemoration of the Resurrection of Christ. There is no indication that Sunday was observed during this time as a day of rest or that its observance was in any way connected with the observance of the Jewish sabbath.

2. From Clement of Alexandria to Peter of Alexandria. Clement of Alexandria, at the close of the 2nd cent. and the beginning of the 3rd, was the first of the patristic writers to apply the spiritualizing method of Alexandria in support of the observance of Sunday. A passing reference in Plato's Republic to an eighth day is interpreted to mean that Plato spoke prophetically of the Lord's day (The Stromata, V, 14). Later on in the same work, he speaks of a Christian as a true Gnostic: "He, in fulfillment of the precept, according to the Gospel, keeps the Lord's day, when he abandons an evil disposition, and assumes that of a Gnostic, glorifying the Lord's resurrection in himself" (VII, 12). In thus spiritualizing both Sunday and the Sabbath, he implies that the Lord's day bears some analogy to the Heb. sabbath.

Tertullian, the great apologist of the first quarter of the 3rd cent., in writing to Christians, insisted that "We have nothing to do with sabbaths or the other Jewish festivals, much less with those of the heathen. We have our own solemnities, the Lord's day, for instance, and Pentecost" (On Idolatry, ch. 14). In writing to pagans, however, Tertullian contrasts the Christian observance of Sunday with the pagan rites connected with the worship of the sun, and suggests that there is a resemblance between the Christian observance of Sunday and the Jewish observance of Saturday as a day of rest (Ad Nationes, Bk. I, ch. 13). His most famous statement is found in another work addressed to Christians, where he says: "We, on the day of the Lord's resurrection, ought to guard not only against kneeling, but every office of solicitude, deferring even our businesses lest we give any place to the devil" (De Oratione, ch. 23). Tertullian, then, was the first Christian writer to urge the cessation of labor on Sunday. He did not, however, base it on the sabbath command, but on the need to preserve the Lord's day as a day of worship.

Origen, Clement's successor in the school of Alexandria, lived during the first half of the 3rd cent. Like his predecessor, he gave a spiritual interpretation to the observance of Sunday. In his famous defense of Christianity, he writes: "If it be objected to us on this subject that we ourselves are accustomed to observe certain days, as for example the Lord's day...I have to answer that to the perfect Christian, who is ever in his thoughts, words, and deeds serving his natural Lord, God the Word, all his days are the Lord's, and he is always keeping the Lord's day" (Against Celsus, ch. 22). In spite of Origen's idealistic interpretation, he does bear witness to the Christian observance of the Lord's day.

The Syr. document of the Didascalia Apostolorum, or The Teaching of the Apostles, prob. written in the second half of the 3rd cent., affirms that the Lord's day was appointed by the apostles as a day of Christian worship. The statement reads: "The Apostles further appointed: On the first day of the week let there be service, and the reading of the Holy Scriptures, and the oblation: because on the first day of the week our Lord rose from the dead, and on the first day of the week He ascended up to heaven, and on the first day of the week He will appear at last with the angels of heaven" (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. VIII, p. 668).

Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, in a synodical epistle from the third council of Carthage, a.d. 253, speaks of the Jewish practice of circumcision on the eighth day as prefiguring the Christian observance of the Lord's day. He says: "Because the eighth day...was to be that on which the Lord should rise again...and give us circumcision of the spirit, the eighth day...the Lord's day, went before in the figure" (Epistle 64:4).

Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, bears witness to the observance of Sunday at the beginning of the 4th cent. He writes: "We keep the Lord's Day as a day of joy, because of Him who rose thereon" (The Canonical Epistle, Canon XV). He concludes the testimony of the 3rd-cent. Christian writers to the continued observance of Sunday as a day of Christian worship based on the resurrection of Christ and the apostolic tradition.

III. The history of the Christian Sunday in the Medieval Church

A. The Early Medieval Period, A.D. 321-590. In 321 the Rom. Emperor Constantine issued an edict that introduced a new era in the history of the Christian Sunday. Before this time Sunday had been observed by Christians as a day of worship, and, to some extent, also as a day of rest. It now became an officially recognized and prescribed day of rest. The edict permitted people living in the country to "attend to agriculture," but commanded that "all judges, city-people and craftsmen shall rest on the venerable day of the Sun" (H. Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church, p. 26).

1. Christian writings. Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, argued in his Church History that the decision to celebrate Easter on Sunday was based on apostolic tradition (Bk. V, ch. 23). He extolled Constantine for his pious observance of the Lord's day and states that the emperor's appointment of Sunday as a day of rest for all his subjects was "to lead all mankind to the worship of God" (Life of Constantine, Bk. IV, ch. 18). Although Eusebius does not base the observance of Sunday on the sabbath commandment, he does draw an analogy between the Lord's day and the Heb. sabbath (Commentary on the 91st [92nd] Psalm).

Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria at the same time as Eusebius, applies the words of Psalm 118:24, "This is the day which the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it," to the Lord's day (J. A. Hessey, Sunday, p. 69). In another work he declares that the sabbath, the end of the old creation, has deceased, and the Lord's day, the commencement of the new creation, has set in (The Sabbath and Circumcision, quoted in Hessey, Sunday, pp. 68, 69).

Epiphanius, Bishop of Constantia, Cyprus, in the latter half of the 4th cent. contrasts the sabbath of the law with "the Great Sabbath," which is Christ Himself (Against Heresies, Bk. XXX, ch. 32). He asserts that the Lord's day, and the observance of Wednesday and Friday as fast days, were established by the apostles (Expos. Fid. Cathol., ch. 22).

Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, and Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, speak of both the Heb. sabbath and the Christian Sunday as allegorical of rest from sin. Gregory calls them "sister days" (De Castig. quoted in Hessey, Sunday, p. 72). Ambrose prohibited fasting on the Lord's day (Epistles, XXIII quoted in William B. Trevelyan, Sunday, p. 26).

Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, writing at the close of the 4th cent., condemns the practice of the Manicheans of fasting on the Lord's day (Ep. 36, To Casulanus, ch. 11). In another epistle he distinguishes between the Jewish sabbath and the Christian Sunday, but sees them both as typical days, the sabbath of the repose of the dead, and Sunday of the resurrection of the dead (Ep. 55, chs. 12, 13). Similarly, Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, warns Christians against sabbatizing with the Jews (Commentary on I Cor., Homily 43), but maintains that Christian as well as Jewish ordinances have a spiritual interpretation (Commentary on Matt, Homily 39).

Jerome, at the beginning of the 5th cent. describes the activities of certain Egyp. Christians on Sunday: "Every Lord's day they spend their whole time in prayer and reading" (Letter 22). Paula and her companions, however, are described as follows: "On the Lord's day only they proceeded to the church beside which they lived, each company following its own mother-superior. Returning home in the same order, they then devoted themselves to their allotted tasks, and made garments either for themselves or else for others" (Letter 108).

The Apostolic Constitutions, a manual of church order written about this time, provides valuable information concerning the status of Sunday observance at the beginning of the 5th cent. After giving directions concerning daily worship, it enjoins Christians: "And on the day of the Lord's resurrection, which is the Lord's day, meet more diligently, sending praise to God that made the universe by Jesus, and sent him to us, and condescended to let him suffer, and raised him from the dead" (Bk. II, sec. 7, par. 59). Fasting and labor were forbidden on both the sabbath and Sunday (Bk. V, sec. 3, par. 20; Bk. VIII, sec. 4, par. 33). Sunday has begun to be associated with other Christian festivals and with the Jewish sabbath, which is observed in a similar way; and Sunday observance is now being enforced by ecclesiastical rules.

2. Church councils and legislation. During the 4th, 5th and 6th centuries a number of church councils and imperial laws sought to enforce the proper observance of Sunday. The Council of Nicea, a.d. 325, passed a canon to make uniform the custom of standing for prayer on the Lord's day (20th Canon). The Council of Gangra, around 350, condemned fasting on the Lord's day and those who despised the House of God and frequented schismatic assemblies. The Council of Laodicea, a.d. 363, commands Christians not to observe Saturday, the Jewish sabbath, but Sunday as the day of rest. In 368, Theodosius the Great made an edict, repeating Constantine's permission of the manumission of slaves on Sunday and prohibiting trials before arbitrators, so that the sacred rites of religion should not be violated "on the day of the Sun, which our fathers rightly named the Lord's day" (quoted by Hessey, Sunday, p. 84).

The Fourth Council of Carthage, a.d. 436, threatened excommunication for anyone who left church during the preaching, forbade fasting on the Lord's day, and discouraged attendance at the Games or the Public Circus on Sunday (Hessey, Sunday, p. 82). In 425, Theodosius the Younger had passed a law forbidding all games on Sunday and on other church festivals; in 469, another law was passed, forbidding the celebration of the games on Sunday even if that was the emperor's birthday (Hessey, Sunday, pp. 83, 84). In 538, the Third Council of Orleans forbade all agricultural work on Sunday, but condemned the practice of abstinence from journeys or of preparing meals as Judaistic (Trevelyan, Sunday, p. 46). The Second Council of Macon in 585, however, prohibited work and commanded worship on Sunday on the authority of the OT sabbath regulations (Hessey, Sunday, pp. 87, 88).

During the period between Constantine and Gregory the Great, Sunday became a legalized day of rest, enforced by ecclesiastical and secular law; worship on the Lord's day was enjoined by church councils and imperial edicts; a number of other festivals came to be observed; and Sunday came to be less sharply distinguished from the Heb. sabbath.

B. The Later Medieval Period, A.D. 590-1517

1. Christian writings. Among Christian writers during this period, the observance of Sunday gradually came to be based on the OT sabbath commandments. As Christianity became more and more legalistic, it became quite natural for Christians to justify their legalism from the OT laws. So it was that, as Paul Cotton observes, "the Christian Sunday became a fixed and established institution with all the authority of the Roman government and the Hebrew Scriptures behind it" (From Sabbath to Sunday, p. 155).

Gregory the Great, who became Bishop of Rome in 590, wrote in most emphatic language against sabbatarianism, which he called a doctrine of Antichrist (Epistles, Bk. XI, Ep. 3). Similarly, Theodulphus, Bishop of Orleans in the 8th cent., pled for the observance of Sunday in accordance with its character as a day of Christian worship, not on the grounds of the Heb. sabbath law (Hessey, Sunday, p. 93).

The pleas of such men went unheeded. Alcuin, at the close of the 8th cent., based the observance of Sunday on the same foundation as the observance of the Heb. sabbath. He asserts: "Christian custom has transferred the observance of the Sabbath to the Lord's Day" (Homily 18, post Pentec.). Bernard of Clairvaux in the 12th cent., grounded both the Lord's day and other holy days on the fourth commandment (Hessey, Sunday, pp. 89, 90). Peter Alphonsus, in the same cent., was the first to use the term, "Christian Sabbath" of the Lord's day (Hessey, Sunday, p. 90).

Thomas Aquinas in the 13th cent. was the first to apply the distinctions of moral and ceremonial law to the observance of Sunday. He distinguished in the fourth commandment the moral element of an obligatory stated worship of God from the ceremonial element of the seventh day, and said: "The observance of Sunday under the new law follows the keeping of the Sabbath, not in consequence of a legal precept, but from the decision of the Church and the custom of Christians" (S. E. Warren, The Sunday Question, p. 109), Tostatus, Bishop of Avila, in the 14th cent. laid down a whole series of ordinances based on the regulations concerning the manna in Exodus 16:31-35, including prohibitions against hiring a musician, cooking a feast, washing dishes, traveling to places other than a shrine, or working for profit on the Lord's day (Hessey, Sunday, 91, 92).

2. Church councils and legislation. Both church councils and secular rulers imposed restrictions on the observance of Sunday similar to those imposed on the observance of the Jewish sabbath. The Council of Clovishoff, held in England in 747, forbade traveling on the Lord's day (Hessey, Sunday, p. 89). The Constitutions of Egbert in 749 forbade all work on Sunday under severe penalties (Hessey, Sunday, p. 89). In France, Charlemagne promulgated a decree in 789 which prohibited all ordinary labor on Sunday as a breach of the fourth commandment (Charles Huestis, Sunday in the Making, p. 115). The exemption granted by Constantine to agricultural labor was repealed by the Emperor Leo Philosophus in 910, but he based his prohibition, not on the fourth commandment, but on apostolic appointment of Sunday (Hessey, Sunday, p. 94). The Archbishop of Canterbury, in the 14th cent., ordered "abstinence from secular works...on the sacred day of the Lord," but warned the people not to meet before Saturday evening for fear that they "partake in the Jewish profession" (Hessey, Sunday, p. 94).

There developed in the later medieval period an ecclesiastical sabbatarianism. Sunday became known as the Christian sabbath; its observance was grounded on the fourth commandment or on the canons of the church; and its observance was enforced by severe ecclesiastical and secular restrictions. Other holy days with similar restrictions were imposed on the people, with the result that neither they nor the Lord's day were observed as days of worship, but rather deteriorated into mere holidays devoted to idleness and dissipation (S. E. Warren, The Sunday Question, p. 121).

IV. The history of the Christian Sunday in the Modern Church

A. The Reformation Period, A.D. 1517-1648

1. The teachings of the Reformers. Luther maintained that the believer in Christ was not subject to laws or ceremonies; for the believer all time was holy, so there was no need of festivals such as Sunday or the sabbath. He realized, however, the benefits to be derived from a weekly day of rest and worship. In the Larger Catechism, he taught that the working classes needed a weekly day of rest so that there might be time for worship, but he insists that "no day is better or more excellent than another." In his Table Talk, he speaks out against making Sunday observance rest on a Jewish foundation: "If anywhere the day is made holy for the mere day's sake—if anywhere anyone sets up its observance on a Jewish foundation, then I order you to work on it, to ride on it, to dance on it, to feast on it, to do anything that shall remove this encroachment on Christian liberty."

Zwingli shared Luther's view that the worship of God should not be tied down to any one day. He wrote: "If we would have the Lord's day so confined to a certain time, that it shall be thought wicked to transfer it to another time...this day, so scrupulously limited to a certain day, would impose on us a ceremony. For we are in no way bound to time, but time ought so to serve us, as to make it lawful, and permitted to each church, when necessity urges...to transfer the solemnity and rest of the Lord's day or sabbath to some other day" (S. E. Warren, The Sunday Question, pp. 124, 125).

Calvin regarded the Heb. sabbath as typical of the entire rest and peace granted to Christians under the Gospel. It was a part of the "shadow of things to come" (Col 2:17 KJV) fulfilled in Christ, who is the body, the whole essence of the truth. He concludes: "This is not contented with one day, but requires the whole course of our lives, until being completely dead to ourselves, we are filled with the life of God. Christians, therefore, should have nothing to do with a superstitious observance of days" (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Bk. II, ch. 8). Calvin, however, saw the advisability of setting apart one day in seven as a day for Christian worship, but treats the observance of Sunday as a matter of expediency, and not an adherence to a shadowy ceremony.

John Knox agreed substantially with the opinions of Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin regarding the observance of Sunday. He did, however, advocate a greater strictness in keeping Sunday as a day of worship (Book of Discipline). All of the Reformers insisted that Sunday observance should not be based on the OT sabbath commandment or in any way connected with the Heb. sabbath. The observance of Sunday was to be maintained as a matter of expediency, for it afforded rest for the body and an opportunity for united worship of God, esp. in view of the fact that the day had been previously chosen for these purposes.

2. Creedal statements. The creedal statements produced in the post-reformation period are significant, for they represent not simply the opinions of individual men, but the views of various groups with respect to the nature and obligation of Sunday observance.

The Confession of Augsburg, produced by Luther and Melancthon in 1530, says in part: "For they that think that the observation [sic] of the Lord's Day was appointed by the authority of the Church, instead of the Sabbath, as necessary, are greatly deceived. The Scripture...has abrogated the Sabbath. And yet, because it was requisite to appoint a certain day that the people might know when they ought to come together, it appears that the Church did for that purpose appoint the Lord's day" (Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III, p. 69).

The second Helvetic Confession, prepared by Henry Bullinger and edited by Theodore Beza in 1566, was a formulation of the faith of the Reformed churches in Switzerland. In an article relating to the observance of Sunday, it reads: "Although religion be not tied unto time, yet can it not be planted and exercised without a due dividing and allotting out of time. Every church, therefore, does choose unto itself a certain time for public prayers, and for the preaching of the Gospel, and for the celebration of the sacraments. In regard hereof, we see that in the ancient churches there were not only certain set hours in the week appointed for meetings, but that also the Lord's Day itself, ever since the apostles' time, was consecrated to religious exercises and to a holy rest; which also is now very well observed by our churches" (Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III, p. 899).

In an entirely different vein, the Westminster Confession of 1643 states: "As it is of the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so, in His word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages, He hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto Him; which, from the beginning of the world to the Resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week; and from the Resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which in Scripture is called the Lord's Day, and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath" (Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III, pp. 658, 659).

3. Puritanism. The Westminster Confession was the product of English Puritanism, which arose in England in the 17th cent. as a protest against the polity and practices of the Church of England that the Puritans regarded as contrary to Scripture. Since they held that only what was specifically commanded in Scripture should be believed or practiced, and since they did not find any command in the NT to observe the Lord's day, they boldly identified it with the sabbath of the fourth commandment and enforced its observance with all the rigor of the ancient Heb. sabbath (H. R. Gamble, Sunday and the Sabbath, pp. 121, 122). A book entitled The True Doctrine of the Sabbath, written by Nicholas Bownd in 1595, was very influential in promulgating the Puritan doctrine of sabbatarianism. He not only based the observance of Sunday on the fourth commandment which he regarded as moral and perpetual, but he set forth specific prohibitions of various kinds of labor on the Lord's day.

The Puritan teachings affected other countries besides England. They were accepted by the Church and the Parliament of Scotland. They were introduced into Holland and became a part of the Synod of Dort held in Holland in 1618. Finally, the Puritans brought their Christian Sabbath to America, where it became the prevailing view for centuries.

B. The Modern Period, A.D. 1648 to the Present

1. Sunday on the continent of Europe. Even though the Synod of Dort had adopted the view of the Puritans that Sunday was the Christian Sabbath, and persons such as Mosheim advocated the view that Sunday was an institution entirely distinct from the Sabbath and that it had been founded by the apostles of Christ under divine guidance, these views were never widely accepted on the continent of Europe. The view that prevailed was a purely ecclesiastical one, that is, that the observance of Sunday was based solely on the authority of the Church. E. W. Hengstenberg, for example, maintained that the Sabbath was a Jewish institution that had been abrogated by Christ. The sabbath may have suggested Sunday as a weekly day of worship. Sunday, however, was not instituted by Christ or by His apostles; it arose simply from the spontaneous feeling of the Early Church, guided by the Holy Spirit (Hessey, Sunday, pp. 181-183).

The practical result of such a subjective view of the basis of obligation to observe Sunday was a widespread desecration of the Lord's day on the continent of Europe. The teachings of the Reformers regarding Christian liberty, in spite of their exhortations to keep the day as a day of worship, led in many cases to antinomianism in practice as well as in principle. For a brief time at the close of the 18th cent., France abolished Sunday as a weekly day of rest. In other places Sunday was treated much like any other day. For the most part this condition has prevailed to the present time.

2. Sunday in England and Scotland. Due to the teachings of the Puritans in these countries, a fuller consideration of the subject of Sunday observance took place, which resulted in a more wholesome and Christian observance of the day, esp. during the 17th and the early part of the 18th centuries. After a period of spiritual and moral decline in the first half of the 18th cent., the Evangelical Revival under Wesley and Whitfield brought about a better observance of the Lord's day. During the cent. following the Evangelical Revival, sabbatarian and ecclesiastical views of Sunday observance vied with each other. Bishop Hessey's monumental work in the middle of the 19th cent. was an attempt to reconcile these two opposing views by basing the observance of the Lord's day neither on the authority of the OT sabbath command nor on the authority of the Church, but on the authority of Christ and the teaching and practice of the apostles. In spite of such efforts to recover a proper observance of the day, there has been a manifest decline in church attendance and in any spiritual observance of the day during the present cent.

Nearly the same state of affairs has been characteristic of Scotland, where for more than two centuries the Christian Sabbath of the Puritans was taught and enforced with a great deal of rigor. By the beginning of the present cent. a widespread reaction set in to these Puritan teachings and practices.

3. Sunday in the United States. The Puritans who came to America established their Christian sabbath as an integral part of their social and religious life. To insure the due observance of their sacred day, they enacted laws, which came to be known as "Blue Laws," laws even stricter than those formulated by the ancient Jews to enforce the observance of their sabbath. Beginning at sundown on Saturday evening, all forms of work or recreation were strictly forbidden under pain of severe penalties. Although to many, such restrictions were altogether too strict, to those who gladly accepted them, the sabbath must have been a welcome respite. As Alice M. Earle expresses it, "Sweet to the Pilgrims and to their descendants was the hush of their calm Saturday night, and their still, tranquil Sabbath—sign and token to them, not only of the weekly rest ordained in the creation, but of the eternal rest to come. The universal quiet and peace of the community showed the primitive instinct of a pure, simple devotion, the sincere religion which knew no compromise in spiritual things, no half-way obedience to God's Word, but rest absolutely on the Lord's Day—as was commanded. No work, no play, no idle strolling was known; no sign of human life or motion was seen except the necessary care of the patient cattle and other dumb beasts, the orderly and quiet going to and from the meeting, and at the nooning, a visit to the churchyard to stand by the side of the silent dead. This absolute obedience to the letter, as well as to the spirit of God's Word, was one of the most typical traits of the character of the Puritans, and appeared to them to be one of the most vital points of their religion" (Alice M. Earle, The Sabbath in Puritan New England, p. 258).

The influence of Puritanism on American religious life cannot be overemphasized. The Christian sabbath of the Puritans, so much a part of their religious life, worked itself into the hearts and minds of the American people, and became a standard of the ideal Sunday of America for many generations. Beginning in the 19th cent., however, a marked reaction set in to the strict Sunday of the Puritans, esp. to the laws that had been enacted to enforce its observance. This natural and inevitable reaction was augmented by the importation to America of the Continental Sunday. Crafts and Waffle, both writing in 1885, decry the growing desecration of the Lord's day at that time. A report made in 1917 to the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ noted that while Sunday was being observed as a day of rest, its observance as a day of worship was declining (Christian Cooperation and World Redemption, p. 149). In 1933, D. H. Martin wrote: "America faces the peril of losing the Christian Sabbath. The holy day of our fathers is fast becoming a day for secular business and amusements, and little is being done to save it" (The Day: A Manual on the Christian Sabbath, Preface).

In spite of the efforts of individuals such as D. H. Martin, and of organizations such as the Lord's Day Alliance, to promote the due observance of Sunday as a day of rest and worship, the reaction to the strict observance of Sunday so characteristic of the Puritans has continued, and the observance of the day has continued to become more lax. This neglect of Sunday observance may be correlated with a general decline in spiritual matters. Although in recent years a renewed interest in spiritual things has been manifest, there does not seem to be any stricter observance of the Lord's Day. Sunday has, rather, become a day of business and recreation, with only an hour or two in the morning set aside for worship, and that only by devout Christians.

V. Conclusion

Many different views have been held regarding the nature of the Lord's day and the Christian's obligation to observe it. These may be comprehended under three general classifications: sabbatarian, ecclesiastical, and antinomian.

The sabbatarian view holds Sunday to be a Christian sabbath and its observance to be based on the fourth commandment of the Decalogue. Its proponents maintain that it is not the seventh day that is important in the sabbath command, but the principle of one day in seven. Otherwise, the command is held to be moral and binding on all people. To be consistent, others have insisted that, if this command is binding on all people in all ages, then the seventh day should be observed. This is the view of Seventh-day

[/size]
[/size]

Quote from: Rella on Sun Nov 10, 2024 - 08:48:19If I have gone for 77 years going to church on Sundays, or Watching my church on Sundays on the laptop, Or others for that matter...
do you not think my fate will be sealed?

Do you realize how many people will face that horrible extinction
and only the Jews and SDA  Seventh Day Baptists, Church of God ( Seventh Day) Hebrew Roots, United Church of God, will escape.

Truth be told. If that is the case... how lucky for all the aborted babies that never will face that.

________________
Gen 2:2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

Funny that so many translations vary with by or on.

If God finished on, then he may have still been working on that day.

If God finished by, then that would indicate some time before.

We do not know. We were not there.

Gen 2:3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Wonderful and wise. Do no work on the 7th day and worship.     

The following rather long but food for thought... Any color changes are mine for emphasis.

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Lords-Day

Encyclopedia of The Bible – The Lord's Day

No one will be lost for worshipping God on any day. Many have been and will be lost for choosing to believe they can disobey and reject the authority of a direct commandment of God with impunity. Which is what started our whole sin problem in the first place. Adam and Eve did not believe they would actually die, for disobeying one simple command from God. But they did, and all of us after them do as well, as a result of choosing to ignore that one command.

Humanity can and does come up with non stop reasons, arguments, and or excuses to ignore God's commandments. This changes nothing. They are the standard God has set before us. None who will choose to ignore even one of them, will be counted worthy to enter into heaven, seeing that they choose to follow the exact example and issue our parents addressed in the garden. Will humanity obey God or not.

The devil of course wishes humanity to once again believe that God is too "loving" to actually demand obedience from His created beings, and will not punish them as He has stated He will. Nevertheless, the truth of the matter is simply stated in scripture for all to see.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Observing Sunday sacredness and worshipping God on that day is not a sin. Ignoring God's fourth commandment regarding the seventh day is a sin, in breaking a commandment of God. Teaching people that the fourth commandment is no longer, while Sunday sacredness is obligatory is a lie, and a sin. No liars will enter heaven.

Rev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. 7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. 8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Humanity may do whatever they wish with or about God's commands, but those who choose to ignore or break them as a rule in their lives, will not be sustained by God unto eternal life. And will be punished as God determines. Just as we were when our first parents decided to ignore a commandment of God. This is the entirety of the matter to be considered by humanity. Will they choose to obey God and thereby demonstrate fitness for heaven and eternity, or not? Our original parents messed up in the garden, will we now blow the second opportunity God has given us, or not.

Ecc 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

It is really very simple. It only becomes complicated when we do not want to acknowledge the truth of holy scripture.

Quote from: Rella on Sat Nov 09, 2024 - 07:39:27I am not disagreeing with this.

But I am when it says if I pray to our heavenly Father on a Sunday I am worshipping the beast.

When you worship another God is He pleased, of course not, same with Sabbath especially when it is change to the sun worship of pagan origin..

Trump is a good U.S. President, one we haven't had in a long, long time.

But is he maybe (unknowingly) helping to bring in the New World Order, or "one world government"? Yes..... of course, because God has ORDAINED the beast kingdom and beast king (Antichrist) to come to power at the end of this world.

And everyone wants peace and prosperity, except maybe radical Islam who appears to be against the concept of a modern world. (one should read Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom book he wrote about his experiences with the Arabs.)

The way globalism works, or those behind bringing in a New World Order, is to create a problem, and then offer a solution. One of the philosophies they especially follow is the Hegelian Dialectic from German socialist Frederich Hegel (1770-1831). That's what their problem creation and offer solution working does, i.e., pit two opposing factions against each other in order to present a third faction, the solution that moves towards New World Order plans. Hegel based this theory on the simple existence of opposites in nature.

Another matter not widely known about even right-wing politicians working towards a New World Order is, a little know 1960's book written by ex-President Bill Clinton's history professor at Georgetown, i.e., Tragedy and Hope by Carrol Quigley.

Bill Clinton endorsed Quigley in his inaugural speech, which Quigley was his college history professor at Georgetown. Quigley was an Insider. He came up with the phrase "the establishment" in the 1960's to describe a group of New England power-brokers who worked with the British Socialist Round Table group. Quigley, in his book Tragedy and Hope, exposed an American branch of that British Socialist Round Table group working in the United States towards a "one world government." They are called the Council On Foreign Relations, or CFR.

Quigley outlines, even naming names, involved in the establishing of the Cecil Rhodes program at Oxford called the Rhodes Scholarship. Rhodes himself was a wealthy diamond, gold, merchant in South Africa and also a British Socialist for a one world government, and thought Britain should be the head of it. Thus the Rhodes Scholarship program was actually developed to train future political leaders in creating laws that move towards a one world government. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar.

That is why those globalists had Quigley's book knocked out of print, and Quigley had to sue his publisher to find out why they quit printing it, i.e., the publisher destroyed the printing plates, Quigley discovered. And he then said his book must have said something the Insiders didn't want known. Quigley himself said he had no problem with the movement, and that he had been close to it most of his life. He simply did not agree that it should be kept a secret, because its influence on foreign affairs and history was too important to leave out. One of the matters Quigley admitted about the "establishment" Insiders is that they often work with Communism, and have no problem doing so! How could that be?

One of the early agreements by the Soviet Union towards the United Nations structure was that it be a tool to establish a "one world government." The British Socialists also want a "one world government", so both parties have the same goal, and thus work together. And as a Christian who is a studied disciple of Christ in His Word, it's easy to figure out the plan which both of those parties have, i.e., the beast kingdom of Revelation 13 that is to be established over all nations at the end of this world.

So Trump represent a return to basic Christian principles in our nation of the United States of America, so what true American could be against that? Yet at the same time, that is going to create a greater atmosphere for world peace, which is the globalist's one world government eventual plan. And what did Miss America respond with when asked what she wished for especially? World Peace.

Quote from: dpr on Sun Jan 11, 2026 - 07:56:48Another matter not widely known about even right-wing politicians working towards a New World Order is, a little know 1960's book written by ex-President Bill Clinton's history professor at Georgetown, i.e., Tragedy and Hope by Carrol Quigley.

Bill Clinton endorsed Quigley in his inaugural speech, which Quigley was his college history professor at Georgetown. Quigley was an Insider. He came up with the phrase "the establishment" in the 1960's to describe a group of New England power-brokers who worked with the British Socialist Round Table group. Quigley, in his book Tragedy and Hope, exposed an American branch of that British Socialist Round Table group working in the United States towards a "one world government." They are called the Council On Foreign Relations, or CFR.

Quigley outlines, even naming names, involved in the establishing of the Cecil Rhodes program at Oxford called the Rhodes Scholarship. Rhodes himself was a wealthy diamond, gold, merchant in South Africa and also a British Socialist for a one world government, and thought Britain should be the head of it. Thus the Rhodes Scholarship program was actually developed to train future political leaders in creating laws that move towards a one world government. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar.

That is why those globalists had Quigley's book knocked out of print, and Quigley had to sue his publisher to find out why they quit printing it, i.e., the publisher destroyed the printing plates, Quigley discovered. And he then said his book must have said something the Insiders didn't want known. Quigley himself said he had no problem with the movement, and that he had been close to it most of his life. He simply did not agree that it should be kept a secret, because its influence on foreign affairs and history was too important to leave out. One of the matters Quigley admitted about the "establishment" Insiders is that they often work with Communism, and have no problem doing so! How could that be?

One of the early agreements by the Soviet Union towards the United Nations structure was that it be a tool to establish a "one world government." The British Socialists also want a "one world government", so both parties have the same goal, and thus work together. And as a Christian who is a studied disciple of Christ in His Word, it's easy to figure out the plan which both of those parties have, i.e., the beast kingdom of Revelation 13 that is to be established over all nations at the end of this world.

So Trump represent a return to basic Christian principles in our nation of the United States of America, so what true American could be against that? Yet at the same time, that is going to create a greater atmosphere for world peace, which is the globalist's one world government eventual plan. And what did Miss America respond with when asked what she wished for especially? World Peace.

The Papacy also shares these goals, and relations with Communism and Socialism. It has been a globalist institution for at least about 1500 years before the Communist or Socialist entities of today ever existed. Their plans and cooperation are with this most ancient globalist institution, not the other way around. The Roman Empire was, is, and will continue to be the greatest empire of this world until the end. As Holy Scripture has predicted. The Papacy was, is, and will continue to be the apex of that continuation. All others have, are, and in the end will continue to submit to her as Holy Scripture has determined. The authentic Church of Christ alone has, does, and will refuse her usurped authority. Why do you think this man was given such elitest inside information?

https://sleuthfox.substack.com/p/carroll-quigley-the-georgetown-professor

Quoted material below from link above. Emphasis is mine.

QuoteCarroll Quigley: The Georgetown Professor Who Saw Too Much

In the 1960s, a history professor at Georgetown University was handed something almost no one gets. Access. Real access. To the private archives of a network he had studied for twenty years.

His name was Carroll Quigley. And his credentials weren't fringe. They were as establishment as it gets.

He earned his PhD from Harvard. He taught at Princeton. He taught at Harvard. Then for thirty-five years, from 1941 to 1976, he taught at Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, the oldest school of international affairs in the United States. A Jesuit institution, founded by Father Edmund A. Walsh, S.J., that has trained generations of American diplomats and foreign policy professionals.

The following information is in relation to my last post concerning Carroll Quigely who taught at "Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, the oldest school of international affairs in the United States. A Jesuit institution". Regarding one Constantine E. McGuire who helped found the above School of Foreign Service.

https://findingaids.library.georgetown.edu/repositories/15/resources/12373

Quoted information below from link above. Emphasis is mine.

QuoteBiographical Note

Constantine E. McGuire (1890-1965) was a historian and international economic affairs consultant who helped found the Foreign Service College at Georgetown in 1918 and served on its Executive Faculty as the unofficial executive secretary of the school from 1919 to 1922. He was born in Boston and earned his doctorate degree from Harvard University, later teaching as a faculty member at his alma mater Catholic University of America. He also served as treasurer of the American Historical Association and president of the American Catholic Historical Association. He served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in 1917 and later worked at Brookings Institution as an economist from 1922-1929. He then devoted the remainder of his career to private consulting in international economic affairs, primarily in South American countries.

The following link and quoted material below may also be of interest to the subject at hand.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Jesuitworldorder/comments/nab957/secret_layjesuit_temporal_financier_coadjutor/

QuoteSecret Lay-Jesuit Temporal Financier Coadjutor & Papal Knight: Constantine E. McGuire, K.S.G. — Advised the Vatican to Transfer Its Wall Street Security Holdings into Gold Three Months Prior to the Stock Market Crash (Oct. 29, 1929)

"McGuire's [...] was one of the most influential Catholic Laymen in the United States, had been adviser to the Papacy on American financial matters, and, in the summer of 1929, just before the Stock Market crash, had advised the Vatican to transfer its security holdings here into gold in anticipation of a panic. [...] it is a fact that at the age of thirty-two (in February, 1923), McGuire was made a Knight of St. Gregory the Great by Pope Pius XI,"

—Jesuit G.U., Prof. Carroll Quigley – 'Constantine McGuire: A Man of Mystery,' 'Courier,' pp. 16-20, (Georgetown University Archives: Dec. 1965)

Quote from: Amo on Sun Jan 25, 2026 - 16:41:21The following information is in relation to my last post concerning Carroll Quigely who taught at "Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, the oldest school of international affairs in the United States. A Jesuit institution". Regarding one Constantine E. McGuire who helped found the above School of Foreign Service.

https://findingaids.library.georgetown.edu/repositories/15/resources/12373

Quoted information below from link above. Emphasis is mine.

The following link and quoted material below may also be of interest to the subject at hand.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Jesuitworldorder/comments/nab957/secret_layjesuit_temporal_financier_coadjutor/

Been saying for years... Watch out and do not trust those Jesuits... not even those with Jesuit associations in SCOTUS.

My Grandpap use to say... Wtch out for the round hats.... and that was
his learning from more then 100 years ago

Quote from: Amo on Sun Jan 25, 2026 - 16:17:27The Papacy also shares these goals, and relations with Communism and Socialism. It has been a globalist institution for at least about 1500 years before the Communist or Socialist entities of today ever existed. Their plans and cooperation are with this most ancient globalist institution, not the other way around. The Roman Empire was, is, and will continue to be the greatest empire of this world until the end...

We differ on that theory about the Roman Church.

The Roman Church is no more deceived and working with the Globalists than many Protestant denominations are. So it is ludicrous to single out Rome while omitting the many Protestant denominations that also are on the bandwagon towards a "one world government." As a matter of fact, most of the American New England "establishment" Quigley was associated with are members of Protestant Churches.

The Babylon Harlot of Revelation 17 isn't about Rome, it is about JERUSALEM. That symbolic harlot "woman" we are told there is a "great city", and that is where Revelation 11:8 points to with Jerusalem as that "great city", where our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified.

What you are most likely missing in your Bible study is how Satan's servants crept in among the children of Israel over time, especially among the Jews, and they are the ones behind "one world government."

In Deuteronomy 20, God told Israel to wipe out specific nations of the enemy in the land of Canaan, and the children of Israel failed, so in Judges 2 & 3 God said He would leave those Canaanites dwelling among Israel to test Israel with, to see if Israel would follow Him, or not.

Then per Joshua 9, a group of Canaanites masked themselves to Joshua as if they had come from far away in another land, and were starving and needed Joshua's help. So Joshua agreed to make a pact with them. Then the children of Israel looked around at those foreigners and discovered they were actually Canaanites in disguise. It was because the Canaanites had heard what Israel was successful in doing to them, and so they feared destruction. Since Joshua already made the pact with them to let them dwell among Israel, he couldn't go back on that, so he made them bondservants to Israel.

Then in king David's day, he drafted workers from the king of Tyre, a pagan idol worshiping people, and brought them to Israel to help build the City of David. David's son Solomon later did the same thing, and in 1 Kings 9 the bondservants of those Canaanite nations are still dwelling among Israel as bondservants.

Those bondservants then became the Nethinims, which means 'given to temple service'. They had worked their way into helping the Levite priests in their temple duties.

By the time of Lord Jesus' 1st coming, those crept in unawares had gone into captivity with the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi to Babylon, and returned back to Jerusalem with that "house of Judah" remnant, and they have been at Jerusalem along with the Jews ever since, and even took the name Jew just as all foreigners in Jerusalem did at that time.

So please, let's not talk about the Roman Church and the Jesuits as being the creators of the plans for a "one world government." That plan was hatched at least 22 centuries ago by Satan's servants back then, long before the Church, and the Roman empire. Satan's servants that had the skills in masonry and stone cutting and building were right there in the building of the City of David, and in the building of Solomon's temple, and the building of many temples and churches even later in history.

Even the Bavarian Order of The Illuminati was created by the Orthodox Jew Adam Weishaupt, a doctor of law who taught at Ingolstadt university, which its purpose was to destroy all the governments and royalty, and especially Christianity, in 18th century Europe. It was the model for later Communist doctrine.

So you want to know who is actually behind the idea of the Roman Church and a pope as the final Antichrist at the end? The Jews associated with the secret initiate fraternities of Occultism.

Back centuries ago in Europe, the Catholic Church executed one those occultic leaders of the Knights Templar, and also many of the Order of the Masons, Rosicrucians, and Illuminati. That's the real war that's still going on today, because those occult groups are the ones preparing for their king (Satan) to come sit on a throne ruling over all nations from JERUSALEM. Those associated in those orders are Jews, but not true... Jews of the 'seed', but fakes, the "synagogue of Satan" which Lord Jesus said they only SAY... they are Jews, but are not (Rev.2:9; Rev.3:9). Those are the crept in unawares of Jude 4 which God says there were 'ordained' to the condemnation of working against The Father and The Son. And those are the ones that are still angry at the Catholic Church for executing their occult brethren in past centuries.

That still does not mean the Roman Church is not deceived, just as many Protestant denominations are also today.

FRANCESCO PETRARCH, Poet (1304-1374) Concerning the church of Rome.

HE INVEIGHS AGAINST THE COURT OF ROME

Vengeaunce must fall on thee, thow filthie whore
Of Babilon, thow breaker of Christ's fold,
That from achorns, and from the water colde,
Art riche become with making many poore.
Thow treason's neste that in thie harte dost holde
Of cankard malice, and of myschief more
Than pen can wryte, or may with tongue be tolde,
Slave to delights that chastitie hath solde;
For wyne and ease which settith all thie store
Uppon whoredome and none other lore,
In thye pallais of strompetts yonge and olde
Theare walks Plentie, and Belzebub thye Lorde:
Guydes thee and them, and doth thye raigne upholde:
It is but late, as wryting will recorde,
That poore thow weart withouten lande or goolde;
Yet now hathe golde and pryde, by one accorde,
In wickednesse so spreadd thie lyf abrode,
That it dothe stincke before the face of God.

( Francesco Petrarch, Sonnet CV, translated by Wyatt  (?), in The Sonnets, Triumphs, and Other Poems of Petrarch, pp. 135, 136.)

" Thou Babylon, seated on the wild banks of the Rhone, shall I call thee famous or infamous, O harlot, who hast committed harlotry with the kings of the earth? Truly thou art the same that the holy Evangelist saw in spirit, the same, I say, and not another, sitting upon many waters. Either literally, being surrounded by three rivers, or, in the profusion of this world's goods, among which thou sittest wanton and secure, unmindful of eternal riches; or, in the sense laid down by him that beheld thee, that the waters on which you the harlot sit are peoples and nations and languages. Recognize thine own features. A women clothed in purple and scarlet, decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand, full of abomination in the impurity of her fornication-Dost thou not know thyself, O Babylon? Unless perhaps what is written upon her forehead is wrong, Babylon the great, you indeed are Babylon the little." ( Translated from Petrarch, Epistolarum Sine Titulo, Liber, letter headed Babylonem Gallicam Describit, in Opera, vol. 2, p. 807. )


WALTER BRUTE fourteenth-century British or Welsh layman and Lollard scholar.

" If the city of Rome do allow his Traditions, and do disallow Christ's holy Commandments, and Christ's Doctrine, that it may confirm his Traditions; then is she Babylon the Great, or the Daughter of Babylon, and the Great Whore sitting upon many waters, with whom the Kings of the Earth have committed Fornication, and the Inhabitants of the earth are become drunken with the Wine of her Harlotry lying open to Bawdry. With whose spiritual Whoredom, Enchantments, Witchcrafts, and Simon Magus Merchandises, the whole round world is infected and seduced; saying in her heart, I sit as a Queen, and Widow I am not, neither shall I see Sorrow and mourning.  (Registrum, p. 288; Foxe, Acts, vol. 1, p. 546.)

JOHN HUSS, OR HUS ( 1369-1415)  "The Lord shall destroy the head and the tail- that is, the Pope and his prophets, masters, doctors, priests, who under the false pretext of sanctity conceal the abomination of the beast. Pray, what greater abomination can their be than a harlot who should parade herself and offer herself publicly? (The Letters of John Hus, edited by Herbert B. Workman and R. Martin Pope, Letter XXVI, pp. 118, 119.)

GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA (1452-1498)  "The Roman church is full of simony and vileness.... I visualized a black cross over Babylon-Rome with the inscription: Wrath of the Lord. And it rained upon her swords and knives, lances and weapons of all kinds, as well as hailstones and brimstones in a terrible thunderstorm in deepest gloom. (Savonarola, Auswahl, pp. 120, 121.)

    " Fly from Rome, for Babylon signifies confusion, and Rome hath confused all the Scriptures, confused all vices together, confused everything. Fly, then, from Rome, and come to repentance." (Villari, op. cit., p.413, citing Lenten Sermon (1496), for Wednesday after fifth Sunday.)

MARTIN LUTHER (1483-1546)  " I cry aloud on behalf of liberty and conscience, and I proclaim with confidence that no kind of law can with any justice be imposed on Christians, whether by men or angels, except so far as they themselves will; for we are free from all. If such laws are imposed on us, we ought so to endure them as still to preserve the consciousness of our liberty. We ought to know and steadfastly to protest that a wrong is being done to that liberty, though we may bear and even glory in that wrong; taking care neither to justify the tyrant nor to murmur against the tyranny. 'Who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? (1 Pet. 3:13.) All things work together for good to the elect of God. Since, however, there are but few who understand the glory of baptism and the happiness of Christian liberty, or who can understand them for the tyranny of the Pope- I for my part will set free my own mind and deliver my conscience, by declaring aloud to the Pope and all papists, that, unless they shall throw aside all their laws and traditions, and restore liberty to the churches of Christ, and cause that liberty to be taught, they are guilty of the death of all the souls which are perishing in this wretched bondage, and that the papacy is in truth nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny. It has extinguished faith, darkened the sacraments, crushed the gospel; while it has enjoined and multiplied without end its own laws, which are not only wicked and sacrilegious, but also most unlearned and barbarous." (Luther, First Principles, pp. 196, 197 (Schriften, vol. 19. Cols. 70, 71).

NICOLAUS VON AMSDORF (1483-1565) ' This beast we know is the Roman Empire, which carries and supports the red Babylonian whore, which is the Papacy. ." (Nicolaus von Amsdorf, Funff furnemliche und gewisse Zeichen, sig. D1r.-D2r.)

MATTHIAS FLAGIUS (Vlacich)  (1520-1575) The sixth and last reason for our separation from the pope and his followers be this: By many writings of our church, by the Divinely Inspired Word, by prophecies concerning the future and by the special characteristics of the papacy, it has been profusely and thoroughly proved that the pope with his prelates and clergy is the real true great Antichrist, that his kingdom is the real Babylon, a never ceasing fountain and a mother of all abominable idolatry. (Flacius, Etliche Hochwichtige Ursachen und Grunde, warumb das sich alle Christen von dem Antichrist.....absondern sollen.)

ANDREAS MUSCULUS (1514-1581) ..... Now since 800 years the pope of Rome from the beginning of his Antichristian kingdom has started to slay, to kill, and to destroy. Many a learned man, many pious Christians who have comprehended this abomination, protested against it, and refused to worship the Bride of Babylon, were put to death by him and exterminated.
(Translated from Andreas Musculus, Vom tungsten Tage.)

HEINRICH BULLINGER (1504-1575) The scarlet woman of Revelation 17 is "the Romish church" and Rome the seat of the Beast. (Bullinger, A Hundred Sermons upon the Apocalips, preface; see also his Decades, decade 4, sermon 7, pp. 273 ff.)

WILLIAM TYNDALE (1484-1536) And [they] have set up that great idol, the whore of Babylon, antichrist of Rome, whom they call pope; and have conspired against all commonwealths, and have made them a several kingdom, wherein it is lawful, unpunished, to work all abomination. (Tyndale, The Obedience of a Christian Man, in Works, vol. 1, p. 191.)

NICHOLAS RIDLEY (1500-1555)  The head, under Satan, of all mischief is Antichrist and his brood; and the same is he which is the Babylonical beast, The beast is he whereupon the whore sitteth. The whore is that city, saith John in plain words, which hath empire over the kings of the earth. This whore hath a golden cup of abominations in her hand, whereof she maketh to drink the kings of the earth, and of the wine of this harlot all nations hath drunk; yea, and kings of the earth have lain by this whore; and merchants of the earth, by virtue of her pleasant merchandise, have been made rich.

Now what city is there in the whole world, that when John wrote, ruled over the kings of the earth; or what city can be read of in any time, that of the city itself challenged the empire over the kings of the earth, but only the city of Rome, and that since the usurpation of that See hath grown to her full strength? And is it not read, that old and ancient writers understood Peter's former Epistle to be written at Rome, and it to be called of him in the same Epistle, in plain terms, Babylon! BY the abominations thereof, I understand all the whole trade of the Romish religion, under the name and title of Christ, which is contrary to the only rule of all true religion, that is God's word.("Conferences...Between Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer," in Ridley, Works, p. 258)

JOHN PHILPOT (1516-1555)  St John in the Apocalypse telleth us plainly, that none of those who are written in the book of life do receive the mark of the beast, which is, of the papistical synagogue, either in their foreheads or else in their hands, that is, apparently or obediently....Finally, in the 18th of the Apocalypse, God biddeth us plainly to depart from this Babylonical synagogue, and not to be partakers of her trespass..........

Ponder therefore well, good brethren and sisters, these scriptures, which be written for your erudition and reformation; whereof one iota is not written in vain; which be utterly against all counterfeit collusion to be used of us with the papists in their fantastical religion. (Philpot, Examinations and Writings, letter1, p. 222.)

OHN BRADFORD (1510-1555)  Ah, wretches then that we be, if we will defile either part with the rose-coloured whore of Babylon's filthy mass-abomination! It had been better for us never to have been washed, than so to wallow ourselves in the filthy puddle of popery: it had been better never to have known the truth, than thus to betray it. Surely, surely, let such men fear, that their 'latter end be not worse than the beginning.' (John Bradford in Writings [vol. 1] {Sermons, Meditations, Examinations}, vol. 1, p. 390.)

JOHN HOOPER (1495-1555)  Of that wicked and pestilent see and chair of Rome, which is indeed the very whore of Babylon that St John describeth in the Revelation of Jesus Christ,sitting upon a seven headed beast, which St John himself interpreted to be seven hills, and the children in the grammar-school do know that Rome is called civitas septem montium, the city of seven hills. (Hooper, An Apology Against the Untrue and Slanderous Reports, in Works, vol. 2, p. 554.)

THOMAS CRANMER (1489-1556)  And in the seventeenth chapter he lively setteth forth the pope in his own colours, under the person of the whore of Babylon being drunken with the blood of saints; pointing, as it were with his finger, who this whore of Babylon is, and the place where she shall reign, saying: 'The woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.' Now what other city reigned at that time, or at any time since, over the christian kings of the earth, but only Rome? Whereof it followed Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. (Cranmer, Works, vol. 1,  pp. 62, 63.)

Edwin Sandys (1519-1588)  This is our apostasy. We have forsaken him that hath forsaken God, and whom God hath forsaken: we have left that man of sin, that rose-colored harlot with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, that triple-crowned beast, that double-sworded tyrant, that thief and murderer, who hath robbed so many souls of salvation, and sucked so much innocent blood of christian martyrs, that adversary unto Christ, that pretensed vicar, who hath displaced the person, not only taking upon him Christ's room and office, but also boasting himself as if he were a god, and being content of his parasites so to be called. (Edwin Sandys, The Sermons of Edwin Sandys, p. 389.)

Jean (John) Calvin (1509-1564) Daniel and Paul had predicted that Antichrist would sit in the temple of God. The head of that cursed and abominable kingdom, in the Western Church, we affirm to be the Pope. When his seat is placed in the temple of God, it suggests, that his kingdom will be such, that he will not abolish the name of Christ or the Church. Hence it appears , that we by no means deny that churches may exist, even under his tyranny; but he has profaned them by sacrilegious impiety, afflicted them by cruel despotism, corrupted and almost terminated their existence by false and pernicious doctrines; like poisonous potions, in such churches, Christ lies half buried, the gospel is suppressed, piety exterminated, and the worship of God almost abolished; in a word, they are altogether in such a state of confusion, that they exhibit a picture of Babylon, rather than the holy city of God. (Calvin, Institutes, vol. 2, pp. 314,315. The English translation of 1561, fol. 15v, gives the same thought, only in the quaint but often more ivivd phrasing of the time.)

JOHN NAPIER  (NEPER)  (1550-1617)  In the former proposition was described the holie Spouse of Christ, here is to bee described the filthie whoore of Sathan, there that Ladie, who is adorned with the Sunne, Starres, and heavenlie virtues: here that Adultresse, who glories in golde, silver, precious stones, and worllie pleasures: there shee, who is persecuted by the Dragon, here she unto whome the Dragon doeth give authoritie: There she, who is chaced into the wilderness, and hath no lodge to hide her in; here she who impireth above all people, and is the Metropolitane citie of the world. And finallie, seeing in al things this Whoore, or whoorish Babylon, is contrarious to Christes holie Spouse, lette us, and all Christians trie her out, as our detestable and deadlie enemie, and see what Babylon she is. We say then, that this Babylon, is not that reall Babylon of Chaldee, but Rome, for these reasons. First, for that this Babylon is called mysterium Babylon, that is to say, mysticall or figurative Babylon: Therefore, it is not Babylon it self in Chaldee. (John Napier, A Plaine Discovery of the Whole Revelation of Saint Iohn., p. 34. This first reason was supported by a series of supplemental arguments.)

For firste (saieth the text) the Woman that sate upon this Beast, is the great Citie, that sitteth over the Kings of the earth: So the chiefe seate and citie of the Latine or Romane Empire, is that great citie Rome, that had Empire overe all the kingdomes of the earth. (Ibid., pp. 36,37; and introductory table.)

Of the Power of the Civil Magistrates.

The Power of the Civil Magistrate extendeth to all men, as well Clergy as Laity, in all things temporal; but hath no authority in things purely spiritual. And we hold it to be the duty of all men who are professors of the Gospel, to pay respectful obedience to the Civil Authority, regularly and legitimately constituted.

The original 1571, 1662 text of this Article reads as follows: "The King's Majesty hath the chief power in this Realm of England, and other his Dominions, unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign Jurisdiction. Where we attribute to the King's Majesty the chief government, by which Titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended; we give not our Princes the ministering either of God's Word, or of the Sacraments, the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify; but that only prerogative, which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself; that is, that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers.

"The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm of England.
"The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian men with death, for heinous and grievous offenses.

"It is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the Magistrate, to wear weapons, and serve in the wars."

Respecting the Pope, " Whereas the Bishop of Rome hath erected for himself a temporal monarchy in the Christian world, and usurping a sovereign authority and lordship over all churches and pastors, doth exalt itself to that degree of insolency as to be called God, and will be adored, arrogating to himself all power in heaven and on earth to dispose of all ecclesiastical matters, and to define articles of faith; and in the civil State he tramples under foot all lawful authority of magistrates, setting up and pulling down Kings, disposing of Kings, and their kingdoms at his pleasure; we therefore believe and maintain that he is truly and properly the anti-Christ, the son of perdition, predicted by the Holy Prophets; we hope and wait that the Lord, according to His promise, and as He hath already begun, will confound him by the Spirit of His mouth, and destroy him finally by the brightness of His coming" (Taken from - The Seventeenth National Synod of the Huguenots, at Gap, in Dauphiny, October 1st, 1603) Taken from the book - THE HUGUENOTS OR REFORMED FRENCH CHURCHES, by William Henry Foote, D. D

The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom]. Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions etc.]. And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth. These three articles we hold to be false, godless, tyrannical, and [quite] pernicious to the Church ...................................................

The second article is still clearer, that Christ gave to the apostles only spiritual power, i.e., the command to teach the Gospel to announce the forgiveness of sins, to administer the Sacraments, to excommunicate the godless without bodily force [by the Word], and that He did not give the power of the sword, or the right to establish, occupy or confer kingdoms of the world [to set up or depose kings]. For Christ says, Matt. 28, 19. 20: Go ye, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; also John 20, 21: As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you.

Now, it is manifest that Christ was not sent to bear the sword or possess a worldly kingdom [rule in a worldly fashion], as He Himself says, John 18, 36: My kingdom is not of this world. And Paul says, 2 Cor. 1, 24: Not for that we have dominion over your faith; and 2 Cor. 10, 4: The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, etc.

Accordingly, that Christ in His passion is crowned with thorns and led forth to be derided in royal purple, this signified that in the future, after His spiritual kingdom was despised, i.e., the Gospel was suppressed, another kingdom of a worldly kind would be set up [in its place] with the pretext of ecclesiastical power. Therefore the Constitution of Boniface VIII and the chapter Omnes, Dist. 22 and similar opinions which contend that the Pope is by divine right the ruler of the kingdoms of the world, are [utterly] false and godless. From this persuasion horrible darkness has been brought into the Church, and after that also great commotions have arisen in Europe. For the ministry of the Gospel was neglected, the knowledge of faith and the spiritual kingdom became extinct, Christian righteousness was supposed to be that external government which the Pope had established.

Next, the Popes began to seize upon kingdoms for themselves; they transferred kingdoms, they vexed with unjust excommunications and wars the kings of almost all nations in Europe, but especially the German emperors, sometimes for the purpose of occupying cities of Italy, at other times for the purpose of reducing to subjection the bishops of Germany, and wresting from the emperors the conferring of episcopates. Yea, in the Clementines it is even written: When the empire is vacant, the Pope is the legitimate successor.

Thus the Pope has not only usurped dominion, contrary to Christ's command, but has also tyrannically exalted himself above all kings. And in this matter the deed itself is not to be reprehended as much as it is to be detested, that he assigns as a pretext the authority of Christ; that he transfers the keys to a worldly government; that he binds salvation to these godless and execrable opinions, when he says it is necessary to salvation for men to believe that this dominion belongs to him by divine right.Since these great errors obscure [the doctrine of] faith and [of] the kingdom of Christ they are in no way to be concealed. For the result shows that they have been great pests to the Church.

In the third place, this must be added: Even though the bishop of Rome had the primacy and superiority by divine right nevertheless obedience would not be due those pontiffs who defend godless services, idolatry, and doctrine conflicting with the Gospel. Nay; such pontiffs and such a government ought to be held accursed, as Paul clearly teaches, Gal. 1, 8: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. And in Acts 5, 29: We ought to obey God rather than men. Likewise the canons also clearly teach that a heretical Pope is not to be obeyed.

The Levitical high priest was the chief priest by divine right, and yet godless high priests were not to be obeyed, as Jeremiah and other prophets dissented from the high priests, the apostles dissented from Caiaphas and did not have to obey them. Now, it is manifest that the Roman pontiffs, with their adherents, defend [and practice] godless doctrines and godless services. And the marks [all the vices] of Antichrist plainly agree with the kingdom of the Pope and his adherents. For Paul, 2 Ep. 2, 3, in describing to the Thessalonians Antichrist, calls him an adversary of Christ, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God. He speaks therefore of one ruling in the Church, not of heathen kings, and he calls this one the adversary of Christ, because he will devise doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, and will assume to himself divine authority.

Moreover, it is manifest, in the first place, that the Pope rules in the Church, and by the pretext of ecclesiastical authority and of the ministry has established for himself this kingdom. For he assigns as a pretext these words: I will give to thee the keys. Secondly, the doctrine of the Pope conflicts in many ways with the Gospel, and [thirdly] the Pope assumes to himself divine authority in a threefold manner. First, because he takes to himself the right to change the doctrine of Christ and services instituted by God, and wants his own doctrine and his own services to be observed as divine; secondly, because he takes to himself the power not only of binding and loosing in this life, but also the jurisdiction over souls after this life; thirdly, because the Pope does not want to be judged by the Church or by any one, and puts his own authority ahead of the decision of Councils and the entire Church. But to be unwilling to be judged by the Church or by any one is to make oneself God. Lastly, these errors so horrible, and this impiety, he defends with the greatest cruelty, and puts to death those dissenting.

This being the case, all Christians ought to beware of becoming partakers of the godless doctrine, blasphemies, and unjust cruelty of the Pope. On this account they ought to desert and execrate the Pope with his adherents as the kingdom of Antichrist; just as Christ has commanded, Matt. 7,15: Beware of false prophets. And Paul commands that godless teachers should be avoided and execrated as cursed, Gal. 1, 8; Titus 3, 10. And 2 Cor. 6, 14 he says: Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what communion hath light with darkness?
To dissent from the agreement of so many nations and to be called schismatics is a grave matter. But divine authority commands all not to be allies and defenders of impiety and unjust cruelty.

I, Dr. John Bugenhagen, Pomeranus, subscribe the Articles of the Augsburg Confession, the Apology, and the Article presented to the princes at Smalcald concerning the Papacy.

I also, Dr. Urban Rhegius, Superintendent of the churches in the Duchy of Lueneburg, subscribe.

Nicolaus Amsdorf of Magdeburg subscribed.

Georpe Spalatin of Altenburg subscribed.

I, Andrew Osiander, subscribe.

Magister Veit Dieterich of Nuernberg subscribed.

Stephen Agricola, Minister at Hof, subscribed with his own hand.

John Draconites of Marburg subscribed.

Conrad Figenbotz subscribed to all throughout.

Martin Bucer.

I, Erhard Schnepf, subscribe.

Paul Rhodius, Preacher in Stettin.

Gerhard Oeniken, Minister of the Church at Minden.

Brixius Northanus, Minister at Soest.

Simon Schnevveis, Pastor of Crailsheim.

I, Pomeranus, again subscribe in the name of Magister John Brentz, as he ordered me.

Philip Melanchthon subscribes with his own hand.

Anthony Corvinus subscribes with his own hand, as well as in the name of Adam a Fulda.

John Schlainhauffen subscribes with his own hand.

Magister George Helt of Forchheim.

Michael Coelius, Preacher at Mansfeld.

Peter Geltner, Preacher of the Church of Frankfort.

Dionysius Melander subscribed.

Paul Fagius of Strassburg.

Wendel Faber, Pastor of Seeburg in Mansfeld

Conrad Oettinger of Pforzheim, Preacher of Ulric, Duke of Wuerttemberg.

Boniface Wolfart, Minister of the Word of the Church at Augsburg.

John Aepinus, Superintendent of Hamburg, subscribed with his own hand.

John Amsterdam of Bremen does the same.

John Fontanus, Superintendent of Lower Hesse, subscribed.

Frederick Myconius subscribed for himself and Justus Menius. Amobrose Blaurer.

I have read, and again and again reread, the Confession and Apology presented at Augsburg by the Most Illustrious Prince, the Elector of Saxony, and by the other princes and estates of the Roman Empire, to his Imperial Majesty. I have also read the Formula of Concord concerning the Sacrament, made at Wittenberg with Dr. Bucer and others. I have also read the articles written at the Assembly at Smalcald in the German language by Dr. Martin Luther, our most revered preceptor, and the tract concerning the Papacy and the Power and Jurisdiction of Bishops. And in my humble opinion I judge that all these agree with Holy Scripture, and with the belief of the true and genuine catholic Church. But although in so great a number of most learned men who have now assembled at Smalcald I acknowledge that I am of all the least yet, as I am not permitted to await the end of the assembly, I ask you, most renowned man, Dr. John Bugenhagen, most revered Father in Christ, that your courtesy may add my name, if it be necessary, to all that I have above mentioned. For I testify in this my own handwriting that I thus hold, confess, and constantly will teach, through Jesus Christ, our Lord.
John Brentz, Minister of Hall.
Done at Smalcald February 23, 1537.

BEWARE BRETHREN OF OLD DOCTRINES LIKE THE 15TH-16TH REFORMERS HAD:

Though the 15th-16th century Protestant Reformation created the Protestant Church, because the separated from the falseness going on within the Catholic Church, many of their ideas simply did NOT come true, as they claimed Rome was the Babylon Harlot of Revelation 17 when it was not, and that the pope was the Antichrist when he was not.

So today, the JEWS are using the old Reformation ideas to TRICK YOU into ganging up against the Catholic Church and their pope, in order to... do what? TO DECEIVE YOU AWAY FROM THE REAL... COMING ANTICHRIST, A FALSE-MESSIAH IN JERUSALEM THAT WILL BE SETUP FROM THE JEWS.

Those still pushing the old Reformation doctrines are DEPENDING ON YOU BEING BIBLICALLY IGNORANT of what God's Word actually reveals about the coming final Antichrist-false-Messiah to JERUSALEM, and NOT to Rome.

Those behind pushing those old ideas today are the "synagogue of Satan" that Jesus mentioned in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9, as Jesus said those only SAY... they are Jews, but LIE, and are not, but are the "synagogue of Satan", meaning Satan's servants.

Here is the meat of the situation, Biblically:

1. the coming Antichrist MUST originate from the tribe of Judah, because that is the tribe of The Real Messiah Jesus Christ.

2. that false one will sit in a NEW JEWISH STONE TEMPLE BUILT IN JERUSALEM FOR THE END according to the 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 prophecy that Apostle Paul preached that will happen at the end of this world.

3. JERUSALEM is defined as the Babylon Harlot of Revelation 17, NOT ROME (compare Rev.17 with Rev.11:8 as Jerusalem is where Lord Jesus was crucified and Jerusalem is shown there as the "great city". Don't listen to the LIARS who claim it is ROME.

4. the coming Antichrist-false-Messiah will be setup as the King of Israel, because he is coming to PLAY Jesus Christ, and Jesus is King of Israel. Thus it is impossible for that coming false one to be a pope, much less a pope that claims the Christian religion.

5. the early Church fathers, like Hippolytus, well understood that the coming Antichrist is coming at the end of this world to PLAY Jesus Christ, and wrote that fake will mimic Jesus Christ in every way possible, from a JEWISH HERITAGE of the tribe of Judah, of the house of David, even with the performing of great signs and wonders that IF it were possible, would deceive even Christ's very elect (See Matth.24:23-26).

Quote from: dpr on Sun Feb 01, 2026 - 08:14:10BEWARE BRETHREN OF OLD DOCTRINES LIKE THE 15TH-16TH REFORMERS HAD:

Though the 15th-16th century Protestant Reformation created the Protestant Church, because the separated from the falseness going on within the Catholic Church, many of their ideas simply did NOT come true, as they claimed Rome was the Babylon Harlot of Revelation 17 when it was not, and that the pope was the Antichrist when he was not.

So today, the JEWS are using the old Reformation ideas to TRICK YOU into ganging up against the Catholic Church and their pope, in order to... do what? TO DECEIVE YOU AWAY FROM THE REAL... COMING ANTICHRIST, A FALSE-MESSIAH IN JERUSALEM THAT WILL BE SETUP FROM THE JEWS.

Those still pushing the old Reformation doctrines are DEPENDING ON YOU BEING BIBLICALLY IGNORANT of what God's Word actually reveals about the coming final Antichrist-false-Messiah to JERUSALEM, and NOT to Rome.

Those behind pushing those old ideas today are the "synagogue of Satan" that Jesus mentioned in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9, as Jesus said those only SAY... they are Jews, but LIE, and are not, but are the "synagogue of Satan", meaning Satan's servants.

Here is the meat of the situation, Biblically:

1. the coming Antichrist MUST originate from the tribe of Judah, because that is the tribe of The Real Messiah Jesus Christ.

2. that false one will sit in a NEW JEWISH STONE TEMPLE BUILT IN JERUSALEM FOR THE END according to the 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 prophecy that Apostle Paul preached that will happen at the end of this world.

3. JERUSALEM is defined as the Babylon Harlot of Revelation 17, NOT ROME (compare Rev.17 with Rev.11:8 as Jerusalem is where Lord Jesus was crucified and Jerusalem is shown there as the "great city". Don't listen to the LIARS who claim it is ROME.

4. the coming Antichrist-false-Messiah will be setup as the King of Israel, because he is coming to PLAY Jesus Christ, and Jesus is King of Israel. Thus it is impossible for that coming false one to be a pope, much less a pope that claims the Christian religion.

5. the early Church fathers, like Hippolytus, well understood that the coming Antichrist is coming at the end of this world to PLAY Jesus Christ, and wrote that fake will mimic Jesus Christ in every way possible, from a JEWISH HERITAGE of the tribe of Judah, of the house of David, even with the performing of great signs and wonders that IF it were possible, would deceive even Christ's very elect (See Matth.24:23-26).

Beware brethren of those who make false claims that only Reformers of the 15th and 16th century have believed as they did regarding the Papacy as Babylon the Great and or the system of anti-christ. As I have already presented evidence to the contrary concerning those who believed such long before these Reformers, and long after to this present day. And will continue to do so for many more posts no doubt. It is one thing to believe differently and or as one wishes, it is another altogether to make false claims concerning what a great many have believed for many centuries now.

Quote from: Amo on Sun Feb 01, 2026 - 08:49:39Beware brethren of those who make false claims that only Reformers of the 15th and 16th century have believed as they did regarding the Papacy as Babylon the Great and or the system of anti-christ. As I have already presented evidence to the contrary concerning those who believed such long before these Reformers, and long after to this present day. And will continue to do so for many more posts no doubt. It is one thing to believe differently and or as one wishes, it is another altogether to make false claims concerning what a great many have believed for many centuries now.

These pushers of the old Reformation doctrines of the 15th-16th century Reformers are only following the false Jews of the "synagogue of Satan". Those false Jews are the ones behind that propaganda, and it's actual VERY EASY TO KNOW, simply because BIBLE PROPHECY is VERY SPECIFIC about the END TIME false-MESSIAH that is coming at the end, MUST BE from the TRIBE OF JUDAH, I.E., OF THE JEWS!

So what better way to DECEIVE YOU and hide their little propaganda of using old Reformation history that did not pan out according to Bible Scripture for the END, just to get your ATTENTION AWAY FROM JERUSALEM AT THE END, which is where the MAIN EVENT for the END is going to be, and NOT AT ROME!

Two specific SO-CALLED churches are behind that propaganda today, the SDA church and the JW church which contain many Jewish converts that still hold to many traditions of JUDAISM, while calling it Christianity.

Quote from: dpr on Sun Feb 01, 2026 - 08:57:42These pushers of the old Reformation doctrines of the 15th-16th century Reformers are only following the false Jews of the "synagogue of Satan". Those false Jews are the ones behind that propaganda, and it's actual VERY EASY TO KNOW, simply because BIBLE PROPHECY is VERY SPECIFIC about the END TIME false-MESSIAH that is coming at the end, MUST BE from the TRIBE OF JUDAH, I.E., OF THE JEWS!

So what better way to DECEIVE YOU and hide their little propaganda of using old Reformation history that did not pan out according to Bible Scripture for the END, just to get your ATTENTION AWAY FROM JERUSALEM AT THE END, which is where the MAIN EVENT for the END is going to be, and NOT AT ROME!

Two specific SO-CALLED churches are behind that propaganda today, the SDA church and the JW church which contain many Jewish converts that still hold to many traditions of JUDAISM, while calling it Christianity.

Specific scripture on this ?

Those false Jews are the ones behind that propaganda, and it's actual VERY EASY TO KNOW, simply because BIBLE PROPHECY is VERY SPECIFIC about the END TIME false-MESSIAH that is coming at the end, MUST BE from the TRIBE OF JUDAH, I.E., OF THE JEWS!

Quote from: Rella on Mon Feb 02, 2026 - 08:53:48Specific scripture on this ?

Those false Jews are the ones behind that propaganda, and it's actual VERY EASY TO KNOW, simply because BIBLE PROPHECY is VERY SPECIFIC about the END TIME false-MESSIAH that is coming at the end, MUST BE from the TRIBE OF JUDAH, I.E., OF THE JEWS!

Well, you asked for it. And this is going to be long. And you won't get this Bible revelation in your local Church. Most preachers today are taught to stay off of any Bible subject that seems controversial, but stay on the 'milk' of God's Word instead. This is "strong meat" stuff; whether one agrees with it or not, it is written in God's Word.

1. Jesus used that label of the "synagogue of Satan" per Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 when speaking to His two elect Churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia that He had no rebuke for. He said the "synagogue of Satan" are those who lie and only SAY... they are Jews, but are not.

That "synagogue of Satan" even has planted a false identity about themselves within many Churches today, as it is claimed they simply represent unbelieving Jews of the 'seed' of Israel. Not true though, because Jesus was specific that "synagogue of Satan" lies, and only SAY... they are Jews of the seed. In reality they represent FOREIGNERS that crept in among true Judah long ago, the 'crept in unawares' of Jude 4...

Jude 4
4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
KJV
 
2. This history about those crept in unawares began with the Canaanites of the nations of Canaan which God commanded the children of Israel to literally exterminate when they came out of Egypt to the lands of Canaan (See Deut.20:16-18; the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites.)

See Judges 2 and Judges 3 where God revealed how the children of Israel failed His commandment to wipe out those pagan nations of the land of Canaan. Because the children of Israel who dwelt among them began taking up their false gods of Baalim, etc., God said He would leave those nations among Israel to test Israel with, to see if the children of Israel would follow Him, or not, even as it still is to this day.

In Joshua 9, because Israel was at that time destroying Canaanites that God commanded, a group of Canaanites dressed up in tattered clothes with spoiled food like in a caravan, to simulate they had come from a far away land. They asked Joshua for help, and to join in with Joshua's people. So Joshua made a pact with them. Then one of the Israelites found out those were actually Canaanites, and not foreigners from a far away land. The pact had already been made, so Joshua made them bondservants unto Israel.

3. In 1 Kings 9:19-22, those bondservants of the nations of Canaan are still dwelling among the children of Israel in Solomon's day.

4. Ezra 2:55-58 reveals those Canaanite bondservants returned with the remnant of the "house of Judah" there which were taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

5. Per Ezra 2:55-58 and Nehemiah 7:57-64, these Canaanite bondservant foreigners included the Nethinims which meant workers in the temple for the Levites. Obviously, some of them over time became priests among Israel.

6. Hiram, king of Tyre, a pagan foreign king of the Phoenicians, sent carpenters and stone masons to David to build David's palace (2 Samuel 5). Thus David made peace with the foreign pagan idol worshiping king of Tyre. Jezebel, king Ahab's wife in Israel, was a Sidonian pagan idol worshiper of Baal. Thus continues yet another relationship of Israel with pagan foreigners that were allowed to dwell among Israel.

7. Per 1 Kings 5, Hiram and Solomon also made a pact to trade peoples for the building of Solomon's temple, Hiram sending workers for that because of skills Israel did not have.

8. The fraternity of the Masonic Lodge claims a heritage back to Solomon's days involving stone masonry. This is one of the purposes behind many of the Lodge's ancient symbols they use, especially the twin pillars, which was a creation of the Sidonian pagans in Hiram's day.

9. Per 1 Chronicles 2:55, the scribes of Israel were a people known as Kenites, a foreign people of the land of Canaan (See Genesis 15:19). They had become in charge of keeping the copies of God's written Word from generation to generation. They as scribes were also among the false Pharisees that tried to find some way to trap Lord Jesus so as to have Him crucified (See Matthew 23).

10. Nethinims - some scholars claim the name comes from the first priests of Aaron, but Ezra 2 about the return of Jews back to Jerusalem from Babylon points out they were made up of the bondservants spoken of before, and were temple servants to the Levites.

Ezra 2:58-59
58 All the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon's servants, were three hundred ninety and two.
59 And these were they which went up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, Cherub, Addan, and Immer: but they could not shew their father's house, and their seed, whether they were of Israel:
KJV

10. Per Nehemiah 3:26, those Nethinims dwelt at Ophel, a place right next to the Israelite temple.

11. Per Judges 1, the foreigner Kenites who had been good to the children of Israel, joined in to live with Judah in the wilderness, south of Arad, and dwelt among Judah.

12. When the children of Israel came out of the wilderness on the way to Canaan, the people of Edom (from Jacob's brother Esau) would not allow them to pass through their land, which would have been shorter. God remembered that, and He would later destroy Edom that was south of Canaan. Many of those Edomites became David's servants, and crept in among Judah and became Jews. King Herod, appointed as king of Judea by the Romans in the days of Baby Jesus, was a Jew but not by birth; Herod was of Esau (Edom, Idumean).

All those foreigners among today's Jews, give true Judah a bad name. And the Masonic Lodge origin is... Jewish, as their dwelling place in the Lodge is in their higher Mysteries which they screen lower members away from. These false Jews of the "synagogue of Satan" are Satan's servants, and are working towards setting up the one-world beast kingdom of Revelation 13:1, in prep for 'their'... king, Satan himself, who is coming to sit in a new stone temple in JERUSALEM for the end. They even mention this matter of setting up their "king of the world" in their meeting minutes of their leaked Protocols.

Thus their usage of the old Reformation doctrines they see as a boon to their overall strategy towards "one world government", as doctrines like Amillennialism comes from ideas of the old Reformers who also thought 70 A.D. signaled the establishment of Christ's LITERAL Kingdom here on earth, when it did not, as Jesus said His Kingdom (i.e., His physical LITERAL Kingdom) is not of this present world time, per John 18:36). What those doctrines do is deceive the Reformation Churches into thinking that Christ's Kingdom is here today, and it's just a matter of time when all nations and peoples will accept Christ, and we will have a Christian Utopia right here on earth, even without Lord Jesus being here de facto. In reality, that's a working towards the "synagogue of Satan" plan for "one world government". Several Protestant Christian denominations are working towards exactly that, and are deceived.

And mind you, my family comes from the 16th century French Huguenots who were the first French Protestants in France, and persecuted by the Catholic Church. My family fled to Britain, and then signed on to become indentured servants to America, and came to Virginia Colony in the 1600's. They eventually settled in South Carolina where there is a large Huguenot ancestry.

QuoteAnd mind you, my family comes from the 16th century French Huguenots who were the first French Protestants in France, and persecuted by the Catholic Church. My family fled to Britain, and then signed on to become indentured servants to America, and came to Virginia Colony in the 1600's. They eventually settled in South Carolina where there is a large Huguenot ancestry.

Yet you obviously do not agree with what they believed regarding the Pope or papacy.

QuoteRespecting the Pope, " Whereas the Bishop of Rome hath erected for himself a temporal monarchy in the Christian world, and usurping a sovereign authority and lordship over all churches and pastors, doth exalt itself to that degree of insolency as to be called God, and will be adored, arrogating to himself all power in heaven and on earth to dispose of all ecclesiastical matters, and to define articles of faith; and in the civil State he tramples under foot all lawful authority of magistrates, setting up and pulling down Kings, disposing of Kings, and their kingdoms at his pleasure; we therefore believe and maintain that he is truly and properly the anti-Christ, the son of perdition, predicted by the Holy Prophets; we hope and wait that the Lord, according to His promise, and as He hath already begun, will confound him by the Spirit of His mouth, and destroy him finally by the brightness of His coming" (Taken from - The Seventeenth National Synod of the Huguenots, at Gap, in Dauphiny, October 1st, 1603) Taken from the book - THE HUGUENOTS OR REFORMED FRENCH CHURCHES, by William Henry Foote, D. D

https://archive.org/details/huguenotsorrefor00foot/page/590/mode/2up

The above link dpr, is to the book THE HUGUENOTS OR REFORMED FRENCH CHURCH, by William Henry Foote. It is a good book that you should read. Starting on page 590, it addresses the Huguenots settling in SC.