When Apologists Claim Christianity is Idolatry

Of all the people you expect to make the claim that Christianity is idolatry, who would be your last pick?  Try apologetics ministries.  Because they pretty much do exactly that, but in a round-about way that you're not likely to catch, but which a Jew will almost certainly catch.  Have you ever heard the claim that, "the Jews don't worship the same god that Christians do because they don't worship Jesus"?  Guess what:  Any Jew that understands God's law will take this as an open admission that Christians serve a different god than the one that brought them out of Egypt.  Of course, the same people who make such a claim will also state that Jesus is the same God that brought Israel out of Egypt.  But this isn't going to help much.  This would have made a great entry into my 5 Inconsistencies With Church Doctrines post.

Let's examine the first claim from the perspective of a religious Jew who has even just a basic understanding of the Deuteronomy 13 Test.  A religious Jew believes he/she is worshiping the God who brought the descendants of Jacob out of the land of Egypt.  This God then have the nation of Israel his law, which includes instructions on how to test a teacher.  These instructions state that if anyone comes in the name of another god, you are not to listen to that teacher.  Now, here comes your mainstream "Christian" apologist from a very popular apologetics ministry who claims that the Jews and Christians do not worship the same god.  Do you see the problem here?

So now we have the religious Jew who believes that he/she is worshiping the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  And we have the Christian, who also believes that he/she is worshiping the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  And in one "careless" statement, the "Christian" apologist has caused both of them to believe that the other worships a false god.  In other words, the apologist has caused the Jews to believe that Christianity is the epitome of idolatry!  Thus the apologist has just made it that much harder.  Because according to Deuteronomy 13, anyone coming in the name of another god (aka:  exactly what the apologist claims every Christian is doing) is to be put to death.  Obviously, not a good way to win a Jew to the Lord.

If we want to win a devout Jew to the Lord, we need to do it in a way that does not cause them to think that we are coming in the name of a different god, yet does not compromise the truth.  Does such a way exist?  Yes.  Actually, two ways that I can think of.  The first is to prove that the Jews do not, in fact, worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  We can do that by pointing out the more subtle definition of idolatry in Deuteronomy 13:  Disobedience.  That's right, Deuteronomy 13 defines obedience as serving Yahweh, and disobedience as serving other gods (aka: idolatry).  Though I seriously doubt this approach will work for the simple reason that most who profess being Christian make every excuse in the apologetics book to avoid obeying God's law.  Have fun winning them over by making them think you're a hypocrite.  Most apologists are probably not going to use that approach anyways because they know very well the implications of Deuteronomy 13.

The second way is to prove that the God who brought Israel out of Egypt is the same God that sent Yeshua (Jesus).  Or if you insist on being more picky than the original apostles on how you present things (there's something for a future post), prove that Yeshua is the God that brought Israel out of Egypt.  Not only are these things true, and easily proved from just the Old Testament alone, but it also has the added benefits of (a) not making Christianity look like idolatry, and (b) not making Christians look like hypocrites.

Here's another point to consider:  Upon learning that "Jews and Christians don't serve the same god" (assuming for a moment that the claim is true), did you assume that Christians serve the right god while the Jews do not?  Because it can also be the case that it's the Jews who serve the right god while the Christians do not, or that neither the Christians nor the Jews serve the right god.  Those who make the claim that "Jews and Christians don't serve the same god" are counting on you to make the assumption that Christians serve the right god while Jews serve the wrong god.  They are also counting on you to not even consider the possibility that neither serve the right god, or to even know what it truly means to serve God.

So what does it mean to serve God?  I already answered that when I referenced the Deuteronomy 13 Test.  Serving God means obeying him and keeping his law/commandments.  So it's those who keep God's commandments truly serve him.  And this should give you something else to consider:  Since Deuteronomy 13 is teaching you how to test the teachers and prophets when it defines disobedience as idolatry, it means that anyone who claims to be the Messiah must teach obedience to God's law, also called "Torah" in Hebrew, which literally means "instructions".  Such a person must also himself keep the Torah.  Any messiah that does not both keep and teach Torah, by definition, cannot be the son of God.

Here's another point to consider:  Just because you serve someone named "Jesus" (aka: "Yeshua"), doesn't mean you serve the right Jesus, for there are many counterfeits.  So how do you know you're serving the right one?  You actually already have your answer:  The one you obey is the one you serve (Romans 6:16).  So if you put Yeshua's teaching in the Bible into practice, and obey his commandments, then you are by definition, serving the son of God.  Jesus is also the example of how to obey Torah.  And since he outright commanded us to obey God's law, you cannot be serving Jesus without also keeping Torah.

So if saying Christians and Jews don't serve the wrong way to evangelize, then what's the right way?  Well, we already have part of the answer.  Both Jews and Christians claim to worship the God of the Bible, also referred to as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  And apologists do a very good job of showing how Yeshua fulfilled all of the "Old Testament" prophecies concerning his first coming.  That's already a pretty good start.  But we also need to approach the issue as if both Christians and Jews do serve the same god.  Because in the mind of the Christian, Christians do serve the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  And in the mind of the Jew, Jews do serve the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Here comes the part that most Christians will not like:  We must stop dressing Yeshua and those who were around him in that day in pagan clothing and symbolism, and dress them in the Jewish clothing of that day.  For Yeshua (Jesus) was born a Jew and lived as a Jew, having Jewish parents and practicing Jewish customs in strict accordance with Torah (Yeshua did not practice any Jewish customs that were contrary to Torah).  We must also stop claiming that Yeshua abolished the law, as he clearly said he did not come to abolish it, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17).  If we no longer have to keep the law (the law was never about salvation, by the way), then Yeshua did the opposite of fulfilling the law.  By the way, another thing most Christians won't like is the fact that following in Yeshua's example means doing what Yeshua did [1 John 2:6].

While there will be some success in reaching out to Jews without actually walking as Yeshua walked, you certainly aren't going to be provoking them to jealousy by hanging onto all of your Golden Calves.  In other words, our effectiveness at bringing God's elect to salvation is directly tied to how we portray Yeshua.  But the moment a Jew comes across a Christian apologist saying that Christians and Jews do not serve the same god is the moment that our witness to God's chosen people becomes entirely ineffective to all Christians until we can first prove that Christians and Jews do indeed serve the same God.  And woe to anyone who deliberately sabotages any attempt at Jewish outreach.

Swearing vs Cursing vs Profane Language

A while ago, I addressed a few instances of Yeshua saying, "but I say" in what appears, at first glance, to be him nullifying the Law of God.  One of those instances concerns swearing.  But what's the relationship between swearing and cursing?  And since the use of profane language is often referred to as "swearing" or "cursing", what's the relationship between profanity and the other two?

First, let's address the issue of swearing.  Swearing is making a promise to do something, or to abstain from doing something.  Leviticus 19:12 makes it very clear that we are allowed to swear, but that we are not to swear falsely.  And if that were not clear enough, Numbers 30:2 makes it all the more clear that one must do as they swear to do.  And Leviticus 5:4 warns us to be careful when we swear, lest we sin by failing to keep an oath we swore recklessly.  Notice that Yahweh only gave provision for swearing by him.  And also note how the Pharisees abused the "you shall not swear by My name falsely" of Leviticus 19:12 to say that if you swear by something other than God's name, you may do so falsely.  Yeshua didn't take too kindly to that rule.  By the way, James 5:12 is the same situation as Matthew 5:34.  The "not" is a qualified not.  The context proves that the proper qualifier is "falsely".  Both passages say "do not swear falsely".  Nowhere are we forbidden from swearing an oath.

Cursing on the other hand, is to declare harm or misfortune on someone or some thing.  It's not a promise to do something, it's calling on God (or a false god) to bring judgement on someone or some thing.  Just like with swearing, the "New Testament's" teaching on cursing is also misunderstood.  Of course, it doesn't help that cursing and swearing are often conflated.  For example, Romans 12:14 says "bless and do not curse" in the context of blessing those who persecute us.  And in James 3:9-10, James rebukes those who curse others.  The context of this rebuke concerns doing evil with the tongue.  But we also have instances such as Acts 8:20-23, where Peter curses a man who just recently came into the Body of Messiah.  Again, Peter cursed someone who just became a follower of Yeshua.  The reason for this curse?  This man thought that the Holy Spirit could be purchased with money.

So cursing isn't forbidden in all circumstances.  There are times where cursing is absolutely called for.  And like with swearing, it's not something to be taken lightly.  And as shown in several instances, people can die from being cursed.  And also, as shown in passages like Deuteronomy 23:5, Yahweh has the ultimate authority over curses and what happens as a result of said curse.

So that leaves profane language.  Or to put it in layman's terms:  "bad words" or "curse words".  The concept that a word, by itself, is bad, is not from the Bible at all.  It's from paganism.  Words, in and of themselves, are not good or bad.  It's the context in which they are used that is good or bad.  Christians are generally taught to be offended by certain words because such words are "bad words".  But this teaching does not come from Scripture.  Now, obviously words have meaning, and it is important to take into consideration the meaning of a word when it is used.  Using the wrong words in a sentence can convey a meaning that is not the intended meaning.  But even this does not make a word by itself good or bad, since words by themselves are not good or bad.  It just makes certain words not fit to convey a particular meaning.  Yeshua warned that we will be held accountable for every careless word that is spoken.

If words by themselves are not good or bad, then what about passages like Colossians 3:8, or Ephesians 5:4?  Those passages are not condemning words that culture says are "bad".  Rather, they are condemning something known in Hebrew as "the evil tongue".  And if you look at the context of both passages, you'll see that both concern abstaining from evil, including evil speech.  Remember Deuteronomy 12:32.  Examples of evil speech would be lying, deceit, defamation, speaking maliciously about someone, and swearing falsely.  All of these things God hates (and speaking the names of other gods)!  Not the use of words that humans consider "bad" or "offensive".

Resurrection Contradiction?

25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" [John 11:25-26; NKJV]

The above passage is one of several passages where Yeshua references the resurrection and promises eternal life.  The reason I bring up this passage is the apparent contradiction between Yeshua saying, "the one who believes in me shall live even though he dies" and him also saying, "the one who believes in me shall never die".  So how is this alleged contradiction resolved?  First, the passage is in the context of the resurrection.  Yeshua even states that much right before he said what he did.  Therefore, the rest of the passage shall be interpreted as if it is a statement of what will happen at the resurrection of the righteous.  Note that the one who does not believe in Yeshua will perish.

If the one who believes in Yeshua shall live even though he dies, then that is clearly a promise that the believer who dies shall be raised back to life.  I used to interpret verse 26 to mean that the soul leaves the body just before death, I have since learned (through some people pointing it out) that (a) souls are something that we are (Genesis 2:7), not something that we have.  And (b) the dead know nothing (Ecclesiastes 9:5)!  So that interpretation is ruled-out.  But again, Yeshua made it clear that what he is saying concerns the resurrection of the righteous, those who believe in him.  So the correct interpretation is that once you are raised at the resurrection of the righteous, you will never die again.

One interesting thing to note is that Yeshua counted the living among the dead and the dead among the living.  For example, in Mathew 8:22, he spoke of living people as if they were already dead.  And in Matthew 22:32, he spoke of dead people as if they were still living.  Matthew 22:32 is another passage who's context concerns the resurrection.  There are probably other passages like this.  So what's the idea behind counting the living as being dead and the dead as being alive?  If you answer the following question, you will have your answer:  What is the end result?  Those who are raised at the resurrection of the righteous will live forever.  Those who are not raised at the resurrection of the righteous will perish!

But there is not one resurrection, but two!  The resurrection of the righteous, which is the one that happens first (1 Thessalonians 4:16), and the resurrection of the wicked, which happens later.  At the second resurrection, there will be many people who will wish that they were not raised because of what will happen to them!

11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and [the Grave] delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and [the Grave] were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. [Revelation 22:11-15; NKJV] [see note at end of post]

This is what will happen at the second resurrection, the resurrection of the wicked.  They will be required to give an account of everything that they have done.  And because they do not have any atonement for their sins, they themselves will pay the penalty for their sins by burning up in the lake of fire!  All who transgress the Law of Yahweh and have not had their sins atoned for by the blood of Yeshua will perish in the lake of fire as punishment for their innumerable transgressions.  The same will happen to anyone who uses this atonement as a license to sin, and willfully do that which they know is contrary to the commands of Yahweh.  The atonement for sin comes from the blood of Yeshua by believing in Yeshua, the one who died for our sins and was raised from the dead.

Note:
The Greek word "Hades" is a substitute for the Hebrew word "sheol", which literally means "grave".  The definition of the Hebrew equivalent is prioritized, because the New Testament (with the exception of Hebrews) was written in Hebrew.  One of the definitions of "Hades" is also "grave", but usually refers to either a false god or the realm of said false god which has the same name.  This pagan association is also why I'm prioritizing the definition of the Hebrew equivalent.

Valentine's Day's Pagan Origins

Today, Valentine's Day looks like an innocent celebration of love, but it originated from an ancient pagan fertility ritual, which was then later "Christianized" by the Roman Catholic Church.  The mere fact that this is a pagan holiday means that it is forbidden by Deuteronomy 12.  For God commanded us not to mimic the ways of the pagans.  Also, since the Catholic Church is pagan, anyone who tries to assert that this day isn't pagan because it was created by the Catholic Church is actually proving the day to be pagan.

This fertility ritual would start with the sacrifice of a goat and a dog.  Then they would make strips of goat skin, drip them in blood, and slap their crops and young women with those strips.  And the women, believing that this would make them more fertile, would line up to slapped with these strips of goat skin.  Now, since this was a pagan fertility ritual, it was of course done in worship of a pagan god.  This "god" is Cupid, who is depicted as a naked baby with angel-like wings, and equipped with a bow and arrow.  Whoever got shot by this arrow would fall in love with someone.  Modern depictions of this false god have it covered with some sort of cloth for "modesty".  Anyone claiming to be Christian that celebrates Valentine's Day worships Cupid, not Yeshua.

Of course, this isn't the only thing that was done in the middle of the second month.  I like to refer to Valentine's Day as "adultery feast".  Why?  Because as part of this pagan fertility ritual, the young women would put their names inside a large urn, and the young men would take a card out of the urn, and whoever's name was on that card got to be his partner in sex for the year.  Sometimes, this would end in marriage.  The "adultery" refers to what would happen if it didn't result in marriage.  Though, technically speaking, adultery is when a man has sexual relations with another man's wife, not with an unmarried woman, as would be the case here.

By the way, have you noticed that this ancient ritual is a perversion of something that Yahweh called "very good"?  Yahweh created mankind to be fertile, along with everything required to produce offspring.  He created man to love women and women to love men.  And he calls this "very good" (Genesis 1:31).  The pagans somehow got the idea that there needed to be a ritual involving animal sacrifices to a god in order to increase women's fertility.  Fertility that is already there by design!  They also pervert that which Yahweh intended to lead to marriage into something sexually impure; into a ritual that results in a type of relationship that Yahweh requires to end in marriage.  And finally, they turned an attribute of Yahweh into a god who's very character is hostile to the ways of Yahweh!

The Catholic Church Hijacks Everything

When it comes to the teachings, practices, and traditions of the Catholic Church, you'd be hard-pressed to find something that actually did originate with them.  Actually, it's probably impossible to find a single thing that originated from the Catholic Church.  This is because of the Roman tradition of incorporating the traditions of surrounding cultures into their own.  The Catholic Church began as an extension of the Roman government, so it should come as no surprise that they continue that tradition.

Here's how this hijacking works.  When the Catholic Church wants to make "Christianity" look more appealing to the masses of whatever culture they encounter, they adopt the pagan practices of that culture and modify it to look more "Christian".  We know from Deuteronomy 12 that God does not accept his people worshiping him the way the pagans worshiped their gods.  Yet this is how we got Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, Halloween, Sunday Sabbath, etc.  All of these are pagan traditions modified to look Christian.

Not all practices come from the pagan cultures.  Some actually did come from Christianity, which came from Judaism.  The Catholic Church corrupts those practices as well.  Baptism is one example of a Christian practice that was hijacked by the Catholic Church.  Another example is the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Yeshua (Jesus), and some of his teachings.  Since the Catholic Church is trying to look Christian (though they are actually pagan), it should be expected that they hijack some Christian practices and teachings.  Because convincing deceptions use truth to gain your trust.  By the way, the Catholic's "Mary" is actually the pagan goddess Diana, which also makes the Catholic "Jesus" a pagan deity, which they make to look like the Jesus of the Bible.

Going off of Isaiah 1:12-15, we can clearly see that when we mix God's instructions with man's traditions, God counts all of it as man's traditions, and despises them!  Yet this is exactly what the Catholic Church has done with Yeshua.  When Isaiah proclaimed that all the feasts that Yahweh proclaimed to Israel were despised by the one who proclaimed them, the people must have been very confused as to why.  After all, God proclaimed them, so he must be pleased when we partake in them, right?  Unfortunately, they fell for the same trap that their ancestors fell for 1,000 years earlier:  When you make a golden calf to Yahweh, you aren't worshiping Yahweh, you're worshiping the calf!  Likewise, when you mix the practices that Yahweh commanded with human tradition, you're not practicing what Yahweh commanded, you're following human rules.  Isaiah 29:13 points this out quite clearly, which Yeshua later quoted in Matthew 15:8.

Because the Catholic Church hated the Jews, they did everything in their power not to adopt any of their practices (biblical or otherwise).  This is why instead of remembering Yeshua's death on Passover, they do it on Good Friday, and why Good Friday almost never falls on the same day as Passover.  This is also why they don't keep the Day of Atonement, or the biblical Sabbath (Saturday), or the Feasts of Trumpets, or any other day that God has appointed.  In fact, they even outlawed the observance of such days under penalty of death!  By the way, to the best of my knowledge, this is the only exception to the rule.

To summarize:  If something appears to have originated with the Catholic Church, then it is certainly a hijacked pagan tradition or teaching that has been modified to look Christian.  And even in the rare instances where the Catholic Church actually did invent something rather than adapting an existing pagan practice, it's still pagan because it came from the Catholic Church.  And any practice or teaching of the Catholic Church that appears to come from the Bible is certainly a corrupted version of what the Bible actually teaches.  Discernment is needed to distinguish between the Biblical teaching, and the Catholic counterfeit.

The Paganism of Christmas

From the beginning, Satan's goal is to keep people away from God.  And he does that through any means necessary.  From deceiving people into believing that the Bible is scientifically and historically inaccurate, to following human traditions and rules under the guise of "this is what the Bible requires", even to leading people to follow other gods which at best, don't exist.  And that's without mentioning the repeated use of the trick of making God's Law look burdensome.  There is no shortage of ways that people have been kept away from God.

The reason I mentioned the deception of making God's Law look burdensome is because it makes it easier to lead people to do things their own way, just as Adam and Eve did things their own way by trying to obtain a type of knowledge that God never indented for us to have.  Take this exchange between Jesus and the Pharisees, for example:

1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2 "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!"

3 Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.' 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is 'devoted to God,' 6 they are not to 'honor their father or mother' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

8 "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.

9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.'" [Matthew 15:1-9; NIV]

The elders of the day put in place a tradition of washing ones hands before they ate, and the Pharisees expected everyone to follow that tradition (along with many, many other human traditions) as if it was equal to God's Law.  Some of these traditions even broke God's Law as you can see from the quoted verses.  Jesus points this out, then quotes Isaiah 29:13, exposing the system for what it really is:  A set of human rules!  To drive the point home, Jesus outright said that the Pharisees cannot escape being condemned because of their system that keeps people far from God [Matthew 23:13-36].  How does it keep people far from God?  By keeping them in rebellion against God's Law, in direct violation of Deuteronomy 13.  Isn't it interesting that the Pharisees tested Jesus against Deuteronomy 13, but never tested their own?

What does this have to do with Christmas?  Only everything.  Christmas is nothing but human tradition built upon human tradition.  These traditions are in place as a means of worshiping God, in direct violation of Deuteronomy 12, which, in summary, says that we shall worship him the way he wants to be worshiped [12:1], not as the pagans worshiped their gods [12:4], nor as we see fit [12:8].  And that we are to keep his commands, not adding to them or diminishing from them [12:32].

So, you think Christmas is not a pagan holiday?  Let's say, for argument sake that it isn't.  Does that change anything?  God did not authorize us to worship him in the ways that are done on Christmas (violates Deuteronomy 12:1).  That in and of itself disqualifies Christmas as a Christian holiday.  What about why Christmas is celebrated?  Isn't it because it's viewed as okay in the eyes of man because "God never forbade it" or "the Disciples did it"?  Strike two, violation of Deuteronomy 12:8!  In other words, Christmas being Christian in origin would mean nothing!

As mentioned in a previous post, the Catholic Church is part of a much larger, satanic cult that is bent on ruling the world.  So if you trace any teaching or tradition back to the Catholic Church, you are, by definition, tracing that teaching or tradition back to paganism.  For the Catholic Church is a pagan Church.  We, as Christians, should be doing nothing that originates from them.

The Catholic Church never creates anything new.  All of their practices come from somewhere.  They just modify these practices to suit their counterfeit version of Christianity (if that).  When it comes to Christmas, they took the winter solstice practices of the surrounding pagan cultures, condensed it down to a single day, and named the modified practice "Christmas".  These days were the Saturnalia and Sol Invictus (and perhaps a couple others).  These practices are themselves modifications of the pagan practices of the Babylonians, Egyptians, etc.  Practices that long pre-date Christianity.  Even the date that Christmas is celebrated is the same as Sol Invictus.  And if it wasn't for the fact that the calendar tends to drift about 1 day every 100 or so years, the winter solstice would still be on December 25, as it was when the Julian calendar was established.

Let's talk about the Christmas Tree.  Those who wish to defend it will trace its origins back to the Catholic Church, which we already discussed why that doesn't work.  But the practice of using trees in the worship of the pagan gods long pre-dates Christianity.  In fact, if you've read the historical documentation contained in the Bible, you'll realize just how prevalent tree worship was in the pagan societies.  Deuteronomy 12:2 commands us to seek-out and destroy all of the pagan alters under every green tree.  Deuteronomy 16:21 commands us not to plant any trees next to any alter of Yahweh.  Deuteronomy 12:4 commands us not to worship God the way the pagans worshiped their gods.

So the mere fact that the pagans used trees to worship their god is enough to make the Christmas Tree a satanic practice.  But did you know that what Christians do to pine trees is exactly what the pagans in the middle eastern regions did to Cedar trees?  Isaiah 14:8 notes the type of trees used in idol worship:  They are indeed evergreen trees!  Jeremiah 10:1-4 gives a perfect description of a Christmas Tree.  And it's rather interesting how the practice evolved over time.  The ancient pagans carved images into the tree.  Christians do not.  The ancient pagans used Cedars (and Junipers, and sometimes even Pines), Christians use Pines.  Some modern trees are made of metal or plastic and are stored when not in use.  What about the claim that the trees in Jeremiah 10 aren't Christmas Trees?  That claim is a lie!  By the way, here's another description of pagan practices surrounding trees!  Isaiah 44:14-19.  Notice that most of the trees listed are evergreen trees (the exception being the Oak).

The Catholics didn't invent the Christmas Tree.  Some pagan convert to Catholicism brought an existing custom into the Catholic Church and it stuck.  Also notice in the passage in Isaiah that these people don't know why they are worshiping trees.  They never stop to think about the absurdity of their practices!  Christians do the exact same things that Isaiah was mocking 2,500 years ago!  Those who set up a tree in the name of Yeshua (Jesus) are worshiping the tree, not the Son of God.  Those who put an angel on top of the tree are worshiping the angel.  Those who put a star on top of the tree are worshiping the star (which represents the pagan sun gods, but was renamed to "Star of Bethlehem" after being adopted by the Catholic Church) and the pagan sun gods that are associated with it.  Those who set up a manger scene worship the manger scene, not the one that is allegedly represented by it.  These are all golden calves.  And I already pointed out how much God hates setting up images in his name!  The one who sets up a "golden calf" does not worship God, but the calf, even if they say in their heart "I'm worshiping God."

Every single thing that is done at Christmas time is a human tradition, including the date.  The rationalization for the date is also an appeal to human tradition.  Some have appealed to a Jewish tradition that a prophet of God lives an exact number of years.  They even admit in their argument that it's a human tradition!  The evidence that this tradition is true:  None that I've seen!  They just assume that this tradition is true, and state that because a prophet lives an exact number of years, and because life begins at conception, and because Jesus died on March 25, and because human gestation is 9 months, Jesus must have been born on December 25.

There are so many holes in this argument that it's astonishing that it's even believed!  Where to begin?  How about the fact that the tradition actually uses the Hebrew calendar (which typically has 355 days in a year), while those justifying the December 25 date are applying it to the Julian or Gregorian calendar.  If the tradition is true, then you need to calculate from the Hebrew calendar when Jesus would be born, not the Julian or Gregorian calendar.  Even if his death was on March 25 (it was not), you would have to find the Hebrew date that year, then calculate back to the year of his conception to get the actual Julian date of his conception.  And the same for the date of his birth.  Except there's one problem:  Birth can happen anywhere between 37 and 42 weeks from conception.  That's a span of 1.5 months!  So we can't know for sure when he was born just by knowing when he was conceived.

The next problem is that the years that a person has been alive is counted from birth, not conception.  It is true that life begins at conception, but the years of a persons life are counted from birth.  In other words, according to the tradition being appealed to, it is the day of birth that is also the day of death.  Oh, and did I mention that this appeal began with the Catholic Church?  Add that to the list of traditions that the Catholic Church modified to suit their agenda.  Anyone who uses this argument is not appealing to a Jewish tradition, but a Catholic one.

Because the Catholic Church hated the Jews, they set up Good Friday and Easter Sunday to never fall on the same day as Passover or the Feast of Firstfruits.  Granted, they still sometimes fall on the same day, but this is rare by design.  So we can know for sure that whatever day Good Friday fell on in the year that Jesus died is not when Passover was (which is when he actually died).  So without even looking for when Passover that year was, we know that the March 25 date is wrong.  Also, 33 AD is not the year that Jesus died.  It was 30 AD.  And March 25 did not land on a Friday that year.  And neither did Passover.

The fact that the Church appeals to tradition rather than the Bible or other period documents to determine the day that Jesus was born tells you everything you need to know about the December 25 date.  In fact, it is impossible to determine the day of the Messiah's birth from the Bible or any other documentation of the time.  That should tell you all you need to know about how God feels about our celebration of his birthday.  If God wanted us to celebrate his birthday, he would have revealed to us when it was.  God hid it from us because he does not want us to celebrate it.  Why?  Because the pagans celebrated the birthdays of their gods.  And Jesus' birthday is irrelevant to the gospel message.

Want to see just how demonic Christmas really is?  Here's a documentary produced by Passion for Truth Ministries showing just that:

Here's another documentary from 119 Ministries, also showing the paganism of Christmas:

There's also more evidence for those who care about searching for the truth instead of justifying unbiblical and demonic traditions.

Go to Jail to Fall-Away

It is typically believed that if a minister is sent to jail even though he has done nothing wrong, that the prisoners within the jail will be saved.  And the minister who was falsely jailed will come out stronger in faith than ever.  But I've noticed two cases where a minister is falsely jailed, and when he got out, ended up going off the deep end.  These two ministers are Dr. Kent Hovind, and Pastor Jim Staley.

Before we get started, keep in mind that just because someone is mentioned in a positive light on this blog, or one of their teachings are featured on occasion, doesn't mean I agree with all of their teachings.

Dr. Kent Hovind is a Young Earth Creationist who was arrested for tax evasion.  Well, tax evasion is the official story.  He not only taught about YEC, but also about government and corporate corruption.  And made many predictions about what these corrupt entities would do in the future.  All of these predictions that I know of have come true, by the way.  When it comes to YEC, Kent Hovind actually got a lot of things wrong.  For example, the blood vessels in the eye are not in front of the photoreceptors.  It's the nerve fibers that carry signals from the receptors to the brain that are in front of the receptors.

Kent Hovind wasn't jailed for what he got wrong.  He was jailed for what he got right, which has very little to do with YEC.  After he got out of jail, he wound up reading a New Age book, and accepted its demonic teachings as biblical.  And he did not listen to his viewers who warned him about the deceptions in that book.  To this day, I do not know if he has since renounced those teachings since then (probably not).  By the way, this is an excellent example of the point I made in a previous post:  Either learn to obey the whole Word of God, or you will fall away.

Next, we have Pastor Jim Staley, who was charged with fraud, investigated by his own state, and cleared of all charges.  Many years later, some women who hated Jim Staley accused him of the exact same crime that he was cleared of many years earlier, but this time, he was jailed.  This jailing is an example of something known as "double jeopardy", and it's illegal.  Jim Staley is not your traditional Christian.  In fact, he's hated by the Church for exposing the pagan traditions that exist within Christianity.  But he is (or was?) a Christian by the standards set forth in the Bible.  His teachings are mostly Messianic in nature last time I checked.

So what went wrong?  The 2020 election.  Although I can no longer find the video, Jim Staley prophesied in God's name that Biden was celebrating his victory too early and that Trump would be declared the winner of the 2020 election.  He compared it to Adonijah declaring himself king over Israel, only for King David to declare Solomon king over Israel.  Apparently, the idea that his arrest brought him closer to God went to his head.  So although he passes the Deuteronomy 13 Test, this single, failed prophesy makes him a false prophet according to Deuteronomy 18.  Also, some time later, I went back to that video to find that the comments were disabled.  It's because of this that I said, "his teachings are mostly Messianic in nature last time I checked."  And if I ever feature any of his teachings on this blog (which I have in the past), it'll be one from before the 2020 election.

What About Hanukkah and Purim?

In my last post, I exposed the "golden calves" of Christianity, which includes its false holy days.  In this post, we're going to examine Hanukkah and Purim to see if they also count as "golden calves" as well.  Some who wish to justify the observances of the traditional "Christian" holidays will point to these days (which are not mandated by God's Law) and say, "if these aren't okay, then why are Hanukkah and Purim okay?" under the premise (which they know is false) that these traditionally "Christian" holidays are not of pagan origin.  If we remove the deceitful premise, then the question is perfectly valid.

Let's start with Purim, since the record of its institution is in the Bible, in the book of Esther.  The description is in Esther 9:20-32.  The day was established as a celebration and memorial of God delivering the descendants of Israel from an enemy (Haman) that sought to destroy them completely.  And that the remembrance of that day shall never die from among the descendants of Israel.

So, is Purim okay?  If so, why?  I'll let you decide the answer to the first question as well as your rationalization.  But here's what I've noticed, and what my opinion on this matter is.  There is nothing in the text about Purim being a feast to Yahweh, like what Aaron and Jeroboam I did during their times.  That means it's not masquerading around as a holy day to be celebrated in addition to or in the place of something that God has ordained.  And there's absolutely no indication that anyone is attempting to even claim that God is commanding its observance.  In addition, there's also no indication in the text that this day was derived from any pagan practices, except the giving of gifts.

I did however, find that there are those who believe that the book of Esther is an example of historical fraud, designed to justify and sanitize what they claim is a holiday that is on par with a version of Halloween that includes indulgence in sexual sin.  Make of these claims and any presented evidence what you will.  But if these claims are true, then the book should be removed from the Biblical canon, for historical fraud does not belong in the canon of Scripture.  Also, if these claims are true, then Purim absolutely should not be celebrated for the reasons discussed in my previous post.  Also, I will be investigating these claims and the evidence presented.  Interestingly enough, when I first started writing this paragraph, I was going to conclude that Purim is okay, now I'm not so sure about that.  It is entirely possible that, once I finish my investigation, my answer to the question "is Purim okay" will be a definitive "no".

Okay, so I can't give a definitive answer to Purim.  Hopefully I can give one for Hanukkah.  But you're not really supposed to be relying on what I say about anything, anyways.  Do the research for yourself and draw your own conclusions.  Hanukkah is not found in the Bible (except in passing in one verse in the New Testament), but it is found in the Apocrypha.  The account of it's establishment is found in 1 Maccabees 4:36-39.  And in 2 Maccabees 10:1-9, it is recorded that the day was originally kept in the order of the Feast of Tabernacles.  Interestingly enough, the text says that they worshiped Heaven, not God.  That is definitely sinful, and it shows how just how hard it is to rid yourself of all pagan practices.

I have found no historical evidence that the feast was called "the festival of lights" until long after the day's establishment.  But there is definitely a pagan feast called "the festival of lights".  I believe this to be a paganization of the celebration.  I've also found no evidence of the miracle of the one day's worth of oil lasting eight days.  This appears to be an embellishment of the Talmud.  There is also no record of a 9-branch variant of the Menorah until much later on.  There is also the tradition that the first Hanukkah was the Feast of Tabernacles that year because they weren't able to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles that year at the appointed time.  This is the only tradition that has any sort of historical support for it.  That's because of 2 Maccabees 10:1-9, which I mentioned earlier.  But I haven't found any definitive proof of that tradition either.

In terms of the first Hanukkah being a late Feast of Tabernacles, the Torah does give precedent for such things.  In Numbers 9:10-13, God gives provision for eating the Passover later than the appointed time if you are unable to eat it at the appointed time.  That would make the first Hanukkah perfectly fine to celebrate.  But what about the Hanukkahs that come after that one.  Some interpret Jesus not condemning the holiday as a nod of approval.  And even celebrating it himself.  Others interpret the mention of the holiday as simply a convenient reference to the timing of the events described, not being meant as either affirmation that the holiday is okay, nor condemnation of the holiday.  I can see both points of view.  It's important to remember to distinguish between what the text says, and the interpretation of the text.  The Bible does not state that Jesus was celebrating Hanukkah.

Now in modern times, Hanukkah has been highly paganized because of Christmas.  This paganized version of Hanukkah is definitely not okay.  Neither are any other paganized forms of Hanukkah.  But what about as recorded in 1 and 2 Maccabees?  Well, there's no record of it being established as a feast to the Lord, either in addition to, in in place of what God has established.  In addition, the celebration, as described in Maccabees, is in the order of the Feast of Tabernacles, not in the order of any of the surrounding pagan holidays.  And I can find no evidence that contradicts the historical record of Maccabees.

There is however, an apparent link to paganism found in the date of the celebration:  The 25th day of the 9th month, which on a solar calendar, would be the winter solstice (which would later become the 25th of the 12th month).  It is entirely possible that in the year that the Temple was desecrated, the 25th day of the 9th lunar month coincided with the winter solstice.  But there's no evidence in the text that the winter solstice has anything to do with the celebration.  Because, if it were, they would have tried to fix the date to the winter solstice rather than to wherever the 25th of the 9th lunar month fell each year.  They seem to be ignoring the solstice altogether.  But there are paganized forms that do place importance on the winter solstice.  So I'm going to conclude that Hanukkah, without all of the pagan traditions that are associated with it, is perfectly okay.

The Golden Calves of Christianity

In my previous post, we investigated the two incidents in Israel's history involving golden calves and the perspective of the people who were worshiping the calves.  I'll give a brief recap:  From their perspective, they were using the calves to worship God, but from God's perspective, they were worshiping the calves.  Also in both instances, they held "sacred" feasts to God (only God can declare a sacred feast).  I also want to make sure that we are clear on the criteria for a golden calf.

The first criteria is that it has to be a direct violation of Exodus 20:4.

You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. [Exodus 20:4; NIV]

By the way, the word "image" in the Bible means any physical object with a form that is designed to look like something else.

Failing the first criteria, something will still be classified as a "golden calf" if (a) the pagans did the same thing to worship their gods (see Deuteronomy 12) or (b) if the object in question is part of the worship of God.

If the item in question is not a physical object, but rather a "sacred" feast, celebration, or fast that God has not ordained, then that also counts.  Basically, any day called "holy" that God has not made holy, with holy meaning set apart to God.  That is, any violation of Deuteronomy 12:32.

Now that we have the criteria defined, let's take a look at (hopefully) all of the golden calves of Christianity.

Depending on the denomination, there may or may not be statures of angels among Christians.  This is a blatant violation of the 2nd Commandment and obviously meets the first criteria.  Similarly, nearly all denominations have something called "manger scenes", which has a statue of Jesus as a baby surrounded by statues of Mary, Joseph, three wise men, and possibly a number of animals.  Again, a violation of the 2nd Commandment.  Also, the Catholic Church (which completely corrupted Christianity even to this day) has something called a "crucifix", which is a cross with a stature of Jesus nailed to it.

So that's all the things that I can think of that blatantly violate the 2nd commandment.  What about Deuteronomy 12, which is the first part of the second criteria?  We have many more things that meet this criteria that probably don't meet the first criteria in an obvious way.  These still violates the 2nd Commandment just by being worshiped.  And remember, it's your perspective vs. God's perspective on who or what is being worshiped.  And guess which perspective is the one that matters.  I only quoted the first part of the 2nd Commandment in this post.  The second part, in verses 5 and 6, forbid us from worshiping anything other than God.  And defines loving God as keeping the 2nd Commandment, and hating God as breaking the 2nd Commandment.

The first item on our list is the Christmas tree, which comes directly from the pagan practices that the Israelites were supposed to wipe out of the land that God gave them!  This is shown directly in Jeramiah 10:3-5.  Even the shape of the tree is the same, for they were cedars, as mentioned in Isaiah 37:24.  Not that this makes much difference.  The fact that the pagans used trees to worship their gods automatically means that using trees to worship our God is a violation of Deuteronomy 12.  And even if that were not the case, it's still the case that it's the tree that's being worshiped, not God.  The exact same thing goes for the star placed on top of the tree, the Easter egg, and Easter rabbit.  All of which, by the way, are symbols of fertility associated with the pagan fertility gods and goddesses.

We have the same situation with the symbols of Valentines Day and Halloween.  The symbolism of the Valentines Day symbols is yet another example of worshiping fertility rather than the One who makes people fertile.  And the symbolism of Halloween doesn't even try to hide it's demonic origins.  In a previous blog post, I pointed out the satanic origins of Halloween.  What I failed to mention in that post is that the symbols were used to deter evil spirits and keep spells away.  And also that "trick or treat" originated as a threat for the purposes of extortion.  It still is that way in some parts of the world.  And no, the Church has not, historically, celebrated Halloween as a celebration of Jesus defeating death and the devil on the cross (which doesn't change anything anyways).

Now, what about the holidays that are celebrated?  Christmas was an instance of sun worship that happened on the Winter Solstice, which was on December 25 when Julius Cesar established his Calendar in 45 B.C.  It was at this time that the pagans celebrated the birth of their sun gods.  The Catholic Church hijacked this celebration to celebrate the birth of the Son of God instead to make "Christianity" more appealing to the masses.  Even if the date was just a coincidence (which it is not), the fact that the pagans celebrated the birth of their gods means we are forbidden from celebrating the birth of our God.  And even if the pagans did not have such a celebration, it would not change the fact that it is a man-made day to the Lord, which is a direct violation of Deuteronomy 12:32.  Only God can appoint days to God.

Easter is even worse than Christmas, because even the name comes from the name of the pagan fertility goddess.  In fact, the pronunciation is nearly identical to the name of the Babylonian fertility goddess (Ishtar).  And its celebration is directly condemned in Ezekiel 8:16 (and that's just a sample of what went on during that celebration).  What became the Easter celebration of Christianity predates the founding of the Catholic Church by more than 1,000 years!  And by the way, this was also the day that the pagans sacrificed their infants in the fire to Moloch.  Are you sure you want to be celebrating Christ's resurrection on this day?

A couple more notes about the celebration of Easter and Good Friday.  The timing instituted by the Catholic Church was deliberately set so that the two days would never coincide with Passover and Feast of First Fruits.  In fact, the Catholic Church outright replaced Passover with Good Friday, and First Fruits with Easter Sunday.  So if Christmas is merely an addition to God's commands, Easter is outright rebellion against God!  Jesus gave us something to remember his death by.  Something that is in full compliance with all of God's commands.  But even that has been replaced with a cracker and a one-ounce cup of grape juice!

Now, about Halloween.  I already made a post about it on Halloween.  But let's go into a bit more detail.  First off, the word Halloween comes from the phrase "All Hallows Evening", which translates into "All Holy Night".  That alone should tell you everything you need to know about Halloween, since God never declared the last day of any month holy.  This is another celebration that was hijacked by the Catholic Church to make "Christianity" more appealing.  What they did was they changed the day of the celebration to the last day of a month on their calendar that came closest to the last day of the month on the calendar that it was originally celebrated on.  The new date happened to be October 31.  The Catholic Church also added "All Saints Day" to the celebration, which was given the date of November 1, out of the need to remember all of their dead "saints" without completely filling-up the calendar.  Then they added "All Souls Day" for November 2.  In terms of the celebration on October 31, virtually nothing has changed except the calendar used to schedule the celebration, and the fact that some parts of the world now do it for fun rather than out of fear of evil spirits or being cursed with a spell.

How about Valentines Day?  This is yet another pagan celebration of fertility which, by the way, is also linked to witchcraft and the superstitions surrounding the full moon (which is why it's in the middle of the month, which was originally a lunar month).  The name comes from the name of a Catholic "saint":  St. Valentine.  On this day, the pagans made sacrifices to their gods so that they would remain fertile and to celebrate their fertility.

Finally, we have the Sunday Sabbath.  This came about in direct rebellion to God's commands because the Catholic Church didn't want to do anything on the same day that the Jews did things on.  The day has it's name because the pagans worshiped the sun in the sky on this day.  The excuse that the Catholic Church gives is that Jesus rose on the first day of the week (in reality, he rose at sunset on what we would call the seventh day of the week).  But God said to rest on the seventh day of the week.  The purpose of the Sabbath has also been changed from the "day of rest" to the "day of worship".  And a common defense of not observing the Sabbath on its proper day (which we call "Saturday") is that "cults worship on Saturday".  Some of these same people acknowledge that Christmas and Easter originated within cults, which should tell you all you need to know about their motives.  Regardless of which, God commanded that we rest on the seventh day of the week.  And that those who deliberately work on the seventh day are to be put to death!  Remember, the Sabbath is the only one of the Appointed Times that God commands all to practice!  The whole world!  For it was established in the beginning, and it was established for the benefit of all mankind!

The Truth About the Golden Calves

The account of the first golden calf is well-known within Christianity (or at least I'm under the impression that this is the case).  But it is poorly understood.  And this is no coincidence as Satan wants to keep people away from God.  A proper understanding of this account is necessary to understand just how successful the enemy has been at keeping Christians away from God.

When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.” [Exodus 32:1; NIV]

An interesting thing to note about the Hebrew word that is translated as "god" or "gods" is that it's almost always in the plural form.  This word is "elohim". In fact, this word appears 2,606 times in the Old Testament.  The singular form appears only 57 times.  One of the times that the plural form of the word is found is in Exodus 20:2, where the literal translation is "I (singular) am Yahweh your gods (plural)."  The word "elohim" literally means "mighty one(s)", not "god(s)".  Though it's often used to refer to god(s) and the One, True, and Living God.

Notice in Exodus 32:1, the "gods" that they asked Aaron to make are to replace Moses.  In their mind, they were not replacing God, just the mediator between them and God (which would be Moses in this case).  The passage can just as easily be translated as them saying "make us a god who will go before us."  In their mind, they were still serving the God that brought them out of Egypt.  But Christians are taught that the Israelites openly went after other gods.  And this is the misunderstanding of the incident that blinds Christians from the truth about idolatry!

2 Aaron answered them, “Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. 4 He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, “These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”

5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced, “Tomorrow there will be a festival to the Lord.” 6 So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry. [Exodus 32:2-6; NIV]

In verse 4, we again have a situation where the words can be translated in either their singular or plural form.  In this case, we have two words, not just one.  The first one is "elle", which can mean either "this" or "these" (as well as a number of other things).  The verse can easily be translated as "This is your god".  Again, the word "god" in this case refers to the mediator between God and men.  And in verse 6, the word translated as "Lord" is actually the name of God, Yahweh.  So not only did they replace their mediator with a golden calf, but they also decided to make their own feast to God!  Again, in their eyes, they were worshiping God, not the calf.

7 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. 8 They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’ [Exodus 32:7-8; NIV]

Now the Bible reveals God's perspective of what the Israelites were doing.  Again, the phrase "these are your gods" can also be translated as "this is your god".  Notice that in God's mind, the people were sacrificing to the calf they built.  The people are sincere in their worship of Yahweh, but they don't realize that they are actually worshiping the calf.  Unfortunately, most read this account from the perspective of God and don't even realize that there are two perspectives here.  God's perspective and man's perspective.  The Bible reveals both perspectives, but it's God's perspective that matters.

Have you noticed how frequently I mention Deuteronomy 13 in these types of posts?  There is a reason for that.  And really, I should be mentioning Deuteronomy 12 more often, since it also deals with idolatry.  Deuteronomy 12:32 warns us to be careful to keep God's commands, and not to add to or diminish from it.  And Deuteronomy 13 defines idolatry as rebellion against God's Law by how it contrasts obedience against serving other gods.  And Exodus 32 should serve as a reminder of what it means to God when we try to worship him our own way.

Now:  About that second golden calf incident.  By the way, there was a second incident involving golden calves.  The first king of the northern kingdom of Israel (Jeroboam I) set up two of those:  One in the north and one in the south.  Let's analyze that one as well.

25 Then Jeroboam fortified Shechem in the hill country of Ephraim and lived there. From there he went out and built up Peniel.

26 Jeroboam thought to himself, “The kingdom will now likely revert to the house of David. 27 If these people go up to offer sacrifices at the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem, they will again give their allegiance to their lord, Rehoboam king of Judah. They will kill me and return to King Rehoboam.”

28 After seeking advice, the king made two golden calves. He said to the people, “It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem. Here are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.” 29 One he set up in Bethel, and the other in Dan. 30 And this thing became a sin; the people came to worship the one at Bethel and went as far as Dan to worship the other.

31 Jeroboam built shrines on high places and appointed priests from all sorts of people, even though they were not Levites. 32 He instituted a festival on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, like the festival held in Judah, and offered sacrifices on the altar. This he did in Bethel, sacrificing to the calves he had made. And at Bethel he also installed priests at the high places he had made. 33 On the fifteenth day of the eighth month, a month of his own choosing, he offered sacrifices on the altar he had built at Bethel. So he instituted the festival for the Israelites and went up to the altar to make offerings. [1 Kings 12:25-33; NIV]

The NIV for some reason replaced the word "behold" with "here are".  A more accurate translation would be "here is your god."  While this second account doesn't give nearly the insight on the perspective of the people, it doesn't need to if you already understand it from Exodus 32.  The calves represent Yahweh, who brought Israel out of Egypt.  This of course is a violation of the 3rd Commandment as was the calf that was made several hundred years earlier.  But the people were sincerely worshiping God and sacrificing to him.  Notice however, that the text gives God's perspective on the matter.  And from God's perspective, they are worshiping the calf and sacrificing to the calf, not him!

Notice also that he changed one of the Appointed Times to be on the eighth month instead of the seventh month.  Yet another violation of Deuteronomy 12, which by itself would be classified as idolatry by Deuteronomy 13.  And if that wasn't bad enough, Jeroboam I built high places in outright defiance of the Deuteronomy 12 commands to (a) tear down all the high places and (b) not to worship God the way the pagans worshiped their gods.  There is a reason God is so strict on how we are and are not to worship him.  And the sequence of events that unfolds over the course of the book of 1 Kings demonstrates perfectly the reason.  The kingdom of Israel went from worshiping God through unauthorized and forbidden means (lip service) to openly serving other gods.  Had they stuck to God's Law concerning how we are to worship him, this would not have happened.

God is eternal.  And his law is eternal.  This means that neither God, nor his law, can change.  And it should be clear from the Deuteronomy 13 Test that anyone seeking to change the Law, by definition, is leading you to serve other gods.  Basically, God put it in his law that the Law cannot be changed or done away with.  So anyone who worships God in a way that is forbidden by God's Law is, at best, paying God lip service.  Anyone who changes or replaces God's Appointed Times is, at best, paying God lip service.  Both are far from God and serving false gods, no matter how sincere they are in their worship of God.  Remember, God wants obedience rather than sacrifice.  And he wants that obedience to come from the heart.

The Evil of Halloween

Every October 31, children go out on something called "trick or treating" to ask complete strangers for candy while dressed-up with the appearance of evil and with their houses dressed up with the appearance of evil.  Halloween doesn't even try to hide its satanic origins!  And Paul correctly pointed-out that we should abstain from all appearance of evil.  Yet Christians still find some way to try to justify continuing to celebrate this satanic day.

By the way, did you know that Paul was applying Deuteronomy 12 when he said to abstain from all appearance of evil?  God himself commanded us not mimic the ways of the pagans, not even as a means of serving him, but said to keep his commandments without adding to or diminishing from them [Deuteronomy 12:32].  Here's an article giving a very brief summary about what the Celts did for their new year celebration, which was later hijacked by the Roman Catholic Church, being given the name "All Hallows Eve" assigned to October 31, and mimicking the Celtic witchcraft in their celebration to this day!

Actually, the article linked above gives a watered-down version of what the Celts did.  A very watered-down version.  There are still cultures around the world that practice Celtic witchcraft instead of "merely" mimicking it.  And those who actually read the passages I linked (bonus points if you read more), you will know that God wants these pagan practices and their articles completely destroyed, leaving no trace that they even ever existed.  He wants us to practice what he commanded, not what the pagans practiced.  He has set us apart (made us holy) from the rest of the world to be an example to the world.

Let's take a look at some of the excuses that Christians make to continue to celebrate this holiday.  Some who claim to be Christians outright lie about the origins of the various practices and claim that the pagans borrowed from Christianity.  But even if that's true, what business does a Christian have in dressing as witches or demonic entities?  What part of "abstain from all appearance of evil" [1 Thessalonians 5:22] do you not understand?  What part of "do not add to God's commandments" do you not understand?  Should God be pleased with us for dressing as those whom God said shall be put to death?  Should God be pleased with us for honoring the rebellious angels by dressing as them?  Should God be pleased at the glorification of death, which he says is the enemy [1 Corinthians 15:26]?

Some Christians claim to celebrate Halloween to make a mockery of Satan because he was defeated by Jesus dying on the cross and then rising from the dead.  While I have no reason to question their sincerity, there are a couple a major problems with this, not counting the fact that it's a direct violation of Deuteronomy 12 and a violation of Paul's command.  The first problem is that Jesus didn't die on October 31.  He died on Aviv 14 (buried the following sundown) in 30 AD, which landed on Wednesday, April 3.  He rose on Aviv 18 (at sundown), which landed on Sunday, April 7, but which would still be counted by our standards as Saturday (the Sabbath), April 6.

The second major problem is this:  Who's mocking who?  Is it the Christian making a mockery of demonic powers, or Satan making a mockery of Christians who have been tricked into doing things that are contrary to everything that God stands for?  Satan's goal is to keep Christians away from God and he is the father of lies [John 8:44].  And what better way to do that than to trick us into believing that there's nothing wrong with doing things that God calls abominations?  I think the answer to the question of "who's mocking who" is quite clear.

I'll leave you with this video on the origins of Halloween by Pastor Jim Staley.