Church of God News

An engraving allegedly of Irenaeus, in Gaul (now Lyons, France)

COGwriter

Today is considered to be the feast/saint’s day for Irenaeus of Lyon. His writings are some of the earliest available on certain heresies and he claimed to have met the faithful Polycarp of Smyrna.

A reader sent me the following:

Celebrated by the Roman Catholic Church on June 28, and by Eastern Catholics of the Byzantine tradition on August 23, Saint Irenaeus of Lyons was a second-century bishop and writer in present-day France.

He is best known for defending Christian orthodoxy, especially the reality of Christ’s human incarnation, against the set of heresies known as Gnosticism.

Pope Benedict XVI spoke admiringly of St. Irenaeus in a 2007 general audience, recalling how this early Church Father “refuted the Gnostic dualism and pessimism which debased corporeal realities. He decisively claimed the original holiness of matter, of the body, of the flesh no less than of the spirit.”

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/st-irenaeus-stand-for-orthodoxy-honored-june-28/

Did Irenaeus properly defend Christian orthodoxy?

For years, I have considered Irenaeus to be a major heretic.

Notice also something from the late evangelist, John Ogwyn wrote,

Justin Martyr (ca. 95–167AD) and Irenaeus (ca. 130–202AD), while maintaining some truths they had learned under Polycarp, also sought to accommodate themselves to the new direction of Roman theology in the name of “church unity”…Justin also molded the thinking of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons…He believed that the God of Plato was also the God of the Bible (Ogwyn J. God’s Church Through the Ages. 2003).

While I have not seen any major other treatise explaining why Irenaeus was a major heretic (actually, outside of Church of God circles, I have seen little that specifically considers him to have been a heretic, though groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses probably do), it appears to me that he may have been the most dangerous heretic.

Why?

Because, Irenaeus’ heresies were not obvious to those outside the true Church of God. His heresies and false statements were less numerous and less obvious than Justin’s, thus have been missed by nearly all scholars (though some have noticed one or two errors he made).

What were His Most Important Heresies?

Irenaeus heard Polycarp, yet made deals with Rome that disagreed with Polycarp’s teachings. Irenaeus knew that Justin did not agree with Polycarp, yet he approved of Justin–and sadly seemed to prefer to be influenced more by him that by Polycarp.

Irenaeus knew that Polycarp condemned heretics such as Marcion and Valentinus, but failed to mention that they were still allowed to be Roman Catholic until at two decades later. Irenaeus supported the Roman Church even though Irenaeus knew they tolerated heretics that had earlier been condemned by Polycarp (and eventually by Irenaeus himself).

Notice this from Tertullian:

Where was Marcion then, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus then, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago,—in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,—and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled (Tertullian. The Prescription against Heretics, Chapter 30. Translated by Peter Holmes. Electronic Version Copyright © 2006 by Kevin Knight. All rights reserved).

Even though Marcion and Valentinus were condemned by Polycarp as a heretic about two decades before Eleutherius became bishop, apparently they were not put out of the Roman Catholic Church then. (Marcion gave a large financial contribution that kept him in good graces for a while–though the Roman Church allegedly returned that contribution after some time.)

And why is all of this about Polycarp and Irenaeus so important?

Because Irenaeus knew that Polycarp had the original faith that the apostles had, but did not stand up for it. Apparently, he did not consider that faith to be important enough to fully follow it personally. Notice what Irenaeus records this about Polycarp:

But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna…always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time (Irenaeus. Adversus Haeres. Book III, Chapter 4, Verse 3 and Chapter 3, Verse 4).

So we have from this early Roman Catholic source that Polycarp and his successors in Asia Minor (at least until the time that Irenaeus wrote this, around 180 A.D.) practiced the true teachings that they learned from the apostles.

Irenaeus also wrote:

And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, “Dost thou know me?” “I do know thee, the first-born of Satan.”(Irenaeus. Adversus Haereses. Book III, Chapter 3, Verse 4. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

What Irenaeus failed to mention is that Marcion was possibly the first heretic to do away with the seventh-day Sabbath. And while Justin did not believe in keeping the Sabbath either, Justin did attend church services on Sunday. Irenaeus apparently felt that neither Saturday nor Sunday was of particular importance, as long as one worshipped God regularly–and this is a heresy that many still hold to today (including even the Jehovah’s witnesses).

Irenaeus also had some teachings that Polycarp held. For example, like Polycarp, Irenaeus clearly did not teach the trinity–he held a binitarian view, hence he did not follow that error of Montanus or Valentinus:

…there is none other called God by the Scriptures except the Father of all, and the Son, and those who possess the adoption (Irenaeus. Adversus haereses, Book IV, Preface, Verse 4. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

Notice that Irenaeus states that only the Father, the Son, and those who possess the adoption (Christians) are God. This is a binitarian, not a trinitarian view.

So why would binitarians consider Irenaeus a dangerous heretic?

Because he sided with Roman unity above the teachings that he must have known that Polycarp held. And he also introduced prophetic and other misunderstandings that many still accept today.

The Real “Passover Plot”

Irenaeus clearly knew that Polycarp kept Passover yet he did not condemn Rome for changing it. Notice what he wrote:

And when the blessed Polycarp was sojourning in Rome in the time of Anicetus, although a slight controversy had arisen among them as to certain other points…For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp to forego the observance [in his own way], inasmuch as these things had been always observed by John the disciple of our Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant; nor, on the other hand, could Polycarp succeed in persuading Anicetus to keep [the observance in his way], for he maintained that he was bound to adhere to the usage of the presbyters who preceded him. And in this state of affairs they held fellowship with each other; and Anicetus conceded to Polycarp in the Church the celebration of the Eucharist, by way of showing him respect (Irenaeus. FRAGMENTS FROM THE LOST WRITINGS OF IRENAEUS. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Excerpted from Volume I of The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, editors); American Edition copyright © 1885. Electronic version copyright © 1997 by New Advent, Inc).

Eusebius records that Polycrates explained how the Apostles Philip and John, as well as faithful church leaders and martyrs such as Polycarp and Melito, kept the Passover on the 14th of Nisan in accordance with the gospel and would not deviate from it.

This displeased the Roman Bishop Victor. Notice what Eusebius also recorded:

But the bishops of Asia, led by Polycrates, decided to hold to the old custom handed down to them. He himself, in a letter which he addressed to Victor and the church of Rome, set forth in the following words the tradition which had come down to him: “We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away…”

He then writes of all the bishops who were present with him and thought as he did. His words are as follows: “I could mention the bishops who were present, whom I summoned at your desire; whose names, should I write them, would constitute a great multitude. And they, beholding my littleness, gave their consent to the letter, knowing that I did not bear my gray hairs in vain, but had always governed my life by the Lord Jesus.” Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate. But this did not please all the bishops. And they besought him to consider the things of peace, and of neighborly unity and love. Words of theirs are extant, sharply rebuking Victor. Among them was Irenaeus, who, sending letters in the name of the brethren in Gaul over whom he presided, maintained that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be observed only on the Lord’s day. He fittingly admonishes Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God which observed the tradition of an ancient custom and after many other words he proceeds as follows:

“For the controversy is not only concerning the day, but also concerning the very manner of the fast. For some think that they should fast one day, others two, yet others more; some, moreover, count their day as consisting of forty hours day and night. And this variety in its observance has not originated in our time; but long before in that of our ancestors. It is likely that they did not hold to strict accuracy, and thus formed a custom for their posterity according to their own simplicity and peculiar mode. Yet all of these lived none the less in peace, and we also live in peace with one another; and the disagreement in regard to the fast confirms the agreement in the faith.”

He adds to this the following account, which I may properly insert:

“Among these were the presbyters before Soter, who presided over the church which thou now rulest. We mean Anicetus, and Pius, and Hyginus, and Telesphorus, and Xystus. They neither observed it themselves, nor did they permit those after them to do so. And yet though not observing it, they were none the less at peace with those who came to them from the parishes in which it was observed; although this observance was more opposed to those who did not observe it. But none were ever cast out on account of this form; but the presbyters before thee who did not observe it, sent the eucharist to those of other parishes who observed it. And when the blessed Polycarp was at Rome in the time of Anicetus, and they disagreed a little about certain other things…For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord…” (Eusebius. Church History. Book V, Chapter 24).

Notice that what Irenaeus did was persuade to the Roman Bishop Victor to not be as angry against those who in Asia Minor did what the Bible and the Apostles Philip and John stated. And also notice that Irenaeus himself did not stand up for the biblical Passover even though he knew that Polycarp observed it.

So why was that so heretical?

First of all, because Irenaeus’ own practices were complicit with Rome’s–Irenaeus should have condemned Rome’s practices. And secondly, because Irenaeus knew that Sunday was not observed by Polycarp as Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John–hence should not have advocated it. Thirdly, Irenaeus also had to have known that Victor was not binitarian (he was Sabellian). And fourthly because he, unbiblically, is referring to Sunday as the Lord’s Day (an article of related interest may be Is Revelation 1:10 talking about Sunday or the Day of the Lord?). Because of Irenaeus most who profess Christ now accept Easter.

And why was that so dangerous? Besides the pagan connections, notice what Eusebius recorded:

Irenæus, who, sending letters in the name of the brethren in Gaul over whom he presided, maintained that the mystery of the resurrection of the Lord should be observed only on the Lord’s day…Thus Irenaeus, who truly was well named, became a peacemaker in this matter (Eusebius. Church History. Book V, Chapter 24).

Instead of condemning Irenaeus for not standing up for the biblical Passover, he is praised by Roman supporters for persuading those in the second century to not be too harsh on those that kept the proper biblical teaching of the date of the Passover.

Notice that the Apostle John taught that those who seemed like Christians, but did not do what John did were following leaders John describes as antichrists,

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us (1 John 2:18-19).

The change of Passover may have been the first specific departure from the practices of John that we have a historical record of (involving John’s name) (see also Some Doctrines of Antichrist).

Roman supporters ultimately did eliminate the observance of the Passover on the 14th among those they had cordial contact with by the decree of the pagan Emperor Constantine in 325 A.D. And later did try to kill those who refused to accept that decree (please see article Europa, the Beast, and Revelation).

Apparently Irenaeus valued doctrinal compromise above biblical truth. Irenaeus, while knowing that Polycarp was faithful, only followed some of his faithful teachings (this reminds me of what Daniel told Belshazzar–Belshazzar knew what happened earlier, yet chose to ignore much of it and live the opposite–see Daniel 5:22-23).

These are reasons that most Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant scholars seem to have overlooked. Instead, they all tend to consider that Irenaeus was a great early apologist and/or saint.

Furthermore, notice that Pope Benedict XVI called him:

The true founder of Catholic theology, St. Irenaeus of Lyon (Pope Benedict XVI. Homily for the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul. June 29, 2005, http://www.crossroadsinitiative.com/library_article/647/Homily_on_Saints_Peter_and_Paul_Pope_Benedict_XVI.html 6/19/07).

Those in the Church of God do not consider that Irenaeus was the founder of true theology.

Irenaeus Quoted “The Shepherd of Hermas” the Same as He Did Scripture

In a writing called The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, Irenaeus wrote:

For it is necessary that, things that are made should have the beginning of their making from some great cause; and the beginning of all things is God. For He Himself was not made by any, and by Him all things were made. And therefore it is right first of all to believe that there is One God, the Father, who made and fashioned all things, and made what was not that it should be, and who, containing all things, alone is uncontained (Irenaeus, St., Bishop of Lyon. Translated from the Armenian by Armitage Robinson. The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching. Wells, Somerset, Oct. 1879. As published in SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN CO, 1920).

The 69th footnote at that writing, which includes the original Greek states:

69 In IV, xxxiv. 2 he quotes, as “Scripture,” the Shepherd of Hermas, Mand.: Πρώτον πάντων πίστευσον ότι είς έστίν ό θεός, ό τά πάντα κτίσας καί καταρτίσας, καί ποιήσας έίκ τού μή όντος είς τό είναι τά πάντα, καί πάντα χωρών, μόνος δέάχώρητοςών. Cf. also I, xv. 1.

This is also the opinion of Roman Catholic scholars:

…”The Shepherd” (Poimen, Pastor), a work which had great authority in ancient times and was ranked with Holy Scripture. Eusebius tells us that it was publicly read in the churches, and that while some denied it to be canonical, others “considered it most necessary”. St. Athanasius speaks of it…St. Irenæus and Tertullian (in his Catholic days) cite the “Shepherd” as Scripture. Clement of Alexandria constantly quotes it with reverence, and so does Origen (Chapman. J. Transcribed by Don Ross. Hermas. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. Published 1910. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

No one can read The Shepherd of Hermas and think that it is on par with scripture–it is simply too bizarre. Irenaeus, however, was apparently the first known leader to do so. Irenaeus may have deferred to it as many believe that it was written by the brother of the Roman “bishop” Pius. This was a dangerous compromise. And one of the most dangerous.

What Motivated Irenaeus?

While it is impossible to know for certain what Irenaeus thought, there are some clues in his writings.

Irenaeus’ writings against heretics shows that there were many heretics who held views of God that they could not have possibly gotten from the Bible–essentially the views of the followers or Simon Magus and others like Valentinus that were later termed “gnostics”. Apparently as far as Irenaeus was concerned, these were the important heresies.

And while Irenaeus commended Polycarp for blasting the heretic Valentinus (who originated the idea that God existed as three hypostases) and Marcion (who tried to do away with the Old Testament, the law, and the sabbath), he apparently did not think that changing the date of the Passover to Sunday (as some Roman bishops did) or the day of worship to Sunday (as Justin advocated) was heretical.

The question is: Was he right?

The answer is simply no.

The proof that Irenaeus gave (as mentioned earlier) was tradition, not scripture. However, based upon the following writing, it might appear that Irenaeus is providing scriptural justification for his position:

The apostles ordained, that “we should not judge any one in respect to meat or drink, or in regard to a feast day, or the new moons, or the sabbaths.” Whence then these contentions? whence these schisms? We keep the feast, but in the leaven of malice and wickedness, cutting in pieces the Church of God; and we preserve what belongs to its exterior, that we may cast away these better things, faith and love. We have heard from the prophetic words that these feasts and fasts are displeasing to the Lord. (Fragments of Irenaeus XXXVIII.)

However, he has misconstrued that scripture. He left off the end of the statement, Colossians 2:17. The verse he left out has been translated:

3739…. .2076…….. 4639… 3588…….. 3195…… 3588…1161 ..4983… 9999 3588…5547
Which are a ………shadow of things ….to come; the…… but…body….. is…….. of …..Christ

(Interlinear Transliterated Bible. Copyright (c) 1994 by Biblesoft). Note: The term is does not exist in the original Greek (that is what 9999 represents–a translator added term).

Thus Colossians 2:16-17 literally states:

So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body of Christ.

Since the church is “the body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12:27), this passage is stating to ignore outsiders (those that are not true Christians) as to how the feasts and the sabbaths should be kept, but that the church is the judge.

Notice that Irenaeus did not appeal to vs. 17 that the Roman Church had authority on this over those in Asia Minor–he probably did not do this because almost none outside of Victor thought that the Roman Church had that type of authority (Victor was the first to clearly attempt to actually project Roman Catholic authority to distant areas).

And this is why Irenaeus was possibly the most dangerous heretic. He decided to ignore what the Bible taught, decided that those not faithful to the original teachings were close enough and that both sides had valid views. Irenaeus, like nearly all theologians after him, concluded that certain traditions were of more value than what the Bible (or those faithful to the teachings of the apostles) taught.

The New Testament warned of the same type of problems in Jesus’ day:

Nevertheless even among the rulers many believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:42-43, NKJV).

And the approval of men was apparently more important to Irenaeus than the truth of God.

Some articles of possibly related interest may include:

Irenaeus: The Most Dangerous Heretic? Was Irenaeus a faithful peacemaker or was he possibly the most dangerous of the early heretics?
Polycarp of Smyrna: The Heretic Fighter Polycarp was the successor of the Apostle John and a major leader in Asia Minor. Do you know much about what he taught?
Which Is Faithful: The Roman Catholic Church or the Continuing Church of God? Do you know that both groups shared a lot of the earliest teachings? Do you know which church changed? Do you know which group is most faithful to the teachings of the apostolic church? Which group best represents true Christianity? This documented article answers those questions. [Português: Qual é fiel: A igreja católica romana ou a igreja do deus?]
Simon Magus, What Did He Teach? Sometimes called “the father early heretics” or the “father of heresies”, do you know what early writers claimed that Simon Magus taught? Sadly, most who profess Christ still hold to versions of his teachings.
Marcion: The First Protestant? Considered to have been an organized heretic, he taught against the Old Testament, the law, and the Sabbath. Some have considered him to be the first Protestant reformer. But was he?
Valentinus: The Gnostic Trinitarian Heretic He apparently was the first Christ-professing heretic to come up with the idea of three hypostases.
Justin Martyr: Saint, Heretic, or Apostate? Justin is considered one of the first Christian theologians and scholars. But did he support a Gnostic version of Christianity? Do you know what he taught about souls going to heaven upon death? This article shows from his own writings, what Justin really taught.
Marcus and the Marcosians: Developers of the Eucharist? Marcus was a second century heretic condemned for having a ceremony similar to one still practiced by many who profess Christ. Might he also be in the apostolic succession list of the Orthodox Church of Alexandria?
Did Early Christians Celebrate Easter? If not, when did this happen? What do scholars and the Bible reveal?
Passover and the Early Church Did the early Christians observe Passover? What did Jesus and Paul teach? Why did Jesus die for our sins?
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

10th Century Representation of Gospel Writer Luke

COGwriter

The Continuing Church of God is pleased to announce its latest suggested sermon: which is at its ContinuingCOG channel:

This is the first of a multi-part sermon series by Dr. Thiel covering the Gospel account credited to Luke. This sermon covers chapters 1 & 2.  Dr. Thiel explains some controversies about the author of this Gospel and some controversies related to the census in Luke 2.  He also discusses issues associated with John the Baptist and his father Zacharias and not accepting when God answers prayer.  He also explains verses that some claim are in the Bible about Jesus’ mother Mary.  Dr. Thiel explains from a couple of sources why late December could not be when Jesus was born.

Here is a link to the sermon: Luke 1-2: John the Baptist, Mary, and the Census.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Jesus: The Son of God and Saviour Who was Jesus? Why did He come to earth? What message did He bring? Is there evidence outside the Bible that He existed? Here is a YouTube sermon titled Jesus: Son of God and Saviour.
Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Apparitions Do you know much about Mary? Are the apparitions real? What happened at Fatima? What might they mean for the rise of the ecumenical religion of Antichrist? Are Protestants moving towards Mary? How do the Eastern/Greek Orthodox view Mary? How might Mary view her adorers? Here is a link to a YouTube video Marian Apparitions May Fulfill Prophecy. Here is a link to a sermon video: Why Learn About Fatima?
The Elijah Heresies Does the Bible teach that there will be a future Elijah? Must it be Herbert W. Armstrong?
How To Determine If Someone is a True Prophet of God There are many false prophets. How can Christians determine who is a true prophet? There is also a sermon-length video titled How to determine if someone is a true prophet of God. Here is a related link in Spanish/español: ¿Cómo determinar si alguien es un verdadero profeta de Dios?
ContinuingCOG channel. Dr. Thiel has produced scores of YouTube video sermons for this channel. Note: Since these are sermon-length, they can take a little longer to load than other YouTube videos.

Red Angus Heifer

COGwriter

A red heifer found in the USA has some in Israel concerned and two readers sent links to the following:

TORAH CONDITION FOR 3RD TEMPLE NOW MET?

Institute reports required ‘red heifer’ being raised in U.S.

The Jerusalem-based Temple Institute has taken on the goal of rebuilding the Third Jewish Temple, regarded by Jews and Christians as a precursor to the coming of the Messiah.

The plan is guaranteed to provoke world conflict, since the Islamic Dome of the Rock now sits on the presumed Temple site…

The organization posted a video this month showing what appears to be a perfect red heifer that is being raised at an unidentified location in the United States.

“In truth, the fate of the entire world depends on the red heifer,” the institute says.

“For G-d has ordained that its ashes alone are the single missing ingredient for the reinstatement of biblical purity – and thereafter, the rebuilding of the Holy Temple.”

The Temple Institute says purification with the red heifer “reminds us that man has the potential to rise above his transitory physical existence, with all its false sense of hopelessness and misery … the impurity of death.”  http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/torah-condition-for-3rd-temple-now-met/#pTyWBvkkroch6Mub.99

Finding a red heifer is like finding a needle in a hay stack. But early this week some overly industrious Jew managed to do just that in the United States of America.

This finding is all the more intriguing considering that on the coming Sabbath (Shabbat) Jews will read in the synagogues the Torah portion that begins with one of the mysterious commandment of the Red Heifer: “Tell the Israelites to procure for you a red heifer that is free from every blemish and defect and on which no yoke has ever been laid…” (Num. 19:2ff).

The Red Heifer is an extremely rare creature. According to Jewish tradition, during the two thousand years from the time this commandment was given until the destruction of the Second Temple in the first century AD, only nine red cows that met the biblical criteria were ever found.

For a cow to be a Red Heifer it has to be without blemish, one that was never put to work and completely reddish. Jewish law requires keeping the young cow under strict care until it reaches three years old. During this time, leaning on the cow, riding it even once or even putting a piece of cloth on its back disqualifies it from becoming a Red Heifer…

The discovery of a red calf that could potentially become a Red Heifer excites many Jews who believe that Moses prepared the first Red Heifer and Messiah will prepare the last one.

The possibility of finding a real Red Heifer prompted the Temple Institute to make the logistic preparations needed for bringing the American calf to Israel and to train priests that will perform this sacred and rare sacrificial ceremony.

At least in theory, this calf could help Jews sufficiently purify themselves to engage in real Temple activities. For now, however, believers will have to chew their nails for at least two and a half years before it will be known whether or not this import is the Red Heifer.  http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/24701/Default.aspx?hp=popular_posts

The fate of the world does not depend on upon a red heifer being found, though at some point in time, at least one will apparently be pointed to as important.

Here is what the Bible says about a red heifer:

1 Now the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 2 “This is the ordinance of the law which the Lord has commanded, saying: ‘Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring you a red heifer without blemish, in which there is no defect and on which a yoke has never come. 3 You shall give it to Eleazar the priest, that he may take it outside the camp, and it shall be slaughtered before him; 4 and Eleazar the priest shall take some of its blood with his finger, and sprinkle some of its blood seven times directly in front of the tabernacle of meeting. 5 Then the heifer shall be burned in his sight: its hide, its flesh, its blood, and its offal shall be burned. 6 And the priest shall take cedar wood and hyssop and scarlet, and cast them into the midst of the fire burning the heifer. 7 Then the priest shall wash his clothes, he shall bathe in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp; the priest shall be unclean until evening. 8 And the one who burns it shall wash his clothes in water, bathe in water, and shall be unclean until evening. 9 Then a man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and store them outside the camp in a clean place; and they shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for the water of purification; it is for purifying from sin. 10 And the one who gathers the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until evening. It shall be a statute forever to the children of Israel and to the stranger who dwells among them. (Numbers 19:1-10)

Jews have interpreted this to mean that another red heifer needs to be sacrificed for sacrifices to be resumed or for the Messiah to return.  While that is not directly stated above, it could be implied from that one is again needed.  And if those who want to sacrifice will not do so until they have a red heifer, then in that respect a red heifer is important.

Some Jews believe that the Books of Daniel and Isaiah tell about a future red heifer, despite the fact that they do not specify one.  Notice the following passages that are sometimes cited starting with those in Daniel:

9 And he said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.

11 “And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days. (Daniel 12:9-12)

While certain Jews tie the purification in verse 10 to the removal of sacrifices in verse 11, the Bible does not tie this in with a red heifer.  Some Jews then tie in the following from Isaiah:

18 “Come now, and let us reason together,”
Says the Lord,
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
They shall be as white as snow;
Though they are red like crimson,
They shall be as wool. (Isaiah 1:18)

Some Jews tie the burning of scarlet in Numbers 9:6 to the above.  Yet, while sins can be as scarlet, the Bible is not saying that this is related to a red heifer.  It is a call from God to repent.  And Christians do this without a red heifer (Acts 2:38) as it is not possible that the blood of bulls or goats to take away sins (Hebrews 10:4).  Jesus takes away sins (John 1:36).

The Jews have various traditions about the red heifer.  In the Mishnah (Parah 3.5) it was claimed that “Moses prepared the first, Ezra prepared the second, and five were prepared after Ezra.”

So, supposedly there have been only nine proper prepared ones and the tenth one is what is needed.

Notice some of what the Temple Institute teaches about it:

But in truth, the fate of the entire world depends on the red heifer. For G-d has ordained that its ashes alone are the single missing ingredient for the reinstatement of Biblical purity – and thereafter, the rebuilding of the Holy Temple…

The Divine ordinance of the heifer, beyond the grasp of man’s frail intellect, with all the details of its preparation and ceremony, calls out to Israel and to all who seek to cling to the living word of the G-d of Israel: “Purify yourselves! Shake off your despair! Death is an illusion!” Thus it is written, “…but all of you who cling to the Lord your G-d…you are all alive today” (Deut. 4:4)…

G-d uses many devices to bring His children back to Him. …  the rabbis observed: “And if one should wonder, how could a man turn his life around, and come close to G-d on account of a heifer?! Do not wonder: For it is through the heifer that all of Israel becomes pure.  https://www.templeinstitute.org/red_heifer/introduction.htm

The Mishna teaches that up until the destruction of the Second Temple, ashes had been prepared from a total of only nine red heifers. The very first red heifer was processed by Moses himself – as the verse states, “… have them bring you a red heifer.” The second was done by the prophet Ezra in the days of the First Temple, and during the entire era of the Second Temple only seven more heifers were used for ashes. This was enough to provide for the nation’s needs for purification throughout all those years.

The names of all the High Priests who prepared those seven heifers during Second Temple times are recorded by the Mishna: Simon the Just and Yochanan each made two; El’yhoeini ben Hakof, Chanamel HaMitzri and Yishmael ben Pi’avi processed one heifer each. Thus, from the time that Moses received the commandment of the red heifer from the Holy One, blessed be He, until the destruction of the Second Temple, purifying ashes had been produced by the hands of these great leaders from a total of nine red heifers.

The Tenth Red Heifer Will be Prepared by the Messiah

In recounting this historical record in his commentary to the Mishna, the great Maimonides ends with the enigmatic statement: “… and the tenth red heifer will be accomplished by the king, the Messiah; may he be revealed speedily, Amen, May it be God’s will.”

With this amazing statement, Maimonides recounts an ancient tradition – that the tenth red heifer is associated with the Messianic era. Does this perhaps mean that the appearance of a red heifer in these waning end times is an indication, a forerunner of the appearance of the Messiah himself, who will officiate at its preparation?

If there has been no red heifer for the past 2,000 years, perhaps it is because the time was not right; Israel was far from being ready. But now… what could it mean for the times we live in, to have the means for purification so close at hand? With the words of Maimonides in mind, we cannot help but wonder and pray: If there are now red heifers… is ours the era that will need them?  https://www.templeinstitute.org/red_heifer/tenth_red_heifer.htm

Some believe that the tenth red heifer came prior to the destruction of the last temple.  Whether it did or not, the Bible simply does not mention ten red heifers.

Some have wondered if the abomination of desolation Jesus mentioned in Matthew 24:15 that Daniel taught spoke of is the sacrificing of the next agreed upon Jewish red heifer.  Let me simply state that no it is not.  That abomination has to do more with the final coming Beast of the Sea of Revelation 13 and not a sacrifice of the Jews.

Some Jews, like those affiliated with the Temple Institute, want to resume animal sacrifices and believe having a red heifer is a sign that the time is right.  An agreed upon red heifer may increase pressure on the nation of Israel to allow such sacrifices–though it may not happen until the deal of Daniel 9:27 is fulfilled (see also The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27).

Many evangelical prophecy watchers seem to believe that a third Jewish Temple needs to  be rebuilt in Jerusalem in the Temple Mount area near the Dome of the Rock for many end time prophecies to come to pass.

That belief is in error.  An employee of the Temple Institute told me personally that his group did not believe that they needed a rebuilt Jewish Temple to resume animal sacrifices.  He basically said is that all they need is an altar, which they have, and permission for the Israeli government, which they expect will happen some day.  Years earlier, a representative of the ‘reconstituted Sanhedrin’ emailed me and said the same thing (see Why is a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem Not Required?).

There have been a few claimed red heifers over the past decade or two, but supposedly they were not sufficiently blemish-free.  Notice the following:

The Temple Institute … thought to have identified two candidates, one in 1997 and another in 2002.^[7] The Temple Institute had initially declared both kosher, but later found each to be unsuitable. During a March 2010 radio interview a Temple Institute representative claimed that there is now “definitely a kosher red heifer here in Israel.” (Red Heifer.  Wikipedia, viewed 06/27/14)

So, now apparently another is being watched.

It is my belief is that once there is permission to start regular sacrifices, that whichever red heifer  may be available then will be considered to be the right and acceptable one (if it was not so before hand).

Temple Not Required For Jewish Sacrifices

As far as a temple goes, it should also be noted that many doubt whether or not the claimed Temple Mount is truly the location of the last Jewish temple.  Furthermore, many of the stones from that temple were moved to the Western Hill in Jerusalem, commonly referred to as Mount Zion (see Church of God on Jerusalem’s Western Hill).

Notice that the Bible shows that during the time of Ezra animal sacrifices in the Temple were made before the second Jewish Temple was built:

2 Then Jeshua the son of Jozadak and his brethren the priests, and Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel and his brethren, arose and built the altar of the God of Israel, to offer burnt offerings on it, as it is written in the Law of Moses the man of God. 3 Though fear had come upon them because of the people of those countries, they set the altar on its bases; and they offered burnt offerings on it to the Lord, both the morning and evening burnt offerings. 4 They also kept the Feast of Tabernacles, as it is written, and offered the daily burnt offerings in the number required by ordinance for each day. 5 Afterwards they offered the regular burnt offering, and those for New Moons and for all the appointed feasts of the Lord that were consecrated, and those of everyone who willingly offered a freewill offering to the Lord. 6 From the first day of the seventh month they began to offer burnt offerings to the Lord, although the foundation of the temple of the Lord had not been laid. (Ezra 3:2-6)

So, while a red heifer may be required (or at least desired) for the Temple Institute to sacrifice, an actual rebuilt temple on the Temple Mount is not.

That being said, the Temple Mount area is a likely location for end time sacrifices to resume, especially considering that the Temple Institute insists that it is the correct location (which is truly debatable).

Since the Bible shows that the Jews will again have animal sacrifices (cf. Daniel 9:27; 11:31), the fact that The Temple Institute and others are taking note of another claimed red heifer shows that there is real interest in taking steps that will lead to the fulfillment of various end time prophecies.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

The Red Heifer, Jewish Beliefs, and the End of the World The Temple Institute is watching a ‘red heifer.’ Why might this be important in the sequence of end time events?
Why is a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem Not Required? Although people like Timothy LaHaye teach a third Jewish temple is required, who is ‘the temple of God” in the New Testament? Does the Bible require a rebuilt Jewish Temple?
Church of God on Jerusalem’s Western Hill Could this building, often referred to as the Cenacle on Mt. Zion, possibly have been the oldest actual Christian church building? Might it contain stones from the Jerusalem Temple?
The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27 This prophecy could give up to 3 1/2 years advance notice of the coming Great Tribulation. Will most ignore or misunderstand its fulfillment? Here is a link to a related sermon video Daniel 9:27 and the Start of the Great Tribulation.
Does the ‘Cenacle’ deal have prophetic ramifications? After a 20 year negotiation, the Church of Rome has negotiated the right to have Catholic mass in the building known as the Cenacle. It is in the area where the Church of God on Jerusalem’s Western Hill once stood. This is believed to be the location of the earliest Christian church building. How does the Bible define the ‘temple of God’ in the New Testament? Could this be the area where the ‘man of sin’ will sit in the “temple of God’ that Bible prophecy discusses in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4? This is a YouTube video.
Jerusalem: Past, Present, and Future What does the Bible say about Jerusalem and its future? Is Jerusalem going to be divided and eliminated? Is Jesus returning to the area of Jerusalem? There is also a related YouTube video you can watch titled Jerusalem To be divided and eliminated.
Who is the Man of Sin of 2 Thessalonians 2? Is this the King of the North, the ten-horned beast of Revelation 13:1-11, or the two-horned Beast of Revelation 13:12-16? Some rely on traditions, but what does the Bible teach? Here is a related link in Spanish/español: ¿Quién es el Hombre de Pecado de 2 Tesalonicenses 2? Here is a version in Mandarin: 主编： 谁是’大罪人’？Here is a link to a related YouTube video, in English, titled Who is the Man of Sin?
Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel Are the Americans, Canadians, English, Scottish, Welsh, Australians, Anglo-Saxon (non-Dutch) Southern Africans, and New Zealanders descendants of Joseph? Where are the lost ten-tribes of Israel? Who are the lost tribes of Israel? What will happen to Jerusalem and the Jews in Israel? Will God punish the U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom, and other Anglo-Saxon nations? Why might God allow them to be punished first? Here is a link to the Spanish version of this article: Anglo-América & las Tribus Perdidas de Israel. Information is also in the YouTube sermons titled Where are the Ten Lost Tribes? Why does it matter? and British are the Covenant People.

David Cameron and Jean Claude Juncker

COGwriter

The UK’s David Cameron has become more isolated from the rest of the European Union:

27 June 2014

The British Prime Minister sees the former Luxembourg leader as lacking the will and the skills to reform the EU and told fellow leaders bluntly they were about to make a mistake in backing him – warning of unspecified “consequences.”

Germany’s Die Welt newspaper called him “the loneliest man in Europe.” …

…the Commission presidency, {is} one of the EU’s most powerful jobs with sway over legislation affecting 500 million people…

Opinion polls show that many British voters support Cameron taking a hard line on Europe…

But it leaves Cameron in an uncomfortable position towards his fellow leaders, many of whom are now openly concerned about the possibility of Britain moving inexorably towards the exit.

Cameron, many of whose own Conservatives favour a British exit from the EU, or “Brexit,” has promised voters a referendum on leaving the bloc by 2017 – if he wins re-election next year.  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/eu-juncker/article19358039/

27 June 2014

David Cameron has insisted his failure to stop the nomination of Jean-Claude Juncker for the EU’s top job is not his “last stand” in Europe.

The UK prime minister admitted it would make securing the reforms he wants harder but he vowed: “I am not going to back down.”

EU leaders voted 26-2 to reject Mr Cameron’s plea to prevent Mr Juncker becoming European Commission president.

Labour said it had been a “humiliating defeat” for a “toxic” prime minister.

Mr Cameron said the selection of Mr Juncker, whom he regards as an outdated Brussels insider committed to closer political union, was “a bad day for Europe”.

The prime minister needs to convince his fellow EU leaders to allow Britain to take powers back from Brussels if he is to make good on his pledge to hold a referendum on Britain’s membership of the 28-nation bloc. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-28053791

More and more, the continental Europeans are becoming displeased with the UK and its approach to European Union matters.

Basically, the David Cameron believes that if Jean-Claude Juncker becomes EU Commission President, Juncker will push for a more unified federal European Union that many in the UK oppose. David Cameron believes that this will increase the probability that the UK will later vote to leave the European Union.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will not be an equal part of the European Union. Britain will either pull out or be forced out or at least truly lose its sovereignty. The Bible indicates that the end time descendants of the Israelite tribes, because of their national sins, will be taken over and many killed.

As far as the UK’s role in the future, as I have written before, the UK will not remain a major power in the final European configuration.  The UK will be taken over and essentially devoured by the Beast power.  And it may well leave prior to its final formation.  Notice also the following from various writers who were once part of the Church of God (three of which have since died):

Here is Britain trying to GET IN on this uniting of Europe! … It is this same daughter of ancient Babylon who is to lay the YOKE of captivity and slavery on America and Britain. … Britain is allowing it self to get mixed in with European foreigners… When God brings Britain DOWN-the rime of JACOS’ S TROUBLE -the only time when the DAUGHTER of Babylon will be sitting astride a united MILITARY EUROPE. (Armstrong HW. BRITAIN’S DOOM Prophesied for Common Market Seeking Membership! Plain Truth, July 1962)

Perhaps it should be mentioned that the general position within the Churches of God is that Britain will not remain in the EU and will pull out at some point. (Thiel B. Tony Blair a Catholic EU Leader? Church of God News, June 26, 2007. https://www.cogwriter.com/news/prophecy/tony-blair-a-catholic-eu-leader/)

The English-speaking nations will not prosper for long in connection with this system, however. In fact, they will ultimately be overpowered and destroyed by it militarily. Prior to military attack and occupation, devastating weather problems, combined with internal civil strife (“tumults in the midst” cf. Amos 3:9) will bring our nations to the point of internal collapse. (Ogywn J. The United States and Great Britain in Prophecy. Booklet, Charlotte (NC)).

It should be understood that ultimately, Britain will NOT thrive as part of the EU but will be taken over by the final European Beast power–yet its former Prime Minister is promoting something that will not help the peoples of the UK. (Thiel B. Tony Blair Calls for a Strong, Elected, EU President Church of God News, June 9, 2007. https://www.cogwriter.com/news/prophecy/tony-blair-calls-for-a-strong-elected-eu-president/)

Bible prophecy clearly shows that Britain will not be one …comprising the final United States of Europe (McNair R. A Strong United Europe. Tomorrow’s World, February 1970, p. 17).

The UK is concerned that Europe wants to become an empire and the UK does not wish to lose its sovereignty. Ultimately, however, the UK will lose its sovereignty and more.

Many of the Anglo-peoples of the UK, USA, etc. will be killed, others will be scattered, and many will be made slaves by the final European Beast power (see Hosea 7:11-16; 9:1-17; 11:5-7; 12:1; 13:12-16; see also Will the Anglo-Nations be Divided and Have People Taken as Slaves?). That is some of what the Bible shows will happen during the Great Tribulation.

The final King of the North (Daniel 11:27-40) will take over the UK, USA, and their Anglo-Saxon allies according to Bible prophecy (cf. Daniel 11:39).

While more and more people in the UK are starting to realize that the EU poses dangers to it, most have no idea how dangerous the rising Beast power in Europe will become (cf. Revelation 13:1-4; Daniel 11:39). Britain will ultimately NOT thrive as part of the EU but will be taken over by the final European Beast power.

Events are happening in Europe that will lead to the final rise of the European Beast power. The UK will not be able to stop this.  David Cameron failed to even block one leader.  It will get worse for the UK in the future.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

British are the Covenant People What do ‘British’ and ‘Britain’ mean in Hebrew? Are the descendants of the Anglo-Saxons people of the covenant? Does the British royal family connect to the throne of David? What does the Bible teach? What does history show us? Is there any DNA evidence related to British-Israelism? When did Christianity make it to the British Isles? Could Jeremiah have made it to the British Isles? What type of Christians made it to the British Isles? Did the last King of England believe in British Israelism?
Europa, the Beast, and Revelation Where did Europe get its name? What might Europe have to do with the Book of Revelation? What about “the Beast”? Is an emerging European power “the daughter of Babylon”? What is ahead for Europe? Here is a link to a video titled: Can You Prove that the Beast to Come is European?
Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations? Some claim that these passages refer to a gathering of 10 currently existing nations together, while one group teaches that this is referring to 11 nations getting together. Is that what Revelation 17:12-13 refers to? The ramifications of misunderstanding this are enormous.
Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel Are the Americans, Canadians, English, Scottish, Welsh, Australians, Anglo-Saxon (non-Dutch) Southern Africans, and New Zealanders descendants of Joseph? Where are the lost ten-tribes of Israel? Who are the lost tribes of Israel? What will happen to Jerusalem and the Jews in Israel? Will God punish the U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom, and other Anglo-Saxon nations? Why might God allow them to be punished first? Here is a link to the Spanish version of this article: Anglo-América & las Tribus Perdidas de Israel. Information is also in the YouTube sermons titled Where are the Ten Lost Tribes? Why does it matter? and British are the Covenant People. A short YouTube of prophetic interest may be Barack Obama and the State of the Apocalypse.
Will the Anglo-Saxon Nations be Divided and Have People Taken as Slaves? Will the lands of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand be divided? What about Jerusalem? What does Bible prophecy teach? Are there non-biblical prophecies that support this idea? Who will divide those lands? Who will end up with the lands and the people? Here is a link to a video titled Will the USA and other Anglo-nations be Divided and Their People Made Slaves? Here is a related item in the Spanish language ¿Serán divididas las naciones anglosajonas?
Might German Baron Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg become the King of the North? Is the former German Defense Minister (who is also the former German Minister for Economics and Technology) one to watch? What do Catholic, Byzantine, and biblical prophecies suggest?
Germany’s Assyrian Roots Throughout History Are the Germanic peoples descended from Asshur of the Bible? Have there been real Christians in Germanic history? What about the “Holy Roman Empire”? There is also a You-Tube video sermon on this titled Germany’s Biblical Origins.
Germany in Biblical and Catholic Prophecy Does Assyria in the Bible equate to an end time power inhabiting the area of the old Roman Empire? What does prophecy say Germany will do and what does it say will happen to most of the German people?
Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies for the Great Monarch point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? Is a nuclear attack prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? When do the 1335 days, 1290 days, and 1260 days (the time, times, and half a time) of Daniel 12 begin? When does the Bible show that economic collapse will affect the United States? Here is a link to a video titled: The Future King of the North.
Can You Prove that the Beast to Come is European? The Book of Revelation tells of a beast power that will rise up. Some think that this must be Russia or could be Islamic, while others say that this power is European. The Book of Daniel tells of the rise of an end time King of the North that some think must be referring to a Russian leader, while others say that this power is European. How can you be sure? This YouTube video has all the scriptural proofs that you should need to prove that this power must be a European one.
The Eurasian Union, the Kings of the East, and Bible Prophecy Is there a Eurasian union that will be formed? Is one being formed right now? Are any leaders working on that in the 21st century? Does the Bible teach that there will be a Eurasian union? If some type of Eurasian union is formed, who might it benefit and who will it destroy? A related video would be Is The Eurasian Union Rising?
Is Russia the King of the North? Some claim it is. But what does the Bible teach? Here is a link to a video, also titled Is Russia the King of the North?

Ukraine’s Petro Poroshenko (Αντώνης Σαμαράς Πρωθυπουργός της Ελλάδας) and EU’s Herman van Rompuy

COGwriter

Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia signed deals with the European Union:

June 27, 2014

Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova have signed partnership agreements with the European Union, in a move strongly opposed by Russia.

The pact – which would bind the three countries more closely to the West both economically and politically – is at the heart of the crisis in Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said making Ukraine choose between Russia and the EU would split it in two.

A ceasefire with pro-Russian rebels in east Ukraine is due to end on Friday.  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28052645

June 27, 2014

Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko says his country has paid “the highest possible price” to achieve the goal of a free trade agreement with the European Union — a goal reached Friday when he signed the deal at a summit in Brussels.

Earlier in the day Poroshenko called the signing “historic,” despite negative reaction from Moscow. Russia’s deputy foreign minister said Ukraine’s move is “fraught with serious consequences.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that controversy over the agreement, which led to the ouster of pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych earlier this year, has forced Ukrainians into an “artificial” choice between loyalties to Europe or to Russia. He called for a long-term ceasefire in Ukraine as a condition for talks between Ukrainian authorities and pro-Russian separatists.

Western leaders warn Putin

At the Brussels summit, EU leaders set a Monday deadline for Putin to demonstrate support for calming the unrest in Ukraine.

In a statement issued Friday, the 28 leaders called for Moscow to meet several conditions, including visibly supporting the Ukrainian government’s proposed peace plan, the French news agency AFP reported. Ukraine’s government also should be granted oversight of three major border checkpoints, Reuters reported.

Two other terms according to the Associated Press, include setting up a means of verifying the cease-fire and securing the release of all captives.

If Putin fails to meet those conditions, Russia could face “further significant restrictive measures,” the statement said, according to AFP.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly has warned Putin that the EU will consider a new round of sanctions against Moscow if it doesn’t cooperate.

The Obama administration says it also is ready to impose new sanctions if Moscow fails to take action to de-escalate the crisis in eastern Ukraine. The administration said it has delayed implementation as it presses for unified support from European and U.S. manufacturers for the measures.  http://www.voanews.com/content/poroshenko-signs-ukraine-eu-free-trade-agreement/1946060.html

June 27, 2014

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Friday signed a broad deal with the European Union covering closer trade and political ties despite objections from Russia, which also warned that the deal will have grave consequences…

Poroshenko said the agreement — which allows for free trade within the EU as well as for key business-related reforms for Kiev — may be the “most important day” for his country since it became independent from the Soviet Union.”It’s absolutely a new perspective for my country,” Poroshenko said.

The EU’s deal with Ukraine is especially sensitive now as it comes at a time when a fragile cease-fire between the Ukrainian government and pro-Russia separatists is due to end, and as Europe’s top diplomats decide whether to impose fresh economic sanctions on Russia.

Georgia and Moldova also signed association agreements with the EU on Friday in a move that is opposed by Russia…

European Council President Herman van Rompuy described the signings as a great day for Europe.

“The EU stands by your side, today more than ever before,” he said. “There is nothing in these agreements or in the European Union’s approach that might harm Russia in any way.”

Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for President Vladimir Putin, told Russian news agencies that the Kremlin would respond to the EU-Ukraine accord “as soon as negative consequences arise for the economy.”  http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/06/27/ukraine-eu-association-agreement-russia/11448547/

The European Union wants to grow and expand and Russia in not pleased.  Russia has wanted Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia to be part of its Eurasian Union, which officially begins on January 1, 2015.  While many in Eastern Ukraine, parts of Moldova, and parts of Georgia would prefer to be part the Eurasian Union, for many reasons, others prefer closer ties with the European Union.

Moldova is currently considered the poorest nation in Europe and hopes the deal with the EU will assist it financially.  However, as it is dependent upon Russia for energy and a significant amount of its trade, it must tread lightly.  It is also possible that Moldova will split and/or later become part of the Eurasian Union if it gets enough pressure from Russia and/or the deal with the EU does not work out as well as hoped.  The same basically goes for Georgia, except the hostilities toward Russia seem to be higher in Georgia.

That being said, Georgia is a country that is not connected to the European Union via land.  Georgia is it is bounded to the west by the Black Sea, to the north by Russia, to the south by Turkey and Armenia, and to the southeast by Azerbaijan.

However, Georgia is south and east of the Benelux nations.

Why bring that up?

The Bible prophesied that a little horn would develop into what apparently is becoming a European entity. Actually what is now the EU began as a small organization involving three small countries located in the northern and western regions of Europe (Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg, called the Benelux nations)–they then helped form the European Economic Community. Which expanded into the European Union.

Notice that, the Bible prophesied that a little horn would mainly expand South and East:

And out of one of them came a little horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Glorious Land. And it grew up to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and some of the stars to the ground, and trampled them. He even exalted himself as high as the Prince of the host; and by him the daily sacrifices were taken away, and the place of His sanctuary was cast down. Because of transgression, an army was given over to the horn to oppose the daily sacrifices; and he cast truth down to the ground. He did all this and prospered (Daniel 8:9-12).

And while the above has had a past fulfillment, this prophecy seems to be dual (compare with Daniel 11:27-39). The reality is that the European Union has mainly expanded south and east of the Benelux nations. Now, approximately 500 million people are now under a new, single (though not completed united) government, called the European Union, headquartered in Brussels. Ukraine is mainly east of much of the EU–thus its geography is consistent with being part of the EU.  And Moldova and Georgia are south and east, which is also consistent.

Those groups (such as PCG and LCG) that tend to insist that the final European Beast power will only have ten or eleven nations may be caught up unexpectedly (cf. Luke 21:34) if the final Beast power has more (the European Union currently has 28 members, with at least a half-dozen more countries, like Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia with interest).  See also Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations?

Not all in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia want to be part of the European Union, some prefer to be in Russia’s upcoming Eurasian Union. Those that become disillusioned/disappointed by the EU may ultimately back out of it.

From a prophetic perspective, we appear to be seeing some separation between some of the peoples that live within the borders of Ukraine as well as Georgia and Moldova. According to Bible prophecy, those that appear to have descended from the ancient Medes will ultimately align with Russia.

This does not mean that some or all of Ukraine, etc. will not be part of the European Union, at least for a time.

The European Union has demonstrated a history and willingness to enlarge–and it is interested in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia.  The USA keeps encouraging all of this, but this will not end well for the USA (cf. Daniel 11:39; Isaiah 10:5-11).

Russia is upset by the developments in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia and is attempting to plan its next move.

That being said, I believe that later, even Russia will cooperate with the rising European Beast power for a time (cf. Revelation 13:4,8).  Europe is busily making trade and political deals around the world and is attempting to position itself to rise up and rival the USA and its Anglo-Saxon allies.  And that final European Beast power will succeed for a time.

Yet, the time will later come when Russia and its future allies will turns against the European Beast power to destroy it (Daniel 11:44; Jeremiah 50:41-43). War is in the future for Russia as well as the European Union (and is also for the USA and its Anglo-Saxon allies).

War is also in the future for Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia.  Signing those agreements with the EU today will not prevent this.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

WTO/TTIP and the Babylonian Beast Will international trade agreements like WTO/TTIP/CETA lead to the fulfillment of end time prophecies concerning the Babylonian Beast power that the Book of Revelation warns against? What does the Bible teach? A related video would be WTO Trade Deal and the Rise of the European Beast Power.
Europa, the Beast, and Revelation Where did Europe get its name? What might Europe have to do with the Book of Revelation? What about “the Beast”? Is an emerging European power “the daughter of Babylon”? What is ahead for Europe? Here is a link to a video titled: Can You Prove that the Beast to Come is European?
Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations? Some claim that these passages refer to a gathering of 10 currently existing nations together, while one group teaches that this is referring to 11 nations getting together. Is that what Revelation 17:12-13 refers to? The ramifications of misunderstanding this are enormous.
European Technology and the Beast of Revelation Will the coming European Beast power would use and develop technology that will result in the taking over of the USA and its Anglo-Saxon allies? Is this possible? What does the Bible teach?
Military Technology and the Beast of Revelation Will the coming Beast power use technology to fulfill passages in Revelation 13? What will this mean for the USA, its Anglo-Saxon allies, as well as a coming Arabic-Turkish confederation? What will Russia, China, and others do about this? Who is developing ‘Beast’ military technology now? What might Galileo, ELI, and supercolliders have to do with this?
Russia and Ukraine: Origins and Prophesied Future Where do the Russians come from? What about those in the Ukraine? What is prophesied for Russia and its allies? What will they do to the Europeans that supported the Beast in the end? You can also watch the video Ukraine in Prophecy?
Russia in the Bible and in Prophecy Is Russia mentioned in the Bible? It it is where is it? Is there any evidence of a people moving to the land that the Russians now occupy? What do Catholic and other prophecies say about Russia? What does the Bible teach? How are Protestants often in error on this? Is there more in biblical prophecy for Russia than war? Does God have a plan to save Russia and her allies? Does Russia have a history involving Sabbath keepers? Does scripture tie Russia in with Armageddon? Will Russia help defeat the end time Babylonian power? What did the Apostle John, and the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel, write about Russia? This is a sermon-length video.
Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations? Some claim that these passages refer to a gathering of 10 currently existing nations together, while one group teaches that this is referring to 11 nations getting together. Is that what Revelation 17:12-13 refers to? The ramifications of misunderstanding this are enormous.
World War III: Steps in Progress Are there surprising actions going on now that are leading to WWIII? Might a nuclear attack be expected? Does the Bible promise protection to all or only some Christians? How can you be part of those that will be protected? A related video would be Is World War III About to Begin? Can You Escape?
Wars, rumors of wars, and the Apocalypse Jesus foretold a time before the end where there would be wars and rumors of wars. The Apocalypse (the Book of Revelation) warns of the red horseman of war. Now, even secular writers, like Larry Edelson, are worried that wars and rumors of war are the most menacing problem that now haunts the earth? Are they right? What is the solution? This is a sermonette-length video.
Is Russia the King of the North? Some claim it is. But what does the Bible teach? Here is a link to a video, also titled Is Russia the King of the North?
The Eurasian Union, the Kings of the East, and Bible Prophecy Is there a Eurasian union that will be formed? Is one being formed right now? Are any leaders working on that in the 21st century? Does the Bible teach that there will be a Eurasian union? If some type of Eurasian union is formed, who might it benefit and who will it destroy? A related video would be Is The Eurasian Union Rising?
Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies for the Great Monarch point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? Is a nuclear attack prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? When do the 1335 days, 1290 days, and 1260 days (the time, times, and half a time) of Daniel 12 begin? When does the Bible show that economic collapse will affect the United States? In the Spanish language check out ¿Quién es el Rey del Norte? Here is a link to a video titled: The Future King of the North.
Barack Obama, Prophecy, and the Destruction of the United States-Second Edition for Second Obama Term This is a 160 page book for people truly interested in prophecies related to Barack Obama and the United States, including learning about many that have already been fulfilled (which the book documents in detail) and those that will be fulfilled in the future. It also has a chapter about a Republican choice. This book is available to order at www.barackobamaprophecy.com. The physical book can also be purchased at Amazon from the following link: Barack Obama, Prophecy, and the Destruction of the United States: Is Barack Obama Fulfilling Biblical, Islamic Catholic, Kenyan, and other America-Related Prophecies? What About Republican Leaders? Second Edition for Second Obama Term.
Barack Obama, Prophecy, and the Destruction of the United States-Second Term-Amazon Kindle edition. This electronic version is available for only US$2.99. And you do not need an actual Kindle device to read it. Why? Amazon will allow you to download it to almost any device: Please click HERE to download one of Amazon s Free Reader Apps. After you go to for your free Kindle reader and then go to Barack Obama, Prophecy, and the Destruction of the United States-Second Term-Amazon Kindle edition.

The Casket Claimed to be that of Mark of Alexandria in Venice (Photo by Joyce Thiel)

COGwriter

Last year, my wife Joyce and I got to visit St. Mark’s Square and the related church in Venice, Italy.

People in Venice actually believe that they have the body of Mark, the Gospel writer. Essentially, the old Venetians stole a body from Alexandria, Egypt centuries ago, that the Alexandrians claimed was Mark, the writer of the Gospel bearing his name.

Here is the story behind one of the mosaics at the sqauare:

The mosaic (said to be of Saint Alipio) that overlooks the first portal on the right hand side dates back to 1260. It tells the story of two merchants: Rustico from Torcello and Bruno from Malamocco who in 828 secretly stole the body of San Marco from Alessandria (Egypt). From the picture you can see the two merchants avoid the Muslim guards by hiding the body of St Mark underneath pork meat,( food considered dirty according to Islam) and calling out ‘canzir’ that in Arabic means pork. The disgusted guards reacted by not inspecting the load, enabling the corpse to be taken aboard the ship that set sail immediately for Venice. http://www.tours-italy.com/venice-about-st_marks_basilica.htm

Some believe that the arrival of the corpse of “Mark” in Venice fulfilled a private prophecy, which is one reason that this is accepted. Some believe that the idea that Mark indirectly founded Venice by founding a bishopric in Aquileia. This seems to be based upon legends found in eighth century writings (Sethre J. The souls of Venice. McFarland, 2003, p. 28). Because of these legends, the Venetians claim that the gospel writer Mark founded their church (the Alexandrians also claim Mark).

As far as the ‘prophecy’ of Mark’s body goes, here is one account of it:

In the “legend of predestination,” ratified by Andrea Dandolo, Mark of the Gospel becomes Mark of Venice. An angel brings him a message while he pauses amidst the Venetian marshes. at the very site where Rivus Altus/Venice will rise centuries later: “Pax tibi, Marce, evangelista meus.” The message foresees Mark’s spiritual presence in the city. The arrival of his relics in 828 “confirms” the truth of that prophecy. (Sethre J. The souls of Venice. McFarland, 2003, p. 28).

Whether or not Mark was in Venice, many believe the Venetians taking of a body in Alexandria fulfills this prophecy. Yet, as will be discussed later, Mark’s body was not actually in Alexandria, thus in the physical sense, the prophecy is clearly false.

Some Religious History of Venice

Those in the Patriarchate of Venice believe that the gospel writer Mark may have visited some of the outlying islands or at least one he ordained came to their area. Notice also the following:

The Venetian islands at first belonged to the diocese of Altino or the diocese of Padua, under jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Aquileia, believed to be the successor of St. Mark.

It is certain that during the Lombard invasion (568-572) many bishops of the invaded mainland escaped under protection of the Byzantine fleet in the eastern lagoons. The Archbishop himself took refuge in Grado, where he was claimed as Patriarch, during the schism of the Three Chapters. At the end of the invasion, many of the ancient diocese of the mainland were restored by the Lombards, while the Exiles supported the new sees in the lagoons. Two patriarchs emerged from the war and from the schism (at least solved in 698): Patriarchate of Old-Aquileia on the mainland and Patriarchate of Grado…

774. In that year, with the consent of pope Adrian I and the Patriarch of Grado John IV, an episcopal see was erected on the island of Olivolo (afterwards called Castello) with jurisdiction over Gemini, Rialto, Luprio and Dorsoduro. The first bishop, Obelerius, was invested and enthroned by the Doge of Venice, Maurice Galbaio, and ordained by the Patriarch. After Obelerius’ death, the doge named Christopher from Damiata in 798, a member of the Greek party (that is, the partisans of the Eastern Emperor). Patriarch John, a member of the Frankish party (the partisans of Charlemagne) refused to consecrate him, due to his extreme youth. A subsequent confrontation led to the murder of Patriarch John. John was succeeded by his nephew Fortunato from Trieste, who placed himself under the protection of the Frank-Lombard Kingdom and to a confused period, during which the chair of Olivolo was a long struggle. The same Duchy was invaded by the Franks, that besieged the (political) Metamaucus and were defeated and expelled only in 810. The victorious Greek party, led by the new ducal family of Parteciaci, in 812 moved the ducal see from Metamaucus to the more secure Rialto, at the center of the lagoon. A new city was created by the merger of the central islands, including Olivolo: that city was Venice. Finally, after the death of Patriarch Fortunato in 825, Orso, son of the doge John I Pateciacus, became bishop of the city. Under him, the relics of the Evangelist St. Mark were transferred from the Muslim dominated Alexandria of Egypt and brought to Venice…

In 1074 Bishop Henry, from the noble family of Contarini, was the first to bear the title of Bishop of Castello, indicating the complete merger of the island of Olivolo with Venice…Patriarchs of Grado began to reside in Venice more and more until in 1105 they definitely transferred to the city, with their own church at St. Silvestrus. For the next three centuries, three bishops resided in Venice: the Patriarch of Grado, the Primicerius of St. Mark and the Bishop of Castello, each one with his own jurisdiction.

The city gathered relics, especially from the East, and especially after the conquest of Constantinople. After 1204, the icon of the Madonna called Nicopoeia, which is still in St. Mark’s, arrived. (Patriarch of Venice, Wikipedia, viewed 06/09/13)

The diocese of Venice was basically created in 774 as suffragan of the Patriarchate of Grado. It is alleged that because the Venetians did not wish to have to fully accept papal authority that they decided to take the alleged body of Mark from the Eastern Orthodox of Alexandria Egypt. At this time, the “Great Schism” of 1054 (which is how the Eastern Orthodox describe it had not happened yet, and Rome officially still recognized their claimed sees).

This seemed to work for the Venetians for a while, especially when they were in the height of their power (they basically had a monopoly on making clear glass for some time, which made them fairly wealthy). But they eventually reunited with Rome.

In 1457, basically because in consideration of the political influence of the city, its bishops were accorded the title of patriarch by the Pope.

Within the Latin Church, Rome recognizes five Latin sees, including the Diocese of Rome. The others, which it accords the title of Patriarchate, also include Venice, Lisbon, the East Indies, and Jerusalem.

By tradition, the Patriarch of Venice is created a cardinal at the consistory following his appointment, although the Pope is not bound by law to do this. So, basically the Venetians feel special and have more influence than the average Catholic diocese.

The fact that Mark was not part of a faith that would have encourage the collection and adoration of relics does not seem to bother the Venetians.

Mark, the Alexandrians, and the Body

As far as Mark being the bishop of the Alexandrians, that is simply not true. The fact that it is at best highly questionable has long been known by the Church of Rome. Notice what the old The Catholic Encyclopedia taught:

A widespread, if somewhat late, tradition represents St. Mark as the founder of the Church of Alexandria. Though strangely enough Clement and Origen make no reference to the saint’s connection with their city…the chronology of the Apostolic age is admittedly uncertain, and that we have no earlier authority than Eusebius for the date of the foundation of the Alexandrian Church, we may perhaps conclude with more probability that it was founded somewhat later…the New Testament is silent in regard to St. Mark, for his activity in Egypt. (MacRory, Joseph. “St. Mark.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 9. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910. 17 Aug. 2008 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09672c.htm>)

A “late tradition” means that it was likely made up over a century later. The fact is that the biblical Mark could not have been the first “Bishop of Alexandria,” and probably did not even visit Alexandria. Origen wrote so much that it is almost inconceivable that he would not have pointed to a biblical connection to Alexandria, if one actually existed. The fact that the New Testament does not mention Mark in Egypt (but instead mentions him in many other places) should show that there are major problems with the later tradition. Despite the facts, in late 2012, the then Pope Benedict XVI referred to the Coptic Orthodox Church in Alexandria as the “See of Saint Mark,” which it could not be (Pope Benedict’s Message to His Holiness Tawadros II. From the Vatican 11/14/12;. Zenit.org, November 19, 2012).

Perhaps it should also be noted that the body that is in Venice now is not even certain to be the body that was taken from Alexandria as the Venetians lost it. Here is an explanation:

In 1063, during the construction of a new basilica in Venice, St. Mark’s relics could not be found. However, according to tradition, in 1094 the saint himself revealed the location of his remains by extending an arm from a pillar. The newfound remains were placed in a sarcophagus in the basilica. Copts believe that the head of St. Mark remains in a church named after him in Alexandria, and parts of his relics are in St. Mark’s Cairo’s Cathedral. (Wikipedia, viewed 06/03/2013)

Thus, the body is at best incomplete. It is not Mark’s body, and even what is there now may have been just thrown together from some bones not even from Alexandria. Mark is dead and in his grave and he did not appear to tell the Venetians were some of his body parts were.

It is not possible according to the scriptural accounts, for Mark to have been the Bishop of Alexandria when the Alexandrians (and Copts) claim that he was. Those who falsely believe that (and those that falsely believe a lot of other theological lies) would not have that problem if they would truly heed Jesus’ words:

31 “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:31-32)

Allegory and fable is not on the same level as the literal truth of the word of God.

Mark is Not Mentioned as Being in Alexandria or Venice in the Bible

Since Mark is mentioned many times in the New Testament (never with the title of apostle or Bishop), the apparent dates and events in the Bible that mention Mark demonstrate that Mark could not have been the Bishop of Alexandria at that time. The Bible clearly shows that Mark was in, or traveling to, many other places. The area of Venice is not mentioned either, though it is theoretically more possible that Mark could have visited Venice than been Bishop of Alexandria.

As far as Mark and his locations, around 43-44 A.D., Mark is mentioned first in Acts 12:12, when he is praying in Jerusalem. Herod is noted as dying in Acts 12:20-23, which was in 44 A.D. (Radmacher, p. 1813). Sometime after Herod’s death, notice:

25 And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem when they had fulfilled their ministry, and they also took with them John whose surname was Mark (Acts 12:25).

Thus, Mark was in Jerusalem and then went with Paul and Barnabas.

In A.D. 46, Mark spent time with Paul and Barnabas in the Antioch Church before he accompanied them as a helper on their first missionary journey.

Mark apparently went with Paul and Barnabas from around 47-49 A.D.

But Paul was not pleased with Mark and did not want him to accompany him on the next trip:

37 Now Barnabas was determined to take with them John called Mark. 38 But Paul insisted that they should not take with them the one who had departed from them in Pamphylia, and had not gone with them to the work. 39 Then the contention became so sharp that they parted from one another. And so Barnabas took Mark and sailed to Cyprus (Acts 15:37-39).

Notice that Paul considered Mark unfaithful, and that Mark then went to the island of Cyprus (not Alexandria). There is no way anyone should have considered the unfaithful Mark to have been a faithful “apostle” at that time, around 50-53 A.D.

Later, Paul apparently changed his mind about Mark.

10 Aristarchus my fellow prisoner greets you, with Mark the cousin of Barnabas (about whom you received instructions: if he comes to you, welcome him) (Colossians 4:10).

This occurred around 60 A.D. and Mark is believed to have been with Paul in Rome then. He could have possibly past by the islands near Venice then, but the Bible does not specify.

Around 64-67 A.D., Paul declared that Mark was useful:

11 Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful to me for ministry (2 Timothy 4:11).

It should be noted that the Bible never mentions that Mark was ever in Alexandria, and gives no indication that he was a “bishop” over any area.

Instead, the biblical account clearly contradicts the position of the Orthodox Church of Alexandria that Mark was its bishop from 42-62 A.D. as Mark was in Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Cyprus, and other areas during this time. Plus, according to various historians, he was still alive in 67 A.D.

Also notice what other scholars have noted:

… Alexandria, the second home of Judaism, occupies no place in the development of the Church as depicted for us in the Acts. (Ramsay WM. The Church in the Roman Empire before A.D. 170. (London, 1893.) as cited/discussed in Studies in early church history: collected papers. C.H. Turner,editor, Clarendon Press, 1912, p. 165)

Alexandria and Mark’s connection to it should have been in the Book of Acts if Alexandria was founded and led by him.

Furthermore, even though Eusebius mentions Mark, he noted that there was a problem with those who professed Christ early in Alexandria:

1. And they say that this Mark was the first that was sent to Egypt, and that he proclaimed the Gospel which he had written, and first established churches in Alexandria.

2. And the multitude of believers, both men and women, that were collected there at the very outset, and lived lives of the most philosophical and excessive asceticism was so great, that Philo thought it worth while to describe their pursuits, their meetings, their entertainments, and their whole manner of life. (Eusebius. The History of the Church, Book II, Chapter XVI, Verses 1-2, p. 33)

When Nero was in the eighth year of his reign, Annianus succeeded Mark the evangelist in the administration of the parish of Alexandria ( Ibid, Chapter 24, p. 42).

It should be noted that Eusebius’ source or conclusion regarding Annianus/Anianos seems to be in error. The eighth year of Nero’s reign would be 61-62 A.D. and the Orthodox does claim that Anianos was a bishop there from 62 A.D.

However, this would seem to be a historical problem if he succeeded Mark upon his death.

Why?

Because according to Peter, Mark was alive when Peter wrote 1 Peter 5:13, which states:

13 She who is in Babylon, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son…

Furthermore, according to Irenaeus (c. 175 A.D.), Mark was alive after Peter died:

Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter…(Irenaeus. Adversus haereses, Book III, Chapter 1, Verse 1. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), p. 414.)

While it is not certain that Peter actually preached in Rome, if Irenaeus is correct that Mark functioned as Peter’s interpreter and later wrote after the death of Peter, then it would seem that Mark could not have died before 67 A.D., nor could he have been functioning as the Bishop of Alexandria. Thus, if there was an “Apostle” Mark in Alexandria in the 1^st century, he would have been a false apostle and not the Mark who the New Testament discusses.

The Early and Allegorical Alexandrians

Of course, almost nothing is known about Mark’s claimed Alexandrian successor Anianos (sometimes spelled Anianus) nor any of his early claimed “successors” in Alexandria. Nor does it seem possible that Anianos could have become a bishop after the time of the death of “Mark.” Hence, Eusebius’s writings about Alexandria have been discounted by many scholars.

It does need to be understood that in the 1^st century, Philo reported that there were problems with those who were in Alexandria who professed Christ. Here is some of what Eusebius said Philo taught about the ascetic followers, who he seems to improperly allege followed Mark in Alexandria:

3. In the work to which he gave the title, On a Contemplative Life or on Suppliants, after affirming in the first place that he will add to those things which he is about to relate nothing contrary to truth or of his own invention, he says that these men were called Therapeutæ and the women that were with them Therapeutrides…

7. Philo … adds the following account: “Everywhere in the world is this race found. For it was fitting that both Greek and Barbarian should share in what is perfectly good. But the race particularly abounds in Egypt, in each of its so-called nomes, and especially about Alexandria…

9…”In each house there is a sacred apartment which is called a sanctuary and monastery, where, quite alone, they perform the mysteries of the religious life. They bring nothing into it, neither drink nor food, nor any of the other things which contribute to the necessities of the body, but only the laws, and the inspired oracles of the prophets, and hymns and such other things as augment and make perfect their knowledge and piety.”

10. And after some other matters he says:

“The whole interval, from morning to evening, is for them a time of exercise. For they read the holy Scriptures, and explain the philosophy of their fathers in an allegorical manner, regarding the written words as symbols of hidden truth which is communicated in obscure figures.

11. They have also writings of ancient men, who were the founders of their sect, and who left many monuments of the allegorical method. These they use as models, and imitate their principles”…

16. “Having laid down temperance as a sort of foundation in the soul, they build upon it the other virtues. None of them may take food or drink before sunset, since they regard philosophizing as a work worthy of the light, but attention to the wants of the body as proper only in the darkness, and therefore assign the day to the former, but to the latter a small portion of the night.

17. But some, in whom a great desire for knowledge dwells, forget to take food for three days; and some are so delighted and feast so luxuriously upon wisdom, which furnishes doctrines richly and without stint, that they abstain even twice as long as this, and are accustomed, after six days, scarcely to take necessary food.” These statements of Philo we regard as referring clearly and indisputably to those of our communion.

19. For they say that there were women also with those of whom we are speaking, and that the most of them were aged virgins who had preserved their chastity…by their own choice, through zeal and a desire for wisdom…

20. Then after a little he adds still more emphatically: “They expound the Sacred Scriptures figuratively by means of allegories. For the whole law seems to these men to resemble a living organism, of which the spoken words constitute the body, while the hidden sense stored up within the words constitutes the soul. This hidden meaning has first been particularly studied by this sect, which sees, revealed as in a mirror of names, the surpassing beauties of the thoughts”…

23. In addition to this Philo describes the order of dignities which exists among those who carry on the services of the church, mentioning the diaconate, and the office of bishop, which takes the precedence over all the others. (Eusebius. Church History, Book II, Chapter XVII. Translated by Arthur Cushman McGiffert. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series Two, Volume 1. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. American Edition, 1890. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight)

So Eusebius claims that Philo, circa late 1^st century, reported that those in Alexandria were ascetic, had mysteries, seem to have been Gnostics (ones who claimed to have special knowledge/wisdom essential for salvation), had some promotion of celibacy, allegorized scripture, and had a bishop—and Eusebius seems to claim that they are part of the Catholic Church (see vs. 17 above)—even though the Roman Church did not have celibacy rules at that time. Alexandria was a place where allegory was the main order of the day, and its leaders influenced professing Christians in many areas, ultimately including Rome. And, it seemed to have dispelled certain Jewish religious practices (like unclean meats) at an earlier date than other areas. The Alexandrians did not have the practices of the gospel writer Mark.

When the Alexandrians first had a bishop over the entire area is not clear. If it was Anianus, it appears that he led a group that did not teach the Bible the same way that the apostles did. Since the Orthodox Church claims an unbroken line of bishops here, they are apparently including individuals who allegorized scriptures and taught other doctrines contrary to those of the apostles.

Probably little of this mattered to the old Venetians. They basically wanted to pretend enough to be Catholic that the Church of Rome could not brand them as heretics or apostates worthy of punishment. Having a body and claiming to have been related to Mark was politically-expedient. And whether or not this was a factor, for a long time the Church of Rome left Venice basically alone.

Doctrines That Mark Would Have Held Should Matter

Of course, the gospel writer Mark would have had doctrines that the faithful and real Christians had.

Notice something that Mark was inspired to write:

19…Jesus…27 And He said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. 28 Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.” (Mark 2:19, 27-28)

But the neither the Venetians nor the Alexandrians keep the seventh-day Sabbath as Jesus and Mark would have.

Mark was also inspired to write:

11 And He said to them, “To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, 12 so that

‘Seeing they may see and not perceive,
And hearing they may hear and not understand;
Lest they should turn,
And their sins be forgiven them.'” (Mark 4:11-12)

30 Then He said, “To what shall we liken the kingdom of God? Or with what parable shall we picture it? 31 It is like a mustard seed which, when it is sown on the ground, is smaller than all the seeds on earth; 32 but when it is sown, it grows up and becomes greater than all herbs, and shoots out large branches, so that the birds of the air may nest under its shade.” (Mark 4:30-32)

But the neither the Venetians nor the Alexandrians teach or understand about the mystery of the kingdom of God nor the real meaning of the Parable of the Mustard Seed.

To a great degree, the Venetians and Alexandians hold to tradition about scripture in many areas. Jesus noted the same problem in His day, as Mark was inspired to report:

6 He answered and said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:

‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
7 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

8 For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men — the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.”

9 He said to them, “All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. (Mark 7:6-9)

Notice also the following that Mark reported:

12 Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they killed the Passover lamb, His disciples said to Him, “Where do You want us to go and prepare, that You may eat the Passover?”

13 And He sent out two of His disciples and said to them, “Go into the city, and a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him. 14 Wherever he goes in, say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says, “Where is the guest room in which I may eat the Passover with My disciples?”‘ 15 Then he will show you a large upper room, furnished and prepared; there make ready for us.”

16 So His disciples went out, and came into the city, and found it just as He had said to them; and they prepared the Passover.

17 In the evening He came with the twelve. (Mark 14:12-18)

That Passover was on the fourteenth of Nisan as nearly all scholars will admit. But that day was condemned by the Greco-Roman faiths, yet Mark would have kept it. Yet, those associated with the Venetians and Alexandrians do not.

The following also would have been doctrines that Mark would have held to that the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Venice do not hold:

Baptism was by immersion and did not include infants.
A Binitarian view, that acknowledged the Holy Spirit, was held by the apostolic and post-apostolic true Christian leaders.
Birthdays were not celebrated by early Christians.
Born-Again meant being born at the resurrection, not at the time of conversion.
Celibacy for Bishops/Presbyters/Elders was not a requirement.
Christmas was not observed by any professing Christ prior to the third century, or ever by those holding to early teachings.  Here is a link to a related sermon: What do Catholic and other scholars teach about Christmas?
Confession of sins were not made to priests and did not require penance.  A related sermon is Confess to God and truly repent.
Duties of Elders/Pastors were pastoral and theological, not predominantly sacramental–nor did they dress as many now do.
Easter per se was not observed by the apostolic church.
The Fall Holy Days were observed by true early Christians.
Heaven was not taught to be the reward of Christians. Here is a link to a related sermon: Heaven and Christianity.
Holy Spirit was not referred to as God or as a person by any early true Christians.
Idols were taught against, including adoration of the cross.
Immortality of the soul or humans was not taught. Here is a YouTube video titled Are humans immortal?
The Kingdom of God was preached. You can also see a YouTube video sermon The Gospel of the Kingdom.
Leavened Bread was removed from the homes of early Christians when the Jews did the same.  See also the video : Christians and the Days of Unleavened Bread.
Lent was not observed by the primitive church.
Limbo was not taught by the original church.
Military Service was not allowed for true early Christians.  A related sermon would be: Christians, Violence, and Military Service.
Millenarianism (a literal thousand year reign of Christ on Earth, often called the millennium) was taught by the early Christians.  A related sermon is titled The Millennium.
Monasticism was unheard of in the early Christian church.
Passover was kept on the 14th of Nisan by apostolic and second century Christians in Asia Minor.  There is also a detailed YouTube video available titled History of the Christian Passover.
Pentecost was kept on Sunday by certain Jews and was observed then by professing Christians.  Here is a YouTube sermon titled Pentecost: Feast of Firstfruits.
Purgatory was not taught by the original apostolic church.
Salvation was believed to be offered to the chosen now by the early Church, with others being called later, though not all that taught that (or other doctrines) practiced “the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).
God’s Six Thousand Year Plan for humankind to rule itself was believed by early professors of Christ.  There is also a video titled The 6000 Year Plan: Is the end of humanity’s reign almost up?
Sunday was not observed by the apostolic and original post-apostolic Christians.
Tithes and Offerings were given to support the ministry, the churches, the needy, and evangelical travels and gospel proclamation.
Tradition had some impact on the second century Christians, but was never supposed to supercede the Bible.
The Trinity was not a word used to describe the Godhead by the apostolic or second century Christians, though a certain threeness was acknowledged.
The New Testament Church and Unclean Meats Are foods considered to have been unclean in the Old Testament considered to be food in the New Testament? This article discusses this from the perspective of the New Testament. It also has a list of clean and unclean animals. It also answers the question, is pork healthy or is pork dangerous? There is also a sermon-length video on this: Christians and Unclean Meats.

The fact that the Alexandrians and Venetians of the Middle Ages did not have the same teachings or practices of the gospel writer Mark probably did not matter to the Venetians of old either.

Sadly, the fact that those associated with the Venetian and Alexandrian patriarchs today do not hold them either should give them pause to consider that if Mark was their founder, how can they claim that if they do not do what he would have done or believe as he did.

Why is any of this important to Christians?

There are basically two reasons.

The first is the reality is that the so-called ‘apostolic sees” of the Church of Rome and the Eastern Orthodox claim simply do not hold to the teachings of the original apostles, hence none truly have ‘apostolic succession.’

The fact that there origins are often, directly or indirectly (such as the non-fulfilled ‘prophecy” about Mark returning to Venice), based on false or implausible information should show all that they do not have “the love of the truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:10).

The second is that we who have that “love of the truth” need to “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15, KJV) as to why we do not except the improper Greco-Roman versions of church doctrine or history. The truth of church history needs to be restored and brought to light (cf. Matthew 5:14-16; 17:11).

The time is coming when the Beast power will rise up and, at first, I expect that he and his supporters will give lip service to the idea of the Greco-Roman apostolic sees as partial proof why they, and not groups like the Continuing Church of God have ties to apostolic Christianity. They will be wrong, of course. But we of the faithful need to be able to explain why they are wrong and that is part of why I posted this about the claimed ‘see’ of Venice.

Only those who have the same teachings and practices of the apostles can possibly have true apostolic succession.

Some items to assist in your studies may include:

What Do Roman Catholic Scholars Actually Teach About Early Church History? Although most believe that the Roman Catholic Church history teaches an unbroken line of succession of bishops beginning with Peter, with stories about most of them, Roman Catholic scholars know the truth of this matter. Is telling the truth about the early church citing Catholic accepted sources anti-Catholic? This eye-opening article is a must-read for any who really wants to know what Roman Catholic history actually admits about the early church. There is also a YouTube sermon on the subject titled Church of God or Church of Rome: What Do Catholic Scholars Admit About Early Church History?
Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes? Who were the Nazarene Christians? What did they believe? Should 21st century Christians be modern Nazarenes? Is there a group that exists now that traces its history through the Nazarenes and holds the same beliefs today? Here is a link to a related video sermon Nazarene Christians: Were the early Christians “Nazarenes”?
Location of the Early Church: Another Look at Ephesus, Smyrna, and Rome What actually happened to the primitive Church? And did the Bible tell about this in advance?
Apostolic Succession What really happened? Did structure and beliefs change? Are many of the widely-held current understandings of this even possible? Did you know that Catholic scholars really do not believe that several of the claimed “apostolic sees” of the Orthodox have apostolic succession–despite the fact that the current pontiff himself seems to wish to ignore this view?  Is there actually a true church that has ties to any of the apostles that is not part of the Catholic or Orthodox churches?  Read this article if you truly are interested in the truth on this matter! Here is a version in the Spanish language La sucesión apostólica. ¿Ocurrió en Roma, Alejandría, Constantinopla, Antioquía, Jerusalén o Asia Menor?
Early Church History: Who Were the Two Major Groups Professed Christ in the Second and Third Centuries? Did you know that many in the second and third centuries felt that there were two major, and separate, professing Christian groups in the second century, but that those in the majority churches tend to now blend the groups together and claim “saints” from both? “Saints” that condemn some of their current beliefs. Who are the two groups?
What Was the Original Apostles’ Creed? What is the Nicene Creed? Did the original apostles write a creed? When was the first creed written? Are the creeds commonly used by the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholics original?
Do You Practice Mithraism? Many practices and doctrines that mainstream so-called Christian groups have are the same or similar to those of the sun-god Mithras. December 25th was celebrated as his birthday. Do you follow Mithraism combined with the Bible or original Christianity? A sermon video from Vatican City is titled Church of Rome, Mithras, and Isis?
The Churches of Revelation 2 & 3 Do they matter? Most say they must, but act like they do not. This article contains some history about the Church of God (sometimes referred to as the continuation of Primitive Christianity) over the past 2000 years. It also discusses the concept of church eras. There is also a YouTube video: The Seven Church Eras of Revelation.
Which Is Faithful: The Roman Catholic Church or the Continuing Church of God? Do you know that both groups shared a lot of the earliest teachings? Do you know which church changed? Do you know which group is most faithful to the teachings of the apostolic church? Which group best represents true Christianity? This documented article answers those questions.
Continuing History of the Church of God This pdf booklet is a historical overview of the true Church of God and some of its main opponents from c. 31 A.D. to 2014. A related sermon link would be Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D.
Continuing Church of God The group striving to be most faithful amongst all real Christian groups to the word of God.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

Iran’s ‘Supreme Leader’ Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

COGwriter

The improperly named Philadelphia Church of God (PCG) posted the following:

Three Reasons Why Iran Is the ‘King of the South’ of Bible Prophecy

The king of the south is stirring up trouble today and it’s critical that you know the identity of this prophesied power!

Could this prophesied king of the south be linked to modern Iran?

The Trumpet identifies the king of the south as radical Islam, led by Iran. Editor in chief Gerald Flurry first made this connection in 1994, just six years after Iran emerged from its devastating eight-year war with Iraq—a time when few paid any attention to this rogue Islamist nation.

Here are three reasons why Iran is the king of the south prophesied in the Bible.

1. Iran Is the King of Radical Islam…

2. Iran and Its Allies Are Located to the South…

3. Bible Prophecy Eliminates Every Possibility Except Iran…

Daniel 11:43 shows that the king of the north will also conquer Libya and Ethiopia, which will also be allied with the king of the south.

PCG has long been wrong on this.  Before going through why its three reasons are wrong, let’s first look at the verses in the Bible related to the King of the South:

40 “At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through. 41 He shall also enter the Glorious Land, and many countries shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon. 42 He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 He shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; also the Libyans and Ethiopians shall follow at his heels.  (Daniel 11:40-43)

Now, let’s look at PCG’s three reasons:

1. Iran Is the King of Radical Islam

Some would perhaps point out that the Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood that formed in the 1920s predated it.  Also, the 9/11 terror attack against the USA was mainly from Saudi Arabians associated with radical elements of the Sunni Muslim faith (Iran is primarily Shi-ite Muslim).  As the religion of the specific nations listed in Daniel 11:40-43 is Sunni Islam, combined with the fact that many Sunnis question if Shi’ite Islam is truly Islam, unless a massive conversion takes place, those nations would not support Iran this way.  The rise of ISIS in Iraq and Syria also shows that there are strong militaristic Islamic groups that are not with Iran.

2. Iran and Its Allies Are Located to the South

By being south, this is a reference to being south of Jerusalem.  While most of the nations listed as being aligned with the King of the South in Daniel 11:40-43, as well as the related account in Ezekiel 30:2-8, are mainly south of Jerusalem, Iran itself is basically due east.

3. Bible Prophecy Eliminates Every Possibility Except Iran

No, Bible prophecy does not eliminate every possibility except Iran.  Iran is not even listed in Daniel 11:40-43.  Also, when one looks at the parallel account of the King of the South in Ezekiel 30:2-8, one sees that this is an alliance that is tied to Egypt and is mainly an Arabic confederation.

Furthermore, notice something that PCG improperly claims:

The PCG is the only Church that holds onto ALL of what Christ established through Mr. Armstrong (Flurry, Gerald and Leap, Dennis. Ezra and Nehemiah: Building God’s Temple. Booklet. 1997. p.29).

Did the late Herbert W. Armstrong (HWA) teach that Iran was the King of the South?

No.

Under HWA’s leadership, notice he had taught that the King of the South would be an Arab-Moslem confederation:

But who is the ‘king of the south’?…in verse 40 we skip to ‘the time of the end’…Just as there is yet to be a final ‘king of the north’…there may very well emerge in the same manner a final ‘king of the south’–an overall leader of an Arab-Moslem confederation…Germany (Assyria in Bible prophecy) and perhaps the rest of Europe will be in league in the future with a union of Arab nations…But in the end, the European-Arab alliance will prove short-lived…the ‘king of the north’ will ultimately turn against the Arab ‘king of the south’…The Arab-Moslem Confederation will, of course, be thrown into chaotic disarray in the fact of invasion (The Arab World in Prophecy. Plain Truth. December, 1979).

Bible prophecy reveals the coming emergence of an Arab-Moslem confederation in the Middle East. It is referred to in prophecy as “the king of the south” (Dan. 11:40). This confederation will play a crucial role in end-time events. (Seeing the World Through Islamic Eyes. Plain Truth, June 1983, p.44).

The king of the South? EGYPT, of course. But not Egypt of today. Egypt of a few more years from now–Egypt as she continues to expand the U.A.R., bringing more and more of the North Africa Mohammedan nations into the same Afro-Arabian power block! (“And when you see the Abomination…” Plain Truth, July, 1963, p. 22).

So under HWA, the old WCG taught that the King of the South would be a Arab-Muslim confederation. I do not recall seeing anything in the old WCG literature indicating that Iran would be the king of the South.

What was taught about Iran was:

Iran will eventually become linked with the Soviet Union. This is not to say that Iran…will be incorporated into the Soviet Union…Rather, there will generally be only political linkage in the form of alliances or vassal states dominated by Moscow” (Why Russia Will Not Attack the United States, reprint 1980, p. 11).

Those who want to understand more of this matter should read the article titled Is there a Future King of the South?

Notice the claim that Gerald Flurry wrote the following in the October-November 2012 edition of the Philadelphia Trumpet:

Egypt Unites With Iran and Fulfills a Bible Prophecy…

Over the last 20 years, I have been explaining the prophecy in Daniel 11 which says that Egypt would fall to radical Islam, ally itself with Iran, trash its peace treaty with Israel, and become a violent enemy of Israel and the United States.

In August, that prophecy was fully and totally fulfilled! It is now reality!

Egypt and Iran are now allies…

A Fulfilled Prophecy

In a January 2006 letter to co-workers, I wrote: “We have said for years that Egypt has been a friend to the West, but because of this prophecy [Daniel 11:42], we also said that could change. … As the MB grows more popular it will strengthen its ties with Islamic powers throughout the region—especially Iran. … [W]atch for Cairo to distance itself from America. Should the MB ever take control, there is no doubt that a strong alliance between Iran and Egypt will be built.”

That is a fulfilled prophecy.

That was NOT a fulfilled prophecy, but yet another where Gerald Flurry has been proven to be a false prophet.

Egypt and Iran are not now strong allies. Simply do a google news search and you will find many articles explaining that Egypt is still a rival to Iran and that they are not strong allies.  “Egypt is the only Arab country without an embassy in Iran” (Wikipedia, viewed 06/26/14), hence that relationship is not that close. Also, according to a 2013 BBC World Service poll, only 15% of Egyptians view Iran’s influence positively, with 48% expressing a negative view.

Gerald Flurry may disagree about their connections, but he is ignoring reality. The Iranians mainly support Shi’a Islam and the Egyptians still mainly support Sunni Islam–and the two groups are not close enough together to consider them “strong” allies.

Furthermore, the meeting Gerald Flurry referred to in August 2012 between leaders of those two nations did not fulfill any biblical prophecies in Daniel 11.  Plus, the Egyptian leader (Dr. Morsi) that Iran met with has been deposed.

PCG may wish to reconsider that what it teaches about Iran is in clear error.  Iran is NOT the final King of the South.

Some items of related interest may include:

Teachings Unique to the Philadelphia Church of God Simply calling oneself ‘Philadelphia’ does not make one so (see Revelation 3:7-9), nor does Gerald Flurry calling himself “that prophet” make it so. This article provides many quotes from this group which tries to look faithful.
Iran in Prophecy Is Iran in Bible prophecy? If so, what does the Bible teach? What names, other than Persia, may be used to describe Iran? There is also a YouTube video titled Iran in Prophecy. Here is a related video Iran In Prophecy.
Iraq, the King of the South, Armageddon, and Prophecy What will happen to Iraq? Is it the prophesied Mystery Babylon? What is Armageddon and how does that have to do with Iraq? Here is a related video Iraq, Armageddon, & Prophecy.
The Arab and Islamic World In the Bible, History, and Prophecy The Bible discusses the origins of the Arab world and discusses the Middle East in prophecy. What is ahead for the Middle East and those who follow Islam? What about the Imam Mahdi? What lies ahead for Turkey, Iran, and the other non-Arabic Muslims? An item of possibly related interest in the Spanish language would be: Líderes iraníes condenan la hipocresía de Occidente y declaran que ahora es tiempo para prepararse para el Armagedón, la guerra, y el Imán Mahdi.
Is the Future King of the South Rising Up? Some no longer believe there needs to be a future King of the South. Might Egypt, Islam, Iran, Arabs, or Ethiopia be involved? Might this King be called the Mahdi or Caliph? What does the Bible say? A YouTube video of related interest may be: The Future King of the South is Rising.
Why Be Concerned About False and Heretical Leaders? There have been many false leaders–here is some of why you should be concerned about them. Here is a related article in the Spanish language ¿Por qué estar preocupado acerca de falsos y heréticos líderes?.
How To Determine If Someone is a True Prophet of God There are many false prophets. How can Christians determine who is a true prophet? There is also a sermon-length video titled How to determine if someone is a true prophet of God. Here is a related link in Spanish/español: ¿Cómo determinar si alguien es un verdadero profeta de Dios?

David Cameron and Jean Claude Juncker

COGwriter

The UK’s David Cameron is becoming more isolated from the rest of the European Union because of his pressing to try to prevent Jean Claude Junker from becoming the next European Commission President:

26 June 2014

There is, of course, an element of domestic politics at play with David Cameron’s strategy. Facing down the lacklustre Mr Juncker seems to be playing well with British voters. It is certain that come the UK’s national election, potential UKIP voters will be reminded of the PM’s lone stand in Brussels.

But David Cameron is also fighting for a principle that nominating Mr Juncker would be an “irreversible step which would hand power from the European Council [heads of state and government] to the European Parliament”. Why does that matter? Because the prime minister in his bid to sell a reformed Europe to the British public needs the reverse to happen: a shift in power back to national parliaments. This fight over the former prime minister of Luxembourg is part of the longer struggle to reform the EU. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28031469

26 June 2014

Jean-Claude Juncker’s bid to become the European Commission’s next president has been given a boost after two more EU countries said they would support his candidacy. This leaves the UK looking increasingly isolated…

Cameron has said he regards Juncker as an old school European federalist who is incapable of breathing new life into the bloc.  http://www.dw.de/camerons-bid-to-prevent-juncker-from-getting-top-european-post-loses-steam/a-17737398

26 June 2014

The prime minister is determined to try to snatch a moral victory from the jaws of a certain negotiating defeat at the EU summit which begins today.

It is now almost certain that Jean-Claude Juncker, a man David Cameron has consistently opposed, will be confirmed as the next president of the European Commission on Friday…

David Cameron will try to turn his humiliation abroad into a popular stand back at home – the polls show that Thatcherite defiance is popular.

Here’s the problem though – Eurosceptics and those who oppose our membership altogether may well say “all that effort and nothing to show for it”.

And the real question at the end of it will be this: Will Europe’s leaders say “we must help that guy next time”, or will they say “he’s set on a course that will lead Britain to the exit and there’s not that much we can do about it”?  http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-28026473

More and more, the continental Europeans are becoming displeased with the UK and its approach to European Union matters.

Basically, the David Cameron believes that if Jean-Claude Juncker become EU Commission President, he will push for a more unified federal European Union.  David Cameron believes that this will increase the probability that the UK will later vote to leave the European Union.  While David Cameron want the United Kingdom to remain part of the European Union, there are some leaders who want the UK out as soon as possible

Notice the following:

June 25, 2014

U.K. Independence Party leader Nigel Farage said the appointment of Jean-Claude Juncker to the European Union’s top executive job over British objections would add momentum to UKIP’s calls to leave the EU.

U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron has “misunderstood” the EU’s political determination to install Juncker as European Commission president, an appointment that will undermine Britain’s push to scale back the bloc’s powers through renegotiation, Farage said in an interview yesterday in Brussels.

“The prime minister has gone to war over the appointment of the next commission president — a war that he’s clearly going to lose,” said Farage. “There is an increasingly bad relationship between Britain’s leaders and the leaders of many other European countries.” …

Juncker’s rise to top contender underlines the weakness of Cameron’s “in-the-middle” position — between Britain’s EU backers and opponents — of attempting to keep the U.K. in the bloc with “one last go at mending this marriage before we head for the divorce lawyers,” said Farage.

“That does tempt people, the idea that maybe it’s worth a last shot,” he said. “Well, if the British prime minister makes a stand as big against Mr. Juncker and can’t really find a friend in Europe to help him, what hope is there after that of getting any substantial renegotiation? So I think quite a lot of that middle sector move towards the UKIP position because of it.”  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-24/farage-says-juncker-appointment-a-gift-to-ukip-exit-drive.html

Nigel Farage’s views are getting more traction as many in the UK are somewhat stunned that most other EU nations have abandoned it on the Jean-Claude Juncker matter.

It may very well be that because of people such as Jean Claude Junker (also spelled Juncker) that the UK will vote to leave the European Union next year or at a later time.

The idea of Britain leaving the European Union has been called a “Brexit”  or “Brixet” – British exit.  Here is a news item I posted here back in February related to that:

The fact of the matter is that “Brexit” happens to make perfect sense for the UK.

There is not going to be a two-speed EU with some countries in the Eurozone and others not. One is going to be either in or out. Sitting on the fence forever won’t happen. Neither French president Francois Hollande nor the UK liberals will allow that.

Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/rise-of-eurosceptics-in-netherlands.html#Rp3H28DwXxljt5Y1.99

On June 26, 2007, (see Tony Blair a Catholic EU Leader?), I posted the following:

We in the COGs tend to believe that the final beast power will be nominally Catholic (see Europa and the Beast of Revelation)…we in the COGs do believe that Britain will pull out of the EU…

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will not be an equal part of the European Union. Britain will either pull out or be forced out or at least truly lose its sovereignty.  The Bible indicates that the end time descendants of the Israelite tribes, because of their national sins, will be taken over and many killed.

Many of the Anglo-peoples of the UK, USA, etc. that are not killed will to be scattered and many will be made slaves by the final European Beast power(see Hosea 7:11-16; 9:1-17; 11:5-7; 12:1; 13:12-16; see also Will the Anglo-Nations be Divided and Have People Taken as Slaves?). That is some of what the Bible shows will happen during the Great Tribulation.

The final King of the North (Daniel 11:27-40) will take over the UK, USA, and their Anglo-Saxon allies according to Bible prophecy (cf. Daniel 11:39).

While more and more people in the UK are starting to realize that the EU poses dangers to it, most have no idea how dangerous the rising Beast power in Europe will become (cf. Revelation 13:1-4; Daniel 11:39). Britain will ultimately NOT thrive as part of the EU but will be taken over by the final European Beast power.

Events are happening in Europe that will lead to the final rise of the European Beast power.  The UK will not be able to stop this.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

British are the Covenant People What do ‘British’ and ‘Britain’ mean in Hebrew? Are the descendants of the Anglo-Saxons people of the covenant? Does the British royal family connect to the throne of David? What does the Bible teach? What does history show us? Is there any DNA evidence related to British-Israelism? When did Christianity make it to the British Isles? Could Jeremiah have made it to the British Isles? What type of Christians made it to the British Isles? Did the last King of England believe in British Israelism?
Europa, the Beast, and Revelation Where did Europe get its name? What might Europe have to do with the Book of Revelation? What about “the Beast”? Is an emerging European power “the daughter of Babylon”? What is ahead for Europe? Here is a link to a video titled: Can You Prove that the Beast to Come is European?
Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations? Some claim that these passages refer to a gathering of 10 currently existing nations together, while one group teaches that this is referring to 11 nations getting together. Is that what Revelation 17:12-13 refers to? The ramifications of misunderstanding this are enormous.
Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel Are the Americans, Canadians, English, Scottish, Welsh, Australians, Anglo-Saxon (non-Dutch) Southern Africans, and New Zealanders descendants of Joseph? Where are the lost ten-tribes of Israel? Who are the lost tribes of Israel? What will happen to Jerusalem and the Jews in Israel? Will God punish the U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom, and other Anglo-Saxon nations? Why might God allow them to be punished first? Here is a link to the Spanish version of this article: Anglo-América & las Tribus Perdidas de Israel. Information is also in the YouTube sermons titled Where are the Ten Lost Tribes? Why does it matter? and British are the Covenant People. A short YouTube of prophetic interest may be Barack Obama and the State of the Apocalypse.
Will the Anglo-Saxon Nations be Divided and Have People Taken as Slaves? Will the lands of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand be divided? What about Jerusalem? What does Bible prophecy teach? Are there non-biblical prophecies that support this idea? Who will divide those lands? Who will end up with the lands and the people? Here is a link to a video titled Will the USA and other Anglo-nations be Divided and Their People Made Slaves? Here is a related item in the Spanish language ¿Serán divididas las naciones anglosajonas?
Might German Baron Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg become the King of the North? Is the former German Defense Minister (who is also the former German Minister for Economics and Technology) one to watch? What do Catholic, Byzantine, and biblical prophecies suggest?
Germany’s Assyrian Roots Throughout History Are the Germanic peoples descended from Asshur of the Bible? Have there been real Christians in Germanic history? What about the “Holy Roman Empire”? There is also a You-Tube video sermon on this titled Germany’s Biblical Origins.
Germany in Biblical and Catholic Prophecy Does Assyria in the Bible equate to an end time power inhabiting the area of the old Roman Empire? What does prophecy say Germany will do and what does it say will happen to most of the German people?
Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies for the Great Monarch point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? Is a nuclear attack prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? When do the 1335 days, 1290 days, and 1260 days (the time, times, and half a time) of Daniel 12 begin? When does the Bible show that economic collapse will affect the United States? Here is a link to a video titled: The Future King of the North.
Can You Prove that the Beast to Come is European? The Book of Revelation tells of a beast power that will rise up. Some think that this must be Russia or could be Islamic, while others say that this power is European. The Book of Daniel tells of the rise of an end time King of the North that some think must be referring to a Russian leader, while others say that this power is European. How can you be sure? This YouTube video has all the scriptural proofs that you should need to prove that this power must be a European one.
The Eurasian Union, the Kings of the East, and Bible Prophecy Is there a Eurasian union that will be formed? Is one being formed right now? Are any leaders working on that in the 21st century? Does the Bible teach that there will be a Eurasian union? If some type of Eurasian union is formed, who might it benefit and who will it destroy? A related video would be Is The Eurasian Union Rising?
Is Russia the King of the North? Some claim it is. But what does the Bible teach? Here is a link to a video, also titled Is Russia the King of the North?

COGwriter

Do you realize where the practice of birthday celebrations came from or how they are viewed by certain Satanists?

Back in 1969 Anton Lavey wrote The Satanic Bible. On page 96 (in the 1976 version) it mentions birthdays:

THE highest of all holidays in the Satanic religion is the date of one’s own birth. This is in direct contradiction to the holy of holy days of other religions, which deify a particular god who has been created in an anthropomorphic form of their own image, thereby showing that the ego is not really buried.

The Satanist feels: “Why not really be honest and if you are going to create a god in your image, why not create that god as yourself.” Every man is a god if he chooses to recognize himself as one. So, the Satanist celebrates his own birthday as the most important holiday of the year. After all, aren’t you happier about the fact that you were born than you are about the birth of someone you have never even met? Or for that matter, aside from religious holidays, why pay higher tribute to the birthday of a president or to a date in history than we do to the day we were brought into this greatest of all worlds?

After one’s own birthday, the two major Satanic holidays are Walpurgisnacht and Halloween (or All Hallows’ Eve). (Lavey A, Gilmore P. The Satanic Bible. Avon, September 1, 1976, p. 96–note it is on page 53 of an online version I found also).

It is interesting that birthdays are considered one of the three the most important holiday to these Satan worshipers (the two others called Walpurgisnacht, and Halloween also have pagan ties and are observed by millions who claim to be Christian).

The Bible never encourages the celebration of birthdays. Instead, it tends to speak in a negative manner concerning them (cf. Matthew 14:6-11; Jeremiah 20:14-18).

Of course, early Christians did not celebrate birthdays nor did the early Jews. Nor have real Christians ever celebrated Halloween. As far as the Jews, notice what the first century Jewish historian Josephus noted that Jewish families did not celebrate birthdays:

Nay, indeed, the law does not permit us to make festivals at the birth of our children, and thereby afford occasion of drinking to excess (Josephus. Translated by W. Whiston. Against Apion, Book II, Chapter 26. Extracted from Josephus Complete Works, Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids (MI), 14th printing, 1977, p. 632).

Now although there is no specific command against the celebration of birthdays in the Bible, the Jewish custom in those days was apparently based on the negative occurrences in the Bible surrounding birthdays, as well as the astrological implications of the celebration of birthdays (pagan practices, like astrology, were specifically prohibited in the law).

No early religious/church writing from the second century that I have seen (and I have read most that are available) seems to endorse (or even suggest) the celebration of birthdays by any who professed Christ either.

Astrology also seems to play a role:

Since it was believed that the positions of the stars at the time of birth influenced a child’s future, astrological horoscopes came into being, purporting to foretell the future, based on the time of birth. “Birthdays are intimately linked with the stars, since without the calendar, no one could tell when to celebrate his birthday. They are also indebted to the stars in another way, for in early days the chief importance of birthday records was to enable the astrologers to chart horoscopes” (The Lore of Birthdays, p. 53). Rawlinson’s translation of Herodotus includes the following footnote: “Horoscopes were of very early use in Egypt… and Cicero speaks of the Egyptians and Chaldees predicting… a man’s destiny at his birth”…

When we examine the principles of God’s law closely, as they relate to birthday celebrations, we can understand why neither Christ, nor His Apostles, nor their true followers, observed their birthdays. As noted earlier, the practice has its origin in idolatry and the worship of the sun, moon and stars…Some may view birthday customs as purely secular, lacking any religious significance. Yet we need to be aware of the broader perspective of their origins, and the religious significance they have had—and still have—for vast multitudes of people. (Reynolds, Rod. Should Christians Celebrate Birthdays? Living Church News, May-June 2002. pp.16-18).

The Bible condemns practices associated with astrology:

You are wearied in the multitude of your counsels; Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, And the monthly prognosticators Stand up and save you From what shall come upon you. Behold, they shall be as stubble, The fire shall burn them; They shall not deliver themselves From the power of the flame (Isaiah 47:13-14).

Although he was not part of the Church of God, the writings of the early third century Catholic theologian Origen of Alexandria show that, even that late, Orthodox Catholics were against the celebration of birthdays. The Catholic Encyclopedia states:

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 (Martindale C. Christmas, 1908).

Here is some of what Origen wrote:

…of all the holy people in the Scriptures, no one is recorded to have kept a feast or held a great banquet on his birthday. It is only sinners (like Pharaoh and Herod) who make great rejoicings over the day on which they were born into this world below (Origen, in Levit., Hom. VIII, in Migne P.G., XII, 495) (Thurston H. Natal Day. Transcribed by Thomas M. Barrett. Dedicated to Margaret Johanna Albertina Behling Barrett. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

The writings of the late third century Catholic theologian Arnobius show that, even that late, Catholics objected to the celebration of birthdays as he wrote:

…you worship with couches, altars, temples, and other service, and by celebrating their games and birthdays, those whom it was fitting that you should assail with keenest hatred. (Arnobius. Against the Heathen (Book I), Chapter 64. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 6. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1886. Online Edition Copyright © 2005 by K. Knight).

Thus birthday celebrations, even of gods and leaders, were condemned as far as the late third century by even Roman Catholic leaders. But like many practices associated with non-biblical “Christianity”, this changed in the fourth century.

Essentially birthdays became celebrated later because of compromises with the pagan cult of Mithraism (see Did Early Christians Celebrate Birthdays? and Do You Practice Mithraism?)

And for over four decades now, Satanists claim that birthdays are their highest holiday. Do you observe them too?

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Did God Create a Devil? If not, what happened? Herbert W. Armstrong wrote this as a booklet.
The Bible and Astrology Should Christians avoid participating in astrology or did God inspire it? Does the Bible encourage astrology? What does the Bible actually teach? What is astrology? How does astrology differ from astronomy? Should Christians Be Involved In Astrology?
OMENS? DIVINATION? HOROSCOPES? THE ORIGIN OF ASTROLOGY Where did astrology come from? Should you read your horoscope?
Does Astrology Work? Many believe and follow astrology–but does it work?
Close Encounters of a ‘Spirit’ Kind discusses some experiences I believe were (demon) ‘spirit’ related.
Angels, Cherubim, and Seraphim This is information about various types of angelic beings.
Is Halloween Holy Time for Christians? This article provides some historical and biblical insight on this question.
Walpurgis Night: Witches’ Sabbath? This is observed in parts of Europe April 30th-May 1st. Though named after a Catholic saint, it tends to be like Halloween.
Do You Practice Mithraism? Many practices and doctrines that mainstream so-called Christian groups have are the same or similar to those of the sun-god Mithras. December 25th was celebrated as his birthday. Do you follow Mithraism combined with the Bible or original Christianity? A sermon video from Vatican City is titled Church of Rome, Mithras, and Isis?
Is God Unreasonable? Some have suggested that if God requires Sabbath-keeping He is unreasonable. Is that true?
Holy Day Calendar This is a listing of the biblical holy days through 2024, with their Roman calendar dates. They are really hard to observe if you do not know when they occur 🙂 In the Spanish/Español/Castellano language: Calendario de los Días Santos. In Mandarin Chinese: 何日是神的圣日？ 这里是一份神的圣日日历从2013年至2024年。.
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki

COGwriter

Iraq’s top leader has rejected the idea that the USA proposed about making certain governmental changes and concessions in the hope to persuade certain leaders there to better unite in order to better fight the terrorist-linked group ISIS:

June 25, 2014

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has rejected forming an emergency government to help the country counter a surge by Sunni Islamist militants.

Maliki said Wednesday during a televised address that such a move would go against the constitution and the results of Iraq’s April 30 parliamentary elections.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Monday that Iraqi leaders assured him they would meet a July 1 deadline for beginning to form the post-election government.

U.S. Support for Iraqi Security Forces and U.S. Interests

• 30-35 daily surveillance flights over Iraq
• Aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush, guided-missile cruiser and guided-missile destroyer deployed to Arabian Gulf
• 300 military personnel to deploy to advise Iraqi security forces
• Amphibious transport dock ship moves to Arabian Gulf with aircraft and Marines

Source: U.S. Department of Defense

Both Kerry and President Barack Obama have been urging Iraq to install a government that is inclusive of Iraq’s Sunni and Kurdish minorities.

Maliki’s Shi’ite-led government has faced criticism of sidelining the minorities and breeding sectarian tensions.  He called for unity in his address Wednesday.

The militants from the al-Qaida breakaway group the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant have seized areas across northern and western Iraq.

US forces arrive

The United States is sending up to 300 military advisors to help Iraq counter the militants.  The first group of advisers began their mission Tuesday and more are scheduled to arrive in the next few days.  http://www.voanews.com/content/iraqi-pm-rejects-forming-emergency-government/1944406.html

June 25, 2014

Al-Maliki slams Sunnis

The sectarian rift in Iraq may have widened Wednesday when Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki blamed his political rivals for “coordinating” the crisis.

Al-Maliki, a Shiite, accused Sunnis of collaborating with militants and slammed the call to have a national salvation government that would remove him from power.

“Iraq is facing a cross-border terrorist attack that is supported by some neighboring countries,” al-Maliki added in a televised speech Wednesday.

He appealed to his Shia constituency by saying he is adhering to the wishes of of Shiite religious leader Ali Sistani, who called for volunteers to support the Iraqi army and government. http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/25/world/meast/iraq-crisis/