Church of God News

COGwriter

February 8th is observed as International Septuagint Day.

Many, particularly Greco-Roman Catholics, consider that the Greek Septuagint Old Testament is superior to the Hebrew Masoretic text for the Old Testament. Plus, supporters of the Septuagint tend to accept books of the Bible that early Christians, current Church of God Christians, and Protestants do not accept as inspired.

Here is some information in it from our free online book Who Gave the World the Bible? The Canon: Why do we have the books we now do in the Bible? Is the Bible complete?:

The term ‘Septuagint’ (LXX) is from the Latin septuaginta, ‘seventy.’ This term septuaginta seems to have been first used by Augustine in his City of God (Sundberg AC, Jr. The Septuagint: The Bible of Hellenistic Judaism. In: The Canon Debate. Baker Academic, 2002) which was published in 426.

The Septuagint is a translation of Hebrew writings, which now includes ones known as the Old Testament as well as those often referred to as the Old Testament Apocrypha.

According to legend, seventy-two Jewish scholars were asked by the Greek King of Egypt Ptolemy II Philadelphus to translate the Torah (the first five books of the Bible) from biblical Hebrew into Greek. This was to be done on a scroll to be included in the famous Library of Alexandria shortly before it ended up burning down (Dines JM. The Septuagint. Michael A. Knibb, Ed., London: T&T Clark, 2004).

The legend claims that the translators each came up with identical translations of the Torah — Irenaeus of Lyon also pushed this story (Adversus Heresies, III, Chapter, 21, verse 2). That legend came from a falsified work. Here is some information about it:

Letter of Aristeas, pseudepigraphal work of pseudo-history produced in Alexandria … The author assumed the name of a 2nd-century-bc writer and purported to give a contemporary account of the translation of the Hebrew Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, into Greek. He presented himself as a pagan admirer of Judaism who held a high position in the court of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 bc) in Alexandria. The writer used current Hellenistic literary conventions and the technical language of the Alexandrian court, but his Greek style and several historical inaccuracies indicate that he was a deliberate archaist. (Letter of Aristeas. Encyclopædia Britannica — accessed 04/17/20)

The initial ‘Septuagint’ translation was believed to have been done in the 2^nd and/or 3^rd century B.C. The Hellenistic Jews of Alexandria in Egypt ended up accepting and promoting this translation.

The Eastern Orthodox essentially believe that the Septuagint translators improved the Bible:

The Orthodox Church has the same New Testament as the rest of Christendom. As its authoritative text for the Old Testament, it uses the ancient Greek Septuagint. When this differs from the original Hebrew (which happens quite often), Orthodox believe that the changes in the Septuagint were made under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and are to be accepted as part of God’s continuing revelation. (Ware T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books, London, 1997, p.200)

Orthodox Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev notes:

 … though the Greek text is not the original language of the Old Testament books, the Septuagint does reflect the state of the original text as it would have been found in the third to second centuries BCE …  St. Philaret of Moscow considers it possible to maintain that “in the Orthodox teaching of Holy Scripture it is necessary to attribute a dogmatic merit to the Translation of the Seventy, in some cases placing it on equal level with the original and even elevating it above the Hebrew text, as is generally accepted in the most recent editions.” (Alfeyev H. Orthodox Christianity, Volume II: Doctrine and Teaching of the Orthodox Church, New York: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 2012, p. 34)

Therefore, the Eastern Orthodox believe that the original inspiration of the Old Testament (which was mainly written in Hebrew) was improved by humans who translated it into Greek, in the version known as the Septuagint.

Jewish, as well as Church of God, scholars would consider that to effectively be a blasphemous position to take. Humans cannot improve the originally inspired word of God.

That being said, Greek Christians (like Theophilus of Antioch) who seemingly did not read Hebrew tended to read the Septuagint or similar translations of the Old Testament (not because they accepted the Apocrypha, but because it was available), but that does not mean they called it superior to the Hebrew text.

Notice also:

In the 3rd century ce Origen attempted to clear up copyists’ errors that had crept into the text of the Septuagint, which by then varied widely from copy to copy, and a number of other scholars consulted the Hebrew texts in order to make the Septuagint more accurate. (Septuagint. Encyclopædia Britannica — accessed 04/17/20)

Since the manuscripts of the Septuagint were copied by hand and by people of differing abilities, there were different versions of the Septuagint in existence. The translation of the book of Daniel was so poor that the second-century translation attributed to Theodotion replaced it.

By the 3^rd century, the textual problem had become so bad that Origen collected all the existing versions of the Septuagint and created a six-column work called the Hexapla. The Hexapla … was Origen’s ‘corrected’ text of the Septuagint. (Carlson K. Hidden in Plain Sight, Part I: The Development of the Canon. Dormition Publishing, 2019, p. 47)

So, this demonstrates whatever version that exists now was not fully in place during the time of Jesus and His disciples.

Furthermore, it should also be pointed out that Lucian of Antioch (late 3^rd and early 4^th century) while opposing allegorical positions (such as held by Origen) tried to correct translation errors in the Septuagint by consulting with the Hebrew texts:

Lucian was a Hebrew scholar, and his version was adopted by the greater number of the churches of Syria and in Asia Minor. (Duchesne L. Early History of the Christian Church: From Its Foundation to the End of the Third Century, Volume 1, 4^th edition. Longmans, Green & Co., 1912, p. 362)

Lucian also rejected the Apocrypha (Wilkinson BG. Truth Triumphant, ca. 1890. Reprint: Teach Services, Brushton, NY, 1994, p. 51). Waldensian and pre-Waldensians later used information from Lucian (Wilkinson BG. Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. 1930, reprint TEACH Services, 2014, pp. 31, 40).

Augustine of Hippo thought the Hebrew (the Masoretic) and Septuagint were both authoritative, even where they contradicted each other (Augustine. City of God, Book 18, Chapter 44). But he also seemed to show a preference for the Masoretic as ‘authoritative’ (Wendland E. HOW WE GOT THE BIBLE: Overview of Aspects of the Scripture Transmission Process, Version 2.6. Lusaka Lutheran Seminary, August 29, 2017, p. 20).

Jesus declared, “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), hence to suggest that scripture was broken and then declare it was later improved/fixed is theologically unsound. Changing/improving scripture is also in violation of numerous scriptures (e.g. Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32; Proverbs 30:5; Psalm 12:6-7, 33:4, 119:160, Revelation 22:18).

We in the Continuing Church of God believe that the Bible is infallible as originally written and do not believe that the Holy Spirit improved the word of God through human translators. We believe God gave the world the Bible, through His chosen human instruments (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:19-21), and it was infallible when given.

Some scholars have claimed that the term ‘Septuagint’ was developed from Exodus 24:1,9 where seventy elders were referred to, and that Moses and Aaron were added to come up with 72 translators (Sundberg AC, Jr. The Septuagint: The Bible of Hellenistic Judaism. In: The Canon Debate. Baker Academic, 2002). However, irrespective of where the term Septuagint may have come from, Moses did not write the Torah in Greek.

Chronology Errors

The Septuagint has errors in chronology related to Genesis 5 and 11. Even according to defenders of the Septuagint, this results in adding 1386 additional years as compared to the Masoretic text (e.g. Smith, HB, Jr. 2018.  The case for the Septuagint’s chronology in Genesis 5 and 11. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism, ed. J.H. Whitmore, pp. 117–132. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship).

Notice what a translation of the Septuagint teaches:

²⁵ And Mathusala lived an hundred and sixty and seven years, and begot Lamech. ²⁶ And Mathusala lived after his begetting Lamech eight hundred and two years, and begot sons and daughters. ²⁷ And all the days of Mathusala which he lived, were nine hundred and sixty and nine years, and he died. ²⁸ And Lamech lived an hundred and eighty and eight years, and begot a son. (Genesis 5:25-28, Elpenor’s Bilingual (Greek / English) Old Testament. English translation by L.C.L. Brenton)

²¹ And there died all flesh that moved upon the earth, of flying creatures and cattle, and of wild beasts, and every reptile moving upon the earth, and every man. ²² And all things which have the breath of life, and whatever was on the dry land, died. ²³ And [God] blotted out every offspring which was upon the face of the earth, both man and beast, and reptiles, and birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth, and Noe was left alone, and those with him in the ark. (Genesis 7:21-23, Ibid)

The Septuagint has Methuselah living 802 years after Lamech was born and Lamech having a son Noah at age 188. This means that Methuselah lived 614 years after Noah was born. Yet, the Great Flood came in the 600th year of Noah’s life per Genesis 7:10-12.

This is a major problem for the Septuagint. Since all humans died from the Flood except those with Noah (Genesis 7:23), and Mathusula/Methuselah was not among them, because “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), the Bible itself proves that the Septuagint was wrong and the translation was NOT inspired by God. (Note: The Roman Catholic Douay Old Testament of 1609 does not agree with the Septuagint on Genesis 5:25-26, but with the chronology of the Masoretic text.)

According to the Masoretic text, Methuselah lived 782 years after Lamech was born and 600 years after Noah was born (Genesis 5:26-29). That means either Methuselah died right before the flood or, probably more likely, in the Flood. Methuselah did not live past the Flood.

There is another chronological item to consider with the Septuagint. “Figures from the LXX place creation at ca. 5554 BC” (Smith, p. 117).

This creates a problem for the Eastern Orthodox because several of their early saints taught that a millennial reign of 1,000 years would begin at the end of the 6,000 years (e.g. Irenaeus. Adversus haereses, Book V, Chapter 28:2-3; 29:2 and Methodius. Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 9, Chapter 1). Since the Septuagint’s 6,000 years would have been up in the 5^th century A.D., and the millennium then did not happen, this demonstrates that either Greco-Roman saints were in error and/or the Septuagint’s chronology was off.

Since the Masoretic text, in this author’s view, points to the creation being c. 3959-3971 B.C., we have not yet come to the end of the 6,000 years, though we are getting close.

Superiority?

 Many, particularly among the Eastern Orthodox, believe that the Septuagint is superior to the original Hebrew. Notice the following summary of claimed reasons from Alexandru Mihaila from the University of Bucharest Orthodox Theology Department:

I summarize the principal arguments in favor of the exclusiveness of the Septuagint:

– the Septuagint is older than the Masoretic Text;

– the Septuagint is inspired (a conception that started with Philo of Alexandria);

– the Holy Apostles and New Testament authors used the Septuagint;

– the Fathers of the Church quoted the Septuagint;

– the rabbis modified the Masoretic Text in order to eliminate the Messianic prophecies concerning Jesus Christ;

– the Septuagint is the official version of the Orthodox Church. (Mihăilă A. The Septuagint and the Masoretic Text in the Orthodox Church(es) Download Date | 9/18/19. https://docplayer.net/156142221-The-septuagint-and-the-masoretic-text-in-the-orthodox-church-es-alexandru-mihaila-recent-positions-of-romanian-theologians.html — accessed 03/24/20)

Let’s look at each of those.

First, it is true that several of the Septuagint documents are older than the Masoretic texts, but it is not in the original language of the Old Testament. It should be noted that the ‘Silver Scrolls’ provide evidence of the accuracy of the Masoretic text as far back as the 6^th and/or 7^th centuries B.C.—and they are older than the earliest Septuagint texts that have been found (c. 2^nd century B.C.). Additional reasons to accept the Masoretic text are found later in this book.

Second, claims of inspiration of translators have no basis in scripture and are mainly speculation. Because of errors in the Septuagint, any claims of Divine inspiration can be fully discounted. Furthermore, Philo of Alexandria believed that the world existed eternally in contradiction to the account in the Book of Genesis — he also held many other non-biblical positions.

Third, Jesus, at least sometimes, quoted from the Hebrew. And while New Testament authors and others writing in Greek sometimes quoted in ways consistent with the Septuagint, they never indicated that the Septuagint was in any way superior to the Hebrew originals or they would ALWAYS quote it precisely. The fact that a Greek translation of the Hebrew was sometimes correct, does not prove that God inspired the entire translation. Plus the fact that the Septuagint was changed after the original apostles died should show all that it was NOT directly inspired.

Fourth, the fact that some early Greek writers sometimes used a Greek translation of Hebrew does not mean that it was superior. Melito’s not listing the books in the order found in the Septuagint is, in essence, additional concurrence of that point.

Fifth, there is no proof that rabbis (or Levites) specifically altered the Masoretic text in order to eliminate prophecies associated with Jesus. Actually, the Great Isaiah Scroll found in Qumran, demonstrates that the Jews did not alter Isaiah.

Portion of the Great Isaiah Scroll

Furthermore, there are hundreds of prophecies from the Masoretic text that Jesus fulfilled—so obviously the Jews had not intentionally removed those. Those prophetic verses can be found in the free book, online at ccog.org, Proof Jesus is the Messiah.

Sixth, the fact that the Orthodox Catholic Church (as it is officially called) has adopted the Septuagint is true, but those in the COG and most other faiths do not consider their determination as authoritative (see also the free book, online at ccog.org, titled: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church).

Seventh, the modern Septuagint contains books that neither Jesus nor the apostles accepted as valid.

Additional Books

After the Greek version of the Torah was completed, more books were later translated — but the original Septuagint did NOT include the Apocryphal books — they were added later.

Apocrypha comes from the Greek ἀπόκρυφος meaning ‘hidden’ or ‘secret wisdom.’ The apocryphal books, in other words, had a hidden beginning, a secret origin — not openly given to the community at first.

The Catholic Encyclopedia claims that the expanded list of Septuagint books (the Apocryphal ones), and not just the books that Jesus and others in Palestine used, is more complete and should be considered as sacred scripture:

… that there is a smaller, or incomplete, and larger, or complete, Old Testament. Both of these were handed down by the Jews; the former by the Palestinian, the latter by the Alexandrian, Hellenist, Jews. …

The most striking difference between the Catholic and Protestant Bibles is the presence in the former of a number of writings which are wanting in the latter and also in the Hebrew Bible, which became the Old Testament of Protestantism. These number seven books: Tobias (Tobit), Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I and II Machabees, and three documents added to protocanonical books, viz., the supplement to Esther, from x, 4, to the end, the Canticle of the Three Youths (Song of the Three Children) in Daniel 3, and the stories of Susanna and the Elders and Bel and the Dragon, forming the closing chapters of the Catholic version of that book. Of these works, Tobias and Judith were written originally in Aramaic, perhaps in Hebrew; Baruch and I Machabees in Hebrew, while Wisdom and II Machabees were certainly composed in Greek. The probabilities favour Hebrew as the original language of the addition to Esther, and Greek for the enlargements of Daniel.

The ancient Greek Old Testament known as the Septuagint was the vehicle which conveyed these additional Scriptures into the Catholic Church. (Reid G. Canon of the Old Testament)

Sadly, improper books have been used as the vehicle to provide support for various non-scriptural positions related to the dead and improper worship.

Like the Catholics of Rome, the Eastern Orthodox believe it took many centuries to determine the books of the Bible that they accepted:

The Hebrew version of the Old Testament contains thirty-nine books. The Septuagint contains in addition ten further books not present in the Hebrew, which are known in the Orthodox Church as the ‘Deutero-Canonical Books’. These were declared by the Councils of Jassy (1641) and Jerusalem (1672) to be ‘genuine parts of Scripture’; (Ware, p. 200)

The late Septuagint included the Apocrypha, the so-called Deutero-Canonical Books, which means it had extra-books. These extra books are not inspired by God.

It may be of interest to note that those apocryphal books were not found in the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran.

“Based on the findings at Qumran, the Apocrypha was not viewed as canonical by the Qumran community. It was only during and after the time of Augustine (AD 354-430), when he, along with the local councils he influenced, declared the books of the Apocrypha inspired.” (Holden, p. 90)

Notice the following admission from an Eastern Orthodox source:

[M]ost Orthodox scholars … consider that the Deutero-Canonical Books, although part of the Bible, stand at a lower footing than the rest of scripture. (Ware, p.200)

So, while the Old Testament Apocrypha is accepted as scripture by the Eastern Orthodox, their scholars believe it is of lower footing than the actual biblical books.

This seems to be confusing for the Orthodox: it either is scripture or it is not! Of course, “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Corinthians 14:33).

The extra books were not divinely inspired. Though they can have some interesting historical information, they should not be considered part of the biblical canon.

Notice the following observation:

Numerous spurious books were gradually introduced into the inspired Canon. No two copies of the earliest Catholic Bibles agree as to which apocryphal books were to be added. It was not until 397 A.D., at the Council of Carthage, that Augustine, the Canaanite Bishop from Hippo in North Africa, led the Council of Carthage to generally approve seven Apocryphal books. As late as 363 A.D., at the Council of Laodicea the Greek Church rejected the Apocryphal books as a whole. … At the Council of Trent on April 8, 1546, those who rejected the Apocrypha were declared to be ‘anathema of Christ’! Here was the authority of men determining what others must believe. This was not the authority of God. (Do We Have The COMPLETE BIBLE? Ambassador College Publications, 1974)

Before going further, it may be of interest to note that the Church of Rome and the Eastern Orthodox do not accept ALL the extra books that are part of the Septuagint. Though, the Eastern Orthodox claim:

The official version of the Old Testament authorized by the Orthodox Church for use in worship and reading is that of the Septuagint. The number of books in the Septuagint Old Testament edition of the Bible are forty-nine books, twenty-seven in the New Testament. (Holy Scripture In The Orthodox Church. ‘The Bible.’ Compiled by Father Demetrios Serfes, Boise, Idaho, USA. August 20 2000)

Essentially, the Roman and Orthodox Catholics do not consider 2 Esdras, to be canonical (though it is in an appendix to the Slavonic Bible) nor 4 Maccabees (though it is in an appendix to the Greek Bible). 1 & 2 Esdras were part of the Latin Vulgate that Jerome originally prepared (though he endorsed neither one).

2 Esdras was possibly rejected by the Catholics of Rome and most of the Eastern Orthodox because it teaches that one should not pray for the dead as that will not affect their “punishment or reward” (2 Esdras 7:105; cf. 7:88). This is in contradiction to the Septuagint text of 2 Maccabees 12:45-46, which improperly endorses prayer for the dead.

The following additional Septuagint books are accepted by the Eastern Orthodox, but not the Roman Catholics:

• 1 Esdras
• Prayer of Manasseh
• 3 Maccabees
• 4 Maccabees
• Psalm 151 (in the Septuagint)
• Odes

Thus, neither the Church of Rome nor the Eastern Orthodox seemingly accept all the Septuagint books, and they also do not accept all of the same books. Note that the Eastern Orthodox say they have 79 books and the Church of Rome 73.

This would seem to be problematic in their talks about ecumenical unity. However, some of the text is the same in both Bibles, but categorized differently.

Some Quotes from the Apocrypha

Beyond the Jews and history, one can determine that the Apocrypha should not be considered as scripture as it contains doctrinal contradictions to the Bible.

For example, notice something from the fifth chapter of the Apocryphal Book of Tobit:

⁴ Tobiah went out to look for someone who would travel with him to Media, someone who knew the way. He went out and found the angel Raphael standing before him (though he did not know that this was an angel of God).

⁵ Tobiah said to him, “Where do you come from, young man?” He replied, “I am an Israelite, one of your kindred. I have come here to work.” …

¹¹ Tobit asked him, “Brother, tell me, please, from what family and tribe are you?”

¹² He replied, “Why? What need do you have for a tribe? Aren’t you looking for a hired man?” Tobit replied, “I only want to know, brother, whose son you truly are and what your name is.”

¹³ He answered, “I am Azariah, son of the great Hananiah, one of your own kindred.”

An angel of God would not lie about his ancestry. But that is what is happening in this book.

In chapter 6, this lying angel later told Tobit to get fish entrails:

⁷ Then the young man asked the angel this question: “Brother Azariah, what medicine is in the fish’s heart, liver, and gall?”

⁸ He answered: “As for the fish’s heart and liver, if you burn them to make smoke in the presence of a man or a woman who is afflicted by a demon or evil spirit, any affliction will flee and never return. ⁹ As for the gall, if you apply it to the eyes of one who has white scales, blowing right into them, sight will be restored.”

The Bible does not enjoin anything like burning fish entrails for removing demons.  This is not something that Jesus did (Matthew 5:8; 17:18), nor the Apostle Paul (Acts 16:18). Jesus also did not apply gall to eyes for healing (cf. Matthew 20:34; John 9:6-7).

Another false book of the Apocrypha is called Wisdom (or the Wisdom of Solomon). Its third chapter teaches:

¹⁶ But the children of adulterers will not reach maturity, the offspring of an unlawful bed will disappear.

¹⁷ Even if they live long, they will count for nothing, their old age will go unhonoured at the last; ¹⁸ while if they die early, they have neither hope nor comfort on the day of judgement, ¹⁹ for the end of a race of evil-doers is harsh.

So, in other words, Wisdom is teaching that if you are born outside of proper wedlock, you will likely not reach maturity. That is simply false.

Furthermore, Wisdom is teaching that a child of adultery will perish and there’s nothing anyone can do about it! This is against scriptures in the New Testament such as Mark 3:28, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, and John 3:16-17 — as well as some in the Old Testament like Ezekiel 18:19-20.

The sixth chapter of the Book of Wisdom contains the following lie:

²⁴ In the greatest number of the wise lies the world’s salvation, in a sagacious king the stability of a people.

The wisdom of the world IS NOT salvation (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:19-29) —salvation only comes through Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:30; Acts 4:10-12).

Here are some passages from the third chapter of the book of Sirach also called Ecclesiasticus:

³ Those who honor their father atone for sins;

¹⁴ Kindness to a father will not be forgotten; it will serve as a sin offering — it will take lasting root. ¹⁵ In time of trouble it will be recalled to your advantage, like warmth upon frost it will melt away your sins.

³⁰ As water quenches a flaming fire, so almsgiving atones for sins.

While we are to honor our father (cf. Exodus 20:12) and give to the poor (cf. 2 Corinthians 9:9), these are not offerings that atone for sins. Sirach is clearly in conflict with New Testament scriptures such as Ephesians 2:8-10, Titus 3:3-7, Hebrews 10:4-10, and 1 John 2:2.

Notice the first several verses of the 12^th chapter of Sirach:

¹ If you do good, know for whom you are doing it, and your kindness will have its effect.

² Do good to the righteous and reward will be yours, if not from them, from the LORD.

³ No good comes to those who give comfort to the wicked, nor is it an act of mercy that they do. ⁴ Give to the good but refuse the sinner; ⁵ refresh the downtrodden but give nothing to the proud. No arms for combat should you give them, lest they use these against you; Twofold evil you will obtain for every good deed you do for them.

These passages clearly go against the teachings of Jesus in passages such as Matthew 5:43-48, 6:3, and Luke 6:27-36.

Sirach takes a negative stance against women (cf. Sirach 22:3). It also has the following statement which conflicts with scripture:

²⁴ With a woman sin had a beginning, and because of her we all die. (Sirach 25:24)

On this, let us look at some of what the New Testament teaches:

²¹ For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. ²² For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:21-22)

The New Testament is blaming Adam, not Eve (cf. Romans 5:12-14; 1 Timothy 2:14) for death.

Sirach is obviously opposed to the Bible and no one should consider it as part of the Old Testament Canon.

There are many other passages from the Apocrypha that could be cited here to show that they should not be scripture. Hopefully, enough are cited here to provide you sufficient proof of that.

Note: The version of the Apocrypha shown in this section is that used at the website of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2017 (www.usccb.org) — lest any feel that a translation bias distorted their meaning.

The Jewish Encyclopedia of 1906 notes, “no controversy arose concerning the Apocrypha: all were agreed that they were non-canonical.”

Justin and Other Books?

Is there justification for other books in the Old Testament?

In what looks like a rather weak attempt to try to justify its use of the  additional books, The Catholic Encyclopedia states:

St. Justin Martyr is the first to note that the Church has a set of Old Testament Scriptures different from the Jews’, and also the earliest to intimate the principle proclaimed by later writers, namely, the self-sufficiency of the Church in establishing the Canon; its independence of the Synagogue in this respect. (Reid, Old Testament Canon)

Specifically, Justin claimed, that the Jews (‘they’) removed scriptures:

And I wish you to observe, that they have altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy …

Trypho remarked, “Whether [or not] the rulers of the people have erased any portion of the Scriptures, as you affirm, God knows; but it seems incredible.”

“Assuredly,” said I, “it does seem incredible”. (Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 71,73)

Justin seemed to teach that Jewish leaders removed passages from the Bible — he did not clearly teach that books were missing (Ibid. Chapters 71-73). Scholar F.F. Bruce indicated that Justin erroneously thought that words which were later added to the Septuagint by ‘Christians’ had been removed by the Jews in their scriptures (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 66).

Justin also stated that the Jews did NOT trust the Septuagint as they asserted the Septuagint translators improperly changed passages, but he wanted Trypho to trust it anyway (Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 68).

Furthermore, Justin Martyr, in this author’s view, was an apostate and not a faithful Christian. While in Ephesus, Justin admitted that he did not live differently than the Gentiles (in violation of Paul’s admonition in Ephesians 4:17), taught God’s law was not in force, and did not observe the Sabbaths or the other Holy Days that the early Church did (Dialogue. Chapter 18). And, apparently, he did not accept the same content of the books that the disciples did for the Old Testament. Justin seemed to teach that the Jews eliminated parts by not accepting everything from the Septuagint translators. It may be important to note that Justin wrote decades BEFORE Melito, and Melito did not include any of the deuterocanonical books in his list.

After Justin Martyr left Ephesus he became influential in Rome. Eusebius noted:

And in Rome … Anicetus assumed the leadership of the Christians there … But Justin was especially prominent in those days. (Eusebius Church History. Book IV, Chapter 11)

Justin became so prominent that his influence was later being used as justification that ultimately led to the adoption of extra books in the Old Testament (Reid, Old Testament Canon) that were not in those scriptures used by Christ and the original apostles! He influenced Rome’s preference for the Septuagint.

Apocrypha Not Accepted by Certain Famous Greco-Roman Saints

As mentioned earlier, the books that the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox tend to call the deuterocanonical books, are normally called the Apocrypha or the apocryphal books associated with the Old Testament. (There are also ones associated with the New Testament and they are specifically rejected by Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, and those in the Churches of God.)

These books were not included in Melito’s list of the 2^nd century. They were also rejected in the third and fourth centuries by Greco-Roman scholars such as Origen, Athanasius, and Jerome (who was named Eusebius Hieronymus Sophronius), essentially because they understood that the books were not properly accepted by the Jews and did not agree with certain church teachings.

Origen of Alexandria (c. 200 A.D.), taught:

“It should be stated that the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two; corresponding with the number of their letters”. (Eusebius. Church History, Book VI, Chapter 25, verse 1)

He then listed the books as we know them from the Hebrew Bible. He did not list the Apocrypha as canonical and put Maccabees in a different category than canonical scripture (Ibid, verse 2).

Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 330 A.D.) taught:

The books of the Old Testament are twenty-two, which is the number of the letters among the Hebrews. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, of Kings four, two books; of Paralipomenon (Chronicles) two, one book; Esdras two, one book; Psalms, Proverbs; twelve prophets, one book; then Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and epistles; Ezekiel and Daniel. Then there are books uncanonical, but readable, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit. (As cited in Stowe CE. Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament. Bibliotheca sacra: a theological quarterly, Volume 11. Dallas Theological Seminary and Graduate School of Theology, April 1854, p. 298)

Notice, that although he was wrong about Esther and Baruch, Athanasius basically did not consider that the Apocrypha was part of the canon.  He also stated:

Since some persons have attempted to set in order the books that are called apocryphal, and to mix them with the divinely inspired Scriptures, of which we have been fully certified, as those who saw them from the beginning, and who, being ministers of that word, handed them down from our fathers, it seemed fitting to me, being exhorted thereto by the orthodox brethren, and having learned the truth, to set in order the canonical Scriptures, which have been handed down, and are believed to be from God; that every one who has been deceived, may convict those who led him astray. (ibid, pp. 298-299)

So, Athanasius said that people had been deceived by non-canonical books and that the Apocrypha was not canonical. He also claimed that the true books had been handed down from the beginning: and even though he himself did not know the precise list well, he was right about the correct books being handed down to the faithful (he also did list the 27 books of the New Testament in a letter in 367: Athanasius. 39^th Letter. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 4. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace).

It should be noted that Athanasius is considered to be a major saint by the Greco-Romans as he was the biggest advocate of the trinity at the Council of Nicea and was outnumbered by non-trinitarians by about 8:1. Clearly, he did not accept the ‘deuterocanonical’ books.

Notice something from a Roman Catholic author:

The Septuagint tradition, which included not only the protocanonicals but also seven additional books … this tradition also had fuzzy boundaries. Some editions of the Septuagint included additional books such as 1-2 Esdras, 3-4 Maccabees, and the Prayer of Manasseh. (Akin J. The Bible is a Catholic Book. Catholic Answers Press, 2019, p. 41)

‘Fuzzy boundaries’ means that scholars realize that the Septuagint’s traditional inclusion of various books cannot be trusted and some versions of the Septuagint have even more improper books.

“God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints” (1 Corinthians 14:33).

Jerome and the Deuterocanonical Books

The Catholic Encyclopedia notes:

St. Jerome cast his weighty suffrage on the side unfavourable to the disputed books … Jerome lived long in Palestine, in an environment where everything outside the Jewish Canon was suspect, and that, moreover, he had an excessive veneration for the Hebrew text, the Hebraica veritas as he called it. … the inferior rank to which the deuteros were relegated by authorities like Origen, Athanasius, and Jerome, was due to too rigid a conception of canonicity, one demanding that a book, to be entitled to this supreme dignity, must be received by all, must have the sanction of Jewish antiquity, and must moreover be adapted not only to edification, but also to the ‘confirmation of the doctrine of the Church’, to borrow Jerome’s phrase. (Reid, Old Testament Canon)

But Jerome did not simply consider these additions were inferior.

Notice here where he calls Judith a historical book (as opposed to divinely inspired), but says he was forced to include it:

Among the Jews, the book of Judith is considered among the apocrypha; its warrant for affirming those [apocryphal texts] which have come into dispute is deemed less than sufficient. Moreover, since it was written in the Chaldean language, it is counted among the historical books. But since the Nicene Council is considered to have counted this book among the number of sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request (or should I say demand!): and, my other work set aside, from which I was forcibly restrained, I have given a single night’s work, translating according to sense rather than verbatim. (Jerome. Jerome, The Preface on the Book of Judith: English translation by Andrew S. Jacobs)

Notice that Jerome called it apocrypha and that he did not consider that it actually was considered sacred at the time of Nicea (325 A.D.). Notice also the following he wrote about Tobias:

I do not cease to wonder at the constancy of your demanding. For you demand that I bring a book written in Chaldean words into Latin writing, indeed the book of Tobias, which the Hebrews exclude from the catalogue of Divine Scriptures, being mindful of those things which they have titled Hagiographa. I have done enough for your desire, yet not by my study. For the studies of the Hebrews rebuke us and find fault with us, to translate this for the ears of Latins contrary to their canon. (Jerome, Prologue to Tobit. Translated by Kevin P. Edgecomb, 2006)

Notice also that Jerome specifically stated that the churches condemned the Septuagint additions to the Book of Daniel:

In reference to Daniel … I also told the reader that the version read in the Christian churches was not that of the Septuagint translators but that of Theodotion. It is true, I said that the Septuagint version was in this book very different from the original, and that it was condemned by the right judgment of the churches of Christ … I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible. (Jerome. Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Chapter 33)

The Septuagint version includes a section called Bel and the Dragon and the Susanna story — which were originally written in Greek (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 76) — these are two sections that the original Hebrew does not have, but they have been accepted by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches as part of their Bible.

Here is a Roman Catholic claim:

Saint Jerome … used the Septuagint Greek version and retained all forty-six Old Testament books with the twenty-seven New Testament books to formulate the first single-volume edition of the Christian Bible, totaling seventy-three books. Things didn’t change for fifteen centuries until the Protestant Reformation. (Brighenti KK, Trijilio J Jr. The Catholicism Answer Book: The 300 Most Frequently Asked Questions. Sourcebooks, Inc, 2007, p. 23)

Yet that certainly gives the wrong impression. Jerome was opposed to the Apocrypha and other Roman leaders were uncertain about them. Nor was it 15 centuries to the Protestant Reformation — it was just over 11. Plus, Jerome used the Hebrew text for the Old Testament when he could (Francis, Pope. APOSTOLIC LETTER SCRIPTURAE SACRAE AFFECTUS OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS ON THE SIXTEEN HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE DEATH OF SAINT JEROME. Copyright – Libreria Editrice Vaticana, September 30, 2020)—he used comparatively little of the Septuagint itself as he preferred the Hebrew first and the Greek text by Theodotion and others secondarily (Worth Jr, RH. Bible Translations: A History Through Source Documents. McFarland Publishing, 1992, pp. 19–30).

Regarding Jerome and his involvement with scripture, Pope Francis went so far as to declare:

Jerome can serve as our guide because, like Philip (cf. Acts 8:35), he leads every reader to the mystery of Jesus, while responsibly and systematically providing the exegetical and cultural information needed for a correct and fruitful reading of the Scriptures. (Francis, APOSTOLIC LETTER SCRIPTURAE SACRAE AFFECTUS)

Yet, if Jerome is the guide for Roman Catholics, they would have to admit that he did not want people to value the Apocrypha of the Septuagint.

Consider that Jerome accepted the 22 books as the Hebrews numbered them as inspired and not the Apocrypha:

Jerome, writing about A.D. 400, has left two lists of OT books.  Both agree with the Protestant OT canon, though the order varies and the two lists differ in order.  He lists the books of the OT in his Prologus Galeatus (written in 388) and numbers them twenty-two according to the letters of the Hebrew alphabet.  Others he says are among the Apocrypha and names Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobit, the post-Christian Shepherd of Hermas (or as some think 4 Esdras), and the books of Maccabees.  It has always been regarded as curious that the man who translated the VULGATE Bible used by Roman Catholics with its Apocrypha is a most explicit witness against the Apocrypha. (Tenney MC. The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 1: Revised Full-Color Edition — Kindle. Zondervan Academic, 2010)

Furthermore, Jerome specifically challenges the validity of the Septuagint and states that the Hebrew Bible was used by Jesus and the Apostles:

The Hebrew Scriptures are used by apostolic men; they are used, as is evident, by the apostles and evangelists. Our Lord and Saviour himself whenever he refers to the Scriptures, takes his quotations from the Hebrew; as in the instance of the words “He that believes in me, as the Scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,” and in the words used on the cross itself, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani,” which is by interpretation “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” not, as it is given by the Septuagint, “My God, my God, look upon me, why have you forsaken me?” and many similar cases. I do not say this in order to aim a blow at the seventy translators; but I assert that the Apostles of Christ have an authority superior to theirs. Wherever the Seventy agree with the Hebrew, the apostles took their quotations from that translation; but, where they disagree, they set down in Greek what they had found in the Hebrew. (Jerome. Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Chapter 34)

Jerome, the person who, in a sense, gave the Church of Rome the Bible, was opposed to books that he was required to include. He also correctly believed that the translation of the Septuagint was inferior to the Apostles’ writings.

While Jerome was apparently pressured to state otherwise later in his life, his writings clearly show he had serious misgivings about the Apocrypha and realized those books were not originally part of the Bible.

Historical Catholic Concerns

Origen, Jerome, and Athanasius were not the only Roman or Eastern Orthodox leaders with concerns about the extra books.

Cyril of Jerusalem (4^th century) also indicated that the Apocryphal books were considered to be of lesser reliability as he wrote:

We speak not from apocryphal books, but from Daniel; for he says, And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and half a time. A time is the one year in which his coming shall for a while have increase; and the times are the remaining two years of iniquity, making up the sum of the three years; and the half a time is the six months. (Cyril of Jerusalem. Catechetical Lecture 15 On the Clause, And Shall Come in Glory to Judge the Quick and the Dead; Of Whose Kingdom There Shall Be No End, Chapter 16. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 7. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1894)

The Roman Catholic Church recognizes its leaders had concerns about these additional Old Testament books for centuries. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes:

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT DURING THE FOURTH, AND FIRST HALF OF THE FIFTH, CENTURY

In this period the position of the deuterocanonical literature is no longer as secure … Alexandria, with its elastic Scriptures, had from the beginning been a congenial field for apocryphal literature, and St. Athanasius, the vigilant pastor of that flock, to protect it against the pernicious influence, drew up a catalogue of books with the values to be attached to each. First, the strict canon and authoritative source of truth is the Jewish Old Testament, Esther excepted … Following the precedent of Origen and the Alexandrian tradition, the saintly doctor recognized no other formal canon of the Old Testament than the Hebrew one; but also, faithful to the same tradition, he practically admitted the deutero books to a Scriptural dignity, as is evident from his general usage …

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE FIFTH TO THE CLOSE OF THE SEVENTH CENTURY

This period exhibits a curious exchange of opinions between the West and the East, while ecclesiastical usage remained unchanged, at least in the Latin Church. During this intermediate age the use of St. Jerome’s new version of the Old Testament (the Vulgate) became widespread in the Occident. With its text went Jerome’s prefaces disparaging the deuterocanonicals, and under the influence of his authority the West began to distrust these and to show the first symptoms of a current hostile to their canonicity …

The Latin Church

In the Latin Church, all through the Middle Ages we find evidence of hesitation about the character of the deuterocanonicals. (Reid, Canon of the Old Testament. The Catholic Encyclopedia)

Even into the Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church was not sure if the deuterocanonical books were on a par with scripture!

Either they always were inspired by God or always were not.

Thus, while many of the Greco-Roman churches knew which were and were not the true books at least as early as the fourth and fifth centuries, there still was contention. Additional books came to be accepted by them that were NOT part of the original faith, which true Christians are to earnestly contend for (Jude 3).

Catholic theologians, like 11^th century Saxony priest Hugh of St. Victor, taught that the additional books were not scripture (Hugh. On the Sacraments, I, Prologue. As cited in Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 99).

Notice something from ArmenianBible.org (accessed 04/16/20):

Not till the 8th century was the Apocrypha rendered into Armenian: it was not read in Armenian churches until the 12th.

Furthermore, these additional books were not once and for all officially adopted by Rome until 1546. The use of the term ‘deuterocanonical’ seems to have first been used in the 16^th century (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 105) and is essentially an admission that they were not original.

The Catholic Encyclopedia also states:

The protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants. The deuterocanonical (deuteros, ‘second’) are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters, but which long ago gained a secure footing in the Bible of the Catholic Church, though those of the Old Testament are classed by Protestants as the ‘Apocrypha’. … The Septuagint version was the Bible of the Greek-speaking, or Hellenist, Jews, whose intellectual and literary centre was Alexandria (see SEPTUAGINT). The oldest extant copies date from the fourth and fifth centuries of our era … The most explicit definition of the Catholic Canon is that given by the Council of Trent, Session IV, 1546 … The order of books copies that of the Council of Florence, 1442, and in its general plan is that of the Septuagint. (Reid, Old Testament Canon)

Why were they adopted in the 16^th century?

Here is the view of a Protestant writer:

There is a mistaken belief among some that the Apocrypha books were part of the Bible, and that these were rejected by the Protestant Reformers. On the contrary, the Apocrypha books were never a part of the Old Testament Canon. Thus there is no question of the Reformers dropping out some books from the Canon. Rather, it is the Roman Catholic Church which ADDED these books to the Canon by a proclamation made at the Council of Trent…

With the Protestant Reformation, many of the Reformers challenged the Catholic church to prove their doctrine by supporting these from the Canon. To their dismay the Roman Catholics discovered that many of their doctrines are not derived from the Canon. At the same time they realized that at least some of these erroneous doctrines are supported by the Apocrypha. Thus for their survival it became necessary to add the Apocrypha to the Canon.

In 1545 the Roman Catholic Church convened what is called the Council Of Trent. Here they passed numerous resolutions, including many curses against the Protestant Believers. In April 1545 the Council declared that the Apocrypha are also part of the Bible. Thus for the first time in history the Apocrypha books were ADDED by the Roman Catholic church to the Bible. This was done in order to justify their doctrinal errors (for which support was available only in the Apocrypha), and also to oppose the Protestant believers. The first Vatican Council held 1869-70 reaffirmed the decision of the Roman Catholic Church to add the Apocrypha to the Canon.

Historically and theologically the Apocrypha was never part of the Canon. (Philip JC. Reliability of The Canon. Indus School of Apologetics and Theology Textbook No -004A1, version used in 2006)

The Roman Catholics were not the only ones to adopt those so-called deuterocanonical books. The Eastern Orthodox Church did as well.

It should also be noted, further, that John Wycliffe included them in his 1384 and 1395 translations (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 100). Also, in the original of the King James Version of the Bible in 1611, Protestants did also include the Old Testament Apocrypha, but later they were dropped from it (for the last time around 1666).

An Anglican canon, with the Apocrypha declared not to be of ‘divine origin,’ appeared in 1644 (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 109). In 1826, after the Protestant National Bible Society of Scotland petitioned the British and Foreign Bible Society not to print the Apocrypha, they ceased to be in most Protestant Bibles.

Protestants have claimed the Apocrypha were originally included in their Bibles for historical, not scriptural, value.

The following is from the Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God:

THE HOLY BIBLE

The Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God and was finalized by the Apostle John (see also Who Gave the World the Bible?). As commonly divided, it is a collection of 66 books, with 39 from the Hebrew scriptures (The Old Testament Canon) and 27 from the Greek Scriptures (The New Testament Canon). Scripture is inspired in thought and word and contains knowledge of what is needed for salvation (2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 4:4; 2 Peter 1:20-21). Scripture is truth (John 17:17) and is infallible and inerrant in its original manuscripts (John 10:35).

We in the Continuing Church of God are following the Apostle Jude’s admonition “to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). The Roman and Eastern Orthodox churches clearly are NOT doing this as they adopted books that early leaders knew were not part of the true canon.

The 39 books that are in the Old Testaments that those in the COGs and Protestant Churches use are the correct books of the Old Testament.

Even the Roman Catholic supporting Jerome recognized some of the flaws of the deuterocanonical books. His original research made him only accept the 39 Old Testament books as truly valid and seemingly he partially consulted with those who held Church of God doctrines when he put his books together.

The true Old Testament canon is based on the biblical criteria and this canon essentially was affirmed during the 2^nd century by one considered to have been faithful (Melito).

While it is true, in a sense, that ‘the Church gave the world the Bible’ — it was the church established by Christ through the apostles Peter, Paul, and John and their successors as inspired by the Holy Spirit that did so. This was the Church of God which Polycarp and other early saints became part of.

Consider that:

just because a book is found in the Septuagint, doesn’t automatically mean that it is canonical. Do you believe the Prayer of Manasseh is canonical? The Vulgate’s 3 Esdras, or Maccabees 3 and 4? How about Psalm 151 or the Psalms of Solomon? No, I don’t think you would believe that, yet these books are in some of the Septuagint manuscripts. So, don’t try to say that the deuterocanonicals are equal in inspiration to the protocanonical books just because they are found in the Septuagint.

(http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2012/02/did-catholic-church-give-us-bible.html)

The Catholic Encyclopedia refers to the “admitted absence of any explicit citation of the deutero writings … the non-citation of the deuterocanonicals in the New Testament” (Reid, George. Canon of the Old Testament. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 3., 1908), while also admitting that most of the other books of the Old Testament are cited in the New.

Jesus and His apostles DID NOT consider that the extra books that the Church of Rome accepts were valid or that they were validated by events recorded in the New Testament.

Quotes in the New Testament from the Greek

Does the Greek New Testament ever quote the Septuagint?

Here is what the Greco-Roman Catholic priest Jerome wrote about the Book of Matthew and its use of the Old Testament:

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist “Out of Egypt have I called my son,” and “for he shall be called a Nazarene”. (Jerome. De Viris Illustribus [On Illustrious Men]. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 3. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. American Edition, 1892)

This was cited to show that the Hebrew scriptures were what were normally used for scripture in Palestine/Judea.

But, since nearly all of the New Testament was written in Greek, it is logical that Greek translations were sometimes quoted.

John Ogwyn noted:

Should we be concerned that some New Testament quotations from the Old Testament {seemingly} were taken from a Greek translation—the Septuagint—rather than from the Hebrew Masoretic Text? Greek was the most universal language at the time when the New Testament was being written.

Gentile converts were unfamiliar with the Hebrew language and even most Jews outside of Palestine no longer had a good reading knowledge of Hebrew.

The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Old Testament that had been made in Egypt.

But it was not the only Greek translation of the Old Testament available in the time when the New Testament was written. There was at least one Greek translation that differed significantly from the Septuagint.

It was used by Theodotion in the second century ad for his revised Greek text of the Old Testament.

The book of Daniel, as preserved in Greek translation by Theodotion, matches far more closely the quotations from Daniel in the New Testament than does the Septuagint, for instance. Though none of the Greek translations of the Old Testament were totally accurate, most of their deviations from the Hebrew text were in areas that did not affect the overall sense of the message …

Gleason Archer and G. C. Chirichigno in their comprehensive work, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey, make the following points about New Testament quotations: 1) in 268 New Testament citations both the Septuagint and Masoretic Text are in complete harmony; 2) in 50 citations the New Testament agrees with the Septuagint, even though it differs slightly from the Masoretic Text (although not seriously enough to distort the meaning); 3) in 33 citations the New Testament adheres more closely to the Masoretic Text than to the Septuagint; 4) in 22 citations the New Testament adheres closely to the Septuagint even when it deviates somewhat from the Masoretic Text.

The New Testament writers only made use of Septuagint quotations if those passages properly conveyed the inspired meaning of the Hebrew text. (Ogwyn J. How Did We Get The Bible? Tomorrow’s World, January-February 2002)

Essentially, John Ogwyn was saying that New Testament writers did not rely on translated passages of the Old Testament into Greek that differed materially from the original Hebrew. Therefore, one should not conclude that the entire, flawed, Septuagint was acceptable to them (though where it was not flawed and a proper translation, they could have used it or something similar).

Others have claimed that:

TWO OUT OF EVERY THREE QUOTATIONS from the OLD TESTAMENT FOUND IN THE NEW DO NOT AGREE VERBALLY WITH THE READING OF THE SEPTUAGINT translation of the Old Testament. (Do We Have The COMPLETE BIBLE? Ambassador College Publications, 1974)

Now, the Eastern Orthodox believe that the majority of Old Testament quotes are based on the Septuagint, but that is mainly an assumption since most are not direct quotes, which one would logically conclude they would have to be if the Septuagint was the preferred and divinely inspired source.

While the Eastern Orthodox generally claim that the Masoretic Text (Hebrew Bible with vowels and limited punctuation) is flawed and has been changed, their proof is lacking (more on the Masoretic Text is in the next chapter).

This author states that the type of ‘proof’ that the Septuagint was inspired is reminiscent of the same type of ‘proof’ that people bring out when they claim that the New Testament was written in Aramaic and not Greek (for specific details, check out the following link: www.cogwriter.com/greek-aramaic-hebrew-new-testament.htm).

Furthermore, unlike the Septuagint, the Masoretic text does not include the Old Testament Apocrypha.

While it can give insight into the ancient understanding of certain words, events, and concepts, the Septuagint is NOT a better version of the Old Testament than the Masoretic Hebrew text. Plus it has non-biblical books.

More on it and the Bible can be found in the free online book: Who Gave the World the Bible? The Canon: Why do we have the books we now do in the Bible? Is the Bible complete?

An online sermon of related interest is also available: The Septuagint and its Apocrypha,

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Who Gave the World the Bible? The Canon: Why do we have the books we now do in the Bible? Is the Bible complete? Are there lost gospels? What about the Apocrypha? Is the Septuagint better than the Masoretic text? What about the Textus Receptus vs. Nestle Alland? Was the New Testament written in Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew? Which translations are based upon the best ancient text? Did the true Church of God have the canon from the beginning? Here are links to related sermons: Let’s Talk About the Bible, The Books of the Old Testament, The Septuagint and its Apocrypha, Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, and Lost Books of the Bible, and Let’s Talk About the New Testament, The New Testament Canon From the Beginning, English Versions of the Bible and How Did We Get Them?, What was the Original Language of the New Testament?, Original Order of the Books of the Bible, and Who Gave the World the Bible? Who Had the Chain of Custody?
Read the Bible Christians should read and study the Bible. This article gives some rationale for regular bible reading, certain ancient texts, and discusses translations. Here is a link in Mandarin Chinese: ‹ûW#~Ï Here is a link in the Spanish language: Lea la Biblia..
Bible: Superstition or Authority? Should you rely on the Bible? Is it reliable? Herbert W. Armstrong wrote this as a booklet on this important subject.
Is God’s Existence Logical? Is it really logical to believe in God? Yes! This is a free online booklet that deal with improper theories and musings called science related to the origin of the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and evolution. An animated video of related interest is also available: Big Bang: Nothing or Creator?
Proof Jesus is the Messiah This free book has over 200 Hebrew prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus. Plus, His arrival was consistent with specific prophecies and even Jewish interpretations of prophecy. Here are links to seven related sermons: Proof Jesus is the Messiah, Prophecies of Jesus’ birth, timing, and death, Jesus’ prophesied divinity, 200+ OT prophecies Jesus filled; Plus prophecies He made, Why Don’t Jews Accept Jesus?, Daniel 9, Jews, and Jesus, and Facts and Atheists’ Delusions About Jesus. Plus the links to two sermonettes: Luke’s census: Any historical evidence? and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but … These videos cover nearly all of the book, plus have some information not in the book.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church. Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God? , Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, and What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, and Early Heresies and Heretics, and Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, and Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, and Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List.
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.

Celebration of Black History Month

COGwriter

February was designated as Black History Month in 1969 and observed since 1970 by various Americans. Its origins are even earlier:

February marks the launch of Black History Month, a time to recognize the central role and revolutionary work of black people in America.

Historian Carter G. Woodson created Negro History Week in 1926 and it officially evolved into a month-long celebration forty years later. 02/01/17 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/this-black-history-month-we-declare-we-too-are-america_us_588fa515e4b0c90efeff4088

Throughout February, there will tend to be more documentaries and mainstream news articles related to ‘Black History.’ Some will also probably point to Kamala Harris.

Instead of focusing on secular history in the USA, this post will attempt to cover some of the history of Christianity in Africa as well as some African-related news, but will start with scripture.

The New Testament discusses in some detail the conversion of at least one influential African and shows that God intended him to receive the message:

26 Now an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying, “Arise and go toward the south along the road which goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” This is desert. 27 So he arose and went. And behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge of all her treasury, and had come to Jerusalem to worship, 28 was returning. And sitting in his chariot, he was reading Isaiah the prophet. 29 Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go near and overtake this chariot.” 30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:

“He was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
And who will declare His generation?
For His life is taken from the earth.”

34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, “I ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?”

35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water.

And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”

37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. 39 Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing (Acts 8:26-39).

According to Fox’s Book of Martyrs, at least one of the twelve apostles preached in Africa:

XV. Simon Surnamed Zelotes, preached the Gospel in Mauritania, Africa, and even in Britain, in which latter country he was crucified, A.D. 74. (Fox’s Book of Martyrs. Edited by William Byron Forbush. Copyright 1926/1967. Zondervan, Publishing, Grand Rapids (MI), pp. 3-5).

Another source agrees that the apostles got to Africa (Ruffin C.B. The Twelve: The Lives of the Apostles After Calvary. Our Sunday Visitor, Huntington (IN), 1997, pp. 17-171).

Early church history shows that there were both true as well as false Christians in northern Africa (as well as other places).

In the third century, Origen noted in northern Africa that there were two groups that he considered to be “Ebionites,” one who believed in the virgin birth (and that would be those who this paper suggests were also known as the Nazarenes) and those who did not:

Let it be admitted, moreover, that there are some who accept Jesus, and who boast on that account of being Christians, and yet would regulate their lives, like the Jewish multitude, in accordance with the Jewish law,—and these are the twofold sect of Ebionites, who either acknowledge with us that Jesus was born of a virgin, or deny this, and maintain that He was begotten like other human beings…(Origen. Contra Celsus, Book V, Chapter 61).

The true Christians in Africa were not those associated with Origen (please see what happened in Alexandria), nor those that denied the virgin birth. The true Christians were those who professed Jesus and had practices similar to those of the Jews.

Origen of Alexandria, however, was not a true Christian. Origen even appeared to recognize several non-canonical writings as scripture and had been influenced by some Gnostic teachings. Sadly, Origen, who referred to The Epistle of Barnabas like he does actual parts of the Bible (Origen. Contra Celsus, Book I, Chapter 63), seems to also do so with the falsely titled Gospel of Peter (Origen. Commentary on Matthew, Book X, Verse 17. ANF), and even calls what I consider to be the “demonically-influenced” Shepherd of Hermas as “divinely inspired” (Cited in Metzger, Bruce M. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance).

Serapion of Antioch denounced the false “Gospel of Peter.”

It probably should also be mentioned that around the time of Serapion, at least one African leader named Nepos stood up to allegorists like Origen. The Catholic Encyclopedia reported:

An Egyptian bishop, Nepos, taught the Chiliastic error that there would be a reign of Christ upon earth for a thousand years, a period of corporal delights; he founded this doctrine upon the Apocalypse in a book entitled “Refutation of the Allegorizers” (Chapman, John. “Dionysius of Alexandria.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 5. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. 14 Aug. 2008 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05011a.htm>.).

Believing in the millennial reign of Jesus is not an error, but a biblical doctrine per Revelation 20:4-6

A nineteenth century anti-millennial scholar named Giovanni Battista Pagani went as far as to write the following about Nepos and those who supported the millennium:

…all those who teach a millennium framed according to Jewish ideas, saying that during the millennium, Mosaic law will be restored…These are called Judaical Millenarians, not as being Jews, but as having invented and upheld a millennium according to Jewish taste. The principal authors of this error were Nepos, an African Bishop, against whom St. Dionysius wrote his two books on Promises; and Apollinaris, whom St. Epiphanius confound in his work against heresies (Pagani, Giovanni Battista. Published by Charles Dolman, 1855. Original from Oxford University. Digitized Aug 15, 2006, pp. 252-253).

It should be of interest to note that neither Nepos nor Apollinaris were Jews, but were condemned for having a religion that had “Jewish” beliefs. And since Apollinaris is a Greco-Roman Catholic saint (see article Apollinaris of Hierapolis), it should be clear that the respected and non-Jewish Christian leaders in the early third century clearly did hold to ideas that were condemned by the allegorists.

As far as Nepos himself goes, he is included in the list of apostolic successors of the Continuing Church of God:

Peter through death circa 64-68 (mainly oversaw churches from Asia Minor, Antioch, and Jerusalem)
John through death circa 98-102 (oversaw churches from Ephesus of Asia Minor)
Polycarp through death circa 155-157 (oversaw churches from Smyrna of Asia Minor) 1
Thraseas through death circa 160 (oversaw the churches from Eumenia, but died in Smyrna)
Sagaris through death circa 166-167 (died in Laodicea of Asia Minor)
Papirius through death circa 170 (oversaw churches from Smyrna of Asia Minor)
Melito through death circa 170-180 (oversaw churches from Sardis of Asia Minor)
Polycrates through death circa 200 (oversaw churches from Ephesus of Asia Minor)
Apollonius of Ephesus through death circa 210 (oversaw churches from Ephesus of Asia Minor). 1
Camerius of Smyrna through death circa 220 (possibly oversaw churches from Smyrna of Asia Minor). 1
c. 220 – c. 254 Nepos of Arsinoe

(More on succession can be found in the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?)

The following from Dionysius clearly shows that Nepos was still respected after he died (Nepos died prior to Dionysius’ mid-third century writing of the following) and really did not refute him from a biblical perspective:

But as they produce a certain composition by Nepos, on which they insist very strongly, as if it demonstrated incontestably that there will be a (temporal) reign of Christ upon the earth, I have to say, that in many other respects I accept the opinion of Nepos, and love him at once for his faith, and his laboriousness, and his patient study in the Scriptures, as also for his great efforts in psalmody, by which even now many of the brethren are delighted. I hold the man, too, in deep respect still more, inasmuch as he has gone to his rest before us. Nevertheless the truth is to be prized and reverenced above all things else. And while it is indeed proper to praise and approve ungrudgingly anything that is said aright, it is no less proper to examine and correct anything which may appear to have been written unsoundly. If he had been present then himself, and had been stating his opinions orally, it would have been sufficient to discuss the question together without the use of writing, and to endeavour to convince the opponents, and carry them along by interrogation and reply. But the work is published, and is, as it seems to some, of a very persuasive character; and there are unquestionably some teachers, who hold that the law and the prophets are of no importance, and who decline to follow the Gospels, and who depreciate the epistles of the apostles, and who have also made large promises regarding the doctrine of this composition, as though it were some great and hidden mystery, and who, at the same time, do not allow that our simpler brethren have any sublime and elevated conceptions either of our Lord’s appearing in His glory and His true divinity, or of our own resurrection from the dead, and of our being gathered together to Him, and assimilated to Him, but, on the contrary, endeavour to lead them to hope for things which are trivial and corruptible, and only such as what we find at present in the kingdom of God. And since this is the case, it becomes necessary for us to discuss this subject with our brother Nepos just as if he were present (Dionysius of Alexandria. From the Two Books on the Promises. Copyright © 2008 by Kevin Knight. Viewed 8/14/08).

In other words, Nepos knew his Bible, but did not hold to the same position that allegorists like Dionysius of Alexandria held. But those who held to Judaeo-Christian beliefs, while slightly chastised, simply were almost never condemned by the early allegorists during the Smyrna Church Era.

Mainly, because the early allegorists knew that the original Christians held to beliefs and practices that the allegorists considered to be Jewish–and at this stage, the allegorists simply did not have the ability to condemn the literalists because most who professed Christ at the time knew that the literalists had ties to the original apostolic church. (More information on faithful Christians in northern African locations can be found in the article Arabic Nazarenes May Have Kept Original Christian Practices.)

A “literalist” school was founded in Antioch during the time of Nepos and perhaps he helped influence that development.

Getting back to Africa, in the fourth century related to Ethiopia, Frumentius reported:

“And we assemble on Saturday,” he continues; “not that we are infected with Judaism, but to worship Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath” (Davis, Tamar. A General History of the Sabbatarian Churches. 1851; Reprinted 1995 by Commonwealth Publishing, Salt Lake City, pp. 41-42).

Africa has long had groups of people who have kept the seventh-day Sabbath. In the 21st century, there are Church of God groups throughout Africa.

Since it is USA ‘Black History Month,’ I thought it might be appropriate to quote some writings from the late Martin Luther King Jr. Particularly, those on the ancient sun-god religion of Mithraism, that was popular in the Roman Empire from about the first century B.C. until the fourth century A.D.

So here is some of what Dr. King wrote on Mithraism, in a document dated November 23, 1949:

In Avesta, Mithra was the genius of celestial light…The doctrine of the immortality of the soul was another view which was very prominent in Mithraism…

Women were compelled to seek salvation in some other cult, for Mithraism excluded them entirely…

When Mithraism is compared to Christianity, there are surprisingly many points of similarity. Of all the mystery cults, Mithraism was the greatest competitor of Christianity…

That Christians did copy and borrow from Mithraism cannot be denied (King ML. The papers of Martin Luther King, Jr, Volume 4. Clayborne Carson, Ralph Luker, Penny A. Russell editors/compliers. University of California Press, 1992, pp. 213-214, 217, 222, 224).

Of course, true Christians did not really borrow from Mithraism, but the Greco-Roman faiths did.

Here is some of what Dr. King wrote in a document dated February 15, 1950:

Mithraism…was suppressed by the Christians sometime in the latter part of the fourth century A.D.: but its collapse seems to have been due to the fact that by that time many of its doctrines had been adopted by the church, so that it was practically absorbed by its rival.

…the Church made a sacred day out of Sunday partially because…of the resurrection. But when we observe a little further we find that as a solar festival, Sunday was the sacred day of Mithra: it is also interesting to notice that since Mithra was addressed as Lord, Sunday must have been “the Lord’s Day” long before Christian use. It is also to be noticed that our Christmas, December 25th, was the birthday of Mithra, and was only taken over in the Fourth Century as the date, actually unknown, of the birth of Jesus.

To make the picture a little more clear, we may list a few of the similarities between these two religions: (1) Both regard Sunday as a Holy Day. (2) December 25 came to be considered as the anniversary of the birth of Mithra and Christ also. (3) Baptism and a ritual meal were important parts of both groups…

In summary we may say that the belief in immortality, a mediator between god and man, the observance of certain sacramental rites…were common to Mithraism and Christianity. (King ML. The papers of Martin Luther King, Jr, Volume 4. Clayborne Carson, Ralph Luker, Penny A. Russell editors/compliers. University of California Press, 1992, pp. 307, 309.)

Notice that Martin Luther King, Jr. clearly understood that the Sunday churches dropped the Sabbath, that “the Lord’s Day” essentially first meant the day of Mithra, and that the worlds’ churches did adopt many practices from Mithraism.

I wish he and others emphasized this aspect of his writings more. His writings on Mithraism should help raise the awareness of its influence to all. Hopefully, so people who claim Christ will realize that they should not continue practices that many obtained outside of the Bible, but from the influence of Mithraism.

I would again like to emphasize that Christians faithful to the original teachings of Christ, the apostles, and the New Testament did not adopt the practices of Mithraism.

The Continuing Church of God , which opposes Mithraism, has many congregations in various African countries such as Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, South Sudan, Zambia, and Tanzania. We also have members/tentative supporters that we know of in Uganda, South Africa, and elsewhere. I personally visited Africa back in 1985 and was able to visit Africa again in 2014 (information related to a conference held there is in the post CCOG Letter and Nairobi Conference). I was also able to attend for the Continuing Church of God for leaders across Africa in 2017 (information related to a conference held there is in the post). CCOG evangelist Evans Ochieng has visited numerous countries in Africa where people have first contacted us because of finding out about us on the internet–and the list of places continues to grow.

We must, of course, go through those doors that Jesus opens for us.

Jesus taught:

7 “And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write,’These things says He who is holy, He who is true, “He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens”: 8 I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. (Revelation 3:7-8)

37“The harvest truly is plentiful, but the laborers are few.  38Therefore pray the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest.” (Matthew 9:37-38)

Are more Gentiles going to be called in this age?

Yes.

In Romans 11, verse 25, the Apostle Paul wrote the following:

25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. (Romans 11:25)

In the second century A.D., Irenaeus of Lyon, who claimed to have received some of his doctrines from Polycarp of Smyrna wrote:

God has made the Gentiles, whose salvation was despaired of, fellow-heirs (Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter X)

It is not possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church, [scattered] throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and which she exerts day by day for the benefit of the Gentiles (Against Heresies, Book II, Chapter XXXII)

God did purpose to take from among the Gentiles a people for His name (Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter XII)

God has justly rejected them, and given to the Gentiles outside the vineyard the fruits of its cultivation. (Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter XXXVI)

God shall enlarge unto Japheth, and he shall dwell in the house of Shem, and Ham shall be his servant. That is to say: In the end of the ages he blossomed forth, at the appearing of the Lord, through the calling of the Gentiles, when God enlarged unto them the calling; and their sound went out into all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. The enlarging, then, is the calling from among the Gentiles, that is to say, the Church. (A Discourse on the Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching. Chapter 21)

So, the idea of reaching Gentiles did not die out after the writing of the New Testament.

Getting back to the Apostle Paul, he wrote:

26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.” (Romans 11:26-27)

So, in the sequence of Romans 11, we see the full number of the Gentiles will come into the faith (Romans 11:25), prior to Jesus’ return (Romans 11:26).

The late Pastor General of the old Worldwide Church of God, Herbert W. Armstrong, taught the following about Romans 11:25:

Now I want you to study carefully one of the most wonderful, important chapters in all the Bible — the 11th of Romans. … Verse 23 says those who abide not still in unbelief shall YET receive salvation. … Now study carefully beginning verse 25: “Blindness in part is happened to Israel [HOW LONG? Forever? No — note it], UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” — the end of this age during which God is calling a people from among the gentiles to bear His name (Acts 15:14). And so, says Romans 11:26, “all Israel SHALL BE SAVED [how?]: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.” The Deliverer, Jesus Christ, is coming again!

When He comes, the gentile times will be over — the BLINDNESS will be removed from the Israelites — and their opportunity — their FIRST chance — of salvation will then come to those whom God had blinded! This is at the time when He comes to REIGN on HIS THRONE — the throne of David, with the saints made immortal reigning and ruling with Him — and the time is DURING THE THOUSAND YEARS!

Notice verse 31. These blinded Israelites have not now, in this age, received mercy, that through the mercy of the gentiles saved in this age, they MAY, THEN, obtain mercy and salvation. How? Because these saved gentiles will then be kings and priests, assisting in this wonderful Work! (Armstrong HW. Where Will The MILLENNIUM Be Spent? Tomorrow’s Word magazine, September 1971, p. 5)

25: “Blindness in part is happened until Israel”-HOW LONG? Forever? No-note it-“UNTIL the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” -the end of this age during which God is calling a people from among the Gentiles to bear His name (Acts 15: 14). … These blinded Israelites have not now, in this age, received mercy, that thru the mercy of the Gentiles saved in this age, they MAY, THEN, obtain mercy and salvation. How? Because these saved Gentiles will then be kings and priests, assisting in this wonderful work! (Armstrong HW. Where Will The MILLENNIUM Be Spent? Plain Truth, February-March 1954 , pp. 4-5)

(25) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel [or that part of Israel, meaning the great part, the big part — all but a few, have been blinded. It’s the big part actually] until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. [Or the number of Gentiles to be converted becomes complete — as other translations have it] (Armstrong HW. Romans 11-13. Bible Study, June 27, 1980)

Clearly, we are much closer to the time when all the Gentiles are to come in to later be kings and priests than when those articles were published (see also: Christians are to Rule).

More of the Gentiles had to be called and converted– and that is happening now!

Sadly, many people are affected by prejudices and other factors which stop them from acting on the truth and supporting the reaching of the Gentiles.

Jesus taught that the end does NOT come until the ‘Gospel of the Kingdom of God‘ reaches enough nations (Matthew 24:14) and, based on Paul’s writings, we also see that “the full number” (as the NIV, NLT, BSB, CEV, GNT, HCSV, ISV, and NET Bible, put Romans 11:25) of Gentiles God wants in this age come in. One way we have assisted in that is getting the English edition of our booklet The Gospel of the Kingdom of God translated into over 1000 languages (see also Preaching the Gospel in Over 1000 Languages ), including African ones.

In CCOG we are reaching Gentiles and non-Gentiles (cf. Romans 9:27; see also What is the Ezekiel Warning?).

And that is basically why we have been the fastest growing xWCG church in the 21st century.

The Continuing Church of God has sent songbooks, Bible News Prophecy magazines, other books, history booklets, literature, and other support (including laborers for the harvest) to those in Africa (including food for the hungry and support for widows and orphans). In addition to English, the Continuing Church of God has had literature, such as the Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God (see KATIKA LUGHA YA KISWAHILI) and our Study the Bible Course (see Somo 1 Katika Kiswahili), translated into Kiswahili which is the ‘linga-Franca’ in many nations in Africa.

While English is understood in many parts of Africa, it is often a second or third language. Right now, in addition to English and Kiswahili, we have produced printed literature in Ekegusii and Dholuo and Asante Twi. We also have gospel information in Chichewa and many other African languages (to see a list go to: www.ccog.org).

We also now have a YouTube channel called CCOGAfrica. This channel features messages from ministers in Africa and mainly in African languages (see also CCOGAfrica YouTube channel now live!). Plus, we have a website CCOGAFRICA.ORG which is targeted towards those in Africa–its recent posts tend to feature news as well as new literature available in African languages.

As far as recent news goes, we sent our Kenya-based evangelist Evans Ochieng recently came back from a trip to Malawi where thousands more have asked to be part of the CCOG.

That said, as ancient Nepos for example demonstrated, Africans are sometimes willing to stand up for what is right when others do not.

Martin Luther King, Jr. pointed out theological changes that many in the world accept, that they should not have.

Statue purported to be Peter Waldo
(photo by Alexander Hoernigk)

COGwriter

Did any of the Waldensians keep the seventh-day Sabbath?

Did all of them?

What about Peter Waldo?

Some have asserted that those who have called themselves some version of the term Waldensian always kept Sunday.

Seventh-day Adventist scholar Gerard Damsteegt has stated:

Although there is no record that Waldo and his followers observed the seventh-day Sabbath, we know that several movements related to the Waldenses were reported to observe this custom. Damsteegt PG. DECODING ANCIENT WALDENSIAN NAMES: NEW DISCOVERIES. Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 54, 2016, No. 2, Autumn 2016, p. 254)

Actually, the above scholar actually provided evidence that Peter Waldo and his followers kept the Sabbath in the same article, more of which will be cited later.

First, let it be made clear that scholars who have looked into the Waldensians have concluded that at least some of them kept the seventh-day Sabbath.

Here is an old report from old English (where the letter ‘f’ was often used instead of the letter ‘s,’ so it is changed below) from a Baptist historian in the 18th century:

Some of the inhabitants of the Pyrenees, and of the adjacent states, and not those of the vallies of Piedmont, were the true original Waldenses, … Some of these christians were called Sabbati, Sabbatati, and Insabbatati, and more frequently Inzabbatati. Led astray by found without attending to facts, one says, they were so named from the hebrew word sabbath, because they kept the saturday for the Lord’s day. Another says, they were so called because they rejected all the festivals, or sabbaths, in the low latin sense of the word, which the catholick church religiously observed. (Robinson R. Ecclesiastical Researches. Francis Hodson, publisher. 1792, pp. 299-304)

So, there were multiple types of Waldensians, and many kept the seventh-day Sabbath.

Notice the following:

One of the primary sources of evidence of Waldensian Sabbathkeeping during the first half of the thirteenth century comes from a collection of five books written against the Cathars and Waldensians about 1241-1244 by Dominican inquisitor Father Moneta of Cremona in northern Italy.

Moneta passionately defended himself against criticism from Waldensians and Cathars that Catholics were transgressors of the Sabbath commandment. In the chapter De Sabbato, et De Die Dominico he discussed the significance of the seventh-day Sabbath of Exodus 20:8, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,” and contrasted it with the value of the Lord’s day, his term for the first day of the week. …

Sabbathkeeping among Waldensians was most widespread in Bohemia and Moravia, places to which they fled during papal persecution.

A fifteenth-century manuscript, published by church historian Johann Döllinger in History of the Sects {Beiträge zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters (Munich: Beck, 1890), Vol. II, p. 662} reports that Waldensians in Bohemia “do not celebrate the feasts of the blessed virgin Mary and the Apostles, except the Lord’s day. Not a few celebrate the Sabbath with the Jews.” (Damsteegt PG. Were Waldensians Sabbath-keepers? Adventist World, September 6, 2017).

Here is a report from the Lutheran historian Johann Mosheim concerning a group in the 12th century and two of their tenets:

the denomination of the Pasaginians … The first was a notion, that the observance of the law of Moses, in everything except the offering of sacrifices, was obligatory upon Christians; in consequence of which they circumcised their followers, abstained from those meats, the use of which was prohibited under the Mosaic economy, and celebrated the Jewish sabbath. The second tenet that distinguished this sect was advanced in opposition to the doctrine of three persons in the divine nature. (Mosheim JL, Coote C, Gleig G. An Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern: In which the Rise, Progress, and Variations of Church Power, are Considered in Their Connexion with the State of Learning and Philosophy, and the Political History of Europe During that Period, Volume 1. Translated by Archibald Maclaine. Plaskitt & Cugle, 1840. Original from Ohio State University, Digitized Aug 8, 2013, p. 333)

So, they kept the Sabbath, abstained from unclean meats, and were opposed to the trinitarian view. While not all the views that Mosheim had about the Pasaginians were Church of God views, apparently some called by that name were Church of God Christians. It should also be noted that Mosheim believed that there were two types of Waldnesians. One considered that the Church of Rome was a real Christian church, whereas the other considered the Church of Rome to be the harlot of Revelation 17 (Moshiem, p. 333). Others have written that one type of Waldensian was fairly close to the Greco-Romans, whereas the other type was much more independent of them (Froom LE. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Volume 1. Review and Herald, 1950, p. 831).

In the seventeenth century, Peter Allix reported about beliefs of the early Waldensians from a critic and then made his own comments:

That the Law of Moses is to be kept according to the letter, and that the keeping of the Sabbath, Circumcision, and other legal observances, ought to take place. They hold also, that Christ the Son of God is not equal with the Father, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, these three Persons, are not one God and one substance; and, as a surplus to these their errors, -they judge and condemn all the doctors of the Church, and universally the whole Roman Church. Now, since they endeavour to defend this their error by testimonies drawn from the New Testament and Prophets, I shall, with assistance of the grace of Christ, stop their mouths, as David did Goliah’s, with their own sword. (Allix P. Some Remarks upon the Eccelisastical History of the Ancient churches of Piedmont. originally published 1690, Oxford reprint 1831, p. 169)

But here, first of all, we are to take notice, that the Waldenses and Albigenses had both of them the same belief… the difference between the Waldenses and the Church of Rome was not so small, that they could be looked upon only as schismatics, as the Bishop of Meaux has been pleased to imagine … the Waldenses, or disciples of Waldo, having been particularly famous for their refusing to swear, … Peter Waldo’s translating of the Bible, which must have been done before the year 1180, shews, that in France there was already a language different from the Latin tongue, (Ibid, pp. 173, 183, 184)

The above suggests that they held several Church of God doctrines, including binitarianism, non-swearing of oaths, and Sabbath-keeping.

The Petrobrusians (considered related to the Waldenses) kept the Sabbath and were condemned for it by the Roman Catholic saint Bernard in the 12th century (Andrews J. History of the Sabbath and First Day of the Week. Reprint by Teach Services, 1998, p. 421). Notice the following from a Sunday-keeping writer (where I have typed it as originally written–knowing that now, the “f” charcaters below would have been an “s” in modern writing):

the feventh day Sabbath … In S. Bernard’s dayes it was condemned in the Petrobufiani. (In: White F, Bifhop of Ely. A Treatise on the Sabbath Day …. Richard Badger, 1635, p. 8)

So, yes, some of the immediate predecessors of Peter Waldo and the Waldensians kept the seventh-day Sabbath and were condemned for it. Peter Waldo likely was in contact with some considered Petrobrusians.

The Patarenes (considered related to the Waldenses) kept the Sabbath and were condemned for it by Cardinal Damian around the same time (Wilkinson B. Reprint by Teach Services, 1994, pp. 234-235).

Now what about Peter Waldo himself? Here is more from SDA scholar Gerard Damsteegt:

With few exceptions, Waldensians today deny that the ancient Waldenses kept the seventh-day Sabbath. However, historical evidence indicates that many did observe Sabbath during the Middle Ages. During the early part of the seventeenth century, the Swiss histo-rian Melchior Goldastus (1576–1635) commented on Emperor Frederic II’s Constitution of 1220 against heretics. He reasoned that the label insabbatati was used to describe heretics during the thirteenth century “because they judaize on the Sabbath,” that is, they kept the Sabbath like the Jews. He mentioned that the “Valdenses” were often called “Insabbatati,”14 indicating that during that time there were Waldenses who kept the seventh-day Sabbath (Saturday) as a day of rest. …

Primary sources show that, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, there were two groups of Waldenses–one group that observed Sunday as the Lord’s day, the other that kept the seventh-day Sabbath of the Bible. Our research reveals that the title insabbatati could apply to (1) Waldenses who rejected Catholic festivals and holy days, or sabbaths, and observed only Sunday as the Lord’s day and (2) Waldenses who, in addition, rejected Sunday as a Catholic institution and kept the seventh-day Sabbath of the Bible. The title sabbatati, as applied to heretics, was used to characterize Waldenses who stood out because of their observance of the seventh-day Sabbath. (Damsteegt PG. The ancient Waldenses: Did the Reformation predate Luther? Ministry, October 2017, pp. 23,24)

The Waldensian historian, Emilio Comba, admits that northern Italy was a stronghold of various dissident groups associated with the Waldenses, some of which kept the Sabbath and often influenced and merged with the various groups of the Poor of Lyon and Poor Lombards.Sabbath keeping among the Waldenses was most widespread in Bohemia and Moravia. An inquisitor’s manuscript from the fifteenth century reports that Waldenses in Bohemia “do not celebrate the feasts of the blessed virgin Mary and the Apostles, except the Lord’s day. Not a few celebrate the Sabbath with the Jews.” … Most historians identify Tourlupins with the Picardian branch of Waldenses. A company of them was arrested in 1420. Well-preserved manuscripts mention that they “upheld that the Saturday must be celebrated instead of Sunday.”

From the end of the twelfth century, opponents of the Waldenses called them insabbatati, insabbatatis, xabatati, xabatenses, sabbatati, sabatatos, inzabattati, insabbatatorum, and insabbatatos. These words can be traced back to the basic The first time the word insabbatati appeared in the existing Latin literature is in an edict issued in 1192 against heretics by Alfonso II, King of Aragon, (1152–1196), Count of Barcelona, and Count of Provence. This edict warned against the Valdenses (Waldenses) and identified them as Insabbatatos and Pauperes de Lugduno (Poor of Lyon). The edict, however, did not explain why Waldenses were called Insabbatatos. The next use of this term was in an 1197 edict issued by the son of Alfonso II, Peter II, King of Aragon, (1174–1213) and Count of Provence. This document called them Sabatati and Pauperes de Lugduno. …

From the various accounts of Waldenses rejecting holy days, festivals or sabbaths, it is not surprising that, as late as the time of archbishop James Usher (1581–1656), there were many who believed that insabbatati referred to those Waldenses who worshiped by judaizing on the Sabbath. Concerning the word insabbatati, Jesuit Inquisitor Pegne also admitted that “many used to think it came from Sabbath, and that they [Waldenses] observed the Sabbath according to the custom of the Jews.” …

Since the Middle Ages, historians have characterized the Waldenses by the uncomplimentary names insabbatati and sabbatati to indicate their unique attire by the type of shoes they wore, or their unique belief in rejecting Catholic holy days or festivals and practices. The research underlying this article has tried to decode the confusion surrounding these names. This has led to the following insights for historiography, previously unnoticed. From the analysis of the shoe theory, the research brought out that the wearing of perforated shoes was not introduced by or was not the custom of the Waldenses or the Poor of Lyon, but it was a custom introduced by the Poor Catholics and the Reconciled Poor. …

The term sabbatati also could have been used to describe some groups of Waldenses who followed the Jewish practice of resting on the Sabbath. This fits the meaning of both Insabbatati as depicting the rejection of Catholic holy days, Sabbaths, and teachings, and sabbatati describing the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath. Primary sources show that one inquisitor in the thirteenth century wrote a book against the Waldenses and Cathars in which he refuted their criticism that Roman Catholics observed Sunday instead of the seventh-day Sabbath. This is evidence that there were Waldenses and Cathars who kept the seventh-day Sabbath during the high Middle Ages. Additional evidence shows that several groups closely associated and considered part of the Waldensian movement did indeed keep the seventh-day Sabbath as early as the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. (Damsteegt PG. DECODING ANCIENT WALDENSIAN NAMES: NEW DISCOVERIES. Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 54, 2016, No. 2, 237–258)

While there may be debate regarding the precise year of Alphonso’s decree, notice the following:

Again to the South-West, about AD. 1190, we read of a public discussion between certain Valdenses and Catholics near Narbonne: and in 1194 of a Decree of Alphonzo II of Arragon against them …

[596] “Waldenses sive Insabbatatos, qui alio nomine se vocant Pauperes de Lugduno,…ab omni regno nostro, tanquam inimicos crucis Christi,…et regni publicos hostes, exire ac fugere praecipinius.” (Elliot EB, ed. The Horae Apocalypticae. Originally finished in 1860. Cross The Border Publishing, reprint 2018, Chapter VII and reference 596)

I have translated the above as follows:

“The Waldenses, or the Insabbatatos, who call themselves the Poor of Lyons by another name, … from all our kingdom, as enemies of the cross of Christ, … and the public enemies of the kingdom, to go forth and flee from the headlands.”

The fact that the followers of Peter Waldo may not have been publicly accused of keeping the seventh-day Sabbath until the late 12^th century could possibly suggest that some who were earlier categorized as Waldensians did not then do so.

Yet, since Peter Waldo lived until 1205 in the 13^th century, the fact that his people were called insabbatati by the end of the 12^th century looks to be evidence that Peter Waldo and his followers were keeping the seventh-day Sabbath by then.

As far as Peter Waldo goes, it is my view that he initially (c. 1160-1179) may or may not have been a Sabbath-keeper, but became one, probably no later than 1180, after exposure to some in his region who held Church of God-type doctrines.

He is also in a succession list article that I wrote and that the January-February 2022 edition of the Sabbath Sentinel put out by the Bible Sabbath Association, which is not a Church of God group (though it has members that are in the COGs, as well as members who are not), published on pages 16-19:

Sabbatarian/Waldensian Apostolic Succession List?

By Dr. Bob Thiel

Could there be a list of successive Sabbath-keepers from the time of the original apostles to present?

Yes.

After seeing several published claims in the 19^th and 20^th centuries of apostolic succession related to a group known as the Waldensians [1-6], I contacted historians and librarians associated with the American Waldensian Society to see if they had a list to back up such claims—I also contacted leaders in several Sabbatarian churches.

Those I was in communication with were unaware of any such list, even though several documents claimed that early Waldensians (also known as Vaudois) had true succession and/or some type of list prior to the time of the 16^th century Protestant Reformation [1-7].

However, to assist, the Waldensians referred me to Moravian scholar Dr. Craig Atwood as well as the Archivo Della Tavola Valdese–the historical archives of the Waldensian Church in Italy—for more information.

Dr. Atwood provided information that the succession of Moravian prelates was accepted by the British Parliament in 1749 (Acta Fratrum Unitatis in Anglia), because they claimed succession via the Waldensians [2, 7].

The Waldensians, or at least a Moravian portion, claimed to have originally descended from ‘‘a branch of the Greek church’’ from the 9^th century [3]. Moravia is a historical region in the east of the Czech Republic and one of three historical Czech lands, with Bohemia and Czech Silesia. In the 18^th century, the Episcopal Church seemed to accept the Moravians as having valid Greek church succession [3].

Some indicate that the Waldensians came from a branch of the 4^th century Greek church [7], which would point to Asia Minor and Antioch. Another source seems to point to the Waldensians being a branch of the 3^rd or 4^th century Antioch church [8]. Even Roman Catholic sources acknowledge that there were Sabbath-keeping leaders in Antioch in the 3^rd or 4^th centuries [9]

While there were different groups called Waldensians by the Roman Catholics, some did keep the Sabbath as well as hold to other doctrines not held by the Roman Catholics or the bulk of the Protestants [10].

Although modern Waldenesians observe Sunday, notice the following:

Sabbathkeeping among Waldensians was most widespread in Bohemia and Moravia, places to which they fled during papal persecution. A fifteenth-century manuscript, published by church historian Johann Döllinger in History of the Sects, reports that Waldensians in Bohemia “do not celebrate the feasts of the blessed virgin Mary and the Apostles, except the Lord’s day. Not a few celebrate the Sabbath with the Jews.” [11]

Here is what Johann Döllinger published in Latin in the above source, with my translation below it:

festa divae virginis Mariae et Apostolorum non celebrant, solam diem Dominicam aliqui. Nonnulli vero cum Judaeis sabbatum celebrant, [12]

the festival of the blessed virgin Mary and the Apostles not celebrated, only some the Lord’s day. Not a few of the people celebrate the Sabbath with the Jews,

There were differences among the Waldenesians. Some kept the Sabbath. The succession list in this article only includes leaders, starting with the apostles, who seemingly kept the seventh-day Sabbath.

In the 14^th century, the assertion of Waldensian apostolic succession was reported by a Dominican monk:

Waldenses … push back their beginnings to the age of primitive Christianity. Thus they deny that they first appeared as a set of heretics breaking off from the historical Church, and claim to have preserved the purity of the faith through the ages, while all the rest of the Church was degenerating and accumulating the corruptions against which they protested from the first.

Claim to apostolic origin. — This claim is first met with in a Dominican monk at Passau in the year 1316, who states that the Waldenses are the most ancient of all the sects, some even saying that this sect ‘duravit a tempore patrum.’ It was but a step to add that the Waldensian church was founded by St. Paul when on his way to Spain. [4]

The Latin duravit a tempore patrum translated to English means they ‘‘lasted from the time of the fathers.’’ While there could be groups with ties to Spain, since the Waldenses elsewhere indicated that they came from part of the Greek church originally (apparently Asia Minor/Antioch) [3,8], that would seemingly rule out Spain (though there were different groups called Waldensians).

The Catholic Encyclopedia says that earlier succession claims were made by other groups, such as those known as Paulicians and Cathari [13-14]. The 12^th century abbot Bernard of Clairvaux, a declared doctor of the Roman Church, called, ‘‘The Cathari, a sect of the Waldenses’’ [15].

Reportedly, Waldensians ‘‘Being scattered abroad in various countries, … they supported amongst them the true apostolic succession of ministers and bishops, after the aforesaid manner of appointment, without break, down to the year 1450, about which time the separation of the Bohemian Brethren from the then prevailing religion of Bohemia took place for sufficient causes’’ [6].

A branch of the Greek Orthodox Church essentially approved Waldensian succession in 1451 through the acceptance of the ordinations of some Waldensian presbyters who accepted their church [5].

Interestingly in the early 1700s, John Potter, Anglican Bishop of Oxford/Canterbury, said the Moravian bishops (who claimed descent from the Waldenses) had ‘‘true succession’’ and made a point that ‘‘only those ignorant of church history could cast any doubt about it’’ [2].

But in this century, no Waldensian list dating back to the apostles has been found in modern Waldensian sources.

Marco Fratini, who works at the Waldensian Library in Italy, said that the archives there did not have such a list [16]. He also stated that such a list would be difficult to compile as there are a variety of doctrinal inconsistencies related to modern Waldensians. He is correct about that, but also there is the historical problem that people of various beliefs were termed Waldensians, not because they were all part of the same group, but because they were not in communion with, or were considered to be in opposition to, the Roman Catholic Church.

Notice also the following:

Roman Church they refused to give it the name of Catholic, and showed in what it had departed from true catholicity. The Vaudois, therefore, are not schismatics, but the continued inheritors of the church founded by the apostles. This church then bore the name of Catholic, [17].

That being said, Marco Fratini of Archivo Della Tavola Valdese also emailed me on September 3, 2020 to encourage me to send him such a list if I came up with one. In June 2021, I sent him a list with through 1525 that follows:

31 – c. 64-68 Apostles Peter and Paul c. 67
c. 98 – 102 Apostle John
c. 100 – c. 157 Polycarp of Smyrna
c. 157 – c. 160 Thraseas of Smyrna
c.160 – c. 167 Sagaris of Laodicea
c. 167 – c.170 Papirius of Smyrna
c. 170 – c. 180 Melito of Sardis
c. 180 – c. 200 Polycrates of Ephesus
c. 200 – c. 220 Camerius of Smyrna
c. 220 – c.254 Nepos of Arsinoe
c. 254 – c. 275 Unnamed Antiochian(s) or possibly Dorotheus
c. 275 – 312 Lucian of Antioch
c. 313 – 380 Unnamed Antiochian(s)
c. 380 – c. 470 Unnamed Antiochians or Unnamed Nazarenes
c. 470 – c. 500 Constantine of Antioch and Aushin
c. 500 – c. 645 Unnamed ‘Paulicians’
c. 645 – c. 650 Unnamed leader with New Testament from Syria
c. 650 – c. 684 Constantine of Mananali (Silvanus)
c. 684 – c. 696 Simeon
c. 697 – c.702 Sergius
c. 702 – c. 717 Paul the Armenian
c. 717 – c. 746 Gegnesius
c. 746 – c. 782 Joseph (Epaphroditus)
c. 783 – c. 800 Unnamed Paulician(s)
c. 801 – c. 835 Sergius (Tychicus)
c.836 – c. 919 Unnamed Paulicians
c. 920 – c. 950 Basil
c. 951 – c. 980 Jeremiah
1000s Sergius (27 years)
c. 1110 – 1140 Peter DeBruy (Pierre De Bruy)
1140 – 1155 Arnold of Brescia
1156 – 1181 Nicetas
1181 – 1205 Peter Waldo
1205 – 1224 Arnold Hot
1224- 1300 Unnamed Waldensians
c. 1310 – 1322 Walter the Lollard
1322 – c. 1335 Raymond the Lollard
c. 1335 – c. 1460 Unnamed Waldensians
c. 1460 -1492 Anthony Ferrar
1492 – 1525 Stefano Carlino or Unnamed Waldenesians

He responded to that list by stating:

Dear Dr. Thiel,

thank you for the exhaustive list.

I don’t know all of them, but it’s interesting. So I’m not able to suggest modification.

Best regards

Marco Fratini [18]

However, since we know that Anabaptists in Moravia were known for keeping the seventh-day Sabbath [19], and the Moravians claimed ties through the Waldensians, the following Moravian Sabbath-keepers could be added next of the list:

1526 – 1528 Moravian Sabbatarian Anabaptist ‘traveling minister’
1529 – 1540 Andreas Fischer

So, yes, there now is a list going back to the original apostles through the Waldensians and Moravian Anabaptist Sabbath-keepers. But, it is not as complete as preferred.

There are, of course, other possible lists and I expect to make modifications for other purposes, but for now this list looks plausible–even considering that several of the leaders on it were denounced by other churches based on real and fabricated teachings [cf. 20].

I invite others who have insight and could possibly help improve the list (and fill in gaps, if possible) to contact me.

My email address is COGwriter@aol.com

Bob Thiel

References

[1] Proceedings of the New York State Historical Association:…Annual Meeting with Constitution and By-laws and List of Members, Volume 17; Volume 19. The Association, 1919, pp. 190-191
[2] Podmore C. The Moravian Church in England, 1728-1760. Clarendon Press, 1998, pp. 210-239
[3] Martin JH. Historical Sketch of Bethlehem in Pennsylvania With Some Account of the Moravian Church. Philadelphia,1873, pp. 8, 51
[4] Adeney W. Waldenses, Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics Volume 12. Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1922, p. 664; the cited earlier source for this was from ‘‘Contra Valenses, in Maxima Bibliotheca…, Lyons, 1677-1707, xxv, 262 ff’’
[5] On the Episcopacy of the Herrnhuters, Commonly Known as the Moravians. The British Magazine, volume 7. 1835, pp. 645-647
[6] Benham D. Notes on the Origin and Episcopate of the Bohemian Brethren. Dalton & Lucy, 1867, p. 104
[7] Atwood CD. Community of the Cross Moravian Piety in Colonial Bethlehem. Penn State Press, 2004, p. 23
[8] Edwardson C. FACTS of FAITH. Christian Edwardson, 1943, pp. 18, 153
[9] Cardinal Newman, John Henry. The Arians of the Fourth Century. Longmans, Green, & Co., New York, 1908, pp. 7, 9
[10] Robinson R. Ecclesiastical Researches. Francis Hodson, publisher. 1792. Original from University of Chicago, Digitized Nov 19, 2015, pp. 299-304
[11] DamsteegT GF. Were the Waldensians Sabbathkeepers? Adventist World – November 11, 2017, p. 15
[12] Döllinger J. Beiträge zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters (Munich: Beck, 1890), Vol. II, p. 662.
[13] Fortescue, Adrian. ‘‘Paulicians.’’ The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911
[14] Weber, Nicholas. ‘‘Cathari.’’ The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 3. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908
[15] Taylor A. The history of the English General Baptists of the Seventeenth Century. 1818, pp. 22, 24
[16] Re: I: Prima successione dell’elenco dei leader. Email from Marco Frateri to Dr. Thiel, September 2, 2020
[17] Muston A. THE ISRAEL OF THE ALPS. A COMPLETE HISTORYOF THE WALDENSES AND THEIR COLONIES. Translated by J.Montgomery. LONDON: BLACKIE & SON, 1875, pp. 11-13
[18] Re: Waldenian Prima successione dell’elenco dei leader. Email from Marco Frateri to Dr. Thiel, June 17, 2021
[19] Clasen CP. Anabaptist Sects in the Sixteenth Century: A Research Report. Mennonite Quarterly Review, VOl. XLVI, July 1972, pp. 256-279
[20] Hoeh, A True History of the True Church. Radio Church of God, 1959, pp. 18-19

Dr. Thiel is the overseeing pastor of the international Continuing Church of God, www.ccog.org. He also posts daily reports on Church of God and prophetic news at www.cogwriter.com

We put together a sermonette related to the above:

Waldensian Apostolic Succession

Jesus said that the true church would continue to the end of the age. Did any in the groups called Waldensians (or Waldenses), Vaudois, or Moravians have apostolic succession? Were there such claims over 500 years ago?  Did any group claim to have an actual apostolic succession list of bishops? Was such a list at least partially accepted by the British Parliament in the 18th century or the Greek Orthodox Church in the 15th century or others centuries ago? Could the Waldenses have came from the true church in Antioch or Asia Minor in the 3rd or 4th centuries? Do modern American Waldensians claim to have such a list? What about the ones associated with that church or its Archivo Della Tavola Valdese in Italy? Did Dr. Thiel put together such a list and share it with them? Can such a list be seen today? Dr. Thiel goes over that and some of his research into this topic, while also asking for others to help fill in the gaps or assist in improving the list in this video. Dr. Thiel also discusses its symbol with a candle on a lampstand pointing to the fourth star and Jesus words in Revelation.

Here is a link to our video: Waldensian Apostolic Succession.

The true Christian Church of God, and all of its true ministers, have laying on of hands succession from the original apostles to present.

And yes, we believe all who held succession did keep the seventh-day Sabbath, including Peter Waldo.

Some items of possibly related interest may include the following:

 The Thyatira Church Era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. It claimed succession from the apostles. Here is a link toa related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
Another Look at the Didache, Ignatius, and the Sabbath Did Ignatius write against the Sabbath and for Sunday? What about the Didache? What does the actual Greek reveal?
The Sabbath in the Early Church and Abroad Was the seventh-day (Saturday) Sabbath observed by the apostolic and post-apostolic Church? Here is a related sermon video The Christian Sabbath and How and Why to Keep It.
The Christian Sabbath. This is a series of articles from the Catholic Mirror essentially proving that the biblical Sabbath was Saturday, that the Lord’s day in Revelation 1 is not a reference to Sunday, that the Church of Rome implemented Sunday, and that nearly all Protestants followed Rome.
Early Sabbath Keeping in North America When did Europeans first keep the Sabbath in North America? Did the pilgrims who arrived on the Mayflower keep Saturday or Sunday?
How to Observe the Sabbath How should you keep the Sabbath? This is an old article by Raymond Cole, with updated information for the 21st century.
The Dramatic Story of Chinese Sabbathkeepers This reformatted Good News article from 1955 discusses Sabbath-keeping in China in the 1800s.
Is God Unreasonable? Some have suggested that if God requires Sabbath-keeping He is unreasonable. Is that true? Here is a link to a related article in Mandarin Chinese 一个不合理的神？
Should You Observe God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? This is a free pdf booklet explaining what the Bible and history shows about God’s Holy Days and popular holidays. A related sermon is Which Spring Days should Christians observe?
Is Revelation 1:10 talking about Sunday or the Day of the Lord? Most Protestant scholars say Sunday is the Lord’s Day, but is that what the Bible teaches?
Sunday and Christianity Was Sunday observed by the apostolic and true post-apostolic Christians? Who clearly endorsed Sunday? What relevance is the first or the “eighth” day? A related sermon is also available: Sunday: First and Eighth Day?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they?
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? A YouTube video or related interesy may be: Polycarp of Smyrna: Why Christians should know more about him.
Theophilus of Antioch This is one of the second century leaders of some Christians in Antioch and is considered a Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch.
The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast This is a free draft/unedited pdf book explaining the what the Ten Commandments are, where they came from, how early professors of Christ viewed them, and how various ones, including the Beast of Revelation, will oppose them. A related sermon is titled: The Ten Commandments and the Beast of Revelation.

COGwriter

How did the original Christian church understand the Godhead?

Did you know that the early church was neither trinitarian nor unitarian? The early church was binitarian. And, shockingly, most people who profess Christianity are not even familiar with that term.

Early Christians considered that the Father and the Son were God and that the Holy Spirit was the power of God. And while some dispute this, historically it is a fact.

Do any scholars realize this?

While there are many articles at the COGwriter website which document the binitarian beliefs of 2nd century Christians, I thought that a few quotes from modern theologians may be eye-opening for those who have had little exposure to the binitarian truth of the Godhead.

Modern scholars, like Larry Hurtado, have realized the Christians who claimed to be Nazarene, including most considered to be “proto-orthodox,” held a binitarian view of the Godhead:

…”Nazarene” Christianity, had a view of Jesus fully compatible with the beliefs favored by the proto-orthodox (indeed, they could be considered part of the circles that made up proto-orthodox Christianity of the time). Pritz contended that this Nazarene Christianity was the dominant form of Christianity in the first and second centuries…the devotional stance toward Jesus that characterized most of the Jewish Christians of the first and second centuries seems to have been congruent with proto-orthodox devotion to Jesus…the proto-orthodox “binitarian” pattern of devotion…(Hurtado LW. Lord Jesus Christ, Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. William B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, 2003, pp. 560-561,618).

Furthermore, it perhaps should be mentioned that the sacra nomina (generally two-letter abbreviations, perhaps intended to identify the documents as “Christian”) found on early documents associated with Christianity is also believed to support the position that those that professed Christ in the second century were binitarian. Larry Hurtado also observed:

The Christian nomina sacra…differ in form from any Jewish scribal devices…Most significantly, the four earliest Christian nomina sacra are the two key words for God (Theos and Kyrios) and key designations for Jesus (Iēosus, Christos, and Kyrios).If therefore, as is usually believed, the nomina sacra practice represents an expression of piety and reverence, it is a striking departure from pre-Christian Jewish scribal practice to extend to these designations of Jesus the same scribal treatment given to key designations for God. That is, the four earliest Christian nomina sacra collectively manifest one noteworthy expression of what I have called the “binitarian shape” of earliest Christian piety and devotion (Hurtado LW.The Earliest Christian Artifacts.William B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids (MI), 2006, pp. 105-106).

Dr. Harold Brown, a Protestant trinitarian scholar, has admitted:

The language of the New Testament permits the Holy Spirit to be understood as an impersonal force or influence more readily than it does the Son…those who saw the Holy Spirit as a Person, were often heretical, for example, the Montanists (Brown HOJ. Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), 1988, p. 140).

Harold Brown also has admitted:

It is impossible to document what we now call orthodoxy in the first two centuries of Christianity (ibid, p.5).

And that is true. And he was specifically referring to doctrines like the trinity and other teachings that are contrary to what the Continuing Church of God holds.

What about Roman Catholic scholars? The Catholic Encyclopedia teaches this about the 4th century binitarians, which it calls the Semi-Arians:

Semi-Arians…A name frequently given to the conservative majority in the East in the fourth century…showing that the very name of father implies a son of like substance…rejected the Divinity of the Holy Ghost (Chapman, John. Transcribed by Douglas J. Potter. Semiarians and Semiarianism. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIII. Published 1912. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, D.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Thus it is clear that many held the binitarian view at that time (including no doubt, many who were not true Christians).

What about Orthodox scholars? Notice this frank admission from a bishop of the Orthodox Church about the late acceptance of the trinity:

…the councils defined once and for all the Church’s teaching upon the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith — the Trinity and the Incarnation. All Christians agree in regarding these things as ‘mysteries’ which lie beyond human understanding and language…the first two, held in the fourth century…formulated the doctrine of the Trinity…The work of Nicea was taken up by the second Ecumenical Council, held in Constantinople in 381. This council expanded and adapted the Nicene Creed, developing in particular that teaching upon the Holy Spirit, whom it affirmed to be God even as the Father and the Son are God…It was the supreme achievement of St. Athanasius of Alexandria to draw out the full implications of the key word in the Nicene Cred: homoousios, one in essence or substance, consubstantial. Complementary to his work was that of the three Cappadocian Fathers, Saints…(died 394). While Athanasius emphasized the unity of God — Father and Son are one in essence (ousia) – the Cappadocians stressed God’s threeness: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (hypostasis) (Ware T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books, London, 1997, pp. 20-23).

So it took councils of men to change the predominant view, that the Godhead was basically binitarian, to trinitarian. Yet, as recorded in the New Testament, Jude wrote:

“…contend earnestly for the faith that was once for all delivered for the saints” (Jude 3).

The faith delivered once for all should not have been changed.

Such a doctrinal change to the trinity should never have been made and never has been adopted by the true Christian Church.

Regarding the New Testament, even a trinitarian scholar has admitted:

The binitarian formulas are found in Rom. 8:11, 2 Cor. 4:14, Gal. 1:1, Eph. 1:20, 1 Tim 1:2, 1 Pet. 1:21, and 2 John 1:13…No doctrine of the Trinity in the Nicene sense is present in the New Testament…There is no doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense in the Apostolic Fathers…(Rusch W.G. The Trinitarian Controversy. Fortress Press, Phil., 1980, pp. 2-3).

Since modern scholars know that the early church was binitarian and not trinitarian, have you been taught this before?

If not, perhaps you had better look into this further.

The Continuing Church of God also had the following sermon on its ContinuingCOG channel:

Here is a link to the sermon: The Godhead.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Binitarian View: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning Is binitarianism the correct position? What about unitarianism or trinitarianism?
Is The Father God? What is the view of the Bible? What was the view of the early church?
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.
Proof Jesus is the Messiah This free book has over 200 Hebrew prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus. Plus, His arrival was consistent with specific prophecies and even Jewish interpretations of prophecy. Here are links to seven related sermons: Proof Jesus is the Messiah, Prophecies of Jesus’ birth, timing, and death, Jesus’ prophesied divinity, 200+ OT prophecies Jesus filled; Plus prophecies He made, Why Don’t Jews Accept Jesus?, Daniel 9, Jews, and Jesus, and Facts and Atheists’ Delusions About Jesus. Plus the links to two sermonettes: Luke’s census: Any historical evidence? and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but … These videos cover nearly all of the book, plus have some information not in the book. We also have the book translated in the Spanish PRUEBA de que JESÚS es el MESÍAS and French PREUVES QUE JÉSUS EST LE MESSIE languages.
Jesus is God, But Became Flesh Was Jesus fully human and fully God or what? Here is information in the Spanish language¿Es Jesucristo Dios?.
Virgin Birth: Does the Bible Teach It? What does the Bible teach? What is claimed in The Da Vinci Code?
Why Does Jesus Have Two Different Genealogies listed in Matthew 1 and Luke 3? Matthew 1:1-16 and Luke 3:23-38 seemingly list two different genealogies for Jesus. Why? Here is a version in the Spanish language: ¿Por qué Jesús tiene dos genealogías diferentes las cuales aparecen en Mateo 1 y Lucas 3?
Did Early Christians Think the Holy Spirit Was A Separate Person in a Trinity? Or did they have a different view? A related sermon is available: Truth about the Holy Spirit: What THEY do not want you to know!
Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity? Most act like this is so, but is it? Here is an old, by somewhat related, article in the Spanish language LA DOCTRINA DE LA TRINIDAD. Two related sermons are available: Trinity: Fundamental to Christianity or Something Else? and The Godhead and the Trinity. A brief video is also available: Three trinitarian scriptures?
Was Unitarianism the Teaching of the Bible or Early Church? Many, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, claim it was, but was it? Here is a link to a related sermon: Unitarianism? How is God One?
Did the Archangel Michael become Jesus? The Jehovah’s Witnesses teach this, and SDA Ellen White did, but does the Bible allow for this? Here is a link to a related video message: Is Jesus the Archangel Michael? Here is a related article in the Spanish language: ¿Se convirtió el Arcángel Miguel en Jesús?
How Many Creators? Did the ancient Mayans know the truth about the Godhead at creation?
Binitarianism: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning This is a longer article than the Binitarian View article, and has a little more information on binitarianism, and less about unitarianism. A related sermon is also available: Binitarian view of the Godhead.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.

COGwriter

A couple of anti-COG sites have pushed some of the following that came out many years ago:

Bruce Renehan

Chapter 9Sardis…Thou Livest, and Art DeadRhode Island 1671
The first Seventh Day Baptist Church in America was organized in December 1671 from members of a Baptist Church who had come to the conviction of the Sabbath of the Bible. Stephen and Anne Mumford were Sabbathkeeping members of the Tewksbury Baptist Church in England when they migrated to America in 1664 during a period of dissenter persecution. About the same time, according to Samuel Hubbard’s journal, his wife, Tacy, “took up keeping the Lord’s holy 7th day Sabbath the 10 day March 1665.” Within a year her husband, their three daughters and a son-in-law followed. By the end of the decade there were nine people within the congregation who had embraced the Sabbath along with others who had moved to the western part of the colony.

For several years the Sabbathkeepers remained as active members of the First Baptist Church in Newport, but in 1669 two couples rejected the Sabbath and spoke against it. The others found it difficult to take communion with those who had once known the truth and then entered into apostasy. Correspondence with English Seventh Day Baptists urged caution and “love to all saints holding up general communion with them lest it be those you have the particular offense against.” Finally, in 1671 when the pastor preached that the teaching of the Sabbath was causing people to leave Christ and go to Moses, the split occurred. Five members, Samuel and Tacy Hubbard with their daughter, Rachel Langworthy, William Hiscox and Roger Baster withdrew. With Stephen and Anne Mumford they covenanted together to form the first Seventh Day Baptist church in America. Within 20 years about 76 names were added to the covenant relationship which spread out to places such as Westerly, Rhode Island, and New London, Connecticut. The membership included American Indians as well as English colonists. ( pp. 8-10)

In brief, Stephen Mumford was not a member of a Church of God but rather was a minister of the Seventh Day Baptist Church. The Hubbard’s were members of the first Seventh Day Baptist Church of America. The Newport church kept a roster or diary in which it calls itself the Seventh Day Baptist Church. The historical library in Janesville, Wisconsin has the church roster which I’m sure Dr. Sanford holds dear, since his ancestors are Samuel and Tacy Hubbard!

Research By Others
I was not alone in my discoveries concerning the Worldwide Church of God’s falsified link to the Seventh Day Baptist church of Newport, Rhode Island. As early as 1968, William T. Voyce of Des Moines, Iowa had corresponded with both the Seventh Day Baptist Historical Society (located then in Plainfield, New Jersey) and the Worldwide Church of God editorial staff in Pasadena. …

A great disservice was done to both Seventh Day Baptists and Seventh Day Adventists by an Elder A. N. Dugger… accessed 08/29/20 https://hwarmstrong.com/daughter-of-bablylon-09.htm

Let me start out by saying that although A.N. Dugger’s basic historical view was correct, there were numerous errors in understanding church history that he and others have made. Bruce Renehan was right that Stephen Mumford was NOT COG. But also, Bruce Renehan has his issues as well. For example, the name “Seventh Day Baptist” was not formally adopted until 1818 (Strand KA, ed. The Sabbath In Scripture and History. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1982, p. 246). Stephen Mumford was part of a church group in Rhode Island that initially called themselves Sabbatarian Baptists, not Seventh Day Baptists.

Working to correct errors in church history was something I began to work on when I was with the Living Church of God (which promised to correct numerous historical errors it admitted it taught, yet that it later failed to do so) and then later in the Continuing Church of God.

While the late Dr. Herman Hoeh (of the old Radio then Worldwide Church of God) was prone to correct errors in his historical understandings, and there was a willingness to do so by the late John Ogwyn, sadly many others have not been as willing.

For what it’s worth, off and on for years I have looked into the historical period of the 1600s to 1800s. In doing so, I have spoken to and/or emailed leaders in many groups, including various CG7s and xWCG related ones. One of which still sends out A.N. Dugger’s book (and a leader there asked for a copy of my book, Continuing History of the Church of God, which I sent him). Also, I have had several contacts, including verbal, with leaders of groups claiming to have come from the Waldensians.

Perhaps it should be pointed out that that our book Continuing History of the Church of God does not even mention Steven Mumford nor Samuel Hubbard.

Why?

Because we agree with Bruce Renehan (who I never recall hearing of until 2020) that they were not COG–they were more of what was called ‘Particular’ Baptists, whose successors essentially later were formerly named Seventh Day Baptists.

Here is some of what my book states about the differences in the 1600s related to two groups of Sabbath keepers:

It perhaps should be pointed out that in the area of England in the 1600s, there were two basic groups of baptism by immersion Sabbath keepers, which have identified as General and Particular.[i] Those called General believed Jesus died for all, the doctrine of the laying on hands, avoiding pork, keeping Passover on the 14^th (though often calling it the “Lord’s Supper”), footwashing, millenarianism, anointing the sick, “Jewish ceremonies” (possibly a reference to biblical holy days or Passover), and a soon coming kingdom of God.[ii] The group called Particular Baptists were Calvinists [iii] who believed Jesus only died for the elect.[iv] The Particular group, in time, became more ecumenically Protestant and more like first day Baptists. Note the faithful used back then the term “Church of God”[v] or Church of Christ,[vi] not “Baptist” (a term used more in the 1700s and later).

In the 1600s there were several Sabbath-keeping congregations in England and some in the Americas according to O. Leonard:

Sabbath keepers of the middle ages {in the UK} … as a continuous body … transferred to America, in Rhode Island in 1664-65, and earliest showed itself in Newport, R. I., in 1644.[vii]

The Cottrells, which at that time seemed to be COG, arrived from the British Isles were no later than 1692 attending a Sabbath-keeping church. [viii]

From these groups, some became known as Sabbatarian Anabaptists or later Seventh Day Baptists (SDBs). Irrespective of what they were called originally, most of those groups tended to be loosely affiliated. Some of them kept COG doctrines, while others (like the SDBs) were Protestant in approach. …

Although there were small groups of Sabbath-keepers, from the 1600s through to the 1800s, changes set in. The SDB movement overtook many groups in America and elsewhere. And sadly, many of those that stayed in certain Sabbatarian churches did become SDBs, and held less of the truth.

The SDBs have basically documented several changes and doctrinal differences in their own pronouncements and books.[i] There was a separation between the SDBs and those who were in the Church of God as those truly in the COG would not accept the trinity. [ii]

It appears that many of those in the U.S.A. who kept Church of God doctrines in the 17^th and 18^th centuries were those whose descendants later became part of the Church of God, Seventh Day.

[i] Dugger, A History of True Religion, p. 277

[ii] Stillman W. Miscellaneous Compositions in Poetry and Prose. F.H.Bacon, New-London 1852; p. 3. Original from the New York Public Library Digitized Nov 15, 2006

[i] Ball, pp. 102-103; Brackney WH. The Baptists. ABC-CLIO, 1994, pp. 6-7

[ii] Ball, p. 9-10,15,49,59,102; see also Brackney, p. 7

[iii] Brackney, p. 6

[iv] Ball, p. 102

[v] Philotheos. A Threefold Dialogue, Concerning the Three Chief Points in Controversy amongst Protestants in our Day. London, 1708, pp. 26-27

[vi] Philotheos. A Threefold Dialogue, Concerning the Three Chief Points in Controversy amongst Protestants in our Day. London, 1708, pp. 26-27

[vii] Leonard O. HISTORICAL SKETCH OF SEVENTH DAY BAPTISTS OF NEW JERSEY in Griffiths TS. A History of Baptists in New Jersey. Barr Press Pub. Co., 1904. Original from Princeton University. Digitized Mar 17, 2008, p. 518

[viii] The Memorial: Portraits of William Bliss [and others], pp. 31, 121

COGwriter

February 14th is often celebrated as Valentine’s Day. Should you celebrate it?

Christians who may be tempted to compromise need to ask themselves about the origins of Valentine’s Day.

Notice what the Roman Catholics teach:

The roots of St. Valentine’s Day lie in the ancient Roman festival of Lupercalia, which was celebrated on Feb. 15. For 800 years the Romans had dedicated this day to the god Lupercus. On Lupercalia, a young man would draw the name of a young woman in a lottery and would then keep the woman as a sexual companion for the year (The Origins of St. Valentine’s Day. http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/ValentinesDay/, January 31, 2004).

It is of interest to note that the same source states:

The Catholic Church no longer officially honors St. Valentine, but the holiday has both Roman and Catholic roots.

It is good that the Church of Rome no longer officially honors Valentine or the holiday. Roman roots refers to pagan roots.

Look at some of what the Muslims say about Valentine’s Day:

Question

What is the ruling on celebrating Valentine’s Day?

Summary of answer

Celebrating Valentine’s Day is not permissible because it is an innovated festival and it promotes love and infatuation. https://islamqa.info/en/answers/73007/ruling-on-celebrating-valentines-day accessed 01/01/2023

Celebrating the Valentine Day is not permissible because: Firstly, it is an innovated holiday that has no basis in the Sharee`ah…Christians were aware of the Pagan roots of Valentine’s Day. The way the Christians adopted St. Valentine’s Day should be a lesson for Muslims. In fact, the failure to fully separate Valentine’s Day from its pagan roots explains why Islamic scholars and a number of Muslims avoid adopting traditions of non-Muslims, even though they could possibly be Islamicized…We should avoid anything associated with pagan immoral practices -…- Islam does not encourage flirting or suggestions of romantic relationships before marriage – Love between families, friends and married people does not need to be celebrated on a day with such un-Islamic origins (Ruling on Celebrating Valentine’s Day. http://www.contactpakistan.com/news/news144.htm, January 31, 2004).

What is the ruling on Valentine’s Day?…Firstly: Valentine’s Day is a jaahili Roman festival, which continued to be celebrated until after the Romans became Christian. This festival became connected with the saint known as Valentine who was sentenced to death on 14 February 270 CE. The kuffaar still celebrate this festival, during which immorality and evil are practised widely…Secondly: It is not permissible for a Muslim to celebrate any of the festivals of the kuffaar, because festivals come under the heading of shar’i issues which are to be based on the sound texts…Partially joining in, at the very least, is disobedience and sin…it is not permissible to celebrate the festivals of the ignorant and the mushrikeen (polytheists). (fatwa No. 73007. What is the ruling on Valentine’s Day? http://islamqa.info/en/ref/73007 viewed 02/04/12)

So, according to Muslims, it is improper to celebrate pagan holidays and the so-called “Christians” clearly adopted a pagan holiday.

In Pakistan and other Islamic-dominated lands, steps to minimize its impact have been taken:

Conservatives in Pakistan tacked up posters urging people to boycott Valentine’s Day on Thursday, saying it’s a western-inspired event that’s spreading vulgarity in their country…

For them, Valentine’s Day is nothing but an occasion to encourage illicit relations between the country’s young unmarried males and females. It’s a sign that Western culture and values are eating away the fabric of Pakistan’s traditional, Islamic society. Valentine’s Day, they say, is not a Pakistani holiday and not part of the culture here…

In Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, government officials and clerics in Jakarta called for young people to skip Valentine’s Day, saying it was an excuse for couples to have forbidden sex. Santana R. Valentine’s Day under attack in Pakistan. AP, February 14, 2013 http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2013/02/14/valentines-day-under-attack-in-pakistan)

Pakistan’s Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, or PEMRA, sent a letter to TV and radio stations reminding them that the holiday is “not in conformity to our religious and cultural ethos.” The report warns that “a large segment of society” has complained about “Valentine’s Day celebrations” and blames Valentine’s Day for “depraving, corrupting and injuring morality of Pakistani youth.”…

The letter begins:

It is generally observed that in the past “Valentine’s Day” is celebrated on February 14 by all the satellite TV channels whether an Entertainment or News & Current Affairs channel. PEMRA has been receiving complaints from a large segment of society that Valentine’s Day celebrations are not in conformity to our religious and cultural ethos and has, therefore, condemned its unequivocal propagation through media. Furthermore, such events have been perceived as a source of depraving, corrupting and injuring morality of Pakistani youth as well as violating Code of Conduct developed by PEMRA in pursuance of Rule 15 & PEMRA Rules 2009. (Dewey C. Pakistani regulator warns media against promoting Valentine’s Day (Washington Post, February 14, 2013. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/02/14/pakistani-regulator-warns-media-against-promoting-valentines-day/

Notice that because of sexual immorality associated with Valentine’s Day, many of the states in Malaysia have taken proactive steps to try to prevent the sinning associated with Valentine’s Day:

PAS Youth chief Nasrudin Hasan Tantawi said the Kedah, Kelantan and Selangor governments have directed all local authorities to work closely with police and Rela in order to carry out operations to check immoral activities during Valentine’s Day…He said the National Fatwa Council forbids Muslims from celebrating Valentine’s Day because of elements of Christianity and sin. (Move on Valentine’s Day ‘sins’ Malaysia Star – Feb 8, 2011. http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/2/9/nation/8024821&sec=nation)

KUALA LUMPUR – More than 300 volunteers between 19 to 25 years-old today joined a programme to make Muslims wary of the importance of not celebrating Valentine’s Day.

Islamic Development Department (Jakim) director of Family, Social and Community Division, Saimah Mokhtar hopes parents take the ban on Valentine’s Day celebration seriously as it has elements of Christianity and mixed with vices forbidden by Islam.

The programme called “Jerat Hari Valentine” (Valentine’s Day Trap) targets several locations in Kuala Lumpur, said Jakim director-general Datuk Othman Mustapha. (Bernama. Now Jakim wants parents to ban Valentine’s Day celebration. Malaysian Chronicle. February 3, 2013. http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=51672:now-jakim-wants-parents-to-ban-valentines-day-celebration&Itemid=2)

Notice that many of the Muslims associate Valentine’s Day with Christianity (obviously the false compromising kind) and sin.

In other words, Valentine’s Day causes the name of Christ (through the term ‘Christianity’) to be blasphemed among the Gentiles (Romans 2:24; Isaiah 52:5)!

Which is something that the Bible warns against doing:

24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written. (Romans 2:24)

How does this pagan holiday help get the true gospel out?

It does not.

And that is the point.

Of course, Valentine’s Day is NOT a real Christian holiday and does have its basis in sinful pagan practices.

Jesus did not observe Valentine’s Day or anything close to it.

Valentine’s Day is not a biblical holiday.

It is essentially based upon lawlessness and does not edify Christ. 13 years ago, an article in Christianity Today stated:

There are more tales of the “origins” of Valentine’s Day than arrows in Cupid’s quiver. As expected, most have something to do with pagan ritual (pretty much every holiday—from Christmas to Mother’s Day—has something to do with pagan ritual). Four centuries before Christ, Romans had a day called Lupercalia. Without going too much into it, I’ll sum it up as a sexual lottery. Pull names out of a box at random and couple with a young member of the opposite sex. After a year, you get to pick another name (Olsen T. Then Again Maybe Don’t Be My Valentine. Christianity Today. February 12, 1999).

The modern practice of giving cards to ask/tell someone to “be my Valentine” seems to be a holdover from the ancient sexual lottery.

None who profess Christ should observe this February “holiday”–it simply is not a Christian holiday. It began as a sexual lottery and still has sexual ramifications, even in the 21st century. Modern Muslims and modern Catholics realize this, shouldn’t you?

For more information, please consider studying the following:

Valentine’s Day: Its Real Origins Christianity Today suggests that Valentine’s Day is good for Christians to observe. Is this true? There is also a YouTube titled Should Christians Observe Valentine’s Day?
Holy Day Calendar This is a listing of the biblical holy days through 2033, 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。.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Should You Keep God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? This is a free pdf booklet explaining what the Bible and history shows about God’s Holy Days and popular holidays. Two related sermon would be Which Spring Days should Christians observe? and Fall Holy Days for Christians.
The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast This is a free draft/unedited pdf book explaining the what the Ten Commandments are, where they came from, how early professors of Christ viewed them, and how various ones, including the Beast of Revelation, will oppose them. A related sermon is titled: The Ten Commandments and the Beast of Revelation.
Are the Ten Commandment Still in Effect? This article quotes the ten commandments and combines some of the previous articles into one article about the ten commandments. The commandments are shown at Mount Sinai, before Mount Sinai, in the teachings of Jesus, after the crucifixion, and in the teachings of Paul. It addresses the most common “traditions of men” regarding them as well.
Were the Pharisees Condemned for Keeping the Law or Reasoning Around it? Many believe that the Pharisees were condemned for keeping the law, but what does your Bible say? If they were not condemned for that, what were they condemned for?
The Ten Commandments Reflect Love, Breaking them is Evil Some feel that the ten commandments are a burden. Is that what Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, and John taught?
Was the Commandment to Love the Only Command? Some have stated that John’s writings teach this, but is that what the Bible really says?
The Ten Commandments and the Early Church Did Jesus and the Early Church keep the ten commandments? What order were they in? Here are quotes from the Bible and early writings.
Differences Between Islam and the Continuing Church of God What are some of the main differences? Are there any similarities? A video of related interest is titled: Islam: Any Christian Concerns or Similarities?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
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?

COGwriter Peering into Ancient Thyatira (2008)

COGwriter

Have you heard about the Church of God in Thyatira?

In Revelation 2, Jesus said:

18 “And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write,

‘These things says the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet like fine brass: 19 “I know your works, love, service, faith, and your patience; and as for your works, the last are more than the first. 20 Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. 21 And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent. 22 Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds. 23 I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.

24 “Now to you I say, and to the rest in Thyatira, as many as do not have this doctrine, who have not known the depths of Satan, as they say, I will put on you no other burden. 25 But hold fast what you have till I come. 26 And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations —

27 ‘He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter’s vessels’ —

as I also have received from My Father; 28 and I will give him the morning star.

29 “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”‘ (Revelation 2:18-29).

This era of the Church of God was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. Some of the Catholic Inquisitors reported about some of their doctrines.

Because of the portion bolded above, some including the late evangelist John Ogwyn who discussed this with me, have felt that some of the Thyatira remnant would be around until Jesus Christ returns. And I share that view and he encouraged me years ago to search for that remnant. Also, my wife and I later actually visited ancient Thyatira (which is located in the nation of Turkey).

It is of note that it was only to Thyatira (Revelation 2:25) and to Philadelphia (3:11) that Jesus said to “hold fast what you have.” So this got me to consider that perhaps both groups were possibly being told to “hold fast” to many of the same things–but it is also interesting to see that Thyatirans are threatened with the Great Tribulation (2:22).

They might be those that are still associated with (or consider themselves associated with) Grace Communion International (or some other COG group that accepted apostasy) who claim that since they personally hold fast to keeping the Sabbath and Holy Days, avoid unclean meats, and the other doctrines of the Thyatira COG. Instead of placing their top priority on proclaiming the gospel, they also seem to believe that their major work is to be faithful to doctrines personally while at the same time supporting those who know the depth of Satan.

We know these people truly cannot be the faithful remnant of the Philadelphia portion of the COG as they fail to respond to at least one of the truths that Herbert Armstrong claimed God used him to restore to that era, “And how in Revelation 18:4 that God has called us out from among them, to be separate” (Armstrong HW. Mission of the Philadelphia Church Era. Sermon, December 17, 1983); because instead of leaving spiritual Babylon and becoming separate, they publicly insist that they must remain faithful to the renamed WCG corporation until it puts them out (and even then, they still claim that organization is ‘God’s True Church’).

It may be of interest to note that this remnant may have been spiritually born about the same time that a possible last physical location of Thyatira (Bozod-Ujfalu) was destroyed. They are spiritually like weavers as they weave together (and apart) spiritual truth and error. Interestingly, the old Worldwide Church of God was renamed Grace Communion International under the leadership of a man whose last name, Tkach, according to an online English-Ukraine dictionary, means weaver. He is still the chairman of the board of GCI. Thyatirans seem to have compromised organizationally as well as misunderstanding the work.

In the remainder of this post, I would like to focus on some Thyatira doctrines and the Inquisition.

The Catholic Encyclopedia notes this about one of its inquisitors:

Bernard Guidonis
Inquisitor of Toulouse against the Albigenses and Bishop of Lodève, b. at Royères (Limousin) in 1261, d. at Lauroux (Hérault), 30 December, 1331. He was one of the most prolific writers of the Middle Ages (De Moreira M. Transcribed by Albert Judy, O.P. Bernard Guidonis. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume II. Published 1907. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Here are some of the beliefs he found that those he persecuted held:

Nevertheless, attention should be called to the fact that among the Beguins are found some who know, accept and believe many or all of the errors listed below. These are more steeped and hardened in them. Others can say less about these errors yet are sometimes found to be worse in holding and believing them than are others. Still others have heard or remember less and yield to valid reason and saner counsel. Others obstinately persist and refuse to recant, choosing to die rather than abjure their errors, saying that in this matter they defend the gospel truth, the life of Christ, and evangelical and apostolic poverty…

Again, they say that the prelates and inquisitors who judged and condemned them as heretics – and indeed all those who consented or now consent knowingly to their condemnations – have by this action become heretics (if they persevere in it), and by this action have lost the ecclesiastical power to bind, loose and administer the ecclesiastical sacraments…

Again, they say that prelates and members of religious orders whose clothing is too abundant or too costly violate gospel perfection and Christ’s precept, according instead with the precept of Antichrist. Such clerics who go around in pompous fashion are of the family of Antichrist…

Again, they say they are not required to take oaths, nor should they be made to reveal under oath the names of their fellow believers, accomplices and associates, because, as they say, this would violate the command to love one’s neighbor and would on the contrary injure one’s neighbor…

they say the carnal church (by which they mean the Roman church as it exists, not only in the city of Rome, but throughout the whole area under Roman jurisdiction) is Babylon, the great whore of whom John spoke in the Apocalypse. Thus they apply these passages to the Roman Church and attribute to the church all the evil things written there, such as that it is drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus Christ…

Again, they distinguish between two churches, the carnal church which they say is the Roman church which contains the multitude of rebrobate, and the spiritual church which contains those people they describe as spiritual and evangelical, who emulate the life of Christ and the apostles. They say the latter is their church…

Again, some of them claim that on those elect spiritual and evangelical individuals through whom a spiritual and benign church will be founded in the seventh and last period, the Holy Spirit will be poured out in greater or at least in equal abundance as on the apostles, the disciples of Jesus Christ, on the day of Pentecost during the time of the primitive church. And they say the Holy Spirit will descend on them like a fiery flame in a furnace, and they take this to mean that, not only will their souls be filled with the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit will live in their bodies as well.

Again, they claim that there is a double Antichrist, one spiritual or mystical and the other the real, greater Antichrist…

Again, they say that both in the time of persecution by Antichrist and in that of the aforesaid war carnal Christians will be so afflicted that, despairing, they will say, “If Christ were God, he would not permit Christians to suffer so much and such intense evil.” Thus despairing, they will apostacize from the faith and die. But God will hide the elect spiritual individuals so that they cannot be found by Antichrist and his ministers. Then the church will be reduced to the same size as the primitive church when it was first founded…

Again, they say that after Antichrist’s death these spiritual individuals will convert the entire world to the faith of Christ; and the whole world will be so good and benign that there will be no malice or sin in people of that period, except perhaps for venial sins in a few of them; and all things will be common as far as use is concerned; and there will be no one who offends anyone else or encourages another to sin. For there will be the greatest love among them, and there will be one flock and one pastor. According to some of them this period and condition will last for one hundred years. Then, as love fails, malice will creep back in and slowly increase until Christ is, as it were, compelled to come in universal judgment because of it.

Again, these insane heretics seriously and ignominiously rail against the Lord Pope, the vicar of Jesus Christ, calling him the mystical Antichrist, precursor of the greater Antichrist, preparing the way for his life (Bernard Gui: Inquisitor’s Manual, Chapter 5. Translated by David Burr, History Department, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. http://phi.kenyon.edu/Projects/Margin/inquisit.htm 04/09/07).

It should be pointed out that perhaps the Inquisitor slightly confused the millennium, the first part of it (happening after the death of Antichrist), with the 100 years which happens afterwards.

It should also be pointed out that Albigneses and Waldenses were sometimes arrested with the Beguins. Now while most that were killed in the Inquisition were not in the Church of God, nor were the Franciscan Beguins, it is obvious that Church of God doctrines such as that ministers should not dress like the Roman clerics, Christians are not to swear oaths, and that God will offer salvation to all, were clearly condemned by the Roman Catholics during the time of Thyatira.

As far as a spiritual or mystic antichrist and a later one, that is consistent with what the Apostle John taught in 1 John 2:18 (more on this can be found in the article Some Doctrines of Antichrist).

Furthermore, the same inquisitor claimed the following about the Albigenses:

In the first place, they usually say of themselves that they are good Christians, who do not swear, or lie, or speak evil of others; that they do not kill any man or animal, nor anything having the breath of life, and that they hold the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ and his gospel as the apostles taught. They assert that they occupy the place of the apostles, and that, on account of the above-mentioned things, they of the Roman Church, namely the prelates, clerks, and monks, and especially the inquisitors of heresy persecute them and call them heretics, although they are good men and good Christians, and that they are persecuted just as Christ and his apostles were by the Pharisees.

Moreover they talk to the laity of the evil lives of the clerks and prelates of the Roman Church, pointing out and setting forth their pride, cupidity, avarice, and uncleanness of life, and such other evils as they know. They invoke with their own interpretation and according to their abilities the authority of the Gospels and the Epistles against the condition of the prelates, churchmen, and monks, whom they call Pharisees and false prophets, who say, but do no.

Then they attack and vituperate, in turn, all the sacraments of the Church, especially the sacrament of the eucharist, saying that it cannot contain the body of Christ, for had this been as great as the largest mountain Christians would have entirely consumed it before this. They assert that the host comes from straw, that it passes through the tails of horses, to wit, when the flour is cleaned by a sieve (of horse hair); that, moreover, it passes through the body and comes to a vile end, which, they say, could not happen if God were in it.

Of baptism, they assert that the water is material and corruptible and is therefore the creation of the evil power, and cannot sanctify the soul, but that the churchmen sell this water out of avarice, just as they sell earth for the burial of the dead, and oil to the sick when they anoint them, and as: they sell the confession of sins as made to the priests.

Hence they claim that confession made to the priests of, the Roman Church is useless, and that, since the priests may be sinners, they cannot loose nor bind, and, being unclean in themselves, cannot make others clean. They assert, moreover, that the cross of Christ should not be adored or venerated, because, as they urge, no one would venerate or adore the gallows upon which a father, relative, or friend had been hung. They urge, further, that they who adore the cross ought, for similar reasons, to worship all thorns and lances, because as Christ’s body was on the cross during the passion, so was the crown of thorns on his head and the soldier’s lance in his side, They proclaim many other scandalous things in regard to the sacraments.

Moreover they read from the Gospels and the Epistles in the vulgar tongue, applying and expounding them in their favor and against the condition of the Roman Church in a manner which it would take too long to describe in detail; but all that relates to this subject may be read more fully in the books they have written and infected, and may be learned from the confessions of such of their followers as have been converted. (From the Inquisitor’s Manual of Bernard Gui [d.1331], early 14th century, translated in J. H. Robinson, Readings in European History, (Boston: Ginn, 1905), pp. 381-383, http://essenes.crosswinds.net/albe.html 05/27/07).

I will simply state that we in the Continuing Church of God consider ourselves to be true Christians, do not swear, do not kill any man, do consider inquisitors as non-Christians, do not consider that the “Eucharist” is the actual flesh of Christ, oppose the selling of sacraments, do not believe priests can forgive sin, do not revere instruments of death like the cross, do normally read the Bible in the Vulgar tongue (which is English in my case), and that we hold the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ and His gospel as the apostles taught (this latter point is shown fairly clearly in the article Which Is Faithful: The Roman Catholic Church or the Continuing Church of God?).

And as the inquisitor’s accounts show, our positions were also held in the Middle Ages (for documentation that our views have been held since the beginning of the Church age, please go to the History of Early Christianity page).

The following might be of interest to some:

Thyatira Era Begins The pope in 1096 described the Valley Louise in Dauphiny, France, as infested with “heresy.” It was a result of Paulician and Bogomil evangelization of the Alpine regions. About 1104, a man from this valley, called Peter of Bruys, began at Embrun to preach REPENTANCE throughout Languedoc and Provence…One of the definitions of the Greek word Thyatira is “sweet savor of contrition,” in other words, “real repentance.” Peter of Bruys taught that infant baptism was useless. He only baptized persons old enough to know and mean what they were doing — that is, only AFTER REAL REPENTANCE. He further rejected the Catholic MYSTERY teaching that the priest in the Mass produced the literal flesh of Christ. He opposed reverence for crosses, emphasis on huge church edifices, the fable of purgatory, prayers for the dead with their inevitable heavy bribes paid to the greedy religious leaders who falsely claimed to represent God. Converted followers gathered around Peter of Bruys. God’s Church was beginning again to do a Work. Freed from the errors of Cathars and Catholics, a spiritual gospel was once again being widely preached. The numbers of truly converted — those led by the Holy Spirit — multiplied. They kept God’s Sabbath. For “nearly twenty years” Peter preached. Then the false church would no longer stand for this open rejection of its authority. He was taken and burned alive at the stake…

The Waldenses recognized that they were the true successors of the apostolic church. They kept the SABBATH, also the yearly PASSOVER. And each September or October (in God’s seventh month — see Lev. 23), they held at the headquarters church a great “conference.” As many as 700 persons attended from afar. New students were chosen, ministerial assignments were made, AND CROWDS GATHERED DAILY TO LISTEN TO SERMONS. What could this gathering have been but the Feast of Tabernacles! Under the name of Passagini, we have the clearest sort of statement that these people, about 1200, observed the whole Old Testament law, including the Sabbath and FESTIVALS! People called Cathars at Cologne, Germany, kept a fall festival, called “Malilosa”, even before Waldo began to preach. Compare this unexplained name with Hebrew “melilah” (a harvested ear of grain — Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance) and the Biblical title “Feast of Ingathering” (Ex. 23:16). How much more we might have known about these Middle Ages’ Feasts of Tabernacles had not the Inquisitors so zealously burned the records! The three-part division of tithes paid the Waldensian Church is significant. Even in the 1500’s the same division continued. “The money given us by the people is carried to the aforesaid general council, and is delivered in the presence of all, and there it is received by the most ancients (the elders), and part thereof is given to those that are wayfaring men, according to their necessities, and part unto the poor” (George Morel, Waldensian elder, quoted by Lennard, “History of the Waldenses”). 1. Compare this practice with Num. 18:21 and Deut. 14:22-25, 28-29. Isn’t it exactly what the Bible commands?… Most authors have ASSUMED the “wayfaring men” were the traveling “barbel.” But THEIR expenses would have been paid from the money given the elders, at EVERY time of year, for the direct conduct of the Work — “first” tithe and offerings. Notice that in Numbers 18:21. What Morel then mentions is a “second” tithe, for those traveling to and from the festivals — wayfaring men; and following it, the “third” to the poor. See the explanation in Deut. 14. Feast goers who had more “second tithe” than they needed shared their excess with those who had need, even as they do today! (LESSON 51 (1968) AMBASSADOR COLLEGE BIBLE CORRESPONDENCE COURSE “And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place …” Rev. 12:6).

Because those of Thyatira would have not kept the Greco-Roman holidays and would have tended towards the biblical holy days, this would be another reason that they would have been subject to persecutions (see also Persecutions by Church and State).

(As far as the geographic area of Thyatira, it is part of a Turkish city called Akhisar.)

Some items of related interest may include:

In Search of Thyatira This era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. Here is a link to a related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
The Spanish Inquisition and Early Protestant Persecutions Was the Church of Rome really responsible for this? What happened? A video of related interest is titled: The Past and Future Inquisition.
Persecutions by Church and State This article documents some that have occurred against those associated with the COGs and some prophesied to occur. Will those with the cross be the persecutors or the persecuted–this article has the shocking answer. There is also a YouTube video sermon you can watch: The Coming Persecution of the Church. Here is information in the Spanish language: Persecuciones de la Iglesia y el Estado.
Joyce’s Photos of Thyatira Thyatira is the fourth of the seven churches listed in the Book of Revelation. Here some photos of our visit there.
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?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L’Histoire Continue de l’Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
News Articles Related to Church History This link is to articles on Church history that were once published on the COG News Page.
ChurchHistoryBook.com This is a URL with some information on Church History.
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.
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. 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.
Nazarene Christianity: Were the Original Christians Nazarenes? Should Christians be Nazarenes today? What were the practices of the 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?
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 from 31 A.D. to present: information on all of the seven churches of Revelation 2 & 3.
1. The Ephesus Church Era was predominant from 31 A.D. to circa 135 A.D. The Church of James, Peter, Paul, and John, etc. Here is a link to a related video sermon: Ephesus Church Era.
2. The Smyrna Church Era was predominant circa 135 A.D. to circa 450 A.D. The Church led by Polycarp, Melito, Polycrates, etc.Here is a link to a related video sermon: The Smyrna Church Era.
3. The Pergamos Church Era was predominant circa 450 A.D. to circa 1050 A.D. An especially persecuted Church. Here is a link to a related sermon video: Pergamos Era and the Antichrist.
4. The Thyatira Church Era was predominant circa 1050 A.D. to circa 1600 A.D. The Church during the Inquisition. It claimed succession from the apostles. Here is a link to a related sermon: Thyatira, Succession, and Jezebel.
5. The Sardis Church Era was predominant circa 1600 A.D. to circa 1933 A.D. Discusses some early history of the Seventh Day Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, CG7-Salem, Jerusalem 7DCG, and COG-7th Day-Denver. Here are two historical sermons: Sardis Church Era: Beginnings, Doctrines, and Leaders and Sardis: SDBs, SDAs, & CG7s.
6. The Philadelphia Church Era was predominant circa 1933 A.D. to 1986 A.D. The old Radio Church of God and old Worldwide Church of God, now the remnant of that era is basically the most faithful in the Church of God, like who hold to the beliefs and practices of the Continuing Church of God.
7. The Laodicean Church Era has been predominant circa 1986 A.D. to present. The Laodiceans are non-Philadelphians who mainly descended from the old WCG or its offshoots. They do not properly understand the work or biblical prophecies and will face the Great Tribulation if they do not repent. One video of related interest is 17 Laodicean Errors in Prophecy. See also Do You Hold to Any of These Laodicean Prophetic Errors?
When Will the Great Tribulation Begin? Can the Great Tribulation begin today? What happens before the Great Tribulation in the “beginning of sorrows”? What happens in the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord? Is this the time of the Gentiles? When is the earliest that the Great Tribulation can begin? What is the Day of the Lord? Who are the 144,000? A related video is: Great Tribulation: 2026 or 2027?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?

Hierapolis, Turkey (Photo by Joyce Thiel)

COGwriter

The Catholics of Rome consider January 8th as the day to honor Apollinaris of Hierapolis. This should seem to be somewhat odd to them.

Why?

Because the historical records that have been preserved show that Apollinaris held doctrines we are teaching in the Continuing Church of God, which are now opposed by the Church of Rome. He also did not hold Protestant views.

The Protestant scholars Roberts and Donaldson wrote this:

Apollinaris was bishop of Hierapolis on the Maeander, and, Lightfoot thinks, was probably with Melito and Polycrates, known to Polycarp, and influenced by his example and doctrine.” (Roberts and Donaldson pp. 772-773).

Like Melito, Polycrates, and Polycarp, Apollinaris would be considered a Quartodeciman. That is, one who held that the date of Passover must remain the 14th of Nisan. But by the time of Apollinaris, those associated with the Catholics of Rome and the “Orthodox” in Jerusalem and Alexandria kept Passover on a Sunday instead (as the Protestants generally do to this day).

Apollinaris Wrote About the Passover

Anyway, here is nearly all of what is available from what Apollinaris wrote:

There are, then, some who through ignorance raise disputes about these things (though their conduct is pardonable: for ignorance is no subject for blame — it rather needs further instruction), and say that on the fourteenth day the Lord ate the lamb with the disciples, and that on the great day of the feast of unleavened bread He Himself suffered; and they quote Matthew as speaking in accordance with their view. Wherefore their opinion is contrary to the law, and the Gospels seem to be at variance with them…The fourteenth day, the true Passover of the Lord; the great sacrifice, the Son of God instead of the lamb, who was bound, who bound the strong, and who was judged, though Judge of living and dead, and who was delivered into the hands of sinners to be crucified, who was lifted up on the horns of the unicorn, and who was pierced in His holy side, who poured forth from His side the two purifying elements, water and blood, word and spirit, and who was buried on the day of the passover, the stone being placed upon the tomb (Apollinaris. From the Book Concerning Passover. 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. Copyright © 2001 Peter Kirby).

Apollinaris is showing that the Passover is Nisan 14 and that it signifies the sacrifice of Christ, both of which are the positions of the Churches of God.

One Anglican scholar commented;

…there is no doubt that Apollinarius was a Quartodeciman…Those who kept Passover in the evening understood it to be a repetition of the Lord’s Supper (Stewart-Sykes A. Melito of Sardis On Pascha. St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, Crestwood (NY), 2001, p. 81).

Quartodecimans held to the original position of the apostles.

Praised by Serapion of Antioch (called Seraphion of Antioch by the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch)

Apollinaris was praised by Serapion of Antioch:

I have sent you letters of the most blessed Claudius Apollinarius, who was made bishop of Hierapolis in Asia (Serapion of Antioch. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. From the epistle to Caricus and Ponticus. Excerpted from Volume I of The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, editors; American Edition copyright © 1885. Copyright © 2001 Peter Kirby).

It is likely that this suggests that up until the time of Serapion, those in Antioch were also Quartodecimans. And this also seems to have been suggested by Polycrates of Ephesus (and the 4th century historian Eusebius), who wrote about the time of Serapion that the Churches in Asia kept the Passover on the 14th of Nisan, like the Jews, not like the Church of Rome (Eusebius. Church History. Book V, Chapters 23,25).

Apollinaris and the Millennium

People in Apollinaris’ region believed in a literal millennium. This is something he would have been expected to teach.

The doctrines about Passover and the millennium pose severe problems for the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics.

Although both groups claim Apollinaris as one of their saints, the reality is that those groups have both severely criticized both of those beliefs.

Here is a writing from the Eastern Orthodox:

CHILIASM: Chiliasm, from the Greek word meaning “1000,” is a belief based on Revelation 20:2-7. In its classical form (which interprets the Revelation 20 verses verbatim), Chiliasm teaches that Satan will be bound by Christ for 1000 years, at which time Jesus and the Saints will reign on earth, and after which, Satan will be finally defeated and the Eternal Kingdom of God will be inaugurated. In modern times, Chiliasm has been “boiled down” to the teaching that the world will end after one thousand years (or a number of years that is a multiple of one thousand). Though some Ancient Church Fathers of the first three centuries AD had Chiliast leanings, the Orthodox Church formally denounced Chiliasm at the Second Ecumenical Council, in 381. The Church maintains that the 1000 year reign mentioned in Revelation 20 is symbolic of the era of the Christian Church’s ministry in this fallen world, which shall come to its completion at a time unknown to all but God the Father. (Orthodox Christian Beliefs and Practices. © 2006-2007 Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada. http://www.uocc.ca/en-ca/faith/beliefs/ 09/24/14).

In other words, Orthodox Church scholars know that early Christian leaders, which it calls, “Ancient Church Fathers” taught chiliasm (called millenarianism in Latin), yet it CHANGED that teaching AND CONDEMNED it in a church council and now think it is somehow symbolic (note: Many Russian and American Orthodox still teach the millennium, see Some Similarities and Differences Between the Orthodox Church and the Continuing Church of God).

After Adolf Hitler’s “third reich,” which was supposed to be a millennial rule, was losing WWII, the Vatican decided to officially distance itself from millennial teachings. Notice the following:

Millenium {sic}: Since the Holy Office decreed (July 21, 1944) that it cannot safely be taught that Christ at His Second Coming will reign visibly with only some of His saints (risen from the dead) for a period of time before the final and universal judgment, a spiritual millennium is seen in Apoc. 20:4-6. St. John gives a spiritual recapitulation of the activity of Satan, and the spiritual reign of the saints with Christ in heaven and in His Church on earth. When Christianity triumphed over the Beast (in its sixth head, the pagan Roman empire) Satan was chained. With the re-appearance of the Beast in the anti-Christian world empire (the seventh head), he will be unchained, and muster all his forces against the Church until the peak of the persecution under Antichrist. Meanwhile, the church enjoyed its milleniun {sic} with Christ enthroned among the nations. (LeFrois, Bernard J. Eschatological Interpretation of the Apocalypse. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. XIII, pp. 17-20; Cited in Culleton RG. The Reign of Antichrist, 1951. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1974, p. 9).

Notice that the above suggests that Satan has been gone a thousand years. Does any thinking person believe that Satan was ever bound and put away from the earth for 1,000 years after Revelation (which Greco-Roman Catholics often refer to as the Apocalypse) was written? This has never happened literally or spiritually–though it will in the millennium (see also The Day of Atonement–Its Christian Significance). Nor have I seen any credible Catholic writer attempt to explain when planet Earth ever had one thousand years without being influenced by Satan.

And not only have both groups condemned millenarianism, it is the only supposed “doctrine of Antichrist” listed in the current Catechism of the Catholic Church (#676. Catechism of the Catholic Church. Imprimatur Potest +Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, NY 1995, p. 194).

Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics furthermore supported the Council of Constantinople, whose initiator Theodosius decreed the death penalty for any who would keep Passover on the 14th (see Passover and the Early Church and Persecutions by Church and State).

We in the Continuing Church of God observe Passover on the 14th as Apollinaris did and teach a literal millennial reign on the earth as Apollinaris did.

Despite any Greco-Roman Catholic observance in Apollinaris’ honor, the reality is that based on what is actually known about Apollinaris, he had Continuing Church of God, not Roman Catholic Church views.

Some items of possibly related interest may include the following:

Apollinaris of Hierapolis He was an early church leader that may have known Melito and Polycarp; he also wrote about the Passover.
Did The Early Church Teach Millenarianism? Was the millennium (sometimes called chiliasm) taught by early Christians? Who condemned it? Will Jesus literally reign for 1000 years on the earth? Is this time near? Two related sermons are available Millennial Utopia and The Millennium.
Passover and the Early Church Did the early Christians observe Passover? What did Jesus and Paul teach? Why did Jesus die for our sins? There is also a detailed YouTube video available titled History of the Christian Passover.
The Passover Plot What was the first Passover plot? Which plots have Islam and the Greco-Roman faiths perpetuated about Passover? A sermon video of related interest is The Passover Plots, Including Easter.
Melito’s Homily on the Passover This is one of the earliest Christian writings about the Passover. This also includes what Apollinaris wrote on the Passover as well. Here is a related sermon, also titled Melito’s Homily on the Passover.
Persecutions by Church and State This article documents some that have occurred against those associated with the COGs and some prophesied to occur. Will those with the cross be the persecutors or the persecuted–this article has the shocking answer. There is also a YouTube video sermon you can watch: The Coming Persecution of the Church. Here is information in the Spanish language: Persecuciones de la Iglesia y el Estado.
Some Similarities and Differences Between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Continuing Church of God Both groups claim to be the original church, but both groups have differing ways to claim it. Both groups have some amazing similarities and some major differences. Do you know what they are? Here is a link to a related sermon: Eastern Orthodox 40+ Similar Beliefs to the CCOG.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they? Two related sermons are available Scripture and Traditions and Tradition and Scripture.
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L’Histoire Continue de l’Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
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?

COGwriter

Did early Christians keep Saturday or Sunday? While there are various opinions about this, some of those opinions are not based upon biblical or historical fact.

The Bible Sabbath Association, which is not a Church of God group (though it has members that are in the COGs, as well as members who are not), published a series of articles from me on this subject.

The following is in the January-February 2018 edition of its The Sabbath Sentinel magazine which helps give additional historical information:

Sabbath–Post New Testament

By Bob Thiel, Ph.D.

This is the fifth part of a five-part series explaining why certain early documents that are claimed against the seventh-day Sabbath are misunderstood and not actually against it.

In my previous articles, I explained that the Greek word Κυριακήν did not mean Sunday and many have misinterpreted writings from the Didache and Ignatius of Antioch’s Letter to the Magnesians as endorsing Sunday. Thus, the earliest claimed post-New Testament documents cited as “proof” that the seventh-day Sabbath was done away truly did not do so.

Is there other proof?

Yes.

If Jesus and/or His apostles did away with the Sabbath as many claim, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the later faithful disciples would not keep it. Yet, other records and writings demonstrate that the faithful did continue to keep the seventh-day Sabbath.

It is well know that from the first century until about 135 A.D. the first fifteen bishops/pastors of Jerusalem all kept the seventh-day Sabbath and were all circumcised Jews (Eusebius. The History of the Church, Book III, Chapter V, Verses 2,3.& Book IV, Chapter 5, Verses 2-4, pp. 45, 71).

Although they have their own biases, even the historians Philip Schaff and Johann Gieseler correctly noted:

The Jewish Christians, at least in Palestine, conformed as closely as possible to the venerable forms of the cultus of their fathers, which in truth were divinely ordained, and were an expressive type of the Christian worship. So far as we know, they scrupulously observed the Sabbath, the annual Jewish feasts, the hours of daily prayer, and the whole Mosaic ritual (Schaff, Philip, History of the Christian Church, Chapter 9. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc. 1997. This material has been carefully compared, corrected¸ and emended according to the 1910 edition of Charles Scribner’s Sons by The Electronic Bible Society, Dallas, TX, 1998.)

While the Jewish Christians of Palestine retained the entire Mosaic law, and consequently the Jewish festivals, the Gentile Christians observed also the Sabbath and the passover (1 Cor. v. 6-8), with reference to the last scenes of Jesus’ life, but without Jewish superstition (Gal. iv. 10 ; Col. ii. 16) (Gieseler, Johann Karl Ludwig. A text-book of church history, Volume I, Chapter II. New York : Harper & brothers. Date 1857-80).

It is known that early Jewish Christians did keep the Sabbath and biblical holy days. And as prophesied by Isaiah (Isaiah 56:1-7), so did the faithful Gentile Christians (and the Isaiah prophecy still has future application).

Ignatius and Polycarp

The faithful Gentile Christians were also keeping the Sabbath outside of Jerusalem. In the early second century, Pastor/Bishop Ignatius of Antioch wrote:

…to Polycarp, bishop of the Smyrnaeans…So approving am I of your godly mind, which is as it were, grounded upon an unmovable rock, that my praise exceeds all bounds…Do not let those who appear to be trustworthy yet who teach strange doctrines baffle you. Stand firm, like an anvil…Grace will be…always…with Polycarp [Ignatius. Letter to Polycarp. In: Holmes, pp. 194-201].

And according to the later testimonies of Irenaeus, Polycrates, and Tertullian, the leader of the Sabbath-keeping Smyrnaeans [The Martrydom of Polycarp. Verse 8.1. In: Holmes, p. 233], Polycarp, did just that in Asia Minor.

Polycarp also taught that Christians should keep the commandments [Polycarp. Letter to the Philippians. In: Holmes, pp. 206-221].

And on the following sabbath he said; ‘Hear ye my exhortation, beloved children of God. I adjured you when the bishops were present, and now again I exhort you all to walk decorously and worthily in the way of the Lord…Watch ye, and again Be ye ready, Let not your hearts be weighed down, the new commandment concerning love one towards another, His advent suddenly manifest as of rapid lightning, the great judgment by fire, the eternal life, His immortal kingdom. And all things whatsoever being taught of God ye know, when ye search the inspired Scriptures, engrave with the pen of the Holy Spirit on your hearts, that the commandments may abide in you indelible.’ [Life of Polycarp, Chapter 24. (1889) from J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 3.2, pp. 488-506]

(Note: While some claim Polycarp also kept Sunday, that appears to be a later edition to the text [Monroy MS. The Church of Smyrna: History and Theology of a Primitive Christian Community. Peter Lang edition, 2015, p. 31].)

According to the The Martyrdom of Polycarp by the Smyrnaeans [The Martyrdom of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, Verses 7.1 & 8.1. Charles H. Hoole’s 1885 translation] and other sources [Sozomen. THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF SOZOMEN. Book VII, Chapter XIX.], Christians in Polycarp’s area kept the Sabbath after he died.

And since Polycarp referred to Ignatius as ‘blessed’ and endorsed Ignatius’ letters in his Letter to the Philippians [Polycarp. Letter to the Philippians, verse 13.2. In: Holmes, p. 219], it is logical to conclude that Ignatius was faithful to the same teachings and practices that Polycarp did.

Theophilus

In the late second century, Pastor/Bishop Theophilus of Antioch wrote:

And on the sixth day God finished His works which He made, and rested on the seventh day from all His works which He made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because in it He rested from all His works which God began to create…Moreover, [they spoke] concerning the seventh day, which all men acknowledge; but the most know not that what among the Hebrews is called the “Sabbath,” is translated into Greek the “Seventh” (έβδομάς), a name which is adopted by every nation, although they know not the reason of the appellation…God having thus completed the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and all that are in them, on the sixth day, rested on the seventh day from all His works which He made (Theophilus of Antioch. To Autolycus, Book 2, Chapters XI, XII, XIX. Translated by Marcus Dods, A.M. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 2. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885, pp. 99,102).

The early faithful Gentile Christians kept the Sabbath. Until the early third century, there was harmony between the faithful Christians in Antioch and Asia Minor.

Conclusion

Early Jewish and Gentile Christians kept the seventh day Sabbath. The faithful did not believe that the Sabbath was done away.

As explained in early parts of this article, neither the Didache or Ignatius’ Letter to the Magnesians actually mention the term Sunday or directly refer to the first day of the week. The Didache is not an endorsement of early Sunday observance.

Ignatius, himself, would have had to be a supporter of the seventh day Sabbath and would not have written against it. Nor, if properly translated, do Ignatius’ letters ever truly write against the seventh day sabbath–instead they endorse the concept that Christians are to keep the Sabbath in accordance with the commandments and the Lord’s way of living, but not according to the ways endorsed by unbiblical Jewish tradition.

There is no evidence whatsoever that any who professed Christ regularly worshiped on Sunday when Ignatius was alive. The simple fact is that Ignatius’ writings do not support the idea that the early New Testament Church observed Sunday.

The Greek expression he used in Magnesians (κυριακήν ζωντες) simply did not mean Sunday when Ignatius wrote his letters. And there is no other contemporaneous reference that any professing Christian at the time of Ignatius observed Sunday. Available evidence (including the Bible, i.e. Acts 13:42-44; Hebrews 4:9) clearly supports the idea that early Christians kept the seventh day Sabbath.

The first clear reference to Sunday worship, even according to Roman Catholic sources, was from Justin Martyr [Slater T. Sunday. Transcribed by Scott Anthony Hibbs. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIV. Published 1912. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat, July 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York]. Yet he held so many heretical positions [e.g. see Justin Martyr. The First Apology and Letter to Trypho], it makes no sense to this author that any could truly consider him to be a true Christian.

On the other hand, Polycarp and those faithful Christians who remained in Asia Minor and Antioch did continue to keep the Sabbath for centuries after Jesus died. Faithful Christians still keep the Sabbath to this day.

Here is a link to the first article I had published in The Sabbath Sentinel: The Sabbath Sentinel: The Didache and the Sabbath.

The published article is basically an extract from my article Another Look at the Didache, Ignatius, and the Sabbath. Because of the restrictions in article length for The Sabbath Sentinel, I submitted just a few pages which they published.

It is my hope and prayer that those who read the submitted articles will see that early church history supports Saturday, and not Sunday, as the Christian day of rest. This article should be able to reach people we have not been able to reach in other ways. It is also my hope and prayer that those who read the articles will see that we in the Continuing Church of God have a true and proper grasp of early church history.

The series of articles I have submitted and expected to be published in The Sabbath Sentinel should also help non-Sabbath keepers realize that the historical evidence points to early, faithful Christians resting on Saturday and not Sunday.

Interestingly, even to this day, the Eastern Orthodox consider Saturday and Sunday festive days, different from other ones:

In the tradition of our Church, Saturday like Sunday is considered a festal day. Even during the Great Lent the rules of fasting are relaxed on Saturdays and Sundays (Calivas A. The Great and Holy Saturday. Copyright: 2002-2003 Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America).

And the Roman Catholics realize that the seventh day is the Sabbath:

The sabbath…The sacred text says that “on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done”…and that God “rested on this day and sanctified and blessed it”(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 345. Imprimi Potest + Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, New York, 1994, p. 100).

Despite these views, both the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics have prophecies against those who keep the Sabbath:

Blessed Hieronymus Agathaghelos (1279): And lo, an evil assembly of the crafty leader, dressed in black mourning apparel…those who were taking in a most hypocritical manner the most holy name of Christ…those were the most filthy citizens of Pentapolis…these are semi-godless men…they will have to pay the price before the public executioner of the Sabbatians. (Tzima Otto, H.  The Great Monarch and WWIII in Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Scriptural Prophecies. Verenika Press, Rock City (SC), 2000, pp. 134,135,240).

Roman Catholic writer and priest P. Huchedé (19th century): “After having weakened the faith of Christ in the minds and hearts of many, he will proceed to show that the law of Moses still prevails; he will re-establish the Sabbath and all the legal observances; and he will invite the Jews to re-establish their nationality, after which he will declare himself the true messiah; he will endeavor to prove the truth of his assertion from Scripture—he will declare his design of rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple and of bringing the whole world under his dominion…According to St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Cath. 15), he will win the esteem and attachment of mankind by his urbane and unbounded kindness…he will work all kinds of miracles…He will therefore appear as performing miracles similar to all those wrought by Jesus Christ…Antichrist being a Jew, will be circumcised; he will observe the Mosaic law…Then by order of the tyrant the continual sacrifice shall be abolished (Dan. 9:27).  The holy sacrifice of the Mass shall no longer be offered up publicly on the altars.  The Church shall be devastated; the sacred vessels desecrated; the priests shall be scattered…It appears certain, then, that the Roman empire will be completely demolished by Antichrist and that he will substitute another in its place (Huchedé, P.  Translated by JBD. History of Antichrist.  Imprimatur Edward Charles Fabre, Bishop of Montreal.  English edition 1884, Reprint 1976.  TAN Books, Rockford (IL), pp. 17,18,26,54).

Here is something from one known as ‘Pope Gregory the Great’ who wrote the following:

Gregory, servant of the servants of God, to his most beloved sons the Roman citizens.

It has come to my ears that certain men of perverse spirit have sown among you some things that are wrong and opposed to the holy faith, so as to forbid any work being done on the Sabbath day. What else can I call these but preachers of Antichrist (Gregory I. Registrum Epistolarum, Book XIII, Letter 1).

Perhaps because of this inaccurate claims from Gregory, the following inaccurate prophecy from Dionysus of Luxembourg (died 1682) claimed to be about Antichrist will probably become accepted in some Roman Catholic circles (parenthetical statements mine):

Antichrist will be an iconoclast. Most in the world will adore him. He will teach that the Christian (Catholic) religion is false, confiscation of Christian (Catholic) property is legal, Saturday is to be observed instead of Sunday, and he will change the ten commandments … He will read people’s minds, raise the dead, reward his followers, and punish the rest (Conner Edward. Prophecy for Today, 4th ed. TAN Books, Rockford (IL) 1984, p.85).

The truth is that the Antichrist will accept idols (iconoclasts destroy idols), originally embrace some version of Roman Catholicism, originally practice Sunday worship, and accept the Roman Catholic numbering of the ten commandments (see The Ten Commandments and the Early Church). The Bible does not teach that the Antichrist will read people’s minds or raise the dead (although it mentions one who was healed of a deadly wound, Revelation 13:12).

Jesus, on the other hand, will destroy idols, insist on the Saturday Sabbath, and correctly number the ten commandments after His return. He will of course be able to read people’s minds, and will raise the dead (1 Thessalonians 4:16).

When Christ comes it appears that statements, at least partially based upon old Greco-Roman Catholic writings (and those of other traditions/private prophecies), will deceive many. More information can also be found in the article Do Catholic Prophecies About Antichrist Warn Againt Jesus?

Persecution of Sabbath keepers has happened throughout history and will happen again (cf. Revelation 12:17; see also the article Persecutions by Church and State).

But, all scholars realize that the first Christians did keep the day we now call Saturday as the Sabbath.

Some items of possibly related interest may include the following:

CG7.ORG This is a website for those interested in the Sabbath and churches that observe the seventh day Sabbath.
Another Look at the Didache, Ignatius, and the Sabbath Did Ignatius write against the Sabbath and for Sunday? What about the Didache? What does the actual Greek reveal? Are there intentional mistranlations? A related sermon is available: The Didache, Ignatius, and the Lord’s Way.
The Sabbath in the Early Church and Abroad Was the seventh-day (Saturday) Sabbath observed by the apostolic and post-apostolic Church? Here is a related sermon video The Christian Sabbath and How and Why to Keep It.
The Christian Sabbath. This is a series of articles from the Catholic Mirror essentially proving that the biblical Sabbath was Saturday, that the Lord’s day in Revelation 1 is not a reference to Sunday, that the Church of Rome implemented Sunday, and that nearly all Protestants followed Rome. Here is a link to a related sermon: Catholic teachings on the Sabbath, Sunday, and Protestantism.
Early Sabbath Keeping in North America When did Europeans first keep the Sabbath in North America? Did the pilgrims who arrived on the Mayflower keep Saturday or Sunday?
How to Observe the Sabbath How should you keep the Sabbath? This is an old article by Raymond Cole, with updated information for the 21st century.
The Dramatic Story of Chinese Sabbathkeepers This reformatted Good News article from 1955 discusses Sabbath-keeping in China in the 1800s.
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original., & Celibacy, and Early Heresies and Heretics, and Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, and Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, and Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.
Is God Unreasonable? Some have suggested that if God requires Sabbath-keeping He is unreasonable. Is that true? Here is a link to a related article in Mandarin Chinese 一个不合理的神？
Should You Keep God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? This is a free pdf booklet explaining what the Bible and history shows about God’s Holy Days and popular holidays. Two related sermons would be Which Spring Days should Christians observe? and Fall Holy Days for Christians.
Is Revelation 1:10 talking about Sunday or the Day of the Lord? Most Protestant scholars say Sunday is the Lord’s Day, but is that what the Bible teaches?
Sunday and Christianity Was Sunday observed by the apostolic and true post-apostolic Christians? Who clearly endorsed Sunday? What relevance is the first or the “eighth” day? A related sermon is also available: Sunday: First and Eighth Day?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they?
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? A YouTube video or related interesy may be: Polycarp of Smyrna: Why Christians should know more about him.
Theophilus of Antioch This is one of the second century leaders of some Christians in Antioch and is considered a Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch.
The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast This is a free draft/unedited pdf book explaining the what the Ten Commandments are, where they came from, how early professors of Christ viewed them, and how various ones, including the Beast of Revelation, will oppose them. A related sermon is titled: The Ten Commandments and the Beast of Revelation.

Roman God Janus in Vatican Museum

COGwriter

Does God begin His new year on January 1st? If not, what is the origin of January 1st and New Year’s?

Back in 46 B.C., Julius Caesar declared that January 1st would mark the beginning of the new year. January was named after Janus, the god of gates and doors in Roman mythology. People prayed to Janus when they wanted something new in their lives (such as resolutions). Janus is normally represented with two faces, one looking to the past and the other looking to the future (the two faces also signified change that Janus would supposedly bring in, see Burchett B, Janus in Roman life and cult: a study in Roman religions, p. 15). The first day of the month of January was sacred to him.

January first is Julius Caesar’s and Janus’ New year.

It did not come from the Bible.

What About Resolutions?

Notice what the historian Tertullian wrote about winter celebrations, such as Saturnalia, in the late second century:

The Minervalia are as much Minerva’s, as the Saturnalia Saturn’s; Saturn’s, which must necessarily be celebrated even by little slaves at the time of the Saturnalia. New-year’s gifts likewise must be caught at, and the Septimontium kept; and all the presents of Midwinter and the feast of Dear Kinsmanship must be exacted; the schools must be wreathed with flowers; the flamens’ wives and the aediles sacrifice; the school is honoured on the appointed holy-days. The same thing takes place on an idol’s birthday; every pomp of the devil is frequented. Who will think that these things are befitting to a Christian master, unless it be he who shall think them suitable likewise to one who is not a master? (Tertullian. On Idolatry, Chapter X. Translated by S. Thelwall. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

But, however, the majority (of Christians) have by this time induced the belief in their mind that it is pardonable if at any time they do what the heathen do, for fear “the Name be blasphemed”…To live with heathens is lawful, to die with them is not. Let us live with all; let us be glad with them, out of community of nature, not of superstition. We are peers in soul, not in discipline; fellow-possessors of the world, not of error. But if we have no right of communion in matters of this kind with strangers, how far more wicked to celebrate them among brethren! Who can maintain or defend this?…By us,…the Saturnalia and New-year’s and Midwinter’s festivals and Matronalia are frequented–presents come and go–New-year’s gifts–games join their noise–banquets join their din! Oh better fidelity of the nations to their own sect, which claims no solemnity of the Christians for itself!…Not the Lord’s day, not Pentecost, even if they had known them, would they have shared with us; for they would fear lest they should seem to be Christians. We are not apprehensive lest we seem to be heathens! (Tertullian. On Idolatry, Chapter XIV. Translated by S. Thelwall. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

But “let your works shine,” saith He; but now all our shops and gates shine! You will now-a-days find more doors of heathens without lamps and laurel-wreaths than of Christians. What does the case seem to be with regard to that species (of ceremony) also? If it is an idol’s honour, without doubt an idol’s honour is idolatry. If it is for a man’s sake, let us again consider that all idolatry is for man’s sake; let us again consider that all idolatry is a worship done to men, since it is generally agreed even among their worshippers that aforetime the gods themselves of the nations were men; and so it makes no difference whether that superstitious homage be rendered to men of a former age or of this. Idolatry is condemned, not on account of the persons which are set up for worship, but on account of those its observances, which pertain to demons (Tertullian. On Idolatry, Chapter XV. Translated by S. Thelwall. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

What Tertullian seems to be saying is that observing New Year’s celebrations make Christians appear to be followers of pagan gods, and since the pagans would not intentionally celebrate days considered by many to be Christian, Christians should not celebrate days that are honored by the heathen. Specifically, he felt that those who profess Christ should not celebrate New Year’s or other pagan days, as even the observance is a form of idolatry. New Year’s was also observed in honor of the goddess Strenua/Strenia, the goddess of purification and well being. It may partially be because of her that New Year’s resolutions and vows are made.

The Bible teaches:

19 What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything? 20 Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. (1 Corinthians 10:19-20)

New Year’s clearly has demonic origins.

The Catholic Encyclopedia reports:

Christian writers and councils condemned the heathen orgies and excesses connected with the festival of the Saturnalia, which were celebrated at the beginning of the year: Tertullian blames Christians who regarded the customary presents — called strenae (Fr. étrennes) from the goddess Strenia, who presided over New Year’s Day (cf. Ovid, Fasti, 185-90) — as mere tokens of friendly intercourse (De Idol. xiv), and towards the end of the sixth century the Council of Auxerre (can. I) forbade Christians strenas diabolicas observare. The II Council of Tours held in 567 (can. 17) prescribes prayers and a Mass of expiation for New Year’s Day, adding that this is a practice long in use (patres nostri statuerunt). Dances were forbidden, and pagan crimes were to be expiated by Christian fasts (St. Augustine, Serm., cxcvii-viii in P.L., XXXVIII, 1024; Isidore of Seville, De Div. Off. Eccl., I, xli; Trullan Council, 692, can. lxii). (Tierney, John. “New Year’s Day.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 27 Dec. 2011 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11019a.htm>)

The expression strenas diabolicas observare roughly translates from Latin to “observing the new time of the Devil.” It is likely that New Year’s resolutions are related to the purification and well being attributes of the pagan goddess. So, while a Roman Catholic council forbade the devil’s new year, many nowadays observe it.

Thus although many would be surprised to learn this, the celebration of New Year’s was originally opposed by claimed “Christian writers” according to the Church of Rome. Hence, it definitely should not be considered to be an original apostolic practice or even early tradition for the Catholics of Rome.

The Feast of Circumcision?

New Year’s day did not become a holy day for the Roman Catholic Church until 487 A.D. when it was declared to be the Feast of the Circumcision (though it may have been also observed in the fourth century, but other sources suggest eighth century or later dates):

Our “New- Year’s Day, “the “Feast of the Circumcision,” was called the octave of Christmas as early as 487, AD, and was instituted by the Church to commemorate the ceremony of the Jewish law which the Saviour submitted. In the time of Numa the old Roman heathens dedicated the day to Janus, the double-faced deity…(Savage J., editor. The Manhattan and de la Salle monthly. New York Catholic Protectory, 1875 Original from the New York Public Library Digitized Jul 13, 2006, p. 2)

The Feast of the Circumcision has been observed in the Roman church since 487 and in the Anglican church since 1549. (Douglas GW, Compton HD. The American book of days: a compendium of information about holidays, festivals, notable anniversaries and Christian and Jewish holy days, with notes on other American anniversaries worthy of remembrance. H. W. Wilson Co., 1957 Original from the University of California Digitized Sep 25, 2008, p. 2)

This gave the Greco-Roman Catholic, as well as Anglican, churches an eight-day festival with a ‘holy day’ at the beginning and the end, similar in that respect to the Feast of Tabernacles (Leviticus 23:34-35). It was determined that if Jesus was born on December 25th (even though he could not have been), since he was circumcised eight days later (Luke 2:21), he would have been circumcised on January 1st, hence the rationale for New Year’s being ‘the Feast of the Circumcision.’

It should be added that there is no indication in the Bible that Jesus’ circumcision should be celebrated.

What Happens?

So, how is New Year’s celebrated? Well customs do vary around the world. Various cultures believe that meeting with people, eating certain foods, or consuming certain drinks will help insure good luck for the year.

In the 1700s, notice a poem that was written to and about Janus from The poetical works of Jonathan Swift, Volumes 2-3, By Jonathan Swift, John Mitford, p. 120:

TO JANUS, ON NEW YEAR’S DAY, 1726.’

Two-faced Janus, god of Time!
Be my Phoebus while I rhyme;
To oblige your crony Swift,
Bring our dame a new year’s gift;
She has got but half a face;
Janus, since thou hast a brace,
To my lady once be kind;
Give her half thy face behind.

God of Time, if you be wise,
Look not with your future eyes;
What imports thy forward sight?
Well, if you could lose it quite.
Can you take delight in viewing
This poor Isle’s 2 approaching ruin,
When thy retrospection vast
Sees the glorious ages past?
Happy nation were we blind,
Or had only eyes behind!

So, some consider Janus to be the “God of Time”–but no real Christian would.

It seems, though, that Janus could have been mainly a side issue for the year to start then:

The connection between Janus and the ceremonies of January first may be still further illustrated by these lines from the Carmina Tria de Mensibus:

Hie Iani mensis sacer est: en aspice ut aris tura micent, sumant ut pia liba Lares. Annorum saeclique caput, natalis honorumpurpureos fastis qui numerat proceres.

which may mean, “This is the sacred month of January—sacred because of the ceremonies. January is the beginning of the year, because the purple-clad chiefs date their office from that month.” Although Janus is used here only as a personification of his month, yet some sanctity is reflected to the god himself from the ceremonies of the day. From the lines just quoted, it seems evident that Fastorum genitor parensque* means only, “Janus, i. e. January, is the beginning of the year, a fact to be emphasized by patriotic Romans, because the consuls assumed, or renewed, office on January first.” (Janus in Roman life and cult: a study in Roman religions … By Bessie Rebecca Burchett, p. 15)

In the US and many other Western cultures, vows called New Year’s resolutions are often made. From this authors research, while repentance is a good thing, he believes that this custom of resolutions is similar to the prayers made to Janus regarding desiring something new. According to most available research, most people break their New Year’s resolutions. Hopefully they are not making them before the true God whose word says, “When you make a vow to God, do not delay to pay it; for He has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you have vowed–Better not to vow than to vow and not pay. Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin, nor say before the messenger of God that it was an error. Why should God be angry at your excuse and destroy the work of your hands?” (Ecclesiastes 5:4-6).

Another activity which occurs in the US and elsewhere on New Year’s is heavy drinking of alcohol. Many who go to New Year’s parties get drunk. Paul warned Christians, “Do not be drunk” (Ephesians 5:18).

Germans Call it Silvester

A reader sent me the following:

Why on earth do Germans call New Year Silvester?

No your friend isn’t planning to ring in the New Year with someone named Sylvester instead of you. Silvester is the German name for New Year’s Eve – owing to the fourth century Pope Sylvester I. Eventually made a saint by the Catholic Church, his feast day is observed on December 31.

St. Sylvester’s day became associated with New Year’s Eve with the reform of the Gregorian calendar in 1582, when the last day of the year was fixed at December 31. But despite the holiday’s Christian name, many German New Year’s traditions can be traced back to the pagan Rauhnächte practices of heathen Germanic tribes, which took place at the end of December and beginning of January.

Instead of recognizing a single day as the winter solstice, the Germanic tribes observed twelve Rauhnächte – hairy nights, so called due to the furry forms of the deep winter demons – or Rauchnächte – smoky nights, due to the practice of smoking the spirits out of one’s house on January 5. …

As in many other countries, the Germans celebrate Silvester with fireworks, champagne, and boisterous social gatherings. Making noise is key: the ruckus of fireworks, firecrackers, drums, whip-cracking and banging kitchen utensils has been driving away evil winter spirits since the days of the Germanic Teutons. One of the most famous German firework displays takes place at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. Private celebrations with Böllern (firecrackers) are also common. …

The Rauhnächte were also a time when the future for the New Year could be divined. Silvester in Germany still calls for oracle traditions, which often take the form of party games. Bleigießen (lead pouring) is the most popular Silvester fortune-telling tradition. Party-goers melt small lead forms with a candle in an old spoon and pour them into cold water. The lead hardens into a shape that supposedly bears a certain meaning for the New Year. An eagle, for example, indicates career success, while a flower foretells that new friendships will develop. …

For those who go out on Silvester, good luck charms and New Year’s greetings are often exchanged. Acquaintances may give good luck charms to each other in the form of ladybugs, four-leaf clovers, horseshoes and pigs. The phrase Guten Rutsch! is another common Silvester greeting. While many Germans now use it to wish someone a good “slide” into the new year, the word Rutsch more likely comes from the Yiddish word Rosch – which means beginning or head. https://www.thelocal.de/20161230/16425

Anyway, this is NOT a Christian holiday.

God’s New Year Begins in the Spring

Is January 1st the beginning of the New Year God declared?

No.

When speaking of the Hebrew month of Abib, which occurs around late March/early April God declared,

“This month shall be your beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you” (Exodus 12:2).

January 1st is not the beginning of the year for the true God, but only of certain false gods. The last biblical new year actually began at sunset April 1, 2022 (and yes, being called an ‘April fool’ is related to those who stuck with a Spring-time beginning of the new year). In 2024, it begins at sunset on the 8th of April.

Now perhaps it should be mentioned that other cultures also accept that the new year begins in the Spring. And while those cultures have various non-biblical practices, it is certainly possible that because God’s year begins in the Spring that perhaps anciently these people were aware of it, and retained the correct season, but not the practices.

Not all have followed the practices of Julius Caesar (called “Julie” below):

For some thousands of years before Julie and the Roman Senate got involved, the new year was celebrated with the first edible crops of the season or the first new moon.

In much of India, Nava Varsha is celebrated in March or April, just as in the most ancient civilizations.

Sikhs celebrate Hola Mohalla in March; ditto for Persian Nowruz.

As celebrated in China and southeast Asia, Lunar New Year still has a floating date, the first day of the first lunar month. (Shore R. Pagan Party: New Year’s traditions that hail from the depths of antiquity The Vancouver Sun, Canada – Dec 26, 2008, http://www.vancouversun.com/Pagan+Party+Year+traditions+that+hail+from+depths+antiquity/1116320/story.html viewed 01/22/09)

From a biblical perspective, the new year begins in the Spring, and hence not January 1st. And it also begins with a new moon. The fact that even many non-Christian cultures realize that should make it easier for Christians to realize that they too, do not need to heed the later practices of the Romans.

The Continuing Church of God has the following video on our Bible News Prophecy YouTube channel:

Some items of related interest may include:

Is January 1st a Date for Christians Celebrate? Historical and biblical answers to this question about the world’s New Year’s day. A video of related interest is also available: God’s or Satan’s New Year?
Canadian & Philadelphian Mummers Parades: Another tie to Saturnalia In Canada there is a ’12 days of Christmas’ celebration involving Mummers. In Philadelphia, a parade is held on New Years. Does this come from the Bible or where?
Should You Observe God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? This is a free pdf booklet explaining what the Bible and history shows about God’s Holy Days and popular holidays.
What Does the Catholic Church Teach About Christmas and the Holy Days? Do you know what the Catholic Church says were the original Christian holy days? Was Christmas among them?
Is There “An Annual Worship Calendar” In the Bible? This paper provides a biblical and historical critique of several articles, including one by WCG which states that this should be a local decision. What do the Holy Days of the Bible mean? Also you can click here for the calendar of Holy Days.
The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast This is a free draft/unedited pdf book explaining the what the Ten Commandments are, where they came from, how early professors of Christ viewed them, and how various ones, including the Beast of Revelation, will oppose them. A related sermon is titled: The Ten Commandments and the Beast of Revelation.
Mardi Gras: The Devil’s Carnival? Is Mardi Gras Christian? Do you know that in Bolivia the carnival/Mardi Gras time is part of a celebration known as the Devil’s Carnival? Where did it come from? There is also a related YouTube video Mardi Gras & Carnaval: Are they for Christians?
Should Christians Smoke Tobacco or Marijuana? Is smoking a sin? What does the Bible teach? What have COG leaders written? Can smokers change? What about marijuana?
Marijuana: Should a Christian Get High? There is increasing acceptance of the use of marijuana. How should Christians view this? Here is a related video titled How Should a Christian View Marijuana?
Alcohol: Blessing or Curse? This is an article from the old Good News magazine that attempts to answer this question.
Binge Drinking, Health, and the Bible Many college students and others overindulge in alcohol. Are there health risks? What does the Bible teach? A related video is also available: Binge Drinking and the Bible.
Obesity, processed foods, health risks, and the Bible Does the Bible warn about the consequences of being obese? Is overeating dangerous? Is gluttony condemned? What diseases are associated with eating too much refined foods? A related video would be Eating Right, Eating Too Much, and Prophecy.
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?
Where is the True Christian Church Today? This free online pdf booklet answers that question and includes 18 proofs, clues, and signs to identify the true vs. false Christian church. Plus 7 proofs, clues, and signs to help identify Laodicean churches. A related sermon is also available: Where is the True Christian Church? Here is a link to the booklet in the Spanish language: ¿Dónde está la verdadera Iglesia cristiana de hoy? Here is a link in the German language: WO IST DIE WAHRE CHRISTLICHE KIRCHE HEUTE? Here is a link in the French language: Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?
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 Acts 2 to the 21st century. Related sermon links include Continuing History of the Church of God: c. 31 to c. 300 A.D. and Continuing History of the Church of God: 4th-16th Centuries and Continuing History of the Church of God: 17th-20th Centuries. The booklet is available in Spanish: Continuación de la Historia de la Iglesia de Dios, German: Kontinuierliche Geschichte der Kirche Gottes, French: L Histoire Continue de l Église de Dieu and Ekegusii Omogano Bw’ekanisa Ya Nyasae Egendererete.