Examining Acts 15

In a previous post, I refuted the claim that obedience is by definition, salvation by works.  Acts 15 is one example of this false claim influencing the interpretation of Scripture.  For example:

And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." [Acts 15:1; NKJV]

But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses." [Acts 15:5; NKJV]

Here we have two parties making claims about what the believing gentiles must do.  The circumcision party said that they must be circumcised to be saved.  The Pharisees said it is necessary to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses, but said nothing about that being necessary for salvation.  This is an important distinction that most will not catch.  Also, if you read verse 5 carefully, you will notice that the Pharisees who said this were believers in Yeshua.  Another important detail that is often overlooked, especially in light of the fact that the other group is not referred to as believers.

The reason that these key details are overlooked is (as mentioned earlier) the false doctrine that the teaching of obedience is, by definition, salvation by works.  But if you read the three verses between 1 and 5, and the 2 verses immediately following 5, you'll notice that there is a 3-way dispute on what the gentiles need to do and for what purpose.

The fact that the circumcision party is not described as believers, and says that circumcision is necessary for salvation tells you everything you need to know about them:  They rely on their own works to be saved, rather than the Work of Yeshua on the cross.  It's also telling that they used the word "custom" instead of "law" or "command" when describing circumcision.  Is this a subtle admission that the Law of God does not require foreigners who join with the house of Israel to be circumcised?  And that this is a human tradition?

What about the believing Pharisees, who have the entirety of the Law of Yahweh memorized from early childhood?  They seem to have made a distinction between circumcision and keeping God's Law.  Is this another hint that God's commands concerning circumcision are not what we think they are?  Also, you may have noticed at the end of my post on Good Friday vs Passover that I said it's okay if you don't want to keep the Passover because of it's requirements.  But how can I say that and pass the Deuteronomy 13 Test unless the Law of Yahweh does not say what you think it says?  Let's examine what the Law says concerning circumcision, starting in Genesis!

9 And God said to Abraham: "As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. 10 This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised; 11 and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your generations, he who is born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who is not your descendant. 13 He who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money must be circumcised, and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 14 And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant." [Genesis 17:9-14; NKJV]

Anyone descended from Abraham, and those living in the house of someone descended from Abraham, whether born into said house or bought with money from a foreigner, is to be circumcised.  But what about the foreigner that is not living in the house of a descendent of Abraham?  That person does not have to be circumcised according to this passage.  But what about the other commandments?

43 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, "This is the ordinance of the Passover: No foreigner shall eat it. 44 But every man’s servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then he may eat it. 45 A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat it. 46 In one house it shall be eaten; you shall not carry any of the flesh outside the house, nor shall you break one of its bones. 47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. 49 One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you." [Exodus 12:43-49; NKJV]

Any woman living by herself may eat the Passover, since there are, by definition, no males in that house that need to be circumcised (at least, I don't remember reading anything that says otherwise).  But if any house has any males in it, then all the males in that house must be circumcised before anyone in that house is allowed to eat the Passover.  And eating the Passover without all the males in the house being circumcised is wickedness.  Let's see what other rules there are concerning circumcision.

1 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: 'If a woman has conceived, and borne a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days; as in the days of her customary impurity she shall be unclean. 3 And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.'" [Leviticus 12:1-3; NKJV]

This is basically re-affirming Genesis 17:12.  So not much extra information here.  We see another command to be circumcised in Deuteronomy 10:16, but this time, it's a circumcision of the heart.  And again in Deuteronomy 30:6.  Where have we heard of circumcision of the heart before?  That's right, Jeremiah 4:4!  Oh, you were thinking of "New Testament" passages?  Well, I just happened to find this one in Jeremiah and couldn't resist the bait and switch!  Romans 2:29 talks about circumcision of the heart.

Anyways, circumcision is a sign of the covenant between Yahweh and the physical descendants of Israel.  And only the physical descendants of Israel, along with anyone who is living in the house of a physical descendant of Israel, must be circumcised, along with all of their descendants after them forever.  This may be one of the reasons why the Apostle Paul circumcised Timothy in Acts 16:1-3.  The only exception to this rule is for the foreigner who wants to celebrate the Passover.  And of course, there is nothing stopping someone who is not a descendant of Israel from joining into the same covenant as Israel.  And concerning the New Covenant, there is no indication whatsoever of a gentile being required to be circumcised to be a part of the New Covenant.  At least, none that I can remember.

So, both the circumcision party and the Pharisees acknowledge that circumcision of the gentiles is not part of God's Law.  And when Peter testified in Acts 15:6-9 what happened to the gentiles that believed, that they received the Holy Spirit, though they had not been circumcised, and after Barnabas and Paul testified concerning the believing gentiles in Acts 15:12, and after James gave his testimony concerning what the prophets said in Acts 15:13-17, it was agreed by the entire assembly that the gentiles do not need to be circumcised to be a part of the New Covenant.  Literally the only reason a believer from among the gentiles has to become circumcised is be able to keep the Passover without becoming guilty of sin!

So what about the keeping of the Law?  Well, here's what the Apostle James said:

19 Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath. [Acts 15:19-21; NKJV]

Now here's where things get interesting.  There are four rules listed here.  Abstain from sexual immorality, and from eating blood, strangled meat, or foods polluted by idols.  The word translated as "sexual immorality" is the Greek word "porneia", which literally means prostitution, and is sometimes used to refer to sexual immorality in general.  The KJV translates this word as "fornication", which at the time that the KJV was written, also meant prostitution, but now means premarital sex.

So, does that mean that lying is now okay?  How about stealing or murder?  Some people, without thinking about the implications of what they say, interpret Acts 15:20 to mean we only have to follow the 4 rules mentioned in that verse.  Do you see the problem with that interpretation?  Also, who decides what is or is not sexually immoral?  Do we really want to leave that up to man to decide?  Of course not.  And if we translate the passage as saying "abstain from prostitution", then what about fornication, or adultery.  If we translate it as saying "abstain from fornication", then that also takes care of prostitution, but what about adultery, incest, or sodomy?  And although the rules are to abstain from eating foods polluted by idols, it doesn't say anything about not worshiping the idols!  Or using them to worship Yeshua.  Well, that's where verse 21 comes in.  The gentile believers are expected to attend the synagogues every Sabbath.  Either that or everyone in that assembly just failed the Deuteronomy 13 Test and are guilty of teaching idolatry.

As it turns out, in those days, the gentiles regularly met in the synagogues with the Jews.  For example, in Acts 13:42, there were clearly gentiles in the synagogues on the Sabbath (Saturday) eager to hear what Paul had to say from one Sabbath to the next.  Go ahead and read it and the verses after it.  Acts 14:1 is another example where the gentiles are clearly attending the synagogues every Sabbath.  And again in Acts 17:1-4, and Acts 17:10-12.  There are even more examples after that.  So it is expected of the gentile believers to attend the synagogues every Saturday to learn the Law of Yahweh, to keep it.

Notice that these believing gentiles are saved, though they do not know the law.  And as they learn the law, they are still saved though they now keep it.  These believers want to do what is right in the eyes of God.  And keeping God's Law is right in the eyes of God.  Like I've said before:  We don't keep the Law to be saved, we keep the Law because we're saved.

Remember, in Acts 15:1, these gentile were told that they must be circumcised to be saved.  In Acts 15:24, somebody added "saying, 'You must be circumcised and keep the law'—to whom we gave no such commandment—".  There's a good way to lead people into idolatry.  How do we know it was added?  Simple:  The gentiles were told "you must be circumcised to be saved" (Acts 15:1), not "you must be circumcised and keep the law".  Plus, not all manuscripts have the part that I just quoted.  Not to mention the Deuteronomy 13 Test that I mentioned earlier.  Notice that the believing Pharisees in Acts 15:5 did not tell the gentiles "you must be circumcised and keep the Law", but took up their petition with the Apostles concerning the gentile believers.  And they didn't dare say it was to be saved because they knew salvation was by faith!

We also know that the last part of Acts was added to because of the vast amount of evidence that that the gentiles were in the synagogues every Sabbath learning the Law of God, and that Acts 15:21 expects this norm to continue, thereby satisfying the believing Pharisees' beliefs that it is necessary to teach the gentiles to keep God's Law.

Now the Law is broken-up into large portions, which are called "portions" (but with the Hebrew word for "portions").  Over the course of a year, the Torah is read, one portion each week, until the entire Torah has been read.  Then they start over at the beginning once they have finished reading through the entire Torah.  So the gentiles will learn a small portion of Torah at a time rather than being required to learn it all at once and be overwhelmed by it.  The Apostles' letter to the gentiles addressed the four most important issues of the time as simply the starting point.  Notice that their letter said nothing about not having to stop attending synagogue, which they were already doing.

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.

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.