Replies

G~d hates mixture! He calls people to come out and be holy, not to syncretize with the heathen and the unfruitful works of darkness. See Willow Creek link below.*** Christianity today has so infiltrated society that it has become like unto the heathen in most sinful respects. Syncretism is a tool of the devil to make the Church lukewarm. It is clear in the words of Jesus that He can tell who is true and who is false and one big way of doing that is looking at who keeps his commandments and who doesn't and makes up new rules, times and seasons.

Christmas as it exists today is not a syncretized version of the old pagan holiday. Syncretizing involves an attempt to unite and harmonize two things that would otherwise be opposed. I have put forward that what the early Christians did was not a case of syncretizing but rather a case of using a particular day to celebrate a Christian concept- the incarnation of Christ- in order to pull people away from the pagan celebration. This does not mean that the old trappings were retained, as you have been assuming throughout this thread. If the old trappings and meanings had been maintained, then you could make a case that syncretizing had occured. It is incumbent on you to show that this has taken place. This would be far more productive than simply throwing out accusations and claiming that all Christians who take part in Christmas are deceived and have fallen. You certainly are not convincing anyone but yourself of the worthiness of your cause, but rather pushing them away from your message. (And no, this is not because they are "deceived by the devil", but rather because you are speaking with the words of men expressing the ideas of men rather than by the guidance of God)

"Evangelization" is a buzz word used by the globalist change agents in the seeker-sensitive apostate churches.

On the contrary, evangelization is a real word with a real meaning that is at the very basis of what it means to be Christian. Evangelization means to go forth and spread the gospel of Christ. This is what we are commanded to do as Christians. If some have "hijacked" the meaning of true evangelization and perverted it, this does not reflect on "evangelization" itself but rather upon those who perverted it. It does not follow that suddenly we are no longer called to evangelize because some have perverted its meaning.

In the days of Constantine the Romans took the Jewish faith as explained by Jesus Christ, changed it by eliminating the Jewish Feasts, all things Jewish and murdered the Jews who held to those beliefs. In their place and instead of the Torah which the L~rd told them to keep, they installed Satanic rites of Mithracism, mother and child worship from Nimrod and much more. It is set out here: Too Long in the Sun. (this was linked in #15 and #234 above but you must have missed it the first time you read the thread.) They changed what Jesus said and required instead that for Jews to convert to Christianity, they had to make this oath.

I read it the first time, but I considered it to be a quite silly assertion not even worth the effort to refute. It revolves around a post hoc fallacy. The Jewish rites and customs were rejected not out of a desire to "pervert" Christianity so that they could be replaced by pagan rites, but rather because they were signs of the Old Covenant that were done away with the New. Christ had come in glory, had died, and had been resurrected. There was no more need to hope for a messiah, to make sacrifices in the temple, to maintain customs such as circumcision (one need only read Paul's Epistles in the New Testament to know this), or to abstain from certain foods. It was the apostles themselves that did away with the customs in the first place, not the government of Constantine. These latter Christians were merely enforcing what the apostles had set forward in the first place.

As for the so-called "introductions" from Mithracism, simple research into the works of the Church Fathers will show that many of the rites that are claimed to originate from there had existed prior to the legalization of Christianity. That there are parallels in the pagan cults is not proof that they were actually caused by those cults. It is very much akin to the assertions of some that Christianity itself has its roots in the "pagan mystery religions".

You are incorrect in that assumption and shows you have done no research or just denied everything you don't like.

I do hope that the irony here is not lost on you, my friend.

I am not incorrect in that statement. I had posted the story earlier in the thread. Simple research on your part would substantiate the story. A search on St. Boniface will show that this wasn't a story made up on the spot.

Using your model, you could use this as one of the elves for your Christmas decor, as it suits the phallic nature of the tree and you can "spread the word" at the same time, enjoy your spiritual fornication and have the ultimate in Syncretization and feel safe while doing it.

Yes, with this gross picture you have shown an example where Christianity has been syncretized with the world. However, you are now arguing by false analogy, because you have not shown that this has occurred with Christmas. The only arguments supporting your claims in this case have been post hoc arguments that necessitate substantiation that a true casual relationship exists.

It can be denied because it was not his birth that he wanted celebrated but his death and resurrection and the reasons for that, which was discussed on this thread but you missed that too.

Yes, it was discussed earlier, but you were still wrong! Simply because you argued something earlier does not mean that you really proved your point! And you are dead wrong with your statement here. For you to deny the importance of the incarnation of Christ and reduce the importance of his life on earth to his death and resurrection effectively places you outside the fold of Christianity. His death and resurrection were of the utmost importance, but His actual incarnation is every bit as important. Indeed, his death and resurrection have absolutely no meaning whatsoever if he had not come in the first place! There is far more to the Gospel than merely the death and resurrection. To downplay the importance of the fact that God became man to live and teach among us is gross heresy. The celebration of Christ's birth is a celebration of the fact that God saw fit to become one of us and to fulfill the redemption He had promised. This is an essential part of the Faith that saves us.

He was born in the fall and if one had to pick any date, why not pick Feast of Trumpets? Why pick the date most loved by Satanists of the whole year? Because it benefits the occult. If any date will do, if you call the shots and make the rules, and change dates and times, then perhaps you don't need a L~rd that speaks, because you deny what He has said to do and you do what is right in your own eyes.

Your pharisaism is most disturbing. Certainly it is not the day that is important, but rather the ideal and the concept expressed on that day. Secondly, I was under the impression that Halloween was the day most loved by Satanists- make up your minds. Thirdly, no one is picking up the benefits of the occult- the Christianization of the day effectively stomped out the pagan holiday, not syncretized it. Fourthly, if God did not set a specific date to celebrate his incarnation, then it was certainly something left to the liberty of those within the Church.

You still have yet to substantiate your claims that Christianity and Christmas was syncretized in a manner that does not rely on post hoc fallacies. I am not going to bother with this thread until this is done, as I have much more important things to turn my attention to than the claims of a pharisee.

(And yes, I still say these things in love out of a concern for your soul, because I see that you have strayed into several grave errors.)

I would like to apologize about one thing I said in that post. I should not have questioned your Christianity. It was mean spirited and inappropriate and I was a bit caught up in my emotions. However, that said, I stand by my comment that it is wrong for Christians to deny the importance of the incarnation of Christ. It was no excuse for my comment, though, and for that I apologize.

>You still have yet to substantiate your claims that Christianity and Christmas was syncretized in a manner that does not rely on post hoc fallacies. I am not going to bother with this thread until this is done, as I have much more important things to turn my attention to than the claims of a pharisee. (And yes, I still say these things in love out of a concern for your soul, because I see that you have strayed into several grave errors.)

That is the old "prove it to me" demonic argument for those who refuse sound doctrine. It is useless arguing with the blind who follow Nicolaitan overlords into the ditch. If you don't prefer Truth to Tradition, then you have chosen your way. Party hard. Time is short.

Mt 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Re 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

The noise of your party is so loud you have become deaf.

~~~

At least you were warned.

S.O.L. 8/23/01

>>"Evangelization" is a buzz word used by the globalist change agents in the seeker-sensitive apostate churches.

>On the contrary, evangelization is a real word with a real meaning that is at the very basis of what it means to be Christian.

Here are clips of three articles on "Evangelization" --

A HOUSE OF HERESY... USING THE LORD'S NAME IN VAIN
By: Paul Proctor

On September 2nd (2001) the New York Times reported the following: "Aaron Sorkin, the executive producer of "The West Wing" on NBC, says he hopes to break a longstanding network taboo this coming television season: he wants a character to curse in a way that uses the Lord's name in vain."

As Cable Applies Pressure, Network TV Spouts Expletives

Agape Press began their report on the shocking announcement with, "Parents Beware!" while various conservative commentators busied themselves rallying the troops to make their voices heard by television executives. It seems that writers for the big three networks have been commissioned by producers to begin including in their scripts for the new fall lineup all sorts of language that Christians will obviously find offensive, the worst of which is of course "using the Lord's name in vain".

Yes, it is sad to watch our culture morally plummeting before our eyes, not by default mind you, but by design. If nothing else this story should put and end to any additional argument or speculation as to the liberal agenda. There is no slippery slope involved here, my friends. This is clearly a swan dive into the filthy abyss. Only a fool would deny that the primary goal and purpose here is outright rebellion against God.

However, before we start sending our flaming letters of "righteous indignation" to secular society for "using the Lord's name in vain", perhaps we should get our own house in order first. So what's wrong with the language of the church today? Are we too, guilty of breaking the third commandment?

You see, not only does the "GD" word qualify as "using the Lord's name in vain", so does invoking the name of Christ to carry out occult agendas like "evangelization", (church-growth via ecumenism) which for the record, is not "The Great Commission". Whatever you do, don't confuse "evangelization" with evangelism. Evangelization was designed and implemented by demonically led church growth gurus to win "people groups", (countries, cultures, cities and communities, etc.) into a socialistic system of christianized collectivism known as "dominion theology" using the tactics and manipulation of the Hegelian Dialectic or "consensus process". The "church growth movement", made popular by Willow Creek Community Church and Saddleback Community Church is the product of Fuller Theological Seminary. Evangelism, on the other hand, is the Christian's call to simply "preach the gospel to every living creature" that they may respond personally and individually to Jesus Christ in repentance and faith under the guidance, direction, power and conviction of the Holy Spirit. Evangelization and evangelism are two entirely different things. Confusing the two has subsequently led many well-meaning Christians and missionaries into working for the enemy "in the name of Christ".

Far more shocking and outrageous to me than the indecent language of unregenerate Hollywood actors is the number of beguiled believers being recruited by their own local church into various "movements", "networks", "conferences", "missions teams" and "visioning sessions" where attendees are piously instructed to leave their doctrinal differences at the door "for the cause of Christ". Well, DON'T YOU DO IT! The cause of Christ is not achieved by sacrificing truth. Today's wolves and blind guides may be winning the world "in Jesus' name", but they are certainly not winning it for Him.

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." (Matthew 7:21-23)

Did the Lord tell Noah to build an ark big enough, fancy enough and entertaining enough for everyone to enter and enjoy? Did the Lord send Moses back to Egypt to transform it into a Jewish nation? Did Joshua have Israel gather around Jericho to promote "tolerance, diversity and unity" in the name of the Lord? We seem to have again forgotten here that Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world". He came to save you and me FROM THE WORLD not TO THE WORLD or WITH THE WORLD! Unfortunately, the gospel is being re-invented in much the same way socialist/liberals re-invented government; by attracting large crowds of jaded consumers with celebrities, entertainment, drama and a touchy-feely, group-centered theology all designed to condition them into a dependency, not on Christ, but on the collectivist communes of a global religion. With an unbiblical emphasis on human relationships guided by the artificial wisdom of "Christian psychology" (oxymoron), "evangelization" is successfully seducing mainstream Christianity into an apostasy that is nothing but Christian-flavored socialism.

In career advancing cooperation, today's pseudo shepherds of feelings and finance market this narcissistic gospel to manipulate the flock into unequally yoking themselves to the world's goats in preparation for that charming miracle worker who will soon come and deceive many with "signs and lying wonders". In their blindness, the deceived will be led through the peer pressure of "mentoring" down a primrose path Jesus called "the broad way" by a delusion of illusion that will stir their emotions, stimulate their flesh and steer them away from eternal life in Christ.

Now don't get me wrong. Christians should BY ALL MEANS protest the filth and godlessness we see on TV, not just for the good of our children, but for the good of society as a whole. We are to be the "salt of the Earth". No, I don't like hearing my Lord's name used in an unholy way either. But all the outrage in the world isn't going bring the lost to Christ in a house of heresy. What glory is it to God if we lead men and women into the freedom of faith in Christ only to have them led back into the bondage of group-think, idol worship and U.N. pantheism by demonically powered cults like Promise Keepers, Willow Creek and Women of Faith? No, the postmodern church is going to have to do ITS repenting FIRST if they expect anyone else to follow by example.

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." (Matthew 7:5)

DIAPRAX GOES TO Seminary ~ by Paul Proctor -- excerpt:

Commenting on:
'Interactive team-building seminar' called cutting-edge way of learning
For those unacquainted with the term 'Diaprax', it is simply another word for the Hegelian Dialectic or consensus process -- a deceitful procedure designed to bring about change through conflict and compromise that was conceived in the late 1700's by transformational Marxist, Georg Wilhelm Fredric Hegel who sought, as occult-led globalists do to this day, ‘unity in diversity' – a term many of us became familiar with under the Clinton Administration. Diaprax, a word coined by author and teacher Dean Gotcher, essentially brings together people of diverse and often opposing backgrounds, worldviews and belief systems in hopes they will forfeit their own values, traditions and absolutes for the emotional rewards of group acceptance.
...
Do yourself a favor and read the Baptist Press article above. What you'll see is the dialectic language of a brave new world that lures its targets with words like, 'interactive', 'image-rich', 'cutting edge', 'futurist', 'new learning strategy', 'rewired', 'leadership', 'team-building', 'transition', 'audience', 'participative', 'entrepreneurial', 'next millennium', 'whatever it takes', 'dialog', 'evaluate', 'programming', 'new paradigm', 'image-based', 'carving ministries', 'casting ministries', 'experiential momentum', 'passion-driven', 'purpose-driven', 'success', 'non-relevant lectures', 'post-modern', 'concepts', 'solidifying', 'invest', 'money', 'resources', 'conversational', 'intentionally relational', 'share experiences', and 'connecting'.
Words you WON’T see in the article are God, Jesus Christ, cross, sin, rebellion, repentance, confession, forgiveness, grace, mercy, wisdom, love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance, the Holy Spirit, edification, sanctification, glorification or even salvation. Why? -- Because this 'model of things to come for teaching in our churches' is not about the Gospel of Christ. It is about avoiding it at all costs.
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." – 2nd Timothy 4:3-4

>>> Paul Proctor - archives <<<

THE WORLD CHRISTIAN MOVEMENT EVANGELISM VS. EVANGELIZATION ~ by Albert James Dager - excerpt:

Evangelization no longer seeks to bring people to a saving knowledge of Christ in repentance, but rather to "insert" a "Christian presence" in geographical regions, adapting the gospel to regional cultures by telling them that God "loves" them and has a plan for them, rather than proclaiming the "one and ONLY salvation through Jesus Christ" and renouncing of the world.