In this video, Nathan Lawrence documents from their own writings the outright lies, false teachings, deceptions, twisting of the Scriptures, calumnies, virulent racist antisemitism and blasphemies of some of the earliest church fathers that are contrary to the Truth of the Bible. When you hear their actual quotes, one has to wonder if they ever read the Bible, or if so, how well they knew the Scriptures. Yet sadly many fundamental doctrines of mainstream or normative Christianity are based on the writings of these men. As the Bible says, our fathers have inherited many lies. It is time to learn the truth, and when you do, you will be set free!
Boy reading from a gevil parchment scroll. This one is written on goat skin.
A New Way of Life
Coming to an understanding of YHVH Elohim’s Torah-laws and then adopting a Torah-compliant lifestyle coupled with viewing the Bible through a Hebraic perspective and context has numerous positive benefits in one’s life. A pro-Torah approach to one’s life is more than just…
Changing which day you go to church on.
Changing your eating habits.
Celebrating different holidays.
And, if you’re really into it, growing a beard and wearing blue fringes or tassels.
Pursuing a Torah-centric lifestyle will not only change some aspects of your lifestyle, but will also change how you view the Bible, how you view Yeshua or Jesus, Elohim or God, yourself, the Jews, the land of Israel as well as your thinking about a lot of other things, and how you view yourself and your fellow Christians. It will also vastly deepen and broaden your understanding of the Bible in ways you could never imagine. Let’s briefly explore a few of these areas.
The Main Lifestyle Changes Include
Observing the seventh day Sabbath
Celebrating the biblical feasts
Adopting a biblically kosher diet
But as we are about to learn, this is only the beginning.
A New Perspective on the Bible
A pro-Torah and Hebraic view of the Bible opens up multiple new vistas in one’s understanding of the Bible. Here a few of them:
A more traditional Greco-Roman, Western, caricaturized view of Jesus gives way to a more accurate Hebraic or Jewish and Middle Eastern view of the real and authentic Yeshua.
One learns that Yeshua in his pre-incarnate state was the God of the Old Testament and the one who interacted with the patriarchs, Moses, the children of Israel and the prophets. As such, he is the One, as the Word of Elohim who would eventually became flesh, who gave the ancient Hebrews his Torah-law.
One learns that the thesis-antithesis paradigm of the Old Testament Torah-law or law of Moses model versus the New Testament grace model is a false and church-invented construct, and that the concepts of law and grace are not antithetical as the mainstream church teaches but are complimentary and indivisible issues, and are, in reality, two sides of the same coin.
One gains a deeper understanding of who and what the church is. The church was neither birthed nor spontaneously combusted on the day of Pentecost. Rather the church is a long term continuation of YHVH’s relationship with his people going back for thousands of years and continues to this day and involves all of the saints.
A new and greater holistic view of the Bible emerges versus only seeing the Scriptures in a seemingly disparate, disjointed and unrelated parts and pieces. The pieces of this vast puzzle finally begin to fall into place and a much more glorious and expansive picture than ever imagined emerges.
A Hebraic or Eastern view of the Bible replaces a limited and somewhat cartoon Greco-Roman and Western Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant view.
One begins to understand the Bible through Hebraic block logic rather than Greek step or syllogistic logic.
One gains a deeper understanding of the rules of biblical interpretation including understanding Scripture in its whole Bible, linguistic, historical and cultural context. One also learns about the four levels of understanding the Bible known as the PaRDeS method (i.e., the simple, hinted at, allegorical and mystical levels). One also gains an understanding of and an appreciation for the concept of exegesis over eisegesis when correctly interpreting or rightly dividing the Word of Elohim.
A better understanding of biblical history and future events including the Hebraic understanding of cycles emerges.
One gains a new understanding of Paul and the real issues facing the New Testament church. The controversial issue that Paul was dealing with was not the law versus grace and whether or not YHVH’s Torah-law was relevant to Christians. Rather, the issue was about a works-based salvation versus salvation by grace through faith. In Paul’s writings, the validity of the Torah-law was never the issue contrary to what mainstream Christianity has falsely taught over the millennia.
One gains a whole new perspective and understanding of Old Testament Bible prophecies as one learns who the ancient players were and who their modern descendants are and how that relates to end times Bible prophecy.
One learns who the two houses of Israel were and who their modern descendants are and how that relates to each of us regarding our future destiny as it relates to the establishment YHVH’s kingdom on earth.
A New Perspective About Yourself
As one embraces the Torah and the Hebrew roots of one’s faith…
A new and fuller perspective on the biblical definition of sin emerges. One learns that YHVH’s Torah-law defines sin, not church traditions and the rules of men. This is both liberating and sets one’s life on a more solid spiritual foundation based on the Truth of the Bible as opposed to the unbiblical traditions of men.
One gains a new and fuller perspective and understanding on who you are as a grafted-in Israelite. You are no longer a Gentile who is without God and without hope, but are part of the commonwealth, nation, citizenship and covenants of Israel. You are a redeemed Israelite and the literal offspring of Abraham and you are part of YHVH’s chosen people along with our Jewish brothers. This is an enormously empowering concept!
One obtains a new and fuller understanding of what holiness is and how to become holy. The Bible defines what people, things, practices or times are holy, not men.
Your physical diet improves. This is because one becomes a label reader and discovers that one has not only been eating biblical non-kosher foods, but a lot of unhealthy junk and chemical ingredients as well. By eliminating these toxic substances from one’s diet, one’s health will improve because one stops eating physical junk food.
One’s spiritual diet will improve. One becomes a spiritual label reader and begins to compare what the mainstream church is teaching or not teaching compared to what the Bible really says. As a result, one stops feeding from the toxic mixture of truth and lies that are emanating from the pulpit, which is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and one starts feeding from the whole Truth of the Bible, which is the tree of life. Thus, one’s spiritual health improves as one stops eating spiritual junk food.
One gains a deeper understanding of what it is to be the temple of the Holy Spirit and what it means to live a sanctified and holy life.
A New Perspective on Some Other Things
One gains…
A new love for the land of Israel.
A new love for the Jewish people.
A new love for YHVH’s lost and scattered sheep of the house of Israel.
An expanded and deeper understanding of the gospel message including Yeshua’s remarriage to his Israelite bride and why he had to die on the cross to pay the sin price for his adulterous wife.
A fuller understanding on what it is to be the bride of Yeshua and how to prepare for and qualify to be his glorious and immortalized bride.
An understanding of the heavenly and temporal rewards that one will receive as a result Torah obedience versus not obeying YHVH’s Torah.
Delusion and delusional thinking is everywhere including in Christian churchianity. The Bible warns us against delusions that threaten to deceive the strongest saints in the end times.
What is the biblical definition of delusion, how do you come out of it, avoid it and protect yourself from being led astray from the Truth of God/Elohim?
This video explores these issues and answers these questions.
Did you ever wonder how the non-biblical holiday called “Christmas” came into the mainstream Christians church? What follows is the backstory to Christmas—the rest of the story.
Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. Irenaeus and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts; Origen glancing perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom. viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not saints, celebrate their birthday; Amodbius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264) can still ridicule the “birthdays” of the gods. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Christmas”)
Saturnalia was an ancient Roman festival in honour of the god Saturn, held on 17 December of the Julian calendar and later expanded with festivities through to 23 December. The holiday was celebrated with a sacrifice at the Temple of Saturn, in the Roman Forum, and a public banquet, followed by private gift-giving, continual partying, and a carnival atmosphere that overturned Roman social norms: gambling was permitted, and masters provided table service for their slaves. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturnalia)
Saturnalia may have influenced some of the customs associated with later celebrations in western Europe occurring in midwinter, particularly traditions associated with Christmas, the Feast of the Holy Innocents, and Epiphany. (ibid.)
The popularity of Saturnalia continued into the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, and as the Roman Empire came under Christian rule, many of its customs were recast into or at least influenced the seasonal celebrations surrounding Christmas and the New Year. (ibid.)
According to The Catholic Encyclopedia, Christmas is not included in Irenaeus’s nor Tertullian’s list of Christian feasts, the earliest known lists of Christian feasts. The earliest evidence of celebration is from Alexandria, in about 200, when Clement of says that certain Egyptian theologians “over curiously” assign not just the year but also the actual day of Christ’s birth as 25 Pachon (May 20) in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus. By the time of the Council of Nicea in 325, the Alexandrian church had fixed a dies Nativitatis et Epiphaniae. The December feast reached Egypt in the fith century. In Jerusalem, the fourth century pilgrim Egeria from Bordeaux witnessed the Feast of the Presentation, forty days after January 6, which must have been the date of the Nativity there. At Antioch, probably in 386, St. John Chrysostom urged the community to unite in celebrating Christ’s birth on December 25, a part of the community having already kept it on that day for at least ten years.
Some scholars maintain that December 25 was only adopted in the fourth century as a Christian holiday after Roman Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity to encourage a common religious festival for both Christians and pagan. Perusal of historical records indicates that the first mention of such a feast in Constantinople was not until 379, under Gregory. In Rome, it can only be confirmed as being mentioned in a document from approximately 350 but without any mention of sanction by Emperor Constantine. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas)
Evidently, Christmas was birthed out of the infant baptism heresy that was gripping the church theologically in the fourth century. The precursor to Christmas was a reaction or counter-revolt against Marcionite the heretic who denied the birth of Yeshua claiming that the Messiah was not a person, but rather a phantom. By emphasizing the nativity of the literal birth of Yeshua this heresy was countered, and by placing Yeshua’s birth on December 25, Saturnalia, it was a way to woo the sun worshipping heathens into Christianity. Here is what the historians have to say on this subject:
The grounds on which the Church introduced so late as [AD] 350-440 a Christmas feast till then unknown, or, if known, precariously linked with the baptism, seem in the main to have been the following. (I) The transition from adult to infant baptism was proceeding rapidly in the East, and in the West was well-nigh completed. Its natural complement was a festal recognition of the fact that the divine element was present in Christ from the first, and was no new stage of spiritual promotion coeval only with the descent of the Spirit upon him at baptism. The general adoption of child baptism helped to extinguish the old view that the divine life in Jesus dated from his baptism, a view which led the Epiphany feast to be regarded as that of Jesus spiritual rebirth. This aspect of the feast was therefore forgotten, and its importance in every way diminished by the new and rival feast of Christmas, (2) The 4th century witnessed a rapid diffusion of Marcionite, or, as it was now called, Manichaean propaganda, the chief tenet of which was that Jesus either was not born at all, was a mere phantasm, or anyhow did not take flesh of the Virgin Mary. Against this view the new Christmas was a protest, since it was peculiarly the feast of his birth in the flesh, or as a man, and is constantly spoken of as such by the fathers who witnessed its institution. (The Encyclopedia Britannica, eleventh edit., “Christmas”)
We find [Christmas] first in Rome, in the time of the bishop Liberius, who on the twenty-fifth of December, [AD] 360, consecrated Marcella, the sister of St. Ambrose, a nun or bride of Christ, and addressed her with the words: ‘Thou seest what multitudes are come to the birth-festival of they bridegroom.’ This passage implies that the festival was already existing and familiar. Christmas was introduced in Antioch a bout the year 380; in Alexandria, where the feast of Epiphany was celebrated as the nativity of Christ, not until about 430. Chrysostom, who delivered the Christmas homily in Antioch on the 25th of December, 386, already calls it, notwithstanding its recent introduction (some ten years before), the fundamental feast, or the root, from which all other Christian festivals grow forth. (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 3, p. 395)
The Christmas festival was probably the Christian transformation or regeneration of a series of kindred heathen festivals—the Saturnalia, Sigillaria, Juvenalia, and Brumalia—which were kept in Rome in the month of December, in commemorating of the golden age of universal freedom and equality, and in honor of the unconquered sun, and which were great holidays, especially for slaves and children. This custom accounts for many customs of the Christmas season, like the giving of presents to children and to the poor, the lighting of wax t appears, perhaps also the erection of Christmas trees, and gives them a Christian import… Had the Christmas festival arisen in the period of persecution, its derivation from these pagan festivals would be refuted by the then reigning abhorrence of everything heathen; but in the Nicene age this rigidness of opposition between the church and the world was in great measure softened by the general conversion of the heathen. Besides, there lurked in those pagan festivals themselves, in spite of all their sensual abuses, a deep meaning and an adaptation to a real want; they might be called unconscious prophecies of the Christmas feast. Finally, the church father themselves confirm the symbolical references of the feast of the birth of Christ, the Sun of righteousness, the Light of the world, to the birth-festival of the unconquered sun, which on the twenty-fifth of December, after the winter solstice, break the growing power of darkness, and begins anew his heroic career. (ibid., pp. 394–397)
Of the Christmas festival there is no clear trace before the fourth century; partly because the feast of Epiphany in a measure held he place of it; partly because the birth of Christ, the date of which, at any rate, was uncertain, was less prominent in the Christian mind than his death and resurrection. It was of Western (Roman) origin, and found its way to the East after the middle of the fourth century.” (ibid., vol. 2, p. 222)
The Pagan Origins of Christmas
The Catholic Encyclopedia has this say about the origins of Christmas:
The well-known solar feast, however, of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on 25 December, has a strong claim on the responsibility for our December date. For the history of the solar cult, its position in the Roman Empire, and syncretism with Mithraism, see Cumont’s epoch-making “Textes et Monuments” etc., I, ii, 4, 6, p. 355. Mommsen (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, 12, p. 338) has collected the evidence for the feast, which reached its climax of popularity under Aurelian in 274. Filippo del Torre in 1700 first saw its importance; it is marked, as has been said, without addition in Philocalus’ Calendar. It would be impossible here even to outline the history of solar symbolism and language as applied to God, the Messiah, and Christ in Jewish or Christian canonical, patristic, or devotional works. Hymns and Christmas offices abound in instances; the texts are well arranged by Cumont (op. cit., addit. Note C, p. 355). The present writer is inclined to think that, be the origin of the feast in East or West, and though the abundance of analogous midwinter festivals may indefinitely have helped the choice of the December date, the same instinct which set Natalis Invicti at the winter solstice will have sufficed, apart from deliberate adaptation or curious calculation, to set the Christian feast there too. (Catholic Encyclopedia, “Christmas”)
The same article in The Catholic Encyclopedia then goes on to say:
The origin of Christmas should not be sought in the Saturnalia (1-23 December) nor even in the midnight holy birth at Eleusis (see J.E. Harrison, Prolegom., p. 549) with its probable connection through Phrygia with the Naasene heretics, or even with the Alexandrian ceremony quoted above; nor yet in rites analogous to the midwinter cult at Delphi of the cradled Dionysus, with his revocation from the sea to a new birth (Harrison, op. cit., 402 sqq.). (Catholic Encyclopedia, “Christmas”)
On what basis are we to accept the above statement? Just because the author says so, when the circumstantial evidence to the origins of Christmas disagree with this author? Hopefully not.
A Christmas-Type Celebration Predated Christianity
