http://theunhivedmind.com/wordpress/?p=20415
http://theunhivedmind.com/wordpress/?p=18910
__________
From http://theunhivedmind.com/wordpress/?p=18920
Posted by EJP on Dec 23rd, 2011
http://www.vaticanassassins.org/2011/12/santa-equals-satan-christmas-the-winter-pagan-roman-feast-of-saturnalia/
No true, born-again, Reformation Bible believing Christian should ever observe “Christmas,” or rather, the “Merry Mass of Christ.” The holiday is an utter blasphemy forbidden to be celebrated by the godly Puritans in their colony of Massachusetts. This wicked feast of the devil first known as “Saturnalia” only began to be officially observed with the presidency of Episcopalian Jesuit Temporal Coadjutor President Franklin Pierce (1853-1857)—the man who used Commodore Perry to open up Japan in 1853 having been closed to the Jesuits for over 200 years. Of Rome and her Christmas, the great Scottish minister Alexander Hislop wrote in 1858:
“If Rome be indeed the Babylon of the Apocalypse, and the Madonna enshrined in her sanctuaries be the very queen of heaven, for the worshipping of whom the fierce anger of God was provoked against the Jews in the days of Jeremiah, it is of the last consequence that the fact should be established beyond all possibility of doubt; for that being once established, every one who trembles at the Word of God must shudder at the very thought of giving such a system, either individually or nationally, the least countenance or support. Something has been said already that goes far to prove the identity of the Roman and Babylonian systems; but at every step the evidence becomes still more overwheming. That which arises from comparing the different festivals is peculiarly so.
“The festivals of Rome are innumerable; but five of the most important may be singled out for elucidation—viz., Christmas-day, Lady-day, Easter, the nativity of St. John, and the Feast of the Assumption. Each and all of these can be proved to be Babylonian. And first, as to the festival in honour of the birth of Christ, or Christmas. How comes it that that festival was connected with the 25th of December? There is not a word in the Scriptures about the precise day of His birth, or the time of the year when He was born. What is recorded there, implies that at what time soever His birth took place, it could not have been on the 25th of December. . . .
“Indeed, it is admitted by the most learned and candid writers of all parties that the day of our Lord’s birth cannot be determined, and that within the Christian Church no such festival as Christmas was ever heard of till the third century, and that not till the fourth century [after the creation of the Roman Papacy at Constantine's Council of Nicaea, AD 325---EJP] was far advanced did it gain much observance. How, then, did the Romish Church fix on December the 25th as Christmas-day? Why, thus: long before the fourth century, and long before the Christian era itself, a festival was celebrated among the heathen, at that precise time of the year, in honour of the birth of the son of the Babylonian queen of heaven. . . . In Egypt, the son of Isis, the Egyptian title for the queen of heaven, was born at this very time, ‘about the time of the winter solstice.’ The very name by which Christmas is popularly known among ourselves —Yule day—proves at once its Pagan and Babylonian origin. ‘Yule’ is the Chaldee name for an ‘infant’ or ‘little child;’ and the 25th of December was called by our Pagan Anglo-Saxon ancestors, ‘Yule-day,’ or the ‘Child’s day,’ and the night that preceded it, ‘Mother-night,’ long vefore they came in contact with Christianity, that sufficiently proves it real character. Far and wide, in the realms of Paganism, was this birth-day observed. . . . But there is indubitable evidence that the festival in question had a much higher reference than this—that it commemorated not merely the figurative birth-day of the sun in the renewal [longitudinal reversal---EJP] of its course, but the birth-day of the grand Deliverer. . . .
“Now the Yule log is the dead stock of Nimrod, deified as the sun-god, but cut down by his enemies; the Christmas-tree is Nimrod redivivus [revived to new life, EJP]—the slain god come to live again. . . .
“There can be no doubt, then, that the Pagan festival at the winter solstice—in other words, Christmas—was held in honour of the birth of the Babylonian Messiah [the slain Nimrod reborn as Tammuz, and in Egypt, the slain Osiris reborn as Horus---EJP]. . . .
“The thing is incredible. Lady-day and Christmas-day, then, are purely Babylonian.”*
Thus Christmas—the Merry Mass of Christ—is the present day observance of Satan’s coming Babylonian Messiah. In Babylon he was Nimrod reborn from Mother Semiramis as Tammuz; in Egypt he was Osiris reborn from Mother Isis as Horus. This great prophetic myth of Satan is to be literally fulfilled in the coming Antichrist/Man-Beast of I John 2:18/Revelation 13:3-10. But from whence shall this prophecy be fulfilled? From no other place than the Jesuit Roman Papacy! For every pope is, in fact, an acting Osiris, the vicar of the long-awaited Horus. The final pope of Rome will be slain to be reborn from Holy Mother Church as “the beast” (Daniel 7:11; Revelation 13:3-10) Indeed, the final pope—Roman Papal Caesar—is to be slain, the tree cut down in the forest. He then will be brought back to life to recover from his mortal sword wound (Revelation 13:14), the tree brought into the home for decoration. He will then be possessed by Satan (disembodied Lucifer), the tree topped with a star—”Lucifer” being “the star of the morning” (Isaiah 14:12). And the means, Satan’s foremost great Second Cause to bring his ancient, prophetic, Babylonian myth to pass is none other than the diabolical Society of Jesus which is in fact, Satan’s Society of Horus!
For a more complete exposure of the Babylonian Feast of Christmas, listen to your Editor’s broadcast on “Biblical Truth in History and Prophecy” on December 19th, 2011, hosted by Liberty Radio Live.
*Hislop, Alexander, The Two Babylons; Or, the Papal Worship Proved to be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife, (Neptune, New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, 1959; first published in 1858), pp. 91, 92-93, 94, 98, 102, 103.
No comments:
Post a Comment