The Blood

[prophet1]

What if we Baptists taught on the Passover , which is what the word Easter means, instead of the resurrection on Easter?
What if we preached on the Blood?
What if we taught the OT examples, coupled with the NT doctrine, with Jesus in the middle? What a sandwich that is!

But we won't. We will let Rome redefine everything. Even though we celebrate the Resurrection, by assembling in the morning on the first day of the week, a permanent testimony of the Resurrection, and call it "the Lord's Day", yet we will once again go over this same old ground, missing a great opportunity.

Maybe we would eliminate some false professions, and "reassurance professions", if we actually celebrated Easter on Easter.

Maybe we could stop the hemmorhaging of losing IFB to Dispensational Heresey, if we showed Salvation's Plan through the Exodus, for once.

Maybe people would realize that once the Blood is applied to their heart, the second death hath no power over them.

Halelujah, He is risen, for sure.
But that isn't personal to me.
Halelujah, the Blood covers MY SIN!
Halelujah, the Blood is applied to MY HEART!

Then we can preach the Resurrection the other 51 Lord's Days.



Anishinaabe

[prophet1]

I'll include this post, to pre-emptively trouble shoot.

Mar 14:12
12 And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?

Mar 14:12
12 And the fyrste daye of swete breed when men offer ye pascall lambe his disciples sayd vnto him:where wilt thou that we goo and prepare that thou mayst eate the ester lambe?
(TyndaleBible)

The purpose of this is : to show that Tyndale, who was murdered for his efforts, who coined the term "Passover", showed that "esther" (Easter) was a translation of "pascall"(now called 'Passover').
He left the Narration as 'pascall', but when quoting the Disciples, concerning the exact same Lamb, he put in the translation.

The KJV translators buttoned this all up nicely.
But they didn't eliminate the later mention in Acts:
Act 12:4
4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

This was in Israel, the Passover Holiday, so Peter was gonna have to sit in prison til Easter was over, because all of the Jews were busy celebrating, and no one would be available to conduct the trial.

This wasn't a celibration of the resurrection, They didn't believe He rose.

This wasn't a Roman Holiday,
the Sanhedrin wouldn't have cared about it, and would've been available.

I like the Word Passover, but don't let the Pagans claim Easter!

Anishinaabe

[ThePilgrim]

This will not be popular on here, as it has not been popular anywhere I have said it.  I think we should give Easter back to the pagans from whence it came and just celebrate our Lord period.

What does a holiday for Tammuz have to do with Christ's resurrection? 

 

God bless,

Larry

[swathdiver]

nt

[LindaR]

Way of Life Encyclopedia

EASTER

 

(1) A pagan holiday (Acts 12:4). This is the only place in which "easter" appears in the Authorized Version. Some say that this should be translated "passover" and they point to this as an error in the KJV, but they are wrong. The Easter of Acts12:4 occurred after the Passover. We know this because Acts 12:3 says it was "the days of unleavened bread." The feast of unleavened bread followed the Passover (Numbers 28:16-25), but this Easter was after the feast of unleavened bread. It refers to a pagan holiday, prOBably the celebration of Tammuz, the sun god (Jack Moorman, Easter or Passover?). "Easter" is a proper translation to distinguish it from the Jewish Passover, and the KJV translators were wise in their choice of this word. In using the term "Easter" in Acts 12:4, The King James Translators merely left intact the reading of Tyndale, Matthews, and the Geneva Bible: "Then were the days of unleavened bread, and when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people" (The Newe Testament by William Tindale, 1526, John Wesley Sawyer, The Martyrs Bible Series).

[ASongOfDegrees]

There was no such word as "passover" before Tyndale. The prOBlem was that there was no English equivalent for the Greek word so Tyndale stuck in the word most associated with the holiday and that was the word Easter. For the OT he coined the new word (passover). The other major English versions prior to the KJV retained the word Easter in places even in the OT.

 

To this day the Greeks call the holiday Easter pascha.

 

I understand the teaching that Easter in Acts 12 was reference to a pagan holiday but there are a few prOBlems with that interpretation but it could be true. 

 

Just because a word like Easter has pagan origins doesn't mean it can't be used to represent a Christians concept. The word hell has pagan origins too as does the Greek word hades. Yet both were used.

[LindaR]

Exodus 12:13 And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.

[ASongOfDegrees]

Exodus 12:13 And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.

Yes, I'm referring to the word "passover" not the phrase "pass over". There was no equivalent word in English (as well as the Greek or Latin) for the word "passover" so the word Easter was used since nOBody at the time thought of it as a pagan holiday but the Lord's resurrection.

 

As far as I'm concerned the word isn't an error because it could have been translated or transliterated as any word or no word, since their was no equivalent in our language, and for a long time it was translated as Easter which people associated with the resurrection of Christ and still do.

 

One of the main prOBlems with the pagan holiday interpretation in Acts 12:4 is that the pagan Romans didn't celebrate Easter and Herod himself OBserved Jewish holidays. If people want to get technical about the pagan roots of Easter than it's a pagan German holiday and although there are equivalents in other cultures there was none in Rome.

 

Also, its says in Acts 12:5 that Peter was apprehended during the days of unleavened bread. The passover sometimes referred not just to the one day of the paschal lamb but also the feast of unleavened bread afterwords (Ezekiel 45:21).  This would mean that the passover was not past but still taking place during the feast of unleavened bread and Herod was waiting for that to end.

 

Another thing, the name Easter could have been taken from the West Saxon word "eastre" which was the name of the MONTH in which the Lord's resurrection was celebrated. If this is the case it would be no different than the pagan names for the days of the week. 

[ThePilgrim]

Yes, I'm referring to the word "passover" not the phrase "pass over". There was no equivalent word in English (as well as the Greek or Latin) for the word "passover" so the word Easter was used since nOBody at the time thought of it as a pagan holiday but the Lord's resurrection.

 

As far as I'm concerned the word isn't an error because it could have been translated or transliterated as any word or no word, since their was no equivalent in our language, and for a long time it was translated as Easter which people associated with the resurrection of Christ and still do.

 

One of the main prOBlems with the pagan holiday interpretation in Acts 12:4 is that the pagan Romans didn't celebrate Easter and Herod himself OBserved Jewish holidays. If people want to get technical about the pagan roots of Easter than it's a pagan German holiday and although there are equivalents in other cultures there was none in Rome.

 

Also, its says in Acts 12:5 that Peter was apprehended during the days of unleavened bread. The passover sometimes referred not just to the one day of the paschal lamb but also the feast of unleavened bread afterwords (Ezekiel 45:21).  This would mean that the passover was not past but still taking place during the feast of unleavened bread and Herod was waiting for that to end.

 

Another thing, the name Easter could have been taken from the West Saxon word "eastre" which was the name of the MONTH in which the Lord's resurrection was celebrated. If this is the case it would be no different than the pagan names for the days of the week. 

Celebrate Easter, have an Easter egg hunt do it all, but I wish people would spend a little time and find out where it came from and how it got into the RCC and thus to all churchianity.  Resurrection day is great we should celebrate our risen Savior but not by recognizing a pagan holiday. 

 

The purpose of this tract is to help answer those questions, and to help those who seek truth to draw their own conclusions.

The first thing we must understand is that professing Christians were not the only ones who celebrated a festival called "Easter."

"Ishtar", which is pronounced "Easter" was a day that commemorated the resurrection of one of their gods that they called "Tammuz", who was believed to be the only begotten son of the moon-goddess and the sun-god.

In those ancient times, there was a man named Nimrod, who was the grandson of one of Noah's son named Ham.

Ham had a son named Cush who married a woman named Semiramis.Cush and Semiramis then had a son named him "Nimrod."

After the death of his father, Nimrod married his own mother and became a powerful King.

The Bible tells of of this man, Nimrod, in Genesis 10:8-10 as follows: "And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad,and Calneh, in the land of Shinar."

Nimrod became a god-man to the people and Semiramis, his wife and mother, became the powerful Queen of ancient Babylon.

Nimrod was eventually killed by an enemy, and his body was cut in pieces and sent to various parts of his kingdom.

Semiramis had all of the parts gathered, except for one part that could not be found.

That missing part was his reproductive organ. Semiramis claimed that Nimrod could not come back to life without it and told the people of Babylon that Nimrod had ascended to the sun and was now to be called "Baal", the sun god.

Queen Semiramis also proclaimed that Baal would be present on earth in the form of a flame, whether candle or lamp, when used in worship.

Semiramis was creating a mystery religion, and with the help of Satan, she set herself up as a goddess.

Semiramis claimed that she was immaculately conceived.

She taught that the moon was a goddess that went through a 28 day cycle and ovulated when full.

She further claimed that she came down from the moon in a giant moon egg that fell into the Euphrates River.

This was to have happened at the time of the first full moon after the spring equinox.

Semiramis became known as "Ishtar" which is pronounced "Easter", and her moon egg became known as "Ishtar's" egg."

Ishtar soon became pregnant and claimed that it was the rays of the sun-god Baal that caused her to conceive.

The son that she brought forth was named Tammuz.

Tammuz was noted to be especially fond of rabbits, and they became sacred in the ancient religion, because Tammuz was believed to be the son of the sun-god, Baal. Tammuz, like his supposed father, became a hunter.

The day came when Tammuz was killed by a wild pig.

Queen Ishtar told the people that Tammuz was now ascended to his father, Baal, and that the two of them would be with the worshippers in the sacred candle or lamp flame as Father, Son and Spirit.

Ishtar, who was now worshipped as the "Mother of God and Queen of Heaven", continued to build her mystery religion.

The queen told the worshippers that when Tammuz was killed by the wild pig, some of his blood fell on the stump of an evergreen tree, and the stump grew into a full new tree overnight. This made the evergreen tree sacred by the blood of Tammuz.

She also proclaimed a forty day period of time of sorrow each year prior to the anniversary of the death of Tammuz.

During this time, no meat was to be eaten.

Worshippers were to meditate upon the sacred mysteries of Baal and Tammuz, and to make the sign of the "T" in front of their hearts as they worshipped.

They also ate sacred cakes with the marking of a "T" or cross on the top.

Every year, on the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, a celebration was made.

It was Ishtar's Sunday and was celebrated with rabbits and eggs.

Ishtar also proclaimed that because Tammuz was killed by a pig, that a pig must be eaten on that Sunday.

By now, the readers of this tract should have made the connection that paganism has infiltrated the contemporary "Christian" churches, and further study indicates that this paganism came in by way of the Roman Catholic System.

The truth is that Easter has nothing whatsoever to do with the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

We also know that Easter can be as much as three weeks away from the Passover, because the pagan holiday is always set as the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox.

Some have wondered why the word "Easter" is in the the King James Bible.

It is because Acts, chapter 12, tells us that it was the evil King Herod, who was planning to celebrate Easter, and not the Christians.

The true Passover and pagan Easter sometimes coincide, but in some years, they are a great distance apart.

So much more could be said, and we have much more information for you, if you are a seeker of the truth.

We know that the Bible tells us in John 4:24, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

The truth is that the forty days of Lent, eggs, rabbits,hot cross buns and the Easter ham have everything to do with the ancient pagan religion of Mystery Babylon.These are all antichrist activities!

 

God blesss,

Larry

[Salyan]

This information sounds like 'The Two Babylons', which is very interesting but apparently not historically sound.

[LindaR]

Actually, the Old Testament Feast of First Fruits was a picture of Christ's resurrection as the first fruit of those who sleep in death (Leviticus 23:9-14; 1 Corinthians 15:20, 23).

[prophet1]

This thread is going great!

I thank God for all of you who have contributed.

Happy Easter!



Anishinaabe

[ThePilgrim]

This information sounds like 'The Two Babylons', which is very interesting but apparently not historically sound.

Several different sources including ancient Greek and Roman writers.  I will bother you no more with my RCC conspiracy theories.

 

God bless,

Larry

[Steve Schwenke]

Salyan, I have heard that rumor that "The Two Babylons" is not sound, but that is all I have heard.  I have never read anywhere in print as to how and why it is "not sound."  Just because someone says it is "not sound" does not mean they are telling the truth. 

 

It is sound, and extremely insightful as to how the Roman Catholic Cult has borrowed so heavily from the pagan religions. 

 

Hmmmm.....I wonder who would want to silence that kind of criticism, eh?

 

 

Prophet - as for me, all of professing Christians from all denominations recognize Easter as the resurrection of Christ.  This is not like Christmas, where somebody invented a birthday for Jesus Christ, when the Bible says very little about WHEN Christ was born.  We can actually date the resurrection of Christ by marking the day of Passover, then count 3 days and 3 nights from there.....so I don't see why anyone would OBject to have a Resurrection Sunday celebration.  Certainly, meeting on Sundays is in and of itself commemoration of Christ's resurrection, but Easter Sunday actually commemorates it more specifically.

As for me, I can't preach on the resurrection without preaching the entire gospel - the death, burial, and the resurrection.  The resurrection of Christ makes no sense without His crucifixion and burial - so it all goes together.

 

Regarding "dispensationalism." 

1.  Please be more gracious to those of us who hold to some form of dispensationalism.  Covenant Theology is heresy because it denies the literal sense of Scripture, as I have demonstrated ad nauseam on this forum.  I don't call people who reject dispensationalism heretics unless they embrace covenant theology. 

2.  Your comments demonstrate how much you do not understand dispensationalism.  It could be summarized this way:

All of the Bible is written FOR you (Rom. 15:4), but not all of the Bible is written TO you. 

This means that the OT has many lessons that we can learn and apply to our own walk with the Lord today, but the main intent was pointed toward Israel, not the church.

Thus, using the Passover as an illustration of Christ's atonement is absolutely appropriate.  Christ fulfilled the Law.  He is the ultimate fulfillment of all of the OT sacrifices.  All of the Levitical sacrifices point to Christ's suffering, and He is the ultimate sacrifice for sin, fulfilling every letter of the Levitical Law. 

 

Just because I am a dispensationalist does not mean I do not preach from the OT, or use the OT sacrifices to preach about Jesus Christ and how He fulfilled the Law, suffered for my sins, and became the "Lamb of God." 

 

You are mistaking HYPER- dispensationalism for a more balanced, reasonable, milder form of dispensationalism.  Understanding DOCTRINAL differences between the OT Israel and the NT church does not negate any application for the NT saint.

 

PS - I am currently teaching a series on I & II KIngs on Wednesday nights....the OT is extremely important for the Christian's understanding of the Lord and the Christian's walk with the Lord.

[prophet1]

Salyan, I have heard that rumor that "The Two Babylons" is not sound, but that is all I have heard. I have never read anywhere in print as to how and why it is "not sound." Just because someone says it is "not sound" does not mean they are telling the truth.

It is sound, and extremely insightful as to how the Roman Catholic Cult has borrowed so heavily from the pagan religions.

Hmmmm.....I wonder who would want to silence that kind of criticism, eh?


Prophet - as for me, all of professing Christians from all denominations recognize Easter as the resurrection of Christ. This is not like Christmas, where somebody invented a birthday for Jesus Christ, when the Bible says very little about WHEN Christ was born. We can actually date the resurrection of Christ by marking the day of Passover, then count 3 days and 3 nights from there.....so I don't see why anyone would OBject to have a Resurrection Sunday celebration. Certainly, meeting on Sundays is in and of itself commemoration of Christ's resurrection, but Easter Sunday actually commemorates it more specifically.
As for me, I can't preach on the resurrection without preaching the entire gospel - the death, burial, and the resurrection. The resurrection of Christ makes no sense without His crucifixion and burial - so it all goes together.

Regarding "dispensationalism."
1. Please be more gracious to those of us who hold to some form of dispensationalism. Covenant Theology is heresy because it denies the literal sense of Scripture, as I have demonstrated ad nauseam on this forum. I don't call people who reject dispensationalism heretics unless they embrace covenant theology.
2. Your comments demonstrate how much you do not understand dispensationalism. It could be summarized this way:
All of the Bible is written FOR you (Rom. 15:4), but not all of the Bible is written TO you.
This means that the OT has many lessons that we can learn and apply to our own walk with the Lord today, but the main intent was pointed toward Israel, not the church.
Thus, using the Passover as an illustration of Christ's atonement is absolutely appropriate. Christ fulfilled the Law. He is the ultimate fulfillment of all of the OT sacrifices. All of the Levitical sacrifices point to Christ's suffering, and He is the ultimate sacrifice for sin, fulfilling every letter of the Levitical Law.

Just because I am a dispensationalist does not mean I do not preach from the OT, or use the OT sacrifices to preach about Jesus Christ and how He fulfilled the Law, suffered for my sins, and became the "Lamb of God."

You are mistaking HYPER- dispensationalism for a more balanced, reasonable, milder form of dispensationalism. Understanding DOCTRINAL differences between the OT Israel and the NT church does not negate any application for the NT saint.

PS - I am currently teaching a series on I & II KIngs on Wednesday nights....the OT is extremely important for the Christian's understanding of the Lord and the Christian's walk with the Lord.

A couple of thoughts.

1. I have no OBjection to teaching on the Resurrection, without it, we would be ,of all men, most miserable.

2.Easter is a perfect opportunity to teach the reasons for :
A. Unleavened bread, and unfermented wine at the Lord's Supper.
B. The belief that Salvation hasn't changed one iota since Adam and Eve.
C. Why fulfillment of the various feasts give us proper endtime eschatology.

And shoot holes in the Bible correctors like Darby and Scofield's Dispensational 'Doctrines'.




Anishinaabe